Laserfiche WebLink
Rule 22 requires an applicant for a variance from the water supply requirements of <br /> Section 23-84 of the Subdivision Code to prove that all lots to be served by catchment have an <br /> average annual rainfall of not less than sixty inches either"by rainfall records at comparable rain <br /> gauges or by the USGS rainfall map." Planning Department Rules of Practice and Procedure <br /> § 22-4 (2006). <br /> A variance permits a landowner to use his property in a manner forbidden by ordinance <br /> or statute. See Neighborhood Bd. No. 24 (Waianae Coast) v. State Land Use Comm'n, <br /> 64 Haw. 265, 639 P.2d 1097 (1982). Because a variance is an exception to what is otherwise <br /> required by law,there is no guarantee that a variance will be granted just because an applicant <br /> submits a variance application to the Director. When applying for a variance, the applicant has <br /> the burden of providing all the information required by the director to show that they meet the <br /> requirements for a variance. See Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 edition, as amended) <br /> § 23-16(e). If the variance is denied by the Director, the applicant may appeal the Director's <br /> decision to the Board within thirty days after the decision. See Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 <br /> edition, as amended) § 23-5. <br /> At the contested case hearing before the Board,the appellant has the burden of proof, <br /> including the burden of producing evidence and the burden of persuasion. See HRS § 91-10(5). <br /> The Board is an agency within the definition of Chapter 91, HRS, and is thus "duty bound to <br /> hold an applicant to its burden during a contested-case hearing." In re Wai`ola O Moloka`i, Inc., <br /> 103 Hawaii 401, 442, 83 P.3d 664, 705 (Hawai`i, 2004) (citing In re Water Use Permit <br /> Applications (Waidhole), 94 Hawaii 97, 136-38, 9 P.3d 409, 448-50 (2000)). See also <br /> Dependents of Cazimero v. Kohala Sugar Co., 54 Haw. 479, 510 P.2d 89 (Hawai`i 1973) <br /> (explaining that a contested case heard by an agency that is within the definition of the Hawaii <br /> Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 91, HRS) is bound by the proscriptions of HRS § 91-10). <br /> 13 <br />