Laserfiche WebLink
appeal to April 13, 2006. At the April 13, 2006 hearing, the Board determined that the <br /> Planning Director's October 24, 2005 letter was not a final decision of the Planning <br /> Director and the appeal was dismissed based on the grounds that the Board did not have <br /> jurisdiction. <br /> In a letter dated March 20, 2006, the Planning Director informed PLRC of his <br /> final decision to take the following steps: 1) establish the approximate location of the <br /> historic site on the lot including a ten feet buffer and once established, issue building <br /> permits for Lot 54, so long as no development area falls within the established site <br /> boundary; 2) PLRC is ordered to reconstruct the historic site to its approximate condition <br /> before the bulldozing occurred. ROA at 404_407. PLRC's attorney filed an appeal <br /> from that decision and is scheduled to be heard by the Board on July 14, 2006. <br /> II. LEGAL ARGUMENT <br /> 1. The Planning Director is Authorized under the Hawai'i County <br /> Charter to Enforce Conditions of Subdivision Approval <br /> It is well established that"an administrative agency's authority includes those <br /> implied powers that are reasonably necessary to carry out the powers expressly granted." <br /> Morgan v. Planning Department, County of Kaui, 104 Haw. 173, 184; 86 P.3d 982, 993 <br /> (2004). Generally, an administrative agency has only those powers that the legislature <br /> expressly confers upon it, but an agency may also have implied powers that are <br /> reasonably necessary to carry out the express responsibilities given to it by the <br /> legislature. See id. The reason for such implied powers is that"as a practical matter,the <br /> legislature cannot foresee all the problems incidental to carrying out the duties and <br /> responsibilities of the agency." Id. <br /> 6 <br />