Robert Thomas at Inversecondemnation posted up the complaint in which the developer, who sought permits to develop a resort in Waipouli, claims the county imposed conditions far greater than those imposed on similarly-situated recent applicants and other land owners who would benefit by the required infrastructure improvements.
It's a pretty detailed complaint and for a full recitation of the plaintiff's version of the facts I'd refer readers to Robert's blog linked above where one can read the actual document.
At bottom, according to the plaintiff -
The conditions imposed on [the plaintiff] are significantly different and impose a far greater burden on them as compared to the conditions imposed on other similarly situated developments that were processed by the County of Kauai prior to and after consideration of their projects.Arbitrary enforcement of zoning regulations. That's a problem we seem to be grappling with a lot here lately.
Pursuant to the constitutional protections [contained in the Equal Protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions], the County's conditions must have a rational relationship to a legitimate state interest in order to treat similarly situated persons differently.
Further, the County "may not rely on a classification whose relationship to an asserted goal is so attenuated as to render the distinction arbitrary or irrational. It is well established that a city may not enforce its zoning and land use regulations arbitrarily." [citations omitted]
0 comments:
Post a Comment