{"id":15846,"date":"2024-04-05T10:49:38","date_gmt":"2024-04-05T20:49:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.environment-hawaii.org\/?p=15846"},"modified":"2024-04-05T16:22:19","modified_gmt":"2024-04-06T02:22:19","slug":"calls-for-enforcement-at-marconi-point-finally-result-in-several-violation-notices","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/?p=15846","title":{"rendered":"Calls for Enforcement at Marconi Point Finally Result in Several Violation Notices"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

After years of complaints<\/a> from members of the public, the Honolulu Department of Planning and Permitting has begun to crack down on illegal farm dwelling and other development at the Marconi Point Condominiums on O\u02bbahu\u2019s North Shore.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In late March and early April, the DPP issued notices for the following violations:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unit 1<\/strong>, owned by Yue-Sai Kan, has a raised agricultural structure on it that the DPP allowed to be built without permits after Kan promised that it would not require electricity or plumbing. Recent inspections by the DPP found that the structure indeed had been upgraded with electricity and plumbing. Also, two greenhouses and a shipping container had also been constructed without required building permits. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although Kan\u2019s unit is one of the few within the CPR that are allowed a farm dwelling, she has not yet been able to build one. A Special Management Area (SMA) permit application submitted by her consultant last year, seeking to allow for farm dwelling construction and agricultural activities, was rejected by the DPP.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unit 8<\/strong>, owned by the Mary E. Breen Trust, had an existing agricultural structure illegally converted into a farm dwelling, and two ag structures had been built without permits. Breen\u2019s unit is another one that is allowed a farm dwelling, but her applications with the DPP to build one have stalled due, in part, to her failure to submit an agricultural development plan. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The CPR\u2019s developer, Makai Ranch, hired architect William Wong to help facilitate the approval of her permit. The fallout from that endeavor has resulted in claims in federal court that Wong and corrupt DPP employees (all now in federal prison for bribery) caused the department to halt further development within the CPR until an SMA permit is obtained. (See cover story<\/a>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Units 9<\/strong> and 10<\/strong>, also owned by the Mary E. Breen Trust, had a greenhouse built without the required building permit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unit 12<\/strong>, owned by Hui Kawela, LLC, had a two-story ag structure converted to a farm dwelling, a one-story new farm dwelling built, an ag structure fitted with photovoltaic panels, and two shipping containers installed, all without required building permits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unit 13<\/strong>, owned by Native Farmland and Security, LLC, had a two-story ag structure converted to a farm dwelling and a greenhouse, shed\/office, and shed constructed without required building permits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to these violation notices, the DPP issued two other violations notices to the Mary E. Breen Trust\/Mary Breen (for units 9 and 10), another to Hui Kawela, another to Kan, another to Native Farmland and Security, and two to Sushil and Lorene Garg\/Greystone HI Investments LLC (for units 16-19). All of those violation notices were for development within the SMA without the required SMA permit and apparently involved damaged or destroyed wetland areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For those violations, the notices stated that violators were subject to a civil fine of up to $100,000, and \u201cany person who undertakes any additional development in violation of this chapter will, upon notice \u2026 be subject to a daily fine not to exceed $10,000.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is unclear whether Kan\u2019s notice of violation for unauthorized development within the SMA includes an iron fence she had built that community members say poses a threat to nesting Laysan albatross in the area and should be taken down or replaced with a more benign, symbolic fence. The notice does not specify the problematic developments and DPP spokesperson Curtis Lum told Environment Hawai\u02bbi<\/em>, \u201cBecause these are open NOV\u2019s we cannot comment much on them.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Also, with regard to the DPP\u2019s grubbing violation notice<\/a> issued to all of the owners of coastal units at Marconi Point for unauthorized grubbing of about five acres along the coastline last October, that case has been closed. The DPP had proposed a small fine of $200, plus $100 a day if the violation was not cured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lum stated, \u201cThat violation was corrected before we could assess fines. So that one is closed.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He did not respond by press time to questions about what mitigation had been done or whether the initial $200 fine had been paid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Couple Seeks Dismissal of Complaint,<\/strong> Citing \u2018Matters of Public Interest\u2019<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Wayne and Tara Hu, owners of one of the Marconi Point units that are allowed a farm dwelling, were two of the many people (including former state Sen. Gil Riviere) who had raised concerns with the DPP over the years about some of the construction going on within the CPR.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Hus laid out their concerns in an August 2023 letter to the developer and its attorneys, and sent copies of that letter to various city, state, and federal agencies that they believed might be able to address some of the matters raised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their inclusion of the USDA, which backed a large construction loan for several agricultural warehouses on units owned by the developer\u2019s affiliate companies (RCA Trade Center, Inc. and MP Unit 21, LLC), prompted those companies last October to sue the Hus in 1st Circuit Court for damages and injunctive relief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A mandatory settlement conference has been scheduled for next year, but on March 15, the Hus filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. A hearing on the motion has been scheduled for April 24.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the motion to dismiss, the Hus\u2019 attorney, Peter Lenhart, acknowledged that the 60-day deadline to file the motion after being served the complaint had passed and asked that the Hus be granted an extension due to difficulties they had securing funding for their defense from their insurance companies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lenhart argued that the complaint should be dismissed because it violated free speech provisions in the U.S. and Hawai\u02bbi constitutions, as well as the Hawai\u02bbi Public Expression Protection Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Citing a 2006 Hawai\u02bbi appeals court decision (Meridian Mortg. v. First Hawaiian Bank<\/em>), Lenhart pointed out that to establish that the Hus wrongfully interfered with the companies\u2019 contractual relations, they must show, \u201c1) a contract between the plaintiff and a third party; 2) the defendant\u2019s knowledge of the contract; 3) the defendant’s intentional inducement of the third party to breach the contract; 4) the absence of justification on the defendant\u2019s part; 5) the subsequent breach of the contract by the third party; and 6) damages to the plaintiff.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lenhart argued that the companies can\u2019t establish that there was an \u201cabsence of justification,\u201d noting that the Hus, indeed, had a social justification for sending their letter to government agencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe Hawai\u02bbi State Constitution \u2026 makes clear that the preservation of the State\u2019s natural beauty and resources, conservation of agricultural lands, and the preservation of a \u2018clean and healthful environment\u2019 are for the benefit of the citizens of Hawai\u02bbi, and are, therefore, matters of public interest and concern. There have been numerous articles in Environment Hawai\u02bbi<\/em> and Civil Beat<\/em> reporting on issues at the Project related to many of the issues addressed in Defendants\u2019 Letter and several community organizations have also raised concerns similar to those of Defendants\u2019. If monies guaranteed by the USDA to build Plaintiffs\u2019 eight industrial warehouses were being put to illegal use, then the government should know and take action,\u201d Lenhart wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to seeking attorneys\u2019 fees, the Hus also asked for \u201cother relief\u201d for what they believe is an abuse of process by the plaintiffs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOpposing counsel in a Zoom conference held February 1, 2024, informed undersigned counsel that Plaintiffs were required to file Plaintiffs\u2019 Complaint in order to fulfill a \u2018defense obligation\u2019 contained in Plaintiff RCA\u2019s loan agreement which required Plaintiffs to defend against allegations that its collateral (i.e., the property secured by its mortgage) had invalid building permits. Opposing counsel\u2019s admission makes clear that Plaintiffs\u2019 Complaint is nothing more than a fa\u00e7ade to appease Plaintiffs\u2019 lenders. It is clear that the causes of action in Plaintiffs\u2019 Complaint are frivolous, meritless, and brought solely for the purpose of chilling Defendants\u2019 free speech and right to petition the government. Defendants\u2019 actions in mailing their Letter and requesting investigation into the questionable activities at the Project is not an action ripe for litigation since those actions did not cause or result in a breach of any of Plaintiffs\u2019 contracts or result in a business advantage to Defendants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOpposing counsels\u2019 actions in filing the Complaint was willfully done, by their own admission, without any intention of submitting to the Court a meritorious and serious request for relief. Those offensive actions have wasted the Court\u2019s and Defendants\u2019 time and resources and have further caused Defendants stress and damage by needlessly subjecting them to substantial attorneys\u2019 fees in defending against Plaintiffs\u2019 frivolous Complaint,\u201d Lenhart wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2014 Teresa Dawson<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

After years of complaints from members of the public, the Honolulu Department of Planning and Permitting has begun to crack down on illegal farm dwelling and other development at the Marconi Point Condominiums on Oʻahu’s North Shore. In late March … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":15847,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[523,338],"tags":[3],"class_list":["post-15846","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-april-2024","category-land-use","tag-teresa-dawson"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15846","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=15846"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15846\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/15847"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15846"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15846"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15846"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}