Laserfiche WebLink
are not "repair, maintenance, or interior alterations" and they are additions to the <br /> footprint of the building envelop under roof and "new" -- a concrete lanai, a second- <br /> story covered deck, and the foundation for a staircase/closet. <br /> The Planning Director's decision is clearly erroneous because PC Rule 9 and <br /> Chapter 205A must now be read in pari materia with Act 17 (May 3, 2024). The <br /> transient accommodation use at 14 Oeoe St. is neither a residential use under state <br /> law, §46-4(a) (2024), nor an existing "single-family residence" under Planning <br /> Commission Rule 9-4(u), definitions. <br /> III. HOW THE DECISION APPEALED FROM WAS ARBITRARY AND <br /> CHARACTERIZED BY AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION OR CLEARLY <br /> UNWARRANTED EXERCISE OF DISCRETION. <br /> The Planning Director's decision appealed from was arbitrary and <br /> characterized by an abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion <br /> because SMA use permit assessment application No. PL-SAA-2025-000280 is <br /> incomplete. None of the additional information required by PC Rule 9-10 <br /> Assessments and the form the Planning Department uses, such as a site plan <br /> showing the off-street parking, was included. See, Appellant Exhibit 4, pg. 3, #1: <br /> "description of the proposed development in sufficient detail to convey the full <br /> extent of the improvement proposed to and upon the land. For example, in the <br /> construction of a structure, specify the amount of land area to be graded and leveled <br /> to accommodate the proposed structure, parking area and other related facilities. <br /> IV. HOW THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THE CAPACITY TO HOLD <br /> SOCIAL GATHERINGS AT THE TRANSIENT ACCOMMODATION <br /> 6 <br />