Has removal criteria changed?

General Discussion
21

But it doesn’t mark the lot as not multi-family either. It could be any type of residential lot.

22

Agreed - which is why the map site designation is not sufficient in itself and the further detail is necessary to confirm. Which has now been found.

23

I think you both are bending over backwards to guess and make assumptions when that’s nothing of the sorts as to what staff had in mind.

And we shouldn’t have to.

1 Like
24

Which is why when a decision is contentious Staff should give an explaining why the decision was made?

1 Like
25

And is there anything wrong with bending over backwards to try and help out? We’re trying to help and figure out why the outcome you received is said outcome.

Isn’t help appreciated? Isn’t something that could have been missed be helpful? Really, I don’t mind helping.

26

Frankly, I think it comes off as distracting and distancing from the reasoning staff gave. They did not say “this property is not zoned as single family private residential property,” they specifically said “not located on the property of the private residence next to it.”

I’ve asked them to clarify where their research provided that missing detail.

I don’t really care what speculation you want to make about it but it certainly doesn’t seem relevant to their decision unless they comment otherwise.

1 Like
27

Well, it’s not my fault that this thread was started.

28

I agree. Debating over the R1 and R3 classification is a moot point that only serves to distract.

30

This might not be true. There used to be a clear page dedicated to removal reasons in response to an AMA but that has since been deleted by staff. There’s also been other silent changes over the years. And as staff continues to stand by this, it’s certainly a big shift from past removal stances.

I think we’ve both finished our thoughts here and could both move on until staff clarification.

31

And staff has already made a statement:

32

A follow up question was asked in a reply to staff. Aside from that everything else has been speculation when it could have simply been left to staff to follow back. There’s no need to respond or get the last word in as it has been made clear they simply want a response from staff and not opinions or speculation.

33

So why do you get the last word? I think everyone has moved on, and there may not be an answer to the follow-up, as staff may not share what evidence they used.

34

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, everyone! Based on the discussion, I’ll go ahead and close this thread.

3 Likes