* * * IMPORTANT * * * <br />It's also important to realize that this whole mess arises from the unnecessary and complicating <br />addition of "Accessory Dwelling" to the R-2 (and R-3 and R-4) zones under EC Table 9.2750 (Section <br />7 of the "Substitute Ordinance." <br />By far the best approach would be to strike those additions, and then the two amendments to S-C <br />and S-JW, above, would be entirely unnecessary. Everything would be simpler and clearer. The <br />council could accomplish this easily by approving the following motion: <br />MOVED: <br />In Section 5, delete the "P(2)" entries for under the R-2, R-3 and R-4 columns in Table 9.2740. <br />In Section 7, delete the following entries under the R-2, R-3 and R-4 columns in Table 9.2750: See <br />(17)", see (17)(a) and (b)" and see (17)(c))". <br />It would serve all parties' interests for the council to not unnecessarily complicate the code just <br />because planning staff still appears to mistakenly think amendments to R-2, R-3 and R-4 are <br />required for compliance with SB 1051 despite the clear opinions to the contrary by the DLCD <br />representative and the City Attorney. <br />Than you for your consideration. <br />Paul <br />Accredited Earth Advantage <br />Sustainable Homes Professional <br />