Remarks by Dale Byrne
380 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 15 of 16
So it's also codified. So Jeff, I know you want to move to the ADUs and get that in tonight.
I agree. Does somebody want to make a motion?
The option is dirt. Hans, go ahead. Do you make the motion?
All right. Let's just go ahead and get a vote. With the sunset clause?
I think Hans' statement showed it was unnecessary. It's already going to sunset and be part of the design guidelines on its own. Thanks for including that, Brandon. That was well thought out. All right. Thanks for everybody that would participate in that. That could save us some fire issues in town. And it shows that we're making progress. All right, so now we're gonna have a discussion on policy direction regarding the permitting of accessory dwelling units, ADUs and draft amendments to Title 17 relating to ADUs. We're obviously bumping close to our possible curfew time. So if we're gonna…
I have a question. Like why are we doing this and not you? I understand the policy setting of policies, but can you put a matrix in front of us that makes it in perfectly clear terms what the inconsistencies are and what you're asking us to decide?
Have a better favor. Are you asking us, do you want us, do we think you should tighten up our ADU ordinance to make it more difficult to build an ADU? Is that what you're asking? I don't think. Or should we not do that so we could build more ADUs satisfy our housing.
Okay. We can ask you questions in the discussion, I'm sure. Yeah, sure. Yeah, so let's move into public comment, unless anybody has a big question you want to ask right now. Public comment? Have we sufficiently confused everybody? As much as I'm confused? Okay. I'm starting to understand it. Hi. Yeah, Mike, thank you. Welcome. Thanks for being here.
I already guaranteed him that all of us have read all the public comments. But he's going to do it.
Thank you. And I appreciate you putting in writing so that we can.
You did. You did. And it's a very interesting situation that you're in. I don't think I've ever seen it. Are you gonna make a public comment, Chief?
I was hoping we'd have one more. Nancy, you're not gonna say anything? Little nudge at 9.20 at night.
Hopefully we'll clarify it a bit before we end this tonight. And that's part of this, right? That's part of the problem. Anybody else? Nobody online? Maria, you're not going to say anything?
Thank you, Maria. All right, we're going to bring it back. And I'm going to go to Jeff again. Jeff, I just want to thank you, Jeff, first of all, for this being here in the first place. It's clear that it was needed. And your discussion on water early and so on really sort of spurred this happening. And we appreciate it.
How does something like rooftop decks on ADUs enter into this discussion? And then I have a question about what a fully harmonized ADU ordinance would look like on a 4,000 square foot lot.
That's not part of harmonizing with the LCP. Or the Coastal Act.
Another aspect. So could you, in as simple terms as you can do here at 930, tell me what a fully harmonized situation looks like on a 4,000 square foot standard Carmel lot?
I've got a house with an 1,800 square foot house, including the garage, maxed out FAR. Yeah. And now it's fully harmonized. We've got our ADU ordinance in place. What can I do?
But I can't put an 800 or 750 square foot ADU on the back of my house to make a 2,500 square foot house?
So the kinds of units that we're seeing built right now wouldn't happen?
Interesting. Well done. All right. Anybody else have any discussions, comments?
Go ahead. Thank you. No, that's what I'm asking.
It's not right. Nancy? Nancy? Can I? Why don't you wait until after she's asked all her questions.
So how does the water issue that Jeff brought up a while back interfix with this? Do we even need it? Can we even talk about it? It's a better question.
OK, so it's still hanging out there somewhere.