2127 - Laserfiche WebLink

Policy 19: To limit the number of units any developer is allowed to build in any given year in order to ensure several different developers are allowed to build in any given year. The reason for the policy above was to spread development approvals among a substantial number of builders who had been "waiting in line" for building permits under the various interim moratoria prior to the adoption of RAP. There may be no need for such a policy under future growth management procedures. The wording of the policy, as well, is probably too specific to be included in a General Plan Element. Policy 20: To revoke the approval of developments which do not make acceptable progress. Policy #20 establishes the basis for the eighteen month life of project approval under RAP. While the City has been generous in granting extension of these approvals it may be desirable to main- tain a period of validity in order to protect dwindling sewer capacity and to encourage speedy performance by developers in meeting obligations incurred while participating in the growth management program. Policy 21: To ease the procedural requirements of the residential allocation program with respect to those small developments which, because of their size, would not affect materially the growth rate or provision of services should they develop. Provisions to facilitate smaller residential projects should be retained under any growth management system. The remaining policies of the existing Growth Management Element refer to such divergent issues as the percentage of multi-family housing to be provided in the future and the requirement for water and energy conservation in new construction. The staff sees the need of changing only one of these policies at this time. Namely, policy #6 which refers to the maintenance of reserve sewage capacity in the DSRSD and Sunol service areas. This policy should be eliminated. A negative declaration accompanies this report. Based on the initial environmental study done for this project, it is the staff's opinion that case GP-81-10 would not have any significant adverse effects on the environment. If your Commission concurs with this environmental assessment, you must make the finding that the negative declaration is appropriate for the project. The finding must be made prior to taking action on the project itself. In making this finding you should review the contents of Resolution No. 77-66 (Environmental Impact Guidelines and Procedures). Please refer to page 8 of the Guidelines for the definition of significant effect and pages 20 through 22 of the Guidelines for the details on determining significant effect. -4-