Laserfiche WebLink
��— `-'� <br /> In response to the question "Should future development be capped at a lower level in <br /> order to provide residents with a buffer against future Hetch Hetchy rate increases and <br /> drought reductions?" participants felt that impacts to residents from future droughts were <br /> considered an important issue. This was reflected in comments supporting a <br /> development cap to allow for a water supply buffer, providing incentives and public <br /> education on planting drought-resistant landscaping, and implementing stronger <br /> conservation efforts for residents and businesses before the next drought occurs. <br /> The UWMP and its proposed changes forecast a much rnore balanced picture of <br /> Redwood City's future water supply and demand. As the ' Dec. 19 staff report <br /> describes, the City Council will be asked to subsequently ��, consider' additionaf <br /> development review tools and .to fiurther explore the creation of Water Element for the <br /> City's General Plan update: "The premise that has guided staff in formulating <br /> recornmendations is that the Planning Commission and the City Counci{ should ha�r;e the <br /> ability to make informed land us� choices and know clearly what the impacts, and trade- <br /> offs on 'water supply and reliability wil{ be: <br /> 3of3 <br />