The Planning Commission last week unanimously approved revisions to the San Geronimo Valley’s draft stream conservation area ordinance, designed to advance protections for the Lagunitas Creek watershed and its endangered salmonid populations.
The commission passed two resolutions: the first to approve amendments to the ordinance and the second to rezone all lots in the San Geronimo Valley. Because not all properties in the valley have the same zoning, the ordinance implements overlay zoning, a tool that creates special zoning districts within a base zone. The overlay won’t change a property’s underlying zoning but enforces the ordinance by treating all properties the same.
The commission first reviewed the draft in December, but the ordinance was since revised to incorporate terms from the May settlement between Marin County and the Salmon Protection and Watershed Network. The settlement will resolve SPAWN’s litigation dating back to 2007 in exchange for an agreement by the nonprofit to stop suing the county over its streamside development rules. The resulting draft requires tightened development restrictions in the valley’s 100-foot stream conservation area, the expansion of a no-build zone from 20 feet to 35 feet, the shrinking of certain building allowances from 500 square feet to 300, and the inclusion of ephemeral streams, or those that only flow after rains.
Kristin Drumm, a senior planner with the Community Development Agency, said limiting development along streams is a necessary measure to protect endangered coho salmon. Many homeowners and groups like the Sierra Club agree.
“Like myself, the majority of valley residents support this ordinance,” Eric Morey, a 33-year resident of the valley, said at last week’s hearing. “I live within 100 feet of two ephemeral streams, one on each side of the property, and this ordinance will have no effect on the use and enjoyment of my property, while at the same time it helps protect the streams, the riparian habitat and the creatures that live there.”
But others believe the ordinance would put an unnecessary financial burden on homeowners. “With this new ordinance, a lot of the money and the work for this is falling on the residents and property owners of the San Geronimo Valley,” said John Reed, who owns multiple streamside lots in Lagunitas. “I think the end result is that you’re going to bankrupt families.”
Mr. Reed pointed to the proposed fines of up to $500 a day for violating the ordinance with activities like constructing a shed or fence within the S.C.A. without a permit. Ms. Drumm said there are several steps taken to remedy a violation before citing a homeowner, which is the last resort.
Resident Josh Murphy argued that because the county owns a greater share of impervious surfaces than homeowners, the responsibility to limit development shouldn’t rest solely in private hands. “One need only look at the miles of Sir Francis Drake in the San Geronimo Valley and other roadways in the valley that were specifically built in the creek, which is now in the S.C.A., to see the outsized impact,” Mr. Murphy said.
Tom Lai, the director of the Community Development Agency, said the county has spent millions on sediment reduction programs and ensures that road crews follow best management practices related to sensitive habitats.
Other residents are concerned about how the ordinance, which limits the removal of vegetation within the S.C.A., would impact wildfire mitigation. Steve Tognini, a board member of the San Geronimo Valley Stewards, said local fire agencies conducting home inspections often suggest that homeowners remove fire-prone vegetation. Yet the ordinance would protect native and riparian vegetation within 100 feet of the bank. “The ordinance must allow and support homeowners in the San Geronimo Valley with their needs to protect their families, homes and properties in the forests where we live from the intense forest fires witnessed over the past three years in California,” Mr. Tognini said.
The ordinance exempts the trimming and removal of dead, invasive and exotic species, including fire-prone vegetation. Ms. Drumm said that homeowners must follow tree protection ordinances and suggested they keep documentation such as photographs or an arborist report for reference. No live tree or vegetation can be exempt if it is greater than six inches in diameter at breast height and is growing between the creek and the top of the bank, even if it is fire-prone or invasive.
The ordinance may also grant permission for development within the S.C.A. if the entire lot falls within it or if development outside of the designated area cannot be accomplished or would have greater impacts than if the project was located within the S.C.A. Exemptions are also provided for the repair and maintenance of septic systems.
While some residents remain wary of increased regulations, many agree that the ordinance is a necessary step toward safeguarding the watershed. “This S.C.A. ordinance recognizes the right of the creek to its continued existence,” Mr. Morey said.
The Board of Supervisors will consider adopting the ordinance on July 19.