Proposal intended to clarify permit process has locals raising
eyebrows
Morgan Hill – A proposal to give new powers over development to the Santa Clara Valley Water District is raising suspicions among South County residents that the district will infringe on private property rights.
“This will open the door for them to take a stand to dictate the use of your land,” said Morgan Hill resident Tim Clancy, whose property is next to Uvas Creek. “They can compel you to get an environmental review report. They can compel you to do engineering. They can compel you to do things you may not really need but are expensive.”
District officials say the ordinance is intended to streamline the permitting process for landowners by clarifying streamside development rules, and protect waterways by ensuring projects receive the appropriate review. According to the district, the new regulations would cover 38,000 parcels in the county. There are about 300 outstanding creekside violations awaiting district investigation.
“It was a move taken out of simplicity,” said Jim Fiedler, the district’s chief operating officer for watersheds. “We didn’t realize it would raise issues that we’re over-regulating.”
The proposed ordinance would require property owners whose land comes within 50 feet of a creek or stream to receive a permit from the district for many types of development. It would also prohibit planting of non-native plants in and near waterways, clarify which projects require environmental review under state law and give the district new power to fine noncompliant owners.
The water district has required permits since 1959 and the existing ordinance was last updated in 1983. The effort to write a new one dates back to 2001, when the district proposed to subject all development within 150 feet of creeks and streams to additional review. That proposal met with outrage and inspired the Water Resources Protection Collaborative, the group that fashioned the newest proposal.
The ordinance was crafted through months of negotiations among the district, Santa Clara County and the county’s 15 cities.Â
Rick Smelser, an engineer who represented Gilroy in the talks, said the proposed ordinance is an attempt to simplify an ineffective system and won’t create onerous new regulations. Under the collaborative’s pilot program, Gilroy has developed a system to flag every property that would be affected by the ordinance.
“It’s really the easiest way, it’s more of a trigger,” Smelser said. “It shows the reviewer what they need to look for. It doesn’t mean that if there’s a 100-acre parcel we’re going to have certain conditions that cover all of the acreage.”
Currently, residents who want to build any structure within 50 feet of a stream or creek need to get a permit from the district, but residents and city and council officials alike say the process is ineffective. Often, developers aren’t notified they need a district permit at the outset of their project, and many structures are built without a district permit because planners often don’t realize the parcel is near a waterway.
But even those who support toughening creekside development regulations say the proposed ordinance goes too far. Jenny Derry, executive director of the Santa Clara County Farm Bureau, said South County’s farm community will support the ordinance only if it retains the current rule and doesn’t subject development more than 50 feet from stream banks to further review. Derry said farmers, with large plots of land, would be unfairly burdened by the new rule.
“We believe that, overall, this a really good ordinance. At this point the whole process is very inefficient and anything the county and district can do to streamline it will be helpful,” she said. “But why should you have to have a review if your house is built a mile from the creek? You shouldn’t be held to those same standards.”
The district board of directors is set to consider the ordinance in June. Fiedler said it was possible the ordinance will be passed without extending development review beyond the 50-foot limit. Ultimately, he said, the county and cities may choose to adopt their own ordinances. If those regulations substantively match the district’s ordinance, the agency will not have to issue a permit.
“We can’t be the eyes and ears,” Fiedler said. “Cities know their areas better than we do. It may be better for them to take on that responsibility.”
Smelser said a city ordinance would also make it easier for property owners.
“It’s probably best to have the city do it,” he said. “It streamlines the whole process. We hope to enfold it and make a seamless review. We don’t want to make it burdensome.”
Proposed Ordinance
A proposed ordinance would require land owners to get water district approval for development on any parcel within 50 feet of a creek or stream. There are several exceptions, including:
– Less than three cubic yards of digging
– A fence six feet high or shorter
– Storage structure smaller than 120 square feet
– Landscaping on existing single family plots
– Planting, harvesting or routine maintenance of crops
– For more information on the ordinance visit www.valleywater.org or call the district at 265-2600.
Also Online
For more information about the proposed ordinance, visit www.valleywater.org
