Our Purpose and Mission Statement:
The San Geronimo Valley Stewards (SGVS) is a community based organization working to represent property owners in restoring our creeks through collaborative volunteer efforts. The Stewards’ objectives are: To talk to the entire SGV community to develop a clear picture of the residents’ needs, desires, and abilities for creek restoration; Build a diverse community coalition as a resource to support valley residents’ responsible improvement of their properties; Support those individuals who are burdened, and those that feel they don’t have a voice in the future of their home; Bring information and resources to the Valley because we trust our neighbors’ to make wise decisions if they have good information and resources.
Grey Water News
Dear All,
The second draft of the greywater and rainwater code (Chapter 16 and
17) of the California Plumbing Code have been released. HCD sent this
email to their stakeholder list one week before the comments were due.
Below is a draft email you can use to adapt and send. This or other
comments regarding HCD’s proposals should be sent to Shawn Huff at
shuff@hcd.ca.gov. This letter as well as links to the proposed code,
can be found at
http://greywateraction.org/content/2nd-draft-rainwater-and-graywater-code-released
Sincerely,
Laura.
Dear Mr. Huff,
Thank you for your work on the graywater code. I appreciate the improvements made in the second draft of the code.
However, a few important changes are still needed.
Update the procedure for “estimating graywater discharge,” Section 1602.8.1: The current numbers reflect older, water inefficient fixtures. Many homes have water efficient fixtures and appliances, and their graywater systems should be able to be designed to match this. The graywater code needs to have two options for estimating graywater production, the current method of estimation, applicable to older fixtures and appliances, and a new one to reflect modern water efficient homes. Requiring homes with water efficient showers and washers to use the current estimation method adds unnecessary cost to the system and may even unfairly prohibit graywater systems in areas with small lots Sample numbers from other states' codes were included in my previous comments.
Include kitchen sink water as either “graywater” or “dark graywater” Kitchen sink water is clearly different than toilet water and should not fall under the same classification. Other states allow kitchen sink graywater to be used, including Arizona, Washington, Oregon, and Wyoming. Local jurisdictions have given experimental permits for kitchen sink systems, including a recent one in Palo Alto (http://paloalto.patch.com/articles/from-the-sink-to-the-garden-city-green-lights-graywater-test ) Since any unhealthy bacteria found in kitchen sink water originates from food preparation such as cleaning raw chicken or other meats, the potential danger from the water exists inside the home as well, making it illogical to ban its use for subsurface irrigation, at least citing health concerns as the reason. As water shortages grow in California it is important for residents to have the option of legally reusing all graywater sources. As a first step, kitchen sink water could be given a different classification from toilet and diaper wash water.
Thank you for your work to make California's codes support water conservation and reuse.
Kind regards,
Laura Allen
Greywater Action.
(copy of email sent out on April 23rd)
Dear Graywater/Rainwater Stakeholders:
During the past month, we have evaluated the written and verbal comments you provided and developed a second draft showing HCD’s proposed changes to the graywater and rainwater provisions, which ultimately will be published in the 2013 California Plumbing Code.
The attached documents, in both Word and PDF versions, are provided for your review and comment. Please return comments to us by April 29. Proposed Chapter 16 covers graywater systems and includes provisions previously found in Chapter 16A. Proposed Chapter 17 is a new chapter and covers rainwater systems. Although Chapter 16 has been reorganized, our goal is to not lose anything from Chapter 16A. We have developed a cross-reference matrix that can be used to find Chapter 16A sections now relocated in Chapter 16.
Please keep in mind that you will be getting two documents for review. One from HCD related to residential occupancies and the other from the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) related to non-residential occupancies. We have coordinated the contents as much as possible. Prior to final printing, these two documents will be merged into one publication with the sections not applicable to both HCD and CBSC identified with either an [HCD] or [BSC] banner. These are publication decisions made as the two proposals are combined.
At this point, we are not planning to have another focus group meeting. However, we will consider all comments received by April 29 before developing our final draft. The next opportunity to comment will be at a Code Advisory Committee meeting tentatively scheduled in July/August. After that, the next opportunity will be during the required 45-day public comment period and lastly, at the final adoption meeting conducted by the California Building Standards Commission. (See the attached rulemaking schedule for the 2012 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle.)
Please send any comments regarding HCD’s proposals related toresidential occupancies to Shawn Huff at shuff@hcd.ca.gov.
We sincerely appreciate your continued participation in the rulemaking process.
Department of Housing and Community Development
Division of Codes and Standards
1800 3rd Street, Room 260-33
Sacramento, CA 95811-6944
Information you will need if you choose to support our effort to stop the lawsuit between Spawn and the County of Marin:
The cases scheduled for that day start at 9 a.m. and you must pass through two levels of security. So, to be there at 9, when argument starts, you should be at the courtroom no later than 8:40. Leave all phones and unnecessary metal items in your car. We are the third case, although we could get moved up if another case is dropped. With two cases before us, you are probably safe to arrive (at the courtroom) as late as 9:20, but that is not certain. They will not let anyone in the courtroom while an argument is occurring. The court house is at 350 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. This webpage provides directions, including parking.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/2969.htm#tab7341 These are directions from Marin.
From the North Bay: From the Golden Gate Bridge, stay on Highway 101 and take the Lombard Street exit east to Van Ness Avenue, then turn right. Follow Van Ness south approximately 25 blocks to McAllister, and turn left. Follow McAllister one block. Parking is on your right. The building will be on your left.
Parking: No parking is available in the building. Directly across the street from the Earl Warren Building and Courthouse is the Civic Center Plaza Garage at 355 McAllister Street. Current rates are $3.00/hour or $24.00 maximum/day. Other public lots and limited metered street parking are available in the Civic Center area.
If you want your property rights respected and returned, please attend the hearing on April 11 at the S.F. Court of Appeals starting at 9 am!
YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND HELP DEFEAT SPAWN'S COSTLY LAWSUIT
If you would like to carpool, please contact us via email at info@sgvstewards.org
After I sent out the clarification about why we are going to court, one man had a question: "Why ask people to waste their time going to the courthouse to show support. What is the support for anyway?"
Donna eloquently replied back with this email:
The support is for us, (man's name), the homeowners whose property and lives are being affected by this lawsuit.
We need to support each other because from the beginning we were left out of the process. The SGVP group and the County partnered up with a litigious NGO who defines Valley issues and problems in a self serving way that makes money for them and places the burden, blame, and expense squarely on us.
Since Coho reds have nearly doubled from last year and the Steelhead reds count went from 16 to 238, a huge increase, Eric Ettlinger has been quoted on the MMWD blog as saying that improved ocean conditions are the primary driver of this upturn.
At the same time Todd Steiner is on media (KGO TV, KQED radio) saying people who live near the creek are the reason for the decline of the salmon and Coho survival is in the hands of the Marin Supervisors who need to provide regulations to move homes away from the streams. (!)
When the Stewards began years ago a SGVP VIP said, " I have seen organizations like this come and go; they will not last three months." The reason we are still here is because we show up and support
each other against the falsehoods and outrageous exaggerations being perpetrated against us in the name of environmentalism.
There are good environmentalists and bad. Bad environmentalists, as defined in an article in the West Marin Citizen, "don't recognize that human beings have been an inherent part of the natural landscape for hundreds of years. Bad environmentalists believe in a mythical wilderness that largely excludes humans except as visitors and tourists."
The Stewards have never heard a homeowner, once informed, say they were unwilling to do what is best for the environment. We support each other to do what needs to be done to insure a healthy habitat for the the fish and to protect ourselves from over regulation that can be enforced selectively by the County once pressured by SPAWN.
We are showing up to support each other and to interrupt this madness.
Marin County Red Tags Spawns Creekside House
Marin IJ Article
http://www.marinij.com/westmarin/ci_20107095
Lagunitas Creek Spawner Update by MMWD (February 2012)
Coho make a comeback and steelhead follow suit
Coho salmon appear to have completed their spawning run for the 2011-12 season. Only two live fish (both males) were observed last week. MMWD biologists will be conducting spawner surveys again this week in sections of creek that haven’t been surveyed recently, so a few more coho redds may still be found. For now our season totals stand at 130 coho redds and 340 live coho. Most spawning occurred in the main stem of Lagunitas Creek, but 23 redds were seen in San Geronimo Creek and 11 were seen in another tributary, Devil’s Gulch. National Park Service biologists reported seeing coho spawning in another Lagunitas tributary, Cheda Creek, for the first time in four years. Three redds were also seen in small tributaries to San Geronimo Creek. This year’s coho run was smaller than average, but five times larger than the parent generation of three years ago. This is a very hopeful sign that Central California Coast coho are making a comeback after three years of abysmal spawning runs.
Steelhead are also spawning in larger numbers than have been seen in recent years. Steelhead spawning generally peaks in February and continues into April, and to date we’ve counted 60 steelhead redds and 93 live steelhead. Half of the steelhead redds have been seen in San Geronimo Creek. As with coho, this year’s steelhead are unusually large (attached picture), which is an indication that they found plenty of food in the ocean.
Even without the final tallies, it’s not too early to start speculating about why coho and steelhead numbers are up. Of the 2,100 or so coho smolts (adolescent fish) that migrated to the ocean in 2010, approximately 12 percent returned. The rate of coho marine survival in the previous four years ranged between two and five percent. Improving ocean productivity is likely the primary factor that allowed salmon to grow larger and survive at a higher rate. Another potential factor contributing to the coho comeback is the Giacomini Wetlands restoration. In 2008 the National Park Service restored over 500 acres of tidal marsh at the mouth of Lagunitas Creek, providing additional rearing habitat for young salmonids on their way to the ocean. This season’s coho were only the second cohort to have access to this new habitat. Coho numbers from other California streams will hopefully be reported soon, and we should then be able to tease apart which factors improved regionally and which improvements were specific to Lagunitas Creek.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eric Ettlinger, Aquatic Ecologist
Marin Municipal Water District
220 Nellen Ave, Corte Madera,
CA 94925 (415) 945-1193
Please join our mailing list:
You will recieve a confirmation email. You must respond to the confirmation email to be added to the list.
