Page One

A proposal by the city attorney to amend the definition of what a creek is has caught the attention of creek preservationists who say the amendment is confusing and appeared suddenly without notice.  

The amendment to Berkeley’s Creek Ordinance appeared on the City Council’s agenda Tuesday but was pulled by Councilmember Kriss Worthington who said the language of the recommendation wasn’t clear. “It doesn’t have enough wording here to explain what a creek will be under the new definition,” Worthington said. “I just want to make sure all creeks are included.” 

The 1989 Creek Ordinance protects waterways in three ways, it prohibits any kind of obstructions, culverting and new construction within 30 feet of creek center. 

The written recommendation called for an amendment to the Berkeley Creek Ordinance to “define ‘creek’ as any above-ground creek appearing on the most recent version of the Berkeley creeks map.” 

Worthington said redefining exactly what a creek is, should be done very carefully. He said he was particularly concerned with the language of the recommendation, which seemed to change creek definition to only surface creeks. 

“The recommendation only says ‘above ground creeks,’” Worthington said Thursday. “A very large percentage of city creeks run underground through culverts and I want to make sure that all natural water courses are protected and that means above, below and partially below ground.” 

Wendy Cosin, acting director of Planning and Development, said the wording was taken from the current definition in the Creek Ordinance and is not meant to exclude culvert sections of creeks.  

“In fact a new map would show the approximate undergrounding of all watercourses.” 

City Attorney Manuela Albuquerque said the amendment was written because a homeowner challenged the Creek Ordinance while applying for a remodel permit for his Bret Harte property.  

The homeowner challenged the ordinance because he wanted to build within the 30-foot setback of the branch of Codornices Creek that runs through his property. That section of the creek does not appear on either the Geological Survey Map or the 1975 Berkeley Creeks Map, which are currently used to define creeks in Berkeley. 

Albuquerque told the council Tuesday her intention is to strengthen the current ordinance and that the definition should be broadened to include, “all natural occurring waterways.” 

She also said there would be a provision in the amendment that would allow any creek or waterway not currently mapped to be immediately updated and protected by the Creek Ordinance. 

Urban Creeks Council Vice Chair Carol Schemmerling, who was one of three people to write the Creek Ordinance, said there was some concern among preservationists because no one in the UCC or Friends of Five Creeks was consulted before the amendment was written. 

“The amendment looks like it’s OK, but it needs to be looked by people who are familiar with Berkeley’s creeks. ” she said. “We’re just asking that nothing be done until we can look at the changes.” 

Cosin said the City Council will consider the amendment to the Creek Ordinance again at its March 13 meeting.