Council backs habitat for owl
ALBANY: Plan calls for fencing off 8.8 acres along waterfront; some residents concerned about losing open space

By Alan Lopez
CONTRA COSTA TIMES
Wednesday, April 5, 2006

The Albany City Council has approved a plan to fence off nearly half of a parcel of open space for burrowing owl habitat, despite concerns that the project will take away recreational space from current users.

The council voted 4-0 Monday night to back a plan that will cordon off 8.8 acres of the 20.7-acre plateau along the city's waterfront. The area is popular with off-leash dog walkers.

"When you talk enclosing, you mean excluding as far as I'm concerned," Albany resident Joan Larson said. "A lot of special interests got what they wanted and made deals, and we should put a stop on this process."

The habitat is a legal requirement under a plan to build ball fields at Gilman Street in Berkeley. A number of agencies and cities are backing the plan, and construction of the fields is scheduled to begin in May.

"It's unfortunate that we can't make everyone happy," Robert Cheasty, president of Citizens for East Shore Parks, said. "But we made enough people happy and enough compromises were made that it's a good idea."

The East Bay Regional Park District has the final say regarding the owl plan, Berkeley parks director Roger Miller said.

Ball field advocates had eyed the plateau as a spot for ball fields during the creation of Eastshore State Park in 2002.

Late in the process, 16 acres south of Gilman Street became available for the fields, to the delight of advocates as well as environmentalists who opposed that use on the plateau.

During a review of the environmental effects of the fields on the area, Berkeley determined that the fields would have a "significant impact" on a burrowing owl that had been seen during several winters in a southern corner of the land.

California environmental law required a mitigation for the impact on the owl, and it was decided that new habitat would be created at the plateau, which was designated in the Eastshore Park general plan as a conservation and informal recreation area.

"I think it's been a win-win deal for the community," Berkeley ball field advocate Doug Fielding said. "I apologize to people coming late to this and who didn't realize a lot of this already happened."

Residents in person and in letters complained that the city was going to lose valuable open space for humans.

"Albany is about to lose a piece of recreational parkland bigger than Memorial Park and Terrace Park put together," Albany waterfront committee member Susan Moffatt wrote. "Almost nine acres of the Albany plateau ... is about to be transformed from a lovely area for strolling, bird-watching and enjoying views of San Francisco and the Golden Gate into a fenced-off area off-limits to human access."

In other business, the council agreed to spend up to $20,000 to study the legal and fiscal impacts of a proposed initiative that would limit waterfront development.

A coalition of environmental groups is collecting signatures to place the initiative on the November ballot.

The initiative could hinder plans by Southern California-based developer Rick Caruso to develop a retail and housing development at parking lots of the Golden Gate Fields racetrack.

Environmentalists have already criticized city attorney Robert Zweben for hiring an attorney who has represented Caruso to help produce an environmental document for the Golden Gate Fields project.

At the Monday council meeting, the council was warned that residents may perceive the city as biased in favor of Caruso if it moves forward with the analysis for the initiative.

Zweben and Vice Mayor Farid Javandel said that was not the intent.

"It's not a bias against the initiative," Javandel said. "It's just to help us plan and prepare."