The Albany Waterfront future, as envisioned by Albany residents. Blue markers indicate areas residents want converted to, or preserved as, open space. The area enclosed by the blue line represents the approximate space most residents would allow to be developed to generate tax revenues.

By Barbara Grady

A two year study aimed at figuring out what Albany residents wish for the city’s 190 acre waterfront concluded this week with a report to the City Council indicating most people want a major expansion of public park space.

The “Voices to Vision” community engagement found that 62 percent of residents who participated want to expand open space by at least 75 acres, according to Fern Tiger Associates, which did the study. That would mean a total of 163 acres of parkland, wetlands, trails and supporting structures at Albany’s waterfront, an area that now includes the Albany bulb, the Golden Gate Fields race track and parking lot and the Eastshore State Park plateau.

However, ‘Voices to Vision” also found that half of participants hope that enough development occurs on the waterfront to maintain current tax revenue generated from the site: approximately $1.7 million now received from Golden Gate Fields.

Of course, any community vision depends on a developer’s inclination to follow that idea or a local government’s willingness to implement it. Right now, 102 acres of the waterfront is privately owned by Golden Gage Fields racetrack owner Magna Entertainment Corp. The bulb is owned by the city and the plateau by the state. Magna, which has been in Chapter 11 Bankruptcy proceedings since last year, has entered an agreement to give Golden Gate Fields to its largest shareholder, MI Developments Inc., in exchange for repayment of debt. MI is a real estate operating company which manages commercial and industrial developments. However, any major new development on the Golden Gate Fields property would require a zoning change and therefore city approval. That is why the city sought to determine residents’ interests.

City Council members will get a chance to ask Fern Tiger detailed questions about the findings next Monday night, April 19, at the council’s regular meeting at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall.

In a nutshell, “The Albany community envisions a 190-acre waterfront that is a model of environmental and economic sustainability; that supports a multi-generational community, small-scale independently-owned businesses and local arts, culture, and cuisine,” Fern Tiger wrote.

Years of contentious debate at City Hall and elsewhere over whether to seek commercial development at the waterfront or create parkland there led the city in 2007 to commission a community engagement study. Albany City Council voted to spend $600,000 to hire Fern Tiger Associates. The firm, in turn, mailed each household in the city a detailed publication about the waterfront, its zoning and ecological functions and then invited the entire city to participate in 40 different neighborhood meetings.

At those meetings, Fern Tiger asked people to map out their own ideas for the waterfront. Later it asked them to take an online survey and attend followup meetings. In all 1,200 residents participated, drafting 199 maps of their ideas for the site.

Fern Tiger said the gist of what residents produced in those 199 maps showed “Albany’s strong commitment to create and enhance public open space at the waterfront; to acknowledge and support the broader regional plan to create a continuous shoreline park; to restore and improve the site’s wetlands, marshlands, and other natural features; and to enable an appropriate type, scale, and quality of private development that reflects Albany’s goals for economic and environmental sustainability, while simultaneously respecting the city’s and the waterfront’s uniqueness.”

What all the maps have in common is expansion of open space beyond the Albany Bulb and Eastshore State Park plateau area into the space that is now a parking lot. In addition, they all include some kind of hotel and retail stores development.

Eighty-five percent of respondents indicated that a hotel on the site was a good idea with many favoring a 3-story hotel and small conference center as well. A majority of residents participating also voted for some retail and restaurant development on the site. Most suggested development where Golden Gate Fields currently stands. Some people would go beyond a hotel and add a conference center or museum or arts center.

By Barbara Grady

After a round of community meetings about the Albany waterfront indicated that residents want both expanded open space and a continuation of tax revenue-generating activities, residents now have a second chance to voice their opinions. They have two days left to respond to a detailed survey about their hopes for the 190 acres of land along the San Francisco Bay. (Go to www.voicestovision.com to respond to the survey)

The City of Albany’s “Voices to Vision” process has been trying to determine if Albany residents want the land to be open for development or preserved as open space and park land — or some combination of the two. Consultant Fern Tiger Associates has run the Voices to Vision process which started with 38 town meetings last spring.

This second, current phase of the online survey ends at midnight Friday Nov. 20 when the www.voicestovision.com survey will be turned off. All residents were mailed a postcard giving them a password to access the site. If you no longer have the card, please call 510-444-4567 or email info@voicestovision.com.

In the first phase of Voices to Vision, “Everybody indicated additional open space but some people thought just another 20 acres and others 85 or 90 acres,” said Fern Tiger, owner of Fern Tiger Associates.

“There appeared to be real interest in making sure that site preserves the amount of tax revenue it currently provides,” she continued. Most years, the Albany Waterfront draws tax revenue from Golden Gate Fields, $1.14 million last year plus about $600,000 in school parcel taxes. However, this year Golden Gate Fields’ owner Magna Entertainment Corp. is in bankruptcy proceedings under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy code so it has not paid all of its tax bills. According to Magna, there is a tentative plan to put Golden Gate Fields up for sale in February of next year.

The fate of the Albany waterfront has been a subject of debate in this city for many years. The Albany bulb – an extension of land jutting out almost a mile from Buchanan Avenue – was once a landfill but has become a tree and bush covered peninsula that many people hike and bike. The area around it is either owned by the East Bay Regional Park District or the City of Albany or Golden Gate Fields. Developers sought approval a few years ago to build a shopping plaza and condominiums on the site. But citizen opposition to those idea quashed the possibility of getting a zoning change to permit that commercial development. The debate about waterfront development got so rancorous that the City of Albany hired Fern Tiger Associates to help it determine which way Albany should go.

The City with Fern Tiger Associates, plans to hold another series of community meetings in January of next year to consider the range of options that residents voiced interest in for waterfront development.

Horses and trainers prepare for a race at Golden Gate Fields

By Barbara Grady

The Golden Gate Fields race track is scheduled to be auctioned off for sale on February 25 in a U.S. Bankruptcy Court proceeding designed to let its owner Magna Entertainment Corp. sell assets to raise funds.

But whether a sale of the Albany horse racing venue actually takes place is still up in the air, officials said, and dependent on negotiations with bidders. As Magna, the largest owner of horse race tracks in North America, has put other race properties up for sale as part of its reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, it has met both success and obstacles. Two weeks ago it sold its Lone Star Park in Maryland with bankruptcy-court approval for $47.9 million. But a planned sale of its Pimlico Race Track in Maryland – home of the famous Preakness races – has been delayed as Magna bypassed its lead or stalking bid bidder.

“There’s still a lot of questions surrounding the auction and how it is going to take place,” said Robert Hartman, Golden Gate Fields general manager. “I’m not sure if Golden Gate fields will in fact be up for auction on Feb. 25,” he said.

Magna Entertainment filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy court protection in March, stating that excessive debt and interest expenses. Golden Gate Fields and all of Magna’s horse racing venues have continued operations during the Magna restructuring.

One likely bidder for Golden Gate Fields as well as most of Magna’s racing assets is MI Developments Inc., an affiliated Magna company which is Magna’s largest shareholder and largest creditor. The initial court papers with its Chapter 11 filing stated that Magna entered an agreement with MI Developments to provide debtor in possession financing and, in exhange, Magna would consider MI Developments the “stalking horse” or first bidder in the sale of certain assets.  To read its Chapter 11 filing go to Magna’s website at www.magnaent.com.

Ontario, Canada-based Magna owns many of the most famous race tracks in the country. The Albany track itself holds claim as Northern California’s main horse racing venue.

But the Albany track lies across 102 acres of waterfront property that has been coveted both by community members seeking more open space in Albany as well as by developers. The site includes access to beach front and has a spectacular view of San Francisco. One developer who petitioned the City to change zoning to allow him to build a shopping center there met stiff opposition from community members.

The site also is adjacent to land owned by the East Bay Parks District and by the City of Albany, so many people argue it is logical to expand the parks and recreation opportunities there.

The City of Albany has undertaken a study of community wishes for use of the site, called “Voices to Vision,” which is underway now. To participate, go to www.voicestovision.com.

The 68-year old horse racing track has been part of the Albany landscape and business since the 1940s. Horse races occur almost daily during the racing seasons of November through March and again in summer. But it is rarely crowded.

Albany waterfront visitors, and those who might be visitors if conditions were different, will have a chance soon to offer suggestions concerning dogs on the publicly-owned 88 acres at the waterfront.

The City of Albany’s Waterfront Committee (WC) on July 27 voted to ask City staff to provide a report of conditions and issues related to dogs at the waterfront. This vote followed extensive discussion of a report prepared by committee member Francesco Papalia. Papalia researched waterfront conditions by interviewing park visitors onsite this spring. He concluded that Albany’s waterfront is “a de facto off-leash dog park without any enforcement of any rules.” (read Papalia’s report at These public parklands are contiguous, with few boundary markers, so Papalia’s report encouraged coordinated rules for an ordinance.

Papalia noted that many human visitors are professional dog-walkers who don’t live in Albany but find Albany’s waterfront good for their business: no rule enforcement, no business license needed, no limit on the number of dogs walked at one time, no penalty for failure to clean up after the dogs. His report listed twelve issues about dogs at the waterfront, and several possible solutions. Most solutions would require a City of Albany ordinance.

Most solutions also would require coordination with the East Bay Regional Park District, which operates about 55 acres of East Shore State Park on Albany’s waterfront, at the beach, neck, and plateau. The City owns another 33 acres at the bulb plus a right-of-way on the Neck. Map:

Albany’s City Council adopted in June an ordinance concerning dogs in other Albany parks. The ordinance was proposed by Albany’s Parks and Recreation Commission, after it held public meetings at all other Albany parks. This new ordinance can be expanded to include rules for dogs at the waterfront, according to Albany Recreation Director Penelope Leach. (A staff report for the July 27 Waterfront Committee meeting said WC had declined an offer from the Parks and Recreation Commission to include the waterfront in the ordinance earlier this year, because the committee wanted more time to get public input about “more complicated” issues.)

During the discussion July 27, several WC members supported the suggestion that Albany consider adopting East Bay Regional Park District rules, which in general require dogs to be on leashes, limit the number of dogs a visitor may bring at any one time, and prohibit dogs on swimming beaches. Nearby public dog parks including Point Isabel, and Cesar Chavez Park in Berkeley, have similar rules.

Issues relating to dogs at Albany’s waterfront are likely to be on the next Waterfront Committee meeting agenda, September 14 at 7:30, at Albany Community Center ) The public is invited to the meetings, which usually are held second and sometimes fourth Mondays. Waterfront Committee meetings are broadcast live on KALB 33 in Albany, and are webstreamed on the City’s site. Videos of prior WC meetings are available online (scroll under “Community Videos”) at this link.

 The City of Albany has joined the East Bay Green Corridor Partnership, which should open the way for Albany to participate in the green jobs creation and green business recruitment that its neighboring cities of Oakland, Berkeley, Emeryville and Richmond pursue.

 Joining should also help Albany to benefit from $76 million in federal Stimulus money awarded to the Partnership for weatherization, green job training, bio-energy research and carbon capture endeavors.

 “We are a small city,” without the space or clout to attract large businesses, said Albany Mayor Marge Atkinson. “But by leveraging strengths with the other cities and sharing information,” Albany can participate and benefit by the burgeoning green economic activity, she said.

 Atkinson, and the mayors of El Cerrito, Alameda and San Leandro, along with the Chancellors of the Peralta Community College District and Contra Costa Community College District and the President of California State University joined the East Bay Green Corridor Partnership at the organization’s annual summit last week. 

 The East Bay cities of Oakland and Richmond have become nationally known for pioneering work in creating green jobs training programs, the Oakland Green Jobs Corps and Solar Richmond, while Berkeley and its institutions are known for ground-breaking research in renewable energy, as is underway at the University of California at Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.  Emeryville, meanwhile is becoming a mecca for bio-fuels research because of a new research institute founded there, the Joint Bio-Energy Institute.  This Institute, which is researching ways to create affordable bio-fuels, has already spawned numerous start up companies, said Emeryville Mayor Dick Kassis.  And Berkeley is pioneering a solar installation incentive program with its tax rebates to residents who install solar.

The mayors of Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond and Emeryville along with the chancellor of UC Berkeley and director of Lawrence Berkeley Lab formed the Green Corridor Partnership two years ago.

Albany has been active in making itself “green “ by developing a plan to lower its carbon footprint, see Albany Climate Action Plan, see http://www.albanyca.org/index.aspx?page=256  and by encouraging businesses and residents to do the same.  Recently, it has made home energy audits available through Rising Sun Energy Center, a program based in Berkeley. http://www.albanyca.org/index.aspx?recordid=256&page=303

But Albany has not pro-actively recruited green companies or green jobs programs. Atkinson said space limitations are one issue. However, one idea that emerged at the Voices to Vision meetings about use of the Albany waterfront is to attract a world-class renewable energy firm or research institute. The East Bay is ripe for attracting investment in green companies, officials with the East Bay Green Corridor said.  For one thing, Lawrence Berkeley Lab has 170 graduate students working on ideas for renewable energy and carbon capture. Paul Alivisatos, director of the Lab, said some of these ideas could become new business start-ups.

 The $76 million in federal Stimulus grants awarded to date to Partnership members include

-  $30 million over five years to fund two Energy Frontier Research Centers at UC Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley Lab for researching how to capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and store it permanently underground.

-About $18 million was awarded for weatherization, energy efficiency and green job creation in the Green Corridor cities of Berkeley, Oakland and Richmond.

-  $24 million grant to Lawrence Berkeley Lab to figure out how to clean up underground contaminants

- $4 million grant to the Joint Bio-Energy Institute to purchase equipment for bio-fuels research.

 “The expansion of our East Bay Green Corridor partnership is phenomenal,” said Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums.  “Leaders have come together to stress the importance of building a green economy and we are perfectly poised to be the model of innovation, economic and business development, and job training.”

 Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates said, “Working across city boundaries with our educational partners, we have created green tech businesses, leveraged our stimulus funding, and the expansion of green jobs for our residents. “

“Both of us, along with all the members of the City Council, have supported a visioning process, so that we can hear everyone’s ideas, including those who think we should do nothing.”

Dear Readers of Albany Today:

We are glad to see that Albany’s “Voices to Vision” community visioning process with Fern Tiger Associates is already generating ideas.  We respect Mr. Barnes and Mr. Blanchard, the authors of the latest opinion piece in Albany Today, about this planning process.  We hope that they will participate in the community meetings in their neighborhoods and express their ideas.

Groups such as the California Climate Action Team have predicted that the sea level may rise up to one meter within the next one hundred years and this would certainly increase the land area that would be at risk for a coastal flood event.  The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission is encouraging communities to develop plans related to changing shoreline configurations.

Both of us, along with all the members of the City Council, have supported a visioning process, so that we can hear everyone’s ideas, including those who think we should do nothing.

We believe that it is important for us to plan together for the future.  We look forward to participating in the community meetings which Fern Tiger Associates has organized for us.  This is an important opportunity for all of us to speak up about Albany’s future.

Thank you.

Marge Atkinson,
Mayor, City of Albany

Joanne Wile,
Vice Mayor, City of Albany

“As Albany residents,the two of us do not want our tax dollars spent to acquire and upgrade land for parks that will soon  be submerged. And we certainly wouldn’t want to live there, either.”

The controversy surrounding the Albany waterfront is presented as a choice between two opposing positions — commercial development or parkland. But these two positions are not really so different. They are both models of development.

The supporters of both flavors of waterfront development are ignoring a painful environmental reality — the lifetime of the waterfront as we know it is will be measured in decades. By the end of the century, due to rising sea levels, the waterfront will most likely be a tidal basin.

There is a third position, one that is both environmentally sound and fiscally responsible. Do nothing and enjoy the waterfront just as it is. As Albany residents, the two of us do not want our tax dollars spent to acquire and upgrade land for parks that will soon enough be submerged. And we certainly wouldn’t want to live there, either.

On weekend of January 10––11, we headed down to the Albany waterfront to see the effects of the 7.4 foot high tides that occurred late in the mornings on both those days. We didn’t have to look far for evidence of flooding. The lower reaches of the parking lot already have traces of debris that have washed up onto the asphalt during winter storms.

We did some quick checking with simple homemade surveying equipment (we are happy to provide details for anyone interested in a science project) and a detailed contour map provided by the County of Alameda. We found that with one meter of sea level rise, most of the waterfront will be underwater at high tides, leaving the Albany bulb and the racetrack grandstands as islands.

We can conservatively expect one meter or more of sea level rise this century, as two articles in Science magazine point out (see issues of 9/5/2008 and 2/6/2009). The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) uses similar figures for its discussions of the coastal impacts of rising sea levels.

Rising sea levels will also bring bring increased risks of flooding during storms. According to the PPIC (California Coastal Management with a Changing Climate, Ellen Hanak and Georgina Moreno):

Within the San Francisco Estuary, which is protected from the most violent wave action, the incidence of coastal flooding is expected to increase considerably. Models indicate that a one-foot rise in sea level (likely by mid-century) would shift the 100-year storm surge-induced flood event to once every 10 years (Gleick and Maurer, 1990).

In addition to whopping insurance premiums, long-term commercial development of the waterfront will require landfill and levees — levees that must be expanded regularly as the sea level continues to rise. Sort of like New Orleans, but with earthquakes.

Alternatively, public funds could be used to acquire the land for parks. This possibility is the motivation behind the city council’s $600,000 visioning process. The inevitable rise in sea level suggests a much cheaper visioning process — envision the waterfront underwater, at least at high tides.

A grim long term fate awaits Albany. Climate change will bring more violent storms and the need to upgrade city infrastructure. Perhaps a few centuries from now, assuming the sea level rises by only 50 feet, the San Pablo corridor will be submerged, Albany hill will be an island, and students at Cornell elementary will be able to play in the bay during recess.

Let’s enjoy our funky, feral piece of waterfront land just the way it is while we still have the chance, and instead of using resources on a disappearing waterfront, let’s use them to begin planning for the painful changes to come.

If you’d like to comment on the topic, please leave your message under the article or send them to linjun9913@berkeley.edu.

The Albany Waterfront is a paradise for off-leash dogs, but not for as many kids and families. The land’s future is being shaped, as Albany conducts a $600,000 project to abridge disagreements and develop a common vision for it. Photo by Linda (Linjun) Fan.

Residents would often divide into two sides and fiercely attack each other when the waterfront planning issue was brought up on public meetings in Albany. But recently the quarrels seem to be subsiding, as a city-hired consultant began to engage residents to build consensus on the most controversial issue in town.

 The Albany waterfront is located on the western edge of the city and encompasses approximately 160 acres of land between Highway I-80 and the bay. A large portion of the land is occupied by Golden Gate Fields racetrack. And the rest was accumulated as a former landfill, which is now maintained minimally by the city and the state as a park and sparsely visited by residents.

The company that owns the racetrack tried to develop part of the land in 2006, but later withdrew its plan under vehement opposition from a significant number of Albany residents. Two of the leading opponents, Marge Atkinson and Joanne Wile, were elected into the City Council that year.

A majority of Albany’s current councilmembers are against extensive commercial development on the land, and wishes to see it developed as public recreational space as much as the city could afford it. They believe that the racetrack will be sold or closed in the foreseeable future, and the city should get prepared for the scenario. As a result, the Council passed a waterfront planning project last November, and hired a consultant in the spring to engage residents and develop a common vision for the land.

But a considerable number of residents were skeptical of the project. Some believe that the racetrack will stay for years and it’s not the city’s business to plan for a privately-owned land. Some think it costly to spend $600,000 in city funds on the project. Some were worried that the majority of the Council would use the project as a tool to push for their own vision and ignore different voices.

Fern Tiger, the consultant hired for the project, and her associates are well aware of the sensitivity of their task. Instead of giving clear-cut options, they started the engagement by interviewing about 70 residents who hold widely different views on the issue, asking them un-presuming questions, and carefully included diverse voices in their first work report, which was presented to the Council Monday.

This approach impressed many residents, including those who were originally against the project.

“I believe that this company here really listened, ” said Francesco Papalia, a resident who used to criticize the city’s waterfront initiatives.

He said he had faith in Tiger’s ability to find an effective way to engage more residents.

“She showed that by her ability to express the diversity of opinions that exist at this moment, ” he added at the council meeting.

Papalia then called for all Albany residents to get involved in the planning process.

His words obviously touched a chord with Councilmember Marge Atkinson, who praised him for “reaching across the aisle”. The two were campaign enemies in the 2006 council election and had always stood on different side of the waterfront controversy.

“I appreciate Mr. Papalia’s comments. I hope we will get many different people in Albany to participate,” she said. “It’s a great statement.”

Councilmember Jewel Okawachi and Farid Javandel, who voted against spending the city funds on the project in March, said they were encouraged by Tiger’s work and would support it.

“This is one of the better discussions on the waterfront that we haven’t had for a while,” Javandel said. “I am hopeful that it’s just a start of us to work together.”

But a few residents said they were still concerned with the cost of project. Resident Robert Outis said that the project had prompted the city to increase property transfer tax.

“I think it’s unfortunate that no one on the Council or the candidates for the Council has recognized that this process is ill-advised in ill time, ” Outis said.

The City intends to increase its property transfer tax from the current $11.5 per $1,000 value to $14.5 per value, and the Council approved the move in the summer to put the tax measure on the November ballot .

City Administrator Beth Pollard responded that the tax measure was not related with the waterfront project, but to boost funding for general municipal services.

Pollard mailed a letter to every household in Albany last month, introducing the waterfront planning process as “a critical issue to the city”, and calling for all residents to participate in it.

“What happens on the waterfront is in the hands of each of us,” Pollard said in the letter.

Click here to read the full text of the letter.

Fern Tiger Associates will disseminate more information on the waterfront to Albany residents, and host discussions in each city block in the spring to engage hundreds of people into the planning process.

Click here to read Fern Tiger Associates’ first report on the waterfront visioning process. Below is a slideshow made out of a dozen pictures I took at the waterfront in the springtime.