Albany staff and consultants present phased plan to remove some eucalyptus, restore native habitat on Albany Hill

City staff and consultants presented the near-final Albany Hill Forest Management and Habitat Restoration Plan to the Albany City Parks, Recreation and Open Space Commission, outlining phased eucalyptus removals, habitat restoration and pilot plantings to balance wildfire risk, monarch-butterfly habitat and native vegetation recovery.

The presentation, led by Margo Cunningham, Natural Areas Coordinator for the City of Albany, and consultants from Restoration Design Group, asked the commission for final comments before staff sends the plan to the City Council for approval. "We're here to present the just about final Albany Hill Forest Management and Habitat Restoration Plan," Cunningham said.

Why it matters: Albany Hill has been used seasonally by monarch butterflies and contains a mix of eucalyptus stands and remnant native habitat. The plan seeks to reduce hazardous fuel near homes and roads while protecting the sections used by overwintering monarchs and retaining or salvaging native plants to support long-term habitat recovery.

The plan and approach The consultants described three primary objectives that shaped the plan: reduce fire risk, maintain monarch habitat where it currently exists, and restore native habitat. The project is organized into seven phases: three phases of removals and four phases of restoration. Work will proceed from the exterior of the site inward to minimize risks to adjacent properties and infrastructure and to preserve known monarch aggregation areas until later phases.

The team emphasized a public-bid approach that separates tree-removal contractors from restoration contractors so each contractor can be selected for relevant expertise and so the work can be performed carefully. Consultants said they will salvage and store native plants for reinstallation and protect important existing native patches in place. They also plan adaptive management: planting initial test trees and small restoration patches, watching which species perform best, and scaling up the successful mixes in later phases.

Monarch habitat and tree choices Consultant and local monarch biologist Stuart Weiss, who has worked on monarch conservation for decades, told the commission that monarchs are not restricted to a single tree species but instead use sheltered forest structure in mild coastal microclimates. The plan designates a Monarch Management Zone and a buffer; the most critical monarch aggregation area on the hill will be excluded from removals except in cases of clear hazard.

The team is proposing field trials of candidate replacement trees intended to provide suitable structure and nectar resources for monarchs while meeting fire-safety and drought-tolerance needs. Species under consideration for trials included Canary Island pine, Catalina ironwood, and several non-native eucalyptus variants; the report said those and other species will be scrutinized and tested before large-scale planting.

Timing, cost and permitting The consultants provided estimated costs by phase (presented by the consultant during the meeting): Phase 1 (pilot) notated in the presentation as a pilot start; Phase 2 approximately $641,000; Phase 3 approximately $346,000; Phase 4 approximately $523,000; Phase 5 approximately $324,000; Phase 6 approximately $195,000; and a final restoration phase approximately $419,000. The consultants said the overall project would likely be implemented over multiple years and suggested grouping phases for efficiency (for example, combining Phases 1, 2 and 3; 4 and 5; and 6 and 7). A rough multi-year implementation window of about 10 years was cited by staff as a reasonable planning horizon, with funding dependent on grants and the city's capital program.

On environmental review, staff reported the Community Development Department is preparing a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) determination. Presenters described the draft CEQA conclusion as an exemption for "minor alterations of land and existing facilities," citing activities such as fuel management and plantings; staff said they would confirm technical thresholds and acreage with Community Development before finalizing CEQA findings.

Public comment and biological concerns Several residents and local naturalists spoke during the public-comment period. Birders and neighborhood residents urged the commission and staff to retain standing snags and to protect areas used by nesting raptors, including great horned owls. Ralph Pericoli and others described the ecological value of snags for cavity nesters and perching raptors and asked that the city preserve enough structure to support those species.

Speakers from the consultant team and a biological subconsultant (Nomadicology) said year-round nesting-bird surveys can be conducted and that retaining adjacent private-property eucalyptus will mean some tall-stature trees are likely to remain on the hill after city work is done. Dana Terry of Nomadicology said nesting surveys can be done any time of year and that great horned owls are highly adaptable and often use edge habitat and existing adjacent trees.

Distinguishing discussion from decision The commission did not take a formal vote to adopt the plan at the meeting. Staff and consultants asked the commission for final comments and indicated they will return the plan to City Council for approval after incorporating feedback and completing permitting and funding steps. The presentation and public discussion generated detailed technical and wildlife-protection questions that staff said they will address before transmittal to the council.

Clarifying details extracted from the presentation and public discussion - Project acreage: staff said the city-managed portion of the crest and east side subject to the plan is about 11 acres (private property areas are not included). - Phasing: 7 total phases (3 removal phases and 4 restoration phases), with recommended grouping for implementation. - Cost estimates by phase (as presented): Phase 2 ~ $641,000; Phase 3 ~ $346,000; Phase 4 ~ $523,000; Phase 5 ~ $324,000; Phase 6 ~ $195,000; Phase 7 (final restoration) ~ $419,000. (Phase numbering/figures cited during the presentation; staff will publish a final cost summary in the plan package.) - CEQA approach described by staff: draft finds an exemption for "minor alterations to land and existing facilities"; staff said they will confirm acreage thresholds with Community Development. - Replacement strategies: pilot plantings and test trees in monarch and buffer zones, salvage and reinstallation of native plants, use of woody material and mulch on site where feasible.

Next steps and forward look Staff asked the commission for final comments and indicated the plan will be revised to reflect the commission's and public input, finalize the CEQA determination, refine costs, and then be sent to the City Council for consideration and potential adoption. Funding will be pursued through grants and the city capital program; staff cautioned that grant timing and city budget cycles will shape the implementation pace.

Evidence and provenance This article summarizes the Albany Hill Forest Management and Habitat Restoration Plan presentation and related public comments recorded in the commission meeting transcript; staff and consultants requested comment prior to transmittal to council and no final adoption vote occurred at the meeting.