.
Feedback

UC Dean Announces Plans Tied to Gill Tract for Program to Support Urban Farming

UC Berkeley's College of Natural Resources Dean Keith Gilless told the City Council on Tuesday night about his efforts to develop an urban agriculture program and center with roots at the Gill Tract.

[Editor's Note: The headline of this story was updated shortly after publication to clarify statements made by the dean Tuesday night.]

The University of California dean who oversees the Gill Tract announced plans Tuesday night to create a center for food systems, urban agriculture and food policy that would be connected to the research field for at least the next decade.

Keith Gilless, who runs UC Berkeley's College of Natural Resources, gave the City Council, route: {:controller=>"local_facts", :action=>"show", :id=>"albany-city-council"} --> and members of the public an update at and to force the university to let the city have a say in the Gill Tract's future. Fields said he was also disappointed when plans by the city to

Rona September 19, 2012 at 06:10 pm
Hmmmmm...I don't know....with "research" and "food" being in the same vicinity (sentence) of each other makes me scrunch up my face...I don't trust "their" research..or I should say I am "concerned" of the quality of the soil.
if they (the UC) provide information on the "soil" and it is tested that nothing "toxic" is in the soil..then I am for it..I've stated this in the past..or from past articles when the Occupy group was there planting things. I was concerned whether they checked the "soil" before they started farming. Just want safety, or as much as we can get nowadays.
Michael Barnes September 19, 2012 at 06:35 pm
Dean Gilless's letter on campus home page:
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2012/09/19/cnr-dean-outlines-new-plans-for-gill-tract/
Damon Lisch September 19, 2012 at 06:44 pm
I hope this means we can still do our research at Gill. It would be a shame if the net effect of this occupation was the loss of our open air laboratory. If we are in fact allowed to continue to our research unmolested, then this seems like it could work out for everyone. There is room for both urban farming and basic research, assuming their is mutual respect. No, I doubt the occupiers will be permitted to dictate exactly how the research on urban farming will be done, but it sounds as if academics that are sympathetic to their position will be directly involved. I'm not sure what else the University could have reasonably done to address their concerns. I honestly hope that they don't simply ignore efforts to accommodate their desire for making Gill a world-class center for urban agriculture as well as preservation of an invaluable resource for basic research. Will the Occupiers have the good grace to accept a yes when it's offered?
Asa Dodsworth September 19, 2012 at 09:20 pm
Only seven of the 20 acres are temporarily reserved for urban agriculture research. All of the Gilltract was historically for Urban Agriculture Research. We still need all that research land (just ask Damon). Fight is not over.
Asa Dodsworth September 19, 2012 at 09:27 pm
Finally some of the land has a short term guarantee for research!! Why can't Damon celebrate that!? All of the land Damon does research on (the aforementioned 7 acres plot) was slated or development, that's why they transferred it to capital developments, & that's why they won't allow research contracts lasting longer the one year. Cause Capital Development doesn't know what they'll be doing with it next year.
Yet those seven acres are just a third of the approximate 20 acres of almost exclusively research land that is the Gill Tract. Especially now that the diseased tree's were removed, there is more potential research land then ever before. Except for the Creek Zone, all of the land cleared south of the creek was for research. Its time to restart that research work, and reclaim that land. And no amount of commenting, or arm chair jockeying will accomplish that. Only intelligent community focused direct action will save this research land!! #OccupyTheFarm!!!
Muriel Strand September 19, 2012 at 11:52 pm
As a native & alum, and advocate for ecologically friendly agriculture, I would want to know more about the research mentioned above. Not all research is created equal. Also, the uses envisioned for the whole site are apparently not completely described. More information would help the discussion.
Michael Barnes September 20, 2012 at 01:47 am
I'll do some math here, just to provide some perspective, and make no other comments:
In surveyor's terms, a section is one square mile. There are 640 acres to a section. Therefore, one acre is (5280 x 5280)/640=43,560 sq. ft. By taking the square root of that number, we can determine that one acre, if a square plot of land, is about 209 x 209 feet. Multiply that by 7 to determine that 7 acres is a plot of land 209 x 1461 feet. That's a lot of vegetables. For comparison, note that the maximum size of the Whole foods market is 55,000 sq. ft. and that includes storerooms and other work area. 55,000 square feet is 55,000/43,560 = 1.27 acres. Finally, by dividing 7 acres by 1.27, we arrive at the result that 7 acres is more than 5.5 times as big as the square footage of the proposed Whole Foods market. One more comparison. I have two raised beds in my back yard. If fully planted, they keep me busy. Each is 4' x 12', for 48 sq. ft. Let's say if I was retired, and devoted most of my time to gardening, I could take care of 10 such beds, a total of 480 sq. ft. Note that 7 acres is 43,560 x 7 = 304,920 sq. ft. Divide that number by 480 to arrive at the result that if one person can handle 480 sq. ft. of garden, then 7 acres requires about 635 people. Or a lot of mechanization. I'll leave it to the reader to draw their own conclusions.
Damon Lisch September 20, 2012 at 09:47 am
Yup. That's about what I expected.
tr September 20, 2012 at 02:52 pm
mr. barnes, why are you using the size of whole foods for comparison when it is less than half of the project? do you know the size of the entire proposed uc development including the other retail spaces and assisted senior living?
if you were on the council now, would you support rescinding the development agreement or holding a special election? would you have voted to certify the eir? any comment on little league fields and the agriculture land being guaranteed for only 10 years?
Tatter Salad September 20, 2012 at 03:15 pm
Asa,
I'm saddened to hear the 'diseased trees,' mostly pear I believe, were removed. The U.C. Ag department, along with the Entomology Department have been using those trees for years to further our knowledge of natural pest control. If you've got a better idea, or location in Berkeley/Albany for such work, please publish it. If you REALLY want to create a community garden, then I will supply a rototiller for you to get started at the failed 'Owl Habitat Restoration' project, which is just a half mile away from the Gill Tract.
Asa Dodsworth September 21, 2012 at 07:27 am
Dear Tater Salad, The trees I'm speaking of are not the pear tree's on Buchanan (1/8th an acre) but the Monterrey Pine Trees on the San Pablo side of the Tract (3 - 4acres). The Pines were removed two years ago in October 2010. http://www.cp.berkeley.edu/CP/Projects/GillTract/HazardousTreeRmvl.html

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Albany Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Amy Smolens June 7, 2013 at 02:57 pm
Hi there - This doesn't seem like an appropriate announcement for Albany or Berkeley Patch. 1) theRead More category is Announcements/Around Town and these events are all in Marin 2) Patch's "Terms of Use" say "You may use this Service solely for personal and non-commercial purposes. That is to say: You can’t use the Service to make a living unless you enter into a separate agreement with us that says you can." This is clearly solely a commercial venture, not a neighbor of ours or local organization providing a community service and charging for the service. 3) I went to the Novato website and saw this listing: "Ettiquette (sic) Series for Kids - 17737 Ages: 7 Years to 11 Years - Residents $150.00 - Non-residents $163.00" 4) These items push our items of local interest down and out of sight. Especially now that there is no box indicating the stories with the most recent comments, as there used to be on the Patch front page, out of sight does mean out of mind. Charles, what are your thoughts here? Thanks.
angie allison June 7, 2013 at 03:45 pm
Hi Amy, Thank you for letting me know and I understand! Angie
Mechanics from Street Level Cycles tune up bikes at the Albany Arts & Green Festival. Photo courtesy Matt McHugh
Lin B. June 6, 2013 at 11:29 am
I've been waiting for the right time to donate my son's old bike he used in middle/high school. It'sRead More been hanging on hooks in the garage and this seems like a great time to give it up!
christopher papazoglow June 7, 2013 at 10:30 am
Can you please post their hours / days of operation ? As i recall, they're only open afternoons aRead More few days a week, and it won't do to just leave donations outside ( they'll be scavenged ). And i was not able to find the info online.
AS&R - Albany Strollers & Rollers June 7, 2013 at 11:20 am
Thanks, Christopher. Open Community Hours are Friday, Saturday, Sunday 12-6pm so anytime those daysRead More are definitely fine. They're there (84 Bolivar Drive - Aquatic Park) most of the day Wednesdays and Thursdays for Youth Classes and the doors are locked. I just spoke to Amber Rich and she asked you to call them at 510 644 2577 and let them know what time is good for you and they will be sure to be there. Thanks for your generosity!
Dover June 5, 2013 at 02:47 pm
Thanks for the update but I am worried. This is very distressing. How will Eric and Tarina be ableRead More to afford their annual lengthy hipster vacation if they have to cough up lawyer fees? I am sure they were expecting that UCB (aka the rest of us) would pay Mr. Siegel's bill. Now they may have to resort to staying home and eating Top Ramen out of their charming and cheerful "made in Asia by small children but they're not slaving for 14 hours a day in front of our faces so we don't care" ceramic bowls. Oh noes! Bad, bad, very, very bad news.
Charles Burress (Editor) June 5, 2013 at 03:06 pm
David, thanks for the alert to the judge's decision.
Preston Jordan June 9, 2013 at 12:42 pm
Thanks for the comments Erika, Robert and Al. I am kind of amazed to read "Max's owners do notRead More think that the increased business would be worth the hassle." Yes, the customer base may change, but aren't total sales the goal? Regarding the 18 stop, there is discussion of moving it around the corner as part of this change. Even if it does not move around the corner, reducing the number of buses stopping on the south side of Solano would improve traffic flow according to the traffic consultant. Commissioner Javandel, who is also a traffic engineer and head of Berkeley's Transportation Division, agreed and voted for included shifting the stop north in the San Pablo plan. A stop to the north would allow motorists turning right onto Solano to do so more easily, which would reduce congestion and be good for business. It would also result in some of the time the bus is stopping occurring during a red on San Pablo anyway. Al, I think your concern about motorists stopping in a northern bus stop potentially causing problems not only for San Pablo but also for Solano is a good one. If I attend another meeting concerning the San Pablo plan, I will raise this point.
Erika Lockhart June 9, 2013 at 01:51 pm
I guess it is a done deal and Max's doesn't have the petition out any longer. It is interesting toRead More me that the people who profess to be in favor of Albany's being a walking city use traffic concerns to support their points. There is a restaurant on the south side of Solano, somewhere people may be for hours and may be willing to drive around for a parking spot, and a "liquor store", which also provides all kinds of other things one might need in a quick stop, where people will be for minutes. With the green zone there, there is quick turnaround. And, there seems to be some blind spot about business that might be lost if those parking spaces are lost. I drive there and spend $10-$50. Are the bus stop people going to be spending so much? As one commenter said, they survived before, they will survived before. The unsaid thing is "even if beaten down". That's just my opinion! I realize I'm spitting in the wind here but it seems to me that this change did not engage enough people for a fair decision. Then again, I'm new here, not "plugged in", and if no one else thinks the way I do, perhaps I should move somewhere else.
Robert Marshall June 9, 2013 at 09:55 pm
I went into Max's on Friday and asked about the petition. They have it behind the counter. As ofRead More when I saw it, there were something like 130 signatures. As for moving the AC Transit 18 stop around the corner?? How many of the very much in demand parking spaces will be lost by doing that?