Brisbane hearing on plan in butterfly habitat

Publisher: San Francisco Chronicle
Reporter: Peter Fimrite

Brisbane hearing on plan in butterfly habitat By Peter Fimrite Tuesday, January 19, 2010 The quest to build homes on San Bruno Mountain has once again stirred into action local conservationists who claim approval of a proposed development will ruin habitat for endangered butterflies. The Brisbane City Council will hold a public hearing tonight on whether to approve additional language in an environmental report that would allow 71 homes to be built on the mountain, 80 fewer than had been previously approved. Members of the conservationist group San Bruno Mountain Watch are opposed to the plan despite the reduction because they say it will cut off habitat for the endangered Callippe silverspot butterfly. The butterfly, exclusive to grassy hills around the Bay Area, remains in only two locations, San Bruno Mountain and in some hills in Cordelia, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "The plan does not leave a viable corridor for the butterflies, thus isolating them and preventing biological diversity," said Ken McIntire, executive director of San Bruno Mountain Watch, which has been fighting proposed developments on the mountain for years. The development would allow 71 homes of between 2,800 and 3,500 square feet on a ridge with no public transportation, McIntire said. He said the homes would cut off the historic butterfly migration route and prevent the insects from breeding with butterflies from elsewhere, reducing genetic diversity. The butterfly, with its orange-brown coloring and black spots, is native to San Bruno Mountain, where the Canadian developer, Brookfield Homes, has already built 428 of the 578 homes that were approved by the council in 1989. The original plan in 1982 was to build 1,250 condominiums. The company was planning to build 108 town homes and 43 single family homes until 1997 when the Callippe silverspot, named for Calliope, the ancient Greek muse, was listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Under pressure from Fish and Wildlife, Brookfield officials agreed to cut the town homes out of the plan and instead build 28 single-family homes in an area on the northeast ridge that is less sensitive habitat for butterflies. Brisbane City Council members said the proposed change in the environmental report reflects a willingness on the part of the developer to consider the plight of the butterflies. Rejecting it, they fear, would mean the 80 additional homes that were originally approved could be built. "The original plan is already approved, so if you don't approve this I believe it would revert back to the original project," said Mayor Clarke Conway. "I think the lesser number of units is better than a greater number of units," said Councilman Steve Waldo. Not true, said McIntire, who pointed out that the California Environmental Quality Act would require a review of current conditions if the addendum is rejected, including impacts from climate change, traffic, the need for affordable housing and water conservation. Besides, he said, returning to the 1989 project plan would require PG&E to move 15 high voltage transmission towers, which itself would require an Environmental Impact Report. San Bruno Mountain, where the Gold Rush era outlaw Joaquin Murietta once hid after robbing stage coaches between San Francisco and San Jose, is the northernmost portion of the Santa Cruz Mountains. It contains the 2,326-acre San Bruno Mountain State Park and the 83-acre San Bruno Mountain Ecological Reserve on the north slope. The hearing will be held at 7:30, at the Brisbane City Hall, 50 Park Place, Brisbane. This article appeared on page C - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Developer bulldozes butterfly habitat on San Bruno Mountain

Publisher: San Mateo County Times
Reporter: Julia Scott

Developer bulldozes butterfly habitat on San Bruno Mountain By Julia Scott Posted: 10/04/2009 11:00:00 PM PDT Updated: 10/05/2009 09:50:55 PM PDT BRISBANE — A developer bulldozed an area containing endangered butterfly habitat on San Bruno Mountain last week, catching city officials off-guard and enraging environmentalists who plan to file a lawsuit to prevent the company from preparing the land for homes to be built. Although the bulldozing appears to be legal, environmentalists with San Bruno Mountain Watch say the mechanized removal of vegetation on a portion of the Northeast Ridge owned by Brookfield Homes was a cynical attempt to wipe out the last vestiges of habitat for the endangered Callippe Silverspot and Mission Blue butterfly species. Their concerns prompted a site inspection by Brisbane and county officials on Monday afternoon to make sure that the work was in line with what was approved by the county. The officials' conclusions were not available by press time. The developer removed the vegetation early last week on part of a 20-acre site slated for 71 townhouses on a hill overlooking San Francisco. A county consultant approved the work in mid-September, ostensibly for erosion and sediment control of the hillside above a roadway and existing development. On Sept. 22, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors issued a separate and unrelated permit that would allow construction to proceed starting early next year, pending final approval by the Brisbane City Council. Last week's site work was, therefore, expected at some point, and Brookfield Homes prepared for it in August by uprooting 250 Johnny Jump-ups, the host plant of the Callippe Silverspot, and moving them to a safe place on another hillside. It was the timing of the work that surprised Ken McIntire, executive director of San Bruno Mountain Watch. He wonders why Brookfield Homes chose to remove native vegetation and replace it with special grass seeds to minimize erosion when the developer could have left the hillside alone until next spring, when grading will occur in earnest. Leaving the property alone would have prevented erosion and given the butterflies a few more months to propagate, said McIntire. "Why are they spending all this money to scrape away plant material that was preventing problems and spend more money to replace it with mechanical, artificial ways of doing the same thing?" he asked. "Next spring they'll be doing a heck of a lot more than scraping, so why do it twice? I think they wanted to get rid of the habitat as quickly as possible. Now Brookfield can say that there's no butterfly habitat on their building site any more." Brookfield Homes Vice President Kevin Pohlson did not return calls seeking comment. San Bruno Mountain Watch founder David Schooley discovered the soil where the plants had been last Sunday while on a nature walk. The hillside near a sparse grove of eucalyptus is now bare but for some rocks and dirt. Workers have installed a "waddle" — a long flexible barrier to catch sediment — at the base of the cutting. "I looked at the spot where the Silverspot and Mission Blue are — the place I'd been checking for years. It was sheared off. I was horrified," he said. Schooley called Brisbane City Manager Clay Holstine, who was surprised at the news. He said the city had told the developer to "button up" the construction site by Oct. 15 — in other words, cover it for the winter — but he said he had no reason to believe Brookfield Homes was planning to touch the hillside zone known as a protected area. "We would have said, `Why are you doing that now? You're not going to be doing any construction until next spring,' " said Holstine. City and county officials seemed to disagree about who has final responsibility for approving work of this nature. Holstine said the Brisbane Public Works Department did not sign off on the bulldozing work ahead of time because it's not part of the process. "The city staff isn't out there overseeing where the work is going to be done — that's not their responsibility because that's what the county does." San Mateo County Parks Planner Sam Herzberg said the county sent a consultant to the site to "fine-tune" the plan just before the vegetation was removed. Herzberg said the review approval he issued was based on erosion control measures approved by Brisbane — the lead agency in such matters. Whether or not the work should have been done is beyond the county's purview, according to Herzberg. "It's for the erosion control engineer and the city of Brisbane to determine. I didn't come up with this plan." Reach Julia Scott at 650-348-4340.

Development threatens wilderness on San Bruno Mountain

Listen to the Public Radio Show 'Crosscurrents' Broadcast About This Story:
Development Threatens Wilderness on San Bruno Mountain

From the early 1900s until the late 1960s, San Francisco dumped its garbage into the Bay near the small town of Brisbane. For this, Brisbane owes a San Francisco a hearty thanks. Really. For a long time, the overpowering smell stopped development, keeping the wilderness around Brisbane intact. After that, grassroots efforts convinced politicians to set aside what has become 23 hundred acres of state and county park. KALW’s Judy Silber reports that more recent years, the pressure to develop has built up, threatening the wilderness and the species that live there.

Please note: this story contains a factual error. The founder of San Bruno Mountain Watch is David Schooley - not David Schooner. KALW News apologizes for the mistake.
Show Aired 9/29/09 6:12 pm  

---

Board approves development on San Bruno Mountain despite threat to endangered butterflies

Publisher: San Mateo County Times
Reporter: Julia Scott

Board approves development on San Bruno Mountain despite threat to endangered butterflies By Julia Scott Posted: 09/22/2009 06:00:21 PM PDT Updated: 09/22/2009 08:30:11 PM PDT REDWOOD CITY — Ignoring protests from environmentalists, the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted unanimously to award a permit that would allow development of a section of San Bruno Mountain known to contain endangered butterfly habitat. The controversial vote was one of the final hoops Brookfield Homes will have to jump through on its way to breaking ground on a 71-home subdivision on the Northeast ridge of San Bruno Mountain in Brisbane. The county, which protects and restores parts of San Bruno Mountain, was asked to amend its Habitat Conservation Plan to allow some endangered Callippe silverspot butterflies to be killed to make way for the single-family homes. The permit next goes before the Brisbane City Council for final approval. Opponents of the project have fought hard to protect the butterfly and its habitat, the final known remaining habitat for the Callippe silverspot on earth. An extensive letter-writing campaign orchestrated by San Bruno Mountain Conservancy resulted in 180 letters to the county, and many Brisbane residents spoke with great passion at Tuesday's meeting (one Brisbane resident was in favor). Nevertheless, no one seemed surprised by the Supervisors' vote. "It's just another major chip away at the habitat of an already severely imperiled species," said Philip Batchelder, a board member of San Bruno Mountain Conservancy, speaking after the meeting. The project has in fact been planned for years and is part of a much larger development on the mountain's Northeast ridge, a development environmental advocates have fought tooth and nail since the 1980s. The listing of the Callippe silverspot as a federally endangered species had the effect of cutting the planned development down from 151 homes to 71 homes on 20 acres, which will be built as one neighborhood instead of two. Another 20 acres next to the construction site where more homes would once have been will be conserved as butterfly habitat. Those concessions seemed to influence the supervisors' decision to approve the special permit, as did a promise by Brookfield Homes to give a $4 million endowment to the county for natural habitat restoration elsewhere on San Bruno Mountain. The endowment would triple the amount of money the county could spend each year on habitat maintenance. "There's been inadequate funding in the past to protect the butterfly — I believe this funding will help us do that (better)," said Supervisor Mark Church. "This is a compromise. We're giving up a lesser habitat and gaining a significant habitat." Kevin Pohlson, vice president of Brookfield Homes for the Bay Area, reaffirmed his funding commitment at Tuesday's meeting and seemed anxious to gain approval after more than a decade of delays. "Our developments have been reduced in half. The process has been lengthy, very difficult and has affected our property greatly," he said. A total of 476 Callippe silverspot butterflies were counted on San Bruno Mountain in 2008 by a firm hired by the county to monitor their population. Project opponents dispute the scientific process used to reach those conclusions, just as they dispute a finding of "no significant impact" issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service this May — the equivalent of their stamp of approval for the development plan, notwithstanding any effects on the butterflies. Batchelder and his group want a full environmental review of several questions they say were glossed over in all the reports prepared for Tuesday's meeting, and they are prepared to sue to force the county to conduct one. Paul Carroll, the attorney for San Bruno Mountain Conservancy, submitted a letter to the county on Tuesday that asserts the county violated the California Environmental Quality Act by not ordering a full Environmental Impact Report based on new evidence that suggests the development could destroy a crucial pathway for the Callippe silverspot by fragmenting it with homes. Batchelder said the group is discussing whether or not to mount a lawsuit against the county over the matter. If so, they have 30 days to file a notice of intent to sue. "What we're really trying to draw attention to is that the development as proposed would severely encroach on the ability of the butterfly population on the Northeast ridge to migrate to the rest of the habitat on the mountain," said Batchelder. County planner Sam Herzberg said butterfly advocates are making a big deal over a development that would remove no more than 1.7 percent of Callippe silverspot habitat. "We know what significant habitat we need to protect, and we're dealing with the habitat restoration we need to do. The Callippe silverspot is doing well on the mountain overall," Herzberg said. Herzberg added that people often forget that 2,828 acres of San Bruno Mountain are protected as permanent conserved parkland thanks to the county's Habitat Conservation Plan, which was created in 1982. "Before the HCP was adopted, the entire mountain was proposed for development," he said. "Other mountaintops in the Bay Area have been completely developed."

Deadline nears for comment on plan to protect butterflies on San Bruno Mountain

Publisher: San Mateo County Times
Reporter: Sean Maher

Deadline nears for comment on plan to protect butterflies on San Bruno Mountain By Sean Maher Posted: 08/29/2009 06:20:00 PM PDT Updated: 08/29/2009 07:28:27 PM PDT SAN BRUNO — Monday is the deadline for county residents to speak up about likely changes to a plan that deals with protecting endangered butterflies on San Bruno Mountain, officials said. At stake is an amendment that would allow the final stage of a decades-old plan to build housing on the northeastern ridge of San Bruno Mountain, which is home to two endangered species of butterfly: the Callippe Silverspot and Mission Blue butterflies. The San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan is about 27 years old, and would allow Brookfield Homes to complete a housing development by building 71 houses on 20 acres of land, which is about half the scope of the developer's original proposal. Habitat conservation plans are documents required by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from anyone from developers to research scientists whose work could affect endangered species. The Brisbane City Council approved the proposal in March 2008, and the plan was approved by the Fish and Wildlife Service this year. Kevin McIntire, executive director of San Bruno Mountain Watch, a nonprofit that has been fighting the development plan, called habitat conservation plans "loopholes in the Endangered Species Act that allow for development in ways that damage endangered species." McIntire said the San Bruno Mountain plan, which was first drafted in 1982, is based on outdated research that doesn't assess the current condition of the butterflies Advertisement or their habitat, and called for additional research before any final decisions are made. The revised habitat conservation plan also includes a $4 million trust fund to be created by Brookfield and managed by a board of trustees who would all be city managers of cities surrounding the area, according to Dave Holland, director of the San Mateo County Parks Department. "The grass the butterflies live on loses 51/2 to 8 acres per year because of other aggressive plant species like coastal scrub," Kevin Pohlson of Brookfield wrote in an e-mail. "The county doesn't have funds to combat that, and this would create that funding." If the county approves the amendment to the habitat conservation plan the proposal for construction would then go to the city of Brisbane for approval before Brookfield can break ground. "We're pretty sure they'll pass final approval for the project," McIntire said. "If that happens, it will be up to us to decide whether we feel we have a lawsuit we could win that would block development, or modify development. We're trying to be realistic, and they will probably get some kind of project there." Anyone wishing to submit a comment before the hearing can contact Sam Herzberg of the San Mateo County Parks Department at 650-363-1823, sherzberg@co.sanmateo.ca.us, or by mail at 455 County Center in Redwood City, 94063. The county Board of Supervisors will hold a hearing on the issue Sept. 22.