Tim Palmquist is addressing council about upcoming 40-day, 24-hour anti-abortion prayer vigil. He says this has been held here 3 times previously and there have been no complaints.

He mentioned, but did not specificy, ominous statements from city officials implying they would somehow interfere.

His wife Terry Palmquist is now talking about the 30-minute parking zone on H by the family planning clinic where their group protests abortion on a regular basis. City staff at the last meeting said the zone would not be changed.

Jacquie Sullivan wants parking issue sent to Leg and Lit committee to look at parking policy.

Sue Benham, who chairs L and L, is asking city atty Ginny Gennaro for her opinion: wouldn't planning and development committee be better?

Ginny: You are correct: if more of a global issue, P and D would be better; if ordinance change, Leg and Lit more appropriate.

Sue: As chair of L and L, I think better reviewed as a global matter in Pl and dev...I would ask Councilmember Sullivan to refer to P and D.

Jacquie: I'm on Leg committee...I think it's much more appropriate for Leg and Lit comm to hear personal issues involved and also hear policy. I feel it's a policy issue. My strong feeling...send to leg and lit. I think that's the place for it.

Jacquie makes a motion to send to L and L committee; Couch asks to speak before they vote.

Couch: I'm not sure quite what we'd be taking up in Leg and Lit, or what Pl and Dev would take up.

Couch is asking to defer referral for 2 wks so Jacquie can meet with staff to clarify the referral.

Ginny says that would help staff and whatever committee gets this. Staff prepared report 4 weeks ago, will go over that with Sullivan...

Couch: Vice Mayor has prerogative to appoint ad hoc committee also... another option...

Sullivan: I would defi like to be one of the members on the committee making a recommendation. I think there are defi some discrepancies here regarding policy... waiting two weeks not a problem.

She withdraws the motion until the next meeting.

In the cute human interaction department, retiring city Fire Dep't Capt. Edward Watts teared up several times after getting a plaque from Harvey Hall (and a $150 AmEx gift certificate, which he said his wife should have come up to accept...)

As Watts briefly recounted his career, including the first day he came to work for the city 29 years ago, he again choked up. It's all gone so fast, he noted... "the rest of my life is for my four grandkids and my wife..." he managed to say before heading back to his seat, where his wife and grandkids sat beaming.

 Also seated in the row was the father of those grandkids...presumably either Watts' son or son-in-law...who leaned in as Watts sat down. Not sure if he said anything or was getting ready to rib the patriarch for his soft moment, but Watts uttered (in a nice way): "Oh, shut up!" 

It was loud enough the rest of us in chambers could hear. Everyone cracked up.

Sweet moment.

Closed session...Mayor Hall estimated about an hour....

Curious.  How can the Council approve the Canyons at this point when the Williamson Act contract has not been cancelled yet and the thousands of dollars owed by Kapral etal has not yet been paid.  And, with all the caveats about CEQA and lawsuits, current and possible, approving the Canyons does not make sense unless we are trying to facilitate Kapral and General Holding's  effort to make money by selling it off in this disastrous market.

We don't need any more development out there until the infrastructure catches up to the sprawl.

As a Councilman and key committe member of the planning an development committee, how can Weir vote on any of the development done by members of the Builders Exchange without recusing himself, (even tonight) because he's on their payroll? 

Hi reformer-

Which thousands from Kapral is owed? Not sure what's due to whom, but I was leafing through the Hall of Records yesterday and a couple additional  loans, one for about $450,000 and another for $2 million, by James Santurro, have been made against the property since the new year. Maybe those funds were used to pay things off.

The Williamson Act piece isn't likely to be a problem.

I'm sure most seasoned observers expect this project will be approved and that a lawsuit will soon follow.

It will be interesting to watch this play out tonight, though this almost certainly won't be the end of the story...

Looks like they're coming back in...if the other two items aren't pulled off consent we should go straight to the Canyons

As I understand it, city, there are outstanding amounts that must be paid (based on the sale $ of the land) to the State when cancelling the contract.  It was the default of that amount by prior owners that kept this land in the preserve.

Staff presentation now.

Sorry I don't have details on Williamson Act/ ag preserve issues; I wasn't covering this at that time. Maybe James Burger can help clarify tomorrow.

I'm not sure about the ag preserve, but the portion under WA contract hasn't come out yet..that's part of tonight's vote. So that money wouldn't yet be due.

There are quite a few people here, though fireworks, if any, won't come until council and/or public comments....

Speakers in oppostion go first.

Here comes Art Unger from the Sierra Club Kern Kaweah chapter

The project is basically terrible, being a crowd of houses far, far from town...

We will study recirculated EIR and appreciate efforfts gone into studying this huge project...

Now:

Craig Smith, Bako Bluffs and Trails committee

(he has a powerpoint presentation)

They want project to be built based on true facts...

Problem with current plan...it is at the end of the peninsula, which is dependent on many other projects coming into existence.

The problem: they've gone bankrupt, etc...won't be built for years and years...

City in the Hills...other project in northeast are failing...it will be half built, quarter built...that's what happened with city in the hills..where are (rules) that force project to be built...

His slide says: This project is DOA..,.,required infrastructure not in place...what are guarantees to any phases? There are no guarantees...

The EIR is deficient on traffic...lawsuit against city which will have deep impact on traffic, which is not reflected on EIR.

Also: endangered species...Bako cactus...and how it is engineered....to the north is  the Bako cactus preserve..this is where water funnels in with all its pollution...hasn't been compensated for in this EIR...offsite mitigation....

The toxic runoff will cause Bako cactus to rot

In sufficient analysis of filing in canyons, as to quality and quantity of water on site and to the north

Committee wants full Class I bike path, all the way down canyon to Morning Drive...needed for safety...bikers come screaming down Morn Dr at 30 mph...need a Class I...

End of opposition

Russ Thompson representing Canyons LLC now at stand.

We beli Canyons is a unique project that meets goals and plans and ordinances of city of Bako...

Project includes a commercial core to serve future residents, and the public using trails/bike paths...will reduce off-site traffic

Designed to be walkable....trails to connect 11 gated communities

this project not converting any ag land...zoned residential now.

Dev footprint: a lot of accusations about visual prominence...it's isolated...area already disturbed as sand and gravel mine

41 percent to be passive or active recreation. commitment to open space. 9.6 miles of public trails. 16 acres of public parks

We ask for your approval...the key is after all these years of study and analysis, the EIR before you tonight has withstood a great deal of scrutiny...no unavoidable impacts....we urge your approval...

Mary Jane Wilson, president of WZI (enviro consulting firm) passing out a handout on global climate change. What has changed on this recently. Putting that in for the record.

The question about recalculation...or greenhouse gas inventory today...it actually came out less than when we did it in middle of last year, because of methodology changes, more rigorous analysis...GG inv went from 5.4 down to 4.94, so it's very close to same one...meets requirrements and conforms with SJV emission reduction requirements.

She notes she has been certified by CARB as lead for GG inventory

No rebuttals from opposition, now to council

Weir up:

Weir is asking staff if there are any deficiencies in EIR (referring to Smith's comments about cactus)

Grady: none of analyses done by our staff indicate any deficiencies...

Weir had also thanked Unger for his honesty when he said the Sierra Club was more comfortable being opposed to the project.

Weir asks staff to clarify the city had never intended to have a Class I bike path on Morning. Raul Rojas says it was to be a bike lane, not a bike path.

Weir asks for more info on handout from Mary Jane Wilson. She comes back up.

Wilson: Our analysis of global climate change was more than 8 months old; it is rapidly evolving...so I reviewed our analysis with latest and greatest changes to see if it would significantly change any of the findings in our report...

[we're in enviro nitty gritty...essentially this is all a prelude to a probable enviro lawsuit, so people are getting things on the record]

Our original number was 5 metric tons...now it is 4.9...so it is very close. I felt compelled to allow you to see this info so you would feel original analysis was still valid

Weir...(waxing wistful now; this is his moment) after years of work....a quality project..one that is not controversial...has full support of city staff

Tonight we have the opportunity to convert fallow land marred by the remnants of (mining use?)...

20 years from now...I can stand on one of the many vantage points in the NE with my grandkids and say look what we did...instead of look what happened...

A long time ago it was reported I was having backroom meetings to eliminate Tamarack Park...I'm proud to say at tonight's meeting it is now twice orig size...

on a per-acre basis, the Canyons is moving less dirt than some (other developments...)...

Does the Canyons support the concepts within the Northeast Community (plan)

Canyons rep back: yes, we want to be good neighbor, will be agreeable to incorporating those into the project.

Weir: thanking city staff, Grady, retired Movius, Tandy, Ginny...

so with that, I would like to make a motion (to approve)

Sue Benham: 2 q's

Does 276 page doc give you pause?

Ginny: No, Ms Wilson explained it was only a supplement.

No 2: Portion of bike trail that will be a bike lane rather than a bike path. There was comment made a few mintues ago this was always the way it was mapped, I beli it would be fair to say staff tried very hard to get applicant to do bike path rather than bike lane.

Rojas: Yes that's correct.

Harold Hanson:

I'm gonna come at this thing a little different direction. Tonight, we approved item on consent calender, re delinquent assessment districts...we're not doing that for this parti parcel? Or are we?

Rojas: assessment financing for public improvements, currently we are not doing,.

Hanson: (after pointing out he's pro-development) I'm haunted by Ci in the Hills, McA Ranch, Section 10, which tnk gawd we got out of Petrini project, Im sure there's others...but, I gotta tell you, I look at this thing in today's economy, and I don't see how ti pencils out. What I'm concerned about is a hafl-developed project. I need some help on that one,.

We don't need the mountain looking.,,..

Up comes Canyons guy:

'Owner and applicant's perservernce good an indication as anything their intent to follow through... Even though we're in current economic downturn, in long run, economics will work out.

This one, a/o able to take on project of this magnitude would have fina wherewithal to move f/w

Hanson: I'm not sugg there's not a lot of money behind tyhsi project. ..there comes a time when the well goes dry. commercial follows rooftops. Eastside has never done really well, and there's no commercial out there. Not only your rooftops, but city in the hills, alll those other lots out there not developed now,. I talk to dev's day in and day out...they're telling me....we're gonna have 7, 8, 900 new dev homes this yr, maybe same number next year, that's not a lot of homes going up. thats' not going to attract comercal deve as well

Canyons: more of a small-scale, neighborhood level type of services

Hanson: Vons, Albertsons?

Guy: More like a deli, coffe shop, dry cleanign biz; they haven't been defined yet. Not intended as regional commercial. They feel a unique community there...a lot of attractive qualities...bluff top development...

Hanson: I agreee...if things were like good old days, selling 5, 6 7 thousand homes a yr...I'd be a lot more comfortable.

1214 sft, 120 mutlifamily..where are these people going to come from? How long can your clients sustain carrying cost? If you paid a millioin, your carrying costs are probably over 2-3 mill today...it's just going to multiply. I'm just concerned.

to staff; Can we protect ourselves in some way? Two yrs ago, if someone told me someone in Monte Carlo could carry forever and ever (he's referring to Ci in Hills)....he's probably still in Monte Carlo on a yacht and we have that property

Stan Grady: The development is going to be phased over time. Applicant is only one who knows when construction starts...I don't know if particular aspect you want security from.

This particular cycle is a (unusual)...

Hanson: My experience as a banker, whether big house or car etc..when you go pick it up you lose money on the deal (he means when bank has to repo). The public infrastructure: sewer, water, etc...they have to go in first, right?

Rojas; Yes, usually go first. We have agreement with bonds to finish w/e public improvements ...theyr'e usually phased. So public improvement usually safe. Even in Ci in Hills we've cvompleted public improvements. The money was always there...that's not a worry of mine. Whether they get to sell 5 homes or 100 homes, that's a separate issue.

They have to bond for all the public improvements.

Hanson: So if 10 mill, they have to have bond for 10 mill?

Rojas: That's correct. Diff ways to finance; what happened w Ci in Hills...

Robert Kapral, Canyons rep, now up.

Our business plan for the Canyons prjoect, this is the beginning of it for us.

We have 3 yrs of engineering in front of us. 3 yrs of construction before you see the first house go up.

Between approval of plans and start construction...will be a decision based on economy at time. Not looking to start s/t now...like any biz, based on demand. This project not going to get built out by 1 developer.

We will put in backbone infrastructure, public streets. We have 11 gated private communities...sold to developers t/o this community. Our biz plan: we sell off portions of the project. So there is safety in numbers in that respect. (he compares to Castle & Cooke). It will proceed when there's a demand and a market.

Couch now up

COUCH: re loss of bike path on Morning

With miles of (bike path) along this development, it's just very unusual a stand was made on this particular bike path. I would encourage Weir to pressure his good friend (Scriv), on KernCOG, to pursue funding...

It's a cost issue.

Couch makes a dry joke about radio ads...

votes now:

Six yes; Benham votes no. It's approved

Just wait...

It will crater, but not until after the hills are leveled and the canyons are filled in. This is the stupidest thing Bakersfield has done in a while, only to be eclipsed by the widening of 23rd and 24th streets in 2013.

Am I the only one wondering why the city council is approving more urban sprawl when they there is a plague of empty homes in this town and they have already mismanaged the budget so much they can't afford to maintain and protect what we have?  Again they are letting there resume padding and empire building aspirations over ride common sense. Send them all to back to basic economics, for the love of everything that is holy this has got to end somewhere!!!

Wait, maybe I'm wrong, When this whole economic outhouse collapses I guess squatting on view property developers have abandoned in the canyons would be better than the homeless shelter.  Hell, maybe that's THEIR thinking all along!

We have a road problem...we have a water problem...we have a unfinished developments problem.....

Of course it makes sense to approve this project---It's in Weir's district---NOW we know where the missing $800,000.00 went...

Maybe that radical enviormental group will catch wind of this project....hmmmm

Follow the money.  Who will benefit from this monstrous project?  Are we to lose all our hillsides and look like Valencia et al?

Too True ~NancyII~...time for an audit of the YES voters....but don't give it to Weir---he can't (won't) count....

A couple of things~ most of folks on this little eclectic site are opposed to more growth,believing that Bakersfield needs back fill and not more half cocked growth.If you could get folks to think about it~ I bet a majority of the city thinks so also. Especially the kind that of growth that will result in a law suit and another half built/mess/eyesore. As said above,water,roads,infrastructure and MONEY are all scarce to extinct.

Secondly~ the American people just got out of debt last month at record numbers ~ we collectively got our financial houses in more order. Sue Benham seems to be the only councilperson who understands that now is not the time to go out on a limb.

Thirdly~ did these ladder climbers, as they preen themselves for higher office, ever consider that acting prudently just might be more politically wise?

Lastly a word for the Bakersfield Cactus, it really should be our city plant~ rare yet tough,full of character and a gazillion tiny cactus thorns that hurt like...well you know.

We have such a lovely environmental area that stands to be forever scared by a bad idea. A housing track.

I don't think anyone has studied the potential repercussions of such a large residential development. This area is a haven for off roaders, paragliders, hikers, families looking to do something a little more interactive than watching TV all the time. I've gone out here several times...this area was an inlet from a sea during the Miocene era..there are exposed bone beds where fossilized sharks teeth are literally coming up out of the ground...its so rich you can actually find entire fossils...baleen whales...these treasures will soon be under someone's driveway.
Where are all of the animals going to go? There are raccoons, coyotes, kit foxes, skunks...how many calls is animal control going to get because someone wakes up with a skunk in their yard?
How many complaints is the BPD and sheriffs going to receive because the noise from Hart Park carries up to the bluffs and disturbs someone?
How long till Hart Park goes the way of Mesa Marin?
Am I overdramatizing? Maybe...but I don't think so.
In Bakersfield, you don't have to drive very far to see evidence of failed developments. There are lovely brick entranceways to a dirt field, street signs but no street...why not finish what was already started rather than destroy more open space?
I love the councilman's quote :
"Twenty years from now I can stand on one of the many vantage points in the northeast with my grandkids and say: 'Look what we did,'" Weir said.

You sure can, genius!...though you will be arrested for trespassing on someone's private property.