Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />*See <br />Minutes <br />Oct. 9, <br />1974 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT <br />AGENCY. <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br />September 18, 1974 <br /> <br />Mr. Graham Stufflefield, representing Financial Consultants, <br />Larry Smith and Company, stated that the amended proposal <br />would have considerably;less retail downtown because of the <br />recommended northerly expansion of the Project Area to include <br />Fashion Square; that the specialty retail and service shops <br />would set off the Mexican Village theme and cater to downtown <br />daytime population; and that there would be a si~nificantly <br />higher percentage of restaurants, a cultural center and <br />entertainment center to attract people, and later a hotel <br />development or possibly even two or three. <br /> <br />Mr. Goblirsch stated that the proposed amended plan will neces- <br />sitate the re-Iocation of the proposed Senior Citizen's Center <br />and suggested that the County and the City Housing Authority <br />be contacted to negotiate a different location. <br /> <br />John Stevens pointed out that the amended plan to use Fourth <br />Street as an arterial would eliminate the Assessment District <br />landscaping and diagonal parking. <br /> <br />Mr. Goblirsch stated that the proposàl wbuld eventually require <br />some re-zoning. <br /> <br />The Final Proj ect Ar.ea .Developml?I\t:. Pr'Qpo'sal, Alternative Plan <br />3, was approved in principle, subject to review by the Planning <br />Commission and the Redeve+opment.Colll!\lission, on the unanimously <br />approved (5-0) motion of CommissioneT Griset, seconded by <br />Commissioner Ward: <br /> <br />SENIOR CITIZENS' <br />CENTER <br /> <br />The re-location of the <br />proposed Senior Citizens' <br />Center was approved in <br />principle and staff was instructed to negotiate the possibilities <br />with the Orange County Board of Supervisors, on the unanimously <br />approved motion of Commissioner Ward, seconded by Commissioner <br />Garthe. <br /> <br />ROLE OF THE <br />REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY <br /> <br />The role of the Redevelop- <br />ment Agency in the re- <br />development process, as <br />outlined in the report, dated September 3,1974 from the Executive <br />Director,was unanimously approved, on motion of Commissioner <br />Griset, seconded by Commissioner Garthe. <br /> <br />The Executive-Director recommended that the Agency turn over to <br />the Redevelopment Commission all matters pertaining to the <br />business of the Agency except for the following: <br /> <br />a. <br />b. <br />c. <br />d. <br /> <br />budget approval <br />bonds and other financing approvals <br />land acquisition and disposition <br />legally required items such as public hearings, <br />condemnation proceedings, plan amendments and over <br />personnel matters. <br />contracts <br /> <br />policy <br /> <br />e. <br />f. <br /> <br />All other matters would be the Commission's responsibility with <br />the Agency retaining the right of review. <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 74-14 <br />MEETING: TIME AND PLACE <br /> <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE COM- <br />MUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY <br />OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, <br />on motion of Commissioner Griset, <br />and carried (4-1) with Com- <br /> <br />AMENDING ITS BY-LAWS, was adopted <br />seconded by Commissioner Yamamoto <br />missioner Ward dissenting. <br />