My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/20/1987
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
SUCCESOR AGENCY(formerly Community Redevelopment Agency)
>
COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (1974-2012)
>
1973-1999
>
1987
>
10/20/1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 1:14:57 PM
Creation date
3/3/2005 11:52:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Minutes
Date
10/20/1987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />rehabilitation of the real <br />street (Harmon-McNeil House). <br /> <br />property <br /> <br />located <br /> <br />817 N. Lacy <br /> <br />at <br /> <br />AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND <br />ANA NISSAN, INC. <br /> <br />DEVELOPMENT <br /> <br />AGREEMENT <br /> <br />WITH <br /> <br />SANTA <br /> <br />Agency Member Griset advised the Agency Members that he would <br />abstain from the discussion and vote on the proposed amendment <br />to the Disposition and Development Agreement with Santa Ana <br />Nissan since they were one of his clients. <br /> <br />It was then moved by Agency Member Pulido, seconded by Agency <br />Member May and carried by a vote of 5:0 (Agency Member Griset <br />abstaining) that the Redevelopment Agency approve and authorize <br />the Chairman to execute the proposed amendment to the <br />Disposition and Development Agreement with Santa Ana Nissan, <br />Inc., a California corporation. <br /> <br />Agency Member Hart arrived at 5:55 P.M. <br /> <br />A-2 SITE <br />AGREEMENT <br /> <br />TERMINATION <br /> <br />OF AMENDED DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT <br /> <br />The city Manager pointed out that a recent market analysis of <br />the downtown area had indicated that it would be infeasible to <br />develop the A-2 site with a high quality hotel at this time. <br />He stated that the Carley Capital Group had acted in good faith <br />and that, despite all of the setbacks experienced on this <br />project, they are not in default under the terms of the DDA and <br />are not in default for failure to comply with the scope of the <br />development, since the extended litigation on the project <br />prevented the developer from successfully securing project <br />financing. He added that, rather than require the developer to <br />proceed with the project pursuant to the DDA, staff felt it was <br />best to accept the conclusions contained in the market study <br />and terminate the agreement and thus reduce the Agency's <br />potential risk on a project that is clearly deemed infeasible <br />at this point. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Agency Member Acosta, the City <br />Manager stated that the Agency, since it has been working with <br />the Carley Group, has invested approximately $1.5 million in <br />the A-2 project, principally in the purchase of the Broadway <br />Theater and the Roloeff Building to complete the site assembly. <br /> <br />In response to further questions from Agency Member Acosta, the <br />city Attorney stated that the Agency was returning $175,000 of <br />the $200,000 good faith deposit because the Agency was allowing <br />Carley to terminate. The City Attorney stated further that, in <br />prior instances where the good faith deposit had not been <br />returned to the developer, the Agency had a genuine desire to <br />proceed with the project but that this was not the case in this <br />instance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.