Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />The city Manager added that in all cases where the good faith <br />deposit was retained, the Agency felt that these projects were <br />feasible and appropriate for the site and the developer <br />defaulted under those terms. He pointed out that the Carley <br />Group felt that there was not a market for a hotel in downtown <br />Santa Ana and staff agreed with them, adding that staff felt <br />that the Carley Group had made an honest commitment and effort <br />to comply with the terms of the DDA. He stated that Carley was <br />not pleased with the Agency retaining $25,000 of their money <br />but had agreed orally to make this contribution in the spirit <br />of cooperation. The city Manager advised that, if the Agency <br />Members wished to tell staff to enforce the terms of the <br />development agreement, staff would do so but he pointed out <br />that the Carley Group could very well proceed on the project <br />with someone else and require an enormous Agency subsidy in the <br />amount of $18 million, and the city would have a vacant hotel <br />and bad publicity. <br /> <br />In response to questions from Vice Chairperson McGuigan, the <br />Executive Director stated that the Agency staff maintains an <br />extensive list of developers on an on-going basis, adding that <br />staff would send the Request for Qualifications to developers <br />having proven expertise, financing and a major tenant, and to <br />anyone else who might contact the Agency staff and request to <br />be included. The Executive Director added that the Agency <br />would control the design of the development which would <br />probably call for two buildings with an atrium and parking <br />structure. <br /> <br />In response to questions from Chairman Young, the Executive <br />Director stated that she felt that Phase I, with the retail <br />shops and parking structure, could be accomplished, with a <br />second tower coming later as Phase II. She added that it was <br />not anticipated that there would be a subsidy for this project. <br /> <br />Agency Member Pulido stated that he was supportive of the <br />motion and hoped that the Agency would not rush into another <br />development because, in his opinion, the A-2 site was very <br />valuable real estate. <br /> <br />Agency Member Acosta said that he wished to state for the <br />record that the only reason he would not support the motion is <br />because he is opposed to returning the $175,000 to the Carley <br />Capital Group. <br /> <br />It was then moved by Vice Chairperson McGuigan, seconded by <br />Agency Member Griset and carried by a vote of 6:1 (Agency <br />Member Acosta voting "NO") that the Redevelopment Agency: <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />Authorize the Chairman to execute an agreement with the <br />Carley Capital group to terminate the Amended Disposition <br />and Development Agreement covering the A-2 Development site <br />and retain $25,000 with the knowledge and acceptance of the <br />developer; and <br />