FULL PACKET_2010-07-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Amendments to DA No. 2004-01 June 14, 2010 Page 5 unknown during the project approval phase may be addressed. The Public Works Agency advises that the neighborhood traffic plans would commence approximately six months prior to issuance of the certficate of occupancy to allow for an analysis of the before and after conditions. The applicant indicates that obtaining financing in the current economic climate is, in the best of circumstances, challenging. Many projects in the region, and throughout the country, continue to languish for lack of financing, the applicant contends. The applicant maintains that delaying the payment of this $1.2 million will assist with his ability to obtain financing. In that the applicant estimates the construction phase of the project to take 28 months, he proposes payment of the $1.2 million six months prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, but in no event later than 22 months after issuance of the building permit. Staff believes that the 28 month construction estimate is conservative -and that the actual construction phase will extend beyond 28 months. Further, the applicant initially discussed with staff delaying payment until issuance of the certificate of occupancy. Staff could not support such a delay. The value of this requirement is to study the traffiGcirculation right before and right after project occupancy. Staff is amenable to the change in timing to allow payment six months prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, but in no event later than 22 months after issuance of a building permit, and to be permitted to use a funded construction loan as further security for its offsite obligations. As noted above, we believe this allows for ample time to initiate the analysis. 3. Section 5.8 Condition Precedent to Issuance of Any Building Permit The applicant proposes to eliminate the requirement that 50% of the building be pre-leased to "Investment Grade Tenants." This is one of the most significant reasons that the One Broadway Plaza project has not commenced, the applicant contends. And in order for the project to commence this requirement must be deleted. Staff is aware of no precedent for this requirement as no such requirement has been imposed on any other project in Santa Ana. Further, staff believes that the private market is better able to discern whether construction of this project is appropriate in today's market. Indeed, it is principally the market that drives decisions on every other project built in Santa Ana, the region and the nation. It should also be noted that, given the seven year term of this development agreement, this requirement is at best a delay. And, finally, staff notes that nothing in the development agreement requires the applicant to maintain in perpetuity an "Investment Grade Tenant." Staff supports deleting this requirement for these reasons. 4. Section 5.8.2 No Redevelopment Subsidy The applicant believes he can make a good case to the Redevelopment Agency Board as to why it ought to consider financial participation in the One Broadway Plaza project. This provision of the development agreement, however, prohibits the applicant from even 75A-19