HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05071991 - 1.113 1 .113
TO: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
E t• Contra
FROM: Phil Batchelor
Executive Director
County
DATE: May 7, 1991
SUBJECT: Disposition & Development Agreement with Glenfed/Desco/Pleasant
Hill, a California General Partnership
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS (S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Authorize:-the Deputy Director - Redevelopment to (1) notify. Glenfed/
Desco/Pleasant Hill, a, California general partnership (Developer), of
its default pursuant to Section 7. 04 (a) and 7. 04 (g) of Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA) between the Contra Costa County
Redevelopment Agency (Agency) and Developer; (2) proceed to terminate
said DDA due to default if the default remains uncured during the
applicable cure period, or the cure period is waived; and (3) to
execute a letter agreement in which the Developer waives notice and
cure rights and the Agency waives any right of first refusal the
Agency may have under the DDA with respect to the Glenfed transfer and
the Desco option.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Agency could be subject to claims from property owners in Area 4 .
The recommended action provides ' for the Deputy Director -
Redevelopment to take such actions as necessary to preserve the
Agency's remedies under the DDA following termination.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RECOMMEND OF AG CY COMM -- EE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF AGENCY ON May 7, 1991 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF COMMISSIONERS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Orig:Redevelopment Agency
CC: Community Development
County Administrator
Goldfarb & Lipman ATTESTED May 7, 1991
(via Redevelopment Agency) PHIL BATCHELOR,
Glenfed/Desco/Pleasant Hill, AGENCY SECRETARY
a CA general partnership
(via Redevelopment Agency)
BY , DEPUTY
SRA13/rw/DDA.bos
' BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
On December 19, 1989 the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution
89/805 approving a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA)
between the Agency and Glenfed/Desco/Pleasant Hill, a California
general partnership (Developer) . On the same date the
Redevelopment Agency approved the same DDA by adopting Resolution
RA 89-17. The DDA provided for the Agency to:
(1) Assist in the assemblage of development area 4 in the Pleasant
Hill BART station area by acquiring, through negotiated
purchase or eminent domain procedures, certain privately owned
properties;
(2) The conveyance of said properties to the Developer; and
(3) The orderly relocation of all occupants as legally required.
All costs associated with the acquisition of the privately-owned
properties, and relocation were to be borne by the Developer, who
was required to deposit funds with the Agency within prescribed
times. The Developer failed to meet its obligations, therefore the
Agency should terminate the DDA pursuant to Sections 7 . 04 (a) and
7 .04 (g) for the following reasons:
(1) Default under Section 7. 04 (a) (failure to meet the conditions
or requirements of the DDA within the times set forth in the
DDA, subject to the forced delay provisions of Section 10.01)
Glenfed/Desco/Pleasant Hill has failed to meet time deadlines
established by the Agreement in that it has failed to deposit
the Acquisition Cost Estimate amounts with the Agency within
the time periods established by Section 3 . 03 of the DDA. The
invoking of the forced delay provisions of Section 10.04 by
Glenfed/Desco/Pleasant Hill was neither timely nor proper.
(2) Default under Section 7. 04 (x) (failure to tender payment
required by Section 3 . 03)
Glenfed/Desco/Pleasant Hill failed to make payments of the
Acquisition Cost Estimate amounts to the Agency within five
days of receipt of notice from the Agency that the Agency
passed a resolution of necessity with respect to the
Acquisition Parcels, as required by Section 3 . 03 of the DDA.
The Developer has expressed a willingness to waive the notice
requirements and its cure abilities in return for the Agency
waiving its right of first refusal under the DDA with respect to
contemplated property transfers between members of the partnership.
The effect is that the Desco Group has until August 15, 1991 to
exercise an option on properties previously owned by the
partnership. If Desco is able to locate a financial partner with
the capacity to perform, they would so exercise the option. If
they are not the process for selecting a Developer would be
entirely in the hands of the Agency. Desco has invested a
significant amount of time in previewing the project to prospective
financial partners, and has an equally, if not better, chance of
securing the financial capacity required to proceed with the
project than if the Agency were to proceed independently.
SRA13/nv/DDA.bos