Downtown developer asks council to issue permits after financing delays for Park Place phases 2–3

Developers and local supporters urged the Fountain Hills Town Council to issue permits for Park Place Phase 2 and 3, saying delays and repeated funding extensions are jeopardizing their ability to close construction financing.

The requests came during the council—all to the public on Oct. 7, when Cecil Yates, executive vice president of Shea Conley Development, told the council his company had met the requirements of the town eveloper greement and asked that permits be issued so lenders can close. Yates said the project previously generated about $1.2 million in materials sales tax for the town and currently pays more than $500,000 a year in combined taxes from Phase 1 retail and that "time kills all deals" as lenders become unwilling to extend financing repeatedly.

Yates cited portions of an estoppel statement saying there was no existing breach by the developer and that permits for certain buildings were obtained before the developer agreement extension deadline. He said the developer is meeting the developer agreement conditions and asked the council to issue requested permits at a scheduled follow-up meeting.

Several Fountain Hills residents and business leaders also spoke in favor of finishing the project. Crystal Kavanaugh, a local business leader, said there had been confusion over meeting logistics and counsel contact between parties but expressed support for completing the project and urged the council and the developer to hold the attorneys—onference that had been agreed upon. Dori (Dorie) Wittrig, president of the Fountain Hills Community Foundation, described Phase 1 as successful, said Phase 3 will be "great," and listed multiple community contributions made by Bart Shea, the developer, including donations to local cultural and civic amenities.

Speakers who spoke during the public comment urged the council to avoid adding new bargaining steps that could slow permitting, and to allow the developer to proceed under the existing developer agreement. Several said the downtown vacancy would be remedied by completing the approved phases and that doing so would support local businesses and sales tax revenues.

The participants asked for a meeting between the parties nd town staff to resolve outstanding items; Yates said he expected that permits would be discussed at a special meeting scheduled the next day. Council members did not take a formal vote on the permits during the Oct. 7 meeting; the developer and supporters framed their remarks as a request for the council to allow issuance consistent with the existing developer agreement.

Why this matters: Park Place is privately built but has been presented as an anchor of Fountain Hills owntown redevelopment and a source of local tax revenue. Repeated permit and funding delays can affect a project—inancing timeline and the developer greement—onditions under which lenders will close.

What remains unresolved: The council did not take formal action on issuing the Phase 2/3 permits at the Oct. 7 meeting. Developers said they are seeking issuance under the current developer agreement and indicated there would be a follow-up discussion; the council scheduled further discussion the next day.