DRAFT MEMORANDUM -- For Discussion Purposes Only. James R. Musbach and Garrett K. Gray. Subject: Nevada State College Financing Program; EPS #18067

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "DRAFT MEMORANDUM -- For Discussion Purposes Only. James R. Musbach and Garrett K. Gray. Subject: Nevada State College Financing Program; EPS #18067"

Transcription

1 DRAFT MEMORANDUM -- D RAFT M EMORANDUM To: From: NSC Committee James R. Musbach and Garrett K. Gray Subject: Nevada State College Financing Program; EPS #18067 Date: April 8, 2009 Introduction Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) has constructed a financial model that measures the feasibility of alternative development programs and estimates the land values and revenues that can be generated by development of the site, both from lease and/or sale of land for private uses, and from tax increment generated by that development. The purpose of the Financial Feasibility model is to test the financial implications of alternative land use programs, development strategies, infrastructure phasing schemes, infrastructure financing strategies, and other issues associated with the development and financing of the Nevada State College Campus, and the adjoining City-owned Town Center. Model Structure The financial model projects future revenues and expenditures over the course of the buildout of both the private development component and the campus component of the Henderson NSC site, as well as the adjacent City-owned Town Center site. In this preliminary set of model runs, EPS has distinguished between the Nevada State College (NSC) site and the envisioned Town Center site regarding the land development program and evaluated the financial parameters of each component, as well as both sites combined. The initial runs of the model reflect a master-developer scenario, and approach the feasibility of the financing plan from this perspective. Alternative development and disposition strategies can be tested, based on further discussion with NSC and the City of Henderson regarding their objectives, resources and preferred management roles and responsibilities, as well as consideration of developer interests and capabilities.

2 DRAFT MEMORANDUM -- Draft Memorandum April 8, 2009 Nevada State College Financing Program Page 2 The basic structure of the model consists of two primary components: 1) vertical development pro formas for each land use and product type and 2) a land development pro forma. The vertical pro formas estimate the price (or lease rate) that developers could pay for the land for different uses and product types. The land development model uses these land values as the revenue inputs available to a private developer, and then provides a cash flow analysis of the phased construction of infrastructure, paid for from land disposition, tax increment, and developer equity investment. To be feasible, the program must be able to fund all of the infrastructure and provide a market rate return to the developer on equity invested. Net Present Value above that return represents positive land value that could be captured to fund buildings or other campus facilities. The content of the attached tables is summarized briefly below. Table 1 provides a summary of the preliminary development concept and the respective revenues and expenditures for the NSC and Town Center sites. For this preliminary model, it is assumed that infrastructure will begin to be constructed in 2010, with a time-line for completion of 20 years. The product-types are assumed to enter the market in 2012 with a time-line for build-out of 12 years. Further, potential revenues from the TIF District and other Public Financing sources are also anticipated to be included in the model, although values for these sources are yet-to-be-determined. Table 2 provides a brief synopsis of the proposed land program for the NSC and Town Center sites. This proposed program is based on the findings from the EPS Henderson Market Study and the overall concept for the NSC campus and associated Town Center. As the current Land Program shows, there are approximately 115 net acres anticipated for the NSC site and 76 net acres for the Town Center site, accounting for 191 net acres overall. The land programs are fairly equal in distribution between the specific residential and commercial product types, with each residential type accounting for approximately one-third of the total residential land to be developed, with a limited mix of office and retail space integrated into each site. Table 3 summarizes the projected development schedule for the product types anticipated for the NSC and Town Center site. The preliminary development schedule estimated by EPS is guided by information obtained from the Henderson market analysis and the projected absorption rates, as well as economic strategies such as initially producing product types with greater capacity to generate revenues while generating capital for subsequent phases of the land development program, within established thresholds. Based on this research and analysis, EPS has estimated that residential absorption will potentially be up to 10 percent of Henderson s anticipated annual household growth and housing unit absorption rates, which is currently projected to be approximately 4,000 units per year. This allows for the land development programs to be achieved within approximately 12 years. Table 4 provides a summary of the on-site projected infrastructure costs for the entire program. The infrastructure plan is envisioned as serving both the private development of the NSC and Town Center sites, as well as the campus as it develops. The estimated infrastructure costs include utilities, transportation, site preparation, and other necessary items. For this model, it was assumed that only the on-site costs for the NSC and Town Center sites were to be included, while other off-site infrastructure items, such as freeway widening and interchanges, were excluded. These cost estimates have been prepared by ARUP, the project engineers. Initial phasing estimates were made by EPS, consistent with project absorption, but further analysis of infrastructure phasing relative to both campus and private development buildout is needed. P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067mm doc

3 DRAFT MEMORANDUM -- Draft Memorandum April 8, 2009 Nevada State College Financing Program Page 3 Table 5 provides a summary of the projected infrastructure cost allocation for the NSC and Town Center sites based on the gross total infrastructure costs estimated for the entire site. This projected allocation of infrastructure costs is proportionally delegated based on the anticipated net acres available for development. In the current land program, the NSC site accounts for 115 developable net acres, approximately 60 percent of the combined net developable acreage, while the Town Center site accounts for 76 net acres of development, or about 40 percent of the combined net developable acreage. Tables 6 through 10 present the vertical pro formas and the estimated Residual Land Values (RLVs) for each of the proposed product types. These product types include a mix of residential and commercial product types, including single-family homes, townhomes, and apartments; and office and retail space. The RLVs were determined through market research of the direct and indirect costs (including City/County/Regional fees), the estimated revenues achievable per product type, and other comparable land values for the respective product types. It is important to note that certain product types do not currently achieve positive RLVs because of the deflated residential market. However, it is anticipated that this market will recover and that RLVs for single-family housing will more closely align with the current comparable land values. In this model, it is assumed that the market will stabilize near the end of 2009/beginning of 2010, and then proceed to steadily recover the value that has recently been lost. EPS has assumed an accelerated recovery for single-family units and townhomes within the specific NSC and Town Center site micro-markets for a few particular reasons. Most notably, it is extremely rare for homes in the Las Vegas Valley to possess comparable city views, location, accessibility, and design as is envisioned for the homes on the NSC site. P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067mm doc

4 Table of Contents Nevada State College Feasibility DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Table Title 1 NSC Feasibility Model (nominal $$) 2 Land Planning Program for NSC Campus and Town Center 3 Development Schedule (Units and Square Feet) 4 Conceptual NSC & Town Center On-Site Full Cost Estimates (2009 $'s) 5 Conceptual Infrastructure Cost Allocation (Nominal $'s) 6 10 Dwelling Units per Acre NSC Development Residual Land Value 7 20 Dwelling Units per Acre NSC Development Residual Land Value 8 30 Dwelling Units per Acre NSC Development Residual Land Value 9 Office Development Residual Land Value 10 Retail Development Residual Land Value Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

5 Table 1 NSC Feasibility Model (nominal $$) Item Assumption Total NSC Revenues Residential Land Ground Leases Low-Density 3.0% annual growth $22,715,845 $0 $0 $2,196,318 $2,262,207 $2,330,074 $2,999,970 $3,089,969 $3,182,668 $3,278,148 $3,376,492 $0 Mid-Density 3.0% annual growth $16,008,050 $0 $0 $1,469,434 $1,135,138 $1,169,192 $1,204,268 $1,240,396 $1,277,608 $1,315,936 $1,355,414 $1,396,077 High-Density 3.0% annual growth $20,061,297 $0 $0 $1,868,825 $1,924,890 $1,982,637 $1,531,587 $1,577,535 $1,624,861 $1,673,606 $1,723,815 $1,775,529 Subtotal $58,785,192 $0 $0 $5,534,577 $5,322,235 $5,481,902 $5,735,825 $5,907,899 $6,085,136 $6,267,690 $6,455,721 $3,171,606 Commercial Land Ground Leases Office 3.0% annual growth $2,409,877 $0 $0 $1,098,368 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,311,509 $0 $0 Retail 3.0% annual growth $3,440,306 $0 $0 $1,568,015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,872,291 $0 $0 Subtotal $5,850,183 $0 $0 $2,666,383 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,183,800 $0 $0 Total Land Sales (inflated) $64,635,375 $0 $0 $8,200,960 $5,322,235 $5,481,902 $5,735,825 $5,907,899 $6,085,136 $9,451,491 $6,455,721 $3,171,606 NSC Expenditures Direct Costs Water Reservoir $9,752,417 $2,649,215 $0 $0 $818,607 $0 $0 $894,514 $0 $0 $977,460 $0 Storm Drainage $7,054,375 $1,875,323 $0 $0 $596,859 $0 $0 $652,204 $0 $0 $712,681 $0 Central Plant Facility $13,136,358 $3,492,147 $0 $0 $1,111,445 $0 $0 $1,214,507 $0 $0 $1,327,124 $0 Recycled Water Connection $3,397,334 $903,141 $0 $0 $287,443 $0 $0 $314,097 $0 $0 $343,222 $0 Road Infrastructure Improvements $15,684,359 $4,169,503 $0 $0 $1,327,028 $0 $0 $1,450,079 $0 $0 $1,584,540 $0 Direct Cost Contingency 20.0% of direct costs $9,804,969 $2,617,866 $0 $0 $828,276 $0 $0 $905,080 $0 $0 $989,005 $0 Direct Costs Total $58,829,813 $15,707,194 $0 $0 $4,969,659 $0 $0 $5,430,480 $0 $0 $5,934,032 $0 Ground Lease (1) $0 $0 Indirect Costs Engineering 5.0% of direct costs $2,941,491 $785,360 $0 $0 $248,483 $0 $0 $271,524 $0 $0 $296,702 $0 Project Management 3.0% of direct costs $1,764,894 $471,216 $0 $0 $149,090 $0 $0 $162,914 $0 $0 $178,021 $0 General Administration 2.0% of direct costs $1,176,596 $314,144 $0 $0 $99,393 $0 $0 $108,610 $0 $0 $118,681 $0 Insurance 1.5% of direct costs $882,447 $235,608 $0 $0 $74,545 $0 $0 $81,457 $0 $0 $89,010 $0 Financing and Charges 0.0% of direct costs $0 $0 Soft Cost Contingency 0.0% of indirect costs $0 $0 Indirect Costs Total 11.5% of direct costs $6,765,428 $1,806,327 $0 $0 $571,511 $0 $0 $624,505 $0 $0 $682,414 $0 Total NSC Uses Expenditures $65,595,241 $17,513,521 $0 $0 $5,541,169 $0 $0 $6,054,985 $0 $0 $6,616,446 $0 Net Revenues (before public finance) ($959,866) ($17,513,521) $0 $8,200,960 ($218,934) $5,481,902 $5,735,825 ($147,086) $6,085,136 $9,451,491 ($160,725) $3,171,606 IRR 12.6% NPV (at 15%) 15% ($990,700) Public Financing State Grants Tax Increment Financing Total Revenues (After Public Financing) IRR NPV (at 15%) 15% (1) Annual ground lease required to yield a 15% return for the Project; capitalized at 8%. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 1 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

6 Table 1 NSC Feasibility Model (nominal $$) Item Assumption Total NSC Revenues Residential Land Ground Leases Low-Density 3.0% annual growth $22,715,845 Mid-Density 3.0% annual growth $16,008,050 High-Density 3.0% annual growth $20,061,297 Subtotal $58,785,192 Commercial Land Ground Leases Office 3.0% annual growth $2,409,877 Retail 3.0% annual growth $3,440,306 Subtotal $5,850,183 Total Land Sales (inflated) $64,635,375 $1,437,959 $1,481,098 $1,525,531 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,828,795 $1,255,772 $1,293,446 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,266,754 $2,736,870 $2,818,976 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,266,754 $2,736,870 $2,818,976 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NSC Expenditures Direct Costs Water Reservoir $9,752,417 Storm Drainage $7,054,375 Central Plant Facility $13,136,358 Recycled Water Connection $3,397,334 Road Infrastructure Improvements $15,684,359 Direct Cost Contingency 20.0% of direct costs $9,804,969 Direct Costs Total $58,829,813 Ground Lease (1) $0 Indirect Costs Engineering 5.0% of direct costs $2,941,491 Project Management 3.0% of direct costs $1,764,894 General Administration 2.0% of direct costs $1,176,596 Insurance 1.5% of direct costs $882,447 Financing and Charges 0.0% of direct costs $0 Soft Cost Contingency 0.0% of indirect costs $0 Indirect Costs Total 11.5% of direct costs $6,765,428 Total NSC Uses Expenditures $65,595,241 Net Revenues (before public finance) ($959,866) IRR 12.6% NPV (at 15%) 15% ($990,700) Public Financing State Grants --- Tax Increment Financing --- $0 $1,068,097 $0 $0 $1,167,138 $0 $0 $1,275,364 $0 $902,022 $0 $778,766 $0 $0 $850,978 $0 $0 $929,887 $0 $657,678 $0 $1,450,184 $0 $0 $1,584,656 $0 $0 $1,731,596 $0 $1,224,700 $0 $375,048 $0 $0 $409,825 $0 $0 $447,827 $0 $316,733 $0 $1,731,470 $0 $0 $1,892,024 $0 $0 $2,067,466 $0 $1,462,250 $0 $1,080,713 $0 $0 $1,180,924 $0 $0 $1,290,428 $0 $912,677 $0 $6,484,277 $0 $0 $7,085,545 $0 $0 $7,742,566 $0 $5,476,059 $0 $324,214 $0 $0 $354,277 $0 $0 $387,128 $0 $273,803 $0 $194,528 $0 $0 $212,566 $0 $0 $232,277 $0 $164,282 $0 $129,686 $0 $0 $141,711 $0 $0 $154,851 $0 $109,521 $0 $97,264 $0 $0 $106,283 $0 $0 $116,138 $0 $82,141 $0 $745,692 $0 $0 $814,838 $0 $0 $890,395 $0 $629,747 $0 $7,229,969 $0 $0 $7,900,383 $0 $0 $8,632,961 $0 $6,105,806 $3,266,754 ($4,493,099) $2,818,976 $0 ($7,900,383) $0 $0 ($8,632,961) $0 ($6,105,806) Total Revenues (After Public Financing) IRR NPV (at 15%) 15% (1) Annual ground lease required to yield a 15% return for the Project; capitalized at 8%. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 2 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

7 Table 1 Town Center Feasibility Model (nominal $$) Item Assumption Total Town Center Revenues Residential Land Sales Low-Density 3.0% annual growth $13,827,357 $0 $0 $2,196,318 $0 $4,660,147 $1,799,982 $1,235,988 $1,273,067 $1,311,259 $1,350,597 $0 Mid-Density 3.0% annual growth $9,800,168 $0 $0 $1,102,076 $0 $1,558,923 $802,845 $826,931 $851,739 $877,291 $903,609 $930,718 High-Density 3.0% annual growth $12,968,990 $0 $0 $1,245,884 $0 $2,643,516 $1,021,058 $1,051,690 $1,083,240 $1,115,738 $1,149,210 $1,183,686 Subtotal $36,596,516 $0 $0 $4,544,277 $0 $8,862,586 $3,623,885 $3,114,608 $3,208,046 $3,304,287 $3,403,416 $2,114,404 Commercial Land Leases Office 3.0% annual growth $2,263,627 $0 $0 $1,098,368 $0 $1,165,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Retail 3.0% annual growth $1,908,964 $0 $0 $1,908,964 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal $4,172,590 $0 $0 $3,007,332 $0 $1,165,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Land Sales $40,769,106 $0 $0 $7,551,609 $0 $10,027,844 $3,623,885 $3,114,608 $3,208,046 $3,304,287 $3,403,416 $2,114,404 Town Center Expenditures Direct Costs Water Reservoir $6,445,076 $1,750,785 $0 $0 $540,993 $0 $0 $591,157 $0 $0 $645,974 $0 Storm Drainage $4,662,022 $1,239,344 $0 $0 $394,446 $0 $0 $431,022 $0 $0 $470,989 $0 Central Plant Facility $8,681,419 $2,307,853 $0 $0 $734,521 $0 $0 $802,630 $0 $0 $877,056 $0 Recycled Water Connection $2,245,195 $596,859 $0 $0 $189,962 $0 $0 $207,577 $0 $0 $226,825 $0 Road Infrastructure Improvements $10,365,315 $2,755,497 $0 $0 $876,992 $0 $0 $958,313 $0 $0 $1,047,174 $0 Direct Cost Contingency 20.0% of direct costs $6,479,805 $1,730,068 $0 $0 $547,383 $0 $0 $598,140 $0 $0 $653,604 $0 Direct Costs Total $38,878,833 $10,380,406 $0 $0 $3,284,296 $0 $0 $3,588,839 $0 $0 $3,921,621 $0 Ground Lease (1) $0 $0 Indirect Costs Engineering 5.0% of direct costs $1,943,942 $519,020 $0 $0 $164,215 $0 $0 $179,442 $0 $0 $196,081 $0 Project Management 3.0% of direct costs $1,166,365 $311,412 $0 $0 $98,529 $0 $0 $107,665 $0 $0 $117,649 $0 General Administration 2.0% of direct costs $777,577 $207,608 $0 $0 $65,686 $0 $0 $71,777 $0 $0 $78,432 $0 Insurance 1.5% of direct costs $583,182 $155,706 $0 $0 $49,264 $0 $0 $53,833 $0 $0 $58,824 $0 Financing and Charges 0.0% of direct costs $0 $0 Soft Cost Contingency 0.0% of indirect costs $0 $0 Indirect Costs Total 11.5% of direct costs $4,471,066 $1,193,747 $0 $0 $377,694 $0 $0 $412,716 $0 $0 $450,986 $0 Total Town Center Uses Expenditures $43,349,898 $11,574,153 $0 $0 $3,661,990 $0 $0 $4,001,556 $0 $0 $4,372,608 $0 Net Revenues (before public finance) ($2,580,793) ($11,574,153) $0 $7,551,609 ($3,661,990) $10,027,844 $3,623,885 ($886,948) $3,208,046 $3,304,287 ($969,192) $2,114,404 IRR 15.2% NPV (at 15%) 15% $50,700 Public Financing State Grants Tax Increment Financing Total Revenue Sources (After Public Financing) IRR NPV (at 15%) 15% (1) Annual ground lease required to yield a 15% return for the Project; capitalized at 8%. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 3 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

8 Table 1 Town Center Feasibility Model (nominal $$) Item Assumption Total Town Center Revenues Residential Land Sales Low-Density 3.0% annual growth $13,827,357 Mid-Density 3.0% annual growth $9,800,168 High-Density 3.0% annual growth $12,968,990 Subtotal $36,596,516 Commercial Land Leases Office 3.0% annual growth $2,263,627 Retail 3.0% annual growth $1,908,964 Subtotal $4,172,590 Total Land Sales $40,769,106 $958,639 $987,398 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,219,197 $1,255,772 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,177,836 $2,243,171 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,177,836 $2,243,171 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Town Center Expenditures Direct Costs Water Reservoir $6,445,076 Storm Drainage $4,662,022 Central Plant Facility $8,681,419 Recycled Water Connection $2,245,195 Road Infrastructure Improvements $10,365,315 Direct Cost Contingency 20.0% of direct costs $6,479,805 Direct Costs Total $38,878,833 Ground Lease (1) $0 Indirect Costs Engineering 5.0% of direct costs $1,943,942 Project Management 3.0% of direct costs $1,166,365 General Administration 2.0% of direct costs $777,577 Insurance 1.5% of direct costs $583,182 Financing and Charges 0.0% of direct costs $0 Soft Cost Contingency 0.0% of indirect costs $0 Indirect Costs Total 11.5% of direct costs $4,471,066 Total Town Center Uses Expenditures $43,349,898 Net Revenues (before public finance) ($2,580,793) IRR 15.2% NPV (at 15%) 15% $50,700 Public Financing State Grants --- Tax Increment Financing --- $0 $705,873 $0 $0 $771,326 $0 $0 $842,849 $0 $596,119 $0 $514,663 $0 $0 $562,386 $0 $0 $614,534 $0 $434,639 $0 $958,383 $0 $0 $1,047,251 $0 $0 $1,144,359 $0 $809,367 $0 $247,858 $0 $0 $270,841 $0 $0 $295,955 $0 $209,319 $0 $1,144,276 $0 $0 $1,250,381 $0 $0 $1,366,325 $0 $966,356 $0 $714,210 $0 $0 $780,437 $0 $0 $852,804 $0 $603,160 $0 $4,285,262 $0 $0 $4,682,621 $0 $0 $5,116,826 $0 $3,618,961 $0 $214,263 $0 $0 $234,131 $0 $0 $255,841 $0 $180,948 $0 $128,558 $0 $0 $140,479 $0 $0 $153,505 $0 $108,569 $0 $85,705 $0 $0 $93,652 $0 $0 $102,337 $0 $72,379 $0 $64,279 $0 $0 $70,239 $0 $0 $76,752 $0 $54,284 $0 $492,805 $0 $0 $538,501 $0 $0 $588,435 $0 $416,180 $0 $4,778,067 $0 $0 $5,221,122 $0 $0 $5,705,261 $0 $4,035,141 $2,177,836 ($2,534,896) $0 $0 ($5,221,122) $0 $0 ($5,705,261) $0 ($4,035,141) Total Revenue Sources (After Public Financing) IRR NPV (at 15%) 15% (1) Annual ground lease required to yield a 15% return for the Project; capitalized at 8%. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 4 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

9 Table 1 NSC & Town Center Feasibility Model (nominal $$) Item Assumption Total Total NSC & Town Center Revenues Residential Land Sales & Leases Low-Density 3.0% $36,543,203 $0 $0 $4,392,636 $2,262,207 $6,990,221 $4,799,952 $4,325,956 $4,455,735 $4,589,407 $4,727,089 $0 Mid-Density 3.0% $25,808,218 $0 $0 $2,571,510 $1,135,138 $2,728,115 $2,007,113 $2,067,327 $2,129,346 $2,193,227 $2,259,024 $2,326,794 High-Density 3.0% $33,030,287 $0 $0 $3,114,709 $1,924,890 $4,626,153 $2,552,645 $2,629,224 $2,708,101 $2,789,344 $2,873,024 $2,959,215 Subtotal $95,381,708 $0 $0 $10,078,854 $5,322,235 $14,344,488 $9,359,710 $9,022,507 $9,293,182 $9,571,978 $9,859,137 $5,286,009 Commercial Land Leases Office 3.0% $4,673,504 $0 $0 $2,196,736 $0 $1,165,259 $0 $0 $0 $1,311,509 $0 $0 Retail 3.0% $5,349,270 $0 $0 $3,476,978 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,872,291 $0 $0 Subtotal $10,022,773 $0 $0 $5,673,714 $0 $1,165,259 $0 $0 $0 $3,183,800 $0 $0 Total Land Sales $105,404,481 $0 $0 $15,752,569 $5,322,235 $15,509,747 $9,359,710 $9,022,507 $9,293,182 $12,755,778 $9,859,137 $5,286,009 Total Expenditures Direct Costs Water Reservoir $16,197,493 $4,400,000 $0 $0 $1,359,600 $0 $0 $1,485,672 $0 $0 $1,623,434 $0 Storm Drainage $11,716,397 $3,114,667 $0 $0 $991,305 $0 $0 $1,083,226 $0 $0 $1,183,670 $0 Central Plant Facility $21,817,778 $5,800,000 $0 $0 $1,845,966 $0 $0 $2,017,137 $0 $0 $2,204,180 $0 Recycled Water Connection $5,642,529 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $477,405 $0 $0 $521,673 $0 $0 $570,047 $0 Road Infrastructure Improvements $26,049,674 $6,925,000 $0 $0 $2,204,020 $0 $0 $2,408,392 $0 $0 $2,631,715 $0 Direct Cost Contingency 20% of direct costs $16,284,774 $4,347,933 $0 $0 $1,375,659 $0 $0 $1,503,220 $0 $0 $1,642,609 $0 Direct Costs Total $97,708,645 $26,087,600 $0 $0 $8,253,955 $0 $0 $9,019,319 $0 $0 $9,855,654 $0 Ground Lease $0 $0 Indirect Costs Engineering 5% of direct costs $4,885,432 $1,304,380 $0 $0 $412,698 $0 $0 $450,966 $0 $0 $492,783 $0 Project Management 3% of direct costs $2,931,259 $782,628 $0 $0 $247,619 $0 $0 $270,580 $0 $0 $295,670 $0 General Administration 2% of direct costs $1,954,173 $521,752 $0 $0 $165,079 $0 $0 $180,386 $0 $0 $197,113 $0 Insurance 1.5% of direct costs $1,465,630 $391,314 $0 $0 $123,809 $0 $0 $135,290 $0 $0 $147,835 $0 Financing and Charges 0% of direct costs $0 $0 Soft Cost Contingency 0% of indirect costs $0 $0 Indirect Costs Total 11.5% of direct costs $11,236,494 $3,000,074 $0 $0 $949,205 $0 $0 $1,037,222 $0 $0 $1,133,400 $0 Total Uses Expenditures $108,945,140 $29,087,674 $0 $0 $9,203,160 $0 $0 $10,056,541 $0 $0 $10,989,054 $0 Net Revenues (before public finance) ($3,540,658) ($29,087,674) $0 $15,752,569 ($3,880,924) $15,509,747 $9,359,710 ($1,034,034) $9,293,182 $12,755,778 ($1,129,917) $5,286,009 IRR 14% NPV (at 15%) 15% ($3,078,833) Public Financing State Grants Tax Increment Financing Total Revenue Sources (After Public Financing) IRR NPV (at 15%) 15% (1) Annual ground lease required to yield a 15% return for the Project; capitalized at 8%. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 5 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

10 Table 1 NSC & Town Center Feasibility Model (nominal $$) Item Assumption Total Total NSC & Town Center Revenues Residential Land Sales & Leases Low-Density 3.0% $36,543,203 Mid-Density 3.0% $25,808,218 High-Density 3.0% $33,030,287 Subtotal $95,381,708 Commercial Land Leases Office 3.0% $4,673,504 Retail 3.0% $5,349,270 Subtotal $10,022,773 Total Land Sales $105,404,481 $2,396,598 $2,468,496 $1,525,531 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,047,991 $2,511,545 $1,293,446 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,444,590 $4,980,041 $2,818,976 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,444,590 $4,980,041 $2,818,976 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenditures Direct Costs Water Reservoir $16,197,493 Storm Drainage $11,716,397 Central Plant Facility $21,817,778 Recycled Water Connection $5,642,529 Road Infrastructure Improvements $26,049,674 Direct Cost Contingency 20% of direct costs $16,284,774 Direct Costs Total $97,708,645 Ground Lease $0 Indirect Costs Engineering 5% of direct costs $4,885,432 Project Management 3% of direct costs $2,931,259 General Administration 2% of direct costs $1,954,173 Insurance 1.5% of direct costs $1,465,630 Financing and Charges 0% of direct costs $0 Soft Cost Contingency 0% of indirect costs $0 Indirect Costs Total 11.5% of direct costs $11,236,494 Total Uses Expenditures $108,945,140 Net Revenues (before public finance) ($3,540,658) IRR 14% NPV (at 15%) 15% ($3,078,833) Public Financing State Grants --- Tax Increment Financing --- $0 $1,773,970 $0 $0 $1,938,465 $0 $0 $2,118,212 $0 $1,498,141 $0 $1,293,428 $0 $0 $1,413,364 $0 $0 $1,544,421 $0 $1,092,317 $0 $2,408,567 $0 $0 $2,631,906 $0 $0 $2,875,955 $0 $2,034,067 $0 $622,905 $0 $0 $680,665 $0 $0 $743,781 $0 $526,052 $0 $2,875,746 $0 $0 $3,142,405 $0 $0 $3,433,791 $0 $2,428,606 $0 $1,794,923 $0 $0 $1,961,361 $0 $0 $2,143,232 $0 $1,515,837 $0 $10,769,539 $0 $0 $11,768,166 $0 $0 $12,859,393 $0 $9,095,020 $0 $538,477 $0 $0 $588,408 $0 $0 $642,970 $0 $454,751 $0 $323,086 $0 $0 $353,045 $0 $0 $385,782 $0 $272,851 $0 $215,391 $0 $0 $235,363 $0 $0 $257,188 $0 $181,900 $0 $161,543 $0 $0 $176,522 $0 $0 $192,891 $0 $136,425 $0 $1,238,497 $0 $0 $1,353,339 $0 $0 $1,478,830 $0 $1,045,927 $0 $12,008,036 $0 $0 $13,121,505 $0 $0 $14,338,223 $0 $10,140,947 $5,444,590 ($7,027,995) $2,818,976 $0 ($13,121,505) $0 $0 ($14,338,223) $0 ($10,140,947) Total Revenue Sources (After Public Financing) IRR NPV (at 15%) 15% (1) Annual ground lease required to yield a 15% return for the Project; capitalized at 8%. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 6 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

11 Table 2 Land Planning Program for NSC Campus and Town Center Location/Use Net Acres Residential Units 1 Commercial Square Feet NSC Land - Main Campus (159 Gross Acres/115 Net Acres 2 ) Residential Low-Density Housing (10 du's/acre) Medium-Density Housing (20 du's/acre) High-Density Housing (30 du's/acre) 37 1, Total Residential 111 2, Office ,000 Retail ,000 NSC Land Total 115 2, ,000 City-Owned Land - Town Center (90 Gross Acres/76 Net Acres 4 ) Residential Low-Density Housing (10 du's/acre) Medium-Density Housing (20 du's/acre) High-Density Housing (30 du's/acre) Total Residential 70 1, Office ,000 Retail ,000 City-Owned Land Total 76 1, ,000 Total Land Program - Campus and Town Center (249 Gross Acres/191 Net Acres) Residential Low-Density Housing (10 du's/acre) Medium-Density Housing (20 du's/acre) 60 1, High-Density Housing (30 du's/acre) 61 1, Total Residential 181 3, Office ,000 Retail ,000 Total Land Program 191 3, ,000 Notes: (1) This program assumes all recommended uses can utilize surface parking (no structured parking) with nearby on-site parking for each recommended use. This program also assumes that student housing for 2,950 beds will be built on the 350 acres of college campus. (2) Given a total of 509 acres and 350 acres set aside for campus uses, including student housing, there is a residual of 159 acres. After deducting land for roads, easements, parks, and a 15 acre k-8 school site, there is a remainder of 115 acres. (3) Retail uses are assumed to be programmed into ground floor locations within campus buildings on the 350 acres. (4) We are advised that the city owns approximately 90 acres adjacent to the NSC site (509 acres), which we have designated as "Town Center" land. The net available developable acres are assumed to be 76 acres after subtracting 15.5 of the total gross acreage. Sources: Nevada State College; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

12 Table 3 Development Schedule (Units and Square Feet) Units per Acre Total NSC Residential Units Low-Density Mid-Density High-Density 30 1, Subtotal 2, Commercial Square Feet Office 25, , , , Retail 1 30,000 40, , , Subtotal 140, , , Town Center Residential Units Low-Density Mid-Density High-Density Subtotal 1, Commercial Square Feet Office 25, , , , Retail 30,000 60, , Subtotal 160, , , NSC and Town Center Cumulative Residential Units Low-Density Mid-Density 20 1, High-Density 30 1, Subtotal 3, Cumulative Commercial Square Feet Office 25, , , , , Retail 30, , , , Subtotal 300, , , , (1) Anticipated as part of a mixed-use development with other residential or commercial product type, and will not require a land allocation. Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 1 of 2 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

13 Table 3 Development Schedule (Units and Square Feet) Units per Acre Total NSC Residential Units Low-Density Mid-Density High-Density 30 1,110 Subtotal 2,220 Commercial Square Feet Office 25, ,000 Retail 1 30,000 40,000 Subtotal 140, Town Center Residential Units Low-Density Mid-Density High-Density Subtotal 1,410 Commercial Square Feet Office 25, ,000 Retail 30,000 60,000 Subtotal 160, NSC and Town Center Cumulative Residential Units Low-Density Mid-Density 20 1,200 High-Density 30 1,830 Subtotal 3,630 Cumulative Commercial Square Feet Office 25, ,000 Retail 30, ,000 Subtotal 300, (1) Anticipated as part of a mixed-use development with other residential or commercia Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 2 of 2 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

14 Table 4 Conceptual NSC & Town Center On-Site Full Cost Estimates (2009 $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Cost Total Water Reservoir $13,200,000 $13,200,000 $4,400,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $504,000 $504,000 $168,000 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 New Drainage Channels $8,840,000 $8,840,000 $2,946,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 Sub-Total $9,344,000 $9,344,000 $3,114,667 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 Central Plant Facility Low Range or $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $3,333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 High Range $15,000,000 $15,000,000 $5,000,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 Pipe Loop $2,400,000 $2,400,000 $800,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 Sub-Total $17,400,000 $17,400,000 $5,800,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 Recycled Water Connection $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $1,500,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $5,400,000 $5,400,000 $1,800,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 Arterial New Construction $2,250,000 $2,250,000 $750,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 Rail Overpasses $13,125,000 $0 $4,375,000 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 Sub-Total 1 $20,775,000 $20,775,000 $6,925,000 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 Total $65,219,000 $65,219,000 $21,739,667 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrastructure program for the NSC or Town Center sites, and only includes arterial widening, arterial new construction, and rail overpasses. Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 1 of 2 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

15 Table 4 Conceptual NSC & Town Center On-Site Full Cost Estimates (2009 $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Cost Total Water Reservoir $13,200,000 $13,200,000 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $504,000 $504,000 New Drainage Channels $8,840,000 $8,840,000 Sub-Total $9,344,000 $9,344,000 Central Plant Facility Low Range or $10,000,000 $10,000,000 High Range $15,000,000 $15,000,000 Pipe Loop $2,400,000 $2,400,000 Sub-Total $17,400,000 $17,400,000 Recycled Water Connection $4,500,000 $4,500,000 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $5,400,000 $5,400,000 Arterial New Construction $2,250,000 $2,250,000 Rail Overpasses $13,125,000 $0 Sub-Total 1 $20,775,000 $20,775,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $440,000 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $16,800 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $294,667 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $311,467 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $333,333 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $580,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $437,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 $692,500 Total $65,219,000 $65,219,000 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 $2,173,967 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrastructur Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 2 of 2 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

16 Table 5 Conceptual Infrastructure Cost Allocation (Nominal $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Present Cost Total Cost NSC & Town Center Site Water Reservoir $13,200,000 $16,197,493 $4,400,000 $0 $0 $1,359,600 $0 $0 $1,485,672 $0 $0 $1,623,434 $0 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $504,000 $631,963 $168,000 $0 $0 $53,469 $0 $0 $58,427 $0 $0 $63,845 $0 New Drainage Channels $8,840,000 $11,084,434 $2,946,667 $0 $0 $937,836 $0 $0 $1,024,798 $0 $0 $1,119,825 $0 Sub-Total $9,344,000 $11,716,397 $3,114,667 $0 $0 $991,305 $0 $0 $1,083,226 $0 $0 $1,183,670 $0 Central Plant Facility High Range $15,000,000 $18,808,429 $5,000,000 $0 $0 $1,591,350 $0 $0 $1,738,911 $0 $0 $1,900,155 $0 Pipe Loop $2,400,000 $3,009,349 $800,000 $0 $0 $254,616 $0 $0 $278,226 $0 $0 $304,025 $0 Sub-Total $17,400,000 $21,817,778 $5,800,000 $0 $0 $1,845,966 $0 $0 $2,017,137 $0 $0 $2,204,180 $0 Recycled Water Connection $4,500,000 $5,642,529 $1,500,000 $0 $0 $477,405 $0 $0 $521,673 $0 $0 $570,047 $0 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $5,400,000 $6,771,034 $1,800,000 $0 $0 $572,886 $0 $0 $626,008 $0 $0 $684,056 $0 Arterial New Construction $2,250,000 $2,821,264 $750,000 $0 $0 $238,703 $0 $0 $260,837 $0 $0 $285,023 $0 Rail Overpasses $13,125,000 $16,457,375 $4,375,000 $0 $0 $1,392,431 $0 $0 $1,521,547 $0 $0 $1,662,636 $0 Sub-Total 1 $20,775,000 $26,049,674 $6,925,000 $0 $0 $2,204,020 $0 $0 $2,408,392 $0 $0 $2,631,715 $0 NSC & Town Center Site Total $65,219,000 $81,423,871 $21,739,667 $0 $0 $6,878,296 $0 $0 $7,516,099 $0 $0 $8,213,045 $0 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrastructure program for the NSC or Town Center sites, and only includes arterial widening, arterial new construction, and rail overpasses. (2) Assumes that a proportional allocation of infrastructure costs based on net developable acres. The NSC site possess approximately 115 net developable acres of the combined NSC and Town Center total of 191, or 60.2%. Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 1 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

17 Table 5 Conceptual Infrastructure Cost Allocation (Nominal $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Present Cost Total Cost NSC & Town Center Site Water Reservoir $13,200,000 $16,197,493 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $504,000 $631,963 New Drainage Channels $8,840,000 $11,084,434 Sub-Total $9,344,000 $11,716,397 Central Plant Facility High Range $15,000,000 $18,808,429 Pipe Loop $2,400,000 $3,009,349 Sub-Total $17,400,000 $21,817,778 Recycled Water Connection $4,500,000 $5,642,529 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $5,400,000 $6,771,034 Arterial New Construction $2,250,000 $2,821,264 Rail Overpasses $13,125,000 $16,457,375 Sub-Total 1 $20,775,000 $26,049,674 $0 $1,773,970 $0 $0 $1,938,465 $0 $0 $2,118,212 $0 $1,498,141 $0 $69,765 $0 $0 $76,235 $0 $0 $83,304 $0 $58,918 $0 $1,223,663 $0 $0 $1,337,129 $0 $0 $1,461,117 $0 $1,033,400 $0 $1,293,428 $0 $0 $1,413,364 $0 $0 $1,544,421 $0 $1,092,317 $0 $2,076,351 $0 $0 $2,268,885 $0 $0 $2,479,271 $0 $1,753,506 $0 $332,216 $0 $0 $363,022 $0 $0 $396,683 $0 $280,561 $0 $2,408,567 $0 $0 $2,631,906 $0 $0 $2,875,955 $0 $2,034,067 $0 $622,905 $0 $0 $680,665 $0 $0 $743,781 $0 $526,052 $0 $747,486 $0 $0 $816,798 $0 $0 $892,538 $0 $631,262 $0 $311,453 $0 $0 $340,333 $0 $0 $371,891 $0 $263,026 $0 $1,816,807 $0 $0 $1,985,274 $0 $0 $2,169,363 $0 $1,534,318 $0 $2,875,746 $0 $0 $3,142,405 $0 $0 $3,433,791 $0 $2,428,606 NSC & Town Center Site Total $65,219,000 $81,423,871 $0 $8,974,616 $0 $0 $9,806,805 $0 $0 $10,716,161 $0 $7,579,183 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrast (2) Assumes that a proportional allocation of infrastructure costs based on net developable acres Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 2 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

18 Table 5 Conceptual Infrastructure Cost Allocation (Nominal $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Present Cost Total Cost NSC Site 2 Water Reservoir $7,947,644 $9,752,417 $2,649,215 $0 $0 $818,607 $0 $0 $894,514 $0 $0 $977,460 $0 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $303,455 $380,501 $101,152 $0 $0 $32,194 $0 $0 $35,179 $0 $0 $38,441 $0 New Drainage Channels $5,322,513 $6,673,874 $1,774,171 $0 $0 $564,665 $0 $0 $617,025 $0 $0 $674,240 $0 Sub-Total $5,625,969 $7,054,375 $1,875,323 $0 $0 $596,859 $0 $0 $652,204 $0 $0 $712,681 $0 Central Plant Facility High Range $9,031,414 $11,324,447 $3,010,471 $0 $0 $958,143 $0 $0 $1,046,988 $0 $0 $1,144,072 $0 Pipe Loop $1,445,026 $1,811,911 $481,675 $0 $0 $153,303 $0 $0 $167,518 $0 $0 $183,052 $0 Sub-Total $10,476,440 $13,136,358 $3,492,147 $0 $0 $1,111,445 $0 $0 $1,214,507 $0 $0 $1,327,124 $0 Recycled Water Connection $2,709,424 $3,397,334 $903,141 $0 $0 $287,443 $0 $0 $314,097 $0 $0 $343,222 $0 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $3,251,309 $4,076,801 $1,083,770 $0 $0 $344,931 $0 $0 $376,916 $0 $0 $411,866 $0 Arterial New Construction $1,354,712 $1,698,667 $451,571 $0 $0 $143,721 $0 $0 $157,048 $0 $0 $171,611 $0 Rail Overpasses $7,902,487 $9,908,891 $2,634,162 $0 $0 $838,375 $0 $0 $916,115 $0 $0 $1,001,063 $0 Sub-Total 1 $12,508,508 $15,684,359 $4,169,503 $0 $0 $1,327,028 $0 $0 $1,450,079 $0 $0 $1,584,540 $0 NSC Site Total $39,267,984 $49,024,844 $13,089,328 $0 $0 $4,141,382 $0 $0 $4,525,400 $0 $0 $4,945,027 $0 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrastructure program for the NSC or Town Center sites, and only includes arterial widening, arterial new construction, and rail overpasses. (2) Assumes that a proportional allocation of infrastructure costs based on net developable acres. The NSC site possess approximately 115 net developable acres of the combined NSC and Town Center total of 191, or 60.2%. Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 3 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

19 Table 5 Conceptual Infrastructure Cost Allocation (Nominal $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Present Cost Total Cost NSC Site 2 Water Reservoir $7,947,644 $9,752,417 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $303,455 $380,501 New Drainage Channels $5,322,513 $6,673,874 Sub-Total $5,625,969 $7,054,375 Central Plant Facility High Range $9,031,414 $11,324,447 Pipe Loop $1,445,026 $1,811,911 Sub-Total $10,476,440 $13,136,358 Recycled Water Connection $2,709,424 $3,397,334 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $3,251,309 $4,076,801 Arterial New Construction $1,354,712 $1,698,667 Rail Overpasses $7,902,487 $9,908,891 Sub-Total 1 $12,508,508 $15,684,359 $0 $1,068,097 $0 $0 $1,167,138 $0 $0 $1,275,364 $0 $902,022 $0 $42,005 $0 $0 $45,900 $0 $0 $50,157 $0 $35,474 $0 $736,760 $0 $0 $805,078 $0 $0 $879,730 $0 $622,204 $0 $778,766 $0 $0 $850,978 $0 $0 $929,887 $0 $657,678 $0 $1,250,159 $0 $0 $1,366,082 $0 $0 $1,492,755 $0 $1,055,776 $0 $200,025 $0 $0 $218,573 $0 $0 $238,841 $0 $168,924 $0 $1,450,184 $0 $0 $1,584,656 $0 $0 $1,731,596 $0 $1,224,700 $0 $375,048 $0 $0 $409,825 $0 $0 $447,827 $0 $316,733 $0 $450,057 $0 $0 $491,790 $0 $0 $537,392 $0 $380,079 $0 $187,524 $0 $0 $204,912 $0 $0 $223,913 $0 $158,366 $0 $1,093,889 $0 $0 $1,195,322 $0 $0 $1,306,161 $0 $923,804 $0 $1,731,470 $0 $0 $1,892,024 $0 $0 $2,067,466 $0 $1,462,250 NSC Site Total $39,267,984 $49,024,844 $0 $5,403,564 $0 $0 $5,904,621 $0 $0 $6,452,139 $0 $4,563,383 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrast (2) Assumes that a proportional allocation of infrastructure costs based on net developable acres Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 4 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

20 Table 5 Conceptual Infrastructure Cost Allocation (2009 $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Present Cost Total Cost Town Center Site 2 Water Reservoir $4,785,231 $6,445,076 $1,750,785 $0 $0 $540,993 $0 $0 $591,157 $0 $0 $645,974 $0 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $182,709 $251,462 $66,848 $0 $0 $21,276 $0 $0 $23,249 $0 $0 $25,404 $0 New Drainage Channels $3,204,654 $4,410,560 $1,172,496 $0 $0 $373,170 $0 $0 $407,773 $0 $0 $445,585 $0 Sub-Total $3,387,363 $4,662,022 $1,239,344 $0 $0 $394,446 $0 $0 $431,022 $0 $0 $470,989 $0 Central Plant Facility High Range $5,437,762 $7,483,982 $1,989,529 $0 $0 $633,207 $0 $0 $691,923 $0 $0 $756,083 $0 Pipe Loop $870,042 $1,197,437 $318,325 $0 $0 $101,313 $0 $0 $110,708 $0 $0 $120,973 $0 Sub-Total $6,307,804 $8,681,419 $2,307,853 $0 $0 $734,521 $0 $0 $802,630 $0 $0 $877,056 $0 Recycled Water Connection $1,631,329 $2,245,195 $596,859 $0 $0 $189,962 $0 $0 $207,577 $0 $0 $226,825 $0 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $1,957,594 $2,694,234 $716,230 $0 $0 $227,955 $0 $0 $249,092 $0 $0 $272,190 $0 Arterial New Construction $815,664 $1,122,597 $298,429 $0 $0 $94,981 $0 $0 $103,788 $0 $0 $113,412 $0 Rail Overpasses $4,758,042 $6,548,484 $1,740,838 $0 $0 $554,056 $0 $0 $605,432 $0 $0 $661,572 $0 Sub-Total 1 $7,531,301 $10,365,315 $2,755,497 $0 $0 $876,992 $0 $0 $958,313 $0 $0 $1,047,174 $0 Town Center Site Total $23,643,027 $32,399,027 $8,650,339 $0 $0 $2,736,913 $0 $0 $2,990,699 $0 $0 $3,268,018 $0 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrastructure program for the NSC or Town Center sites, and only includes arterial widening, arterial new construction, and rail overpasses. (2) Assumes that a proportional allocation of infrastructure costs based on net developable acres. The NSC site possess approximately 115 net developable acres of the combined NSC and Town Center total of 191, or 60.2%. Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 5 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

21 Table 5 Conceptual Infrastructure Cost Allocation (2009 $'s) DRAFT FINANCIAL MODEL Section Present Cost Total Cost Town Center Site 2 Water Reservoir $4,785,231 $6,445,076 Storm Drainage Berm Removal $182,709 $251,462 New Drainage Channels $3,204,654 $4,410,560 Sub-Total $3,387,363 $4,662,022 Central Plant Facility High Range $5,437,762 $7,483,982 Pipe Loop $870,042 $1,197,437 Sub-Total $6,307,804 $8,681,419 Recycled Water Connection $1,631,329 $2,245,195 Road Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Widening $1,957,594 $2,694,234 Arterial New Construction $815,664 $1,122,597 Rail Overpasses $4,758,042 $6,548,484 Sub-Total 1 $7,531,301 $10,365,315 $0 $705,873 $0 $0 $771,326 $0 $0 $842,849 $0 $596,119 $0 $27,760 $0 $0 $30,334 $0 $0 $33,147 $0 $23,444 $0 $486,902 $0 $0 $532,051 $0 $0 $581,387 $0 $411,196 $0 $514,663 $0 $0 $562,386 $0 $0 $614,534 $0 $434,639 $0 $826,192 $0 $0 $902,802 $0 $0 $986,516 $0 $697,730 $0 $132,191 $0 $0 $144,448 $0 $0 $157,843 $0 $111,637 $0 $958,383 $0 $0 $1,047,251 $0 $0 $1,144,359 $0 $809,367 $0 $247,858 $0 $0 $270,841 $0 $0 $295,955 $0 $209,319 $0 $297,429 $0 $0 $325,009 $0 $0 $355,146 $0 $251,183 $0 $123,929 $0 $0 $135,420 $0 $0 $147,977 $0 $104,660 $0 $722,918 $0 $0 $789,952 $0 $0 $863,202 $0 $610,514 $0 $1,144,276 $0 $0 $1,250,381 $0 $0 $1,366,325 $0 $966,356 Town Center Site Total $23,643,027 $32,399,027 $0 $3,571,051 $0 $0 $3,902,184 $0 $0 $4,264,022 $0 $3,015,801 (1) This figure does not assume freeway widenings and interchanges to be included in the infrast (2) Assumes that a proportional allocation of infrastructure costs based on net developable acres Source: Arup, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 6 of 6 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

22 Table 6 10 Dwelling Units per Acre NSC Development Residual Land Value For-Sale - Moderate Scenario For-Sale - Conservative Scenario For-Sale - Optimistic Scenario Item Assumptions Total Assumptions Total Assumptions Total DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Number of Units Avg Gross Unit Area 4,356 4,356 4,356 Avg Net Unit Area 2,500 2,500 2,500 Net Area 925, , ,000 Efficiency Rate (GLA/Gross SF) 57% 57% 57% Footprint 1,611,720 1,611,720 1,611,720 Direct Costs Construction Cost 1 $85.00 /SF $78,625,000 $85.00 /SF $78,625,000 $85.00 /SF $78,625,000 On-Site Costs $10.00 /Footprint SF $6,867,200 $10.00 /Footprint SF $6,867,200 $10.00 /Footprint SF $6,867,200 Construction Costs $85,492,200 $85,492,200 $85,492,200 Sub-Total of Direct Costs $85,492,200 $85,492,200 $85,492,200 Indirect Costs Water & Sewer 2 Clean Water Coalition Fees $849 / Unit $314,130 $849 / Unit $314,130 $849 / Unit $314,130 Water System Development Charges $1,008 / Unit $372,960 $1,008 / Unit $372,960 $1,008 / Unit $372,960 S.N.W.A Regional Connection Charge $3,400 / Unit $1,258,000 $3,400 / Unit $1,258,000 $3,400 / Unit $1,258,000 Sewer System Development Charges $1,800 / Unit $666,000 $1,800 / Unit $666,000 $1,800 / Unit $666,000 Permit Fees 3 $1,806 / Unit $668,139 $1,806 / Unit $668,139 $1,806 / Unit $668,139 Clark County Transportation Privilege Tax 4 $800 / Unit $296,000 $800 / Unit $296,000 $800 / Unit $296,000 Entitlement & Planning 5.0% of Direct Costs $4,274, % of Direct Costs $4,274, % of Direct Costs $4,274,610 Project Management/General Admin. 5.0% of Direct Costs $4,274, % of Direct Costs $4,274, % of Direct Costs $4,274,610 Financing & Charges 5.0% of Direct Costs $4,274, % of Direct Costs $4,274, % of Direct Costs $4,274,610 Sub-Total of Indirect Costs $16,399,059 $16,399,059 $16,399,059 Total Costs $101,891,259 $101,891,259 $101,891,259 Contingency 5.0% of Total Costs $5,094, % of Total Costs $5,094, % of Total Costs $5,094,563 Developer Profit 10.0% of Total Costs $10,189, % of Total Costs $10,189, % of Total Costs $10,189,126 Total Development Costs $117,174,947 $117,174,947 $117,174,947 Revenue Assumptions Sale Price $ /SF $143,219,674 $ /SF $121,736,723 $ /SF $164,702,625 Gross Achievable Income $143,219,674 $121,736,723 $164,702,625 Closing Cost 4.0% of sale price $5,728, % of sale price $4,869, % of sale price $6,588,105 Net Proceeds $137,490,887 $116,867,254 $158,114,520 RESIDUAL LAND VALUE Net Proceeds $137,490,887 $116,867,254 $158,114,520 (Less) Total Costs (Direct, Indirect, & Contingency) $117,174,947 $117,174,947 $117,174,947 Total Residual Land Value $20,315,940 -$307,693 $40,939,573 Residual Value per Net Acre $549,079 -$8,316 $1,106,475 (1) Based on Developer Quotes in Las Vegas and Phoenix Markets, and RS Means (2) Provided by City of Henderson Development Services Department (3) Calculated by City of Henderson Permit Fee Estimator (4) Provided by City of Henderson Development Services Department Source: City of Henderson, Economic & Planning Systems Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4/8/2009 Page 1 of 2 P:\18000s\18067NevStateCollege\Tasks\Task 4 - Strategic Financing Analysis\18067FeasibilityModel5.xls

Town of Prescott Valley 2014 Development Impact Fee Report. Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc.

Town of Prescott Valley 2014 Development Impact Fee Report. Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. Town of Prescott Valley 2014 Development Impact Fee Report Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. February 13, 2014 Table of Contents Purpose of this Report... 1 Existing Development Impact Fees... 1 Summary

More information

LEVEL OF SERVICE / COST & REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS

LEVEL OF SERVICE / COST & REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE / COST & REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS APPENDIX TO THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF PHASE I OF CAROLINA NORTH University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina Town of Carrboro,

More information

METRO AIR PARK COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

METRO AIR PARK COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN METRO AIR PARK COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO Prepared for the Hearing of the Board of Supervisors On December 11, 2007 DECEMBER 11, 2007 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO METRO AIR PARK PROJECT

More information

GRASS VALLEY TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE PROGRAM NEXUS STUDY

GRASS VALLEY TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE PROGRAM NEXUS STUDY HEARING REPORT GRASS VALLEY TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE PROGRAM NEXUS STUDY Prepared for: City of Grass Valley Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. March 2008 EPS #17525 S A C R A M E N T O 2150

More information

HR&A Advisors, Inc. Incremental Tier 2 & Tier 3 Development Fees Analysis for the Santa Monica Downtown Community Plan Update November 2016

HR&A Advisors, Inc. Incremental Tier 2 & Tier 3 Development Fees Analysis for the Santa Monica Downtown Community Plan Update November 2016 Incremental Tier 2 & Tier 3 Development Fees Analysis for the Santa Monica Downtown Community Plan Update November 2016 HR&A analyzed feasible development fees for incremental floor area increases applicable

More information

Klamath Falls Urban Renewal Feasibility Study

Klamath Falls Urban Renewal Feasibility Study Klamath Falls Urban Renewal Feasibility Study March 17, 2016 Nathan Cherpeski City Manager City of Klamath Falls P.O. Box 237 Klamath Falls, Oregon 97601 Dear Nathan, The Urban Renewal Feasibility Study

More information

Big Chino Water Ranch Project Impact Analysis Prescott & Prescott Valley, Arizona

Big Chino Water Ranch Project Impact Analysis Prescott & Prescott Valley, Arizona Big Chino Water Ranch Project Impact Analysis Prescott & Prescott Valley, Arizona Prepared for: Central Arizona Partnership August 2008 Prepared by: 7505 East 6 th Avenue, Suite 100 Scottsdale, Arizona

More information

D R A F T M E M O R A N D U M

D R A F T M E M O R A N D U M D R A F T M E M O R A N D U M To: From: Joe Speaks, CH2M Darin Smith and Matt Loftis Subject: 4th and King RAB Financing Opportunities; EPS #141018 Date: August 18, 2017 Economic & Planning Systems Inc.

More information

N Catalina - Redondo Beach Transaction Summary PROJECT AND MARKET OVERVIEW

N Catalina - Redondo Beach Transaction Summary PROJECT AND MARKET OVERVIEW Transaction Summary PROJECT AND MARKET OVERVIEW PROJECT OVERVIEW MARKET STATISTICS (2018) Address 100-132 N Catalina - Redondo Beach Submarket Comparables SF $/PSF Sale Price Property Type For Sale Condos

More information

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY Town of New Tecumseth C o n s u l t i n g L t d. May 29, 2013 Amended June 18, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 I INTRODUCTION... 10 II THE METHODOLOGY

More information

River Edge Fiscal Impact Analysis

River Edge Fiscal Impact Analysis Final Report Prepared for: Carbondale Investments Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. EPS #20813 App. N-2 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS... 1 Summary of Findings...

More information

City of La Verne. Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District #1. Infrastructure Financing Plan

City of La Verne. Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District #1. Infrastructure Financing Plan City of La Verne Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District #1 Introduction Infrastructure Financing Plan Senate Bill No. 628 was first introduced in February 2013 by Senators Beall and Wolk. This bill,

More information

123 Main Street Mixed-Use Condominium Development Summary of Development Assumptions - 7/11/2012 % Total $/Unit $/GSF Total

123 Main Street Mixed-Use Condominium Development Summary of Development Assumptions - 7/11/2012 % Total $/Unit $/GSF Total Summary of Development Assumptions - 7/11/2012 % Total $/Unit $/GSF Total BUILDING INFORMATION DEVELOPMENT USES OF FUNDS Project Name Land and Acquisition Costs 0.00% Deposit 32.83% $237,410 $165.00 $33,000,000

More information

STORM WATER USER RATE STUDY

STORM WATER USER RATE STUDY LY STORM WATER USER RATE STUDY STORM WATER UTILITY OREM CITY, UTAH JANUARY 2016 PREPARED BY LEWIS YOUNG ROBERTSON & BURNINGHAM, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 3 SECTION II: OVERVIEW

More information

The Meadows at Fair Lakes Summary of Land Development Assumptions - Part 1-9/16/2012

The Meadows at Fair Lakes Summary of Land Development Assumptions - Part 1-9/16/2012 Summary of Land Development Assumptions - Part 1-9/16/2012 SITE INFORMATION DEVELOPMENT USES OF FUNDS Project Name % Total $/Acre Total Address Old Fairgrounds, Anytown, NY 12345 Land and Acquisition Costs

More information

The Lakes At Fair Meadow Summary of Land Development Assumptions - Part 1-9/16/2012

The Lakes At Fair Meadow Summary of Land Development Assumptions - Part 1-9/16/2012 Summary of Land Development Assumptions - Part 1-9/16/2012 SITE INFORMATION DEVELOPMENT USES OF FUNDS Project Name % Total $/Acre Total Land and Acquisition Costs 10.00% Deposit 34.92% $20,000 $1,000,000

More information

HACKBERRY HIDDEN COVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2 SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN (UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS)

HACKBERRY HIDDEN COVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2 SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN (UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS) HACKBERRY HIDDEN COVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2 SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN (UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS) SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 HACKBERRY HIDDEN COVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 2 SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT

More information

bae urban economics Memorandum Fee Analysis for General Plan Update Cost Recovery and for General Plan Implementation

bae urban economics Memorandum Fee Analysis for General Plan Update Cost Recovery and for General Plan Implementation bae urban economics Memorandum To: Vacaville City Council From: Matt Kowta, Principal, MCP Date: July 10, 2016 Re: Fee Analysis for General Plan Update Cost Recovery and for General Plan Implementation

More information

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY Town of Innisfil C o n s u l t i n g L t d. July 19, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 I PURPOSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY... 6 A. INTRODUCTION

More information

San Francisco Multi-Purpose Venue Project. Fiscal Impact Analysis: Revenues. Draft Report. Prepared for: The City and County of San Francisco

San Francisco Multi-Purpose Venue Project. Fiscal Impact Analysis: Revenues. Draft Report. Prepared for: The City and County of San Francisco Draft Report San Francisco Multi-Purpose Venue Project Fiscal Impact Analysis: Revenues Prepared for: The City and County of San Francisco Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. April 27, 2015

More information

2017 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY. HEMSON C o n s u l t i n g L t d

2017 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY. HEMSON C o n s u l t i n g L t d 2017 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY C o n s u l t i n g L t d June 23, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 I INTRODUCTION... 11 II A MUNICIPAL-WIDE METHODOLOGY ALIGNS DEVELOPMENT- RELATED

More information

DRAFT. Prepared for: CBRE CONSULTING CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JANUARY 2011

DRAFT. Prepared for: CBRE CONSULTING CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JANUARY 2011 DRAFT PARKMERCED FISCAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OVERVIEW Prepared for: CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JANUARY 2011 CBRE CONSULTING 101 California Street, 44 th Floor

More information

City of Denton, Texas

City of Denton, Texas FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS (EXHIBIT D OF THE FINANCE PLAN) Prepared October 2012 Finalized May 2014 Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone No. 2 City of Denton, Texas George R. Schrader Larry D. Cline 4800 Broadway,

More information

Town Square Redevelopment. Phase I Contract Discussion

Town Square Redevelopment. Phase I Contract Discussion Town Square Redevelopment Phase I Contract Discussion Date: June 8, 2017 Current Estimated Schedule Draft RFQ Review September 20, 2016 Final RFQ Publication October 10, 2016 Part I Team Shortlist January

More information

HEMSON C o n s u l t i n g L t d

HEMSON C o n s u l t i n g L t d DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY Town of Gravenhurst C o n s u l t i n g L t d April, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 I INTRODUCTION... 7 II A TOWN-WIDE UNIFORM CHARGE APPROACH TO ALIGN

More information

Market and Financial Inputs to Neighbourhood Centres Policy

Market and Financial Inputs to Neighbourhood Centres Policy Appendix E of PB-01-17 Market and Financial Inputs to Neighbourhood Centres Policy November 2016 Prepared for: City of Burlington By: Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction... 1 1.1 Background... 1 1.2 Approach...

More information

Economic Evaluation and Fiscal Impact Analysis of Gateway Oyster Point

Economic Evaluation and Fiscal Impact Analysis of Gateway Oyster Point Report Economic Evaluation and Fiscal Impact Analysis of Gateway Oyster Point Prepared for: BioMed Realty Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. April 9, 2013 EPS #131017 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION

More information

ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS:

ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: Proposed Alexan Gateway Multi-Family Mixed-Use Development in Avondale Estates, Georgia July 18, 2018 Prepared for Trammell Crow Residential Prepared by: Bleakly Advisory Group,

More information

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS SITE AUTHORITY

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS SITE AUTHORITY CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS SITE AUTHORITY Financial Statements and Supplementary Information for the Year Ended June 30, 2017 and Independent Auditors Report CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

More information

Midtown Row. Fiscal Impact Study. BSV Colonial Owner, LLC. Ted Figura Consulting. City of Williamsburg, Virginia. Prepared by. For. Bethesda, Maryland

Midtown Row. Fiscal Impact Study. BSV Colonial Owner, LLC. Ted Figura Consulting. City of Williamsburg, Virginia. Prepared by. For. Bethesda, Maryland Midtown Row Fiscal Impact Study City of Williamsburg, Virginia Prepared by Ted Figura Consulting For BSV Colonial Owner, LLC Bethesda, Maryland August 1 2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary. 4 Background......

More information

THE TRUE COST OF STUDENT HOUSING

THE TRUE COST OF STUDENT HOUSING THE TRUE COST OF STUDENT HOUSING T U E S D A Y, O C T O B E R 2 N D, 2012 C O M M U N I T Y C O L L E G E B U S I N E S S O F F I C E R S A N N U A L C O N F E R E N C E O R L A N D O, F L PRESENTATION

More information

Aspen Place at the Sawmill Fiscal Impact Analysis

Aspen Place at the Sawmill Fiscal Impact Analysis Aspen Place at the Sawmill Fiscal Impact Analysis PREPARED FOR: City of Flagstaff PREPARED BY: ESI CORPORATION 300 West Clarendon Avenue Suite 470 Phoenix, Arizona 85013 (602) 265-6120 www.esicorp.net

More information

CRANE CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN OAKDALE, CALIFORNIA

CRANE CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN OAKDALE, CALIFORNIA CRANE CROSSING SPECIFIC PLAN OAKDALE, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN AND FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Final Draft MAY 28, 2013 Crane Crossing Specific Plan Oakdale, California Public Facilities

More information

Fiscal Impact Analysis

Fiscal Impact Analysis May 12, 2017 Fiscal Impact Analysis Westport Cupertino Development Prepared for: KT Urban, LLC Prepared by: Applied Development Economics, Inc. 1756 Lacassie Avenue, #100, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925.934.8712

More information

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority - Additional Information for the Long Term Accommodation Project

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority - Additional Information for the Long Term Accommodation Project REPORT FOR ACTION Toronto and Region Conservation Authority - Additional Information for the Long Term Accommodation Project Date: February 14, 2017 To: City Council From: Deputy City Manager & Chief Financial

More information

MEMORANDUM. Date: July 28, 2011; amended August 31, 2011

MEMORANDUM. Date: July 28, 2011; amended August 31, 2011 MEMORANDUM Date: July 28, 2011; amended August 31, 2011 To: From: Project: Subject: Thomas Rogers, City of Menlo Park Mark Hoffheimer, Perkins & Will Prakash Pinto, Perkins & Will Strategic Economics Menlo

More information

ECONOMIC ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES PAPER

ECONOMIC ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES PAPER ECONOMIC ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES PAPER Introduction The purpose of this paper is to identify important economic issues that need to be addressed in order to create policy options for the City of Simi

More information

Lakeside Village Town of Flower Mound, Texas

Lakeside Village Town of Flower Mound, Texas Lakeside Village of Flower Mound, Texas TIRZ Feasibility Analysis December 12, 2018 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING Introduction Hawes Hill and Associates was tasked by the of Flower Mound to look at the financial

More information

Condominium Building Development Assumptions - 7/11/2012. Project Name 123 Main Street, Chicago, IL

Condominium Building Development Assumptions - 7/11/2012. Project Name 123 Main Street, Chicago, IL BUILDING INFORMATION DEVELOPMENT USES OF FUNDS % Total $/Unit $/GSF Total Project Name Land and Acquisition Costs 5.00% Deposit 16.89% $86,957 $63.49 $4,000,000 Lot Square Footage 14,000 SF Total Hard

More information

Mountain House Debt. A Synopsis of How Mountain House Is Financed

Mountain House Debt. A Synopsis of How Mountain House Is Financed Mountain House Debt A Synopsis of How Mountain House Is Financed Source of Debt California works under the premise that development pays for itself and does not impose a burden on existing residents. Several

More information

Indiana LTAP Road School 2007 Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana March 7, 2007

Indiana LTAP Road School 2007 Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana March 7, 2007 Review of GASB Statement No. 34 capital asset provisions and discussion of the Indiana LTAP and Government Fixed Asset Services, Inc. Procedure Manual for Implementation of GASB Statement No. 34 Indiana

More information

Presented By: L. Carson Bise II, AICP President

Presented By: L. Carson Bise II, AICP President Impact Fee Basics: Methodology and Fee Design Presented By: L. Carson Bise II, AICP President Basic Options for One-Time Infrastructure Charges Funding from broad-based revenues (general taxes) Growth

More information

CITY OF BLUE ASH Interoffice Memo City Manager's Office

CITY OF BLUE ASH Interoffice Memo City Manager's Office TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF BLUE ASH Interoffice Memo City Manager's Office City Council City Manager and Department Directors Agenda Items for the November 9 th Council Meeting DATE: November 7, 2017 COPIES:

More information

DREAM UNLIMITED CORP. REPORTS THIRD QUARTER RESULTS

DREAM UNLIMITED CORP. REPORTS THIRD QUARTER RESULTS DREAM UNLIMITED CORP. REPORTS THIRD QUARTER RESULTS This press release contains forward-looking information that is based upon assumptions and is subject to risks and uncertainties as indicated in the

More information

WATER USER RATES & FEE STUDY

WATER USER RATES & FEE STUDY WATER USER RATES & FEE STUDY FINAL REPORT February 2016 BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES Independent Public Finance Consultants 1889 Alcatraz Avenue Berkeley, California 94703 www.bartlewells.com Tel: 510/653-3399

More information

City Council Report 915 I Street, 1 st Floor Sacramento, CA

City Council Report 915 I Street, 1 st Floor Sacramento, CA City Council Report 915 I Street, 1 st Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 www.cityofsacramento.org File ID: 2017-01623 January 9, 2018 Consent Item 04 Title: Mitigation Fee Act Annual Report for the Year Ending

More information

Economic Impact Analysis of the Downtown Green Line Vision Plan and Georgia Multi-modal Passenger Terminal

Economic Impact Analysis of the Downtown Green Line Vision Plan and Georgia Multi-modal Passenger Terminal Economic Impact Analysis of the Downtown Green Line Vision Plan and Georgia Multi-modal Passenger Terminal Summary Released January 2012 Prepared for Central Atlanta Progress/Atlanta Downtown Improvement

More information

Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis of Proposed IKEA in Dublin, California

Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis of Proposed IKEA in Dublin, California Final Report Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis of Proposed IKEA in Dublin, California Prepared for: IKEA Property, Inc. Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. August 22, 2017 EPS #161062 1. INTRODUCTION

More information

Planning Commission Staff Report

Planning Commission Staff Report Staff Recommendation Planning Commission Staff Report February 5, 2015 Project: Southeast Policy Area, Amendment 1 File: PL0016 and EG-13-030 Request: General Plan Amendment, Community Plan Amendment,

More information

Subject: City of St. Louis Park Beltline Boulevard Station Redevelopment Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Review File No.

Subject: City of St. Louis Park Beltline Boulevard Station Redevelopment Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Review File No. Committee Report Business Item No. 2017-54 Community Development Committee For the Metropolitan Council meeting of March 8, 2017 Subject: City of St. Louis Park Beltline Boulevard Station Redevelopment

More information

Revenue Options for Baltimore City s Affordable Housing Trust Fund

Revenue Options for Baltimore City s Affordable Housing Trust Fund Revenue Options for Baltimore City s Affordable Housing Trust Fund A P R I L 2 0 1 8 Baltimore City voters approved a ballot question in 2016 to create an affordable housing trust fund. The purpose of

More information

RESOLUTION NUMBER 3305

RESOLUTION NUMBER 3305 RESOLUTION NUMBER 3305 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PERRIS TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-5 (AMBER OAKS II) OF THE CITY OF PERRIS AND TO AUTHORIZE THE

More information

MONROE CITY COUNCIL. Agenda Bill No

MONROE CITY COUNCIL. Agenda Bill No MONROE CITY COUNCIL Agenda Bill No. 15149 TITLE: Discussion: Impact Fees DATE: DEPT: CONTACT: PRESENTER: ITEM: 08/25/2015 Public Works Brad Feilberg Brad Feilberg Discussion: 08/25/2015 Attachments: 1.

More information

Percent Change from Average* Annual % Growth Rate

Percent Change from Average* Annual % Growth Rate A. SUMMARY Winter Springs growth since the 1950 s has predominantly been accomplished through expansion of land area through annexation of adjacent developing land. By the 1970 s, the City more than doubled

More information

City of Redding, California Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study

City of Redding, California Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study , California Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study December 5, 2017 Prepared by helping communities fund to morrow This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary...1 Background

More information

Proposed Symphony Park TID. January 20, 2015

Proposed Symphony Park TID. January 20, 2015 Proposed Symphony Park TID January 20, 2015 Summary This report analyzes the proposed Symphony Park Tourism Improvement District in Las Vegas. Sources of spending include: The expansion of Premium Outlets

More information

TAX INCREMENTAL PROJECT PLAN

TAX INCREMENTAL PROJECT PLAN TAX INCREMENTAL PROJECT PLAN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT #77 RUSHMORE GATEWAY CORRIDOR CITY OF RAPID CITY Prepared by the Rapid City Community Planning and Development Services Department April 2016 INTRODUCTION

More information

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS INTEGRITY INNOVATION ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE TEAMWORK This section provides a detailed spending plan to account for proceeds of specific revenue sources that are legally

More information

Westwood Country Club Redevelopment

Westwood Country Club Redevelopment Westwood Country Club Redevelopment Economic and Fiscal Impact March, 2014 Prepared for: Mensch Capital Partners Prepared By: Kent Gardner, Ph.D. Project Director 1 South Washington Street Suite 400 Rochester,

More information

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS SITE AUTHORITY

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS SITE AUTHORITY CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS SITE AUTHORITY Financial Statements and Supplementary Information for the Year Ended June 30, 2014 and Independent Auditors Report CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

More information

CITY OF MODESTO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO (HETCH HETCHY) CFD REPORT

CITY OF MODESTO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO (HETCH HETCHY) CFD REPORT CITY OF MODESTO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2005-1 (HETCH HETCHY) CFD REPORT September 23, 2005 Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. 555 University Avenue, Suite 280 Sacramento, California 95825 Phone

More information

TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON GROUNDS AND BUILDINGS: ACTION ITEM

TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON GROUNDS AND BUILDINGS: ACTION ITEM 104 Office of the President TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON : For Meeting of ACTION ITEM AMENDMENT OF THE BUDGET FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND APPROVAL OF EXTERNAL FINANCING

More information

Fiscal Impact Analysis: East Aurora Annexation Study (EAAS)

Fiscal Impact Analysis: East Aurora Annexation Study (EAAS) Final Draft Report Fiscal Impact Analysis: East Aurora Annexation Study (EAAS) Prepared for: City of Aurora, Colorado Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. EPS #153011 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION

More information

Capital Improvements Element

Capital Improvements Element Chapter 6 Capital Improvements Element The Hall County Capital Improvements Element 1, adopted June 25, 2009, is provided as an attachment to Hall County Forward. 1 The 2017-2021 Community Work Program

More information

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY CONSOLIDATION STUDY C o n s u l t i n g L t d. April 25, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary... 1 I Introduction... 12 II III The Methodology Combines A CityWide

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES TABLE OF CONTENTS A. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES... 3 B. SUMMARY... 17 LIST OF TABLES Table IX 1: City of Winter Springs Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements (SCI) FY 2013/14-2017/18... 11 Table

More information

C REVISED ATTACHMENT 5

C REVISED ATTACHMENT 5 Rationale for Communities Outside the Revised Recommended Portfolio C208-0900 REVISED The five communities outlined below (identified in four business cases) have not been included in the portfolio approved

More information

Special Revenue Funds

Special Revenue Funds Special Revenue Funds 347 City of Southlake Fund structure Chart City of Southlake Budgeted Funds Governmental Funds Proprietary Funds Special Revenue Funds -- Bicentennial Concessions -- Community Enhancement

More information

EXHIBIT 1. Salt Lake City

EXHIBIT 1. Salt Lake City EXHIBIT 1 Salt Lake City DRAFT Cost-Benefit and Financial Need Analysis Stadler Development March 5, 2018 COST-BENEFIT AND FINANCIAL NEED ANALYSIS STADLER DEVELOPMENT Zions Public Finance, Inc., has conducted

More information

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS FINANCING AUTHORITY. Financial Statements For The Year Ended June 30, 2017 and Independent Auditors Report

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS FINANCING AUTHORITY. Financial Statements For The Year Ended June 30, 2017 and Independent Auditors Report CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS FINANCING AUTHORITY Financial Statements For The Year Ended June 30, 2017 and Independent Auditors Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Independent

More information

GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY THE COUNTY OF HALIBURTON May 21, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1 2.0 MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY HOUSING ALLOCATION... 2 2.1 Medium and High Option 1 Existing Distribution...

More information

Virginia Beach Strategic Growth Areas: Development Potential UPDATE. City of Virginia Beach Strategic Growth Area Office February 3, 2012

Virginia Beach Strategic Growth Areas: Development Potential UPDATE. City of Virginia Beach Strategic Growth Area Office February 3, 2012 Virginia Beach Strategic Growth Areas: Development Potential UPDATE City of Virginia Beach Strategic Growth Area Office February 3, 2012 OUTLINE Economic Outlook and Commercial Market Update Demographic

More information

FINDINGS. The Board of Supervisors finds that: Resolution No declaring its intention to form Community Facilities District No.

FINDINGS. The Board of Supervisors finds that: Resolution No declaring its intention to form Community Facilities District No. ORDINANCE NO. 879 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES IN IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2 OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 07-1(NEWPORT/I-215 INTERCHANGE) OF THE COUNTY

More information

FTE 1 Table Year (proposed) # Budgeted FTE s

FTE 1 Table Year (proposed) # Budgeted FTE s P1 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROPOSED SERVICE PLAN 2019-2022 1. Mandate: Environmental Services (ENVS) provides leadership in environmental protection and sustainable service for the citizens of

More information

Nepenthe Association

Nepenthe Association Nepenthe Association Campus Commons Water Meter Installation Study January 2019 Prepared By: Contact: Kevin J. Gustorf, P.E. (916) 341-7425 Nepenthe Association / No.1978 Water Meter Installation Study

More information

TAUSSIG DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE JUSTIFICATION STUDY CITY OF ESCALON. Public Finance Public Private Partnerships Urban Economics Clean Energy Bonds

TAUSSIG DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE JUSTIFICATION STUDY CITY OF ESCALON. Public Finance Public Private Partnerships Urban Economics Clean Energy Bonds DAVID TAUSSIG & ASSOCIATES, INC. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE JUSTIFICATION STUDY CITY OF ESCALON B. C. SEPTEMBER 12, 2016 Public Finance Public Private Partnerships Urban Economics Clean Energy Bonds Prepared

More information

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY STAFF CONSOLIDATION REPORT. HEMSON C o n s u l t i n g L t d. Grey County

DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY STAFF CONSOLIDATION REPORT. HEMSON C o n s u l t i n g L t d. Grey County DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY Grey County STAFF CONSOLIDATION REPORT C o n s u l t i n g L t d. November 17, 2016 C o n s u l t i n g L t d. COUNTY OF GREY 2016 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY

More information

Report to: General Committee Meeting Date: December 5, 2017

Report to: General Committee Meeting Date: December 5, 2017 Report to: General Committee Meeting Date: December 5, 2017 SUBJECT: 2017 Development s Background Study PREPARED BY: Kevin Ross, Manager, Development Finance Ext. 2126 RECOMMENDATION: 1) THAT the report

More information

4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT

4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT This section discusses the effects the proposed project may potentially have on local and regional population, housing, and employment. The

More information

WHITE OAK PLACE. Brownfield Plan No East Grand River, Tax ID Spartan Ave, Tax ID

WHITE OAK PLACE. Brownfield Plan No East Grand River, Tax ID Spartan Ave, Tax ID WHITE OAK PLACE 1301 East Grand River, Tax ID 33 20 02 18 415 009 1307 East Grand River, Tax ID 33 20 02 18 415 010 116-132 Spartan Ave, Tax ID 33 20 02 18 415 008 East Lansing, Michigan 48823 Brownfield

More information

BUILD NYC RESOURCE CORPORATION PROJECT COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS July 16, 2015

BUILD NYC RESOURCE CORPORATION PROJECT COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS July 16, 2015 BUILD NYC RESOURCE CORPORATION PROJECT COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS July 16, 2015 APPLICANT Hannah Senesh Community Day School 342 Smith Street Brooklyn, NY 11231 PROJECT LOCATION 342 Smith Street Brooklyn, NY

More information

Fiscal Analysis November 14, Fiscal Analysis Fiscal Conditions Project Background

Fiscal Analysis November 14, Fiscal Analysis Fiscal Conditions Project Background 3.11 Fiscal Analysis Fiscal Analysis 3.11.1 Fiscal Conditions 3.11.1.1 Project Background The proposed action is a 149 unit residential development, including a private road and appurtenances, on a 29.3

More information

Market Assessment and Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Cumberland Community Improvement CUMBERLAND CID DECEMBER 2009

Market Assessment and Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Cumberland Community Improvement CUMBERLAND CID DECEMBER 2009 Market Assessment and Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Cumberland Community Improvement District CUMBERLAND CID DECEMBER 2009 BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES Background RCLCO was retained to assess the

More information

GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34 the basics

GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34. GASB Statement No. 34 the basics GASB Statement No. 34 Indiana LTAP Annual Road School Conference Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana March 11, 2004 GASB Statement No. 34 Summary of Capital Asset and General Infrastructure Accounting

More information

Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies

Biennial Budget Section II: Process/Policies BUDGET POLICIES This section of the budget sets forth the objectives of the budget as a policy document together with a description of the basis of the policy. Policy Context of the Budget The City budget

More information

Business Case* Official Community Plan Update. Submitted by: Phil Blaker. Acting General Manager, Planning and Development Services

Business Case* Official Community Plan Update. Submitted by: Phil Blaker. Acting General Manager, Planning and Development Services Business Case* Official Community Plan Update Submitted by: Phil Blaker Acting General Manager, Planning and Development Services Mark Neill, Director of Community Planning BC EDP OCP UPDATE -66- 1 Executive

More information

Exhibit "B" TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE, NUMBER ONE CITY OF BAYTOWN. July 8, 2015

Exhibit B TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE, NUMBER ONE CITY OF BAYTOWN. July 8, 2015 Exhibit "B" TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE, NUMBER ONE CITY OF BAYTOWN July 8, 2015 2015 AMENDMENT TO THE PROJECT PLAN AND REINVESTMENT ZONE FINANCING PLAN PROJECT PLAN Page I. Existing uses and conditions

More information

Proposed FY Storm Drainage Management Fund Budget. Presented to the Dallas City Council August 19, 2009

Proposed FY Storm Drainage Management Fund Budget. Presented to the Dallas City Council August 19, 2009 Proposed FY2009 10 Storm Drainage Management Fund Budget Presented to the Dallas City Council August 19, 2009 Purpose Storm Drainage Management (SDM) Fund background Current rate structure Proposed rates

More information

WATER AND SEWER RATE STUDY

WATER AND SEWER RATE STUDY FINAL WATER AND SEWER RATE STUDY B&V PROJECT NO. 179322.0100 PREPARED FOR City of Lynwood, CA JANUARY 11, 2017 Black & Veatch Holding Company 2011. All rights reserved. City of Lynwood, CA WATER AND SEWER

More information

Board Report Update on Broadway Corridor & USPS September 9, 2015 Page 1 of 5

Board Report Update on Broadway Corridor & USPS September 9, 2015 Page 1 of 5 September 9, 2015 Page 1 of 5 DATE: September 9, 2015 TO: FROM: Board of Commissioners Patrick Quinton, Executive Director SUBJECT: Report Number 15-57 Update on the Broadway Corridor Framework Plan and

More information

Strategic Growth in the Rangeview Area Structure Plan

Strategic Growth in the Rangeview Area Structure Plan 2018 March 22 Page 1 of 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Administration has received and reviewed an Outline Plan/Land Use (OP/LU) application within the Rangeview Area Structure Plan (ASP). The developer of these

More information

Policy CIE The following are the minimum acceptable LOS standards to be utilized in planning for capital improvement needs:

Policy CIE The following are the minimum acceptable LOS standards to be utilized in planning for capital improvement needs: Vision Statement: Provide high quality public facilities that meet and exceed the minimum level of service standards. Goals, Objectives and Policies: Goal CIE-1. The City shall provide for facilities and

More information

LELAND CONSULTING GROUP

LELAND CONSULTING GROUP Memorandum Date 25 April 2013 To From CC Thomas Puttman, Puttman Infrastructure April Chastain, Leland Consulting Group Chris Zahas, Leland Consulting Group Matt Arnold, SERA Architects Kevin Cronin, Portland

More information

WALTON W ESTPHALIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REPORTS SECOND QUARTER 2016 FISCAL RESULTS AND ANNOUNCES LOAN AGREEMENT FOR EB-5 LOAN FINANCING

WALTON W ESTPHALIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REPORTS SECOND QUARTER 2016 FISCAL RESULTS AND ANNOUNCES LOAN AGREEMENT FOR EB-5 LOAN FINANCING For Immediate Release WALTON W ESTPHALIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REPORTS SECOND QUARTER 2016 FISCAL RESULTS AND ANNOUNCES LOAN AGREEMENT FOR EB-5 LOAN FINANCING Calgary August 26, 2016: Walton Westphalia

More information

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of November 18, 2017

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of November 18, 2017 ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA County Board Agenda Item Meeting of November 18, 2017 DATE: November 9, 2017 SUBJECT: Allocation of up to $13,511,036 in Fiscal Year 2018 Affordable Housing Investment Fund (AHIF)

More information

Fiscal Impact Analysis of Great Pond Village

Fiscal Impact Analysis of Great Pond Village Fiscal Impact Analysis of Great Pond Village Town of Windsor, Connecticut Presentation to: Windsor Town Council Windsor Town Planning & Zoning May 11, 2011 Presentation Overview Introduction Fiscal Impact

More information

Edmonton City Centre Airport Demonstration Plan

Edmonton City Centre Airport Demonstration Plan Edmonton City Centre Airport Demonstration Plan Economic Impact Analysis June 15, 2009 Prepared for the City of Edmonton Page 1 of 51 Report 2009DCM032 - Study Purpose 2 Determine the current and future

More information

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of October 15, Receive the County Manager s Budget Forecast for Fiscal Year 2018.

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of October 15, Receive the County Manager s Budget Forecast for Fiscal Year 2018. ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA County Board Agenda Item Meeting of October 15, 2016 DATE: October 14, 2016 SUBJECT: Presentation of the FY 2018 Financial C. M. RECOMMENDATION: Receive the County Manager s

More information

ENGINEER S REPORT COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 10 BENEFIT ZONE NO. 3 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO THIRD ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT NOVEMBER 21, 2005.

ENGINEER S REPORT COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 10 BENEFIT ZONE NO. 3 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO THIRD ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT NOVEMBER 21, 2005. ENGINEER S REPORT COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 10 BENEFIT ZONE NO. 3 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO THIRD ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT NOVEMBER 21, 2005 Oakland Office 1700 Broadway Temecula, CA Phoenix, AZ 6 th Floor Sacramento,

More information

$ % $2,145,949 DEVELOPMENT SOURCES OF FUNDS

$ % $2,145,949 DEVELOPMENT SOURCES OF FUNDS 123 Main Street Summary of Office Building Development Assumptions Analysis shown: 2/17/2017 BUILDING PROFILE DEVELOPMENT USES OF FUNDS Cost PSF % of Total Total Project Name: 123 Main Street Land & Acquisition

More information