Laserfiche WebLink
City of Elk River, Minnesota <br />Preliminary Financial Analysis of Blackhawk Woods TIF Application <br />10/03/2013 <br />Page 6 <br />of the clubhouse activity building as well as remaining site improvements, The construction cost line -item appears <br />reasonable. <br />The Development Fee /Overhead cost equates to approximately 6% of the total development cost. The Soft Cost <br />category is for expenses related to the professional service costs incurred in the planning and development of the <br />site. The Financing Cost line -item is for expenses related to the Tax Credit process as well as costs associated with <br />the permanent financing, and construction loan interest cost. The Contingency line -item is based on approximately <br />4% of project costs, and the Reserves line -item represents 6 months of debt - service. <br />Sources of Funds <br />The Developer's submittal includes a preliminary total project budget of $10,074,657 as illustrated in the table below, <br />The Developer has indicated they are expecting to receive long term financing through HUD in an amount of <br />$5,869,554 and the loan is anticipated to have a 40 -year term with an effective interest rate of 4.70 %. Additionally, <br />the Developer has indicated they will be able to seek a second mortgage based on the TIF revenue stream, which <br />will provide $996,871 of funding. The term of the second year is 25 -years to coincide with the District, and the <br />effective interest rate is 4,70 %. <br />In addition to the traditional mortgage financing the Developer has projected they will receive additional equity from <br />the sale of the Tax Credits of $2,375,000. The Tax Credits allows the Developer to reduce both their private <br />borrowing amount and their private equity investment in the project. Their total private equity investment in the <br />Development, not including Tax Credit Proceeds, is $558,575. The return on this private equity investment is <br />measured in the return analysis section, <br />Developer Proforma But -For Analysis <br />In approving a TIF district and project, the City must make several findings, including the "but for" test; that the <br />proposed development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the <br />reasonably foreseeable future. The developer has provided a "but -for" argument stating that the developer's lender <br />has indicated that financial assistance from the City is necessary to provide sufficient project cash flow and market <br />returns to investors that will achieve project feasibility. The developer states the assistance is necessary to construct <br />the project as proposed based on current financial indicators, Based on the developer's stated position relative to the <br />Private Equity <br />$558,575 <br />Equity (Tax Credit Proceeds) <br />2,375,000 <br />Permanent Financing <br />6,866,425 <br />Developer Working Capital <br />274,657 <br />Total Sources of Funds <br />$10,074,657 <br />The Developer has indicated they are expecting to receive long term financing through HUD in an amount of <br />$5,869,554 and the loan is anticipated to have a 40 -year term with an effective interest rate of 4.70 %. Additionally, <br />the Developer has indicated they will be able to seek a second mortgage based on the TIF revenue stream, which <br />will provide $996,871 of funding. The term of the second year is 25 -years to coincide with the District, and the <br />effective interest rate is 4,70 %. <br />In addition to the traditional mortgage financing the Developer has projected they will receive additional equity from <br />the sale of the Tax Credits of $2,375,000. The Tax Credits allows the Developer to reduce both their private <br />borrowing amount and their private equity investment in the project. Their total private equity investment in the <br />Development, not including Tax Credit Proceeds, is $558,575. The return on this private equity investment is <br />measured in the return analysis section, <br />Developer Proforma But -For Analysis <br />In approving a TIF district and project, the City must make several findings, including the "but for" test; that the <br />proposed development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the <br />reasonably foreseeable future. The developer has provided a "but -for" argument stating that the developer's lender <br />has indicated that financial assistance from the City is necessary to provide sufficient project cash flow and market <br />returns to investors that will achieve project feasibility. The developer states the assistance is necessary to construct <br />the project as proposed based on current financial indicators, Based on the developer's stated position relative to the <br />