My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005_0228_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2005
>
2005_0228_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 10:13:41 AM
Creation date
9/14/2009 9:59:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
347
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
costs including construction labor & materials, marketing, construction period interest, <br />indirect construction costs and a small contingency. <br />The Redeveloper, for the purpose of preparing the pro forma, is not building the <br />proposed office building on the current Dorso property. The pro fnrma for this part of the <br />development includes selling the land to another office building developer or user for <br />$3.15 million. This is the same price used in our original financial analysis. <br />The Net Income of $22.0 million represents the total sources less total uses before any <br />income taxes. This pro fom�a analysis is preliminary but does represent the <br />Redeveloper's best estimate of revenues and expenses at this time. Housing unit <br />numbers, types and selling price are all market driven and will occur over a period of <br />years. The commercial retail mix could change with a corresponding adjustment to the <br />value of the property. If an office development cannot be built on the Dorso property, <br />other developmentoptions are possible. <br />The amounts shown here are generally expressed in actual dollar amounts. Only the <br />tax increment amounts are shown as present values. The projected net income amount <br />does not appear unreasonable for this level of development and we assume the <br />Redeveloper is hoping to achieve a higher rate of return on their investment than the <br />amount shown. Based on the preliminary information provided to us and assuming the <br />use of the gap strategies, acceptable market conditions and interest rates, it is our <br />opinion that the Redeveloper has complied with the second paragraph of Section 74b) of <br />the Contract for Exclusive Negotiations. <br />_,.. �_, .,t.,. �,�,..,,..�.. _. �..k,. , ., .s. .. <br />• Page 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.