Platteville Library Block Redevelopment Feasibility Study

Platteville Library Block Feasibility Study – July, 2013 Page 1
Economic Development Partners | www.edpwi.com
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2
II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3
III. PROJECT OVERVIEW & GOALS............................................................................................................................................................ 5
IV. KEY DEFINTIONS AND SECTION OUTLINES .................................................................................................................................... 6
V. KEY METRICS FOR PERFORMANCE................................................................................................................................................... 7
VI. OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT METRICS TO CONSIDER................................................................................................. 10
VII. LIBRARY BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT............................................................................................................................. 14
VIII. PROJECT SCOPE: STUDENT HOUSING/COMMERCIAL............................................................................................................. 21
IX. PROJECT SCOPE: EXTENDED STAY HOTEL ................................................................................................................................ 35
X. PROJECT SCOPE: PUBLIC LIBRARY................................................................................................................................................. 44
XI. PROJECT SCOPE: PARKING ................................................................................................................................................................ 47
XII. TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX...................................................................................................................................................................... 49
XIII. SOURCES AND USES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..50
XIV. RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................................................................................ 51
XV. APPENDIX................................................................................................................................................................................................. 52

I. INTRODUCTION
This report is prepared as part of the feasibility analysis conducted by Economic Development Partners, LLC, a professional
economic impact, and development firm providing various market studies, and financial feasibility services in the Midwest. The study
was contracted for the Platteville Public Library and the City of Platteville for the Library Block located between Main and Pine streets
in Downtown Platteville. The report is intended to provide the Platteville Library Board, the City of Platteville and the Advisory team,
which includes the University of Wisconsin – Platteville Foundation and the Mainstreet program, with a preliminary analysis of the
redevelopment feasibility for this mixed-use project. As an accredited Mainstreet Community JD Milburn, Downtown Development
Specialist, WEDC, who provides assistance to Mainstreet and Connect communities assisted with financial modeling.
This report contains an analysis of the redevelopment potential and feasibility within the Platteville Library Block ‘Redevelopment
study area.’ The map in Section VII shows the project boundaries and the conceptual redevelopment TIF area.
The tables that are contained in Sections VIII, IX and X of the document show projected development increments, development
absorption rates, and projected public infrastructure/parking costs. This data and assumptions will be used to calculate the feasibility
of creating a multi-use redevelopment project within the study area.

II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Platteville is a vibrant City in the southwestern part of the state with varying and diverse opportunities for
economic growth. With intentional focus and bold leadership, the City’s economic development efforts on this
redevelopment project will eliminate the blighted conditions that currently exist and will generate measurable results with
positive impacts for Platteville Public Library, businesses, residents and the University of Wisconsin - Platteville. The work
the Platteville Library Board, the City of Platteville and the Advisory team is undertaking has the beginning of an innovative way
of thinking, but it must be kept fresh and alive with big ideas and collaborative action fostering a ‘win-win’ outcome for all the
business partners involved in the project.
The organizational structure of Platteville’s economic development eco-system and the utilization of an extended
partnership of community stakeholders have facilitated strong collaboration on this project and visionary thinking for the
sake of growth for the area as well. Platteville’s economic development eco-system provides Platteville with the structure
to implement a variety of projects in an effective manner utilizing a flexible, forward thinking and structured process.
Business Retention and Expansion, Business Recruitment and Entrepreneurial Development formulate the basis of most
community economic development programs. The City should continue to focus efforts on business retention and
expansion as part of this project, with a majority of effort focused on this valuable downtown area. Business Attraction
should be targeted toward complementing existing businesses that are located downtown and focusing on emerging
businesses that would provide the amenities that the residents and visitors to the Library Block would desire or require to
insure a high quality of life. Many of the opportunities may result from cultivating an environment of entrepreneurism and
innovation and identifying strong business operators.
Working on the City’s physical appearance and appeal on this downtown city block is critical, since it is currently a
‘blighted’ area with a distressed appearance. Downtown development and city-wide redevelopment including code
enforcement is work that is necessary now and will pay dividends long into the future. Blight elimination is an important
element to Platteville’s community and economic health. It’s much easier to market the City when it is attendant to blight
issues before deterioration spreads like a virus.
Marketing Platteville is an area of recommended activities which must be viewed as an investment of time and money,
rather than an expense. The City has many wonderful stories to tell, from the high level of care, health and wellness that

take place within the medical community to the high level of education, training and research that take place within the
public, private and post-secondary education sectors, to the business innovation that takes place within the community,
including cheese and food processing operations and the growing sustainable agriculture activities.
The success of the implementation of this redevelopment project is predicated upon leadership and bold vision for what
Platteville could become with the right direction and collaborative effort.
Recommendations:
1. Maintain the Platteville Public Library as the ‘anchor’ of this redevelopment project, as it will support the success of
the other business entities within the development, especially the Retail/Commercial pieces of the redevelopment.
2. The Financial Feasibility Study shows that the construction of the new, expanded Platteville Public Library and the
parking to support its patrons is ‘feasible’ – The goal of the project is to use the 198,730 square feet and approximately
$38 million redevelopment project to pay for an additional 12,000 square foot of public library space and applicable
additional operating expenses. We recommend a ‘go’ decision.
3. The Student Housing portion of the redevelopment project is ‘feasible’ based on market and financial absorption
rate due to the increasing enrollment at the University of Wisconsin – Platteville. We recommend a ‘go decision.’
4. The Extended Stay Hotel portion of the redevelopment project is ‘not feasible’ based on the $10 million, 70 – unit
proposed development. We recommend that the Extended Stay Hotel should be ‘right – sized’ to become market and
financially feasible. Optimal Hotel project is estimated at $5 Million, 35,000 sq. feet at 600 sf./unit which would equate to an
approximately 60-unit hotel.
5. At a projected construction cost of over $7.4 million for the parking needed to support this project, the parking stalls required
to support each Business/Organization, will have to be allocated into the overall construction costs of each Business Unit
within the project. Debt service, maintenance and associated operating costs would be incorporated into parking leases for
the project.
6. The project would generate additional tax base of $30 million TIF financing value of $13,760,039 over 20 years.
7. It is estimated that the project would create over 41 new jobs.

III. PROJECT OVERVIEW & GOALS
Upon completion, the new Platteville Library Block Redevelopment project will occupy an estimated 228,230 square foot of space
and will include 19,130 square-feet of commercial/retail, 118,000 square-feet of student housing, 84 student residential units with 336
beds, 58,000 square-feet of an Extended Stay Hotel (60 units), 7,500 square-feet for the Neighborhood Health Partners clinic for low
to moderate clients/families and Platteville Public Library’s 22,000 square-foot state-of-the-art Library facility. As one of Platteville’s
first in-fill redevelopment sites, the new Platteville Library Block Redevelopment project will serve as a model for future in-fill
projects.
The Platteville Library Block Redevelopment project is large and extensive. Using multiple real estate uses, the goal is to create
economic, financial and social feasibility.
The goal of the project is to use 198,730 square foot of space to pay for an additional 12,000 square foot of public library space and
applicable additional operating expenses. The project space utilization is broken down as follows (Subject to change):
Proposed Feasible
Student Housing 117,600 117,600
Hotel 70,000 58,000
Bank 4,850 3,000
Health Clinic 6,065 7,500
Foundation 1,000 1,000
Library 18,000 22,000
Commercial 22,630 19,130
Total 240,145 228,230

Development Issues and Objectives
1. Construct a landmark commercial/multi-use structure that incorporates the Platteville Public Library on the city block located
between Main and Pine streets in Downtown Platteville
2. Develop attractive architectural building design and streetscape that will eliminate the blighted conditions of the Downtown
city block and enhance economic redevelopment and vitality of the area
3. Create a “live - work” neighborhood with amenities that will encourage Junior and Senior students at the UW - Platteville to
want to live here
4. Identify high-quality retail/commercial tenants for the development that reinforce the vision of the redevelopment and ensure
and an optimal quality of life – this will add value to the rental fees for the student housing
5. Incorporate adequate parking stalls, both above and underground to support the businesses, activities and residents residing
on the block. Work with the Platteville City Council, City Manager and City Planner to accomplish this
6. Incorporate the Platteville Public Library and its functions into the redevelopment – Utilize the tax increment from the project
to fund the 12,000 square-foot expansion of the Library
7. Respect and enhance the look and feel of the Downtown Platteville neighborhood – while enhancing the services and
amenities for the residents of the area
8. Construct a drive-up for the Library and the Health clinic for services for their patrons. Assist the Platteville Public Library in
relocating their facility to the new site. The relocation would occur through a planned and organized transition.
IV. KEY DEFINTIONS AND SECTION OUTLINES
Each of the sections of the report contains market data, a financial feasibility overview, and risk mitigation strategies. The
subsections are defined as follows:
 Market Feasible: This area will describe some of the proprietary study that was engaged to determine the size and
absorption of the market and whether it would support the venture.
 Financially Feasible: Based on proprietary market data and financial analysis, we will make recommendations as to
whether the project should be a ‘go-no go’ strategy and a likely chance of being able to proceed financially.
 Risk Mitigation Strategies: In each section, we make recommendations on ways in which risk can possibly be mitigated
through legal or contractual means.
For each section, objective information will be provided to assist with decision – making on each part of the project.

Definitions:
Absorption Rate: The rate at which available homes are sold in a specific real estate market during a given time period. It is
calculated by dividing the total number of available homes by the average number of sales per month. The figure shows how
many months it will take to exhaust the supply of homes on the market. A high absorption rate may indicate that the supply of
available homes will shrink rapidly, increasing the odds that a homeowner will sell a piece of property in a shorter period of time.
Absorption: The rate, expressed as a percentage, at which available space in the marketplace is leased during a
predetermined period of time. Also referred to as "Market Absorption".
Market Study: A forecast of future demand for a certain type of real estate project that includes an estimate of the square
footage that can be absorbed and the rents that can be charged. Also called “Marketability Study.”
Capitalization: A method of determining value of real property by considering net operating income divided by a predetermined
annual rate of return.
Capitalization Rate: The rate that is considered a reasonable return on investment (on the basis of both the investor's
alternative investment possibilities and the risk of the investment). Used to determine and value real property through the
capitalization process. Also called “free and clear return.”
V. KEY METRICS FOR PERFORMANCE
There are numerous ways to measure performance in economic development related activities. The two most common
measurements are 1) jobs created and 2) tax base generated. Additionally, the work of economic development practitioners can be
measured by a variety of other metrics, several of which are listed below by category. The Platteville Library Board, the City of
Platteville and the Advisory team should determine the top desired measurements/benchmarks and expect periodic reports based on
performance against the identified goals.
Key Metrics for the Platteville Library Block Project:
Total Library Block Redevelopment Project

 Tax Base Generated – TIF Value 15 Years: $10,320,030
 Proposed Jobs created by the project: Over 41 new jobs created.
Jobs created per Business Unit - Student Housing:
 Onsite manager (1)
 Onsite maintenance (1)
 Total of 2 new jobs
Bank: Assume an employee for every 250 sq. ft.
 Total of 12 employees for 3,000 sq. ft. – 7 new employees
Health Clinic: Assume an employee for every 250 sq. ft.
 Total of 20 employees for 7,500 sq. ft. – 10 new employees
Hotel:
 Manager (1)
 Housekeeping (2)
 Front desk (2)
Parking:
 Operators (0)
 Maintenance (1)
 Total of 1 new job

Retail: The 2007 Economic Census for Grant County reported a new job for every $2,192,105 in spending
 Retail/Commercial space of 19,130 sf. would require a minimum of 12 new jobs
Library:
 Present 8.38 employees
 New estimated employees needed (4)
Library
 Current Library Sq. Footage: 10,450
 Proposed Library Sq. Footage: 22,000
 Current Operating Costs per sq. foot: $58.51/sq. ft.
 Feasible Operating Costs per sq. foot: $40./sq. foot
 Total Estimated Construction costs for New Library: $5,731,382 - $6,298,010
 Estimated Building Construction Cost Per Square Foot: $202.55
 Total Estimated Project Cost Per Square Foot with FFE & Technology: $286.57
 Number of parking spaces required to support the project: Cost of Allocated parking spaces for project: 50
 Cost of Allocated parking spaces for project: $878,700
Student Housing
 Proposed Student Housing Size: 117,600 sq. ft. and 84 units
 Total Estimated Cost for proposed project: $ 16,773,913
 Total Estimated Cost per sq. foot for construction: $143/sq. ft.
 Number of parking spaces required to support the project: 252
 Cost of Allocated parking spaces for project: $4,428,648
Extended Stay Hotel:

 Proposed Extended Stay Hotel Size: 70,000 sq. ft. and 70 units
 Total Estimated Cost for proposed project: $ $10,879,448
 Total Estimated Cost per sq. foot for construction: $155/sq. ft.
 Optimal Hotel project estimated at $5 Million, 35,000 sq. feet at 600 sf/unit equates to approximately 60 unit hotel.
 We are suggesting 58,000 sq. ft. and 60 rooms, at 800 sq. ft. each, and that somebody bear the risk of the additional $3
Million hard costs or income guarantee of $270,000 per year or 17 rooms at the rev par, which equates to $15,700 per room
per year until stabilized.
 Number of parking spaces required to support the project: 70
 Cost of Allocated parking spaces for project: $1,230,180
Parking:
 Proposed parking stalls to support the project: 425
 Proposed construction cost: $7,469,162
 Estimated construction cost per parking stall: $17,574/stall
 Allocated Parking for Library: 50 stalls; $4878,700 in costs
 Allocated Parking for Student Housing: 252 stalls; $4,428,648 in costs
 Allocated Parking for Extended Stay Hotel: 70 stalls; $1,230,180 in costs
VI. OTHER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT METRICS TO CONSIDER
Business Attraction and Marketing
 Businesses attracted to the community (number, distribution across target industry sectors)
 Total number and value of new development projects
 Incentives awarded (number and/or value)
 New investment attracted/ facilitated (overall, per project, public vs. private)
 Increase in tax/revenue base growth
 Active prospects in the pipeline (number, distribution across target industry sectors)
 Percent of business leads that choose to locate in the community

 Economic multipliers to calculate ripple effect of jobs attracted/created
 Presence and quality of direct programs locally to assist new firms (technical assistance, competitive intelligence, marketing,
financing, workforce training, etc)
 Number of tours hosted (in-bound) or organized (outbound)
 Cost-benefit analysis of proposed projects (cost to the community vs. benefit to
 the community)
 Cost savings for businesses assisted as a result of City programs
 Targeted marketing campaigns undertaken (number, number of people reached, variety of marketing techniques)
Business creation and entrepreneurship
 Number of new businesses starts/businesses created
 New business startups as a percentage of all businesses in the City
 Number of business licenses issued/businesses registered
 Financing created for businesses/total capital provided
 Availability of different types of startup capital for local business loans, venture capital, angel investment, total number of
financial providers, and total amount of capital provided etc.)
 Increased diversity of businesses in economy (number of sectors, number per sector)
 Systematic comparisons between companies that received assistance and those that did not
Business retention and expansion (measurements for performance)
 Number of businesses expanded
 Number of businesses retained
 Number of businesses assisted (type of assistance, value of assistance provided)
 Business remaining and growing in the City following the risk of departure or closure
 Local business-to-business investment levels
 Percent of revenue growth for businesses receiving City or technical or financial assistance
 Amount of financing provided
 Relocation of suppliers or customers
 Past utilization of and satisfaction with local business assistance programs

 Rating of the business climate in the community
Workforce
 Jobs attracted (full time, part time, contract, seasonal)
 Jobs created (full time, part time, contract, seasonal)
 Jobs retained (full time, part time, contract, seasonal)
 Decrease in employment
 Percentage of jobs at risk retained
 Wages/salaries of jobs created, average
 Impact on employment by industry sector due to economic development efforts
Technology and Innovation
 Local or regional technology transfer from local universities or medical campus to area businesses
 Percent growth in tech-oriented businesses
 Increase in technology zone (or state offered) incentives
 Amount of R&D funding for businesses assisted by City or Regional Economic Development Entities
 Number of R&D contracts and grants for businesses assisted by City or Regional Economic Development Entities
 Number of new products and/or production lines, new services
 Patents (number filed by local businesses, major sectors in which patents are filed)
 Modernization of facilities
 Percent growth in tech-oriented education programs
 Access to broadband internet
Real Estate
 Availability of shovel-ready sites (number and acreage)
 Availability of certified sites (number and acreage)
 Change in property valuation over time
 Rate of return for projects

 Diversity of financing methods used (tax credits, tax increment financing, leases, industrial revenue bonds, etc.)
 Number and value of redevelopment projects
 Number of new building permits granted
 Timeliness of project completion
 Average cost of construction
 Average cost of remediation (for redevelopment projects)
 Average value of commercial property
 Vacancy and absorption rates (as well as difference in rates between various industrial/ commercial areas of the community)
 Number of subsidized buildings

VII. LIBRARY BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Redevelopment is a process by which property, usually that which is vacant, underutilized, deteriorating or considered ‘blighted’, is
transformed into a higher and better use. Vacant, deteriorated and blighted property is an urban form of cancer. If not attended to
and treated, blight has shown to metastasize and spread to adjacent and other nearby properties invading and threatening entire
neighborhoods.
The history of redevelopment is a result of problems which have been occurring in communities for generations which are often
caused by a ‘status quo’ mentality where no action is taken once properties begin to deteriorate and many cities have inherited this
problem due to a historical lack of action. Maintaining code - complying, safe, healthy properties lies within the City of Platteville’s
jurisdictional ability to inspect and enforce building and property standards or codes. Regardless of existing code(s) used, properties
with code violations left unenforced will deteriorate to where individual property values decline, which in turn adversely affects
surrounding property values, revenues and other investment.
 The purpose of the Platteville Library Block redevelopment project is to address the declining, underutilized blighted properties on
the block and aims to create a new, expanded Platteville Public Library, a new Neighborhood Healthcare Clinic, student housing
for the UW - Platteville, creating a ‘Work, Study, Live’ environment, includes an Extended Stay Hotel, attracts vibrant Commercial
and retail tenants that will provide the necessary amenities to the residents and visitors to the block and improves the overall tax
and property values on the block, thus generating additional tax base $30,0000,000 and a TIF Value over 20 Years of
$13,760,039.
. Conversely, the blighted property on the Library block, if left unattended would:
 reduce property tax revenue,
 maintain few jobs, if any at all,
 stifle investment,
 promotes sprawl, and
 make little to no positive contribution to new job creation and incomes supporting residents.

SCOPE OF THE PLATTEVILLE LIBRARY BLOCK PROJECT
The City of Platteville, the University of Wisconsin - Platteville Foundation (Foundation), Southwest Community Action Program, Inc.
(SWCAP) and the Platteville Public Library are considering becoming involved in a project with these named partners and possibly
others to completely renovate the downtown city block located in the City of Platteville bounded by Main Street, Elm Street, Pine
Street and Chestnut Street (Block). (See map below). The City had a rendering of the project prepared by Joe Lawniczak, Mainstreet
program. (See rendering below). The proposed building is a four-story, multi-use building that will have an underground parking
structure (Building). The first floor of the Building will contain the Neighborhood Partners Health clinic, replacing the current clinic
operated by SWCAP, the Platteville Public Library replacing and expanding the current city library located on the Block, and
commercial/retail spaces. Clare Bank may occupy one of the commercial spaces. The upper floors of the Building, which will be
owned by the Foundation, will be dedicated for student housing for the University of Wisconsin—Platteville and an Extended Stay
Hotel to be used for visiting faculty and visitors. Early estimates place the cost of the building between $35,000,000 and $40,000,000
based on construction estimates provided by C.D. Smith Construction, headquartered in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. (Appendix A)
LEGAL ENTITY
Thomas W. Shellander, Partner at Neider & Boucher, S.C. located in Madison, Wisconsin, was asked to (i) propose an entity through
which the project could be completed, (ii) a legal structure for ownership of the Building, and (iii) advice regarding a
developer/contractor for the project. This assignment was given at a meeting that occurred in Platteville on February 5, 2013. The
meeting was attended by Wally Orzechowski, Dennis R. Cooley of the Foundation, and Cynthia Jaggi of Economic Development
Partners, LLC.
Upon review of the project, Attorney Shellander recommended that the best way to hold title to the project, at least initially, would be
a manager-managed limited liability company (“LLC”). He would anticipate the members (owners) of the LLC would be SWCAP and
the UW – Platteville Foundation. If Clare Bank is interested in becoming involved, it may also consider becoming a member.
SWCAP’s initial contribution will be its real estate at the corner of Elm and Main Streets. The other members would contribute cash,
which will be used to acquire the remaining real estate parcels on the Block. The manager of the LLC will be a board consisting of
individuals appointed by the members. The entity will be taxed for income tax purposes as a partnership. Under partnership
taxation, any taxable income and deductions flow throw to the members based on their percentage of ownership interest in the LLC.
The ownership interest of each member will be determined by their respective capital contributions. It would be expected that the
UW – Platteville Foundation would have a larger economic stake in the LLC than SWCAP if it supplies the cash to purchase the
remainder of the real estate on the Block.

REAL ESTATE STRUCTURE
Due to the various zoning classifications that will be needed for the Building, it was recommended that it be developed as a planned
unit development (“PUD”). A PUD is a detailed plan for developing a project, typically in an urban environment, that has multiple,
incompatible zoning classifications. For example, it is anticipated the Building will have both commercial and residential components
which, under traditional zoning classifications, are incompatible. The details of a PUD are typically worked out between the
developer and the municipality.
At this time, Attorney Shellander’s recommendation would be that the Building should be developed as a condominium. With a
condominium, the Building is divided into separate parcels of real estate by recording a condominium declaration. The physical
structure of the building (e.g., foundation, exterior wall, roof, etc.) and underlying real estate, known in condominium parlance as
common elements, are owned by an association, which is usually established as a non-profit corporation. The association collects
monthly fees from the unit owners to maintain and operate the condominium. The association will be controlled by the LLC initially.
Later control will be turned over to owners of the units in the condominium.
SWCAP’s unit in the condominium will be its clinic. SWCAP’s ability to obtain financing for the expansion of its Platteville Clinic will
depend upon its owning of the clinic. Under the condominium structure, SWCAP will, in fact, own the clinic real estate. Similarly, the
UW – Platteville Foundation will own its residential units. The Foundation will need to decide whether it wants the portion of the
Building it will own to be a single unit encompassing all three floors of the Building on which its residential units will be built or
multiple units, one for each living unit. Similarly, the library and the Retail/commercial space including the bank will be separate
units. The current thinking is that that once the Building is completed and the units sold, the LLC will be dissolved. The duration of
the LLC’s existence may change based on the financing involved.
DEVELOPERS
The developer’s role in a project such as the ‘Building’ can include designing the project, obtaining all approvals necessary to build it,
financing or arranging for financing, overseeing the construction, and selling or continuing to own the units. Several developers were
contacted and evaluated their potential involvement in the Library Block project. Most developers we spoke to seemed to think the
Building should have a developer to assist with obtaining necessary approvals for the PUD and overseeing the construction of the
Building. It was assumed that the LLC would work with its own architect to design the Building and that Economic Development
Partners would handle the Financial feasibility of the project. They suggested issuing an RFP to locate developers who may be
interested in assisting in such capacities. The following Interviews were conducted with developers/builders as part of the research
for this report and findings:

1. Robert W. Schaefer (Bob was legal counsel for the non-profit entity that constructed the University of Wisconsin—Green
Bay dormitories);
2. Timothy Radelet (Tim has significant experience in the financing of non-profit development projects);
3. Thomas G. Klein and Michael L. Morey of the Oakbrook Corporation (Oakbrook is a developer in the Milwaukee and
Madison areas);
4. Richard L. Schmidt, Jr. and Eric Schmidt of CG Schmidt Inc. (CG Schmidt is a developer in the Milwaukee and Madison
areas).
5. Steve Schmitt Joseph Schmitt & Sons Construction, from Sheboygan. (Steve Schmitt has been involved with building
Extended Stay Hotels and housing projects in the State)
6. C.D. Smith Construction, Inc. from Fond du Lac. (C.D. Smith Construction, Inc. built the new Roundtree Commons
residence hall at the UW – Platteville, completed in the Fall of 2012, and home to 620 students)
7. Jon Kennedy, GrandStay Hospitality, Minneapolis, MN (GrandStay Hospitality specialized in building and managing of
Extended Stay hotels and would be considered a strong operator for the project)
8. Joseph Gallina, Gallina Companies, Mt. Horeb (The Gallina Companies develop, design, construct, sell, acquire and
manage the most distinctive and luxurious apartment homes and residential condominiums in Wisconsin, Illinois and
Florida)
Of the developers/builders that were contacted, C.D. Smith Construction, Inc. from Fond du Lac, Joseph Schmitt & Sons
Construction, from Sheboygan and Jon Kennedy, with GrandStay Hospitality, in Minneapolis, MN believe they could help with the
project. All are currently involved in the planning of the project and the potential financing.
Of the developers contacted, most believe that the LLC and the condominium structure that is mentioned above would be compatible
with most government financing programs and would be a recommended legal structure to move the project forward..
All of the developers interviewed noted that the viability of the project depends on the financing which often is dependent upon cash
flow derived from each of the business condo units. For example, SWCAP’s unit will be purchased from the LLC using grants and
loans from government sources. The Foundation’s residential unit will presumably be financed by loans that will be serviced by cash
flows generated by leasing its unit(s) to UW-Platteville. All of the developers that were interviewed, thought that one of the most

difficult aspects of the Building would be the underground parking. The parking area could be classified as a single unit which could
be leased to a third party and then leased to condominium unit owners (and their tenants) or it could be classified as a common
element of the condominium. If the parking garage is a separate unit, a sufficient source of cash flow will have to be identified in
order to pay for it. If it is a common element, the cost of the garage will have to be allocated and absorbed by the individual unit
owners, based on a prorated basis, which could significantly increase the purchase price of the units and the monthly condo
association dues (i.e.SWCAP’s unit will include as a portion of its costs the cost of the parking garage).
It is highly recommended that there be a Development Agreement with a ‘Look-back’ clause written up and enforced between the
partners of the Development LLC.

PROPOSED SITE OF THE PLATTEVILLE LIBRARY BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT

EARLY PROPOSED RENDERING OF THE PLATTEVILLE LIBRARY BLOCK PROJECT (NEW RENDERING WOULD BE REQUIRED)

VIII. PROJECT SCOPE: STUDENT HOUSING/COMMERCIAL
Size Rent Term Total Rent
Student
Housing 84
Units/336
Beds -
$470 12 $1,895,040
without
parking
fees
117,600
Sq. Ft.
Commercial
Space
19,130
Sq. Ft. $10.00 $191,300
Bank 3,000
Sq. Ft.
$12.00 $36,000
UW
Foundation 1,000
Sq. Ft.
$10.00 $10,000
Total 140,730
Sq. Ft.
$2,132,340
Average $15.15 $140,730
The above chart shows the gross potential rent roll of the project.

Absorption of Student Housing
To ascertain the absorption of 84 units of student housing and 336 beds, we employed straightforward methodology. The 2/16/2011
University of Wisconsin Campus Master Plan indicated student enrollment of 7,142 in 2010 rising to 8,377 in 2015 or 1,235 students.
This estimate for student enrollment has already been exceeded in 2012. While differences of opinion may ensue, we find that the
addition of 336 beds will be able to be fully absorbed in the short run 6-12 months
UW – Platteville has shown the greatest percentage enrollment increase within the UW system. According to the official enrollment
records, at UW–Platteville 8,621 students enrolled in 2012, including 7,819 undergraduate students and 802 graduate students —
record enrollment for UW–Platteville. During the 2011–12 academic year UW–Platteville had 7,459 undergraduate students and 756
graduate students enrolled.
Overall, UW - Platteville has 406 more students enrolled in 2012, an increase of 4.9 percent from 2011. The number of
undergraduates increased 4.8 percent, while the number of graduate students increased by 6.1 percent from 2011.
Absorption Commercial Space - Office
The project needs to absorb 19.130 in commercial retail or office space. Standards for office space indicate for every new employee
250 sq. ft. of space is needed. To absorb the 4,000 sq. ft. of professional space the area needs to create 16 new professional
employees. The community profile as provided in LocateinWisconsin by the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC)
indicates a labor force of 5,951 and a growth rate of 9.80%. This would indicate near term growth of 583 employees so we assume
the small number of 16 will be achieved. Therefore the commercial office space should be able to be absorbed in the short run 6-18
months.
Absorption Commercial Space - Retail:
Retail space of 18,000 demands a separate analysis. As area, retail sales increase space demand increases.
For simplicity, we estimate that the space must generate sales of $250 per square foot to be financially feasible. Therefore, the area
must generate an additional $4,500,000 in sales to absorb the space.

Therefore, we reviewed various previous studies and determine the following.
 The downtown inventory was reported as 848,200 sq. ft. including all uses.
 Street level retail inventory is 350,800, roughly the equivalent of two (2) superwalmarts.
 Office use was reported at 46,600, and vacancy at 34,000 sq.ft. equates to 8%.
 74,700 sq. ft. was in banks.
 284,000 sq. ft. in the form of 286 rental/housing units.
Economic Census – Retail
Year 2002 2007 Difference
Estimated Sales $286,371,000 $184,622,000 ($101,749,000)
Employees 902 1,278 376
The above chart shows that retail sales decreased significantly. However, employees increased in this sector. The economic
census did not break the categories down into further subsectors but this period would show a negative absorption of retail space.
The location specific economic census for Platteville has not come out as of this writing. It is clear that this quick snapshot shows
additional retail space as non-market feasible. Therefore, we turn to proprietary purchased data.

2004
Industry Summary Demand Supply Retail Gap Leakage/ Number of
(Retail
Potential)
(Retail Sales)
(Demand -
Supply)
Surplus Businesses
Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink
(NAICS 44-45, 722)
$77,908,917 $70,757,102 $7,151,815 4.8 103
Total Retail Trade (NAICS 44-45) $66,104,313 $46,819,686 $19,284,627 17.1 67
Total Food & Drink (NAICS 722) $11,804,604 $23,937,416 ($12,132,812) -33.9 36
2010
Industry Summary Demand Supply Retail Gap
Surplus /
Leakage
Number of
(Retail
Potential)
(Retail Sales)
(Demand -
Supply)
Factor Businesses
Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink
(NAICS 44-45, 722)
$76,840,065 $55,129,885 $21,710,180 16.5 125
Total Retail Trade (NAICS 44-45) $65,766,871 $46,679,411 $19,087,460 17.0 81
Total Food & Drink (NAICS 722) $11,073,194 $8,450,474 $2,622,720 13.4 44
Change from 2004 to 2010 (Retail) $18,947,185 ($19,424,902) 14
Change from 2004 to 2010 (Food &
Drink) ($12,864,222) ($3,354,130) 8
Source: ESRI data reports. http://www.esri.com/
The above chart shows retail demand increasing $18,947,185 from 2004-2010, or $3,157,864 a year. This shows the ability to
absorb 12,631 sq. feet per year. So it may take as long as two (2) years to lease this amount of new space. The cash flow and
projections factored in vacancy absorption of 10% for the first year and 5% as second year stabilized rolling vacancy.
To further analyze the retail spending and demand we analyze current retail demand, job growth and other data of similar Wisconsin
population - based communities against Platteville. The list of similar population - based communities are as follows:

Rank Municipality
Population
(2010
Census)
Population
(2000 Census)
Type County
71 Two Rivers 11,712 12,639 City Manitowoc
72 Grafton 11,459 10,312 Village Ozaukee
73 Cedarburg 11,412 10,908 City Ozaukee
74 Suamico 11,346 8,686 Village Brown
75 Waupun 11,340 10,718 City
Dodge,
Fond du Lac
76 Port Washington 11,250 10,467 City Ozaukee
77 Platteville 11,224 9,989 City Grant
78 Marinette 10,968 11,749 City Marinette
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_municipalities_in_Wisconsin_by_population

Demand
Category
(Gross $(000) &
Per HH) Apparel Apparel Entertainment Entertainment
Food &
Beverage
Food &
Beverage Gifts Gifts
HH
Income
Platteville $7,316 $2,014 $8,324 $2,291 $24,083 $6,630 $3,688 $1,015 $39,561
Waupun $7,272 $2,091 $9,395 $2,414 $24,066 $6,921 $3,735 $1,074 $43,569
Difference $44 ($77) ($1,071) ($123) $17 ($291) ($47) ($59) ($4,008)
Port Washington $12,281 $2,614 $14,307 $3,045 $39,914 $8,495 $6,543 $1,392 $58,504
Difference ($4,965) ($600) ($5,983) ($754) ($15,831) ($1,865) ($2,855) ($377) ($18,943)
Marinette $9,419 $1,920 $10,800 $2,201 $31,086 $6,337 $4,877 $994 $37,781
Difference ($2,103) $94 ($2,476) $90 ($7,003) $293 ($1,189) $21 $1,780
Cedarburg $14,162 $3,022 $16,597 $3,541 $45,219 $9,649 $7,876 $1,680 $73,941
Difference ($6,846) ($1,008) ($8,273) ($1,250) ($21,136) ($3,019) ($4,188) ($665) ($34,380)
Suamico $13,344 $3,186 $15,724 $3,755 $42,769 $10,214 $7,359 $1,757 $82,285
Difference ($6,028) ($1,172) ($7,400) ($1,464) ($18,686) ($3,584) ($3,671) ($742) ($42,724)
Grafton $13,435 $2,777 $15,771 $3,260 $43,236 $8,938 $7,367 $1,523 $62,346
Difference ($6,119) ($763) ($7,447) ($969) ($19,153) ($2,308) ($3,679) ($508) ($22,785)
Two Rivers $10,798 $2,137 $12,536 $2,480 $35,762 $7,077 $5,580 $1,104 $47,853
Difference ($3,482) ($123) ($4,212) ($189) ($11,679) ($447) ($1,892) ($89) ($8,292)
The above chart shows that Platteville has lower spending in most categories when compared to similar population based
communities. Some retail economist correlate spending with income, which has strong ties. Even so, one of the communities
analyzed, Marinette, showed lower Household (HH) income but higher spending in quite a few of the categories. This shows the
ability of the Platteville area to absorb additional, space in the various categories.
In addition to spending we look at other factors to determine if growth will occur, which should translate into additional space
absorption.

General Details
Labor
Force
Job Growth
rate
White
Collar
Blue
Collar
Bachelors
Degree
higher
High
School
HH
Expenditures
Platteville 5,951 9.80% 63.00% 36.00% 32.93% 91.88% $45,589
Waupun 4,615 5.07% 61.00% 38.00% 11.30% 81.55% $42,750
Difference 1,336 4.73% 2.00% -2.00% 21.63% 10.33% $2,839
Port Washington 6,574 1.28% 59.00% 40.00% 29.72% 92.07% $8,496
Difference (623) 8.52% 4.00% -4.00% 3.21% -0.19% $37,093
Marinette 5,752 -10.37% 54.00% 45.00% 16.04% 92.10% $6,338
Difference 199 20.17% 9.00% -9.00% 16.89% -0.22% $40,212
Cedarburg 6,607 -0.24% 61.00% 38.00% 46.76% 95.09% $66,461
Difference (656) 10.04% 2.00% -2.00% -13.83% -3.21% ($20,872)
Suamico 6,656 22.18% 63.00% 36.00% 32.93% 91.88% $66,341
Difference (705) -12.38% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% ($20,752)
Grafton 6,749 35.00% 58.00% 41.00% 34.64% 95.87% $59,451
Difference (798) -25.20% 5.00% -5.00% -1.71% -3.99% ($13,862)
Two Rivers 6,158 -7.72% 56.00% 43.00% 15.20% 89.00% $46,675
Difference (207) 17.52% 7.00% -7.00% 17.73% 2.88% ($1,086)
As we look at these other factors, Platteville has a lower cost of living, positive job growth rate, and as to be expected, a highly
educated population. If the labor force grew by that 9.80% then the area would have 583 new jobs. If those jobs paid the 2011
Wisconsin per capita income of $27,192, then an additional $16 Million in area wages or demand would be accomplished. Using
our $250 per sq. ft. then 63,000 in additional space would be absorbed. According to the economic census in Wisconsin retail
sales per capita was $12,904 so those 583 may spend $7,523,032 and absorb 30,092 in area space.

The following worksheets show county sales tax distributed to the counties that have enacted the 0.5% local sales tax
Wisconsin Department of Revenue
Division of Enterprise Services
County Sales Tax Distributions
January-December 2013
Counties January February March April
Grant County $244,336.13 $263,557.14 $198,060.62 $191,504.40
Gross up $48,867,226 $52,711,428 $39,612,124 $38,300,880
Absorption ($250 Sq. Ft.) 2,345,627 2,530,149 1,901,382 1,838,442
Growth(Contraction) 0.00% 7.87% -24.85% -3.31%

Counties January February March April May June
Grant County $201,344.39 $260,455.66 $182,374.35 $187,876.08 $258,632.51 $248,693.76
Gross Up $40,268,878 $52,091,132 $36,474,870 $37,575,216 $51,726,502 $49,738,752
Absorption ($250 Sq.
Ft.) 1,932,906 2,500,374 1,750,794 1,803,610 2,482,872 2,387,460
Growth(Contraction) 0.00% 29.36% -29.98% 3.02% 37.66% -3.84%
Counties July August September October November December Total
Grant County $218,736.89 $288,010.03 $232,659.18 $280,545.53 $262,862.95 $227,481.31 $2,849,672.64
Gross Up $43,747,378 $57,602,006 $46,531,836 $56,109,106 $52,572,590 $45,496,262 $569,934,528
Absorption ($250
Sq. Ft.) 2,099,874 2,764,896 2,233,528 2,693,237 2,523,484 2,183,821 2,279,738
Growth(Contraction) -12.05% 31.67% -19.22% 20.58% -6.30% -13.46%

Counties January February March April May June
Grant County $218,719.15 $221,041.07 $213,225.87 $183,618.23 $190,021.53 $278,051.22
Gross Up $43,743,830 $44,208,214 $42,645,174 $36,723,646 $38,004,306 $55,610,244
Absorption ($250 Sq. Ft.) 2,099,704 2,121,994 2,046,968 1,762,735 1,824,207 2,669,292
Growth(Contraction) 0.00% 1.06% -3.54% -13.89% 3.49% 46.33%
Counties July August September October November December Total
Grant County $213,828.94 $242,089.21 $249,740.56 $233,000.61 $277,512.07 232,388.60 $2,753,237.06
Gross Up $42,765,788 $48,417,842 $49,948,112 $46,600,122 $55,502,414 $46,477,720 $ 550,647,412
Absorption ($250
Sq. Ft.) 2,052,758 2,324,056 2,397,509 2,236,806 2,664,116 2,230,931 2,202,590
Growth(Contraction) -23.10% 13.22% 3.16% -6.70% 19.10% -16.26%
Counties 2011 2012
Grant County $2,753,237 $2,849,673
Gross Up $550,647,412 $569,934,528
Absorption ($250 Sq. Ft.) 2,202,590 2,279,738
Growth(Contraction) 3.50%

The county seems to be absorbing 77,000 sq. ft. of new retail space per year based on demand increase. Sales taxes as you review
the monthly amounts above, show volatility. The economic census has shown sharp decreases, and sharp increases, but data isn’t
available except every five (5) years.
Some in summary, based on sale tax increases, the ability to stimulate similar demand of comparable population communities, the
ability to absorb the space shows the ability in the long run when using retail and/or food as a use. The long run is defined as 1-2
years at a favorable rental rate. Just to absorb the space would require around $4,782,500 in new area sales. Of course the
property owner must execute a marketing, and leasing strategy and business plan, which always adds to the project’s success.
Commercial and housing space assumptions
1. The chart directly below shows the income production we used to start our financial feasibility.
2. In addition we used a step down vacancy of 10% down to 5%, and believe 5% is stabilization.
3. Revenue and expenses are forecasted to increase 3% each year. Operating expenses are calculated using percentages
(%’s) from the student housing income and expense survey. The survey encompassed 29 companies in 32 states and 341
properties, which had 195,923 student housing beds (article attached in the appendices). We believe these are probably
higher than area expenses, and have reviewed an actual area multi-family building operating statement.
Size Rent Term Total Rent
Student
Housing
84 Units/336
Beds -
$470 12 $1,895,040
Without
parking fees
117,600
Sq. Ft.
Commercial
Space
19,130
Sq. Ft. $10.00 $191,300
Bank 3,000
Sq. Ft.
$12.00 $36,000
UW
Foundation
1,000
Sq. Ft. $10.00 $10,000
Total 140,730
Sq. Ft.
$2,132,340
Average $15.15 $140,730

Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Potential Rental Income $2,207,145 $2,273,359 $2,341,560 $2,411,807 $2,484,161
- Vacancy & Credit Losses $220,714 $113,668 $117,078 $120,590 $124,208
= Effective Rental Income $1,986,430 $2,159,691 $2,224,482 $2,291,216 $2,359,953
+ Other Income (collectable) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
= Gross Operating Income $1,986,430 $2,159,691 $2,224,482 $2,291,216 $2,359,953
- Operating Expenses $772,721 $795,903 $819,780 $844,373 $869,705
= NET OPERATING INCOME $1,213,709 $1,363,788 $1,404,702 $1,446,843 $1,490,248
Taking the above cash flows, we employ a capitalization rate to create an end hard value.
The build-up of the capitalization rate is as follows:
Amount of
Capital
Asking
Rates
Debt
Constant
% of Capital
Rate
Debt 0.85 5.00% 0.065995600 0.0561
Equity 0.15 8.00% 0.083644000 0.0125
Total 1.00 6.864286%

Notes: Asking rates for solid student housing projects are finding financing rates at the ten year lower grade commercial bond rate
plus a 1-1.5% spread. Those rates are 3.71% for the lower A grade 10 year bond, and 4.54 for the low grade 20 year A corporate
bond.
Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016
Student
Housing/Commercial
Space Cash flow $1,213,709 $1,363,788 $1,404,702 $1,446,843 $1,490,248
Cap Rate 6.86429% 6.86429% 6.86429% 6.86429% 6.86429%
Value $17,681,502 $19,867,880 $20,463,916 $21,077,834 $21,710,169
Tax Rate 2.776700% 2.776700% 2.776700% 2.776700% 2.776700%
Yearly Taxes $490,962 $551,671 $568,222 $585,268 $602,826
TIF Value 15 Years $7,364,434 $8,275,071 $8,523,323 $8,779,023 $9,042,394
TIF Value 20 Years $9,819,245 $11,033,428 $11,364,431 $11,705,364 $12,056,525
TIF Value 27 Years $13,255,981 $14,895,128 $15,341,982 $15,802,242 $16,276,309
Market Feasible
 Our analysis finds the student housing project section market feasible with the ability to absorb the 84 units, 336 beds of
student housing in the short run of 6-18 Months.
 Our analysis finds the commercial office space market feasible with the ability to absorb the office space over the short run of
6-18 months.
 Lastly, our firm finds the retail space market feasible with the space being absorbed over the long run of 1-2 years.
Financially Feasible
 The student housing has excellent financial feasibility showing the ability to easily attract private financing. The student
housing/Commercial space shows the ability to have overall rate of returns of 16%-23%.

Risk Mitigation Strategies
1. The LLC must be a fully tax paying entity.
2. Each investee should be provided restricted series investment units with defined real estate rights, ownership definitions,
responsibilities, parking rights, and defined leases: example series A shall be defined as 84 student housing units 336 beds,
and number of parking units. Lease should provide for fully allocated debt service, common area expenses, and full payment
of parking, taxes, and applicable insurance.
3. The LLC may serve as a holding company to provide for debt service, tax, parking, and financing guarantees. The subset
legal entities must be defined along with covenants.
4. The holding entity may want to set a strike sell price to remove each subset from the project with financing and build out cost
plus a small return as the price.
5. The ability to finance the project as a collective may provide greater initial financing success.

IX. PROJECT SCOPE: EXTENDED STAY HOTEL
A review of available public information shows the number of hotel/motel rooms operating in the Platteville market. We found 158
rooms for rent on a daily or shorter than 30-day basis. Those hotels offering beyond 30 days are considered apartments and as such
are not subject to room tax according to state statues. Although not subject to room tax, those rooms could pose as a substitute
product and potential competition for the described product.
Based on seven (7) days and the rooms available, we find the area has the potential to accommodate 57,670 room stays, if at full
occupancy.
Name # Rooms
High Season
rate
Low Season
rate
Platteville
Country Inn 49 $120.00 $110.00
Super 8 72 $95.00 $79.00
Mound View 32 $110.00 $74.00
Dorsey B & B 5 $175.00 $175.00
Total/Average 158 $125.00 $109.50
Potential Room Days (based on 7 days/wk)
57,670
Excerpt from Wisconsin Department of Revenue publication 219, Hotels, Motels, and Other Lodging providers.

Lodging Services
Less Than One Month — Furnishing lodging to the same person or entity (for example, corporation, partnership, sole
proprietorship) at a hotel for a continuous period of less than one month is subject to Wisconsin sales tax. “One month,” as used
in this publication, means the lesser of: (1) a calendar month, or (2) a continuous period of 30 days. For purposes of counting the
number of days stayed at a hotel, the day the customer checks into the hotel is counted as a day. However, the day the customer
checks out of the hotel is not counted as a day.
http://www.revenue.wi.gov/pubs/pb219.pdf
YEAR
4% + 2%
admin fee
GROSS UP
Sales/Day
100%
Occupancy
Sales/Day
40%
Occupancy
Sales/Day
60%
Occupancy
Sales/Day
70%
Occupancy
Growth
(-
Decline)%
%
Occupancy
@ Low
Season
Rate
$109.50
%
Occupancy
@ High
Season
Rate
$125.00
2005 $1,338,539.83 $23.21 $38.62 $57.94 $77.25 0.00% 21.16% 18.54%
2006 $1,290,398.00 $22.38 $37.23 $55.85 $74.47 -3.60% 20.40% 17.87%
2007 $1,410,866.50 $24.46 $40.71 $61.07 $81.42 5.40% 22.31% 19.54%
2008 $1,449,168.00 $25.13 $41.82 $62.72 $83.63 8.26% 22.91% 20.07%
2009 $1,329,309.17 $23.05 $38.36 $57.54 $76.71 -0.69% 21.02% 18.41%
2010 $1,354,021.17 $23.48 $39.07 $58.61 $78.14 1.16% 21.41% 18.75%
2011 $1,245,449.67 $21.60 $35.94 $53.91 $71.87 -6.95% 19.69% 17.25%
2012 $1,316,043.17 $22.82 $37.97 $56.96 $75.95 -1.68% 20.81% 18.23%
TOTAL $10,733,795.50 $186.12 $309.72 $464.59 $619.45 $0.02 169.71% 148.67%
AVERAGE $16.92 $19.36 $29.04 $38.72 0.12% 10.61% 9.29%

Using the room availability along with room tax collections provides us a potential look at absorption of a new facility:
1996 – 2000
Grant County
Tourism
Impact
%
Change
1996 43,209,404 0.00%
1997 40,298,977 -6.74%
1998 45,049,647 10.99%
1999 55,023,581 23.08%
2000 63,522,605 19.67%
2001 64,375,858 1.97%
2002 69,612,306 12.12%
2003 70,348,846 1.70%
2004 72,913,479 5.94%
2005 72,442,291 -1.09%
2006 74,969,023 5.85%
2007 72,962,697 -4.64%
2008 76,915,689 9.15%
2009 71,572,842 -12.37%
Source: Wisconsin Department of Tourism Economic Impact Statements.

Option 1: $8 Million, 58,000 sf., 60 – room Hotel – Recommended Option
Projection
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Rooms Available 60 60 60 60 60
Occupancy 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 60.00% 60.00%
Average Room Rate $70.00 $70.70 $71.41 $72.12 $72.84
Revenue:
Room Revenue $613,200 $774,165 $938,288 $947,671 $957,148
Food 0 0 0 0 0
Beverage 0 0 0 0 0
Other Food and Beverage 0 0 0 0 0
Telephone $6,132 $7,742 $9,383 $9,477 $9,571
Minor Departments $6,132 $7,742 $9,383 $9,477 $9,571
Rentals and Other Income $6,132 $7,742 $9,383 $9,477 $9,571
Total Revenue $631,596 $797,390 $966,437 $976,101 $985,862
Revenue Growth from Previous Year 0.00% 26.25% 21.20% 1.00% 1.00%
Net Income -$54,145 $23,742 $139,676 $145,348 $151,076
Add:
Depreciation and Amortization $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000
Cash Flow from Operations $70,855 $148,742 $264,676 $270,348 $276,076

Option 1: $8 Million, 58,000 sf., 60 – room Hotel – Recommended Option
Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Hotel Cash Flows $70,855 $148,742 $264,676 $270,348 $276,076
Cap Rate 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00%
Value $787,278 $1,652,690 $2,940,846 $3,003,866 $3,067,516
Tax Rate 2.77670% 2.77670% 2.77670% 2.77670% 2.77670%
Yearly Taxes $21,860 $45,890 $81,658 $83,408 $85,176
TIF Value 15 Years $327,905 $688,353 $1,224,877 $1,251,125 $1,277,636
TIF Value 20 Years $437,207 $917,805 $1,633,170 $1,668,167 $1,703,514
TIF Value 27 Years $590,229 $1,239,036 $2,204,779 $2,252,025 $2,299,744

Option 2: $5 Million, 35,000 sf., 60 – room Hotel – Optimal for Feasibility Only – NOT RECOMMENDED
Projection
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Rooms Available 70 70 70 70 70
Occupancy 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 60.00% 60.00%
Average Room Rate $70.00 $70.70 $71.41 $72.12 $72.84
Revenue:
Room Revenue $715,400 $903,193 $1,094,669 $1,105,616 $1,116,672
Food 0 0 0 0 0
Beverage 0 0 0 0 0
Other Food and Beverage 0 0 0 0 0
Telephone $7,154 $9,032 $10,947 $11,056 $11,167
Minor Departments $7,154 $9,032 $10,947 $11,056 $11,167
Rentals and Other Income $7,154 $9,032 $10,947 $11,056 $11,167
Total Revenue $736,862 $930,288 $1,127,509 $1,138,784 $1,150,172
Revenue Growth from Previous Year 0.00% 26.25% 21.20% 1.00% 1.00%
Net Income $18,673 $115,674 $251,098 $257,884 $264,738
Add:
Depreciation and Amortization $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000
Cash Flow from Operations $143,673 $240,674 $376,098 $382,884 $389,738

Option 2: $5 Million, 35,000 sf., 60 – room Hotel – Optimal for Feasibility Only –
NOT RECOMMENDED
Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Hotel Cash Flows $143,673 $240,674 $376,098 $382,884 $389,738
Cap Rate 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00%
Value $1,596,367 $2,674,156 $4,178,867 $4,254,267 $4,330,422
Tax Rate 2.27767% 2.27767% 2.27767% 2.27767% 2.27767%
Yearly Taxes $36,360 $60,908 $95,181 $96,898 $98,633
TIF Value 15 Years $545,399 $913,627 $1,427,712 $1,453,472 $1,479,491
TIF Value 20 Years $727,199 $1,218,169 $1,903,616 $1,937,963 $1,972,655
TIF Value 27 Years $981,719 $1,644,528 $2,569,881 $2,616,250 $2,663,084
As shown in Table on p. 34 & 35. Proposed Room Rates needed, shown below to support
$10 million hotel project. Option Not Market feasible.
Days Open 365 365 365 365 365
Rooms Available
per Day 70 70 70 70 70
Occupancy
Percent 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0%
Average Room
Rate $122.00 $123.22 $124.45 $125.70 $126.95
Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Hotel Cash Flows $522,324 $718,721 $955,491 $968,071 $980,776
Cap Rate 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00% 9.00%
Value $5,803,594 $7,985,789 $10,616,563 $10,756,340 $10,897,515
Tax Rate 2.27767% 2.27767% 2.27767% 2.27767% 2.27767%
Yearly Taxes $132,187 $181,890 $241,811 $244,994 $248,210
TIF Value 15 Years $1,982,803 $2,728,352 $3,627,158 $3,674,913 $3,723,145
TIF Value 20 Years $2,643,737 $3,637,803 $4,836,211 $4,899,884 $4,964,194
TIF Value 27 Years $3,569,046 $4,911,033 $6,528,885 $6,614,843 $6,701,662

Percentage Benchmarks Used to Create our Expenses
LODGING INDUSTRY RATIOS Ratio to Total Sales
Full Service Limited Service
Revenue
Rooms 61.9% 95.5%
Food 20.5% 0.0%
Beverage 5.3% 0.0%
Other Food and Beverage 4.1% 0.0%
Telecommunications 1.7% 1.4%
Other Operated Departments 4.3% 1.8%
Rentals and Other Income 1.9% 1.3%
Cancellation Fee 0.3% 0.0%
Total Revenue 100.0% 100.0%
Departmental Expenses
Rooms 25.9% 24.7%
Food and Beverage 75.5% 0.0%
Telecommunications 59.8% 91.5%
Other Operated Depts. and Rentals 3.4% 2.2%
Total Departmental Expenses 43.0% 27.0%
Total Departmental Profit 57.0% 73.0%
Undistributed Operating Expenses
Administrative and General 8.2% 9.1%
Marketing 6.6% 6.0%
Utility Costs 3.7% 4.6%
Property Operations and Maintenance 4.9% 5.4%
Total Undistributed Operating Expenses 23.4% 24.8%
Gross Operating Profit 33.6% 47.9%
Franchise Fees (Royalty) 0.5% 2.6%
Management Fees 3.1% 3.2%
Income Before Fixed Charges 29.9% 42.0%
Selected Fixed Charges

Property Taxes 3.4% 4.1%
Insurance 1.1% 1.2%
Reserve for Capital Replacement 2.2% 2.2%
Income available for Debt Service and Other Fixed
Charges* 23.2% 34.5%
*Other Fixed Charges include Depreciation and Amortization, Interest, Rent and Equipment Leases.
Date is based on HOST Study 2003 by Smith Travel Research, Inc.
To order complete study, go to www.smithtravelresearch.com
Market Feasible
 The Extended Stay project is not feasible at the size that was recommended by the builder/developer. Our firm would
recommend that the project be ‘right – sized’ and do not believe 70,000 sq. feet and 70 units are market feasible based
evaluation of the market, the fluctuation of tourism to the area and the room tax analysis. These market drivers would indicate
that the market could support a $4.5 – 5 million hotel project in Platteville.
 The Extended Stay Hotel is not financially feasible as presented. A Hotel operator/owner would have to fully evaluate and
determine who will absorb the risk for the hotel part of the project and how to develop/build the project based on a $4.5 – 5
million estimate on what the market will support in the area.
Risk Mitigation Strategies:
 The Extended Stay Hotel should be ‘right – sized’ to become market and financially feasible.
 The Hotel project could be built and long – term leased to a private entity that bears the full cost of construction, mitigates the
risk and is responsible for marketing/advertising to gain optimal room occupancy.
 UW – Platteville or other institutions/businesses in the area could guarantee the income of a certain level of room occupancy
based on a monthly or annual basis and bear the speculative risk of a larger scale project.
 Optimal Hotel project estimated at $5 Million, 35,000 sq. feet at 600 sf./unit equates to approximately 60 unit hotel.
 We are suggesting 58,000 sq. ft. and 60 rooms, at 800 sq. ft. each, at an estimated cost of $8 Million and that a Hospitality
investor(s) would bear the risk of the additional $3 Million hard costs or income guarantee of $270,000 per year or 17 rooms
at the rev par, which equates to $15,700 per room per year until stabilized.
 In order to support the large scale 70,000 sq. foot, $10 million hotel project that has been proposed, regular room rates of
$127/night and 60% occupancy would be required or a guarantee of $600,000/yr. or a buy-down of $5 million in hard costs.

X. PROJECT SCOPE: PUBLIC LIBRARY
CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
Estimated Total Cost for the New
Platteville Library Updated 4/1/2013
Square Feet Cost per Square Foot Total Cost per Item
Construction 20,000 - 22,000 $200.00 $4,000,000 - $4,400,000
Parking – Surface 20 $1,800.00 $36,000.00
Landscaping $15,000.00
Subtotal Construction $4,051,000 - $4,451,000
Construction Contingency at 15% of
Construction $607,650 - $667,650
Subtotal Construction &
Contingency $4,658,650 - $5,118,650
FF&E 17400 - 19,140 nasf $20.00 $348,000 - $382,800
Subtotal Construction, Contingency,
and FF&E $5,006,650 - $5,501,450
Fees (Architectural and other) at 11%
of Subtotal (including reimbursables) $550,732 - $605,160
Subtotal Construction, Contingency,
FF&E and Fees $5,557,382 - $6,106,610
Information Technology 17400 - 19,140 nasf $10.00 $174,000 - $191,400
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT
COSTS $5,731,382 - $6,298,010
Estimated Building Construction Cost
Per Square Foot - $202.55
Total Estimated Project Cost Per
Square Foot - $286.57
Sources: McGraw Hill Construction Sweets - ‘Green Building Square Foot Costbook 2013’ &
ENR Engineer News-Record Design & Construction Resources- Remodeling Contracting Costbook

Library Feasibility Need Source Excess/(Need)
Hard Construction $6,000,000 Student Housing TIF TIF Value 15 Years $9,042,394 $3,042,394
TIF Value 20 Years $12,056,525 $6,056,525
TIF Value 27 Years $16,276,309 $10,276,309
Parking $878,700 TIF Value 15 Years $2,163,694
TIF Value 20 Years $5,177,825
TIF Value 27 Years $9,397,609
Operating Expenses new
space
Hard Value need using Mill
Rate
2012 Operating Expenses $611,381 $22,018,259
Q1 2013 $106,026 $3,818,418
2013 Annualized $424,104 $15,273,670
Using 2012 Operating
expense Hotel TIF TIF Value 15 Years $1,277,636 ($18,576,930)
TIF Value 20 Years $1,703,514 ($15,136,920)
TIF Value 27 Years $2,299,744 ($10,320,906)
2013 Annualized $424,104 $15,273,670
2013 Annualized Hotel TIF TIF Value 15 Years $1,277,636 ($11,832,341)
TIF Value 20 Years $1,703,514 ($8,392,331)
TIF Value 27 Years $2,299,744 ($3,576,317)

Market Feasible
 The Library is market feasible based upon the expertise of the Platteville Library Executive Director and her staff’s needs analysis
that was conducted for the study. Refer to the study conducted by Carolyn Schuler.
 This financial feasibility assumes a $6 million cost for the design and construction of a new, expanded 22,000 sq. Foot
Platteville Public Library.
 The additional space for the Platteville Public Library has excellent financial feasibility based on the assumption that the
project will generate $936,987 in annual taxes and will generate over $14 million in Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) over 15
years and $18 million over 20 years. The TIF from the project would support the $6 million construction costs for the new,
expanded Library and could help to finance the parking for the overall project.
 The City of Platteville must partner with the legal entity for the development of the Platteville Library Block redevelopment
project and commit the TIF monies toward the construction of the new, expanded Library.
 The City of Platteville would have to evaluate the minimum parking space that would be needed in order to make this project
‘cash flow.’ A parking variance may be needed from the City.
 The developer/builder would have to obtain the financing for the construction phase of the entire project.

XI. PROJECT SCOPE: PARKING
According to the analysis conducted by Mike Krolczyk, Vice President with C.D. Smith Construction Services located in Fond
du Lac, Wisconsin, it is estimated that 425 parking stalls would be required to support the Library Block project. The stall
parking deck that would be located underground would require approximately 140,625 sq. feet and could be constructed at a
cost of $7.4 million based on the building contractor’s estimates. They would be allocated as follows:
Business Entity Parking Stalls
Needed
Library 50
Student Housing 252
Commercial 53
Extended Stay Hotel 60
All Other 10
TOTAL 425
At a construction cost of over $7.4 million for the parking needed to support this project, the parking stalls required to support
each Business/Organization, will have to be allocated into the overall construction costs of each part of the project and would
be allocated as follows:
Business Entity Parking Stalls
Req.
Allocated Costs of
Parking Stalls
Library 50 $878,700
Student Housing 252 $4,428,648
Commercial 53 $931,422
Extended Stay
Hotel
60 $1,054,440
All Other 10 $175,740
TOTAL 425 $7,468,950

Market Feasible
 The overall analysis found the project to be market and financially feasible. The project return is adequate to support the
parking construction expense based on the projected 425 units.
 Parking is seldom financially feasible unless the project’s sole income is parking fees. In order to determine financial
feasibility in this project, each business entity had to be financially feasible to pay for their required building space and
associated business function. Then excess cash flow was evaluated to pay for the required parking needs for the business.
We recommend a ‘go’ decision for the parking project.
 To mitigate the risk of the parking portion of the project, the parking construction costs were allocated by the specific business
entities.
 A management operator/firm would be recommended to manage the parking for the project.
 Each business unit should be required to sign a ‘fixed fee’ lease agreement with the management operator.

XII. TOOLS IN THE TOOLBOX
Platteville is in a unique position to have access to public and private funds which are available from State, national and local
Economic Development Funds. The project would be eligible for nearly $1 million in public grant funds and over $7 million in new
market monies which provides opportunities and challenges. The money must be invested wisely for greatest impact, and also
possibly designed to replenish itself over time.
FOR THE OVERALL PROJECT
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds - From the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC), these
funds could be utilized for projects including but not limited to planning and blight elimination. Contact Jennifer Kuderer for more
information 608-210-6820 Jennifer.Kuderer@wedc.org.
The New Markets Tax Credit Program (NMTC Program) was established by Congress in 2000 to spur new or increased
investments into operating businesses and real estate projects located in low-income communities. The NMTC Program attracts
investment capital to low-income communities by permitting individual and corporate investors to receive a tax credit against their
Federal income tax return in exchange for making equity investments in specialized financial institutions called Community
Development Entities (CDEs). The credit totals 39 percent of the original investment amount and is claimed over a period of seven
years (five percent for each of the first three years, and six percent for each of the remaining four years). The investment in the CDE
cannot be redeemed before the end of the seven-year period.
The project is within a targeted area, and would be eligible for New Markets funds, to buy down debt service, become an equity
source, and therefor increase the overall rate of return or decrease the debt burden.
Capacity Building (CAP) Grant funds assist local and regional economic development groups, to create an advanced economic
development network within the state. The primary use of the funds is for assessments of the economic competitiveness of the area;
support of strategies that will benefit the organizations or their members through operational efficiencies, strategy development,
education/skill development or increased collaboration with other organizations. Contact Jennifer Kuderer for more information 608-
210-6820 Jennifer.Kuderer@wedc.org.

Economic Development Administration (EDA) Technical Assistance Program – provides focused assistance to local
government leaders to help in economic development decision making, including feasibility studies, as well as makes university
resources available to the economic development community.
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) – A diverse tool which should be reexamined on a regular basis for ways to utilize its power and
scope more creatively in Platteville. Creative uses of TIF in combination with levy, CDBG and bonding through the CDA can create
more opportunities than appear to currently exist.
General Levy Funds – The City of Platteville should not shy away from considering utilizing general levy funds on important
investments in economic and community development. The long term benefits of these investments have been proven to reduce the
needs for additional investment over time and in many cases have acted as catalysts for further growth and private sector
investment.
XIII. SOURCES & USES
LIBRARY
LIBRARY USES SOURCES
TIF –
Student
Housing,
Commercial
TIF –
Extended
Stay Hotel
CDBG – PF Capital
Campaign
City GPR TOTAL Excess/Need
Construction $6,000,000 $5,500,000 $0 $500,000 $0 $0 $6,000,000 $0
Parking $878,700 $878,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $878,700 $0
Operating
Expenses
$15,273,670 $5,677,825 $1,703,514 $0 $0 $7,892,331 $15,273,670 $0
TOTAL $22,152,370 54% 8% 2% 0% 36% 100%
The Library Sources and uses chart above is dual, incorporating hard cost of construction, and translating operating expenses into
long term hard end value. Libraries are typically non-revenue producing entities requiring tax levy. The intent of the sources and
uses is to find enough new and existing tax bases to pay for the new, expanded Library space and operating budget. It is imperative
to realize that that $6,878,700 is the immediate need and the $15,273,670 is what is needed to cover the operating expenses over 20
years. We find as stated before that based on the tax base creation for this project, we recommend a ‘Go’ decision. The Library
should consider this in their business planning process.

STUDENT HOUSING
STUDENT
HOUSING
USES SOURCES TOTAL
Bank Loan New Market
Monies
Equity
Construction $19,841,985 $16,865,688 $0 $2,976,298 $19,841,985
Parking $5,360,070 $0 $5,360,070 $0 $5,360,070
TOTAL $25,202,055 67% 21% 12% 100%
The student housing sub entity should create a fully defined operating business plan, including management duties, job descriptions,
and more exact operating expenses, and legal formation.
HOTEL
HOTEL USES SOURCES TOTAL
Bank Loan New Market
Monies
Equity
Construction $8,000,000 $4,800,000 $0 $3,200,000 $8,000,000
Parking $1,054,440 $0 $1,054,440 $0 $1,054,440
TOTAL $9,054,440 53% 12% 35% 100%
The Hotel sub entity should create a fully defined operating business plan, including management duties, job descriptions, and more
exact operating expenses, and legal formation.
XIV. RECOMMENDATIONS
 Our recommendation is to finance the entire project as the ‘collective’ applying various public and private funding including
grants, TIF, New Market Tax Credits, and loan guarantees to insure the success of this project moving forward.

XV. APPENDIX
LINK References:
http://www.uli.org/wp-content/uploads/ULI-Documents/ULI-EY-Real-Estate-Consensus-Forecast-April-2013.pdf
http://pld.dpi.wi.gov/pld_dm-lib-stat
http://www.wisconsinlibraries.org
http://www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0504.pdf
Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II – Parking Costs
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
Appendix Listing:
A. Construction Estimates – Platteville Library Project – C.D. Smith Construction
B. Student Housing/Commercial Space Financial Analysis
C. Extended Stay Hotel ProFormas - $8M, 60 Rooms, $70/night
D. Downtown Platteville Market Analysis – Applicable pages Only
E. Student Housing Income & Expense Survey
F. Platteville vs. Marinette – Locate in Wisconsin Comparisons
G. Sample Platteville Property Bills for Mill Rate
H. Parking Costs Study pages
I. Library 2012 Operating Budget & YTD 2013
J. Composite Bond Rates 6/10/13
K. University of Wisconsin – Platteville Campus Master plan 2/16/11 – Applicable pages only
L. Investment Performance – Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITS) by Sector 5/31/13
M. ULI/E&Y Real Estate Consensus Forecast – Applicable pages Only
N. Comparison of Cap Rates – LoopNet Profiles

{É.
+1Ë-
Ë{
¿d.
. úLH g.fÉGÎ fAÉ.Èttt' .
PLATTEVILLE LIBRARY BLOCK PROJECT
REDEVELOPMENT FEASIBILITY STUDY I JUNE, 2013
APPENDIX A
CONSTRUCTION EST¡MATES

UWP REF Library block
Mixed-Use Development
Pro Forma Development Budget
411412013
PROJECT SCOPE
Gross Square Feet
Rentable Square Feet (BOMA)
Usable Square Feet (BOMA)
Tenant lmprovement Allowance/GSF
Parking Spaces Requ¡red
Percent Use ln Parking Structure
Potent¡al Revenue Producing Stalls
DEVELOPMENT COSTS
Land Cost
Construction Gosts
Shell & Core
Site Work
117,600
117,600
$ 12,700,800
286,942
71,736
E 3s¡,ra4
i 13,45',t,262
hous¡ng
33ô bed/84 units
Condo A
Commerc¡al
22,630
22,630
$
$ 2,149,850
55,217
565,750
13,804
Library
Offìce
18,000
17,000
$
$ 1,440,000
43,920
10,980
44,847
Condo B
375
Stall
Parking
DeckSUBTOTAL
228,230
223,030
$ 23,640,650
556,877
565,750
1 39,219
Hous¡ng: 336 (84 units)
Hotel 70 bed
Café 2600 SF
Clinic 6065 5F
Bank 4580 5F
Foundâtion 5F?
Other 8500 SF
Other 2000
Park¡ng spaces TBD
Block grent 5500,000
EPA Brownfield grant ?
Clinic Grants 5500,000
Rural Development loan
TrFF s3,000,000
NMTC
Foundation 5500,000
hotel
70,000
65,800
140,625
N/A
343,123
85,781
172,242
TOTAL
368,855
223,030
$ $
70
16.47%
25
53
12.47v"
50
11 76%
425
100.00%
$
425252
59 29yo 'f 00 00%
$ 350,707 $ 208,754 $ ô7,487 $ s3,680 $ 680,628 ç 419,372 $ 1,100,000
Tenant lmprovements (Allowance)
Demolition Allowance
Green Roof
Construction Contingency
Subtotal Construction Costs
Owner Other Costs
DevetopmentFee I
Leasing Fee
Design & Engineering Fees 575%
Moveable Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment
Hotel FF&E
Misc Soft Costs (See Schedule)
Construction Loan lnterest s.oo%
OwnerContingency i.so%
Subtotal Owner Other Costs
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS
Annual Gross Rent
Annual Triple Net Rent / Building
Annual Rent for Parking
Annual Triple Net Rent / Residential
TotalAnnual Triple Net Rent
Total Annual Triple Net Rent per RSF
Average Total Annual Rent Per UniUMonth
$ 7,350,000
170,799
42,700
226,905
$ 7,790,403
ry $ 28,953,1 50
900,000
565,750
225,000
I83,539 $ 747,075 919,31 7
$ 2,868,160 $ 1,539,747 i 25,649,572 S 5,913,64s $31,563,217
$$ 672,563
773,448
N/A
875,789
448,375
201,769
$ 2,971,944
$ 16,773,913
$ 1,492,878
ç 192,477
$ 1,685,3ss
$ 14.33
$ 389,s20
109,0ô6
447,948
N/A
1,050,000
507,220
259,680
1 '16,85ô
$ 2,880,290
I 10,879,448
$ 957,391
$ 53,466
$ 1 ,010,8s7
$ 15 36
$ 143,408
40,154
164,919
N/A
186,741
95,605
43,O22
$ 673,8s0
s 3,609,497
$ 317,636
$ 40,48'r
$ 358,1 17
$ 15 82
76,987
21,55ô
88,535
N/A
100,250
51,325
23,096
$ 361,751
s 1,955,177
$ 174,011
$ 38,190
212,201
12 48
$ 1,282,479
170,776
1,474,850
1,050,000
1,670,000
854,986
384,744
3,91 5,891
$ 30,246,090
$ 1 18,273
236,546
N/A
495,500
197,122
88,705
$ 1,136,145
$ 7,469,162
19,918
$ 1,400,7s1
170,776
1 ,711,396
2,165,500
1,052,107
473,448
5,052,036
i37,715,253
$
$

UWP REF L¡brary block
Office & Commercial - Condo A
4t14t13
Annual CPI Adjustment Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
118,469 122,023 125,æ4
Yeat 4 Year 5
129,454 133,338
Yær 6
224,230
223,030
0
g%
Yeat 7 Year 8 Year 9 Yea|l 0
Grc$ Square Feet
Rentable Square Feet
Usable Square Feet
Percent Occupied
rNcoME (NNN)
A Grcæry Store
B Off¡ce
C Commercid
D Off¡ce Expans¡on
E Vacancy Rserye
TOTAL INCOME
OPERATING EXPENSES
Operat¡ng Expenæs (Pas Through - Sery¡ces & Utllitles)
Subtotal
Operat¡ng Expenses (Costs of OwneFh¡p)
H lnsuEnce(PæThrcugh)
l. Real Estate Taes (Pæs Through)
J Util¡t¡s (Pass Thrcugh)
J Building Ræeryes for Replacement
K Trustee Fee
L Asset Management, Legal & Accounting
228230
223,030
0
ggo
228,230
223,030
0
94%
22A,230
223,030
0
94%
228,230
223,030
0
94%
224,230
223,030
0
94%
228,230
223pæ
0
94%
228,2æ
223,030
0
g%
224,230
23,030
0
gryo
224,230
223,030
0
94%
1æ,575
D€wlopment
Cåp Rate
|e-ãõçt
F.ã€o-çl
I 8.m%l
I e.€o%l
6.00%
1,492'878 1,537,665 1,583,794 ,1,631,308 1,680,24a 1,730,655 1,782,575 1,836,052 1'891,133 1'97'æ7
957,391 986,113 1,0',15,697 1,046,167 '1,077,552 1,109,879 1,143,175 1,177,471 ',1,2'12'795 '1'249'179
3,17,636 327,165 336,980 347,089 357,502 3f¡8,227 379,274 390,652 402'371 414'443
.174,011 179,231 184,608 190,146 195,8s1 201,726 207,778 214,011 220,432 227,U5
(176,515) (181,810) (187,265 (192,SS3) (193,669) (204,6æ') (210,768) (217'0911 (223,604' (230'312
J2-.?6s/-õi ,B4Bi63 - Zr3ZB14 Zo2828 3J12483 3,205,858 3,302,034 3,401,095 3,503¡27 3,604'221
79,374
57,964
i1B¡æ - i2ZO23 i-ã5;684 l-2s¡54 - 133,æt 137,338 141,458 145,702 1s0,073 154,s7s
68,469
50,000
70,523
51,500
72,639
53,045
74,A18
54,636
77,062
56,275
81,756
59,703
84,208
61,494
86.734
63,339
89,337
6s,239
Subtotal
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
137,338 141,458 145,702 150,073
F¡nanclng Expen$s
A Note ¡nteræt- Sen¡or Debt
Subtotal
1102¡û '1,079,49ô 1,055,623 ',1,030,466 1,003,956
-ß2150
- 1p?9Æ- I,O-ffi -ì,OSO,¿OO
- 1,003,9s6 976,021 946,s83 915,562 AA2,873 U8,425
(774,300) (774,300) (774.300) (774,300) (774,300) (774,æOt (774,300) (774.300) (774,300) (774,300)
@
-7730-o-t
-çn*æo)
@ @
-7?-ãõõt
-i7ãõõt @
-410-õt
--i??4-ãõõt
976,021 946,583 915,562 882,873 U8,425
Other lncome I (Expen$)
Debt Forgiveness
Deprec¡ation
Sublotal
LGs Carry FoMard

TIF UndeNriting
Grocery
Otfice
Spæ Otfice/Retail
Parking
54 847o $
8.72yo $
17.90% $
't8 54% $
5,413,200
861,191
1,766,487
1,830,092
122.448983,500,000 $
7,179,250 6
7,437,7ñ S
-ö
2 50yo
't.2
0 0641
0 0770
35,000
57,4U
59,502
695
2.45
3.06
3:06
s
$
$
$
100
125
125
0
2.450/o
2.450/"
2.450/o
2.450/o
85,750
175,892
182,225
982,867
982,867
Total
Assume Base lncrcment
lncremental Value
Præent Value of lncrement
Public DebtAssumptions YeaE
lnter$t Rate
DCR
Calculated D¡scout Rate
DCR-adjusted
TIF lncremental Value, PresentValue
Raw
DCR-adjusted
$ 40,117,000 $
$-$
$ 40,117,000 I
$ '10,903,475
$ 9.870.970
Use Un¡tsisF $/Unit or SF Mill Rate
Total Assessed
Value
lncrcmental
Tâxês
ta6/un[ of
SF

Ë1
t+
' ÉL!{ )rrJl'lãÎ'çlÚ''xJilÊ '
APPENDIX B
STUDENT HOUSING
COMMERCIAL SPACE
SPREADSHEETS

Property Name
Location
Type of Property
Size of Property
Total
Platteville Student Housi
Platteville, Wisconsin
Mixed Use
Annual Property Operating Data
Purchase Price
Plus Acquisition Costs
Plus Loan Fees/Costs
Less Mortgages
Equals lnitial lnvestment
16,800,000
14,000,000
2,800,000
(Sq Ft /Units)
Purpose of analysis
Assessed/Appra ised Values
Land 0 15o/o
lmprovements 0 85%
Personal Property 0 Oo/o Pmtsl/r
12
lnterest
6.%
Amort
Period
20
Loan
Term
200 100%
$16,800,000
1st
2nd
Balance
$14,000,000
Periodic Pmt
$100,300
12
Adjusted Basis as of 12-Jun-13
ALL FIGURES ARE ANNUAL
$/SO FT
or $/Unit
o/o
of GOI COMMENTS/FOOTNOTES
1 POTENTIAL RENTAL INCOME
2 Less: Vacancy & Cr. Losses
3 EFFECTIVE RENTAL INCOME
4 Plus: Other lncome (collectable)
5 GROSS OPERATING INCOME
OPERATING EXPENSES:
6 Real Estate Taxes
7 Personal Property Taxes
8 Property lnsurance
9 Off S¡te Management
10 Payroll
1 1 Expenses/Benefits
1 2 TaxesMorker's Compensation
'l 3 Repairs and Maintenance
14 Ut¡lities:
15 Ut¡lities
15.'15
( 10.% of PRI)
172,697
2,132,060
213,206
1,918,854
1,9'18,854
9o/o
2o/o 34,539
5o/o 95,943
SYo 99,780
12Yo 226,425
19 Accounting and Legal
20 Licenses/Permits
21 Advertising
22 Supplies
23 Miscellaneous Contract Services
3o/o 57,566
16
17
18
24
25
26
27
28
3Yo 59,484
29 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
30 NET OPERATING INCOME
31 Less: Annual Debt Service
32 Less: Participation Payments
33 Less: Leasing Commissions
34 Less: Funded Reserves
35 CASH FLOW BEFORE TAXES ($31 ,1 85)
The statements and figures hereín, while not guaranteed, are secured from
sources we believe author¡tative.
Prepared for:
Prepared by:

Cash Flow Analysis Worksheet
Property Name
Prepared For
Prepared By
Oate Prepared
Plattev¡lle Student Housino Purchase Price
Plus Acquis¡ition Costs
Plus Loan Fees/Costs
Less Mortgages
Equals lnitial lnvestment
I 6 ÂOO OOO
14,000,000
2,800,000
Taxable Income
Personal Propertvlmorovements
14.280.000
SL
39
Jânueru-o2
December-1 1
Data
Value
C. R. Method
Useful Life
ln Service Date
Date of Sale
Recaoture
2nd Mortoaoe
12
1 st Mortqaqe
14.000.000
6.OU%
20 Years
20 Years
12
100,300.35
't.203.604
Mortoaoe Data
Amount
lnterest Rate
Amortization Period
Loan Term
Payments^/ear
Periodic Payment
Annual Debt Service
Loan Fees/Costs
Year
1 Potential Rental lncome
2 -Vacancy & Credit Losses
3 =Effective Rental lncome
4 +Other lncome (collectable)
5 =Gross operating lncome
6 -Operating Expenses
7 =NET OPERATING INCOME
8 -lnierest - 1 st Mortgage
9 -lnterest - 2nd Mortgage
'10 -Partic¡pation Payments
1 1 -Cost Recovery - lmprovements
1 2 -Cost Recovery - Personal Property
13 -Amortization of Loan Fees/Costs
14 -Leasing Commiss¡ons
15 =Real Estate Taxable lncome
16 Tax Liability (Savings) @ 36 00%
7
139.093
2.642 t61
2.642.761
973.927
1.668.834
563.072
350,
754.903
271 .7
135.041
2 565.78E
2.565.788
945.560
1.620.227
600.2E3
366.1 39
653,E05
235.370
2.491.056
2.622.164
131 ,108
2.491.056
91E.020
1.573 03ti
635,333
366.1 39
571,565
205,763
2.545.191
127,290
2.418.501
2 414.5rJ1
E91,281
1,527,220
668.346
366 1 39
492.734
177.384
2.471.641
123.582
2.348.059
2,346,053
865,322
1.482.738
699.442
366,1 39
417.157
150 ',l76
2.399.652
1 19.983
2.279.669
2.279.669
840.1 1 8
1.439.551
728.731
366.1 39
344,ti81
124,OEs
2.329.759
1 16,48E
2.213,271
2.213.271
815.649
't 397 622
756,319
366.1 39
275,165
99,059
2,261,902
1 13.095
2.148.807
2,146,60(
791 ,892
1 .356.915
366 139
208.472
75.050
1 .317.393
109.801
2.086.220
2,086.220
806.779
366,1 39
144.4t5
52,O11
2.196.021
+34
420
978)
060
Flow
17 NET OPERATING INCOME (Line 7)
18 -Annual Debt Service
1 9 -Participation Payments
20 -Leasing Comm¡ssions
21 -Funded Reseryes
22 =CASH FLOW BEFORE TAXES
23 -Tax Liability (Savings) (Line 16)
24 =CASH FLOWAFTERTAXES
si'193.4
1.tt6u
1.203 60,
465.230
2t1.t65
16,2|.J.227
1.203.604
416.623
235,370
$161 ,253
1.203.604
369,432
205,763
$163.669
1.573.036.220
3.616
i146.231
1
1
177.384
1.482.738
1203.604
279.133
't 50. 176
Í;126.95/
1,203,604
235.947
124.O45
$1 11,862
'l _439.5511,397,622
1,203.604
194,018
99,059
$94,959
1 ,356.915
153,31 1
75.050
$78.261
1.317.393
1 2tJ3.6(J4
I 13.789
52.O11
$61 //E
The statements and f¡gures herein, while not guaranteed, ars secured from sources we bel¡eve author¡tat¡ve.

Alternative Cash Sales Worksheet
ances
Year: 5
Principal Balance - 1st Mortgage
Principal Balance - 2nd Mortgage
TOTAL UNPAID BALANCE
o 7 I I 10
2 3 4
13,626,228 13,229.403 12,808,102 12,360,817 11,885,944
$13,626,228 $13,229,403 $12,808,1 02 $12,360,817 $11.885.944
11,381.782 10,846,524 10,278,252 9,674,931 9,034,399
$11,381,782 $10,846,s24 810.278,252 $9.674.931 $9,034,399
Calculation of Sale Proceeds
PROJECTED SALES PRICE $28,648,321
(At 6.% cap)
$24,5s5,704 $1 881
(At 7.% cap) (At 9.% cap)
CALCULATION OF ADJUSTED BASIS:
1 Basis at Acquisition
2 +Capital Additions
3 -Cost Recovery (Depreciation) Taken
4 -Basis in Partial Sales
5 =Adjusted Basis at Sale
CALCULATION OF CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE:
6 Sale Price
7 -Costs of Sale
8 -Adjusted Basis at Sale (Line 5)
9 -Participation Payment on Sale
'10 =Gain or (Loss)
11 -Straight Line Cost Recovery (limited to gain)
12 -Suspended Losses
13 =Capital Gain from Appreciation
ITEMS TAXED AS ORDINARY INCOME:
14 Unamortized Loan Fees/Costs (nesative)
15 +
16 =Ordinary Taxable lncome
CALCULATION OF SALES PROCEEDS AFTER TAX:
17 Sale Price
18 -Cost of Sale
l9 +Balance of Funded Reserves
20 -Mortgage Balance(s)
21 -Parlicipaiton Payments on Sale
22 =SALE PROCEEDS BEFORE TAX
23 -fax (Savings): Ordinary lncome at 36% (Line 16)
24 -Tax: Straight Line Recapture at 25o/o (Line '1 1)
25 -Tax on CapitalGains at 15% (Line 13)
26 =SALE PROCEEDS AFTER TAX
$16,800,000
3,630,832
1 3, 1 69,1 68
28
13,473,771
3,630,832
28,648,321
2,005,382
L034,399
17,608,540
907 708
$16,700,832
$16,800,000
3,630,832
1 3, 1 69,1 68
24,555,704
718 899
1 3.1 69,168
9,667,637
3,630,832
6,036,805
24,555,704
1,718,899
9,034,399
13,802,406
90
$16,800,000
3,630,832
1 3,1 69,1 68
19,098,881
1,336,922
1 3,1 69, I 68
4,592,791
3,630,832
961 9s9
19,098,881
1 922
9,034,399
8 727 560
907 708
144,294
$7,675,559
The statements and figures herein, while not guaranteed, are secured from sources we believe authoritative.

z
É,
f
IJJ
É.
nn
Alternative 1
$
BEFORE TAX
Alternative 2
13
1 85)
,789
,947
133
323,616
369,432
16,623
465,230 + 13,802,406
Alternative 3
(2,800,000)
(31 ,1 85)
1 13,789
153,311
194,018
7
79,1 33
6
16,623
10 465,230 + 8,727
IRR= 16.51%
@ 16.51%
z
-{
m
7
z
t-
n
-{
m
at,
0
1
2
3
4
5
o
7
8
9
10
IRR=
NPV=
(2,800,000)
(31,185)
113,789
153,31 1
194,018
235,947
279,133
323,616
153,31 I
194,0r 8
0
,|
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
I
10
000)
n
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
I
l!
o
o
IJJ
É,
z
É,
t¡J
=
16,623
465,230 + 17,608,540
3.35%
@ 23.35o/o
$
@ 20.869/0
AFTER TAX
$
778
959
IRR=
nn
o
'nn
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
I
10
IRR=
,778
261
959
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
I
5
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
I
5
,206)
778
111,862
128,957
146,231
163,669
181,253
193,465 + 16,700,832 193,465 + 11,989,177
111,862
128,957
146,231
163,669
181 ,253
193,465 + 7,675,
11,862
28,957
46,231
63,669
81,253
n
m
I
c
n
z
21
@ 21.04%
Cap rate used on Sale = 6.%
IRR= 17.42o/o
@ 17.42q/o
Cap rate on Sale = 7.%
IRR= 12.83%
@ 12.83o/o
Cap rate on Sale = 9.%
The statements and figures here¡n, wh¡le not guaranteed, are secured from sources we bel¡eve author¡tat¡ve.

Ordinary lncome Tax Bracket
Capital Gain Max Tax Rate
Tax Rate on Straight Line
Month Placed in Service:
(from CashFlows Sheet)
Year---->
Vacancy RateS (enter just year 1, or each year)
Rent lncome Escalators
Other lncome Escalator
(enter just year 2, or each
Expense Escalators (enter just year 2, or each year)
360/o
15o/o
25%
Alternative 1
6.00%
7.00%
87652
Assumptions
3 4
5.00%
Alternative 2
7.00o/o
5.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
Alternative 3
9.00%
5.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
s.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.O0o/o
5.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
5
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
5.
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00%
3.00o/o
3.00%
3.00%
3.00o/o
3.00%
9 10 11
5.00%
3.00%
3.O0o/o
3.00%
Cap rate used in Sale
Expenses of Sale
1

Units Rent Term Total
Student Housino 330 i470 12 $1.895.040
I 17,600
So. Ft.
Commercial Space 1 9,1 30 ;10.00 $191 .300
Bank 3,000 $12.00 $36,000
UW Foundation 1,000 10.00 $10.000
Total 140,730 $2.132.340
Averaqe 15.15 140,730
Clinic 0

ldr
¿d.
. ll.H
'qftlecî'
ÇtÉlLÙÊ o
APPENDIX G
EXTENDED STAY SPREADSHEETS
60 ROOMS - $70
$8,000,000 cosr

Assumptions Extended stay JDM 6-1 I -1 3 $8M
Platteville Library Block/Extend Stay
ASSUMPTIONS
Required lnputs: All required ¡nputs for this sheet are highlighted in light blue.
lnstruct¡ons:
I . Fill in all the cells highlighted in light blue. Remember the inputs are for the corresponding year mentioned in the 'Yea/' column.
For example, in cell E23, enter the total occupancy % you expect in the year mentioned.
2. When enter¡ng your average room rate, you can save tlme by using the infation macro. Simply, enter a value in the f¡rst year, select that cell and press the 3 ke)¡s: CTRL+SHIFT+I
3. You must apply the inflat¡on macro only when select¡ng the fìrst year cell. To remove inflation, select the fìrst year and perform: CTRL+SHIFT+N
4. Next fill in the account assumptions listed below 'Average Room Rate". Use h¡storical data if available or industry averages.
5. When entering fixed dollar values for the accounts, you can apply the inflation macro by selecting the first year cell and performing the inflat¡on function.
6. lf you classified an account as fixed in the "Expense Breakdown" sheet, you should only enter a fixed dollar amount in this sheet for that account
7. Similarly, enter only percentiage values for variable accounts. lf a account is both fixed and variable, enter both dollar amount and percentage.
3
Room Sales:
Days Open
Rooms Available per Day
Occupancy Percent
Average Room Rate
2014
JbÒ
60
40.0%
$70.00
201 5
$70.70
Year
2016
365
60
60.0%
$71.41
2017
365
60
60.0%
972.12
201E
$72.84
365
60
365
60
60 0%50 00/.
Food Sales
Yo 0.00%
Beverage Sales
$
% of Room 0.00% 0.00%
Other Food and Beverage Sales
nt
% of Room Sales
Telephone Sales o/o
of 1.00yo 1.00%
Amount
Fixed $ Amount
o/^ nf Ffnnm S¡lpq
Room Sales
% of Teleohone Sales
Minor Department Sales
Rooms Expense
Telephone Expense
% of F&B Sales 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
1.00%
25 00o/o
60 000/.
1.00o/.
25.00%
60 000/"
1.00o/.
1.OOo/o
60.00%
'l.ooo/"
1 000/"
60.00%
1.OO%
1 000/"
60.00%
% ofOtherSales 50.00% 50.00% 50.00% 50.00% 50.00%

lnOrinirtr"tiu"
and ceneral Expense
Assumptions
Energy Expense
I
Management Fee
Fixed $ Amount
Fixed Amount
o/" of Total Sales
70,000
30,000
3 000/" 3 000/"
Extended stay JDM 6-1 1-13 $8M
75,000 75,000 75,000
30,603 30,909
3 000/" 3.OOo/"
75,000
31,218
300v"
_F¡xed$Amount4o,00o40,O0040,0004o,0004o'o00
I Maintenance Expense
4
Property Taxes
lnsurance Expense
Rent Expense
I
tnterest Expense
Fixed $ Amount
Fixed $ Amount
Fixed $ Amount
F¡xed $ Amount
38,500 70,000 70,700 71,407 72,121
7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500
50 51 51 52 52
140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000
Depreciation/ Amortization Expense
Other Fixed Charges
F¡xed $ Amount
Fixed $ Amount 5,000
I 25,000 r 25,000 125,000 1 25,000
5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
Repayment of Principal on Debt
Fixed Amount
lrixeo
nssets Replacement Reserves used Fixed $ Amount 56,1 86 62,025 64,606 67,08650,705
Now cl¡ck the "lnc. Stmt." tab below

Platteville Library Block Redevelopment Feasibility Study

Platteville Library Block Redevelopment Feasibility Study

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to Platteville Library Block Redevelopment Feasibility Study

Similar to Platteville Library Block Redevelopment Feasibility Study (20)

Platteville Library Block Redevelopment Feasibility Study