My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet 10-17-18 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Public Meetings
>
CMO
>
2018
>
10-17-2018
>
Agenda Packet 10-17-18 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/12/2018 9:46:39 AM
Creation date
10/12/2018 9:39:35 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
125
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
Prepared for: City of Eugene <br />Prepared by: PNW Economics <br />Response to MUPTE Citizen Advisory Committee Questions: Obie Companies Application <br />MEMORANDUM <br />To: Amanda Nobel Flannery <br />Anne Fifield <br />CITY OF EUGENE <br />From: Bill Reid, Principal <br />PNW ECONOMICS <br />Subject: Response to MUPTE Citizen Advisory Committee: Consultant Questions <br />Date: August 29, 2018 <br />This memorandum is intended as a response to questions from the City of Eugene MUPTE citizen <br />advisory committee regarding PNW Economics’ review of Obie Companies’ MUPTE application. Each <br />question from the advisory committee are addressed in turn below. <br />1.Does use of 25 year rather than 30 year amortization have a significant effect? See Report <br />at 13. It appears to significantly increase the cash on cash cash flow return by about 2% <br />each year under the various scenarios, reduce non-viability, with MUPTE and without <br />amenity income, from 5 to 3 years, and achieve adequate DCR in year 2 rather than year 6, <br />under your analysis. <br />Consultant Response: All things equal, a 30-year term for debt would decrease annual debt service <br />by order of magnitude observed in the question and would generally enhance cash flow and cash-on- <br />cash return under all scenarios. But all things are not equal, and a longer-term permanent loan would <br />necessarily be charged a higher interest rate by the lender. So we cannot know exactly what the <br />annual debt service payment would be on a 30-year vs. a 25-year without knowing the consequence to <br />the interest rate from extending the term, though we can be certain the rate would go up by some <br />amount. Though different terms and interest rates are an interesting hypothetical, our charge was to <br />critically review application assumptions only as documented by the Applicant. <br />2.Would use of 30 year amortization rather than 25 year amortization reduce the annual debt <br />service on the project by about $145,000? Why would someone who had a choice use a 25 <br />year rather than a 30 year amortization, especially if they were focused on cash flow cash <br />on cash return? <br />Consultant Response: Again, with a longer term on the permanent loan, we only know that the <br />interest rate would be higher by some amount. Therefore, it cannot be said with certainty how much <br />annual debt service would decrease with a longer term and higher interest rate. 25-year terms are <br />very common on permanent commercial loans. 30-year terms are actually more common for home <br />mortgage loans than for commercial loans. A 25-year term for permanent debt may also be necessary <br />due to the fact that this development is planned to occur on leased land. In order to borrow for <br />Exhibit B to Attachment E <br />October 17, 2018, Work Session – Item 2
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.