The investor-developer would not be comfortable with a 7.8 percent return on cost because the margin for error is too risky. If construction costs are higher or rents are lower than anticipated, the project may not be feasible. The asking price of the project is $4,600,000 and the construction cost per unit is $80,400. The current rent to justify the land acqusition is $1.3 per square foot. The weighted average is 900 square feet per unit. Average vacancy and Operating expenses are 5% and 35% of Gross Revenue respectively. Use the following data to rework the calculations in Concept Box 16.2 9(please see screen shots attached to question) in order to assess the feasibility of the project: Required:a. Based on the fact that the project appears to have 9,360 square feet of surface area in excess of zoning requirements, the developer could make an argument to the planning department for an additional 10 units, 250 units in total, or 25 units per acre. What is the percentage return on total cost under the revised proposal? Is the revised proposal financially feasible?b. Suppose the developer could build a 240-unit luxury apartment complex with a cost of $92,000 per unit. Given that NOI is 60% of rents. What would such a project have to rent for (per square foot) to make an 8 percent return on total cost? II. Financial Feasibility:1. Construction cost per unit: $80,000 × 240 units2. Asking price for land:Total project cost:3. Gross revenue after lease-up and stabilization:Rent: $1.10 per square foot @ 900 square feet @ 240 units × 12 monthsLess:Average vacancy (5%)Operating expenses (35%)Net operating income4. Return on total cost ($1,710,720 ÷ $22,000,000)5. Approximate value based on NOI:a. If cap rateb. If cap rate= .08c. If cap rate= .07= .078$ 19,200,0002,800,000$ 22,000,000*$ 2,851,200142,560997,920$ 1,710,7207.78%$ 22,000,000$ 21,384,000$24,439,000III. Conclusion: Project may be feasible if the investor/developer is willing to accept a total return on cost of 7.8%. If, upon completion, investors arepricing comparable projects at a cap rate of .08, this proposed project would not be feasible because value ($21,384,000) is less than cost ($22,000,000). Ifprojects are being priced at cap rates of .07, the project would produce a sizable development profit of $2,439,000 (or $24,439,000 - $22,000,000).*Includes all infrastructure (roads, drainage, utilities, sewer costs), land, and building costs. I. Physical Feasibility:1. Goal: To provide a preliminary development plan analysis to determine whether an apartment project can be built on a specific site in accordancregulatory requirements and leased at current rental rates in order to justify land acquisition.2. Site: 10 acres or 435,600 square feet.3. Asking price: $2,800,000.4. Basic project description/zoning:a. Setback requirements: 15%b. Circulation requirements: 15%c. Maximum units per acre: 24 (based on a unit mix of 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom apartments; weighted average = 900 square feet per unit)d. Parking requirements: 1.5 spaces per unit @ 400 square feet per spacee. Open space, berms, landscape, support area: 1.0 acre (required) based on 240 unitsf. Maximum building height: 2 stories5. Physical feasibility (in square feet):a. Gross land areaLess: SetbacksCirculation435,60065,34065,34043,560261,360144,000117,360108,0009,360Open space/support/otherb. Area available for building development:Less: Surface parking, 240 units × 1.5 spaces × 400 square feetc. Net surface area available for buildingd. Proposed total footprint areas for buildings, (240 units × 900 square feet) ÷ 2 storiesExcess (or deficiency) of square footage versus zoning requirements:Conclusion: It appears that the site can accommodate a 240-unit apartment project and comply with zoning requirements.

Operating expenses are the expenses a firm must pay to remain accessible, such as salaries and…

The investor-developer would not be comfortable with a 7.8 percent return on cost because the margin for error is too risky. If construction costs are higher or rents are lower than anticipated, the project may not be feasible. The asking price of the project is $4,600,000 and the construction cost per unit is $80,400. The current rent to justify the land acqusition is $1.3 per square foot. The weighted average is 900 square feet per unit. Average vacancy and Operating expenses are 5% and 35% of Gross Revenue respectively. Use the following data to rework the calculations in Concept Box 16.2 9(please see screen shots attached to question) in order to assess the feasibility of the project: Required: a. Based on the fact that the project appears to have 9,360 square feet of surface area in excess of zoning requirements, the developer could make an argument to the planning department for an additional 10 units, 250 units in total, or 25 units per acre. What is the percentage return on total cost under the revised proposal? Is the revised proposal financially feasible? b. Suppose the developer could build a 240-unit luxury apartment complex with a cost of $92,000 per unit. Given that NOI is 60% of rents. What would such a project have to rent for (per square foot) to make an 8 percent return on total cost?

FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING

10th Edition

ISBN:9781259964947

Author:Libby

Publisher:Libby

Chapter1: Financial Statements And Business Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1Q

See similar textbooks

Related questions

Concept explainers

Question

The investor-developer would not be comfortable with a 7.8 percent return on cost because the margin for error is too risky. If construction costs are higher or rents are lower than anticipated, the project may not be feasible. The asking price of the project is $4,600,000 and the construction cost per unit is $80,400. The current rent to justify the land acqusition is $1.3 per square foot. The weighted average is 900 square feet per unit. Average vacancy and Operating expenses are 5% and 35% of Gross Revenue respectively. Use the following data to rework the calculations in Concept Box 16.2 9(please see screen shots attached to question) in order to assess the feasibility of the project:

Required:

a. Based on the fact that the project appears to have 9,360 square feet of surface area in excess of zoning requirements, the developer could make an argument to the planning department for an additional 10 units, 250 units in total, or 25 units per acre. What is the percentage return on total cost under the revised proposal? Is the revised proposal financially feasible?

b. Suppose the developer could build a 240-unit luxury apartment complex with a cost of $92,000 per unit. Given that NOI is 60% of rents. What would such a project have to rent for (per square foot) to make an 8 percent return on total cost?

II. Financial Feasibility:
1. Construction cost per unit: $80,000 × 240 units
2. Asking price for land:
Total project cost:
3. Gross revenue after lease-up and stabilization:
Rent: $1.10 per square foot @ 900 square feet @ 240 units × 12 months
Less:
Average vacancy (5%)
Operating expenses (35%)
Net operating income
4. Return on total cost ($1,710,720 ÷ $22,000,000)
5. Approximate value based on NOI:
a. If cap rate
b. If cap rate= .08
c. If cap rate= .07
= .078
$ 19,200,000
2,800,000
$ 22,000,000*
$ 2,851,200
142,560
997,920
$ 1,710,720
7.78%
$ 22,000,000
$ 21,384,000
$24,439,000
III. Conclusion: Project may be feasible if the investor/developer is willing to accept a total return on cost of 7.8%. If, upon completion, investors are
pricing comparable projects at a cap rate of .08, this proposed project would not be feasible because value ($21,384,000) is less than cost ($22,000,000). If
projects are being priced at cap rates of .07, the project would produce a sizable development profit of $2,439,000 (or $24,439,000 - $22,000,000).
*Includes all infrastructure (roads, drainage, utilities, sewer costs), land, and building costs.

I. Physical Feasibility:
1. Goal: To provide a preliminary development plan analysis to determine whether an apartment project can be built on a specific site in accordanc
regulatory requirements and leased at current rental rates in order to justify land acquisition.
2. Site: 10 acres or 435,600 square feet.
3. Asking price: $2,800,000.
4. Basic project description/zoning:
a. Setback requirements: 15%
b. Circulation requirements: 15%
c. Maximum units per acre: 24 (based on a unit mix of 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom apartments; weighted average = 900 square feet per unit)
d. Parking requirements: 1.5 spaces per unit @ 400 square feet per space
e. Open space, berms, landscape, support area: 1.0 acre (required) based on 240 units
f. Maximum building height: 2 stories
5. Physical feasibility (in square feet):
a. Gross land area
Less: Setbacks
Circulation
435,600
65,340
65,340
43,560
261,360
144,000
117,360
108,000
9,360
Open space/support/other
b. Area available for building development:
Less: Surface parking, 240 units × 1.5 spaces × 400 square feet
c. Net surface area available for building
d. Proposed total footprint areas for buildings, (240 units × 900 square feet) ÷ 2 stories
Excess (or deficiency) of square footage versus zoning requirements:
Conclusion: It appears that the site can accommodate a 240-unit apartment project and comply with zoning requirements.

Expert Solution

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

Step by step

Solved in 4 steps with 4 images

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Follow-up Questions

Read through expert solutions to related follow-up questions below.

Follow-up Question

This solution seems to be wrong. I also do not see where you got your numbers for the percentage return. Please continue to assist me.

Solution

by Bartleby Expert

SEE SOLUTION

Knowledge Booster

Learn more about

Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, accounting and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.