HomeMy WebLinkAbout20831 2013090297 Received: 12/23/2013 8:49:39 AM
Recorded: 12/242013 09:05:01 AM Filed &
Recorded in Official Records of L.arry Crane,
PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT/COUNTY CLERK
1 ORDINANCE N0. 20,831 Fees;240.00
2
3 AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT A PROJECT PLAN FOR
4 REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO 1 (BASS PRO) OF THE CITY
5 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS; TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY; AN '
6 FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
7
9 ;, �_
8 WHEREAS,the Board of Directors created Little Rock Redevelopment District No. 1 ("the Distrr'�'h),,,►,+"`�
9 pursuant to Little Rock, Ark., Ordinance 18,849(April 1, 2003), under the Constitution and statutes of the
10 State of Arkansas, including particularly Amendment 78 to the Constitution of the State of Arkansas
11 ("Amendment 78"), and Ark. Code Ann. §§ 14-168-301 to -324 (West 2004 and West Supp. 2013)
12 (generally,"the Act"),as may be amended; and,
13 WHEREAS, it has been determined that there is a great need for a source revenue to finance the costs
14 of acquisition,construction, and equipping of certain capital improvements of a public nature as defined in
15 the Act("the Project"), within the boundaries of the District; and,
16 WHEREAS, the City is authorized and empowered under the provisions of Amendment 78 and the
17 Act to issue and sell its bonds to finance the costs of capital improvements of a public nature within the
18 District such as those comprising the Project, which bonds are to be secured and payable from the ad
19 valorem tax increment described in and authorized by the Act; and,
20 WHEREAS, prior to the issuance of any such indebtedness, the Act requires the City Board of
21 Directors to adopt a project plan with respect to the District and any proposed amendments to the plan;and,
22 WHEREAS, the capital improvements of a public nature, which are shown in a project plan
23 conforming to the requirements of the Act, had to be guaranteed prior to the construction of the Bass Pro
24 facility located within the District and was deemed an essential aspect of the redevelopment of the area or
25 such a facility would not be so located; and,
26 WHEREAS, on November 15, 2013, prior to notice being published in the local newspaper,
27 correspondence was sent by first class mail to the chief executive officers of all local governmental and
28 taxing entities having the power to levy taxes on the property within the District that the Project had been
29 planned and would be considered at a public hearing before the Board of Directors on December 17, 2013,
30 in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 14-168-306 (e)(2)(B)(West Supp. 2013); and,
31 WHEREAS,on November 22,2013,notice of the public hearing was first published in an appropriate
32 newspaper in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 14-168-306 (e)(2)(A) (West Supp. 2013), and was also
33 published on the City website; and,
(Page 1 of 31
1 WHEREAS, pursuant to Little Rock, Ark., Resolution No. 13,813 (December 3, 2013),the Board of
2 Directors formally set a public hearing for December 17,2013,to consider and approve the Project pursuant
3 to the requirements of Ark. Code Ann. § 14-168-306 (West Supp. 2013); and,
4 WHEREAS,at the conclusion of the public hearing the Board of Directors finds the Project acceptable
5 and formally approves it;
6 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY
7 OF LITTLE ROCK,ARKANSAS;
8 Section 1. Reaffirmation of Creation of the District and Improvements.
9 (a) The finding that the parcels of property within the District prior to the time it was formed
10 substantially impaired and arrested City growth due to the absence of necessary infrastructure and
11 other site improvements is reaffirmed; and,
12 (b) Based upon assurances that such improvements as those set forth in the Project would be
13 made in accordance with the Act a facility has located within the District; and,
14 (c) The completion of these improvements will benefit the real property within the District and
15 encourage growth in commerce, industry, and employment.
16 Section 2. It is hereby found that the District's project plan in the form attached to this ordinance as
17 Exhibit A ("the Project Plan"), is economically feasible, conforms to the requirements of the Act, and is
18 accordingly adopted and approved pursuant to the authority granted in Amendment 78 and the Act.
19 Section 3. Severability. In the event any title, section, paragraph, item, sentence, clause, phrase, or
20 word of this ordinance is declared or adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such declaration or
21 adjudication shall not affect the remaining portions of the resolution which shall remain in full force and
22 effect as if the portion so declared or adjudged invalid or unconstitutional was not originally a part of the
23 resolution.
24 Section 4. Repealer. The provisions of all laws and parts of laws, franchises, and contracts, incon-
25 sistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency and the
26 language of this ordinance is amended and substituted, or added to, any such law, franchise, or contract as
27 if originally a part of the same.
28 Section 6. Emergency. The ability to provide necessary infrastructure within the City to facilitate and
29 maintain the construction of facilities such as the Bass Pro facility, and the need to provide additional such
30 infrastructure within a redevelopment district to promote further growth is essential to the public health,
31 safety, and welfare of the citizens; and emergency is, therefore, declared to exist and this ordinance shall
32 be in full force and effect from and after the date of its passage.
33 PASSED: December 17,2013
34
(Page 2 of 31
4
1 AT S APPROVED:
2 tit
f v.
4 Susan a City Clerk Mark Stodola, Mayor
5 APPR• I • S TO LEGAL FORM:
6
7 e,(4.41k,__
8 Thomas M. Carpenter,City tor`ney
9 //
10 //
11 //
12 //
13 //
14 //
15 //
16 //
17 //
18 //
19 //
20 //
21 //
22 //
23 //
24 //
25 //
26 //
27 //
28 //
29 //
30 //
31 //
32 //
33 //
34 //
35 //
[Page 3 of 31
LITTLE ROCK REDEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NO. 1
(Bass Pro and Gateway Town Center)
Project Plan
Little Rock Redevelopment District No. 1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary i - ii
Project Plan Overview iii— v
TIF District Ordinance 1 — 4
TIF District Boundaries 5
Site Plan 6
Tax & Job Generation Estimate 7
Cost Estimates 8
Cost Allocations 18
Certification of Pulaski County Assessor 19
Existing Land Use & Zoning Map 20
Draft of Ordinanc e Approving
Project 9 ]ect Plan 21
Exhibit I — Economic Analysis
LITTLE ROCK REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Little Rock created a redevelopment district in 2003 consisting of 176.413
acres adjacent to the I-30/I-430 interchange. The district, named the Little Rock
Redevelopment District No. 1 (the "District"), was formed pursuant to Amendment 78
of the Arkansas Constitution and Act 1197 of 2001. In 2005, the Arkansas Legislature
passed Act 2231, revising many provisions of the TIF law. Consequently, the project
plan contained herein will comply with requirements of both acts.
Purpose
The District was formed to address redevelopment issues necessary to accommodate
construction of a Bass Pro Shop and development of lands within the District such that
new jobs and enhanced tax base could be achieved. Even though Bass Pro Shops later
announced its decision to locate in North Little Rock, efforts to convince them to locate
in Little Rock have continued. As a result, development of Bass Pro on the original site
is almost a reality. Approval of the project plan as required by Act 1197 and Act 2231
(collectively the "Act") is necessary to assure timely completion of infrastructure
improvements in the District.
Property within the District is being developed under the name Gateway Town Center.
Proposed development includes Bass Pro Shop, a 30 acre outlet mall, banks, hotels,
restaurants and various other mixed uses. The project potentially will create more than
1000 permanent jobs and estimated annual revenue from sales taxes of $2.3 million for
the City of Little Rock and $1.5 million for Pulaski County.
The plan presented herein is intended to maximize future value enhancement both
within and outside of the district, and thereby significantly impact the tax base for the
city, county, school district and state.
Commitment from the outlet mall, which will contain approximately 80 retail stores, is
the lynchpin for achieving projected sales tax revenue. As a condition of this
commitment, the developer is required to complete the entire project infrastructure
prior to opening the mall in 2014.
While the financial burden of developing Bass Pro is much more favorable today than
was the case in 2003, implementation of a Tax Increment Financing (''TIF") bond issue
under the Act remains appropriate and necessary. Under the plan approximately 70%
of infrastructure costs will be provided by the developer and 30% percent will be
financed through a TIF bond issue.
i
School District Impact
The TIF District is within the boundaries of the Little Rock School District which derives
significant revenue from Ad Valorem taxes.
Currently, the Ad Valorem tax rate within the City of Little Rock is 70.1 mills. Of that
millage, 46.4 mills are allocated to the Little Rock School District. Of the school district
revenues 37.4 mills is protected and not available for tax increment financing.
Therefore, the impacted revenue to the school district is 9 mills.
The TIF district boundaries are limited to property being developed within Gateway
Town Center. Therefore, taxes from increased property value on adjacent or nearby
lands that occur as a result of Gateway Town Center development will accrue 100% to
the school district as well as other taxing entities that may be affected.
Historically, there has been virtually no property tax from the district because it has
been undeveloped. The school district will immediately receive 37.4 mills from all
development that occurs within the TIF district.
ii
LITTLE ROCK REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
TIF PROJECT PLAN OVERVIEW
The Act details the elements to be included in the redevelopment district project plan.
An overview of these elements is provided below. Each item is referred to by the
paragraph and item designation given in Section 2, Arkansas Code 14-168-306. Also,
included in the Project Plan is a map of the TIF District (page 5) and a copy of the City
Ordinance that formed the District (pages 1-4).
(b) (1) List of Improvements. The Project Plan includes 6 projects for the benefit of
the district. The projects are presented by name, and include streets, utilities, two
lakes, conduits for utility relocation, sidewalks, and storm drainage. The projects are
described in detail on pages 8 - 18 of the Project Plan.
(b) (2) (A) and (B) Economic Analysis. An Economic Forecast of Assessment Values
("Forecast") has been performed by the University of Arkansas at Little Rock Institute
for Economic Advancement (IEA). It is included in its entirety as Exhibit I.
(b) (2) (C) ADED Review. The economic analysis has been reviewed by Arkansas
Department of Economic Development and a copy of that review is included as Exhibit
II.
(b) (3) Project Costs. The scope and cost of each project is provided in the project
descriptions, pages 8 - 18. The total cost for the projects, estimated at approximately
$7.76 million is listed on page 18.
(b) (4) Financina Method. TIF financing will fund approximately 30% of the proposed
projects. Private development will pay for approximately 70% of the proposed projects.
The breakdown of total project costs and the funding to be provided from different
sources is provided in the table on page 18.
(b) (5) Certification of the Base Tax Valuation.. This is provided on page 20.
(b) (6) Other Revenues. The table on page 18 itemizes the expected sources of
funding for the projects. Private sources are initially funded with conventional bank
financing. Terms for private financing have been arranged and funding will ultimately
be repaid from land sales by the developer.
(b) (7) Existina Land Use Man. This is the current zoning map for the properties in the
district. There are three properties either developed or under development, which are
shown on the zoning map. It is included on page 21.
(b) (8) Map of Proposed Uses. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan is included on page
22.
iii
(b) (9) Proposed Zoning_ Chang_ es. There are no proposed zoning changes. The entire
district is zoned C-4.
(b) (10) Cross-References. The Project Plan will not affect changes to any City master
plan, map, building codes, or ordinances. The projects and construction proposed will
conform to City requirements in place at the time of construction.
(b) (11) Non-Proiect Costs. Estimates of costs are included in the Project Plan, and
designated project on non-project cost according to the definition of project costs given
in Arkansas code 14-168-301 (10).
(b) (12) Displacement Plan. There will be no displacement within the District.
(b) (13) Job Creation. The anticipated amount of bonds that will be issued for
construction costs is approximately $2,775,000. The bond proceeds will pay for only a
portion of the infrastructure costs. The only jobs to be directly tied to the TIF —
generated bonds will be construction jobs. The infrastructure projects, however, are
essential to the overall development of the District.
The estimate of permanent jobs created in the District is approximately 1400. A table
included on page 7 shows estimated jobs and increases in state, county, and city tax
revenues. Development of private commercial properties in the District is estimated to
occur over a ten year period.
(c) (1) Indebtedness. Based on the Forecast the bond issue amount will be
approximately $2,775,000.
(c) (2) Tax Increment. Based on the UALR-IEA Forecast, the present value of the
amount of tax increment available for the projected 23 year period of the TIF bond
financing based on Valuation Method B is $3,845,636 (the "Projected Yield"). The only
millage funds proposed to be used for debt service on the TIF bond financing are:
Pulaski County General (5.0 mills), Pulaski County Road Funds (1.45 mills), City of Little
Rock General (5.0 mills), City of Little Rock Road Fund (1.45 mills), and Little Rock
School District (9.0 mills), for a total of 21.9 mills available for the TIF bond financing.
(c) (3) Method of Calculation. In order to project an expected rate of appreciation, past
growth trends were reviewed. After the recession, property values declined from 10 to
20%. Therefore, the UALR-IEA Forecast used a conservative annual growth rate of
4%. The base valuation of the 8 parcels in the District was increased initially by the
projected completion values of the Bass Pro Shop and the Gateway Outlet Mall,
resulting in creased of $10.2 million and $48.2 million in years 1 and 2, respectively.
Those valuations were increased by the projected growth rate of 4% in each
succeeding years during the TIF financing period.
iv
(c) (4) Other Revenues. There are no other revenues available to secure the tax
increment financing or to retire the bonds obtained through the tax increment financing
tool.
(c) (5) Other Provisions. No other provisions are considered.
V
200303938B
® • 84/29/2883 82:59:33 PN
Filed I Recorded in
Official Records of
CAROLYN STALEY
18,849 PULASKI COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. CIRCUIT/COUNTY CLERK
Fees $17.88
2
3 AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A REDEVELOPMENT
4 DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS
5 AND PRESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES THEREOF; AND Flk..........
• �•
6 OTHER PURPOSES. G ".17-,c,(sc ‘'•
r Y,44,
•
f 'J.: l✓
litru
8 Whereas, the City of Little Rock, Arkansas (the "City"), a City e�;fiat c�as�s*'
9 has the power, pursuant to Amendment 78 of the Arkansas Constitutic '�dnd,Act1197 .�, 4e
r
• 4. vr�enO` O
10 of 2001 (the "Act"), to create redevelopment districts within the City, and ••a � ;'.;;fe•? '��'
11 Whereas, the City, in conjunction with interested property owners, has
12 determined that creation of a redevelopment district would benefit the City. And
13 Whereas, pursuant to Section 6 of the Act, notice has been sent by first class mail
14 to the chief executive officer of all local governmental and taxing entities having the
15 power to levy taxes on property located within the proposed redevelopment district
16 and to the Board of the Little Rock School District, and
17 Whereas, on March 11, 2003, a public hearing was held at which interested
18 parties were afforded a reasonable opportunity to express their views on the proposed
19 creation of a redevelopment district and its proposed boundaries.
20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
21 OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS:
22 Section 1. The Board of Directors makes the finding and determination that by
23 creating the District, the real property therein will be benefited by the elimination or
24 prevention or spread of slums, blighted, deteriorated, or deteriorating areas,
25 discouraging the loss of commerce, industry, or employment, and increasing
26 employment within the District.
•
[PAGE 1 OF 4]
Ord once
•
1 Section 2. That there be and there is hereby approved the creation of a
2 redevelopment district within the lands more particularly described in Exhibit "A",
3 attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference.
4 Section 3. That the name of the District shall be the "Little Rock
5 Redevelopment District No. ".
6 Section 4. That the City hereby establishes the Bass Pro Redevelopment
7 District No. Fund (the "Bass Pro Redevelopment District No. Tax Increment
8 Fund"). In the event the district's project plan and financing plan are subsequently
9 adopted by separate ordinances by the Board of Directors of the City of Little Rock, any
10 tax increment revenues and other revenues designated by the City for the benefit of the
11 district shall be deposited in the fund, and fro the fund all project costs shall be paid.
12 This special fund may be assigned to and held by a trustee for the benefit ofbond
13 holders if tax increment financing is used.
14 Section 5. That a project plan shall be prepared and adopted by Ordinance of
15 the City in conformance with Section 7 of the Act.
16 Section 6. The provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be
17 severable and, if any such provision shall for any reason be held illegal or invalid, such
18 holding shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Ordinance.
19 Section 7. All resolutions or ordinances and parts thereof in conflict herewith
20 are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict.
21 PASSED: APRIL 1, 2003
22 ATTEST: APPROVED:
23
24 I I 40akett4
25 Nan Wood City Clerk J. . •ailey, Mayor
26
27
[PAGE 2 OF 4]
Oldu 3nce
. S
1 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
2
• 3 �`�` ,......, /"A. 40
4 Thomas M. Carpenter,Cit§/Attorney
5 //
6 //
7 //
8 Il
9 //
10 //
11 //
12 //
13 //
14 //
15 //
16 //
17 //
18 //
19 //
20 //
21 //
22 //
23 II
24 //
25 //
26 //
27 //
28 //
29 //
[PAGE 3 OF 4]
o�aaW,«
• •
1 BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
2
3 Part of Section 4, Township 1 South, Range 13 West, Pulaski County, Arkansas, being more
4 particularly described as follows:
5 Starting at the Southwest corner of Section 4;thence North 01°18'10"East along the West line of said Section 4 a distance of 196.04
6 feet to the North right-of-way line of Otter Creek Road;thence continuing along said North right of way line South 81°55'24"East
7 244.74 feet;thence South 80°50'11"East along said North right of way line 65.97 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;thence North
8 13°01'40"East 625,55 feet;thence South 88°41'50"East 588.55 feet;thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 955.00 feet,an
9 arc distance of 269.42 feet and a chord which bears North 00°2T55'East 268.53 feet;thence North 07°37'00"West 31.88 feet;thence
10 North 88°41'50"West 564.89 feet; thence North 04°07'29"East 1044.75 feet;thence North 21 °10'15"East 164939 feet;thence South
11 86°11'19"East 460.69 feet;thence South 19°58'41"East 667.83 feet;thence along a curve to the right having a radius of 980.00 feet,an
12 arc distance of 258.53 feet and a chord which bears North 77°02'40"East 257.78 feet;thence North 00°45'40"West 212.66 feet;thence
13 North 56 99'40" East 257.59 feet;thence North 02°02'48"West 285.82 feet;thence North 44°14'04"East 208.63 feet to a point on the
14 North line of Lot I, said Section 4; thence South 87°25'30"East along the North line of said Lot 1 a distance of 476.02 feet to the
15 Southwest corner of Lot 3, said Section 4; thence North 00°45' 14"West along the West line of Lot 3 said Section 4 a distance of
16 983.36 feet to the West right-of-way line of Interstate 430; thence along said West right-of-way line to the following two(2)courses
17 and distances: 1)South 25°5025"East 200.97 feet;2)South 20°04'26 East 1424.80 feet to a point on the West right-of-way line of the
18 North frontage road of Interstate 30; thence along said West right-of-way line the following seven (7)courses and distances: I)
19 South 61°31'33" West 119.21 feet;2) thence South 29°18'02" West 256.48 feet;3)South 05°21'50" West 235.36 feet;4)thence South
20 13°50'13" East 595.82 feet;5)South 04°36'20"West 183.78 feet;6) thence South 23°46'56" West 186.23 feet;7)South 36°57'41"West
21 197,26 feet to a point on the West right-of-way line of Interstate 30;thence along said West right-of-way line the following two(2)
22 courses and distances: I)thence South 44°08'53"West 77.75 feet;2)thence South 43°45'54"West 1828.19 feet;thence North 46°09'42"
23 West 200.69 feet;thence South 44°15'59"West 143.51 feet to a point on the North right-of-way line of Otter Creek Road;thence along
24 said North right-of-way line the following twelve(12)courses and distances:1)North 46°30'30"West 196.59 feet;2)along a curve to
25 the left having a radius of 386.48 feet,an arc distance of 88.28 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 52°45'03"West 88.09
26 feet;3)South 01°04'20"West 132.44 feet;4)along a curve to the left having a radius of 505.00 feet,an arc distance of 505.59 feet and a
27 chord bearing and distance of South 72°40'41"West 484.74 feet;5)South 46°33'32"East 30.00 feet;6)South 57°19'01"West 71.59 feet;
28 7)South 70°49'03"West 1.92.33 feet;8)South 77°25'32"West 46.84 feet;9)South 72°53'09"West 36.70 feet;10)North 88°51'10"West
29 74.30 feet;11)North O1°08'50"East 16.37 feet;12)North 80°50'11"West 226.76 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING containing 176.413
30 acres,more or less.
31 //
32 //
33 1/
34 //
35 //
36 EXHIBIT A: Boundary Description of Proposed Redevelopment District
[PAGE 4 OF 4]
Ordinance
•
. ,
• ,
. .
I .
i )
• emer.....comenar.
Is NOR1H ow,at=vow 1-{-2.2-12-12 you nom rm.=coLony,wacomo
VW P211710L.M.
waseest am= .11 ..2 . 02.20a Areftclanivara.M2.0.1. el•C am it c oar
MIZIOI• • "71=0 rly...cFP
**AIL it-ts-ir
Ili.---- ' MN=
11101071.r•117..03 110 10Mr OF .. trwor o moot
•
.. lortX.5 CZ Wg•I'M 4,744241trtgrilAran.....v
R ''' ...fl Cr ar f caa.ar,.243ct V 2•0172•t Ma. imam snow z
to ••••I erwir C 4 .0 Vq•OE I 02Vni.I••
.
•'.- 1•00 a0.0 A 1000 Como 00 A ovvo wen. Imam 04=1,7 r
237.7S1 10110 II loVrat•212 04 laDoX in 1,112,0 C•17.00 Vaal V 0210,0 r Meal
VORX 1,1 assfve 2 21:6/01'Mar*NI-War C C•021.10M0 CM•TIone•awe oo fl......"(0,40, r 21rWO.Strffr•OrICO II zootV'E 204a7cirirr7nir•0rer" s wire:• t
•134 g" „,...,........„..,......,... ,....,,.12201X22rwar•2par,V2120
, . I ATM"•%aro moor s:or at.•ttrowtrl'Wax I 11177.1•■WI=II 04•174••
C. +.41110r.g...1.117W -
........„... 0ria1C Ileax I anWer•Nam%14022 2 6,121W•Misr IN haver al at 110.1.042
4 i a a
•• 0 MI 0 Min 0••••00 1•D*2 110.0•C1C*OR Cr SO'NC 011.100•2 00.2111 a 0+0.2o••11•01
...... ... =MIX*10 1111.07 HA.;l■Calm fl Maar rao Dow WAN.AND=lam ow
Mr MO OM OL • -
WON MIN MOO . . •-.............
entort000twr.4.1:soff7IV*71.1.1:evtooter ice'r otroN
=I Tr-c 1 frkiiiir 11 Wiglia II V+ Vn.0 er.401 I
. .•
.....••.... noNE it emir•a. to or row ow ammo;6sto•••MN AIM ON Lm
1 1 4
.1 • S,,' ....,....... . -----......
"'"......
*f*It.
....1.4:: 1 •
A.. • ,
AN, .. .....,,,,
....,
111011011,4 ;7.- ,, • ..•
a.
's---- ^-....
.'"---
" 1
1. `.1
ICS 1t/A PLOW PLAN LIS 1
I
I 1
. , .
r-0112. '.•• 1 FM
I 1 •
c i
■•• ,„••••••••'''..1 1 o"...."'........„
No• .....,
+ ‘• c
14. .
IN ,• • - ,,,• • , .
,..,, , 4
MO IVIIII.000 P
C LAN LAX
. trIPAO4Nr
. ''444 . ,• .4b. woe ‘ Ilk.
, 4...
J1 \
• % -
..e ,. • .. ' - <3 . ) i
• . . . . • , "At.„:).).,\\..
. .
. I • Loo........1L........
. .... ..
to,
. •/,..,
....„
..- . ,..I, ..........•....... .._ isofr•
1.•••• t
•
N's.. .
06°I
. .„.. .
NIN •I I I 1441 lif t
. a. ,00$ •4.,_ •
• ' 1114, _,„..
, •.. c • -vitt...4,c_„k.
./ _„„. • .
BASS PRO REDEVELOPMENT .DISTRICT o. .\Npppr._.....__,........._ _
•
°BOUNDARIES .
•
LITTLE: ROCK . ARKANSAS . ••
. . . •• . ... — •. .
•
. .
. AS ADOPTED APRIL 1 2003 .
. • .. • •
. . .
•
. . . •
. . • • . • • . .
. .
. •
• .
• . .
. •
. •
`s
ARKANSAS GAME&FrsH
F0UNDATI0N
0 217.0 ACRES
J f , e 25 LOT 24
&4 Ames L0T 23
7J ACRBB
OFFrCi:/COMMFI� -91
11 R
1.. o.o°AO,� LOT°,; 21,rs
t7ACR�I B{ OFFICE/ a°nc
a. , do& 10T4 ` V Ry J
LOT 33 I my L
ti , ACRES
�-", ``` i a40AT 1g\ ..N...-..EL,1 ,IV
C4` : �! ® LOrA 6
�. LITTLE TLE 1Oo
'- ��A ��.1' ��� � R�K. ,)ACRES q. LOT 17 LOT 4 * y OT y ,} LIB
,�� , RETA4
? ,:ore
tib i �� 'LOTAC., u LLOOT 13 Ames HOWL,
/ L0T1
` / 1E1•M a3 5
l0T7 r s'loom\ 2°AORE3 as 1� I rLah
SITE PLAN HWy "
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER `� `O V -� ` ROW
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS �.i' �3o1
Mc.GM�86TRQ NORTH
CNGItrMfR s-PLANIIdRS-SURVEYORS
F
1141°STAO C0AO1 ROAD SUITE 2108 THIS STE PLAN IS PRELIMINARY, AND SUBJECT TO
UTTLL ROCK,WARM."77210
P/1011E 301-45B-31911
0 •- CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE• USES WILL COMPLY WITH
DECEMBER 2013 1" - 600 A LAND USE REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK.
GATEWAY TC'N CENTER
Estimated Annual 1 ax Generation
06/30/2013
Annual Sales Tax Property
Parcel Use Sales Estimate City I County I State Tax 1 Jobs
1 Bank $0 $0 $0 $14,200 10
2 Restaurant 1,800,000 27,000 18,000 108,000 19,170 30
3 Restaurant 1,800,000 27,000 18,000 108,000 19,170 30
4 Bass Pro 45,000,000 * 675,000 450,000 2,700,000 213,000 250
5 Outlet Mall 65,000,000 * 975,000 650,000 3,900,000 646,100 650
6 Bank 0 0 0 28,400 6
7 Retail 8,000.000 120,000 80.000 480,000 24,676 30
8 Retail 2,500,000 37,500 25,000 150,000 8,443 15
9 Retail 3,500,000 52,500 35,000 210,000 10,392 15
10 Retail 3,500,000 52,500 35,000 210,000 10,392 15
11 Hotel 3,200,000 48,000 32,000 192,000 15,773 30
12 Hotel 3,200,000 48,000 32,000 192,000 13,454 30
v 13 Retail 1,500,000 22,500 15,000 90,000 6,754 6
14 Restaurant 2,000,000 30,000 20,000 120,000 12,525 35
15 Restaurant 2,000,000 30,000 20,000 120,000 10,438 35
16 Restaurant 2,000,000 30,000 20,000 120,000 12,525 35
17 Hotel 3,200,000 48,000 32,000 192,000 16,237 30
18 Commercial 0 0 0 0 8,486 15
19 Commercial 0 0 0 0 11,820 10
20 Commercial 0 0 0 0 6,668 10
21 Retail 5,000,000 75,000 50,000 300,000 15,587 20
22 Commercial 0 0 0 0 23,901 25
23 Commercial 0 0 0 0 12,470 20
24 Commercial 0 0 0 0 10,392 20
25 Commercial 0 0 0 0 10,500 25
26 Commercial 0 0 0 0 9,800 25
Total $153,200,000 $2,298,000 $1,532,000 $9,192,000 $1,191,270 1422
* Estimates of$260/S.F. to $300/S.F. per year.
LITTLE ROCK REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
(Gateway Town Center)
COST ESTIMATES
A. Proiect Costs (Supported by TIF Bond Issues)
1. Bass Pro Parkway —The spine parkway through Gateway Town Center begins
at the Otter Creek Road/I-30 interchange and ends at the I-30 frontage road.
This parkway is 4900 linear feet three lane street. This street provides the two
primary points of entrance to Gateway Town Center. Project costs include
clearing, grading, base, curb and gutter, asphalt, sidewalks, storm drainage,
electrical and fiber optic trenching, a transformer pad, street lights, seeding,
testing, and striping. $2,000,000
B. Developer Costs (Financed with Bank debt)
1. Gateway Town Center, Phase I — (Completed in 2010) Involved bringing
utilities (water, sewer, electrical) to the site and constructing approximately 300
feet of Bass Pro Parkway. $790,231.85
2. Bass Pro Drive & Lake #1 — Involved constructing Bass Pro Drive, a 950' long
two lane street beginning at Bass Pro Parkway and intersecting with the I-30
frontage road. Project also included sidewalks, street lights, and utilities.
Additionally, Lake #1 was improved such that it can serve at a detention facility
for Gateway Town Center and an amenity/fishing lake to be used by Bass Pro
Shop. Completed in 2013. $955,606
3. Bass Pro Parkway ROW Utilities/Maior Storm Drain - Storm Drainage, water,
sewer, engineering, utility conduits, testing, surveying Future $1,521,240
4. Gateway Loop — A 2100 foot long loop located between Bass Pro Parkway
and I-430. Includes water, sewer, storm drainage, sidewalks, street lights,
grading, base, curb and gutter, asphalt, clearing and seeding.
Future $1,033,673
5. Lake #2 — Excavation of eleven acre lake to used as a detention facility and
amenity. Future $1,461,000
8
A. PROJECT COSTS (SUPPORTED BY TIF BOND ISSUE)
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER
BASS PRO PARKWAY
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
NO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 SIDEWALK LF. 7800 15.75 122,850.00
1 2 CURB INLET EA. 36 2,850.00 102,600.00
3 18 RCP LF. 280 29.50 8,260.00
1 4 24" RCP LF. 790 40.00 31,600:00
5 36" RCP LF. 560 89.00 49,840.00
6 54" RCP LF. 1650 169.00 278,850.00
7 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 500 23.00 11,500.00
8 CURB & GUTTER LF. 7800 9.75 76,050.00
9 9" SB-2 SY. 15500 9.25 143,375.00
10 3" ASPHALT SY. 14500 15.00 217,500.00
11 BORROW CY. 22000 9.00 198,000.00
12 HC. RAMPS EA. 4 450.00 1,800.00
13 EROSION CONTROL LF. 3000 3.25 9,750.00
14 6"&2" CONDUIT/TRENCH LF. 4000 27.25 109,000.00
15 2" CONDUIT/TRENCH LF. 2800 17.50 49,000.00
16 TRANSFORMER PAD EA. 6 1 ,500.00 9,000.00
17 STREET LIGHTS EA. 35 2,800.00 98,000.00
18 UNDERCUT CY. 13000 5.00 65,000.00
19 SEEDING AC. 6 2,000.00 120,000.00
120 CLEARING AC. 8.0 3,000.00 24,000.00
21 TESTING LS. 1 40,000.00 40,000.00
22 STRIPING LS. 1 .5U,000.UU 30,000.00
SUBTOTAL STREET 1,795,975.00
8% ENGINEERING 150.146.00
3% STAKEOUT 53,879.00
TOTAL 2,000,000.00
1
9 1
PAGE 1
B. DEVELOPER COSTS
1 . GATEWAY TOWN CENTER PHASE 1
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
NO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
1 8" D.I. WATER LINE LF. 140 30.00 4,200.00
2 12" D.I. WATER LINE LF. 980 46.17 45,246.60
3 12" GV. EA. 1 2,450.00 2,450.06
4 8" GV EA. 1 1 ,200.00 1,200.00
5 12" X 16" TAP & GV. EA. 1 5,400.00 5,400.00
1 I 6 2" BO. EA. 2 1 ,400.00 2,800.00
7 BORE LF. 90 180.00 16,200.00
8 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 100 15.00 1,500.00
g FIRE HYDRANT EA. 2 3,400.00 6,800.00
10 FIELD CONNECTION EA. 1 1,280.00 1,280.00
11 TESTING LS. 1 5,000.00 5,000.00
SUBTOTAL WATER 92,076.60
1 8" PVC SEWER 0'-8' LF. 100 14.00 1,400.00
2 8" PVC SEWER 8'-10' LF. 1475 17.50 25,812.50
3 8" D.I. SEWER 0'-8' LF. 75 34.27 2,570.25
4 8" D.I. SEWER 8'-10' LF. 108 44.27 4,781.16
5 MANHOLE 0'-8' EA. 10 1 ,750.00 17,500.00
6 MANHOLE OVER 8' VF. 28 150.00 4,200.00
7 BEDDING CY. 400 16.00 6,400.00
8 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 100 11 .00 1 ,100.00
g 12" PVC SEWER 0'-8' LF. 553 21 .83 12,071.99
10 12" PVC SEWER 8'-10' LF. 75 26.83 2,012.25
11 12" DI SEWER 8'-10' LF. 830 47.17 39,151 .10
12 CONCRETE ENCASEMENItLF. 190 10.50 1 ,995.00
13 WATER TIGHT LIDS EA. 3 375.00 1,125.00
14 CLEARING LS. 1 4,000.00 I 4,000.00
15 TESTING LS. 1 111 ,000.00 I 11 ,000.00
I
SUBTOTAL SEWER ( 135,119.25
in I
t
PAGE 2
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER PHASE 1
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
NO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
1 SIDEWALK LF. 500 16.50 8,250.00
2 CURB INLET EA. 4 2,200.00 8,800.00
3 18" RCP LF. 70 45.00 3,150.00
4 24" RCP LF. 150 53.00 7,950.00 '
5 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 150 18.00 2,700.00
6 4" CONDUIT LF. 100 12.00 1,200.00
7 EXCAVATION CY. 1000 14.00 14,000.00
8 CURB & GUTTER LF. 1150 11 .00 12,650.00
9 10" SB-2 SY. 3200 10.00 32,000.00
10 6" ASPHALT BINDER SY. 3200 26.25 84.000.00
11 2" ASPHALT SY. 3200 8.50 27,200.00
12 BORROW CY. 4000 9.50 38,000.00
I 13 GATES EA. 2 400.00 800.00
' 14 HC. RAMPS EA. 4 450.00 1 ,800.00
15 EROSION CONTROL LF. 1000 10.00 10,000.00
16 4" CONDUIT/TRENCH LF. 1200 12.00 14,400.00
17 TRANSFORMER PAD EA. 2 3,000.00 6,000.00
18 TESTING LS. 1 11,000.00 11,000.00
SUBTOTAL STREET 283,900.00
'SUBTOTAL WATER 92,076.60
SUBTOTAL SEWER 135,119.25
ELECTRICAL 52,150.00
1 TRAFFIC SIGNAL 40,000.00
LANDSCAPE 45,550.00
1
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION 648,795.85
ENGINEERING 63,017.00
SURVEYING 25,206.00
CONTINGENCY / 53,213.00
DEVELOPMENT FEE
TOTAL PROJECT 11. 790,231.85
PAGE 1
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER
2. BASS PRO DRIVE & LAKE #1
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
INO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 SIDEWALK LF. 2020 I 15.50 31,310.00
2 CURB INLET EA. 6 I 2,700.00 16,200.00
3 JUCTION BOX EA. 2 I 3,150.00 6,300.00
4 18" RCP LF. 560 I 30.50 17,080.00
5 24" RCP LF. 220 38.90 8,558.00
6 36" RCP LF. 305 88.35 26,946.75
7 42" RCP I LF. 375 111.54 41.827.50
8 38"X60" RCP I LF. 250 186.30 46.575.00
9 43"X68" RCP LF. 90 220.00 19,800.00
10 18" RCP FES I EA. 1 325.00 325.00
11 38"X60" RCP FES I EA. 1 2,550.00 2,550.00
12 SELECT BACKFILL I CY. 200 23.80 4,760.00
13 CURB & GUTTER I LF. 2180 9.75 21.255.00
14 9" SB-2 I SY. 3800 9.50 35.100„00
15 3” ASPHALT I SY. 3800 13.85 52.630.00
16 EROSION CONTROL I LF. 3000 3.00 9,000.00
17 1 HC. RAMPS I EA. 4 450.00 1.800.00
18 EXCAVATION I CY. 2200 13.00 28,600.00
19 I SEEDING I AC. 1 1,700.00 1,700.00
20 I CLEARING I AC. I 2 3,600.00 7,200.00
21 I STRIPING I LS. 1 5,717.00 5,717.00
22 TESTING LS. I 1 25,000.00 25,000.00
23 CONC. ISLAND SF. ( 1100 4.20 4,620.00
24 6-6" & 2-2" CONDUIT LF. I 1500 30.28 45,420.00
25 PULL BOX EA. I 2 1,700.00 3,400.00
SUBTOTAL STREET 464,674.25
DEVELOPER COSTS PAGE 2
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER
BASS PRO DRIVE & LAKE #1
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
NO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL AMOUNT
1 8" D.I. WATER LINE LF. 860 30.00 25,800.00
2 12" D.I. WATER LINE LF. 900 57.75 51 ,975.00
3 12" GV. EA. 1 2,675.00 2,675.00
4 8" GV EA. 2 1,575.00 3,150.00 '
5 2" BO. EA. 2 1,400.00 2,800.00
6 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 100 23.00 2,300.00
7 FIRE HYDRANT EA. 2 4,400.00 8,800.00
8 FIELD CONNECTION EA. ' 1 6,375.00 6,375.00
9 TESTING LS. 1 7,000.00 7,000.00
SUBTOTAL WATER 110,875.00
1 8" PVC SEWER 8'-12' LF. 420 45.28 19,017.60
2 MANHOLE 0'-8' EA. 1 3,600.00 3,600.00
3 MANHOLE OVER 8' VF. 3 225.00 675.00
4 BEDDING CY. 100 25.00 2,500.00
5 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 50 25.00 1,250.00
6 TESTING LS. 1 1 ,000.00 1 ,000.00
SUBTOTAL SEWER 28,042.60
I 1 DETENTION STRUCTURE LS. I 1 9,850.00 9,850.00
2 38"X60" RCP LF. 450 186.30 83,835.00
3 43"X68" RCP FES FA ( 2 2,851.00 5,702.00
4 EXCAVATE POND LS. I 1 156,600.00 156,600.00
SUBTOTAL LAKE #1 I 255,987.00
SUBTOTAL WATER 110,875.00
SUBTOTAL SEWER 28,042.60
SUBTOTAL STREET 464,674.25
SUBTOTAL 859,578.85
8% ENGINEERING 70,239.78
3% STAKEOUT 25,787.37
TOTAL 955,606.00
11
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER
3, UTILITIES & PROJECT STORM DRAINAGE
BASS PRO PARKWAY
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
NO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 12" D.I. WATER LINE LF. 0 55.00 0.00
2 12" GV EA. 0 2.675.00 0.00
3 8" D.I. WATER LINE LF. 5160 35.00 180,600.00
4 8" GV EA. 14 2.100.00 29,400.00
5 2" BO. EA. 6 1 .450.00 8,700.00
6 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 200 7.100 4,600.00
7 FIRE HYDRANT EA. 9 a nnn nn 36,000.00
8 FIELD CONNECTION EA. 2 ann nn 7,800.00
9 TESTING LS. 1 15.000.00 15,000.00
SUBTOTAL WATER 282,100.00
1 8" PVC SEWER 0'-8' LF. 300 25.00 7,500.00
2 8" PVC SEWER 8'-12' LF. 2538 37.50 95,175.00
3 MANHOLE 0'-8' EA. 12 3,000.00 36,000.00
4 MANHOLE OVER 8' VF. 30 150.00 4.500.00
5 BEDDING CY. 500 23.00 11,500.00
6 SELECT BACKFILL CY. 300 25.00 7,500.00
7 TESTING LS. 1 13,000.00 13,000.00
SUBTOTAL SEWER 175,175.00
1 CURB INLET EA. 10 2,850.00 28,500.00
2 36" RCP LF. 1230 89.00 109,470.00
3 48" RCP LF. 1330 135.00 179,550.00
4 53"X83" RCP LF. 1040 225.00 234,000.00
SUBTOTAL DRAINAGE 551,520.00
SUBTOTAL WATER 282,100.00
SUBTOTAL SEWER 175,175.00
LANDSCAPE 100,000.00
SUBTOTAL I 1 ,108,795.00
CONTINGENCY 290,477.00
13% ENGINEERING I 88,703.60
13% STAKEOUT 1 33,263.85
TOTAL I 1 ,521,239.45
14
•
PAGE 1
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER
4. GATEWAY LOOP
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
NO. CONTRACT ITEM IUNIT QUANTITY I UNIT PRICE I CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 12" D.I. WATER LINE I LF. 0 I 55.00 I 0.00
2 12" GV I EA. 0 2.675.00 I 0.00
3 8" D.I. WATER LINE LF. 2200 I 35.00 77,000.00
4 8" GV EA. 1 I 2.100.00 I 2,100.00
5 2" BO. EA. 1 1.45n,nn I 1,450.00
6 SELECT BACKFILL I CY. 100 I 23 00 2,300.00
7 FIRE HYDRANT I EA. • 4 a nnn nn I 16,000.00
8 FIELD CONNECTION EA. 2 I onn nn I 7,800.00
g TESTING I LS. 1 I 5,000.00 5,000.00
I I I
I I
I I
SUBTOTAL WATER I I 111,650.00
I
I I
1 8" PVC SEWER 0'-8' I LF. 400 25.00 I 10,000.00
2 8" PVC SEWER 8'-12' LF. 800 37.50 I 30,000.00
ANHOI F 0'-R' I EA. 5 3.000.00 I ' 15.000.00
4 MANHnI F nVFR R' I VF. 10 15n on I 1,500.00
5 RFnnINC ICY. 200 23.00 I 4.60Q100
6 SFI FIST RACKFII I ICY. 150 2 nn 3.750.00
7 TESTING I LS. 1 3,000.00 I 3,000.00
8 I I
q
I I
I I
- � I
SUBTOTAL SEWER 67,850.00
I I
PAGE 2
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER
GATEWAY LOOP
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
NO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 SIDEWALK LF. 4200 15.75 66,150.00
2 CURB INLET EA. 8 2,850.00 22,800.00
3 18" RCP LF. 200 30.50 6,100.00
1 4 24" RCP LF. 760 40.00 30,400.00
5 36" RCP LF. 400 89.00 35,600.00
6 48" RCP LF. 0 135.00 0.00
7 54" RCP LF. 0 169.00 0.00
8 SELECT BACKFILL CY. • 150 23.00 3,450.00
9 CURB & GUTTER LF. 4200 9.75 40,950.00
10 7" SB-2 SY. 8100 9.25 74,925.00
11 3" ASPHALT SY. 8100 15.00 121,500.00
1 12 BORROW CY. 6000 9.00 54,000.00
13 HC. RAMPS EA. 0 450.00 0.00
14 EROSION CONTROL LF. 7nnn 3.25 6,500.00
15 4" CONDUIT/TRENCH LF. 20Q0 20.00 40,000.00
16 TRANSFORMER PAD EA. 6 1 ,500.00 9,000.00
17 STREET LIGHTS EA. 18 2,800.00 50,400.00
18 UNDERCUT CY. 3000 5.00 15,000.00
19 DETENTION LS. 0 40,000.00 0.00
20 SEEDING AC. 2 2.000.00 4.000.00
21 CLEARING AC. 3 3,000.00 9,000.00
22 TESTING LS. 1 20,000.00 20,000.00
23 STRIPING LS. 1 15,000.00 15,000.00
SUBTOTAL STREET 624,775.00
SUBTOTAL WATER 111,650.00
SUBTOTAL SEWER 67,850.00
LANDSCAPE 50,000.00
SUBTOTAL 854,275.00
10% CONTINGENCY 85,427.50
. 8% ENGINEERING 68,342.00
3% STAKEOUT 25,628.25
TOTAL 1,033,672.75
16
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER
5. LAKE # 2
ESTIMATE
DATE: AUGUST, 2013
1NO. CONTRACT ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE CONTRACT AMOUNT
1 CLEARING AC. 35 2,500.00 87,500.00
2 EXCAVATION CY. 220,000 4.00 880,000.00
3 UNDERCUT CY. 35,000 5.00 175,000.CS0
I 4 DETENTION LS. 1 25,000.00 25,000.00
5 LANDSCAPE LS. 1 50,000.00 50,000.00
SUBTOTAL LAKE #2 1,217,500.00
I 10% CONTIGENCY 121,750.00
I 8% ENGINEERING 97,400.00
I 2% STAKEOUT 24,350.00
TOTAL 1,461,000.00
17
Allocation of Costs
Project TIF Private
A $2,000,000
B-1 $ 790,232
B-2 $ 955,606
B-3 $1,521,240
B-4 $1,033,673
B-5 $11461,000
Total $2,000,000 $5,761,751
18
Certification of Pulaski County Assessor
1
1
19
CERTIFICATION OF THE PULASKI COUNTY ASSESSOR
To: Pulaski County Clerk
From: Pulaski County Assessor
Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. Section 14-168-311, the Pulaski County Assessor certifies
to the Pulaski County Clerk as follows:
1. Name of Redevelopment District: Redevelopment District No. 1 of the City of
Little Rock, Arkansas.
2. Effective date of creation of Redevelopment District: April 1, 2003.
3. The proposed redevelopment district lies within the following taxing units:
(a) City of Little Rock, Arkansas; and (b) Pulaski County.
Base Value of the District: $1 ,280,440
Total Ad Valorem Rate of the District: 70.1 mills
Debt Service and Exempt Ad Valorem Rate for the District:
Little Rock School District M&O 25 mills
Little Rock School District Debt Service 12.4 mills
Little Rock Bond and Interest 3 mills
Little Rock Police Pension 1 mill
Little Rock Fire Pension 1 mill
Little Rock Library 3.3 mills
City of Little Rock Capital Improvements 1 .9 mills
Pulaski County Hospital (Children's) .6 mills
Applicable Ad Valorem Rate for the District:
Little Rock School District 9 mills
City of Little Rock 5 mills
City of Little Rock Roads 1.45 mills
Pulaski County General 5 mills
Pulaski County Roads 1 .45 mills
The undersigned Pulaski County Assessor further certifies that she has undertaken an
investigation, examination and inspection of the Taxable Real Property in the District
and amends the base value as previously certified. This base value is the full
aggregate value of the taxable property in the District.
This amended certification is made this 25th day of November, 2013 for the 2003
Redevelopment District No. 1 of the City_of Little Rock, Arkansas.
D-
Janet Troutman Ward
Pulaski County Assessor
Attachments: TIF District ParcelsNalues
558181v2
Existing Land Use & Zoning
20
I
ARKANSAS GAME&FISH
FOUNDATION
2120 ACRES
%,.,-.1. .zias it , -."......�,,
ZONING C-4
v..... i.r1r
1 ``�� r
y
✓ !r1 107 �.+"l
I r�$ LOT 4 I
' r Bass Pao 1.
I 1077
•
L\
•
\\_., a ,p ilk 4,k~
\ Yl^
s.
ZONING C-4 ---Th
%4'j%' %`7
"4:424'-‘\.,
N.
\
N. I—
EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING ...
GATEWAY TOWN CENTER -
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS `'"''��� •,,
Hwy -
�,, �� A3U,
Jc tT C(& Mc�TD� „o�w�
LNtI(�tRS-PLANN r—R5—SURVGYORS
NORTH
11410 STAlSOOAa Roan SATE 2100 r
U I E ROGC ARKANSAS 72210 (;-;;
PHONE 101-4.55-8000 .
AUGUST.2017 `' - ,•
1 = 600'
Draft of Ordinance
Approving Project Plan
21
1 ORDINANCE NO.
2
3 AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT A PROJECT PLAN FOR
4 REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 (BASS PRO) OF THE CITY OF
5 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS; TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY; AND
6 FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
7
8 WHEREAS,the Board of Directors created Little Rock Redevelopment District No. 1 ("the District")
9 pursuant to Little Rock,Ark.,Ordinance 18,849 (April 1,2003),under the Constitution and statutes of the
10 State of Arkansas, including particularly Amendment 78 to the Constitution of the State of Arkansas
11 ("Amendment 78"),and Ark.Code Ann. §§ 14-68-301 to-324(West 2004 and West Supp.2013)(generally,
12 "the Act"),as may be amended; and,
13 WHEREAS,it has been determined that there is a great need for a source revenue to finance the costs
14 of acquisition,construction,and equipping of certain capital improvements of a public nature as defined in
15 the Act("the Project"),within the boundaries of the District; and,
16 WHEREAS, the City is authorized and empowered under the provisions of Amendment 78 and the
17 Act to issue and sell its bonds to finance the costs of capital improvements of a public nature within the
18 District such as those comprising the Project, which bonds are to be secured and payable from the ad
19 valorem tax increment described in and authorized by the Act; and,
20 WHEREAS, prior to the issuance of any such indebtedness, the Act requires the City Board of
21 Directors to adopt a project plan with respect to the District and any proposed amendments to the plan;and,
22 WHEREAS,the capital improvements of a public nature,which are shown in a project plan conform-
23 ing to the requirements of the Act, had to be guaranteed prior to the construction of the Bass Pro facility
24 located within the District and was deemed an essential aspect of the redevelopment of the area or such a
25 facility would not be so located; and,
26 WHEREAS, on November 15, 2013, prior to notice being published in the local newspaper, corre-
27 spondence was sent by first class mail to the chief executive officers of all local governmental and taxing
28 entities having the power to levy taxes on the property within the District that the Project had been planned
29 and would be considered at a public hearing before the Board of Directors on December 17, 2013, in ac-
30 cordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 14-168-306(e)(2)(B)(West Supp. 2013); and,
31 WHEREAS,on November 22,2013,notice of the public hearing was first published in an appropriate
32 newspaper in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 14-168-306 (e)(2)(A) (West Supp. 2013), and was also
33 published on the City website; and,
[Pagel of 3]
1 WHEREAS,pursuant to Little Rock, Ark., Resolution No. 13,813 (December 3,2013),the Board of
2 Directors formally set a public hearing for December 17,2013,to consider and approve the Project pursuant
3 to the requirements of Ark. Code Ann. § 14-168-306(West Supp. 2013); and,
4 WHEREAS,at the conclusion of the public hearing the Board of Directors finds the Project acceptable
5 and formally approves it;
6 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY
7 OF LITTLE ROCK,ARKANSAS;
8 Section 1. Reaffirmation of Creation of the District and Improvements.
9 (a) The finding that the parcels of property within the District prior to the time it was formed
10 substantially impaired and arrested City growth due to the absence of necessary infrastructure and
11 other site improvements is reaffirmed; and,
12 (b) Based upon assurances that such improvements as those set forth in the Project would be
13 made in accordance with the Act a facility has located within the District;and,
14 (c) The completion of these improvements will benefit the real property within the District and
15 encourage growth in commerce,industry, and employment.
16 Section 2. It is hereby found that the District's project plan in the form attached to this ordinance as
17 Exhibit A ("the Project Plan"), is economically feasible, conforms to the requirements of the Act, and is
18 accordingly adopted and approved pursuant to the authority granted in Amendment 78 and the Act.
19 Section 3. Severability. In the event any title, section, paragraph, item, sentence, clause, phrase, or
20 word of this ordinance is declared or adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such declaration or adjudi-
21 cation shall not affect the remaining portions of the resolution which shall remain in full force and effect as
22 if the portion so declared or adjudged invalid or unconstitutional was not originally a part of the resolution.
23 Section 4. Repealer. The provisions of all laws and parts of laws, franchises, and contracts, incon-
24 sistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency and the
25 language of this ordinance is amended and substituted,or added to,any such law, franchise, or contract as
26 if originally a part of the same.
27 Section 6. Emergency. The ability to provide necessary infrastructure within the City to facilitate and
28 maintain the construction offacilities such as the Bass Pro facility, and the need to provide additional such
29 infrastructure within a redevelopment district to promote further growth is essential to the public health,
30 safety, and welfare of the citizens; and emergency is, therefore, declared to exist and this ordinance shall
31 be in full force and effect from and after the date of its passage.
32 PASSED: December 17,2013
33
34
[Page 2 of 3]
1 ATTEST: APPROVED:
2
3
4 Susan Langley,City Clerk Mark Stodola,Mayor
5 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
6
7
8 Thomas M. Carpenter,City Attorney
9 //
10 //
11 //
12 //
13 //
14 //
15 //
16 //
17 //
18 //
19 //
20 //
21 //
22 //
23 //
24 //
25 //
26 //
27 //
28 //
29 //
30 //
31 //
32 //
33 //
34 //
35 //
[Page 3 of 3]
EXHIBIT I
Economic Analysis
UAINSTITUTE FOR
J ECONOMIC ADVANCEMENT
Tax Increment Financing for the Bass Pro and Gateway Town Center Development Project:
A Feasibility Report by the Institute for Economic Advancement
• Prepared by Michael Pakko with the assistance of Vaughn Wingfield*
November 2013
Background:
The Institute for Economic Advancement(IEA)was retained by The Hodges Group, a real estate
development company("the Developer")to conduct a feasibility study for a proposed Tax
Increment Financing(TIF) development. The development in question is within an established
redevelopment district("the District") created by the City of Little Rock in 2003, consisting of
176.4 acres adjacent to the I-30/1-430 interchange (Ordinance No. 18,849).
The District was formed pursuant to Amendment 78 of the Arkansas Constitution and Act 1197
of 2001. Act 2231 (enacted in 2005)modified some provisions of Act 1197, including a
provision that the project plan shall include "An economic analysis prepared by a third party
independent of the local governing body that shall include the projected aggregate tax impact, if
any,to taxing units as a result of the creation of the redevelopment district."
The development plan to be considered includes three phases. The first is the construction of a
Bass Pro Shop retail outlet, comprising approximately 102,000 square feet on a 29.3 acre lot
which includes parking and a small lake. The Bass Pro Shop is expected to be completed by the
end of 2013. It will be assessed in 2014 with taxes payable in 2015. The second phase of
development is the Gateway Town Center("the Outlet Mall")that will include 325,000 square
feet of retail space on a lot covering 33.1 acres. The third phase of development includes a
number of retail/office/commercial properties adjacent to the Bass Pro Shop and Outlet Mall.
The third phase is expected to be completed over time. For the purposes of this analysis we
consider only the tax increments attributable to the Bass Pro Shop and the Outlet Mall
developments.
Methodology:
Current property tax rate for the district$70.10 per thousand dollars (70.1 mills). However, the
legislation governing Development Districts specifies that TIF financing cannot utilize property
taxes for libraries, fireman's relief and pension funds,policeman's relief and pension funds, and
any taxes levied for hospitals owned and operated by the county. Available TIF funding also
excludes levies that are expressly devoted to debt service. In addition,Amendment 74 to the
Arkansas constitution requires that a minimum of 25 mills be paid to the local school district.
*Dr.Michael Pakko is Chief Economist and State Economic Forecaster;Vaughn Wingfield is Associate Research
Specialist at the Institute for Economic Advancement.
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK
2801 South University Avenue • Little Rock,AR 72204-1099
0 (501)569.8519 • F(501)569.8538 • iea.ualr.edu
The Little Rock School District(LRSD) currently assesses a tax of 46.4 mills with an operating
levy of 34 mills and a debt service levy of 12.4 mills.1 After excluding the minimum 25 mills and
debt service of 12.4 mills, only 9.0 mills remain available for Tax Increment Financing. In total,
the only millage funds proposed to be used for the TIF district are Pulaski County General(5.0
mills), Pulaski County Road Fund(1.45 mills), Little Rock General (5.0 mills), Little Rock Road
Fund(1.45 mills), and the Little Rock School District component(9.0 mills)—a total of 21.9
mills.
For initial estimates of property values, IEA researchers explored two alternative methodologies:
A. Method A: IEA researchers reviewed a sample of tax appraisals from the Pulaski County
Assessor's office for similar retail establishments.2 Average values from this comparison
were used to establish a baseline appraisal formula that valued land at$480,000 per acre
and retail space at$45/square foot. Application of this formula yields estimates for
appraised values of$18,654,000 for the Bass Pro Shop and$30,513,000 for the Outlet
Ma11.3
B. Method B: Consultation with officials at the Pulaski County Assessor's office suggested a
simple alternative formula for current valuation: $100 per square foot of retail space in
the Bass Pro Shop and$117 per square foot for the Outlet Mall—inclusive of land value.
This formula yields assessments of$10,200,000 for the Bass Pro Shop and $38,025,000.
The total valuation for the two properties under Method A is $49,167,000 while the total
valuation using Method B is $48,225,000. Although these two figures are very similar,the
allocation of value between the two properties differs under the two methods.4 Because the
anticipated completion dates for the Bass Pro Shop and the Outlet Mall differ, the allocation of
value matters for present-value calculations. Accordingly, we calculate present values using both
methods for comparison.
In order to estimate assessed values and taxes into the future, it is necessary to project an
expected rate of appreciation. A reasonable approach would be to extrapolate from past trends;
however, recent events have complicated the evaluation of simple trends. Before the recession
of 2008-09, it was not uncommon to see retail property values increasing at rates of 7 to 8%per
year, on average. However, since the recession we have seen property values decline in the
range of 10 to 20%. We consider the pre-recession rates of increase to be exaggerated
(especially in light of subsequent declines). Going forward, we use a conservative estimate of
4%annual appreciation—approximately 2% due to inflation and 2% due to increases in real
value (roughly commensurate with long-run real economic growth).
1 Little Rock School District Annual Financial Report,June 20, 2012.
'The sample of comparable retailers included JC Penney,Target, Best Buy and Kohls as stand-alone retailers, along
with the Promenade at Shopping Center and the Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center. These properties share the basic
characteristics of the proposed Development—large retail facilities with accompanying parking lots.
3 The Bass Pro Shop will have 102 square feet of retail space on 29.3 acres of land. The Outlet Mall will have 325
square feet of retail space on 33.1 acres.
4 The total valuation using Method B is only 1.9%lower than that using Method A.
- 2 -
To convert nominal values for future years into present values, a discount rate of 5.5%is
assumed(the expected bond financing rate). The project can be considered feasible if the total
net present value of taxes diverted into the TIF fund is sufficient to cover principal, interest and
origination fees on an initial issuance of development bonds totaling $2,690,000.5
Feasibility Calculations:
The results of the present value calculations using assessment Methods A and B are summarized
in Tables 1A and 1B.
Table 1 A shows the valuations using Method A. The first two columns show the tax year and
the year that taxes are due. Taxes will not be owed and the TIF fund will not begin to
accumulate until 2015. For the purposes of calculating present values, tax year 2014(with tax
payable in 2015) is considered to be year one. Column(c) shows the appraised values based on
our model of property values and our assumption of a 4.0%rate of appreciation over time. To
simplify the presentation and to err on the conservative side, no appreciation is assumed to take
place until year 3. Under Arkansas law,taxes are only assessed on a tax base of 20% of
appraised value–shown in column(d). Column(e) shows the potential total tax liability in the
absence of a TIF arrangement,while column(f) shows the portion of the total tax bill that is
planned to finance the TIF fund. (The difference between these two columns shows the total
increase in revenue to the taxing units that will receive the full increment in revenue.) Column
(g) simply subtracts the current property taxes to derive the tax increment that is available to
fund the TIF district.6 Column(h) subtracts a 3%tax collection fee assessed by the county.
Finally, column(i) calculates the present value of the funds available to fund the TIF district,
using a discount rate of 5.5%. The total present value (PV) for the 23-year life of the TIF fund is
$3.641 million—comfortably above the $2.69 million feasibility requirement.
Table 1B reports the same calculations using assessment Method B. Because this method places
a relatively higher value on the property that will be completed later(the Outlet Mall), the
present value calculations amplify the differences in initial value between Methods A and B:
Total present value for method B is $3.539 million—about 2.8% lower than the Method A
calculation. Nevertheless,the total remains well above the feasibility threshold.
Sensitivity Analysis:
Given the calculations in Tables 1A and 1B, the proposed TIF fund is sufficient to cover bond
financing and repayment. Embedded in those estimates, however, are some critical assumptions
that are subject to uncertainty. The most uncertain element is the projected rate of appreciation
5 According to the Developer's plans,the project construction fund will be allocated$2.0 million. Other
components of the total bond issuance include$87,500 for costs of issuance, $269,000 for deposit to a Debt
Service Reserve Fund (DSRF), and$332,887.50 deposit to a Capitalized Interest Fund (CIF).
6 The tax increment calculation is only relevant for the particular taxes that are to be used for TIF financing.
Consequently,the amount subtracted from column(f)to produce the Tax Increment in column (g) reflects only
those taxes that are included in the proposal (which total 21.9 mills). The current tax liability(tax year 2012)for
this subset of taxing units is only$103.
- 3 -
over time. The baseline estimates assume an appreciation rate of 4.0%. Suppose instead that
property values stagnate, showing no net appreciation over the next two decades.? In this event,
the total present value accruing to the TIF district falls to $2.484 million using the more
conservative valuation method B.8 Even under this bleak scenario,the total present value
available for TIF financing falls only slightly short of the $2.69 million cost of finance. Given the
other assumptions of the analysis, the break-even point required for the appreciation rate is only
0.96%—a growth rate less than half of the assumed rate of inflation.
A second critical assumption is the initial assessed value for the properties. Suppose that the
estimates are overstated by as much as 20%. In this case, the total present value of TIF financing
available would be $2.831 million(using valuation method B)—still in excess of the feasibility
point. And given the close correspondence between the two alternative methods of valuation, it is
unlikely that any underestimation would approach such a magnitude.
These"stress tests" suggest that the initial feasibility conclusion is robust. Projected taxes diverted
into the TIF fund are more than adequate to support the repayment of the proposed bond issuance.
Impact on Taxing Districts:
Table 2 decomposes total potential property taxes (at 70.1 mills) into those that will be diverted
into the TIF fund(21.9 mills) and those that will accrue to taxing units (48.2 mills). To simplify
the calculations, the figures in Table 2 reflect gross total taxes (without the 3%tax collection fee
deducted and without subtracting the current tax liability). If there were no TIF district,the total
present value of property taxes would be nearly$11.7 million over the 23 year lifetime of the
TIF project. Of that total,the TIF proposal envisions nearly $3.65 million being diverted to
infrastructure construction projects while more than $8.0 million would be paid to taxing units.
Table 3 shows the specific taxing units and how their potential tax receipts would be impacted by
the TIF development. The first section of the table lists the taxing units for which taxes will be
diverted into the TIF fund. The percentages in the far right column refer to column(d) in Table
2. So, for example, of the $44,676 diverted to the TIF fund in tax year 2014, 22.8% comes from
each of the Pulaski County and Little Rock general funds, amounting to $10,200 for each of
these taxing units. The second section of the Table 3 shows taxes that will be paid to particular
taxing units—corresponding to the totals in column(e) of Table 2.
Because taxes to the Little Rock School District taxes will be partly diverted into the TIF fund
and partly paid to the taxing unit, it is included in both lists. Of the $11.7 million present value
of total potential taxes, $1.50 million will be diverted from LRSD into the TIF fund(41.1%of
$3.649 million), while $6.23 million will flow to the LRSD general operating and debt service
funds (77.6%of$8.032 million).
Note that with an assumed inflation rate of 2%,the real value of the properties would be declining over time.
8 Under valuation method A,the zero-appreciation scenario remains within the limits of feasibility,with a total
present value of$2.788 million.
- 4 -
Other Tax Impacts:
In addition to the impact on local taxing units of changes in property tax assessments,the
Development will have an impact on sales tax receipts. Quantifying the net impact of this effect
on state and local tax revenue is necessarily tentative due to a lack of specific data.
The Developer projects estimates of total annual sales to be $45 million for the Bass Pro Shop
and$65 million for the Outlet Mall. At face value,these figures suggest annual sales tax receipts
of$7.15 million for the State of Arkansas, $1.1 million for Pulaski County, and $1.65 million for
the City of Little Rock(in current dollars).9 However, the net impact is likely to be considerably
smaller: A large share of total sales is likely to comprise local demand-diversion, particularly at
the state level.
According to figures from IMPLAN, the export-ratio for non-gas station retail sales in Arkansas
is 9%.10 Using this figure as a benchmark for the proportion of total tax revenue captured or re-
captured from other states, the net impact of the Development on annual state sales tax revenue
would be approximately$645,000.
For the county and the city,the local capture-ratio is likely to be considerably higher: sales at the
Development will undoubtedly generate exports so surrounding counties within Arkansas as well
as outside of the state. IMPLAN retail export ratios for Pulaski County(non-gas station) average
34%. Applying this percentage to the gross tax receipt figures, we obtain estimates for net
annual tax receipts of$374,000 for Pulaski County and $561,000 for the City of Little Rock.11
Even if the true county export ratio is as low as 10%, sales tax receipts by the city and county
would be far in excess of the property taxes diverted from those taxing units to the TIF fund.
One further aspect of sales and use taxation should be considered: internet sales. Presently, Bass
Pro Shop has no physical locations in Arkansas, so it is not required to collect sales tax on
internet orders. Consumers are required to report and pay taxes on such sales individually, but
compliance is generally considered to be very low. After the establishment of a"substantial
nexus" in the state, Bass Pro Shop (and possibly other tenants of the Outlet Mall), will be
obligated to collect sales tax on catalogue and internet purchases. In the absence of company
data on internet sales in Arkansas, it is difficult to assess the magnitude of this tax capture, but it
is clearly an additional channel of revenue for state and local governments.
9 These figures are directly calculated using current tax rates of 6.5%for the state, 1.0%for the county, and 1.5%
for the city.
o IMPLAN is an input-output model used to assess local economic impact. It utilizes detailed industry data that
can be used to measure inter-regional and inter-industry resource flows.The export-ratio is calculated as domestic
exports relative to total output for the State of Arkansas(2011 IMPLAN data).
11 One factor that suggests these figures may be somewhat overstated is the statutory ceiling on local option sales
and use taxes. In particular,the taxable value of watercraft is capped to apply only to the first$2,500 of a
purchase. To the extent that sales of watercraft constitute a significant proportion of Bass Pro Shop sales,this
limitation will reduce total tax revenue for the city and county.
- 5 -
Table 1A: Tax Increment Financing Values for Bass Pro Shop and Outlet Mall
(Valuation Method A) Assumed appreciation: 4.0%
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)
Total Available
Assessed Potential to TIF Less 3% Present
Tax Tax Appraised Value Tax Fund Tax collection Value
year Payable Value (20%) (.0701) (.0219) Increment fee (@5.5%)
2014 2015 18,654,000 3,730,800 261,529 81,705 81,601 79,153 75,027
2015 2016 49,167,000 9,833,400 689,321 215,351 215,248 208,791 187,589
2016 2017 51,133,680 10,226,736 716,894 223,966 223,862 217,147 184,925
2017 2018 53,179,027 10,635,805 745,570 232,924 232,821 225,836 182,299
2018 2019 55,306,188 11,061,238 775,393 242,241 242,138 234,874 179,710
2019 2020 57,518,436 11,503,687 806,408 251,931 251,828 244,273 177,158
2020 2021 59,819,173 11,963,835 838,665 262,008 261,905 254,048 174,642
2021 2022 62,211,940 12,442,388 872,211 272,488 272,385 264,214 172,161
2022 2023 64,700,418 12,940,084 907,100 283,388 283,285 274,786 169,716
2023 2024 67,288,435 13,457,687 943,384 294,723 294,620 285,782 167,305
2024 2025 69,979,972 13,995,994 981,119 306,512 306,409 297,217 164,929
2025 2026 72,779,171 14,555,834 1,020,364 318,773 318,670 309,110 162,586
2026 2027 75,690,338 15,138,068 1,061,179 331,524 331,421 321,478 160,276
2027 2028 78,717,951 15,743,590 1,103,626 344,785 344,682 334,341 157,999
2028 2029 81,866,669 16,373,334 1,147,771 358,576 358,473 347,719 155,755
2029 2030 85,141,336 17,028,267 1,193,682 372,919 372,816 361,632 153,542
2030 2031 88,546,989 17,709,398 1,241,429 387,836 387,733 376,101 151,360
2031 2032 92,088,869 18,417,774 1,291,086 403,349 403,246 391,149 149,210
2032 2033 95,772,424 19,154,485 1,342,729 419,483 419,380 406,799 147,090
2033 2034 99,603,321 19,920,664 1,396,439 436,263 436,159 423,075 145,000
2034 2035 103,587,453 20,717,491 1,452,296 453,713 453,610 440,002 142,940
2035 2036 107,730,952 21,546,190 1,510,388 471,862 471,758 457,606 140,909
2036 2037 112,040,190 22,408,038 1,570,803 490,736 490,633 475,914 138,906
Total PV Accruing to TIF District: 3,641,034
- 6 -
Table 1B: Tax Increment Financing Values for Bass Pro Shop and Outlet Mall
(Valuation Method B) Assumed appreciation:4.0%
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)
Total Available
Assessed Potential to TIF Less 3% Present
Tax Tax Appraised Value Tax Fund Tax collection Value
year Payable Value (20%) (.0701) (.0219) Increment fee (@5.5%)
2014 2015 10,200,000 2,040,000 143,004 44,676 44,573 43,236 40,982
2015 2016 48,225,000 9,645,000 676,115 211,226 211,122 204,789 183,993
2016 2017 50,154,000 10,030,800 703,159 219,675 219,571 212,984 181,380
2017 2018 52,160,160 10,432,032 731,285 228,462 228,358 221,508 178,805
2018 2019 54,246,566 10,849,313 760,537 237,600 237,497 230,372 176,266
2019 2020 56,416,429 11,283,286 790,958 247,104 247,001 239,591 173,762
2020 2021 58,673,086 11,734,617 822,597 256,988 256,885 249,178 171,294
2021 2022 61,020,010 12,204,002 855,501 267,268 267,165 259,150 168,862
2022 2023 63,460,810 12,692,162 889,721 277,958 277,855 269,520 166,463
2023 2024 65,999,242 13,199,848 925,309 289,077 288,974 280,304 164,099
2024 2025 68,639,212 13,727,842 962,322 300,640 300,537 291,521 161,768
2025 2026 71,384,781 14,276,956 1,000,815 312,665 312,562 303,185 159,470
2026 2027 74,240,172 14,848,034 1,040,847 325,172 325,069 315,317 157,205
2027 2028 77,209,779 15,441,956 1,082,481 338,179 338,076 327,933 154,971
2028 2029 80,298,170 16,059,634 1,125,780 351,706 351,603 341,055 152,770
2029 2030 83,510,097 16,702,019 1,170,812 365,774 365,671 354,701 150,599
2030 2031 86,850,501 17,370,100 1,217,644 380,405 380,302 368,893 148,460
2031 2032 90,324,521 18,064,904 1,266,350 395,621 395,518 383,653 146,350
2032 2033 93,937,501 18,787,500 1,317,004 411,446 411,343 399,003 144,271
2033 2034 97,695,001 19,539,000 1,369,684 427,904 427,801 414,967 142,221
2034 2035 101,602,802 20,320,560 1,424,471 445,020 444,917 431,570 140,200
2035 2036 105,666,914 21,133,383 1,481,450 462,821 462,718 448,836 138,208
2036 2037 109,893,590 21,978,718 1,540,708 481,334 481,231 466,794 136,244
Total PV Accruing to TIF District: 3,538,644
- 7 -
Table 2: Aggregate Impact on Taxing Districts
(Valuation Method B) Assumed appreciation: 4.0%
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Total Available to Paid to
Tax Potential Tax TIF Fund Taxing Units
Tax year Payable (0.0701) (.0219) (.0482)
2014 2015 143,004 44,676 98,328
2015 2016 676,115 211,226 464,889
2016 2017 703,159 219,675 483,485
2017 2018 731,285 228,462 502,824
2018 2019 760,537 237,600 522,937
2019 2020 790,958 247,104 543,854
2020 2021 822,597 256,988 565,609
2021 2022 855,501 267,268 588,233
2022 2023 889,721 277,958 611,762
2023 2024 925,309 289,077 636,233
2024 2025 962,322 300,640 661,682
2025 2026 1,000,815 312,665 688,149
2026 2027 1,040,847 325,172 715,675
2027 2028 1,082,481 338,179 744,302
2028 2029 1,125,780 351,706 774,074
2029 2030 1,170,812 365,774 805,037
2030 2031 1,217,644 380,405 837,239
2031 2032 1,266,350 395,621 870,728
2032 2033 1,317,004 411,446 905,558
2033 2034 1,369,684 427,904 941,780
2034 2035 1,424,471 445,020 979,451
2035 2036 1,481,450 462,821 1,018,629
2036 2037 1,540,708 481,334 1,059,374
Total Present
Values: 11,681,456 3,649,413 8,032,042
- 8 -
Table 3: Taxes Diverted and Paid
Percent of
Mills total
Taxes Diverted to TIF Fund
Pulaski County General Fund 5.00 22.8%
1 Pulaski County Road Fund 1.45 6.6%
Little Rock General Fund 5.00 22.8%
Little Rock Road Fund 1.45 6.6%
Little Rock School District 9.00 41.1%
TOTAL 21.90 100.0%
Taxes Paid to Taxing Units
Childrens Hospital 0.60 1.2%
Little Rock Bond and Interest 3.00 6.2%
Little Rock Library 3.30 6.8%
Little Rock Capital Improvement 1.90 3.9%
Little Rock Police Pension 1.00 2.1%
Little Rock Firemens Pension 1.00 2.1%
Little Rock School District 37.40 77.6%
TOTAL 48.20 100.00%
- 9 -