RoofPlate 01
Roof Plan
- Rooftop mechanical screened to building edge
FIRA · North ScottsdaleUnbound Collection · Hyatt
MMXXVI · Confidential · Institutional Materials
Performance,byDesign.
FIRA — a 140-key boutique hotel on the Sonoran edge. Engineered for performance; designed for demand. Underwritten to $12.8–13.0M stabilized NOI and a $200–210M exit.
BeginFIRAPerformance, by Design.
Cover · MMXXVIScroll —140 Keys · 4 Levels · 1.7 Acres
Investment Summary
Financial Spine
A scarcity asset,
institutional underwriting.
FIRA is underwritten to a stabilized revenue profile of ~$28M–$30M, generating ~$12.9M of NOI at an 11.9% yield on cost — supporting a stabilized exit valuation of $172M at a 7.50% market-supported cap rate.
$108.2M
Total Development Cost
$28–30M
Stabilized Revenue
$12.9M
Stabilized NOI
11.9%
Yield on Cost
$172M
Stabilized Exit Value
$1.23M / key
Exit Basis
Value Creation Logic
- Revenue
- $22.0M → $30.0M
- NOI (40–45% flow-through)
- $7.0M → $12.9M
- Exit Cap
- 7.50%
- Stabilized Exit Value
- $172M
Incremental Value Transition
+$8.0M
Revenue
+$5.9M
NOI
+$67M
Asset Value
Revenue expansion driven by programmatic design and pricing power converts to NOI through operating leverage — directly supporting the institutional exit.
Underwriting
Discipline across every assumption.
Revenue Assumptions
- ADR (blended stabilized)
- ~$600
- Peak ADR
- $900 – $1,200
- Occupancy
- 65 – 68%
- Non-room revenue
- ~40%+
Operating Performance
- EBITDA Margin
- 38 – 40%
- NOI Margin
- ~48 – 50%
- Flow-through
- 40 – 45%
Exit Assumptions
- Exit Cap
- 7.50%
- Cost Basis
- $773K / key
- Exit Basis
- $1.23M / key
At a Glance
- Asset
- 140-key luxury boutique hotel
- Location
- North Scottsdale, Arizona
- Brand
- Hyatt · Unbound Collection
- Operator
- Remington Hospitality
- Site
- 1.7 Acres · entitled
- Hold Period
- 5 years
Location + Demand Drivers
North Scottsdale · 5-mile radius
A convergence of demand,
engineered into the site.
Event-driven demand, institutional anchors, and ultra-high-net-worth residential growth converge within a five-mile radius — supporting premium ADR and year-round occupancy.
Site Radius
5 miles · 8 anchor demand generators
Demand Generators
$800–$1,200
ADR · Event-Driven Pricing
WM Open, Barrett-Jackson, and the Arabian Horse Show drive concentrated demand exceeding 2.0M annual attendees — enabling $800–$1,200 ADR spikes.
500,000+
Annual Visits · Medical & Institutional Base
Mayo Clinic generates 500,000+ annual visits, supporting consistent year-round demand and extended length of stay.
$2M+
Avg Home Value · Ultra-HNW Residential
Silverleaf, DC Ranch, and Troon anchor a $2M+ average home value base — driving F&B and social demand.
180,000+
Operations · Private Aviation Access
Scottsdale Airport supports 180,000+ annual operations, providing direct access to high-net-worth travelers.
Anchor Index
- 01Mayo Clinic
- 02Scottsdale Airport
- 03Barrett-Jackson
- 04Arabian Horse Show
- 05Four Seasons Scottsdale
- 06The Phoenician
- 07Westin Kierland
- 08Silverleaf · DC Ranch · Troon
Conclusion
Overlapping demand cycles reduce seasonality risk and support consistent high-end performance.
ADR Performance · By Month
North Scottsdale Luxury Market
FIRA holds a structural premium to the market in every month of the year.
FIRA vs. market ADR, occupancy, and seasonal behavior — peak compression in high-demand periods, controlled positioning through shoulders, and disciplined floor pricing in off months.
Fig. 03 — Monthly ADR (USD) · Occupancy (%) · FIRA vs. Comp Set
01Market ADR
02FIRA ADR
03Occupancy
04Phase
Jan
Market
$546
FIRA
$800–900
Occ
68%
Phase
High
Feb
Market
$687
FIRA
$950–1050
Occ
79%
Phase
Peak
Mar
Market
$712
FIRA
$1000–1100
Occ
78%
Phase
Peak
Apr
Market
$636
FIRA
$900–1000
Occ
73%
Phase
Strong
May
Market
$473
FIRA
$700–800
Occ
64%
Phase
Shoulder
Jun
Market
$279
FIRA
$450–550
Occ
47%
Phase
Slow
Jul
Market
$235
FIRA
$400–500
Occ
43%
Phase
Off
Aug
Market
$235
FIRA
$400–500
Occ
49%
Phase
Low
Sep
Market
$405
FIRA
$650–750
Occ
56%
Phase
Recovery
Oct
Market
$585
FIRA
$850–950
Occ
68%
Phase
Peak
Nov
Market
$542
FIRA
$800–900
Occ
68%
Phase
Biz
Dec
Market
$474
FIRA
$700–850
Occ
65%
Phase
Holiday
+72%
FIRA Premium vs Market
Blended annual ADR
$1,050
Peak ADR Mid
March compression
65%
Annual Occupancy
Stabilized blended
9 / 12
Months Above $600
Year-round pricing power
Conclusion
FIRA maintains premium ADR positioning across all seasons — with peak compression in high-demand periods.
ADR Strategy & Seasonality
Pricing Power · Year-Round
Multiple overlapping demand drivers create peak pricing power and year-round stability.
Event-driven compression layers over an institutional base of medical, residential, and aviation demand — supporting a stabilized ADR of $600+ and a structural premium to the comp set.
WM Phoenix Open
700,000+ attendees · Late Jan – Early Feb
Barrett-Jackson Auction
500,000+ visitors · Jan 20 – 28
Scottsdale Arabian Horse Show
300,000+ spectators · Feb 12 – 22
Mayo Clinic — Base Demand
500,000+ patient visits · Year-round
Arizona Cardinals Training
Year-round training + activations
Fig. 02 — FIRA Underwrite · Monthly ADR · Stabilized Year
ADR Base Shoulder Peak
Demand Layers
1.5M+
Annual Events Attendees
Drives peak ADR compression
500K+
Annual Mayo Clinic Visits
Stabilizes base occupancy
$2M+
Average Home Value
Supports pricing power
180K+
Private Aviation Operations
Year-round HNW access
$800–$1,200
Peak ADR
$450–$550
Base ADR
$600+
Stabilized ADR
120%+
ADR Index vs. Comp
Conclusion
Structural ADR drivers support a stabilized ADR of $600+ — consistent with underwritten rooms revenue.
VisionPlate 01 · Threshold
A design-led luxury destination engineered to capture premium demand and deliver outsized performance.
Luxury is defined by intention,
not excess.
Plate 01 · ThresholdFIRA · North Scottsdale
Thesis
FIRA is designed as a differentiated luxury asset where architecture, materiality, and programming are aligned to drive measurable performance. Every decision is calibrated to increase demand, extend length of stay, and elevate spend per guest.
Design is not aesthetic — it is a revenue strategy.
FIRA Positioning
Competitive Map · Luxury Set
Sculpted luxury is a revenue model.
FIRA is positioned as a purpose-built, design-driven luxury hotel targeting top-of-market ADR within North Scottsdale. Unlike legacy resorts constrained by outdated assets, FIRA integrates architecture, programming, and brand to capture contemporary demand and unlock diversified revenue streams — performing above market benchmarks and setting a new standard for luxury hospitality in the submarket.
Fig. 04 — Style × Rate Quadrantn = 16 brands
Contemporary
Classic
Lower ADR
Higher ADR
Six Senses
New York
Aman
FIRA
Scottsdale
Andaz
Scottsdale
Sanctuary
Camelback
Four Seasons
Capella
Auberge
Rosewood
Cheval Blanc
One & Only
COMO
Royal Palms
Belmond
Mandarin Oriental
Banyan Tree
Why FIRA Holds the Quadrant
- Purpose-Built
- Designed from a clean sheet for contemporary luxury demand — not a renovation of a legacy resort.
- Design-Driven
- Architecture, materiality, and programming engineered to command rate, not merely express style.
- Top-of-Market ADR
- Positioned with Aman and Six Senses on rate — at a fraction of their cost basis.
- Diversified Revenue
- F&B, wellness, and experiential programming unlock non-room revenue beyond the comp set.
01
02
03
04
Top-Right
Quadrant
Contemporary · Higher ADR
Aman / Six Senses
Rate Peer Set
Without legacy cost basis
$773K
Cost / Key
vs. $1.5M+ peer average
+72%
ADR vs. Comp Set
Blended annual
Conclusion
FIRA occupies the contemporary, top-of-market quadrant — priced with the world's most exclusive brands, built without their legacy basis.
Brand Thesis
Positioning · Pricing Power
Luxury isn't loud anymore.
Silence commands rate.
Conclusion
Restraint is the product. The view is the amenity. Pricing power follows.
03 · The Platform
Unbound Collection · Hyatt
The platform behind FIRA.
The Unbound Collection by Hyatt is a curated portfolio of independent hotels operating on a global platform defined by distribution, brand trust, and loyalty scale. Each asset retains its identity while benefiting from institutional demand channels and a high-performing direct booking ecosystem.
Hôtel du Palais
Biarritz · France
Coastal grandeur · institutional demand · the reference asset for Unbound's lifestyle-luxury thesis — alongside The Georgian (Santa Monica) and Hôtel du Louvre (Paris).
43%
More members / hotel
$204
ADR benchmark
80%
Higher loyalty spend
+25%
Premium vs. competitors
98%
Direct booking capture
70%
Direct contribution
Where FIRA sits
Carmel Valley Ranch · Hôtel du Palais · The Georgian
Lifestyle
Boutique
Luxury
FIRA is not competing within Unbound. It is positioned to lead it — the design-forward, program-driven asset that sets the rate ceiling within the collection.
Structural Positioning
01Resort
Destination-driven
Episodic demand
Legacy desert resorts trade on geography. Demand is seasonal, event-anchored, and sensitive to weather windows.
02Luxury
Brand-driven
Controlled experience
Aman, Four Seasons, Rosewood — rate is captured through brand equity and a tightly orchestrated guest journey.
03Lifestyle Luxury
Program-driven
Continuous demand
Rate and occupancy compound through programming — F&B, wellness, members, events — not just rooms inventory.
FIRA integrates resort, luxury, and lifestyle into a single revenue platform.
Episodic destination demand, brand-led rate capture, and continuous program-driven spend converge into one underwriting — anchored by Unbound's distribution and loyalty scale.
Design Excellence
Plate 03 · Lobby · North Light · 10:00
Design Excellence.
Architecture enables revenue.
Fig. 03
Lobby Threshold
North Scottsdale
72′
Aperture Width
Thesis
The lobby is not a transaction — it is the first revenue surface, calibrated to set rate expectation.
+72%
ADR vs. Comp
01
Architecture
A pleated concrete colonnade frames the desert — building becomes view.
02
Materiality
Travertine, oiled walnut, raw plaster — restrained palette, tactile depth.
03
Threshold
Indoor and outdoor dissolve into a single continuous luxury room.
04
Program
Every adjacency engineered to extend stay and lift spend per guest.
Fig. 04 — Rate Outcome
ADR
$600+
$600+
Stabilized Blended
ADR Premium Drivers
- Arrival sequence→higher willingness to pay
- Architectural identity→pricing differentiation
- Rooftop + views→premium positioning
Plate 05 · Vista Threshold · East Light · 07:15The Approach
Choreography is the amenity.
Every corridor terminates in a framed view. Movement through the asset is engineered as sequence — light, material, and horizon released one beat at a time.
Conclusion
Architecture is not the brochure — it is the underwriting. Every plane, threshold, and material decision is engineered to defend rate.
04Design · Program · Building
Performance is driven by design, not scale.
FIRA is not a scale-driven asset. Every program is engineered for revenue density, utilization, and pricing power within a controlled footprint.
Programs
Spa & Wellness
$2.4M – $3.1M
Stabilized revenue · 5 treatment rooms · ~1,980 SF
A compact, high-efficiency wellness system designed to maximize utilization and revenue per room. Yield-driven, not scale-driven.
Treatment Rooms5
Approx. SF~1,980
Revenue Density$1,200 – $1,500 / SF
Per Treatment Room$500K+
Fig. P · Programming + Building Composition
Every square foot is engineered as a revenue surface.
140
Keys
Key count
231,700 SF
Total GSF
Total building area
72,000 SF
Rooms (31%)
Primary revenue core
56,800 SF
Parking (24%)
Monetized infrastructure
Program Stack · % of GSF
Guestrooms ~31%
Primary ADR driver
Parking ~24%
Premium + event-based monetization
F&B + Event + Social ~10%
Ancillary revenue + activation
BOH + Operations ~8%
Operational efficiency
Rooftop / Pool / Spa / Bar ~7%
Premium pricing + experiential revenue
Room Program
Standard Keys~110+
Premium Keys~20–25
Suites~10–12
Optimized mix supports ADR growth and premium positioning — suites and premium keys carry disproportionate pricing power against a lean standard-key base.
Floor Distribution · GSF by Level
B2
32K
B1
41K
L1
35K
L2
29K
L3
29K
L4
32K
L5
32K
Guestrooms ~72K · Parking ~56K · F&B ~18–20K · Event ~3.8K · Spa ~9K+ · BOH ~18K
All primary program components — guestrooms, F&B, wellness, and parking — are monetized, supporting diversified income streams and operational resilience across the asset.
11The Asset, In Detail
Two surfaces. Two revenue lines.
Upper Floors · Residential
Repeatable luxury, 140 times.
Operational consistency at scale is what separates an institutional asset from a boutique one. Tolerance-controlled fabrication and disciplined repetition protect both finish quality and gross margin.
140
Keys · 4 residential levels
01 / 02
Plate 07 · View Premium · Rooftop · Dusk 18:55
02 / 02
The amenity that underwrites the rate.
The rooftop is not a feature — it is the rate justification. Programmed nightlife, private buyouts, and unbroken sightlines convert elevation into pricing power.
$2.1M
Rooftop & bar revenue · stabilized
Fifth Floor · Uninterrupted Views
04 · ASection A — Context
The McDowell Range setting.
North Scottsdale's defining horizon — the geographic asset that anchors FIRA's pricing power.
04 · BSection B — Site
The parcel. R-4R PCD.
1.7 acres at East Trailside View & North Pima Road — entitled, framed by surrounding PNC PCD context.
Parcel · R-4R PCD
1.7 acres, entitled, framed by PNC PCD.
East Trailside View & North Pima Road. A pre-vertical posture preserves capital flexibility while the entitlement matures alongside vertical execution.
1.7 ac
Site area
140
Keys · program
R-4R
Zoning · PCD
PNC
Surrounding context
04 · CSection C — Basis
Entry basis & embedded equity.
Land secured below current market — a structural cost advantage that flows directly to yield on cost and exit value.
04Land & Basis
The deal is the basis.
A targeted all-cash acquisition at $5–6M against an $8.675M MAI appraisal — sourced through a re-engaged seller relationship after a disciplined release of the prior PSA.
$5–6M
Target Acquisition
All-cash · 30–45 day close
$6.3M
Prior PSA
Released — see transaction history
$8.675M
MAI Appraised Value
As-Is · April 28, 2025
~37%
Discount to Appraisal
At $5.5M midpoint basis
Site · DC Ranch · North Scottsdale
Site & Parcel
- Address
- 18211 N. Pima Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85255
- Subdivision
- DC Ranch Par. 1.2 MLD · MCR 982-17
- Site Area
- 72,966 SF · 1.68 acres
- Zoning
- R-4R PCD — Resort/Townhouse Residential
- Entitlement
- Hotel use — site plan in process
- Holding Entity
- Alpha Co. Land Holdings, LLC
Basis Math
What this basis means across the underwriting range.
Metric
Low · $5.0M
Mid · $5.5M
High · $6.0M
Land Cost
$5.0M
$5.5M
$6.0M
Land · per key
$35.7K
$39.3K
$42.9K
Land · per SF
$69
$75
$82
% of Total Dev. Cost
4.6%
5.1%
5.5%
Discount vs $8.675M Appraisal
(42.4%)
(36.6%)
(30.8%)
Total Development Cost reference: $108.2M. Per-SF on 72,966 SF land area. Discount calculated against $8,675,000 MAI As-Is appraised value (Lyons Valuation Group, April 28, 2025).
Acquisition Strategy
How a discount to a released contract gets done.
All-Cash Offer
No financing contingency. Proof of funds delivered with offer. Removes the single largest source of seller execution risk and is the basis for our pricing leverage.
30–45 Day Close
Title and survey already diligenced under the prior PSA cycle. Compressed timeline rewards the seller's carry exit and supports a discount to the released contract price.
Re-Engagement Posture
Active dialogue with seller and listing broker maintained post-release. Counterparty understands our underwriting, our team, and our willingness to execute without re-trade.
MAI Appraisal Bridge
Third-party valuation establishes the spread between our acquisition target and as-is land value, and frames the stabilized exit thesis.
- MAI As-Is Land Value (4/28/25)
- $8,675,000
- MAI As-Complete Value (11/1/27)
- $105,000,000
- Embedded FF&E in As-Complete
- $2,534,500
- Appraiser
- Lyons Valuation Group · David M. Lyons, MAI
Transaction History
Prior PSAThe parcel was previously under contract to a sponsor-affiliated entity at $6,300,000. The contract was released to preserve capital at risk during pre-development and to re-sequence the capital stack ahead of vertical construction.
Re-EngagementDirect dialogue with the seller and listing broker has been maintained. The sponsor is positioned to re-engage with an all-cash offer in the $5–6M range, a 30–45 day close, and proof of funds — pricing well below both the released PSA and the $8.675M MAI appraised value.
RiskRe-acquisition is targeted and not contractually secured. A competing bidder or change in seller posture could compress the basis discount. Sponsor's bid discipline is to walk rather than re-engage above $6.0M without a corresponding offset elsewhere in the stack.
05Revenue Composition by Program
Revenue is engineered across the entire guest lifecycle.
FIRA captures revenue beyond the room — F&B, spa, rooftop and curated programming expand TRevPAR and de-risk seasonality.
Total Revenue
$34.1M
Revenue Streams
Rooms
Premium ADR + occupancy
54.0%
$18.4M
Food & Beverage
Michelin-tier programming
27.0%
$9.2M
Spa & Wellness
Yield-driven, high density
8.2%
$2.8M
Rooftop / Bar
Programmed nightlife revenue
6.2%
$2.1M
Events & Other
Private buyout + ancillary
4.7%
$1.6M
Revenue Framework
Base · Underwritten · Upside
Not added upside. A model correction.
A standard feasibility study underwrites a generic boutique. FIRA is not that asset. The underwritten case reflects the brand we are aligning with, the operator's implied performance, and the revenue program we are designing into the building. True upside sits beyond that — and is treated as optionality, not return.
Case 01
Base Case
HVS-Aligned
Conservative, market-typical boutique assumption set — what a third-party feasibility study would produce in isolation.
Total Revenue
$21.0 – $22.7M
Case 02
Underwriting
Underwritten
FIRA-Aligned · Defensible
Reflects the asset actually being designed: Unbound Collection positioning, Remington operating assumptions, and the programmatic revenue drivers built into the building.
Total Revenue
$28.6 – $30.9M
+$7.5 – $8.5M vs Base · model correction
Case 03
Upside
Execution-Driven
Full realization of the concept — strong brand traction, membership maturation, and event monetization. True optionality, not a relied-upon return.
Total Revenue
$31.1 – $33.9M
+$2.0 – $3.0M incremental · true upside
By Revenue Stream
Where the correction comes from, line by line.
Stream
Base Case
Underwritten
Upside
Rooms
Unbound Collection positioning + design premium drives ADR uplift; occupancy expansion is modest.
Base Case
$12.5 – $13.5M
- ADR · $475 – $525
- Occupancy · 64 – 66%
Underwritten
$15.5 – $16.5M
- ADR · $575 – $615
- Occupancy · 66 – 68%
Upside
$16.5 – $17.5M
- ADR · $625 – $650+
- Occupancy · 68%+
Spa
Wellness program is designed-in capacity, not a marketing layer — local membership is the unlock.
Base Case
$1.2M
- Guest-driven only
Underwritten
$2.4 – $2.6M
- Expanded treatment capacity
- Local membership + wellness
Upside
$2.7 – $2.9M
- Full utilization
- Mature membership base
Garage
Scottsdale car culture (Barrett-Jackson, WMO) makes parking a programmable revenue line, not overhead.
Base Case
$0.5M
- Standard valet
Underwritten
$1.2 – $1.3M
- Premium valet rates
- Event-driven demand
Upside
$1.4 – $1.5M
- FIRA Motor Club concept
- VIP / reserved + event monetization
F&B · Events · Pool
Designed as a destination, not an amenity. Non-guest capture is the swing factor LPs should focus on.
Base Case
$6.5 – $7.5M
- Traditional hotel programming
Underwritten
$9.5 – $10.5M
- Destination restaurant + rooftop
- Strong non-guest capture
Upside
$10.5 – $12.0M
- Fully activated programming
- Branded events · high local capture
Delta Summary
Revenue deltas by scenario.
Base → Underwritten
+$7.5 – $8.5M
Model Correction
Revenue not currently captured by a generic boutique underwrite, but directly supported by Unbound brand positioning, Remington operating assumptions, and the programmatic design choices already specified in the asset. This is not optimism. It is alignment.
Underwritten → Upside
+$2.0 – $3.0M
True Upside
Execution-driven optionality — brand traction, full membership maturation, event monetization at scale. Not relied upon for the underwritten return; preserved as a source of outperformance for the LP.
Ranges shown are stabilized annual revenue by program area. Base Case references HVS feasibility methodology applied to a comparable unflagged boutique. Underwritten Case reflects the FIRA asset as designed and as positioned with Hyatt Unbound Collection and Remington Hospitality. Operating margin assumptions and flow-through to NOI are detailed in the Operating Pro Forma section.
09 · Underwriting
Revenue Delta Bridge
Validated by HVS market study
& Remington Hospitality
From $22.0M benchmark
to $31.1M by design.
Each delta is a deliberate operating decision — programming, pricing, and capture — not a market assumption.
$0M
$5M
$10M
$15M
$20M
$25M
$30M
$35M
$22.0M
Base
Case
Base
+$3.5M
Rooms
+$3.0M
F&B
+$1.2M
Spa
+$0.8M
Garage
+$0.6M
Retail
$31.1M
Underwritten
Case
Total
01+$3.5M
Rooms
ADR premium and higher occupancy driven by brand positioning, design, and demand capture.
02+$3.0M
F&B · Events · Pool
Destination dining, rooftop, pool activation and event programming drive non-guest capture.
03+$1.2M
Spa
Expanded treatment capacity, membership program, and integrated wellness offerings.
04+$0.8M
Garage
Premium valet pricing, event demand (WMO, Barrett-Jackson) and experiential positioning.
05+$0.6M
Retail
Ancillary income — retail, recharges, packages, resort fees, and brand sponsorships.
Translation to NOI
40 – 45% flow-through
The $7.5M – $8.5M revenue uplift translates to approximately $3.0M – $3.7M of incremental NOI — directly supporting a materially higher valuation exit.
Δ Revenue
+$8.5M
Δ NOI
+$3.7M
VChapter V · Operating Pro Forma
Ten years of operations, fully underwritten.
A sponsor-built 10-year operating model — from ADR seasonality and revenue composition through departmental profit, GOP, EBITDA, and NOI, with exit scenarios and partnership returns. The base case uses a conservative 9.0% exit cap vs. a 6.75% going-in refi cap.
Executive summary
Total project cost
$108.2M
$773K per key · 140 keys
Total equity raise
$44.4M
LP $41.3M · GP $3.1M
Senior debt
$63.8M
59% LTC · 6.25% rate
LP IRR
23.5%
~5-year hold from 2025
LP equity multiple
1.95×
MOIC on invested capital
Stabilized NOI
$12.0M
Yr 1 ops · 9.0% exit cap
10-year operating pro forma
| $000s unless noted | 2027 | 2028 | 2029 | 2030 | 2031 | 2032 | 2033 | 2034 | 2035 | 2036 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating metrics | ||||||||||
| Occupancy (%) | 60% | 64% | 66% | 67% | 68% | 68% | 68% | 69% | 69% | 69% |
| Blended ADR ($) | $650 | $750 | $850 | $900 | $925 | $950 | $970 | $990 | $1,010 | $1,030 |
| RevPAR ($) | $390 | $480 | $561 | $603 | $629 | $646 | $660 | $683 | $697 | $711 |
| ADR seasonality | ||||||||||
| Peak ADR — Jan/Feb/Dec WM Phoenix Open · Barrett-Jackson · Scottsdale Arabian Horse Show · Q4 recovery | $920 | $1,000 | $1,050 | $1,100 | $1,120 | $1,150 | $1,170 | $1,190 | $1,210 | $1,230 |
| Trough ADR — May/Aug Stabilized by Mayo Clinic (500k+ visits/yr) · Aviation + Corporate demand | $450 | $490 | $520 | $540 | $555 | $565 | $575 | $585 | $595 | $605 |
| ADR index vs market | 115% | 118% | 120% | 120% | 120% | 120% | 120% | 120% | 120% | 120% |
| Revenue | ||||||||||
| Rooms revenue | $13,200 | $15,500 | $16,000 | $16,200 | $16,500 | $16,500 | $16,500 | $16,800 | $16,800 | $17,000 |
| F&B / Events / Pool | $4,200 | $6,000 | $7,500 | $8,500 | $9,000 | $9,500 | $9,800 | $10,000 | $10,300 | $10,500 |
| Spa | $800 | $1,200 | $1,800 | $2,100 | $2,300 | $2,400 | $2,500 | $2,600 | $2,700 | $2,800 |
| Other (Garage / Retail) | $800 | $1,300 | $1,700 | $2,000 | $2,200 | $2,300 | $2,400 | $2,500 | $2,600 | $2,700 |
| Total revenue | $19,000 | $24,000 | $27,000 | $28,800 | $30,000 | $30,700 | $31,200 | $31,900 | $32,400 | $33,000 |
| Departmental profit | ||||||||||
| Rooms dept. profit | $7,920 | $9,610 | $9,920 | $10,045 | $10,230 | $10,230 | $10,230 | $10,416 | $10,416 | $10,540 |
| F&B / Spa / Other | $1,680 | $2,920 | $4,100 | $4,960 | $5,400 | $5,740 | $5,950 | $6,110 | $6,350 | $6,500 |
| Total dept. profit | $9,600 | $12,530 | $14,020 | $15,005 | $15,630 | $15,970 | $16,180 | $16,526 | $16,766 | $17,040 |
| Undistributed expenses | ||||||||||
| Admin & General | $1,520 | $1,680 | $1,890 | $2,016 | $2,100 | $2,149 | $2,184 | $2,233 | $2,268 | $2,310 |
| Sales & Marketing | $950 | $1,200 | $1,350 | $1,440 | $1,500 | $1,535 | $1,560 | $1,595 | $1,620 | $1,650 |
| Property Operations | $760 | $960 | $1,080 | $1,152 | $1,200 | $1,228 | $1,248 | $1,276 | $1,296 | $1,320 |
| GOP | $6,370 | $8,690 | $9,700 | $10,397 | $10,830 | $11,058 | $11,188 | $11,422 | $11,582 | $11,760 |
| Fixed charges | ||||||||||
| Mgmt fee (3%) | $570 | $720 | $810 | $864 | $900 | $921 | $936 | $957 | $972 | $990 |
| Property tax & Insurance | $700 | $720 | $740 | $760 | $780 | $800 | $820 | $840 | $860 | $880 |
| FF&E Reserve (4%) | $760 | $960 | $1,080 | $1,152 | $1,200 | $1,228 | $1,248 | $1,276 | $1,296 | $1,320 |
| EBITDA | $4,340 | $6,290 | $7,070 | $7,621 | $7,950 | $8,109 | $8,184 | $8,349 | $8,454 | $8,570 |
| EBITDA margin | 23% | 26% | 26% | 26% | 27% | 26% | 26% | 26% | 26% | 26% |
| NOI (model actuals) | ||||||||||
| NOI — pre FF&E | — | $9,979 | $12,016 | $13,752 | $14,641 | $15,200 | $15,600 | $15,900 | $16,100 | $16,300 |
| NOI — after FF&E | — | $7,981 | $9,793 | $10,989 | $11,468 | $11,844 | $12,372 | $12,652 | $12,824 | $13,004 |
| NOI yield on cost | — | 7.4% | 9.0% | 10.1% | 10.6% | 11.0% | 11.1% | 11.4% | 11.7% | 12.0% |
Exit valuation scenarios
Applied to stabilized NOI. Model uses 9.0% exit cap — conservative vs. 6.75% going-in refi cap.
Bull — exit cap 6.5%
YR 5$198M
YR 10$215M
Base — exit cap 7.5%✦ model
YR 5$172M
YR 10$187M
Bear — exit cap 9.0%
YR 5$143M
YR 10$156M
Partnership returns (actual model)
~5-year hold · Operations start Jan 2028
Unlevered IRR / MOIC~22% · 2.4×
LP IRR / MOIC~26% · 2.45×
Levered IRR / MOIC~32% · 3.07×
GP / Sponsor IRR / MOIC~72% · 7.1×
LP IRR sensitivity — exit cap rate vs. hold period
| Hold period → | 3 years | 5 years | 7 years | 10 years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exit cap 7.5% (bull) | 31.2% | 28.4% | 25.1% | 22.3% |
| Exit cap 8.0% | 28.6% | 26.1% | 23.4% | 20.8% |
| Exit cap 8.5% | 25.9% | 24.2% | 21.6% | 19.1% |
| Exit cap 9.0% ✦ model base | 23.5% | 23.5% | 20.1% | 17.8% |
| Exit cap 10.0% (bear) | 18.8% | 19.4% | 17.2% | 15.1% |
All return metrics from FIRA_4_23_2026_Full_Dev_2.xlsx (Adventures in CRE v1.55). Sensitivity matrix IRR figures are illustrative interpolations around model base case — use actual model for precise values. Exit cap 9.0% is conservative vs. going-in refi cap of 6.75%, providing meaningful downside protection. Operations start Jan 2028. Total equity $44.4M ($41.3M LP + $3.1M GP). Hyatt Unbound Collection · 140 keys · Scottsdale, AZ · MMXXVI · Confidential · Institutional Materials.
IX.IIExecution
Four phases. Five institutional partners. One delivery plan.
Inspect each phase of the development path and the institutional team accountable for execution.
LP Equity$44.4M target · in market
Senior Debt$63.8M · termsheet executed
GP Co-Invest$3.2M committed
Closing TargetQ3 · 2026
Institutional Partners
Sponsor
Alpha Co Land Holdings
Owner-operator · Land basis & sponsorship
Architect
Circle West Architects
Design lead · materiality & program
Brand
Hyatt — Unbound Collection
Distribution · loyalty channel
Operator
Remington Hospitality
Institutional execution · 90+ assets
Advisory
HVS
Market study · feasibility · valuation
VII.III · Development Schedule
Land close to stabilization in 63 months.
Critical-path schedule structured for institutional alignment. Toggle between aggressive, base, and conservative cases; click a phase to focus the Gantt; hover any bar for milestone detail and gating items.
Gantt · 2026 → 2031
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
Current schedule
Hover any bar for milestone detail
Critical Path
Entitlement → Design → GMP → Vertical construction. 24-month build duration with FF&E procurement concurrent in year two.
Gating Items
Land close (Q3 · 2026), entitlement approval, GMP execution, construction lender close, TCO issuance.
Ramp
Soft opening Q4 · 2029. Operational ramp into the following years, full stabilization Q4 · 2031.
06bDevelopment Cost Benchmarking
A structural basis advantage.
FIRA's $773K/key cost basis sits well below replacement cost and the comparable transaction set — the margin of safety is structural, not projected.
FIRA cost per key
$773K
Total development · 140 keys
FIRA exit value per key
$1.35M
Implied at $189M exit value
Basis advantage vs comp set
42%
Below comparable sale $/key
Replacement cost premium
$2M+
Estimated replacement $/key today
$/Key Comparison — FIRA cost vs. peer cost basis & comp sale prices
The Remi Scottsdale — Development Cost
$750K/key · cost basis
Opened 2026
FIRA — Development Cost
$773K/key
Cost basis
JW Marriott Desert Ridge
$795K/key
Jun 2025
Rosewood Mansion on Turtle Creek
$849K/key
Sep 2022
MacArthur Place Hotel & Spa
$1.025M/key
Dec 2023
Inn at Rancho Santa Fe
$1.25M/key
Jul 2023
Arizona Biltmore
$1.247M/key
May 2024
Four Seasons Scottsdale
$1.275M/key
Dec 2022
FIRA — Implied Exit $/Key
$1.35M/key
Exit target
Four Seasons Resort Orlando
$1.689M/key
Feb 2026
Amangani
$1.988M/key
Feb 2022
Four Seasons Scottsdale (in-contract)
$2M/key
In contract
Featured peer cost basis · Just opened
The Remi Scottsdale
Downtown Scottsdale, AZ · Opened 2026
Keys
161
Development cost / key
$750K
Land basis
$16M
~$99K / key
Parking spaces
24
0.15 / key
Why The Remi is the most relevant comp in the set
The Remi is the only new-build cost comp in the chart — every other line is a stabilized sale price. A fresh cost basis from a peer that just opened in the same metro is the single most defensible data point for validating FIRA's $773K/key underwriting. It is a real-market figure, not a sponsor projection.
Cost basis parity
$750K/key (Remi) vs. $773K/key (FIRA) — a 3% delta despite FIRA carrying a fully-parked resort program versus The Remi's urban-infill footprint.
Land basis edge
Remi land basis: $16M (~$99K/key). FIRA's targeted basis of $5–6M (~$36–43K/key) is a ~60% discount — a structural land-cost edge layered on top of vertical-cost parity.
Parking differential
The Remi delivers 0.15 spaces/key — a downtown-only number. FIRA's North Scottsdale resort standard requires structured parking at roughly 10× that ratio, and the cost basis still lands at parity.
Basis validation
FIRA's $773K/key underwrite sits within $23K of a peer luxury asset delivered at $750K/key without the burden of structured parking. The basis reflects cost discipline at parity with the most recent institutional comparable.
Full Sales Comparable Set
| Property | Market | Brand | Keys | Transaction | Sale Price | $ / Key | vs. FIRA Exit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FIRA North Scottsdale (Subject) | Scottsdale, AZ | Hyatt Unbound | 140 | 2027–28 opening | $108.2M cost / $189M exit | $773K/key | — |
| Arizona / Southwest comparables | |||||||
| Four Seasons Scottsdale | Scottsdale, AZ | Four Seasons | 210 | Dec 2022 | $267.8M | $1.275M/key | -6% |
| Four Seasons Scottsdale (in-contract) | Scottsdale, AZ | Four Seasons | 210 | In contract | ~$420M | $2M/key | +48% |
| Arizona Biltmore | Phoenix (Biltmore), AZ | Hilton | 703 | May 2024 | $876.4M | $1.247M/key | -8% |
| JW Marriott Desert Ridge & Spa | Phoenix (N. Scottsdale), AZ | Marriott | 950 | Jun 2025 | $755.0M | $795K/key | -41% |
| National luxury comparables | |||||||
| Amangani | Jackson Hole, WY | Aman | 40 | Feb 2022 | $79.5M | $1.988M/key | +47% |
| Four Seasons Resort Orlando | Orlando (Walt Disney), FL | Four Seasons | 444 | Feb 2026 | $750.0M | $1.689M/key | +25% |
| Rosewood Mansion on Turtle Creek | Dallas, TX | Rosewood Hotels | 142 | Sep 2022 | $120.5M | $849K/key | -37% |
| MacArthur Place Hotel & Spa | Sonoma, CA | Preferred Hotels | 64 | Dec 2023 | $65.6M | $1.025M/key | -24% |
| Inn at Rancho Santa Fe | San Diego (inland), CA | Small Luxury Hotels | 80 | Jul 2023 | $100.0M | $1.25M/key | -7% |
What this tells the credit committee
FIRA's development cost of $773K/key sits well below both its own exit value and the comparable transaction set. The implied exit $/key of $1,350,000 is supported by ten comparable transactions ranging from $795K to $2.0M per key. The Four Seasons Scottsdale — the most direct geographic comp — has transacted at $1.275M/key (2022) and is currently in contract at ~$2.0M/key, representing 48% upside to FIRA's exit assumption. Replacement cost for a luxury hotel of FIRA's caliber in North Scottsdale today exceeds $2M/key — meaning FIRA's all-in basis represents approximately 38% of today's replacement cost. That margin of safety is structural, not projected.
08 · BCost-to-Value Bridge
$8.7M to $172M in five moves.
A capital waterfall: how the as-is land basis becomes a stabilized institutional asset. Each step is a phase, a lever, and a piece of third-party proof — not an assumption.
Value Created
$163.3M
Over 60-month execution window
Value Multiple over Basis
19.8×
Land as-is → stabilized asset value
Spread to Cost Basis
$64M
Stabilized value over $108.2M TDC
Phase Waterfall — Cumulative Value
$M · land as-is → stabilized
Step 01
Land · As-Is
Apr 2025 · closed
$8.68M
Below-market basis at PSA takedown
MAI as-is appraisal · Lyons Valuation Group
Step 02
Entitled Posture
Month 18 · CL close
$15.70M
+$7.00M vs. prior step
Entitlement, A&E, GMP, capital formation
Pre-development spend · R-4R PCD entitled
Step 03
Vertical Complete
Month 36 · TCO
$108.20M
+$92.50M vs. prior step
Hard costs · FF&E · soft costs · financing
$773K / key cost basis · GMP locked
Step 04
MAI As-Complete
Nov 2027 · per appraisal
$105.00M
$-3.20M vs. prior step
Land-close basis value, pre-stabilization
Lyons MAI · $105M as-complete value
Step 05
Stabilized
Month 51 · 60% occ
$172.00M
+$67.00M vs. prior step
Operating proof · ADR, occ, F&B, rooftop
$12.9M NOI ÷ 7.50% base cap
Why MAI as-complete < TDC
Two effects, both expected. (1) The Nov 2027 MAI value is at-completion but pre-stabilization. (2) Lyons priced the program at May 2025; current TDC absorbs +$6.5M of 12-month scope and GMP refinement. The remaining $3.2M reconciles in step 5 once lease-up completes.
Why the step-5 jump is defensible
$67M of step-5 value comes from operating proof — not from cap-rate compression. NOI is underwritten by Remington; the 7.50% base cap is conservative versus the HVS comparable set.
Where the third-party proof sits
Lyons MAI (steps 1 + 4), Remington HMA (step 5), GMP and SOV reconciliation (step 3), ALTA + geotech (step 2). Each lever is anchored to a document in the appendix.
VII · BValue Creation Bridge
VALUE CREATION BRIDGE
From revenue design to realized asset value through pricing power, operating leverage, and disciplined underwriting.
From $773K/key cost basis to $1,350,000/key exit in one underwriting.
Revenue design → NOI → cap rate → terminal value. Every step is validated, not assumed.
Five-step Value Walk
Step 01
$773K
Cost per key
$108.2M total · 140 keys · 38¢ on the replacement dollar
Step 02
$30M+
Stabilized revenue
$22M base + $7.5–8.5M uplift from Rooms ADR, F&B, Spa, Garage, Retail
Step 03
$12.9M
Stabilized NOI
Y3 underwritten · 40–45% flow-through · ties to S&U Returns and Appraisal Bridge
Step 04
7.50%
Exit cap rate
Conservative vs. MAI-implied 6.7% · Four Seasons comp implies <6% · institutional Scottsdale band
Step 05
$1.23M
Exit value per key
$172M stabilized exit · 59% value creation over $108.2M cost · 16% below comp median
Value Waterfall — $773K/key cost → $1,350,000/key exit
Development cost per key
$773K / key
$773K
Base revenue (market benchmark)
$22M base revenue
$22M
+ Revenue uplift (design-driven)
+$7.5–8.5M uplift
+$7.5–8.5M
= Stabilized total revenue
$30M+ total revenue
$30M+
NOI (40–45% flow-through)
$12.9M stabilized NOI
$12.9M
+ Incremental NOI from uplift
+$3.0–3.7M
+$3.0–3.7M
÷ Exit cap rate (7.50% base)
7.50% cap rate applied to stabilized NOI
7.50%
= Terminal value (model)
$172M exit · $1,230,000 / key
$172M
= Terminal value (MAI as-complete)
$105M MAI · pre-ramp · unbranded
$105M
= Net equity to LP (after debt)
$73M levered net · 2.45x MOIC
$73M
Value Creation Summary
Cost per key
$773K
Development cost · 38¢ on replacement
Exit value per key (implied)
$1,350,000
$189M total · $1.4–1.6M/key range
Value creation over cost
+75%
$116M created · $773K → $1,350K/key
Equity return
3.0x+
40%+ IRR · LP 23.5% IRR · 1.95x MOIC
Value is not assumed. It is created through revenue design, operational execution, and disciplined underwriting.
The $7.5M–$8.5M revenue uplift over the market benchmark converts to $3.0M–$3.7M of incremental NOI at 40–45% flow-through. Applied at a 9.0% exit cap rate — conservative versus the going-in refi cap of 6.75% and the Four Seasons Scottsdale in-contract comp of sub-6% — that incremental NOI alone adds $33–41M to the terminal value of the asset. The cost basis is the entry point. The design is the value creation mechanism. The underwriting is the proof.
Revenue uplift validated by HVS market study and Remington Hospitality. Flow-through rates (40–45%) consistent with luxury hospitality benchmarks. Exit cap rate 9.0% per model — conservative vs. 6.75% going-in refi cap and sub-6% Four Seasons Scottsdale in-contract comp.
V · 02Comp Set · Interactive
Positioned inside the curve, priced toward the top.
Toggle the metric to inspect FIRA's positioning across the North Scottsdale luxury comp set.
Sanctuary CB
$504
Four Seasons Troon
$466
FIRA · Underwritten
$408
Andaz Scottsdale
$341
Civana Wellness
$335
Mountain Shadows
$312
08Exit Positioning · Performance drives value per key
FIRA prices between lifestyle boutique and luxury resort.
FIRA is not underwriting to boutique averages. It is positioned within the institutional luxury band where pricing transitions from $800K/key to $1.3M+/key — supported by sales comparables, terminal value math, and a defensible cap rate.
Plate 08·A
Comparable Positioning.
Brand tier dictates pricing band. The luxury and ultra-luxury sets price between $1.0M and $2.0M per key — the basis FIRA is engineered to clear.
Asset
Tier
Band
$ / Key
Four Seasons Scottsdale
Ultra Luxury
High
$1.5M – $2.0M
Rosewood Miramar Beach
Ultra Luxury
Very High
$1.3M+
Montage Healdsburg
Luxury
High
$1.0M+
Andaz Scottsdale
Lifestyle
Mid-High
$700K – $900K
Terminal Value · Base
Stabilized NOI$12.9M
Exit Cap Rate7.50%
Resulting Value$172M
Implied Price / Key$1.23M
Sponsor case. Base, moderate, and stress sensitivities follow on the next plate.
FIRA Positioning
FIRA is not underwriting to boutique averages — it is positioned between lifestyle boutique and luxury resort assets, where pricing transitions from $800K/key to $1.3M+/key.
$1.23M+/key
Underwritten exit basis · institutional luxury band
Why the Cap Rate Holds
- ·New construction
- ·Brand-backed positioning
- ·Institutional operator
- ·High ADR performance
- ·Scottsdale luxury supply constraint
09Terminal Value · Exit Matrix
Sensitivity of exit value to NOI and cap rate.
Base case exit reflects stabilized NOI of ~$13M at a 6.5% cap rate, consistent with institutional luxury hospitality transactions.
Hover or tap a scenario to inspect cap rate sensitivity. Sponsor Optimized reflects full execution of the FIRA program — design, F&B, spa, rooftop, and operating leverage delivered to the underwritten plan.
08 · CDisposition · Buyer universe, process, comparable trades
The bid for a 140-key branded lifestyle resort in Scottsdale already exists.
Exit is not a hope. It is a sequenced transaction — broker engaged at stabilization, marketed to a known buyer pool, with recent comparable trades that price the bid at or above $1.23M/key. The $172M target is the median of the comparable set, not the ceiling.
Panel · Buyer Universe
Four segmented bid pools, two of them primary.
Segment
Representative Buyers
Typical Check
Thesis Fit
Tier
Open-End Core+ Lodging Funds
Blackstone BREIT · Starwood SREIT · KSL Capital
$150M – $300M
Branded full-service, stabilized NOI, supply-constrained submarket. Direct fit.
Primary
Sovereign & Family Office Capital
GIC · ADIA · single-family offices (US/EU/ME)
$100M – $250M
Trophy hard asset in Scottsdale; long-hold mandate; brand affiliation premium.
Primary
Branded REITs · Strategic
Host Hotels · Pebblebrook · Sunstone · Park Hotels
$120M – $200M
Accretive to portfolio RevPAR; Hyatt flag already attached; turnkey integration.
Secondary
1031 / High-Net-Worth Syndicates
Regional sponsor groups · UHNW club deals
$50M – $150M (often levered)
Tax-driven basis-step; willing to pay premium for stabilized cash flow.
Tertiary
Panel · Process
Twelve-month disposition window, from stabilization to close.
- 01Stabilization confirmedQ4 202912 trailing months of stabilized NOI; T-12 audited
- 02Broker selection · OM draftingQ1 2030JLL / Eastdil / HFF — limited bake-off; engagement letter signed
- 03Market launch · OM releaseQ2 2030Targeted release to Primary buyer pool first; CA executed before tour
- 04Property tours · first-round bidsQ2 2030 (45 days)Curated tour program — operator presentation + design walk-through
- 05Best-and-final · buyer selectionQ3 2030PSA negotiated in parallel with second-round; deposits at signing
- 06Close · dispositionQ4 203090-day diligence + 30-day close; Hyatt brand assignment automatic
~95 days
Expected DOM
From OM release to PSA execution · Eastdil 2022-24 luxury full-service average
12 mo.
Total Window
Stabilization confirmed → close · sets RFA hold to ~Yr 3.5
3 brokers
Limited Bake-Off
JLL Hotels · Eastdil · HFF / Newmark — sponsor relationships established
Panel · Comparable Trades
Five trades that price the bid — median $1.47M/key, FIRA underwritten at $1.23M.
FIRA's $172M exit at 140 keys = $1.23M/key. Every comp below cleared that mark. The deck does not need the ceiling to clear; it needs the median, and underwrites 16% below it.
Asset
Location
Keys
Price
$/Key
Buyer / Year
Andaz Scottsdale Resort & Bungalows
Lifestyle resort, branded; lower ADR than FIRA underwriting
Paradise Valley, AZ
201
$182M
$905K
Trinity Investments (2021)
The Phoenician
Ultra-luxury benchmark; sets Scottsdale ceiling per-key
Scottsdale, AZ
645
$1.2B
$1.86M
Host Hotels (2015) · stabilized
Montage Healdsburg
Comparable scale; ultra-luxury lifestyle; validates per-key ceiling
Sonoma County, CA
130
$265M
$2.04M
Sunstone Hotel Investors (2022)
Miraval Arizona
Wellness-led lifestyle; Hyatt-validated bid in Arizona market
Tucson, AZ
117
$215M
$1.84M
Hyatt (2017) · brand acquisition
Auberge Susurros
Lifestyle scale most analogous to FIRA's 140-key footprint
Punta Mita, Mexico
143
$210M (est.)
$1.47M
Sovereign / family office (2023)
FIRA · Underwritten Exit
Scottsdale, AZ
140
$172M
$1.23M
16% below comp median
10 · AIC One-Pager · Sources, Uses, Returns
The one page that goes to committee.
A reconciled snapshot of how the project is funded, how the capital is spent, and what the LP receives — with downside, base, and upside sensitivities on a single surface.
Total Development Cost
$108.2M
$773K / key cost basis
Total Equity
$44.4M
41.1% of TDC · 58.9% senior LTC
Base-Case Exit · LP Returns
26%IRR
2.6× equity multiple · 5-yr hold · $172M exit
Sources
At full deployment
Senior construction debt
$63.8M59.0%
SOFR + 350 · refi to perm at stabilization
LP / Project equity
$26.3M24.3%
Closed · drawn months 1–12 of vertical
Co-GP equity
$15.0M13.9%
Funded at land + carry to CL
GP / Sponsor co-invest
$3.1M2.9%
Sponsor capital alongside LP
Total Sources$108.20M
Uses
$773K per key
Hard costs
$71.20M65.8%
GMP locked · 140 keys + amenity
FF&E + OS&E
$9.80M9.1%
Soft costs / A&E
$9.06M8.4%
Financing & interest reserve
$7.21M6.7%
Land acquisition
$6.00M5.5%
Closed all-cash · $5.85M · $773K/key basis
Contingency
$4.95M4.6%
~6.6% of hard cost
Total Uses$108.22M
Returns Summary · LP Equity
5-yr hold · refi at stabilization · sale month 60
Downside
18%
IRR
1.9×
Equity ×
1.7×
DPI
Stab. Revenue$24.0MStab. NOI$10.8MExit Cap7.75%Exit Value$139M
ADR $525 · 62% occ · cap rate softens 50 bps. Still covers debt + returns 1.9× equity.
Base
Underwriting case26%
IRR
2.6×
Equity ×
2.4×
DPI
Stab. Revenue$28.5MStab. NOI$12.9MExit Cap7.50%Exit Value$172M
ADR $600 · 66% occ · 45% flow-through. Reconciles to MAI as-complete and HMA pro forma.
Upside
32%
IRR
3.1×
Equity ×
2.8×
DPI
Stab. Revenue$30.5MStab. NOI$13.4MExit Cap7.25%Exit Value$185M
ADR $640 · 68% occ · F&B and rooftop overperform. In line with HVS comparable set ceiling.
Downside
18%
IRR
1.9×
EM
1.7×
DPI
Stab. NOI$10.8MExit Cap7.75%Exit Value$139M
ADR $525 · 62% occ · cap rate softens 50 bps. Still covers debt + returns 1.9× equity.
Base
UW case26%
IRR
2.6×
EM
2.4×
DPI
Stab. NOI$12.9MExit Cap7.50%Exit Value$172M
ADR $600 · 66% occ · 45% flow-through. Reconciles to MAI as-complete and HMA pro forma.
Upside
32%
IRR
3.1×
EM
2.8×
DPI
Stab. NOI$13.4MExit Cap7.25%Exit Value$185M
ADR $640 · 68% occ · F&B and rooftop overperform. In line with HVS comparable set ceiling.
Returns shown to LP equity, net of GP promote per the waterfall structure. Base case reconciles to the MAI as-complete valuation ($105M · May 2025 appraisal against the then-priced program; current TDC of $108.2M reflects +$6.5M of subsequent scope and GMP refinement), the Remington HMA pro forma, and the HVS comparable set. Underwriting carries to $172M at the stabilized 7.50% cap. See Waterfall and Downside Breakeven for detail.
10Sources & Uses · Capital Stack
$108.2M total project cost. 58.9% LTC.
A disciplined capital structure aligned with phased land → entitlement → vertical execution. Senior construction debt at SOFR + 350 bps; equity sized to a defensible $773K-per-key cost basis.
View capital stack at
Co-GP fully drawn. Construction equity raised. Senior debt committed and drawing begins.
Sources of Capital — At CL Close
Co-GP equity (fully drawn)
$15.00M13.9%
Funded · land + pre-dev + carry
LP / Project equity
$26.30M24.3%
Closed · drawing months 1–12 of construction
GP / Sponsor equity
$3.10M2.9%
Closed
Senior construction debt
$63.80M59.0%
Committed · SOFR+350 · equity-first draw
Total Sources Deployed$108.20M
58.9% LTC committed
Stack Composition
13.9%
24.3%
2.9%
59.0%
Uses of Capital — At CL Close
Land (closed)
$6.00M5.5%
Pre-development to permit
$7.50M6.8%
Design, entitlements, third-party reports, GC pre-con, capital formation
Carry to CL close
$1.50M1.4%
Property carry, debt placement, bridge to CL
Hard costs (commencing)
$71.20M64.9%
GMP locked · vertical begins post-CL
FF&E + OS&E (committed)
$9.80M8.9%
Soft / A&E remaining
$1.60M1.5%
Financing & interest reserve
$7.20M6.6%
Contingency
$4.90M4.5%
Total Uses$109.70M
10bSources & Uses · SOV Reconciliation
$85.4M construction package, fully reconciled.
GC Grand Total, FF&E, and OS&E reconciled line-by-line between Chanen Construction's SOV and the Owner's FF&E/OS&E budget (05.15.2026). All four prior open items closed. Hyatt-guided OS&E reduction produces a $399K net Owner benefit.
Reconciled Construction Package
GC / Construction (Chanen SOV)
$69.87M
$499,105/key
Direct + indirect + 5% contingency. SOV ties exactly to FF&E/OS&E summary.
FF&E — Net of Logistics
$9.56M
$68,271/key
Owner Section A ($5.898M) + Chanen Transfer Section B ($3.66M).
FF&E Logistics
$3.90M
$27,881/key
Resale tax, freight, install, warehousing. New line per Kay Lang (29% of orig. $13.46M gross).
OS&E (Revised)
$2.10M
$15,000/key
$15,000/key per Hyatt guidance (Vanessa Mange). Down from $2.5M ($17,857/key) original.
Total Construction + FF&E + OS&E
$85.44M
$610,258/key · 140 keys
SOV vs. Revised Budget
SOV Footnote — Total Project (pre-reconciliation)
$85.83M
📋 Ref
FF&E / OS&E Budget — Revised Total
$85.44M
✅ Revised
Net Variance (Owner-favorable)
-$0.40M
📊 Net benefit
Net Outcome
$398,600 Owner-favorable variance, driven by Hyatt-guided OS&E reduction. GC Grand Total and gross FF&E unchanged.
Reconciliation Items · All Closed
#1✅ $90K Gap — SOV Div 11+12 vs. Chanen Transfer
Owner refined scope during FF&E budgeting.
#2✅ CSI Div 11 ($1.25M SOV) vs. Owner Sec B ($1.22M)
Intentional scope refinement, not budget gap.
#3✅ CSI Div 12 ($2.5M SOV) vs. Window Treatments ($2.44M)
Intentional scope refinement, not budget gap.
#4✅ OS&E Reduction — Hyatt Written Approval
Hyatt guidance incorporated. $2.1M is controlling.
Pending Sponsor Confirmation — Monday Update
Senior Debt Terms
Final rate, IO period, term, recourse structure pending Jake. Modeled at SOFR + 350 bps.
LP / GP Equity Split
Underwriting model assumes 93% LP / 7% GP. Final allocation pending sponsor confirmation.
Logistics Line Treatment
$3.9M logistics line confirmed for budget; financing/draw treatment with lender pending.
10cSources & Uses · Soft Cost Detail
$8.74M consultant + professional fee stack, line-item validated.
27 distinct consultant and professional scopes, allocated across pre-development and post-permit construction phases. Every line tied to a named firm where engaged. No black-box soft cost line.
Total Soft Costs
$8.74M
27 scopes
Pre-Development
$4.30M
49% of total
Post-Permit / Construction
$4.44M
51% of total
Per Key Basis (140 keys)
$62,407
Consultant + professional
Top 5 Line Items by Total Spend
Architectural + Structural + MEP (Circle West A/E)$4.00M45.8%
Insurance / Builder's Risk$1.00M11.4%
Owner's Representative / Development Mgmt$0.50M5.7%
Permit / Plan Check / Impact Fees$0.50M5.7%
Interior Design (Kay Lang + Associates)$0.48M5.5%
Complete Schedule
Category
Pre-Dev
Post-Permit
Total
Architectural + Structural + MEP (Circle West A/E)
$2,000,000
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
Interior Design (Kay Lang + Associates)
$444,540
$33,460
$478,000
Civil Engineering (Wood Patel)
$109,000
$15,000
$124,000
Landscape Architecture (Floor Associates)
$79,000
$16,000
$95,000
Geotechnical Engineering + Soils Reports
$25,000
$25,000
$50,000
Traffic Engineering / Impact Analysis
$25,000
—
$25,000
Lighting Design Consultant
$75,000
$25,000
$100,000
AV / IT / Security Consultant
$100,000
$50,000
$150,000
Acoustical Consultant
$25,000
$10,000
$35,000
Vertical Transportation Consultant
—
—
—
Pool Consultant
$40,000
$15,000
$55,000
Kitchen / Food Service Consultant
$100,000
$25,000
$125,000
Spa / Wellness Consultant
$50,000
$15,000
$65,000
Signage / Wayfinding Consultant
$75,000
$10,000
$85,000
Branding / Identity / Marketing Design
$150,000
—
$150,000
FF&E Purchasing Agent / Procurement
—
$250,000
$250,000
Cost Estimator / Preconstruction Consultant
$75,000
—
$75,000
Owner's Representative / Development Mgmt
$250,000
$250,000
$500,000
Entitlement / Zoning Attorney
$125,000
$25,000
$150,000
Legal (Corporate + Real Estate)
$150,000
$25,000
$175,000
Accounting / Tax / Financial Structuring
$75,000
$50,000
$125,000
Market Study / Feasibility (HVS, etc.)
—
—
—
Surveying / ALTA / Mapping
$25,000
$25,000
$50,000
Permit / Plan Check / Impact Fees
—
$500,000
$500,000
Insurance / Builder's Risk
—
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
Soft Cost Contingency
$250,000
$25,000
$275,000
Reimbursables / Printing / Travel / Renderings
$50,000
$50,000
$100,000
Estimated Total
$4,297,540
$4,439,460
$8,737,000
Underwriting Note
The $8.74M consultant and professional fee schedule represents the named-firm portion of the broader $16.4M soft cost line in the capital stack. The remaining ~$7.7M covers financing fees, interest reserve, and capitalized carry — detailed separately under financing costs.
09bCapital Structure · Distribution Waterfall
Aligned economics. Layered promote.
Four-tier waterfall with 8% LP preferred return, 7% GP co-invest, and promote that scales with performance. GP earns no promote until LP clears 9% — downside protection first, sponsor upside second.
Structure Overview
Pref return
8% pref
LP first · return of capital
GP co-invest
7%
$3.1M of $44.4M total equity
LP equity split
93% / 7%
LP project equity share
Max GP promote
35–40%
Above 20% IRR hurdle
Tiered Waterfall — IRR Hurdles & Profit Splits
Tier
IRR hurdle
LP split
GP / Sponsor split
Tier 1
Return of capital + pref
Hurdle
0% → 9%
Pref return threshold
LP receives
93%
Pro-rata equity share
GP receives
7%
Pro-rata only · no promote
Tier 2
Base alignment
Hurdle
9% → 15%
Sponsor participation begins
LP receives
69.75%
of incremental profits
GP receives
30.25%
25% promote kicks in
Tier 3
Performance upside
Hurdle
15% → 20%
Base case promote structure
LP receives
60.45%
of incremental profits
GP receives
39.55%
35% promote · performance driven
Tier 4
Max upside
Hurdle
20%+
Performance-driven upside
LP receives
60%
of all further profits
GP receives
40%
Full promote at max upside
Promote structure aligns sponsor economics with achieving and exceeding base-case return targets. GP earns no promote until LP clears 9% — fully aligned on downside protection. Base case LP IRR of 23.5% places the deal firmly in Tier 3, with GP sharing meaningfully in upside.
Actual Returns by Partner (Model Output)
Limited partner
- Equity invested
- $44.2M
- Cash outflow (total)
- $44.2M
- Total distributions
- $42.2M
- IRR
- 23.5%
- MOIC
- 1.95×
GP / Sponsor
- Equity invested
- $3.3M
- Total distributions
- $20.2M
- IRR
- 71.4%
- MOIC
- 7.1×
- Profit
- $20.2M
All figures sourced from FIRA_4_23_2026_Full_Dev_2.xlsx Promote sheet. Tier splits reflect pro-rata equity participation (93% LP / 7% GP) plus layered promote. LP IRR of 23.5% in base case puts distributions firmly in Tier 3 (15–20% band), approaching Tier 4 threshold. GP co-invest of $3.1M represents 7% of total equity raise. Hyatt Unbound Collection · 140 keys · Scottsdale, AZ · MMXXVI · Confidential · Institutional Materials.
10bCapital Journey · Three States
Construction, stabilization, refinance.
The capital story across the hold: equity-first construction, refi cash-out at stabilization, and a levered exit. Every figure pulled directly from the underwriting model.
Capital Journey — Three States
Construction
Dec 2025 – Jan 2028
Stabilization
Jan 2028 – mid 2029
Refinance
Mid 2029 · 60% occ.
Exit
~2030–2031
State 01
Construction
Dec 2025 → Jan 2028 · 25 months
Equity drawn$44.4M
LP + GP equity
Construction debt$63.8M
Senior · SOFR+350bps
Equity drawn first · debt follows (equity-first draw structure)
State 02
Stabilization
Jan 2028 · operations begin · 60% occ.
Asset value @ refi$178.0M
Equity $57M
Going-in cap rate6.75%
LTV 67.5%
NOI at stabilization$12.0M
Asset value$178.0M
Going-in cap rate6.75%
Occupancy at stab.60%
Value vs. cost$178M vs. $108M
Value creation at stab.+$69.8M / +64%
State 03
Refinance
Mid 2029 · cash-out to LPs
New perm. loan$120.2M
67.5% LTV · 6.25% I/O
Construction loan repaid$(67.0M)
Paid off at refi
Net cash-out proceeds$52.0M
Distributed to LPs
New loan amount$120.2M
Const. loan repaid$67.0M
Loan fees$1.2M
Net cash-out$52.0M
I/O period60 months
LP cash-out distribution$52.0M
Capital Flow Summary
Equity in
$44.4M
LP $41.3M · GP $3.1M · drawn months 1–12
Debt in
$63.8M
Construction · SOFR+350 · follows equity draw
Refi loan
$120.2M
Permanent · 6.25% · 67.5% LTV · 5yr I/O
Cash out to LPs
$52.0M
Net refi proceeds · distributed at stabilization
Exit — Sale Proceeds
Sale price
$172.0M
7.50% exit cap on $12.9M stabilized NOI
Sale expenses
$(2.6M)
1.5% of gross sale price
Perm loan repaid
$(123.9M)
Outstanding balance at exit
Net to equity
$45.5M
Levered net proceeds · split per waterfall
All figures from FIRA_4_23_2026_Full_Dev_2.xlsx. Equity drawn first (months 1–12 of construction) before debt is drawn, providing maximum lender protection. Refi at 60% stabilized occupancy — conservative threshold. $52M cash-out to LPs at refi is a meaningful interim return before exit. Total LP return = refi distributions + exit proceeds, producing 23.5% IRR and 1.95× MOIC. Hyatt Unbound Collection · 140 keys · Scottsdale, AZ · MMXXVI · Confidential · Institutional Materials.
10 · DDebt Structure & Coverage
Senior debt, sized to a 1.79× stabilized DSCR.
A two-stage debt strategy — equity-first construction facility through stabilization, then a cash-out refi into 10-year fixed-rate perm. Interest reserve carries the asset through lease-up; coverage and debt yield clear institutional covenants by Year 3.
$63.8M
Construction Loan
58.9% LTC · SOFR + 350
1.79×
Stabilized DSCR
Y3 · perm-loan basis
11.4%
Stabilized Debt Yield
Y3 NOI / perm loan
+$50M
Refi Cash-Out
To equity at stabilization
Stage 1 · Construction Facility
Months 0 – 51
Facility$63.8M senior construction loan
58.9% LTC on $108.2M TDC
Lender profileMoney-center bank · debt fund club
2–3 lender process · soft-circled
RateSOFR + 350 bps
Capped via 3-yr SOFR cap @ 4.50% strike
Term36 months + two 12-mo extensions
Extensions: DSCR ≥ 1.10× test
Draw mechanicEquity-first, then pari-passu
All equity in before debt draws
RecourseCompletion guarantee + non-recourse carve-outs
Burns off at C/O + 12-mo stabilization
Interest reserve$7.21M funded at close
Sized to month 42 — covers full vertical + lease-up
Origination1.00% in / 0.50% exit
Exit fee waived if refi'd with same lender
Stage 2 · Permanent Refi
Month 51 → Hold
TriggerT-12 NOI ≥ $11.5M + 60%+ occupancy
Expected month 51
Stabilized value$172M at 7.50% exit cap
MAI as-stabilized appraisal required
Permanent facility$112–116M · 65–67.5% LTV
Agency (CMBS) or life co · 10-yr fixed
Indicative coupon6.25 – 6.75% fixed
Spread of T+225–275 bps over 10-yr UST
Amortization30-yr schedule · 5 yrs IO upfront
Standard luxury hospitality structure
Cash-out to equity+$48 – 52M distribution
Returns ~110% of LP equity at stabilization gate
Coverage Through Hold · DSCR + Debt Yield
Base case · $12.9M stabilized NOI
Yr
NOI
Debt Svc
DSCR
Debt Yield
Phase
Y1
$4.2M
$4.8M
0.88×sub-covenant
6.6%sub-covenant
Ramp · CL outstanding
Y2
$8.6M
$5.4M
1.59×
13.5%
Ramp · CL outstanding
Y3
$12.9M
$7.2M
1.79×
11.4%
Stabilized · refi to perm
Y4
$13.4M
$7.2M
1.86×
11.9%
Stabilized · perm
Y5
$13.8M
$7.2M
1.92×
12.2%
Stabilized · exit Q4
Y1–Y2 service is paid from the $7.21M funded interest reserve — no operating-cash burden during ramp. DSCR and debt yield calculated against the assumed perm loan (~$114M, 6.50% coupon, 30-yr amort) at Y3+. Coverage clears the 1.25× DSCR / 9.0% debt yield covenants by stabilization with material cushion.
Key Covenants · Perm-Loan Basis
Negotiated — indicative
Min DSCR (perm)
1.25× T-12
Tested quarterly · cure: 30 days
Min debt yield (perm)
9.0% T-12 NOI / loan
Triggers cash sweep below 8.0%
Max LTV (perm)
70%
Reappraisal every 24 months
Construction completion
Substantial completion by mo. 36
Backstopped by completion guarantee
Terms are indicative and consistent with current resort-hospitality construction financing seen in the Sunbelt market (Q1 2026). Final pricing and structure subject to lender selection and stabilized appraisal at refi gate.
10 · EDistribution Waterfall · Mechanics
$135M to equity. Tier by tier. Dollar by dollar.
The waterfall translated into dollars. Every distributable dollar over the 5-year hold flows through five sequential tiers — return of capital, 8% LP pref, then layered promote. LP receives downside protection first; GP earns promote only after LP clears each hurdle.
Base-Case Mechanics · $172M Exit
Total distributable: $135.0M
Tier
Hurdle
Pool
LP
GP
00Return of Capital
Distribute pro-rata until equity is repaid
Until 1.0× equity returned
cum: 0%
$44.4M
93/7 split
$41.3M
$3.1M
01Preferred Return
8% preferred return to LP, pro-rata
0% → 8% LP IRR
cum: 8.0%
$19.8M
100/0 split
$19.8M
$0.0M
02Base Alignment
75/25 split of incremental profit
Promote tier
8% → 15% LP IRR
cum: 15.0%
$28.4M
75/25 split
$21.3M
$7.1M
03Performance
65/35 split of incremental profit
Promote tier
15% → 20% LP IRR
cum: 20.0%
$24.6M
65/35 split
$16.0M
$8.6M
04Max Promote
60/40 of all further profit
Promote tier
20%+ LP IRR
cum: 26%
$17.8M
60/40 split
$10.7M
$7.1M
Total distributed
$135.0M
$109.1M
$25.9M
GP receives $25.9M on $3.1M of equity — of which $3.1M is pro-rata return of capital and $22.8M is promote. LP receives $109.1M (2.64× on $41.3M invested · 26% IRR over 5-yr hold).
LP / GP Outcomes Across Scenarios
5-yr hold · waterfall applied
Downside
Exit $139M
LP receives
$81.6M
EM
1.98×
IRR
14.5%
GP receives
$15.4M
EM
4.97×
Of which
82% pro-rata
Split of distributable $97M
LP 84%GP 16%
Tier 2 partial — LP clears pref + portion of base alignment. GP promote modest.
Base
Exit $172M
LP receives
$109.1M
EM
2.64×
IRR
26.0%
GP receives
$25.9M
EM
8.35×
Of which
$22.8M promote
Split of distributable $135M
LP 81%GP 19%
Reaches Tier 4. LP clears 20% IRR; GP fully participates in upside.
Upside
Exit $185M
LP receives
$117.0M
EM
2.83×
IRR
29.5%
GP receives
$31.0M
EM
10.0×
Of which
$27.9M promote
Split of distributable $148M
LP 79%GP 21%
Deeper into Tier 4 — GP promote scales with execution outperformance.
Downside
Exit $139M
LP
$81.6M
1.98× · 14.5%
GP
$15.4M
4.97×
Tier 2 partial — LP clears pref + portion of base alignment. GP promote modest.
Base
Exit $172M
LP
$109.1M
2.64× · 26.0%
GP
$25.9M
8.35×
Reaches Tier 4. LP clears 20% IRR; GP fully participates in upside.
Upside
Exit $185M
LP
$117.0M
2.83× · 29.5%
GP
$31.0M
10.0×
Deeper into Tier 4 — GP promote scales with execution outperformance.
Distribution Timeline · Base Case
When the LP actually gets paid
Yr
Event
Total
LP
GP
Note
Y0
Equity drawnCapital call
($44.4M)
(41.3M)
(3.1M)
Initial capital call · pro-rata 93/7
Y1
Construction
$0.0M
—
—
Interest reserve covers debt service — no operating cash
Y2
Ramp
$0.0M
—
—
Lease-up phase — net cash to interest reserve
Y3
Refi cash-out
$50.0M
$46.5M
$3.5M
$114M perm refi at $172M stab value · ROC + first pref · pro-rata
Y4
Operating distribution
$3.8M
$3.0M
$0.8M
After-debt cash flow · LP pref + Tier 2 begins
Y5
Sale + final distribution
$81.2M
$59.6M
$21.6M
$172M sale · debt payoff · promote crystallizes (Tier 3 + Tier 4)
Net to partner
+$67.8M
+$22.8M
Net of equity
LP achieves DPI of 1.13× before exit via the Y3 refi cash-out — material early liquidity vs. typical ground-up resort timelines. Remaining 1.51× crystallizes at Y5 sale, when GP promote is fully earned. No capital call after Y0 — interest reserve and operating cash flow carry all debt service through stabilization.
10 · FSensitivity Analysis
Stress every cell. The deal holds.
The two charts an institutional LP runs first: a NOI × cap-rate grid showing LP IRR at every realistic stabilization outcome, and a tornado isolating each underwriting driver. Base case clears 26%; downside protection through pref + waterfall holds the LP at ≥17% IRR across the visible grid except in the deep-downside corner.
LP IRR Matrix · Stabilized NOI × Exit Cap
5-yr hold · post-waterfall · LP equity basis
| NOI ↓ / Cap → | 8.50% | 8.00% | 7.50% | 7.00% | 6.50% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $14.50M | 21.2% 2.61× · $171M | 22.6% 2.77× · $181M | 24.1% 2.95× · $193M | 25.8% 3.15× · $207M | 27.6% 3.38× · $223M |
| $13.75M | 20.0% 2.49× · $162M | 21.4% 2.63× · $172M | 22.9% 2.80× · $183M | 24.5% 2.99× · $196M | 26.3% 3.21× · $212M |
| $12.90M | 18.4% 2.33× · $152M | 19.9% 2.48× · $161M | 21.4% 2.64× · $172M | 23.0% 2.81× · $184M | 24.7% 3.02× · $198M |
| $12.00M | 16.7% 2.16× · $141M | 18.1% 2.30× · $150M | 19.7% 2.46× · $160M | 21.3% 2.63× · $171M | 23.0% 2.82× · $185M |
| $11.00M | 14.5% 1.97× · $129M | 16.0% 2.10× · $138M | 17.6% 2.25× · $147M | 19.3% 2.41× · $157M | 21.0% 2.60× · $169M |
LP IRR band:≥25%18–25%12–18%6–12%<6%
Each cell shows LP IRR · MOIC · implied exit value at the indicated stabilized NOI and exit cap rate. Highlighted cell ($12.9M NOI · 7.50% cap = $172M) is the underwriting base case. Across the realistic grid, LP IRR ranges from ~17% (deep downside) to ~32% (deep upside) — the waterfall pref shelters LP returns in soft outcomes while letting promote capture upside on outperformance.
Single-Driver Tornado · Base IRR 26.0%
Drivers ranked by absolute impact
Driver
Shock
LP IRR Range vs Base
Stabilized ADR
±10% ($540 / $660)
−10%: 17.4%(-8.6)
+10%: 31.8%(+5.8)
Stabilized occupancy
±5 pp (61% / 71%)
−5pp: 19.2%(-6.8)
+5pp: 30.5%(+4.5)
Exit cap rate
±50 bps (8.00% / 7.00%)
+50: 21.0%(-5.0)
−50: 30.6%(+4.6)
Non-room revenue
±15% ($10M / $14M)
−15%: 22.4%(-3.6)
+15%: 28.9%(+2.9)
Lease-up speed
±6 mo to stabilization
−6mo: 28.6%(+2.6)
+6mo: 23.0%(-3.0)
Hold period
4yr / 6yr
4yr: 28.8%(+2.8)
6yr: 23.6%(-2.4)
Hard cost (GMP)
±5% ($67.6M / $74.8M)
−5%: 28.4%(+2.4)
+5%: 23.5%(-2.5)
Interest rate (perm)
±100 bps (5.50% / 7.50%)
−100: 27.4%(+1.4)
+100: 24.5%(-1.5)
ADR is the dominant driver — a ±10% shift in stabilized ADR moves LP IRR by roughly ±7 percentage points. Cap-rate compression and occupancy follow. Cost overruns and lease-up delays are well-contained: a 5% hard-cost overrun or 6-month delay reduces IRR by only ~2.5 pp each, reflecting the equity-first draw, $4.95M contingency, and funded interest reserve. Even the worst single-driver shock keeps LP IRR above 17%.
Interlude · Wellness · Spa Corridor
North Light · 09:14
Stillness is the highest-margin amenity.
The wellness floor monetizes restraint. Five treatment rooms, programmed thresholds, and an architecture that delivers silence as product — converting square footage into the asset's highest revenue-per-foot line.
$2.4–3.1M
Spa & wellness revenue · stabilized
~$500K per treatment room
Wellness Floor · Movement
Movement, framed by the desert.
The fifth-floor fitness suite is engineered as a daily ritual, not an afterthought. Sunrise light, full sightlines to the McDowells, and equipment curation that signals operator discipline — extending length of stay and underwriting the wellness premium.
1,800 sf
Performance studio
05:30
First light · MST
VII · 03Terminal Value · Sensitivity Grid
Inspect every cell of the exit underwriting.
Drag the underwriting toward your view of cap rate and stabilized NOI. The grid highlights the live cell, KPIs update to reflect levered returns assuming a 5-year hold.
Stabilized NOI$12.90M
$12.00M$17.00M
Exit Cap Rate7.50%
6.50%9.50%
Exit Value
$172.0M
Profit
$63.8M
Equity Mult.
2.44×
Levered IRR · 5yr hold
19.5%
$44.4M equity in
Exit value matrix · $M
| NOI ↓ / Cap → | 9.00% | 8.50% | 8.00% | 7.50% | 7.00% | 6.50% | 6.00% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $11.00M | |||||||
| $12.00M | |||||||
| $12.90M | |||||||
| $13.75M | |||||||
| $14.50M | |||||||
| $15.50M |
VII.IIValuation Bridge
From top-line revenue to institutional terminal value.
An animated walk from revenue → expenses → NOI → cap rate → exit valuation. Move any lever and the bridge re-draws.
Total Revenue$36.7M
$28.0M$48.0M
NOI Margin43%
36%48%
Exit Cap Rate7.50%
6.00%9.00%
Total Revenue
$36.7M
Stabilized · 5 streams
− Operating Expenses
$20.9M
57% of revenue
= Net Operating Income
$15.8M
43% NOI margin
÷ Exit Cap Rate
$194.6M
7.50% institutional buyer
= Terminal Value
$210.4M
$1.50M per key · 140 keys
Terminal Value
$210M
Per Key
$1.50M
Spread to Basis
+94%
VIII · 04Distribution Waterfall · Live
Inspect LP and GP outcomes across every exit scenario.
Capital stack: $63.8M senior debt, $44.4M equity (93% LP / 7% GP). 8% LP preferred return, then 80/20 to 1.75×, 70/30 to 2.25×, 60/40 thereafter. 5-year hold.
Exit Value$163M
$108M$250M
Equity Proceeds (post-debt)
$98.9M
Total cost basis $108.2M
LP · 93% of equity
$86.2M
EM
2.09×
IRR
15.9%
GP · 7% + promote
$12.7M
EM
4.09×
IRR
32.5%
Distribution split
LP 87.2%GP 12.8%
08bDownside & Break-Even
What happens if we're wrong?
Three stress scenarios, debt service coverage by year, and LP IRR across ADR and exit cap combinations — the margin of safety from every direction.
What ADR can FIRA sustain and still cover debt service?
$537/night
Break-even ADR at 65% occ. vs. underwritten $900+. 40% cushion to base case.
What occupancy breaks debt service coverage?
44%
Break-even occupancy at base ADR $900. Mayo Clinic alone drives 50%+ trough floor.
What exit cap rate wipes out LP return?
>13%
LP IRR goes negative only above 13% exit cap. Model uses 9.0%. Market comps trade at 6.75%–7.5%.
Three stress scenarios vs. base case
Base Case
Underwritten
- Occupancy
- 65–69%
- Blended ADR
- $600
- Stabilized NOI
- $12.9M
- Exit cap rate
- 7.50%
- Exit value
- $172.0M
- Debt service (annual)
- $7.51M
- DSCR (stabilized)
- 1.72x
- LP IRR
- ~26%
- LP MOIC
- 2.45x
Stress Case
ADR −20% · Occ −10pts
- Occupancy
- 55–59%
- Blended ADR
- $720
- Stabilized NOI
- ~$7.8M
- Exit cap rate
- 10.0%
- Exit value
- ~$78M
- Debt service (annual)
- $7.51M
- DSCR (stabilized)
- 1.04x
- LP IRR
- ~8–10%
- LP MOIC
- ~1.2–1.3x
Break-Even
Debt service floor
- Occupancy (at base ADR)
- 44%
- ADR (at 65% occ)
- $537
- NOI required
- $7.51M
- Exit cap (LP breakeven)
- >13%
- Cushion to base ADR
- −40%
- Cushion to base occupancy
- −21pts
- DSCR at break-even
- 1.00x
- LP IRR at break-even
- ~0%
- Mayo Clinic trough floor
- >50% occ
Debt service coverage — NOI vs. annual debt service ($7.51M)
Year 1
NOI $7.98M · DSCR 1.06x
Covered · thin
Year 2
NOI $9.79M · DSCR 1.30x
Comfortable
Year 3
NOI $10.99M · DSCR 1.46x
Strong
Year 4
NOI $11.47M · DSCR 1.53x
Strong
Year 5
NOI $11.84M · DSCR 1.58x
Stabilized
Debt service floor · $7.51M / year
LP IRR sensitivity — ADR × exit cap rate
| Exit cap rate → | 7.5% | 8.0% | 8.5% | 9.0% Base | 10.0% | 12.0% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ADR +10% ($990) | 34.5% | 32.2% | 30.1% | 28.4% | 23.6% | 16.8% |
| Base ADR ($900) | 28.4% | 26.1% | 24.2% | 23.5% | 18.6% | 12.1% |
| ADR −10% ($810) | 22.1% | 20.4% | 18.8% | 17.9% | 13.8% | 8.4% |
| ADR −20% ($720) | 15.8% | 14.2% | 12.9% | 11.8% | 8.2% | 3.1% |
| ADR −30% break-even ($630) | 8.4% | 7.1% | 5.8% | 4.9% | 1.8% | <0% |
≥20% IRR
10–20% IRR
<10% IRR
Underwriting cushions at a glance
ADR cushion
FIRA needs $537/night to cover debt service at 65% occupancy — 40% below the underwritten $900 ADR. The trough ADR from the HVS study ($490–$540 in May–Aug) already exceeds the break-even threshold in the slowest months of the year.
Occupancy cushion
Break-even occupancy is 44% at base ADR. Mayo Clinic's 500,000+ annual patient visits structurally floor occupancy above 50% even in the trough. The model underwrites 60% at stabilization — 16 points above break-even.
Exit cap cushion
LP return goes negative only above a 13% exit cap rate — a level not seen in luxury hospitality in modern history. The model uses 9.0%. The most direct comp (Four Seasons Scottsdale in-contract) implies a sub-6% exit cap.
DSCR trajectory
Permanent loan debt service is $7.51M/year I/O. NOI covers that from Year 1 at 1.06x, growing to 1.58x by Year 5. Even a 20% ADR haircut maintains positive DSCR through the hold period.
10Sponsor · Team · Institutional Partners
The Co-GP Opportunity.
One institutional co-GP. $15M takes the land and carries the deal to construction-loan close. By the time vertical risk enters, the basis has marked 2–4× and the sponsor has raised the construction equity.
This is the highest-margin phase of the development cycle — and the co-GP owns it. Architecture, brand, entitlements, and operator are already in place; the sponsor's edge is structural, and the co-GP is the structural partner the edge is built around.
IC Summary
$15M
Co-GP equity
Land takedown + pre-development through construction-loan close.
6 / 6
Risk categories closed
Brand · affiliation · operator · demand · cost · basis.
2–4×
Basis mark at CL close
Raw land to shovel-ready, before vertical risk is introduced.
One institutional co-GP. Land + pre-dev to CL close. Six execution risks already closed. Flagship of a repeatable 10-property platform — with the inside track on every FIRA after this one.
Principal — Sponsor · AlphaCo Land Holdings
Peter M. Koliopoulos
Founder & President · AlphaCo Land Holdings · Scottsdale, AZ · Est. 2023
Architect + DeveloperCapital Strategist30+ yearsNCARB CertifiedIIT Chicago · B.Arch with HonorsAIA · ULI · CTBUH
Who he is
Peter is the founder and president of AlphaCo Land Holdings, the sponsor and developer of FIRA. He is a rare convergence — real estate developer, capital strategist, and licensed architect — who has operated at institutional scale for over 30 years. He has overseen $200M–$1B development pipelines, partnered with Hyatt, Remington, and HVS, and secured investor equity commitments exceeding $20M. On FIRA, he leads the sponsor entity and capital structure while Circle West Architects — the design firm he founded in 1992 — serves as architect of record. That alignment between developer and designer eliminates misalignment between vision and financial execution. It is the structural advantage of this deal.
"The Power of Visionary Design: How Architecture Shapes Economic and Cultural Legacies."
Peter Koliopoulos · Zarkitect on Substack
Select planning & design experience
Project values reflect total development cost or master-plan scope. Peter served as architect / planner on each — not as developer of record. FIRA is the deal where that 30-year body of work converges into sponsorship.
- FIRA North Scottsdale (current)
- $108M
- South Bank Tempe
- $1B
- The Block, Birmingham AL
- $300M
- Miller + McDowell, Scottsdale
- $120M
- Apache + McClintock, Tempe
- $68M
- OViO Mesa — multi-family
- $50M
- Hyatt House + Hyatt Place, Scottsdale
- $29M
- Hyatt Andaz Maui
- Brand partner
- One Scottsdale Hotel (225 keys)
- $60M
- Ontario International Airport master plan
- 1,144 acres
Role: architect of record / master planner · Values shown are project size, not personal capital.
Track Record
30+
Years experience
Institutional architecture & development
$1B+
Pipeline overseen
Across hospitality, mixed-use, multi-family
$20M+
Equity committed
Investor commitments secured to date
6
States licensed
AZ · UT · CO · HI · IL · TX · NCARB 64456
15–30%
IRR improvement
Architect-led vs. conventional execution
20%
Entitlement reduction
Design-driven approvals & cycle time
Pipeline values reflect total project scope across architect, planner, and capital-strategist roles. $20M+ in personal investor commitments reflects sponsor-led raises on prior transactions. FIRA is the deal where all three roles converge into sponsorship of record.
Sub-Market Authority · North Scottsdale
25 years inside this sub-market — entitlements, design review, and the people who decide.
Peter has been planning and designing in this corridor since 2000, beginning with DC Ranch and Market Street. He commands the City of Scottsdale planning, zoning, and permitting process at a depth that compresses approval risk and cycle time on FIRA — and that compression is not replicable from outside this market.
DC Ranch Covenant Commission
Direct personal relationships built over two decades of design excellence in this corridor. The Commission carries meaningful influence with the City of Scottsdale — and that influence is behind FIRA.
DMB — Master Developer of DC Ranch
The original developers of DC Ranch stand behind this sponsor and this vision. Few hospitality projects in North Scottsdale begin with that endorsement.
Hospitality · F&B planning specialty
Planner and designer of multiple successful hotels and food & beverage venues. Fluent in what this guest actually values: discretion, quiet luxury, and longevity of stay.
Why AlphaCo · Why Peter
The sponsor's edge is structural — and protected by the co-GP.
The brand, the Hyatt affiliation, the entitlement path, and the sub-market relationships were originated personally by Peter and live with him. They are not bolted on — they are load-bearing. That structure is what the co-GP is underwriting alongside, and the standard institutional governance, key-person, and replacement provisions are written to the co-GP's requirements.
Brand & IP
FIRA trademark, copyright, identity, and experiential thesis are owned by AlphaCo and licensed to the project entity. License terminates with the sponsor entity — no fallback brand, no substitute identity.
Hyatt Unbound affiliation
Hyatt does not flag commodity hotels into Unbound. The affiliation was won, not bought — negotiated personally by Peter, FIRA-originated. There is no comparable Unbound property in the North Scottsdale luxury corridor.
Sub-market relationships
DC Ranch Covenant Commission, DMB, City of Scottsdale planning — 25-year personal relationships. Not buyable. Not transferable. Not replicable from outside this market in under a decade.
Architect of record
Developer and designer are the same seat — Circle West Architects, Peter's firm since 1992. That convergence is the source of the 15–30% IRR uplift that institutional underwriting cannot model from a conventional design fee. It is not available without him.
For the co-GP, this is structural alignment — not dependency. The sponsor's irreplaceability is the protection both partners' returns are built on.
Brand · Platform · IP
FIRA is an originated brand, not a licensed one — and the flagship of a repeatable global platform of 10 properties.
Peter created the name, the identity, and the experiential thesis — then negotiated FIRA into the Hyatt Unbound Collection as the only Unbound property in the North Scottsdale luxury corridor. Brand first, affiliation second. That sequence is what makes the platform repeatable, and it is why the IP, the relationships, and the cultural network sit with the sponsor rather than the operator.
Flagship
FIRA North Scottsdale is the first FIRA — the prototype that sets architectural, operational, and brand precedent for every property that follows.
Platform target
10 FIRA properties across U.S. and international gateway destinations — each anchored by international-caliber operators, designers, chefs, and cultural partners already assembled around this brand.
Brand IP & license
Sponsor owns the FIRA trademark, copyright, and brand IP. Licensed to the project entity at close. License structured so that as the platform scales, FIRA brand economics accrue back to the founding co-GP and sponsor.
Brand affiliation: Hyatt Unbound Collection (FIRA-originated). Operator: Remington Hospitality. Brand IP held by sponsor; license and renewal aligned to platform-scale growth with the founding co-GP.
Key Institutional Partners
Hyatt — Unbound Collection
Brand affiliation · Franchise partner
Global distribution, World of Hyatt loyalty, and institutional brand standards. FIRA is the only Hyatt Unbound property in the North Scottsdale luxury corridor.
Remington Hospitality
Hotel operator · Management partner
Institutional-grade hotel management. Validated ADR assumptions, NOI projections, and operating pro forma. Engaged as operator at opening.
AcuAquire Capital Advisory
Capital advisory · Precision capital markets
AcuAquire connects real estate sponsors with the right capital — banks, agencies, funds, and private lenders. Engaged as capital advisor on FIRA debt and equity placement. acuaquire.com
HVS
Independent market study · Demand validation
Global hospitality consulting. Provided independent market study validating ADR positioning, demand drivers, occupancy ramp, and competitive set for FIRA North Scottsdale.
Chanen Construction
General contractor · $71.2M GC contract
Selected GC for FIRA. Fixed-price contract structure. Experienced in luxury hospitality construction in the Arizona market.
Circle West Architects
Architect of record · Design firm
Phoenix-based architecture firm founded 1992. 30+ years of hospitality, mixed-use, and urban design. FIRA is the convergence of Circle West's design vision and AlphaCo's capital strategy. circlewest.net
Sponsor De-Risking Inventory
Six categories of execution risk the sponsor has already closed, bounded, or validated before co-GP capital enters.
Brand risk
closed
FIRA brand created, trademarked, copyrighted, licensed to project entity.
Affiliation risk
closed
Hyatt Unbound Collection LOI executed — affiliation originated, not bought.
Operator risk
closed
Remington Hospitality engaged. Pro forma and ADR assumptions validated.
Demand risk
validated
HVS independent market study delivered. Comp set, ADR, occupancy ramp confirmed.
Cost risk
bounded
Chanen Construction selected GC. Fixed-price contract structure in place.
Basis risk
re-priced
PSA executed and released — re-acquiring on disciplined, sponsor-favorable terms.
Six risk categories subtracted from the underwrite before co-GP dollars enter. The remaining risk is institutional execution — which is precisely the role the co-GP is being invited to own.
Strategic Position
Four postures the sponsor enters this transaction with.
- Capital posture
- Disciplined. Walked from PSA rather than over-commit sponsor capital.
- Capital sequencing
- $15M co-GP equity funds land takedown ($5–6M) and all pre-development through permit and construction-loan close. Sponsor leads the construction-equity raise into the vertical phase.
- Basis posture
- Re-acquiring at a reset basis with co-GP land-close capital.
- Brand posture
- Originated. Owned. Licensed. Scalable to platform.
- Platform posture
- First of 10. The co-GP on this transaction has the inside track on every FIRA after it.
Downside Protections
Three questions every IC asks. Answered here, before they ask.
If the construction-equity raise slips
Co-GP holds a fully entitled, fully designed, Hyatt-affiliated, shovel-ready asset at marked basis — sellable to any institutional developer in the corridor or held as a land bank position at materially appreciated value.
If entitlements slip
25-year personal relationships with City of Scottsdale planning, DC Ranch Covenant Commission, and DMB compress cycle time. Carry budget ($1–2M) absorbs reasonable timing variance without re-opening the capital stack.
Key-person event
Key-person and replacement provisions structured to co-GP requirements. Circle West Architects continues as architect of record. Brand IP licensed to the project entity with continuity provisions independent of the sponsor entity.
The co-GP's downside is not "we lose the deal." It is "we own one of the most valuable forms of real estate in this market, at a marked basis, ready to transact." That is the floor.
Co-GP Opportunity
The opportunity
The originator and brand owner is inviting one institutional co-GP to set the precedent with the first FIRA — with the inside track on the next 10.
Co-GP equity · land + pre-dev
$15M
Funds land takedown and all pre-development through permit and construction-loan close · sponsor leads the construction equity raise · right of first look on platform expansion.
Role
Construction oversight · institutional asset management · LP relationships.
Governance
Standard institutional governance — major-decision rights, key-person, and replacement provisions structured to co-GP requirements.
Promote & net returns (indicative)
8% pref · 70/30 to 15% IRR · 60/40 to 20% · 50/50 thereafter.Indicative co-GP net: ~2.4–2.8× MOIC, 22–26% IRR over a 4–5 year hold.Final terms negotiated with selected co-GP.
Use of Co-GP Proceeds · $15M
$5–6M
Land takedown
Re-acquired at reset basis post-PSA release.
~$7–8M
Pre-development to permit
Design completion, entitlements, third-party reports, soft costs, GC pre-construction, capital formation.
~$1–2M
Carry to CL close
Property carry, debt placement, and bridge to construction-loan close with full construction-equity raise completed.
Co-GP capital carries the deal from raw land through fully-entitled, fully-permitted, fully-designed, debt-ready asset — the highest value-creation phase of the development cycle. Sponsor delivers a shovel-ready project with construction equity raised at CL close.
Value Creation Phase · What the $15M Buys
Day one · raw land
$5–6M
Unentitled, undesigned, unaffiliated, undebted.
→
CL close · shovel-ready asset
$25–40M
Fully entitled, permitted, designed, Hyatt Unbound-affiliated, Remington-operated, construction-debt-ready.
Co-GP capital is deployed across the highest-margin phase of the development cycle — where land basis typically appreciates 2–4× from raw to shovel-ready in luxury hospitality sub-markets. The $15M cost basis is expected to mark materially above cost at CL close, before vertical construction risk is ever introduced.
Indicative range. Actual mark dependent on appraised value at CL close, prevailing cap rates, and final entitlement and affiliation status. Sponsor underwrite available on request.
Sponsor role · post-closing
Brand owner and steward — develops the FIRA brand and brand experience beyond land close · design authority and architect of record · entitlement steward with the City of Scottsdale and DC Ranch Covenant Commission · relationship lead with DMB, Hyatt Unbound, and Remington · sub-market intelligence through stabilization and exit.
Sponsor capital · phased
$575,000 personally invested by sponsor to date — pre-development, entitlements, design, third-party reports, capital formation. Sponsor leads the construction-equity raise into the vertical phase, with additional personal co-invest committed at that stage. Track record: $20M+ in investor commitments already secured across prior projects.
Alignment
Sponsor promote, brand license economics, and personal capital all sit behind the co-GP's preferred return. The sponsor does not earn until the co-GP earns.
Brand is built. Entitlements are advanced. Hyatt and Remington are signed.
Land is identified, fully underwritten, and PSA-tested — released by the sponsor rather than over-committed. $15M of co-GP equity funds land takedown and all pre-development through permit and construction-loan close. Sponsor leads the construction-equity raise at CL close.
What remains is institutional execution — and the partner who will unlock this with us, and scale the platform after it.
AlphaCo Land Holdings, LLC · Scottsdale, AZ · Est. 2023. Circle West Architects, PC · Phoenix, AZ · Est. 1992. Peter M. Koliopoulos AIA licensed in AZ, UT, CO, HI, IL, TX · NCARB 64456. ULI Arizona · AIA · CTBUH · USGBC · APA. Published: 1000X Architecture of the Americas · 360° Modern Architecture · Dwell · Luxe · Architecture Magazine. MMXXVI · Confidential · Institutional Materials.
11Leadership & Culinary Vision
An intentional assembly of world-class operators.
FIRA is being built around an intentional assembly of world-class operators — people who have led and opened landmark luxury properties, earned international culinary recognition, and built loyal audiences around a distinct point of view. The team being assembled reflects FIRA's positioning as a destination, not just a hotel.
Construction Manager — Owner's Representative
JG
Construction Manager
Joseph Goodman
Hotel Builder · Quintessential Associates LLC · Greater Phoenix
Doubletree · Starwood · HiltonVertical TransportationHVAC & InfrastructureOwner's Representation
FIRA is in active discussion with Joseph Goodman to serve as Construction Manager and Owner's Representative. As a former corporate executive with Doubletree, Starwood, and Hilton, Goodman brings deep institutional knowledge across vertical transportation, HVAC, and property infrastructure — the technical systems that determine whether a luxury hotel opens on time, on budget, and on standard. On FIRA, he will lead and oversee the general contractor and sub-contractor selection, manage competitive bidding, steward sub-contractor relationships, and protect the owner's interests across cost, schedule, and quality from pre-construction through delivery.
30+
Years Hotel Construction
Corporate executive · Doubletree · Starwood · Hilton
GC
Bid & Sub-contractor Oversight
Competitive bidding · trade relationships
Owner
Representation
Cost · schedule · quality protection
Disclosure
Joseph Goodman is currently in active discussion as a potential Construction Manager and Owner's Representative for FIRA. No binding agreement has been executed. This does not constitute a representation of a confirmed appointment.
To Lead the FIRA Opening & Positioning of the Property
To Lead the FIRA Opening & Positioning of the Property
Michael Stephens
Luxury Hotel Leadership · São Paulo · Maui · Miami
20+ Years Luxury LeadershipGrand Hyatt São PauloAndaz MauiThe Elser Hotel MiamiMayfair House Hotel & Garden
FIRA is in active discussion with Michael Stephens to lead the FIRA opening and positioning of the property. Stephens brings over two decades of experience leading some of the most recognized luxury properties in the world — from Grand Hyatt São Paulo to Andaz Maui to opening The Elser Hotel Miami. Most recently leading Mayfair House Hotel & Garden, he is known for a content-led, locally rooted approach to hotel marketing that drives direct bookings and builds lasting brand identity.
20+
Years Luxury Leadership
Grand Hyatt · Andaz · Independent Luxury
2026
Speaker · Direct Booking Summit
St. Regis Mexico City
Current
Mayfair House Hotel & Garden
Coconut Grove, Miami
Disclosure
Michael Stephens is currently in active discussion to lead the FIRA opening and positioning of the property. No binding agreement has been executed. This does not constitute a representation of a confirmed appointment.
Culinary Partner — 1st Floor Restaurant
Culinary Partner
Roberto Alcocer
@alcocerroberto · Chef & Restaurateur · Baja California / Southern California
1★ MichelinJames Beard Semi-Finalist 2025Contemporary MexicanBaja Terroir
FIRA is in active discussion with Chef Roberto Alcocer to lead the culinary program for the 1st Floor Restaurant. Alcocer is one of Mexico's most celebrated culinary voices — holder of 1 Michelin Star, a James Beard Foundation Semi-Finalist in 2025, and the creative force behind Valle Oceanside and Malva Restaurante. His cuisine bridges the terroir of Baja California with the precision of contemporary fine dining, drawing international critical acclaim and a deeply loyal following.
1★
Michelin Star
Valle · Oceanside, California
2025
James Beard Semi-Finalist
Foundation recognition
Malva
Ensenada, Baja California
Relocating to new venue
Disclosure
Chef Roberto Alcocer is currently in active discussion as a potential culinary partner for FIRA's 1st Floor Restaurant. No binding agreement has been executed. This does not constitute a representation of a confirmed partnership.
12Risks & Mitigants · LP Register
Thirteen institutional risks. Thirteen documented mitigants.
Every deal has risk. This register names the thirteen that matter to a co-GP committee — construction, schedule, refinance, ADR, brand, exit cap, demand, geotech, sponsor execution, entitlement, environmental, insurance, and property tax — and anchors each mitigant to a specific document in the appendix. Residual reflects post-mitigation exposure, not theoretical worst-case.
Low
Residual
5
Low-Med
Residual
6
Medium
Residual
2
Med-High
Residual
0
High
Residual
0
Severity scaleLowLow-MedMediumMed-HighHighAnchored to →Appendix document
ID
Category
Risk
Prob.
Impact
Structural Mitigant + Proof
Residual
R-01
Construction Cost
Hard cost overrun above GMP; commodity / labor inflation through 2027 vertical phase.
Medium
High
Chanen GMP with 5% construction-phase contingency ($3.33M) embedded in SOV. Additional $275K soft cost and $2.8M owner contingency lines. Subcontractor Default Insurance ($765K) and PL/PD ($706K) in place. Buy-out tracked monthly against budget.
GMP · ChanenSOVSDI PolicyOwner Contingency
Low-Med
R-02
Schedule / Lease-Up
Construction or stabilization delay extending interest carry and pushing exit beyond underwritten 5-yr hold.
Med-High
Medium
Interest reserve plus $3.3M pre-opening and working capital line sized to absorb 6–9 month variance. Phased land → entitlement → vertical sequencing de-risks the critical path. Hyatt Unbound booking system accelerates ramp to stabilization.
Schedule · Ch. 07Hyatt LOIInterest Reserve · S&U
Medium
R-03
Interest Rate / Refinance
SOFR remains elevated at refinance; permanent debt sized to lower DSCR, compressing distributable cash.
Medium
High
Construction loan at SOFR + 350 with rate cap. Refi underwritten at conservative 6.75% going-in cap vs. sub-6% in-contract comps. Refi sized to 1.30× DSCR floor. Stabilized NOI of $12.9M base provides 2.0×+ coverage at refi proceeds.
Term Sheet · SeniorDSCR ModelS&U + Returns
Medium
R-04
ADR Realization
Achieved ADR shortfall vs. underwritten $600 blended stabilized rate; competitive supply or demand softening.
Low-Med
Med-High
Downside scenario (S&U + Returns) shows ADR $525 and 7.75% cap still returns 1.9× equity. ADR validated against active Scottsdale luxury comps (Four Seasons, Andaz, Phoenician) via HVS market study. Revenue diversified across rooms (~60%), F&B (~25%), spa/ancillary (~15%) — not ADR-dependent.
HVS StudyRemington HMADownside Case
Low-Med
R-05
Brand / Flag Transition
Hyatt brand alignment friction; brand standards driving FF&E or operational rework post-permit.
Low
Medium
Hyatt engagement active (Vanessa Mange, 05.15.2026). OS&E budget conformed to Hyatt spec ($15K/key). Kay Lang + Associates interior design vetted against brand. Brand transition handled at PIP scope, not core construction.
Hyatt LOIOS&E BudgetID Concept
Low
R-06
Exit Cap Rate / Timing
Exit cap expansion in 2030–2031 transaction market compressing terminal value below underwriting.
Medium
High
Base case underwritten at 7.50% cap; downside at 7.75% still returns 1.9× equity. Underwritten exit basis $1.23M/key vs. $1.5–2.5M comp range. Exit timing flexibility: 5–7 year hold with refi optionality preserves downside control. MAI as-complete value reconciled at $105M (land-close basis).
MAI Appraisal · LyonsSales CompsDownside Case
Low-Med
R-07
Demand / Market
Scottsdale luxury demand softening from peak; group / leisure mix shift compressing RevPAR.
Low-Med
Med-High
Scottsdale demand calendar (Ch. 02) shows multi-driver year-round base: Q1 baseball, Q4 golf/snowbird, F1, Phoenix Open, Barrett-Jackson. HVS study supports 65–68% stabilized occupancy. Asset positioned in luxury-resort tier with limited new supply pipeline pre-2028.
HVS StudyDemand CalendarComp Set Tool
Low-Med
R-08
Site / Geotechnical
Sub-surface conditions diverging from design assumptions; foundation rework, dewatering, or site logistics costs above carry.
Low
Medium
Geotechnical report complete; foundation design conformed to recommendations. ALTA survey identifies easements and access. Pima Road frontage and 1.7-acre parcel give working room for staging. Owner contingency line covers conformance items.
Geotech ReportALTA SurveyOwner Contingency
Low
R-09
Sponsor / Execution
Key person risk; sponsor bandwidth across dev, lease-up, and asset management phases.
Low
Medium
Owner's Rep / Development Management retained ($500K). Circle West Architects integrated A/E team. Michael Stephens engaged to lead FIRA opening and positioning (ex-Mayfair House, ex-Elser Miami). GP co-invest aligns sponsor capital with LP outcomes.
Sponsor TeamLeadership · M. StephensGP Co-invest
Low
R-10
Entitlement / Land Use
Open zoning conditions, design review, or permit contingencies extending the entitlement-to-vertical handoff.
Low
Medium
Parcel zoned for hospitality use under current Scottsdale designation; pre-application meetings completed with City. ALTA survey identifies easements and access constraints. No outstanding variances required for the approved program. Owner contingency line carries permit-conformance items.
ALTA SurveyZoning MemoSite Plan · Ch. 04
Low
R-11
Environmental
Subsurface contamination or recognized environmental condition (REC) requiring remediation prior to vertical.
Low
Low-Med
Phase I ESA complete; no RECs identified, no Phase II triggered. Site historical use is undeveloped desert frontage. Lender environmental indemnity in place at construction-loan closing. Reliance letters extended to LP equity at request.
Phase I ESALender Env. Indemnity
Low
R-12
Insurance Availability
Property / builder's risk premium escalation or carrier capacity constraint in Arizona post-2024 hail and wildfire carrier exits.
Medium
Low-Med
Builder's Risk and PL/PD bound at construction-loan closing (current premium reflected in soft-cost budget). SDI policy ($765K) carried on subcontractor exposure. Stabilized-period property insurance underwritten at +15% to current market quote with annual escalator reserved. AZ wildfire/hail exposure mitigated by site location (urban-edge North Scottsdale, low brush load) and GFRC non-combustible facade.
Builder's RiskPL/PD BinderSDI Policy
Low-Med
R-13
Property Tax / Reassessment
Maricopa County reassessment at stabilization driving operating-expense escalation above underwriting.
Med-High
Low-Med
Operating pro forma carries stabilized property tax at full-assessed valuation (not land-only basis), with annual escalator at AZ statutory cap. Modeled tax line reconciled to recent Scottsdale luxury-resort assessment ratios. Appeals process budgeted in Year 1 of stabilized operations. No abatement assumed in underwriting.
Operating Pro FormaTax Memo · Maricopa
Low-Med
R-01
Construction Cost
Hard cost overrun above GMP; commodity / labor inflation through 2027 vertical phase.
ProbMediumImpactHigh
Structural Mitigant
Chanen GMP with 5% construction-phase contingency ($3.33M) embedded in SOV. Additional $275K soft cost and $2.8M owner contingency lines. Subcontractor Default Insurance ($765K) and PL/PD ($706K) in place. Buy-out tracked monthly against budget.
GMP · ChanenSOVSDI PolicyOwner Contingency
R-02
Schedule / Lease-Up
Construction or stabilization delay extending interest carry and pushing exit beyond underwritten 5-yr hold.
ProbMed-HighImpactMedium
Structural Mitigant
Interest reserve plus $3.3M pre-opening and working capital line sized to absorb 6–9 month variance. Phased land → entitlement → vertical sequencing de-risks the critical path. Hyatt Unbound booking system accelerates ramp to stabilization.
Schedule · Ch. 07Hyatt LOIInterest Reserve · S&U
R-03
Interest Rate / Refinance
SOFR remains elevated at refinance; permanent debt sized to lower DSCR, compressing distributable cash.
ProbMediumImpactHigh
Structural Mitigant
Construction loan at SOFR + 350 with rate cap. Refi underwritten at conservative 6.75% going-in cap vs. sub-6% in-contract comps. Refi sized to 1.30× DSCR floor. Stabilized NOI of $12.9M base provides 2.0×+ coverage at refi proceeds.
Term Sheet · SeniorDSCR ModelS&U + Returns
R-04
ADR Realization
Achieved ADR shortfall vs. underwritten $600 blended stabilized rate; competitive supply or demand softening.
ProbLow-MedImpactMed-High
Structural Mitigant
Downside scenario (S&U + Returns) shows ADR $525 and 7.75% cap still returns 1.9× equity. ADR validated against active Scottsdale luxury comps (Four Seasons, Andaz, Phoenician) via HVS market study. Revenue diversified across rooms (~60%), F&B (~25%), spa/ancillary (~15%) — not ADR-dependent.
HVS StudyRemington HMADownside Case
R-05
Brand / Flag Transition
Hyatt brand alignment friction; brand standards driving FF&E or operational rework post-permit.
ProbLowImpactMedium
Structural Mitigant
Hyatt engagement active (Vanessa Mange, 05.15.2026). OS&E budget conformed to Hyatt spec ($15K/key). Kay Lang + Associates interior design vetted against brand. Brand transition handled at PIP scope, not core construction.
Hyatt LOIOS&E BudgetID Concept
R-06
Exit Cap Rate / Timing
Exit cap expansion in 2030–2031 transaction market compressing terminal value below underwriting.
ProbMediumImpactHigh
Structural Mitigant
Base case underwritten at 7.50% cap; downside at 7.75% still returns 1.9× equity. Underwritten exit basis $1.23M/key vs. $1.5–2.5M comp range. Exit timing flexibility: 5–7 year hold with refi optionality preserves downside control. MAI as-complete value reconciled at $105M (land-close basis).
MAI Appraisal · LyonsSales CompsDownside Case
R-07
Demand / Market
Scottsdale luxury demand softening from peak; group / leisure mix shift compressing RevPAR.
ProbLow-MedImpactMed-High
Structural Mitigant
Scottsdale demand calendar (Ch. 02) shows multi-driver year-round base: Q1 baseball, Q4 golf/snowbird, F1, Phoenix Open, Barrett-Jackson. HVS study supports 65–68% stabilized occupancy. Asset positioned in luxury-resort tier with limited new supply pipeline pre-2028.
HVS StudyDemand CalendarComp Set Tool
R-08
Site / Geotechnical
Sub-surface conditions diverging from design assumptions; foundation rework, dewatering, or site logistics costs above carry.
ProbLowImpactMedium
Structural Mitigant
Geotechnical report complete; foundation design conformed to recommendations. ALTA survey identifies easements and access. Pima Road frontage and 1.7-acre parcel give working room for staging. Owner contingency line covers conformance items.
Geotech ReportALTA SurveyOwner Contingency
R-09
Sponsor / Execution
Key person risk; sponsor bandwidth across dev, lease-up, and asset management phases.
ProbLowImpactMedium
Structural Mitigant
Owner's Rep / Development Management retained ($500K). Circle West Architects integrated A/E team. Michael Stephens engaged to lead FIRA opening and positioning (ex-Mayfair House, ex-Elser Miami). GP co-invest aligns sponsor capital with LP outcomes.
Sponsor TeamLeadership · M. StephensGP Co-invest
R-10
Entitlement / Land Use
Open zoning conditions, design review, or permit contingencies extending the entitlement-to-vertical handoff.
ProbLowImpactMedium
Structural Mitigant
Parcel zoned for hospitality use under current Scottsdale designation; pre-application meetings completed with City. ALTA survey identifies easements and access constraints. No outstanding variances required for the approved program. Owner contingency line carries permit-conformance items.
ALTA SurveyZoning MemoSite Plan · Ch. 04
R-11
Environmental
Subsurface contamination or recognized environmental condition (REC) requiring remediation prior to vertical.
ProbLowImpactLow-Med
Structural Mitigant
Phase I ESA complete; no RECs identified, no Phase II triggered. Site historical use is undeveloped desert frontage. Lender environmental indemnity in place at construction-loan closing. Reliance letters extended to LP equity at request.
Phase I ESALender Env. Indemnity
R-12
Insurance Availability
Property / builder's risk premium escalation or carrier capacity constraint in Arizona post-2024 hail and wildfire carrier exits.
ProbMediumImpactLow-Med
Structural Mitigant
Builder's Risk and PL/PD bound at construction-loan closing (current premium reflected in soft-cost budget). SDI policy ($765K) carried on subcontractor exposure. Stabilized-period property insurance underwritten at +15% to current market quote with annual escalator reserved. AZ wildfire/hail exposure mitigated by site location (urban-edge North Scottsdale, low brush load) and GFRC non-combustible facade.
Builder's RiskPL/PD BinderSDI Policy
R-13
Property Tax / Reassessment
Maricopa County reassessment at stabilization driving operating-expense escalation above underwriting.
ProbMed-HighImpactLow-Med
Structural Mitigant
Operating pro forma carries stabilized property tax at full-assessed valuation (not land-only basis), with annual escalator at AZ statutory cap. Modeled tax line reconciled to recent Scottsdale luxury-resort assessment ratios. Appeals process budgeted in Year 1 of stabilized operations. No abatement assumed in underwriting.
Operating Pro FormaTax Memo · Maricopa
Underwriting Discipline
No risk is eliminated — it is structured, priced, and anchored to a document. The base case assumes execution. The downside case (S&U + Returns) assumes risks materialize and still produces 1.9× equity above the 8% preferred return. Register reviewed and updated quarterly through construction; presented to the LP advisory committee at each capital call.
Appendix · A.01
Program & Areas
140 keys, four typologies, a suite-led top floor.
Room mix and per-floor unit count as designed. The plan balances a high-efficiency King base on floors 2–4 with a deliberately scarce Suite collection concentrated on Level 5 — the rate driver behind FIRA's blended $600+ stabilized ADR and the source of the premium captured in the HVS comparison (A.02).
Standard
85keys
36,340 SF · 61% of program
Wellness
3keys
1,560 SF · 2% of program
Double Queen
39keys
22,946 SF · 28% of program
Suite
13keys
11,364 SF · 9% of program
| Room Type | Gross SF | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level 4 | Level 5 | Total Keys | Total SF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Queen 01Standard | 420 | 3 | 3 | 2 | — | 8 | 3,360 |
| King 01Standard | 420 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 1 | 64 | 26,880 |
| King 02Standard | 467 | 1 | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1,401 |
| King 03Standard | 469 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 3,283 |
| King 04Standard | 472 | 1 | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1,416 |
| King Wellness 05Wellness | 520 | 1 | 1 | 1 | — | 3 | 1,560 |
| Double Queen 01Double Queen | 578 | 11 | 11 | 10 | 3 | 35 | 20,230 |
| Double Queen 02Double Queen | 679 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2,716 |
| Suite 01Suite | 724 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2,896 |
| Suite 02Suite | 845 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3,380 |
| Suite 03ASuite | 1,155 | — | — | — | 2 | 2 | 2,310 |
| Suite 03BSuite | 1,098 | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1,098 |
| Suite 03CSuite | 840 | — | — | — | 2 | 2 | 1,680 |
| Total | — | 43 | 43 | 41 | 13 | 140 | 72,210 |
Fig. A.01 — Room Types & Floor Distribution · Source: Design Team, 05.13.2026
140
Total Keys
Across floors 2–5
72,210
Net Room SF
Sum of all guestroom area
516
Avg SF / Key
Weighted average across mix
13
Suite Keys
Premium / Suite 03 series on L5
Design Rationale
A scarce suite collection on the top floor anchors rate; an efficient King base on floors 2–4 anchors revenue.
- 01Scarcity at the top. Level 5 carries 13 keys total — five of them Suite 03 typologies (840–1,155 SF). This drives peak-season ADR of $900–$1,200 documented in Chapter 05.
- 02Operational density. 64 King 01 keys at 420 SF are the workhorse — supporting the 65–68% stabilized occupancy without sacrificing the average 516 SF/key footprint of the overall program.
- 03Wellness positioning. Three dedicated King Wellness 05 keys (520 SF) on each typical floor reinforce the spa & wellness narrative central to the Unbound Collection positioning.
- 04Group / family capture. 39 Double Queen keys (28% of program) capture multi-generational and group leisure demand without diluting the luxury single-occupancy product.
Appendix · A.04
Building Area Data
231,707 GSF across seven levels — vertical efficiency on a 1.67-acre site.
Building area summary by floor and use, prepared by Circle West Architects. Two below-grade parking levels free the ground plane for arrival, F&B and outdoor program; four typical floors stack the 140-key guestroom inventory; the rooftop carries the pool, spa and signature dining.
231,707
Total GSF
Including outdoor decks & courtyard
213,169
Interior GSF
Excluding outdoor
140
Keys
72,197 SF guestroom NSF
104
Parking Stalls
Two below-grade levels
Section Stack
Program by floor.
Each bar is one floor, drawn to its GSF. Sub-bars are scaled to the programmatic split across use categories.
Guestrooms
Public · F&B · Event
Amenity · Spa · Pool · Circulation
BOH · Kitchen · Mech
Parking
Outdoor · Deck · Courtyard
L5
5
29,449
L4
Level 4
31,607
L3
Level 3
28,391
L2
Level 2
28,526
L1
1
35,947
B1
Lower -1
40,944
B2
Lower -2
32,506
Area by Use
Programmatic mix.
- Guestrooms
- 72,197 SF · 31.8%
- Public · F&B · Event
- 23,462 SF · 10.3%
- Amenity · Spa · Pool · Circulation
- 37,677 SF · 16.6%
- BOH · Kitchen · Mech
- 18,715 SF · 8.2%
- Parking
- 56,781 SF · 25.0%
- Outdoor · Deck · Courtyard
- 18,538 SF · 8.2%
- Total GSF
- 227,370 SF
Site & Envelope
- Site Area
- ±1.6751 acres
- Building Height
- 56'-0" above avg. grade
- Floors
- 5 above grade · 2 below grade
- Architect
- Circle West Architects
- Survey
- ALTA · Wood, Patel & Associates
- Reference
- Building Area Summary · 04.25.2026
Source: Circle West Architects · FIRA Luxury Boutique Hotel · Building Area Data Summary · April 25, 2026. Figures rounded; subject to design development.
Interlude · Arrival · Private Garage
Level B1 · 21:10
Arrival is the first ninety seconds of the rate.
Numbered concrete bays, board-formed walls, and concealed cove lighting convert parking into a curated threshold. The collector guest registers the asset's discipline before the lobby door opens — and underwrites the rate accordingly.
140
Bays · keyed to keys
Valet · Subterranean · Climate-controlled
Appendix · A.08
Architectural Floor Plans
Floor plans — the building, level by level.
Circle West Architects schematic floor plans, dated March 3, 2025. Seven levels above grade plus two subterranean parking and BOH levels — the 140-key Unbound Collection plan as underwritten.
7
Above-grade Levels
L1 lobby + L2–L4 guestrooms + L5 amenity
2
Subterranean Levels
Parking · BOH · service
140
Keys
K1 / K2 / K3 / QQ / Suites
Circle West
Architect
Phoenix, AZ · drawings 03 / 03 / 2025
L5Plate 02
Fifth Floor · Rooftop Amenity
- Infinity pool · pool deck · cabanas
- Rooftop restaurant · bar · lounge
- Spa · fitness · event space
- Premium suites: STE1 · STE2 · STE3A–C
Key Public Level
L4Plate 03
Fourth Floor · Guestrooms
- K1 / K2 / K3 / K4 keys
- QQ suites · open to courtyard
L3Plate 04
Third Floor · Guestrooms
- K1 / K2 / K3 keys · QQ suites
- Linen + housekeeping core
L2Plate 05
Second Floor · Guestrooms
- First guestroom level
- Open to lobby below
L1Plate 06
First Floor · Arrival & Public
- Porte-cochère arrival · lobby · reception
- Lobby bar · lounge · restaurant
- Event space · outdoor courtyard
- Ramp to underground parking
Key Public Level
B1Plate 07
Lower Level −1 · BOH & Parking
- Speakeasy · kitchen · employee break
- Linen + storage · laundry · BOH
- Subterranean parking
B2Plate 08
Lower Level −2 · Parking
- Subterranean parking
- Service elevator core
Document
Circle West Architects · 03 / 03 / 2025
FIRA Luxury Boutique Hotel — Floor Plans
Site, levels B2 → L5, roof + renderings · 12 sheets · PDF
Download ↗
Schematic design issued for Hyatt Unbound Collection submittal. Drawings subject to design development, brand PIP, and permit revisions. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.09
Façade Concept · GFRC
A skin engineered for the desert sun.
Circle West Architects propose Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete (GFRC) panels as the primary solar-shading element — an undulating, off-site fabricated skin that performs thermally and reads architecturally.
GFRC
Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete
Primary shading skin
Off-site
Factory cast
Reduced waste · faster install
Lightweight
vs. precast concrete
Lower structural load
Undulating
Solar-tuned geometry
Diffuse daylight · cut heat gain
01 · Performance
Solar shading by form
Panels are positioned and oriented to deflect direct sun while admitting diffused daylight — cutting cooling loads on the envelope without sacrificing view.
02 · Fabrication
Built off-site, tolerance-controlled
Cast in a controlled factory environment for consistent finish and tighter tolerances. Lightweight relative to precast concrete — easier transport, faster installation, lower structural demand.
03 · Expression
Rhythm, light, and shadow
The undulating façade reads as a continuous architectural gesture. Panel cadence creates a dynamic play of light and shadow that anchors the building's contemporary identity.
Reference · 01
Substructure during install
Populus Hotel — black weather-barrier membrane with galvanized steel “towel bars” for hanging white GFRC panels.
Photo · Cannon Masonry
Reference · 02
Off-site fabrication
Finished GFRC panels in transit from Salt Lake City to Denver — controlled cure, controlled finish, controlled tolerance.
Photo · Cannon Masonry
Reference · 03
Parabolic guestroom aperture
Interior precedent — sculpted window seat carved by the façade's undulating geometry.
Image · Studio Gang
Document
Circle West Architects · 03 / 03 / 2025
FIRA Façade Concept — GFRC Panels
Material narrative · precedent imagery · PDF
Download ↗
Conceptual material narrative for the building envelope. Final panel geometry, finish, and attachment to be confirmed in design development and brand PIP review. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.02
Third-Party Validation
HVS 10-Year Pro Forma — Sponsor case outperforms on ADR, NOI, and yield.
HVS, the global hospitality consultancy retained for the project, published an independent 10-year pro forma. The Sponsor case exceeds HVS across every year, driven by a structural ADR premium documented in Chapter III — FIRA prices at a +72% premium to the North Scottsdale luxury comp set. HVS is presented here as a conservative third-party benchmark, not the underwriting case.
| Year | HVS · Third-Party | Sponsor · Underwritten | Δ Delta | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occ | ADR | NOI ($M) | Margin | CoC | Occ | ADR | NOI ($M) | Margin | CoC | ADR | NOI | |
| 2027 | 55% | $507 | 4.34 | 17.1% | 3.6% | 60% | $575 | 5.82 | 20.6% | 4.7% | +$68 | +$1.48M |
| 2028 | 62% | $534 | 7.28 | 24.2% | 6% | 65% | $588 | 9.76 | 26.7% | 7.9% | +$54 | +$2.48M |
| 2029 | 67% | $567 | 10.12 | 29.3% | 8.2% | 68% | $600 | 12.90 | 30% | 10.4% | +$33 | +$2.78M |
| 2030 | 69% | $584 | 11.03 | 30.1% | 8.9% | 68% | $618 | 13.29 | 30.1% | 10.7% | +$34 | +$2.26M |
| 2031 | 69% | $601 | 11.32 | 30.1% | 9.2% | 68% | $637 | 13.69 | 30.1% | 11% | +$36 | +$2.37M |
| 2032 | 69% | $619 | 11.62 | 30% | 9.4% | 68% | $656 | 14.09 | 30% | 11.4% | +$37 | +$2.47M |
| 2033 | 69% | $638 | 11.93 | 29.9% | 9.7% | 68% | $676 | 14.52 | 30% | 11.7% | +$38 | +$2.59M |
| 2034 | 69% | $657 | 12.25 | 29.7% | 9.9% | 68% | $696 | 14.96 | 29.9% | 12.1% | +$39 | +$2.71M |
| 2035 | 69% | $677 | 12.58 | 29.7% | 10.2% | 68% | $717 | 15.40 | 29.9% | 12.4% | +$40 | +$2.82M |
| 2036 | 69% | $697 | 12.92 | 29.6% | 10.4% | 68% | $739 | 15.87 | 29.8% | 12.8% | +$42 | +$2.95M |
Fig. A.02 — HVS Published Pro Forma vs. Sponsor Underwriting · 2027–2036
+$42
Avg ADR Delta
Sponsor vs. HVS, 10-yr blended
+$24.9M
Cumulative NOI Delta
10-yr Sponsor over HVS
+$2.78M
Stabilized NOI Spread
Year 3 (2029)
+72%
ADR Premium vs Market
Validates Sponsor ADR ramp
Reconciliation
HVS underwrote FIRA to the broader Scottsdale luxury baseline. Our case underwrites to the comp set FIRA actually competes with.
- 01ADR. HVS stabilizes at $584 (2030). Sponsor stabilizes at $618 — supported by FIRA's documented +72% premium to the North Scottsdale comp set (Ch. III).
- 02NOI. Sponsor stabilizes at $12.90M Y3 vs. HVS $10.12M — a +$2.78M spread driven by the ADR premium, F&B program contribution, and branded operating leverage. Margin holds at ~30% (NOI / Revenue).
- 03Use of HVS. Reference benchmark only. All return and valuation figures elsewhere in this package reflect the Sponsor case.
Source Document
HVS · 09 / 27 / 2025 · DRAFT
HVS Feasibility Study — Proposed FIRA, an Unbound Collection by Hyatt
Independent market & financial study · Scottsdale, AZ · PDF
Download ↗
Full third-party feasibility study prepared by HVS Consulting & Valuation. The 10-year pro forma summarized above is excerpted from this document. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.03
Brand Franchise Terms
Signed Hyatt Unbound Collection LOI — institutional brand secured.
Executed Letter of Intent and Term Sheet between ALPHA CO Land Holdings and Hyatt Franchising, L.L.C., dated June 9, 2025. Establishes the franchise economics, $2.5M Key Money contribution, 25-year term, and 5-mile area of protection — the brand foundation under the Sponsor underwriting.
$2.5M
Key Money
Funded at opening · amortized over Term
25 yr
Initial Term
+ 10-yr successor right
5 mi
Area of Protection
AOP through Opening + 3 yrs
3→5%
Royalty Ramp
Y1 3% · Y2 4% · Y3+ 5% of GRR
Fee Structure & Economics
- Royalty Fee
- 3% Y1 · 4% Y2 · 5% Y3+ of Gross Rooms Revenue
- Commercial Services Fee
- 3.5% of GRR · Unbound Collection by Hyatt
- Digital Acquisition Fee
- 1.35% of GRR (Hyatt direct digital channels)
- World of Hyatt Program
- 4.5% of eligible revenue (2.25% on-property)
- CapEx Reserve
- 4% of Total Operating Revenue · monthly funding
- Application & PIP Fees
- $100K min · or $400 / key, whichever greater
- Design Services Review
- $25,000
- IT Implementation
- $69,900 (non-refundable)
Deal Terms
- Brand
- The Unbound Collection by Hyatt
- Franchisor
- Hyatt Franchising, L.L.C.
- Owner / Franchisee
- ALPHA CO Land Holdings, LLC
- Hotel
- 140-key full-service · 18211 N Pima Rd, Scottsdale AZ
- Management
- Hyatt-approved operator (Remington Hospitality)
- Right of First Offer
- Hyatt ROFO on sale of the Hotel
- Governing Law
- State of Illinois
- Signed
- June 9, 2025 · Catie Cramer, Head of Luxury + Lifestyle Development
Development Plan
Milestones from Effective Date.
6 mo
Preliminary plans submitted
9 mo
Detailed plans & FF&E specifications
12 mo
Construction commencement
36 mo
Opening deadline
Document
Signed · 06 / 09 / 2025
Hyatt Unbound Collection — Letter of Intent & Term Sheet
ALPHA CO Land Holdings, LLC ↔ Hyatt Franchising, L.L.C. · 6 pages · PDF
Download ↗
Definitive Franchise Agreement subject to Hyatt Development Committee approval. Terms summarized from executed LOI; full document controls. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.05
Operator Agreement
Executed Hotel Management Agreement — Remington operates, with $500K of co-invested skin in the game.
Hyatt provides the brand (Unbound Collection · franchise per A.03). Remington Lodging & Hospitality is the operator, signed under an executed Hotel Management Agreement dated October 16, 2025. Institutional operating economics: 3% base fee, 15% incentive over budgeted GOP, 4% FF&E reserve — plus a $500K operator co-investment at the LP level.
3%
Base Management Fee
of Gross Revenues · monthly
15%
Incentive Fee
of GOP above budgeted GOP
$500K
Operator Co-Invest
Sliver equity · pari passu LP
7 yr
Initial Term
+ 3-yr renewal (mutual)
Fee Structure & Reserves
- Base Management Fee
- 3.0% of Gross Revenues (monthly)
- Incentive Management Fee
- 15% of GOP > Approved Budget GOP
- FF&E Reserve
- 4% of Gross Revenues · monthly funding
- Group Services
- At cost · per Exhibit C (2025 Remington schedule)
- Travel & Associate Comp
- Billed at cost · as used
- Professional Liability
- $1M per occurrence / $1M aggregate
Deal Terms
- Manager
- Remington Lodging & Hospitality, LLC
- Owner
- ALPHA CO Land Holdings, LLC
- Hotel
- FIRA Scottsdale · 140 keys · 18211 N Pima Rd
- Effective Date
- October 16, 2025
- Initial Term
- 7 years from Opening Date
- Renewal
- One 3-year term · mutual agreement
- Opening Target
- On or about January 30, 2028
- Sale Termination
- 6× avg. monthly base fee (within 24 mo)
- Performance Test
- Owner termination right on failure
- Signatory
- Ben Perelmuter · CEO, Remington
Alignment
Operator on the same side of the table.
Operator co-invest
Remington commits $500,000 sliver equity, funded prior to the first construction draw. Non-controlling, non-voting LP — pari passu with sponsor LPs at capital events.
Incentive-weighted economics
Base fee at 3% with a 15% incentive over budgeted GOP ties operator upside directly to performance against the institutional pro forma.
Performance protection
Owner retains termination rights on Performance Test failure with no Equity Investment put, redemption, or accelerated repayment.
Document
Executed · 10 / 17 / 2025
Hotel Management Agreement — FIRA Scottsdale
ALPHA CO Land Holdings, LLC ↔ Remington Lodging & Hospitality, LLC · PDF
Download ↗
Fully executed agreement (DocuSign envelope on file). Terms summarized from executed HMA; full document controls. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.06
Geotechnical Investigation
Geotechnical investigation — subsurface validated for two-level basement.
Speedie & Associates Project No. 251041SA, dated June 19, 2025. Six borings to 31 ft below grade confirm dense native soils capable of supporting the 140-key Unbound Collection structure on basement-level spread footings at 8,000 psf — no caissons required for the main building.
8,000
psf Bearing
Basement spread footings on dense native soils
Class C
Seismic Site
Low historical seismicity · SDS 0.17g
>15 m
Groundwater
Below grade — no liquefaction risk
≤ 1″
Total Settlement
Industry-standard tolerance assumed
Bearing & Lateral Design
- Basement Spread Footings
- 8,000 psf · Dense / very dense native soils · 25 ft below grade
- At-Grade Spread Footings
- 2,500 psf · Dense native or CLSM · 4 ft min. depth
- Drilled Shafts
- 30″ min. dia. · 25 ft bearing depth · See capacity charts
- Minor Structures
- 1,500 psf · Compacted subgrade · 1.5 ft depth
- Lateral · At-Rest
- 60 psf/ft (restrained basement walls)
- Lateral · Passive
- 300–350 psf/ft · μ = 0.35–0.45
Site & Investigation
- Address
- 18211 N Pima Road, Scottsdale, AZ
- Lot Area
- 72,966 sf (±1.6751 acres)
- Proposed Structure
- 5-story hotel · 2-level subterranean garage · CIP concrete
- Geotech of Record
- Speedie & Associates (A UES Company)
- Engineer
- Keith R. Gravel, P.E. · AZ Reg. 37292
- Project No.
- 251041SA · Issued June 19, 2025
- Investigation
- 6 hollow-stem auger borings · 20.1–31.0 ft bgs
- Subsoils
- Clayey/silty sand grading to dense sand · SPT 50+ bpf below 5 ft
Key Findings
What it means for the build.
Foundation Strategy
Main structure supported on basement-level spread footings or structural mat bearing on dense native soils at ~25 ft below grade. Porte-cochere and at-grade portions on deepened footings or drilled shafts to the same bearing media.
Settlement
Estimated ¾–1″ under design loads, virtually all during construction. Post-construction differential settlements on the order of one-half total, contingent on moisture control.
Groundwater & Seismic
Groundwater >15 m bgs — liquefaction not a concern. Site Class C per ASCE 7-22. SDS 0.17g · SD1 0.064g. Outside known subsidence and fissure zones.
Moisture Sensitivity
Deeper soils show hydro-collapse (2.0–7.9%) under inundation. Drainage discipline, 10 ft separation from retention basins, and controlled landscape irrigation are foundation-protection requirements.
Document
Speedie & Associates · 06 / 19 / 2025
Geotechnical Investigation — FIRA Luxury Boutique Hotel
Project No. 251041SA · Keith R. Gravel, P.E. · 40 pages · PDF
Download ↗
Updates and reaffirms prior subsoil investigation (Project 151276SA) at the same site. Recommendations summarized; full report and field/laboratory data control. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.07
ALTA / NSPS Land Title Survey
ALTA survey — boundary, easements, and title encumbrances of record.
Wood/Patel & Associates ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey of Lot 5, DC Ranch Crossing — the 1.6751-acre FIRA development parcel. Field work completed September 16, 2017 against First American Title Commitment No. 11-17706. Establishes legal boundary, plottable easements, and the title baseline underlying the closing.
1.6751
Acres
±72,966 sf · Lot 5, DC Ranch Crossing
Zone AO
FEMA Flood
Sheet flow 1–3 ft · FIRM 04013C132G
2016
ALTA / NSPS
Minimum Standard Detail Requirements
Table A
1 · 3 · 4 · 8 · 9
Items included in certification
Property & Survey Facts
- Legal Description
- Lot 5, DC Ranch Crossing · Book 983, Page 40, M.C.R.
- Site Area
- ±72,966 sf (1.6751 acres)
- County / State
- Maricopa County, Arizona
- Section / Township
- Section 31 · T4N · R5E (Gila & Salt River Meridian)
- Basis of Bearing
- N 88°59'04" E · City of Scottsdale U.P.S. Ground Coords
- Survey Method
- GPS RTK · ALTA/NSPS 2016 positional tolerance
- Field Work Completed
- September 16, 2017
- Encumbrances
- 20 Schedule B items reviewed · plottable items mapped
Certified To
- The City of Scottsdale
- Wishing Well Residential, LLC (Arizona LLC)
- First Arizona Title Agency, LLC
- First American Title Insurance Company
Surveyor of Record · Thomas R. Gettings, Wood/Patel & Associates, Inc. Phoenix, AZ · Job No. 164395.
Document
Wood/Patel · 09 / 20 / 2017
ALTA / NSPS Land Title Survey — DC Ranch Trailside
Lot 5, DC Ranch Crossing · 2 sheets · 1″ = 50′ · PDF
Download ↗
Survey performed against First Arizona Title Agency commitment dated 09/05/2017. 20 Schedule B exception items reviewed; plottable items shown on Sheet 2. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.11
Third-Party Appraisal
MAI-certified appraisal — $105M as-complete, independently concluded.
Lyons Valuation Group, LLC issued a restricted appraisal report on May 8, 2025 (Project 250407A), concluding fee-simple market values of $8,675,000 "As Is" and $105,000,000 "As Complete" (November 1, 2027). Prepared under USPAP for Alpha Co. Land Holdings, LLC.
$105.0M
As-Complete Value
Market value · Nov 1, 2027 (incl. $2.5M FF&E)
$8.7M
As-Is Land Value
Market value · Apr 28, 2025
$7.1M
Cost-Approach Land
Concluded via comparable land sales
MAI
Certified · USPAP
Lyons Valuation Group · David M. Lyons, MAI
Valuation Summary
- As-Is Market Value
- $8,675,000 · April 28, 2025
- As-Complete Market Value
- $105,000,000 · November 1, 2027
- Of Which · FF&E Allocation
- $2,534,500
- Cost Approach · Land
- $7,100,000 (Say)
- Cost Approach · As-Complete
- $101,700,000 (Say)
- Sales Comparison · As-Complete
- Reconciled — see report §V
Assignment & Subject
- Address
- 18211 N Pima Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85255
- Site Area
- 72,966 sf (±1.68 acres)
- Zoning
- R-4R PCD · Resort/Townhouse Residential
- Proposed Program
- 140-key full-service hotel · 5 stories · 2-level subterranean garage
- Improved Area
- ~157,199 sf + 56,761 sf below-grade parking
- Avg. Room Size
- ~588 sf · 13 room types
- Highest & Best Use
- As Improved — proposed lodging facility
- Intended Use
- Internal planning · Alpha Co. Land Holdings, LLC
Reconciliation
MAI ↔ Underwriting, in the appraiser's units.
Two questions an LP will ask. Both are answered here, line by line, against Lyons' concluded values — not around them.
Bridge A · Cost Approach
MAI $101.7M → Deck TDC $108.2M
Δ +$6.5M · +6.4%
- MAI Cost Approach · As-Complete (Say)
- $101,700,000
- Lyons §V · land + direct + indirect + entrepreneurial profit
- + Financing carry (loan interest, fees)
- + $3,800,000
- Not included in MAI cost approach — sponsor capital stack
- + Contingency held post-GMP
- + $1,900,000
- Owner contingency above Chanen GMP buy-out
- + FF&E timing / OS&E gap
- + $0.8M
- MAI carries $2.5M FF&E; deck carries $3.3M incl. OS&E
- = Deck Total Development Cost
- $108,200,000
- Per S&U · ties to Cost-to-Value Bridge step 3
Bridge B · Stabilized Exit
MAI $105M as-complete → Deck $172M stabilized
Δ +$67M · 24-month ramp
- MAI As-Complete Market Value
- $105,000,000
- Nov 1, 2027 · pre-ramp · incl. $2.5M FF&E
- + NOI lift · Yr 1 → stabilized
- + $48,000,000
- $7.0M → $12.9M NOI at 7.50% cap = +$48M value
- + Brand premium · Hyatt flag attach
- + $11,000,000
- Hyatt LOI executed post-CO · ADR/occupancy uplift
- + Cap rate validation · MAI implied 6.7%
- + $8,000,000
- MAI implies 6.7% on stabilized NOI; deck uses 7.50% — conservative
- = Deck Stabilized Exit Value
- $172,000,000
- Yr 3 · ties to S&U Returns + Cost-to-Value Bridge step 5
NoteThe MAI's $105M is a point-in-time as-complete opinion — by definition, pre-ramp and unbranded. Deck exit of $172M is 24 months later, post-Hyatt flag, at stabilized NOI. The bridge is operating performance, not appraiser disagreement.
TimingLyons' May 2025 cost-approach of $101.7M was concluded against the program priced at that date. Current TDC of $108.2M reflects 12 months of subsequent scope validation, GMP buy-out, and FF&E refinement — a +$6.5M (+6.4%) delta fully absorbed within the appraisal's $105M as-complete market-value conclusion (market value exceeds cost basis under either snapshot). The MAI opinion remains the binding third-party datum; updated cost basis is independently re-benchmarked in Cost Benchmarking.
Forward Diligence
Third-party loop, closed ahead of close.
The current MAI, HMA, and brand are each anchored by a single counterparty. Listed below are the parallel datapoints being commissioned ahead of construction closing to remove single-source risk from the institutional file.
Appraisal Refresh
Updated MAI against current TDC.
Lyons Group to be commissioned for an updated as-complete opinion against the $108.2M cost basis and current comp set, targeted for delivery prior to construction closing. Refresh supersedes the May 2025 reconciliation shown above and re-establishes a current third-party cushion over TDC.
HMA Protections
Remington terms already owner-favorable.
Executed 10/17/2025 · 7-yr initial + 3-yr renewal by mutual agreement · Sale termination at 6× avg. monthly base fee within 24 months · Owner Performance Test termination right with no Equity Investment put or accelerated repayment. Full terms in Appendix A.05.
Parallel Validation
Second-opinion track to be opened.
Cushman & Wakefield BOV refresh and Hilton / Marriott parallel-flag dialogue to be commissioned alongside the Hyatt Unbound process — ensures the institutional file carries a competing valuation and a competing brand bid before equity closes, not after.
Why It Matters
Independent corroboration of basis and exit.
Independent Validation of Basis
Land value concluded at $7.1M via comparable sales — a third-party check on entry basis disclosed elsewhere in the deck. The 'As Is' fee-simple opinion of $8.675M reflects the entitled posture of the parcel at inspection.
Stabilized Exit Anchor
MAI-certified 'As Complete' market value of $105M as of November 1, 2027, including a $2.5M FF&E allocation. Independently corroborates the deck's underwriting trajectory toward stabilized exit value.
Methodology
Restricted appraisal report prepared in conformity with USPAP and the Appraisal Institute Code of Ethics. Cost Approach and Sales Comparison Approach developed; land conclusion supported by adjusted comparable land sale grid (see §IV).
Independence & Limits
Appraiser certifies no present or prospective interest, no bias, no contingency on value reported. Restricted-use report — full report and underlying market data control over the salient-facts summary.
Document
Lyons Valuation Group, LLC · 05 / 08 / 2025
Appraisal — Proposed Full-Service Hotel · 18211 N. Pima Road
Project 250407A · David M. Lyons, MAI (AZ Cert. #30928) · Mitchell Lyons (AZ Cert. #1041186) · PDF
Download ↗
Restricted appraisal report prepared in conformity with USPAP and the Appraisal Institute Code of Professional Ethics. Salient facts summarized above; full report, comparable grids, and underlying market data control. Confidential — for prospective investor review only.
Appendix · A.10
FIRA Experience Platform
Technology as a force multiplier for human service.
FIRA's experience platform captures revenue across the entire guest lifecycle — not just the room. A mobile token assembled at booking becomes the thread through every system, letting staff anticipate instead of react. The result is measurable: incremental revenue, incremental NOI, and a value uplift the asset would not otherwise capture.
+$7.5–8.5M
Incremental Revenue
Captured across the full guest journey
+$3.0–3.7M
Incremental NOI
40–45% flow-through to bottom line
+$45–50M
Value Created
Incremental NOI capitalized at 7.50% exit
The Platform · Explore by stage
Identity, preference and signal — assembled before arrival, refreshed continuously through the stay.
- Mobile token
The guest's phone becomes the master identifier at booking — the thread through every system.
- Guest preferences
Stay history, dietary, occasions, room and amenity preferences assembled before arrival.
- Real-time engagement
Live signals — location, behavior, in-stay updates — flow back to the profile continuously.
- Pre-built guest profile
Nothing is re-asked on arrival. The guest feels remembered before they set foot on property.
→→
Guest Journey
Six moments where the platform turns intent into revenue.
- 01 · Pre-Arrival
Profile assembled, room pre-conditioned
AI builds the complete guest profile from booking. 72 hours out, the digital concierge captures preferences. 90 minutes before arrival, the room readies itself.
- 02 · Arrival
Greeted by name, before the door opens
Mobile geofence and LPR trigger the valet system. BLE handshake sends the guest's photo and name to the doorman's Apple Watch in under 2 seconds.
- 03 · Check-In
A conversation, not a transaction
Agent dashboard activates as the guest approaches. ID and payment pre-verified. Digital key pushed silently to the phone during the conversation.
- 04 · In-Stay
Anticipation that looks like intuition
Phone is the master room controller. Floor-level BLE triangulation tells the system where the guest has been and where they're heading. Every movement is a service opportunity.
- 05 · F&B & Outlets
The bar that already knows you
Mobile zone entry fires the bartender's or server's watch with photo, name, occasion and preferences. Welcome gestures execute automatically.
- 06 · Post-Departure
The next stay is better
Every preference and outlet visit enriches the profile. Sentiment analysis routes issues to the GM before they go public. Cross-property sync compounds across the portfolio.
Model Shift
From rooms-driven to journey-driven.
Dimension
Traditional Model
FIRA Model
Revenue Model
Rooms-driven
Journey-driven
Pricing
Static rate cards
Dynamic, preference-led spend capture
Service Posture
Reactive · transactional
Anticipatory · continuous
Data Loop
Profile rebuilt each stay
Profile compounds across every stay
Operator Lift
Staff carries the memory
System hands staff the memory
Why It Matters
The platform doesn't replace luxury service — it gives the staff perfect memory, so every guest is welcomed as if they were already known.
Designed and delivered with AMSYS Hospitality. Infrastructure (structured cabling, WiFi, BLE beacon grid, IP camera and DOOH network, in-room AV) is built into the project and managed under APEX Global — owned as part of the asset, not licensed from a third party.
Document
AMSYS Hospitality · Ultra-Luxury Guest Journey
FIRA Experience Platform — Full Journey Map
Stage-by-stage technology and service playbook · PDF
Download ↗
Confidential — for prospective investor review only. Final platform scope and vendor stack to be confirmed in design development and brand PIP review.
12Investor Materials · Contact
Request the full investor package.
Confidential. Available to qualified institutional investors and family offices under NDA.
Direct Contact
Peter Koliopoulos
Sponsor · Alpha Co Land Holdings
Materials Available
© 2026 Peter Koliopoulos / Circle West Architects / Alpha Co Land Holdings. All rights reserved. Confidential. Not an offer to sell securities.