Blink 180 International Limited Feassibility Study

International LTD
Blink 180 International Limited

MEGA HOUSING PROJECT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
July 2014
RIVERS STATE GOVERNMENT MEGA CITY HOUSING ESTATE Page 0

ABSTRACT
This survey seeks to highlight that the basis of a mega city should be to guarantee the
redistribution of the housing acquisitions by expanding urban population for housing and city
development. The methodology adopted for this survey includes a housing census and
administration of a structured questionnaire to various households in selected areas of Port
Harcourt City to ascertain the purpose/uses of existing building units within the study area.
This process was systematically carried out based on the subdivision of the area, commencing
from the Woji axis towards the south through Abuloma, terminating in and around the Amadi-
Ama community. This area of study was selected because of the influx of the middle and high
income earners in these areas, to purchase landed properties for the purpose of constructing
their own houses. The study shows that the predominant use of housing units in the area is for
residential purposes (average of 86.7%), this further underscores the need for adequate
provision of houses (shelter) for the urban population being a fundamental right. The surveyor
therefore provides urban land information being an indispensable tool for the city development.
Land is a limited resource, and it is important to know how much land is occupied by whom and
for what purposes and how much land is still left out for further allocation and development.
It is worrisome, however, that there does not seem to exist adequate planning for the
erection of buildings, owing perhaps to the inability of Ministry of Lands & Urban Development
or Ministry of Works & Housing to control and supervised erection of buildings in Port
Harcourt. As a result, a considerable number of buildings are cited haphazardly with no
hindsight of necessity for drainage facilities. In certain instances and, perhaps, to provide
shelter or shops for economic activities of the teeming urban populations, some
individuals consciously flout governments directives not to build close to electricity poles and
close to major roads for safety, health and environmental protection of the occupiers.
In 2007 the government of Rivers State, Nigeria contracted a South African firm to produce a
master plan for a new city called Greater Port Harcourt to be situated in the outskirts of the old
city. The Greater Port Harcourt Master Plan 2008 is here examined in the context of current
thinking as to whether it has credentials that meet aspirations for modern liveable cities. The
new city plan assumes that Port Harcourt will continue to grow at its current rate so there is
need to respond pro-actively to the reality of meeting cogent challenges. The infrastructure to
be provided must be sustainable, that is, there should be continuity of effective service delivery
by operators, by way of renewal, upgrading and expansion to cope with the city growth.
Provision of services will be private sector driven, while government is politically ready to
amend laws, regulations and policies to create an enabling environment for private sector to
thrive in driving the development initiatives. The plan provides a long-term vision for the city
based on sustainability: social, economic and political equity. Sustainability is hinged on
continual improvement based on accountability, transparency and good governance. The
master plan aims at a development that positively encourages the creation of a mixed
community of 350,000 housing units, initially. The energy infrastructure utilizes the natural
resources in the region such as natural gas for powering turbines and providing domestic fuel,
with a little solar power. Open spaces, sports and recreational grounds are integral part of the
plan.
1. INTRODUCTION
Access to shelter is a basic human right along with food and clothing. However, in the face of a
housing industry and policies that fail to provide them with affordable conventional housing
options, housing beneficiaries worldwide have to resort to a range of other – often inadequate -
means to house themselves. While many of these houses are substandard in terms of basic
1
BLINK 180 INTERNATIONAL MEGA CITY HOUSING ESTATE FEASIBILITY STUDY.
services and construction quality, the percentage of low income earners who live in their homes
is not much lower than that of the population on average.
Every person in a nation has a vital stake in a country’s housing problem and its proper
utilization. In Nigeria, the typical villager and/or urban dweller recognize housing in its totality
and share it with his entire life. To him, a house is a home and workplace.
The extreme congestion, high building and population densities, un-serviced areas, insufficient
and decaying utilities contrast sharply with the expectation of residents and government’s
vision, hence, in late 2007 the new government of Chief Rotimi Amaechi that took over the
reign of power in Rivers State Nigeria made the retrofitting of the old city and the development
of a new city a priority. The new city is called the Greater Port Harcourt and the design project
was awarded to a South African firm in November, 2007.
A house is to be “owned” as symbol of wealth, power and prestige. It serves a social security
function to most people
This report has been prepared to assess the feasibility and the social and technical relevance of
a mega city housing project submitted by Blink 180 International Limited to P & L Limited for
financing support.
Sustainability implies an action that can be maintained over a period of defined time. It is about
meeting basic needs in order to sustain human life, and about making responsible choices and
decisions in an attempt to adhere to and acknowledge the intricate connections between actions
and effects with relation to the environment, economic growth and the growing society.
Sustainable development is generally understood as an integrative and holistic process of
maintaining and managing the dynamic balance between the needs and demands of people for
societal aspects such as equity, prosperity and quality of life, and what is ecologically possible.
Over time the definitive nature of the idea of sustainable development has changed. From the
relatively simplistic idea of meeting basic needs, to the current, of meeting the entire hierarchy
of human needs, to provide an acceptable quality of life for all. Sustainable cities can
accommodate growth and change well, whilst simultaneously being improved by these
processes. This implies that development is managed in an integrated manner with relation to
social, economic and environmental requirements. A sustainable city is much more than green
practices and environmental conservation - it is a holistic concept pertaining to the creation of a
place that provides adequate shelter, innovative economic opportunities and safety in terms of
cultural freedom, resource conservation and development management. Sustainable cities are
liveable; they are attractive to their users and residents. If cities are attractive to live in and
work in, they will inevitably also become attractive for business life, investment and tourism.
Sustainable cities emphasise a quality communal lifestyle, a sense of place and create a liveable
urban environment.
1.1 STATEMENT PROBLEMS
From inception up to about 40 years ago Port Harcourt was a well-developed and well-managed
port city that boasted good infrastructure and service delivery, low densities, well kept open
spaces and parks, a formal CBD and a well-defined institutional precinct. The City had status and
was visually attractive to the extent that it was known as the Garden City of Nigeria, but it is
arguable whether such an appellation still fits its present state. The ways some urban features
disconnect are apparent for Port Harcourt; It is worrisome, however, that there does not
seem to exist adequate planning for the erection of buildings, owing perhaps to the inability
of Ministry of Lands & Urban Development or Ministry of Works & Housing to control and
supervise erection of buildings in Port Harcourt. As a result, a considerable number of
buildings are cited haphazardly with no hindsight of necessity for drainage facilities. In certain
instances and, perhaps, to provide shelter or shops for economic activities of the teeming
urban populations, some individuals consciously flouted government’s directives not to build
close to electricity poles and close to major roads for safety, health and environmental
2
protection of the occupiers. In reaction, there is a nascent demolition of such buildings
described as „illegal structures‟ by the Executive Governor of Rivers State – Hon. Dr. Chibuike
Rotibi Amaechi, in several parts of Port Harcourt that include Rumuokoro, Rumuola,
Rumuokwuta, Mgbuoba, Ozuoba and Choba. This has led to emigration from the city to cities
like Abuja and Lagos by very well to do residents of Port Harcourt to purchase houses, in order
to enjoy workable systems in utilities and better environment. So it is a generally held opinion
of a need to reinstate values that can uphold the former status, create good and healthy living
environment, and achieve sustainability and plan for the future.
1.2 OBJECTIVE OF SURVEYAND BENEFICIARIES
The objective of this survey therefore is to ascertain the socio-economic benefit of creating a
new and exciting urban environment where citizens feel safe, their lifestyle is uplifted and
investments are protected through the application of known urban design principles.
1.2.1 Objectives and beneficiaries of the project
Project Beneficiaries include categories of the population which cannot access a satisfactory
housing solution due to the severe supply and conformability gaps affecting the housing sector
in Nigeria. Targeted population include doctors, bankers, engineers, oil and Gas technicians,
nurses, etc, whose working time does not allow them entering the property market. At present,
the Nigerian mortgage system does not allow families under 120,000Naira/month of disposable
income to borrow to acquire their home. This scheme is supposed to be managed through
selected “Participating Financial Intermediaries”.
Through two types of schemes, Blink 180 International intends to provide outright housing
purchases and a second one which is home ownership through mortgage;
The project will enhance housing supply in the strategic areas identified for the take-off of the
Greater Port Harcourt City with a total of a little over 2000 housing units, focused on the capital
city. As follows:
STANDARD STAND ALONE DUPLEXES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ)
ICONIC ROW HOUSES
LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS
ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS
The project intends to complete most of the building structures in outright ownership. This
approach will allow delivering apartments at a lower cost and getting rid of the bottle neck
associated with land purchase and other commitments before building as experienced in Port
Harcourt.
More specifically, the project will target two social groups: the middle and high income earners.
With the first component who are young professionals and young families working in the
thriving oil sector of the economy, which it intends to contribute to retain and attract in the new
mega city.
3
Finally, the project should contribute to building capacity within the state and participating
local authorities, as already started with phase one, which is the construction of the new
Stadium, the Golf course, etc.
Apart from the desire to allow for planning and to improve the living conditions of
people living in the garden city, government says it has found a more compelling need
for embarking on the megacity project. This is because "There is a need to create a
modern business node that will accelerate economic growth and development
supported by appropriate economic policies and good governance", according to a
government policy statement.
1.3 STUDY AREA
The study area is situated between Latitudes 40 30’ North and 40 45’ North, and
Longitudes 70 00’ East and 70 15’ East. The area is the Ward 20 of the Port Harcourt Local
Government Area of Rivers State. The area comprises of Abuloma town, Ozuboko Town, Tere-
Ama, Fimie and the Amadi-Ama communities, which also include the LNG Port Harcourt base
office road area as shown the figure 1. The people are predominantly of the Okrika extract, but
due to the process of urbanization, there is a great mix of strangers having their private
properties and residing in these areas. This paper shall concentrate on the housing development
in Woji, Ozuboko, Abuloma and Amadi-Ama, with emphasis on residential buildings.
Fig. 1: Map Showing the Study Area
2. THE PROJECT CONTEXT
This social housing project takes place in a context which is best illustrated by the chaotic
nature of Port Harcourt metropolise and terrible traffic.
4
The new Port Harcourt, as many prefer to call it, is planned to situate on a space of 40,000
hectares or 1,900 square km of land spanning eight local council areas of the old PH and
Obio/Akpor, Oyigbo on Aba axis, Okrika and Ogu Bolo jutting into the Bonny River (Ocean),
Eleme on Ogoni axis, and the Ikwerre and Etche in the pure upland zone up north towards the
airport areas/Owerri Rd axis. Major villages and communities that are part of the new dream
and would soon transform to towns in the mega city (who are said to be already clamouring for
quicker action) include Igwuruta, Omagwa, Ipo, Omademe, Ozuha, Omanwa, Eneka,
Rumuodomanya, Rukpokwu, Rumosi, Elekahia, Chokocho, Umuechem, Elele in Etche, Igbo
Etche, Umuebulu on one side. Those from the Eleme axis would include Akpajo, Nchia, and Eteo,
while from Okrika and Ogu-Bolu would comeOkochiri and Ikpokiri. From the Oyigbo local
council side would produce Iriebe and, Obigbo; while the entire old Port Harcourt city would be
integrated into the new dream.
The Greater Port Harcourt City idea is expected to hinge on some turnkey projects such as the
$1Bn Port Harcourt Ring Road, the N35Bn Monorail system, a South-Africa designed multi-
billion new water system that would service every home, a power supply system second to none
in Africa built around over N100Bn gas turbine network supported by a gas pipeline network,
housing system that would douse the frustrations of choking rents paid so far, and an Israel-
backed security system that draws hugely from aggressive surveillance networks. The problem
however is the huge costs involved which have already affected the take-off of the Ring Road
and Monorail projects.
2.1 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HOUSING POLICY
The institutional framework forms the basis of the entire housing delivery system. The firm
resolve of the Federal Government to address the nation’s housing problem is shown by its
adoption of a new national policy on housing and urban development in 2002. The policy is an
embodiment of workable strategies to reform the nation’s housing sector to ensure that
Nigerians have access to affordable and decent rental housing and homeownership. This is to be
achieved through a private sector-led housing delivery system anchored on mass construction
of houses and strong mortgage finance. The main objectives of the current housing policy
driving the ongoing reforms in the sector are summarized as follows:
• Ensure that all Nigerians own or have access to decent, safe and sanitary housing
accommodation at affordable cost with secure tenure.
• Pursue vigorously the implementation of private sector led mass construction of houses with
government encouragement and involvement.
• Provide adequate incentives and an enabling environment for greater private sector (formal
and informal) participation in the provision of housing.
• Strengthen existing institutions involved in housing delivery at the Federal level.
• Promote measures that will mobilize long-term and affordable funding for the housing sector.
• Promote the use of locally produced building materials as a means of reducing housing
construction cost.
• Promote the use of Nigerian professionals, appropriate designs and technologies in housing
delivery.
5
• Encourage active participation of other tiers of government in housing delivery.
• Improve the quality of rural housing and infrastructure (National Housing Policy, 2006).
3. MATERIALS AND METHOD
The field work involved the physical analysis of houses in relation to the areas and
streets; their uses, types, ownership and building age (i.e. how long the buildings have
been in existence). This process was systematically carried out based on the subdivision
of the area commencing from the Woji, through Abuloma axis towards the south
terminating in and around the Amadi-Ama community. The other aspect of the field
work involved the administration of questionnaires to selected (sample) households
spread across the study area. The method adopted was that of direct interview with
heads of households, but in two cases the spouse attended to our questions due to the
absence of the head. After the completion of the field work, the field data were analyzed.
The process involved the verification of all data obtained in relation to what is expected.
The areas selected are a high brow developing area of the city and can only be
compared to the inhabitants expected to be the catchment for the Greater Port Harcourt
City.
3.1. SURVEY FRAME WORK
The house type in the area surveyed were the modern newly built detached and un-
detached duplexes, Bungalows of 2-3 bedrooms, etc., accounting for 48% of all house
types. The modal walling, roofing material and foundation type were cement blocks,
corrugated iron sheets and strip, respectively. About 70.2% of the houses were block of
flats fenced and accommodating about 8 flats, while 29.8% were single unit duplexes
and bungalows. There was total dependence on boreholes for potable water supply and
100% use of the water closet or pour-flush toilets for human waste disposal; all
residents reported that they tipped their household wastes on the streets.
Respondents were asked to rate their neighbourhoods by agreeing or disagreeing with

statements characterizing their neighbourhoods. For the purpose of rating, a 5-point
Likert Agreement Scale was utilized as follows: 1. Disagree Strongly; 2. Disagree
Somewhat; 3. Neither Agree nor Disagree; 4. Agree Somewhat; 5. Agree Strongly. The
results are shown in Fig 5. In Fig 5 the question was “Please indicate your level of
agreement or disagreement with statements (coded A-H), while
A = My neighborhood is quiet
B = My neighborhood is friendly
C = There is a lot of road traffic
6
D = The neighborhood is crowded
E = There are too many strangers
F = The neighborhood is safe (crime rate is low)
G = The neighborhood is attractive
H = There is influx of commercial sex workers
It is evident that in general, people did not rate the quality of their neighbourhood
highly for example, only 2.8, 7.9, 11.6 and 9.8% strongly disagreed that their
neighbourhood was quiet, that the neighbourhood was friendly that the neighbourhood
was safe (i.e., crime rate was low) and that the neighbourhood was attractive,
respectively. Similarly, about 52.8, 0, 0 and 7% strongly agreed that there was a lot of
road traffic that the neighbourhood was crowded that there were too many strange
faces and that there was influx of commercial sex workers.
Respondents were also requested to rate the liveability of their neighbourhoods. The
question was: on the whole would you say that this community is a good place to live in?
Most respondents (37.2%) thought that their neighbourhoods were good places to live
in, however a sizeable proportion (62.8%) thought otherwise. Asked to state three
items (in order of importance) that they desired in order to improve their
neighbourhoods, modal first, second and third mentioned items mentioned by
respondents were police post or adequate security, market and regular electricity,
respectively.
7
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Agree Strongly
23.9 59.4 43.4 0 0 21.2 3.1 7
agree somewhat 30 24 12.4 11.5 1.2 25.2 50 6. 4
8.5 3.6 0 0 7.2 5.2 7.1 17
Neither agree nor 34.8 5.12 40 32.4 12.4 36.8 30.1 32.1
disagree 2.8 7.9 4.18 55.1 79.1 11.6 9.8 37.6
Fig.5: Evaluation of neighborhood
Very pleased
Somewhat pleased
Neither pleased nor displeased Series1

Very displeased
Somewhat displeased
0 10 20 30 40 50
Fig. 6:
Feelings of household respondents about mega city
(Field Survey, October, 2008)
Resident’s feelings about a Better Planned City: Respondents’ feelings about a better
planned city are shown in Fig. 6. It was found that a sizeable proportion (85%) of them
were either very pleased or somewhat pleased, while about one half (15%) were either
somewhat displeased or very displeased with the mega city process.
It was hypothesized that various personality attributes were important in determining

the way people felt about moving in to a better planned city i.e., that these attributes
were related to the feeling about the mega city. In different cross-tabulations, the
observed Chi-square values indicated significant relationships (p<0.01) between
8
marital status, age, income, employment status and feeling about a better planned city.
For marital status and age, the relationships were reasonably strong, Cramer’s V being
0.429 and 0.428, respectively. The relationships were weaker for income and
employment status with Cramer’s V being 0.253 and 0.271, respectively.
Regarding marital status:
• Of the married, 73% were somewhat pleased or very pleased; 17.5% were somewhat
displeased, while 9.5% were neither pleased nor displeased
• Of the separated, 50.6% were somewhat pleased or very pleased; 21.7% were somewhat
displeased or very displeased, while 27.8% were neither pleased nor displeased
• Of the never married, 77.4% were somewhat pleased or very pleased: 20.7% were
somewhat displeased or very displeased, while 1.9% were neither pleased nor displeased
With respect to age:
• Of those aged <40, 90.9% were neither pleased nor displeased, while the rest (9.1%) were
somewhat displeased with the mega city
• Of those aged between 40 and 64, 70.9% were somewhat pleased or very pleased and
26.7% were somewhat displeased or displeased, while 2.4% were neither pleased nor
displeased
• Of those aged 65 years and above 25.5% were somewhat displeased or displeased, while
64.6% were somewhat pleased or pleased and 9.9% were neither pleased nor displeased
Concerning income:
• Amongst low income earners (N180,000 – 2000,000 per month or less), 47% were
somewhat displeased and 52% were somewhat pleased
• Amongst middle income earners (N200,000-500,999 per month), 11.1% were somewhat
displeased, 16.6% were uncertain, while 72.2% were somewhat pleased or pleased
• Amongst the high income group (N510,000 and above per month), 73.3% were somewhat
pleased or Very pleased
9
Table 8: Reasons for displeasure with mega city (percentage distribution of 1st, 2nd and 3rd mentions)
The question was: If you are displeased, tell me in order of importance, three major reasons for your displeasure (Field survey,
October, 2010)
Table 9: Reasons for pleasure with mega City (percentage distribution of first, second and third mentions)
The question was: If you are pleased, tell me in order of importance, three major reasons for your pleasure; (Field survey,
October, 2010)
Table 10: Perceived impacts of the mega City by port Harcourt indigenes
(Field survey, October, 2010)
10
3.1.1 Participating local authorities
All participating authorities, whether state or local councils have been met as part of this
feasibility study and all sites visited. Data and information on current local conditions in visited
local government councils vary depending on the preparedness of the people met. As part of the
preparation for this project, the Blink 180 International has been gathering information on
housing needs in each area of the city, based on the above survey carried out.
Also, all costs and values indicated in the tables below submitted by the Blink 180 are estimates,
whether for land and building and prior investment value as well as for required investments
and building survey and architectural and engineering design. Buildings listed for each unit are
also subject to change as well as whether units will be rental or ownership through mortgage.
3.1.2Project Management
The estate offers 5000 exquisite units of various house types including apartment blocks of 10
floors for one, two and three bedroom flats. 4 bedroom flats, 4-bedroom Terraces and 5-
bedroom detached and un-detached duplexes. The vision behind this is to turn dreams into
reality for many- the dream of premium living in the serenity of the new Garden City; an idyllic
community framed against the backdrop of an environmentally balanced and aesthetically
appealing landscape where residents will proudly call home and in which they can conveniently
and comfortably live, work and play.
Beside the high quality accommodation and excellent finishes, the residents will enjoy an array
of first class services and infrastructure. There would be an automated security/access control;
a helipad to facilitate easy commutes to and fro the city center or the airport. A unique Eco-
Center that will process clean and safe drinking water and equally manage waste. An
independent power scheme to ensure electricity supply round the clock. Residents will avail
themselves of the facilities of an excellent health center, high speed broadband internet network
for both residential and commercial subscribers. A fully equipped fire station and a shopping
mall will also be located within the estate.
The project will be centrally managed, through delegation of authority from the Blink 180
International to the PPP, by the GPHCDA created for the management of the Mega City. This
Supervision Committee is to be created to coordinate and oversee the implementation of the
project.
The Blink 180 International shall be in charge of financial and technical management, including
procurement, day-to-day follow up and monitoring, reporting to the PPP and the GPHCDA.
Works supervision is outsourced. Building inspection, commissioning of architectural and
engineering designs and selection of beneficiaries will be carried out locally by indigenous
contractors and consultants.
For the purpose of the project, buildings ownership will be transferred to the PPP from the
signing of GPHCDA authorities’ participation into the project (subsidiary subrogating
Cooperation Agreements) till completion of works where they will be handed back over to Blink
180 International Ltd. Maintenance and operation as well as rent collection is the responsibility
of the Blink 180 International Ltd. An organization affiliated to GPHCDA, shall be vested with the
11
consultancy, for Verification and Assessment of Construction Projects, they will verify all
projects documentation and carry out works inspection. The Consultant shall be in charge of
ensuring that all local building standards are respected. In terms of money flow, payments will
be issued by the PPP from a project account in local currency, this account will be fed by account
in the same bank to which proceeds of the loan will be transferred by approved bank from a
special account with the Treasury into which the Blink 180 will disburse the tranches of the
loan. These disbursements will be phased according to a project provisional implementation
and expenditures schedule which Blink 180 needs to prepare. They will be conditional to
satisfactory implementation and documentation of prior phases.
The expansion of the project scope to a mortgage scheme and a buyback scheme will require
additional capacities compared with the loan especially in terms of procurement and
monitoring and supervision.
3.1.3Cost Analysis
The table (I) Appendix (1) below shows the project estimated cost and sales summary as per the
project proposal prepared by Blink 180 International
The mortgage cost being borne by the ultimate borrowers is not factored in this table.
As each sub project differs in nature from blocks of flats to semi-detached and cubic row
buildings and mansards, the only way to have a clear and actual idea of construction cost per
square meter would be done during the actual engineering phase of the project, during which a
QS would analyse the costs of the various types of buildings proposed, after proper engineering
of this prototypes have been done. However, a list of the entire prototype is listed below, to
form a guideline to what is expected. In effect, through estimated calculation the total project
shall provide state-of-the-art security systems (electro fence perimeter, CCTV monitoring,
patrols, electronic badge access), redundant power systems, communications (high speed
internet-VSAT, satellite TV, radio communications), water supply, roads, ambient lighting and
other amenities.
The development cost program which shall include cost units of one bedroom penthouse to five
bedrooms located in 25 residential towers of 20 flats each, terraces and detached house types
that offer a variety of lifestyles and amenities that will make every facet of living a wonderful
experience with well laid out plans, recreational facilities, medical and educational centres, a
shopping centre and an eco-system
Cost estimate shall be =N= 80b:
(a) Land Capitalisation Cost (Including all necessary documentations):

(b) Infrastructures and Facilities
(i) Water and waste Treatment Plants
(ii) Power Generating Plants
(iii) Road Networks (6 kilometres)
(iv) Basketball Courts
(v) Lawn Tennis Courts
12
(vi) Fencing of the whole estate
(vii) Security Posts
(viii) Police Posts
(c) Others
(ix) Schools
(x) Sports & Recreational Club
(xi) Shopping Mall
(xii) Clinics
(d) Housing Units
STANDARD STAND ALONE DUPLEXES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
(xiii) DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')(2 DUPLEXES

PER BLOCK)
(xiv) CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')(2 DUPLEXES

PER BLOCK)
(xv) CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) (5 DUPLEXES PER BLOCK)/15
Blocks
(xvi) ICONIC ROW HOUSES 4 DUPLEXES PER BLOCK
(xvii) LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS AND TOWERS 20 Flats on 10 Floors
(xviii) ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS AND TOWERS 20 Flats on 10 Floors
3.1.4 Financing and Reimbursement plan
The Borrower is the PPP. Ultimate beneficiaries of the loan are the participating PPP and Blink
180 International who will also bear the cost of its reimbursements.
The project is made up of two components, each to be considered as a sub project with its own
financing model. The total value of component one and two (around 5000 units) as estimated.
The estimated amount expected is 500 Million USD. This amount includes 65% of the cost of the
works; works supervision and salaries and operating costs of the Blink 180 International Ltd.
should be added to it. Total value of project component needs to be refined, according to the
Blink 180 Int. estimates, it amounts to 300M USD with 100MUSD required for works as
determined.
The remaining 100M is representing the cost of building machineries and sites surveys, Project
management, Site contingencies, architectural and engineering design.
However, the reimbursement plan shall be as worked out in table 4 Appendix (iv) below
13
The table mentioned above shall be for 24 months projections, but however prorated workings
have been made for a 12 months cash flow projections which shall when well managed as
intended by Blink 180 Financial experts shall be able to keep the loan account serviceable
within the shortest time of project commissioning. Table (iii) below gives a summary of the
calculations.
3.1.5. Cost benefit analysis of the project
The project provides good value as far as component one is concerned. It both allows delivering
rental units at an optimal cost to people and contributes to absorbing the stock of unsold
building structure. The risk here is the delay in payment of rents as against the projections
already made. The delay in rent payment cannot be attributed to lack of income in this case but
some delays may occur due to scale of preference drawn by beneficiary with the hope that since
his work history is already known some concessions may be given.
Component two is less favourable as the cost and risk associated to a mortgage scheme in
Nigeria are quite high, its cost benefit analysis is not as good as component one. Component
three combines the risk of component two in respect of the share of the units it intends to
deliver through mortgage.
3.1.6. Risk assessment, mitigation measures
The project is made up of three components, rental flats, mortgage and outright buy, each to be
considered with its own risk and possible mitigation measures. It comprises 2280 blocks of
various blocks of different pattern and well-designed buildings proposed to be bought back and
rented.
Component one, rental flats
The main risk with regard to this component is related to the population it intends to target.
Beneficiaries of component one being middle class employees, who for the fact they love serene
and lovely environment, might leave their private apartment and decide to move in to the estate
with the hope of getting their own built structure rented out just to enjoy the benefit of a
working system.
The risk here is the delay in payment of rents as against the projections already made. The delay
in rent payment cannot be attributed to lack of income in this case but some delays may occur
due to scale of preference drawn by beneficiary with the hope that since his work history is
already known some concessions may be given.
Component two, mortgages
This component main caveat lies in the absence of a serious assessment of the disposable
income and capacity to pay for the targeted beneficiaries, i.e., young middle income earners, or
young specialists.
Mortgages are available for up to 40 per cent of the house value to be purchased and for tenors
up to 20 years. Payment shall be designed to be flexible.
14
However, banks had not been approached prior to this feasibility study and no assessment of
the mortgage market had been made. Several persons told the consultant that people in Nigeria
“would do anything to finance their homes”. This is typically a situation where extra caution
should be used as the Blink 180 International and partners does not want to promote a scheme
whereby constrained borrowers would be committed to unsustainable repayment.
The cost of the mortgage component will be determined by the conditions of the participating
banks: interest rate and expected profit, maturity, percentage of flat cost financed through
mortgage, requested down payment, requested guarantee, etc.
As one banker said: “trust is the main issue to develop mortgages in this country”. This
component seems then to carry a lot of uncertainties and both de-risking it and make sure it
would not miss its social target would require a project on its own, de-grouped from a rental
scheme.
Component three, outright buy
In addition to the risk linked to its mortgage part, the main risk with this component lies with
the acquiring of other privately developed and owned building structures in other parts of
Nigeria such as Abuja and Lagos by most people within the target category, due to the fact that
at the time they actually needed a place to call their own, there was not such a place like this in
the city. But judging by the rate of population growth and influx from other cities to port
Harcourt as have been calculated during the survey, and the estimated project duration for this
estate calculated at 18 months from the time of award, it is imperative to note that this
component seems to have also a very good potential of outright sell out. This is determined by
the fact that in the whole of Niger delta, the entire oil and gas has moved their offices to Port
Harcourt city for the sake of safety and production. Suffice it to say that just recently Shell just
moved out from Warri to Port Harcourt completely with its entire staff and so many more office
structures being constructed in the Shell IA to accommodate these staff. These affected people
are buying landed properties in remote areas of Port Harcourt in a bid to get settled down in a
property of their own as ascertained from the survey carried out. These categories of people
when presented with the option of the mega city estate indicated high interest in the quality of
environment, serenity, and relaxation provided and would prefer to live in a place well planned
than what is available at the moment.
IX. Comments and Recommendations
Rivers State, Nigeria’s second largest economic powerhouse and host to one of Africa’s
hydrocarbon economic backbones. Port Harcourt, popularly called the ‘Garden City’ because of
its ambiance, is set to witness a major breakthrough in the provision of upscale housing.
The project is well conceived as far as its overall goal is to palliate the quality housing deficit in
Port Harcourt for the middle class and the rich.
Based on the conducted survey, and analysis sampled, it has been concluded that there is
market for residential real estate in Port Harcourt. Demand for residential houses outweigh
their supplies which has enabled developers to come in, build and make their money.
15
Housing accommodation in Port-Harcourt has assumed a critical dimension, owing greatly to in-
migration that is traceable to the presence of various banks, oil and Gas companies including the
recent relocation of head offices of major players in the oil and gas such as NLNG and SPDC. Also
it is worth noting that with effect from January 2013, a mass movement of Shell (SPDC) and
other oil and gas companies out of Delta State was effected, as a result of the divestment of OML
34, OML 40, OML 42, OML 36, etc. all in Delta state, creating more influx of their staff to Port
Harcourt, thereby creating a huge demand for quality housing to cater for their demand.
Furthermore, the concentration of government agencies/ parastatals, oil companies/oil
servicing companies among others in Port-Harcourt have made Port-Harcourt to act as vast
magnet to individuals within the middle and the upper class. Eventually, this enormous
population inundated the few available adequate housing units, such as the outright sale off of
the Trans-Amadi Gardens to Total Fina Elf who in turn sold to staff. Also the Intels’ residential
estates and commercial facilities at Aba Road Estate, Heliconia Park, Onne Estate and Warri,
which set the industry standard of excellence for security, reliability and quality of
accommodations and amenities is far too expensive and wholly patronised by cooperate oil and
gas companies for their staff on a prepaid basis, thereby making in effect a proliferation of
inadequate housing units across the state, some of which are substandard in quality, and some
beset with a legion of ecological problems.
The oil companies and oil servicing companies in Port-Harcourt at the moment includes but not
limited to the following:
1) Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) at Rumumasi, Port-Harcourt.
2) Agip Oil Company at Nkpolu Oroworoko, Mile 4 Port-Harcourt.
3) TOTAL FINA ELF at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcour.t
4) Chevron Oil Company at Choba, Port-Harcourt.
5) Hallibutin Oil Company at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcourt.
6) SLUMBERGER Oil Company at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcourt.
7) WAOS Oil Company at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcourt,
8) SAIPEM Oil Company at Rumulumnie, Port-Harcourt.
9) Noble Drilling, KM 10 Aba- Port-Harcourt Express Road, Rumuokwrisi.
10) Sea Truck Oil Nigeria Ltd. –Trans Amadi, Port-Harcourt.
11) Santa Sede Oil Drilling –Rumuomasi, Port-Harcourt.
12) African Oil Field-Trans Amadi, Port-Harcourt.
13) Geo-Services Drilling-Trans Amadi, Port-Harcourt.
14) Oil Server- World Town, Port-Harcourt
15) DATA Oil-Trans Amadi, Port-Harcourt.
16
16) Nigerian Liquefied Natural Gas Limited, Eastern By-Pass Amadi Ama, Port Harcourt.
17) Nigerian National Petroleum corporation (NNPC) Zonal Office Okirika Road, Port-Harcourt.
It is therefore worth noting here that the estate is designed as a prestigious mixed-use
development targeted at high net worth individuals including oil company workers and
executives of multinationals as well as young and upwardly mobile professional men and
women, looking to enjoy success.
This therefore means that the components two and three are the main components expected to
take care of the reimbursement plan, while component one will be managed by Blink 180
international.
Port Harcourt, popularly called the ‘Garden City’ because of its ambiance, is therefore set to
witness a major breakthrough in the provision of this upscale housing estate, and now is the
right time to start.
REFERENCE:
A FRAMEWORK FOR COST MANAGEMENT OF LOW COST HOUSING BY Murtala A OLADAPO
Ede et al., Greater Port Harcourt Master Plan 2008, 47th ISOCARP Congress 2011By Precious N.
Ede, Opuenebo B. Owei and ChimbikoIcheAkarolo
Survey results.
17
Table (i) Cost and Sales summary Appendix (1)
S/No. Home Type Unit Cost Unit Total Cost Unit Sales Total Sales
60%`
1 DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 63,289,064 120 7,594,687,699

2 Stewards') 101,262,503 12,151,500,319
2 CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms 60,180,086 120 7,221,610,345
& 2 Stewards') 96,288,138 11,554,576,552
3 CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) 44,935,111 220 9,885,724,356
71,896,177 15,817,158,970
4 ICONIC ROW HOUSES 40,610,947 220 8,934,408,318
64,977,515 14,295,053,309
5 LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS 38,900,096 510 19,839,049,017
62,240,154 31,742,478,428
6 ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS 35,875,800 990 35,517,042,330
57,401,281 56,827,267,728
Grand Total 2,180 88,992,522,066
142,388,035,305
Offtakers 41,007,754,168 Sales
Loan Off Takers 40%

47,984,767,898 56,955,214,122
discount - 5,695,521,412
allwed 10%
51,259,692,710
50% into project part-payment
40% 20,503,877,084
80% completion part-payment
40% 20,503,877,084
Completion Balance
payment 20% 10,251,938,542
51,259,692,710
18
Owners' Control 20% Rents
28,477,607,061
Balance available for sale 56,955,214,122
WORKINGS
Units 60% Sales Total for 60% sales 40% of Unit

Cost
DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 48 4,860,600,127
2 Stewards') 101,262,50 25,315,626 1,215,150,032
3
CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms 48 4,621,830,621
& 2 Stewards') 96,288,138 24,072,034 1,155,457,655
CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) 88 6,326,863,588
71,896,177 17,974,044 1,581,715,897
ICONIC ROW HOUSES 88 5,718,021,324
64,977,515 16,244,379 1,429,505,331
LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS 396 24,647,100,897
62,240,154 15,560,038 6,161,775,224
ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS 204 11,709,861,229
57,401,281 14,350,320 2,927,465,307
872 57,884,277,786
113,516,442 14,471,069,446
Units Sales for first year 28,942,138,893 7,235,534,723
DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 24

Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms 24 Insurance
& 2 Stewards')
CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) 44 355,970,088
ICONIC ROW HOUSES 44 Advertising
LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS 198 533,955,132
19
ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS 102
Amount through Rentage
Rents Units
DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 7,000,000 8 810,100,021 506,312,513
CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 6,250,000 8 770,305,103 481,440,690
CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) 5,250,000 15 1,078,442,657 674,026,661
ICONIC ROW HOUSES 4,500,000 12 779,730,180 487,331,363
LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS 2,500,000 24 1,493,763,691 933,602,307
ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS 2,000,000 24 1,377,630,733 861,019,208
DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 8,525,000 6 768,000,000 480,000,000

7,077,972,386 4,423,732,741
S/No. Home Type Unit Cost Unit Total Cost Unit Sale
60%`
1 DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 63,289,064 120 7,594,687,699 101,262
2 CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 60,180,086 120 7,221,610,345 96,288
3 CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) 44,935,111 220 9,885,724,356 71,896
4 ICONIC ROW HOUSES 40,610,947 220 8,934,408,318 64,977
5 LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS 38,900,096 510 19,839,049,017 62,240
20
6 ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS 35,875,800 990 35,517,042,330 57,401
Grand Total 2,180 88,992,522,066
Offtakers 41,007,754,168
Loan 47,984,767,898 Off Takers 40%
discount allwed
50% into project part-payment 4

80% completion part-payment 4
Balance payme
Completion 20%
Owners' Control 20% Rents

Balance available for
sale
WORKINGS
Units 60% Sales Total for 60% sales 40% of Unit Cos
DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 48 101,262,503 4,860,600,127 25,315
CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 48 96,288,138 4,621,830,621 24,072
CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) 88 71,896,177 6,326,863,588 17,974
ICONIC ROW HOUSES 88 64,977,515 5,718,021,324 16,244
21
LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS 396 62,240,154 24,647,100,897 15,560
ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS 204 57,401,281 11,709,861,229 14,350
872 57,884,277,786 113,516
Units Sales for first year 28,942,138,893

DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 24
CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards') 24 Insurance
CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ) 44 355,970,088
ICONIC ROW HOUSES 44 Advertising
LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS 198 533,955,132
ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS 102
Table 2 Cash Flow Projections Appendix (ii)
CASHFLOW PROJECTIONS
FIRST 12 MONTHS (1 YEAR)
Month 0 Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6
=N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N=
22
Balance Brought Forward
- 9,753,849,372 9,386,814,785 9,031,551,573 9,147,304,360 9,446,199,461 10,592,732,344
Cash Inflow:
Equity:
- Off Takers (Balance Payment)
10,251,938,542
- Owners' control (Rents)
14,250,000 26,750,000 32,750,000 41,000,000 42,500,000 41,000,000
Sales
448,052,738 448,052,738 1,051,098,783 1,122,994,960 2,013,556,852 2,052,400,002
Total Inflow
10,251,938,542 462,302,738 474,802,738 1,083,848,783 1,163,994,960 2,056,056,852 2,093,400,002
Available Cash Balance
10,251,938,542 10,216,152,110 9,861,617,523 10,115,400,356 10,311,299,320 11,502,256,313 12,686,132,346
Cash Outflow:
Finance & Adminstration:
Bank charges
2,478,055.57 4,126,056.34 4,129,681.34 4,816,397.99 4,303,979.40 4,524,994.87 5,068,785.79
Interest on loans
799,746,132 799,746,132 799,746,132 799,746,132 799,746,132 799,746,132
Principal Repayments
- - - - - - -
Insurance
355,970,088
Sales & Marketing:
Legal, Professional Fees and Sales Commission

23,115,137 23,740,137 54,192,439 58,199,748 102,802,843 104,670,000
Advertiment Expenses
106,791,026 106,791,026 106,791,026
23
Operations:
Internets connection and website hosting

1,000,000 500,000
Transport and travelling
100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Telephone, Postages
100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Office Supplies and Stationeries
500,000 100,000 100,000
Office Equipments
10,000,000
Motor Vehicles
20,000,000
Repairs & Maintenance
100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 100,000 100,000 300,000
Salaries & Wages
1,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Miscellaneous
50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Total Outflow
498,089,170 829,337,325 830,065,950 968,095,995 865,099,859 909,523,969 1,018,825,944
Net Increase/(Decrease) in Cash - -
9,753,849,372 367,034,587 355,263,212 115,752,788 298,895,101 1,146,532,883 1,074,574,058
Net Cash Balance carried forward
9,753,849,372 9,386,814,785 9,031,551,573 9,147,304,360 9,446,199,461 10,592,732,344 11,667,306,402
CASHFLOW PROJECTIONS
FIRST 12 MONTHS (1 YEAR)
Month 0 Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Total
24
=N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N=
Balance
Brought - 10,633,641,372 10,194,353,985 9,766,837,973 9,816,883,198 10,043,525,499 11,133,998,819 12,126,672,077 10,338,418,846 8,567,789,664 8,127,806,833 8,804,321,511 9,715,972,420
Forward
Cash Inflow:
Equity:
- Off Takers
(Balance 11,173,538,542 11,173,538,542
Payment)
- Owners'
14,250,000 26,750,000 49,800,000 41,000,000 59,550,000 41,000,000 64,050,000 32,000,000 33,500,000 9,000,000 13,500,000 13,500,000 397,900,000
control (Rents)
Sales 448,052,738 448,052,738 1,051,098,783 1,122,994,960 2,013,556,852 2,052,400,002 2,052,400,002 2,052,400,002 3,523,446,245 4,548,901,225 4,741,477,501 4,179,471,610 28,234,252,655
Total Inflow 11,173,538,542 462,302,738 474,802,738 1,100,898,783 1,163,994,960 2,073,106,852 2,093,400,002 2,116,450,002 2,084,400,002 3,556,946,245 4,557,901,225 4,754,977,501 4,192,971,610 39,805,691,197
Available Cash 10,669,156,72 10,867,736,75 12,422,818,84 12,685,708,05 13,559,299,01

11,173,538,542 11,095,944,110 10,980,878,158 12,116,632,351 13,227,398,821 14,243,122,078 12,124,735,909 13,908,944,029
Balance 3 6 7 7 2
Cash Outflow:
Finance &
Administration
:
Bank charges 2,686,055.57 4,485,523.01 4,489,148.01 5,228,127.15 4,663,446.06 4,888,724.04 5,476,252.46 19,426,384.24 19,179,249.67 19,885,219.29 19,310,380.83 19,121,027.82 19,317,859.41 148,157,398
Interest on
871,639,465 871,639,465 871,639,465 871,639,465 871,639,465 871,639,465 871,639,465 823,215,050 774,790,636 726,366,221 677,941,806 629,517,391 9,733,307,359
loans
Principal
- - - - - - - 2,905,464,883 2,905,464,883 2,905,464,883 2,905,464,883 2,905,464,883 2,905,464,883 17,432,789,299
Repayments
Insurance 387,970,088 387,970,088
Sales &
-
Marketing:
Legal,
Professional
23,115,137 23,740,137 55,044,939 58,199,748 103,655,343 104,670,000 105,822,500 104,220,000 177,847,312 227,895,061 237,748,875 209,648,580 1,431,607,633
Fees and Sales
Commission
Advertisement
116,391,026 116,391,026 116,391,026 116,391,026 116,391,026 581,955,132
Expenses
-
Operations:
Internets
connection and
1,000,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,500,000
website
hosting
Transport and
100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,300,000
travelling
25
Telephone,
100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,300,000
Postages
Office Supplies
and 500,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 200,000 1,000,000
Stationeries
Office
10,000,000 10,000,000
Equipment
Motor Vehicles 20,000,000 20,000,000
Repairs &
100,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 100,000 100,000 300,000 2,100,000
Maintenance
Salaries &
1,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 25,000,000
Wages
Miscellaneous 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 650,000
Total Outflow 539,897,170 901,590,125 902,318,750 1,050,853,558 937,352,659 982,633,532 1,100,726,744 3,904,703,233 3,855,029,183 3,996,929,077 3,881,386,546 3,843,326,592 3,882,889,741 29,779,636,909
Net
- -
Increase/(Decr 10,633,641,372 - 439,287,387
427,516,012
50,045,225 226,642,301 1,090,473,320 992,673,258 - 1,788,253,231
1,770,629,182
- 439,982,832 676,514,679 911,650,908 310,081,869 10,026,054,288
ease) in Cash
Net Cash
Balance
10,633,641,372 10,194,353,985 9,766,837,973 9,816,883,198 10,043,525,499 11,133,998,819 12,126,672,077 10,338,418,846 8,567,789,664 8,127,806,833 8,804,321,511 9,715,972,420 10,026,054,288
carried
forward
Table 3 Rent Projection for Two Years Appendix (iii)
SALES PROJECTION FOR TWO YEARS

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Total
26
=N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N=
Cart 1: Stand Alone Duplex Houses (5
Bedrooms & 2 Stewards)
Units Rents - - 2 - 2 - 2 - - - 6
Sales Price per
8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 8,525,000 -
Unit
Sub-Total - - 17,050,000 - 17,050,000 - 17,050,000 - - - - - 51,150,000
14,208,333 11,366,667 8,525,000 - 34,100,000
Cart 2: Deluxe Semi-Detached Houses (5
Units Rents - - 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - - 8
Sales Price per
7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 -
Unit
Sub-Total - - 14,000,000 - 14,000,000 - 14,000,000 - 14,000,000 - - - 56,000,000
11,666,667 9,333,333 7,000,000 4,666,667 32,666,667
Cart 3: Cassic Semi-Detached Houses (4
-
Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
Units Rents - 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - - - - 8
Sales Price per
6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 6,250,000 -
Unit
Sub-Total - 12,500,000 - 12,500,000 - 12,500,000 - 12,500,000 - - - - 50,000,000
11,458,333 9,375,000 7,291,667 5,208,333 33,333,333
Cart 4: Cubic Row Houses (with Penthouse &
-
B/Q)
Units Rents 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 15
Sales Price per
5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000
Unit
Sub-Total 5,250,000 5,250,000 5,250,000 10,500,000 10,500,000 10,500,000 10,500,000 10,500,000 10,500,000 - - - 78,750,000
5,250,000 4,812,500 4,375,000 7,875,000 7,000,000 6,125,000 5,250,000 4,375,000 3,500,000 48,562,500
Cart 5: Iconic Row Houses -
Units Rents 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 12
Sales Price per
4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000
Unit
Sub-Total 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 9,000,000 9,000,000 9,000,000 13,500,000 - - - - - 54,000,000
4,500,000 4,125,000 3,750,000 6,750,000 6,000,000 5,250,000 6,750,000 37,125,000
Cart 6: Linear Block Flats -
Units Rents 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 24
27
Sales Price per
2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000
Unit
Sub-Total 2,500,000 2,500,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 7,500,000 7,500,000 60,000,000
2,500,000 2,291,667 4,166,667 3,750,000 3,333,333 2,916,667 2,500,000 2,083,333 1,666,667 1,250,000 1,250,000 625,000 28,333,333
Cart 7: Angular Block Flats -
Units Rents 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 24
Sales Price per
2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
Unit
Sub-Total 2,000,000 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 48,000,000
2,000,000 1,833,333 3,333,333 3,000,000 2,666,667 2,333,333 2,000,000 1,666,667 1,333,333 1,000,000 1,000,000 500,000 22,666,667
202,687,500
14,250,000 26,750,000 49,800,000 41,000,000 59,550,000 41,000,000 64,050,000 32,000,000 33,500,000 9,000,000 13,500,000 13,500,000 397,900,000
SALES PROJECTION FOR TWO YEARS

Cart Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month Month Month Total
10 11 12
=N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N= =N=
Cart 1: Stand Alone Duplex (5
28
Units 6 2 2 2 2 4 2 20
Sold
Sales 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 -
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total - - - - 768,000,000 256,000,000 256,000,000 256,000,000 256,000,000 512,000,000 256,000,000 - 2,560,000,000
Cart 2: Deluxe Semi-Detached

Houses (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards)
Units 6 2 2 2 2 4 4 2 24
Sold
Sales 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 -
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total - - - - 607,575,016 202,525,005 202,525,005 202,525,005 202,525,005 405,050,011 405,050,011 202,525,005 2,430,300,064
Cart 3: Classic Semi-Detached -

Houses (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
Units 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 4 16
Sold
Sales 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 -
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total - - - - 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 192,576,276 192,576,276 385,152,552 385,152,552 1,540,610,207
Cart 4: Cubic Row Houses (with -

Penthouse & B/Q)
Units 2 2 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 1 42
Sold
Sales 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 143,792,354 143,792,354 143,792,354 215,688,531 287,584,709 287,584,709 287,584,709 287,584,709 287,584,709 431,377,063 431,377,063 71,896,177 3,019,639,440
Units 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 41
Sold
Sales 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515
29
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 259,910,060 259,910,060 259,910,060 389,865,090 389,865,090 389,865,090 389,865,090 2,664,078,117
Units 2 2 8 8 8 12 12 12 32 30 30 30 186
Sold
Sales 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 124,480,308 124,480,308 497,921,230 497,921,230 497,921,230 746,881,845 746,881,845 746,881,845 1,991,684,921 1,867,204,613 1,867,204,613 1,867,204,613 11,576,668,603
Units 2 2 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 22 22 22 122
Sold
Sales 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 114,802,561 114,802,561 344,407,683 344,407,683 459,210,244 459,210,244 459,210,244 459,210,244 459,210,244 1,262,828,172 1,262,828,172 1,262,828,172 7,002,956,225
448,052,738 448,052,738 1,051,098,783 1,122,994,960 2,013,556,852 2,052,400,002 2,052,400,002 2,052,400,002 3,523,446,245 4,548,901,225 4,741,477,501 4,179,471,610 30,794,252,655
Year 2
Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Total
Cart 1: Stand Alone Duplex (5

Units 6 2 2 2 2 4 2 20
Sold
Sales 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 128,000,000 -
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total - - - - 768,000,000 256,000,000 256,000,000 256,000,000 256,000,000 512,000,000 256,000,000 - 2,560,000,000
Cart 2: Deluxe Semi-Detached Houses

(5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards)
Units 2 2 4 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 24
Sold
Sales 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 101,262,503 - - -
30
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total - - 405,050,011 202,525,005 202,525,005 405,050,011 405,050,011 405,050,011 202,525,005 202,525,005 - - 2,430,300,064
Cart 3: Cassic Semi-Detached Houses -

(4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')
Units 2 2 4 6 2 4 4 4 4 4 32
Sold
Sales 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 96,288,138 - - -
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total - - 385,152,552 577,728,828 192,576,276 385,152,552 385,152,552 385,152,552 385,152,552 385,152,552 - - 3,081,220,414
Cart 4: Cubic Row Houses (with

-
Penthouse & B/Q)
Units 3 3 3 3 4 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 46
Sold
Sales 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177 71,896,177
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 215,688,531 215,688,531 215,688,531 215,688,531 287,584,709 431,377,063 287,584,709 287,584,709 287,584,709 287,584,709 287,584,709 287,584,709 3,307,224,148

Units 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 6 6 6 47
Sold
Sales 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515 64,977,515
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 194,932,545 194,932,545 194,932,545 259,910,060 194,932,545 194,932,545 194,932,545 194,932,545 259,910,060 389,865,090 389,865,090 389,865,090 3,053,943,207
Units 12 18 18 16 18 18 20 20 16 18 18 18 210
Sold
Sales 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154 62,240,154
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 746,881,845 1,120,322,768 1,120,322,768 995,842,460 1,120,322,768 1,120,322,768 1,244,803,076 1,244,803,076 995,842,460 1,120,322,768 1,120,322,768 1,120,322,768 13,070,432,294
31
Units 6 6 6 8 8 6 8 12 12 10 82
Sold
Sales 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281 57,401,281
Price per
Unit
Sub-Total 344,407,683 344,407,683 344,407,683 459,210,244 459,210,244 344,407,683 459,210,244 688,815,366 688,815,366 574,012,805 - - 4,706,905,004
1,501,910,605 1,875,351,528 2,665,554,090 2,710,905,129 2,457,151,547 2,881,242,622 2,976,733,136 3,206,338,258 2,819,830,153 2,959,462,929 1,797,772,567 1,797,772,567 32,210,025,130
Year 1 & 2 63,004,277,786
Table 4 Loan Repayment Schedule Appendix (iv)
LOAN REPAYMENTS SCHEDULE

24 MONTHS FORECAST
32
Principal
47,984,767,898
Interest Rate 20%p.a
Tenor 24
Term Reducing Balance
with 6 months
moratorium on
Principal
Balance b/f Repayments Balance c/f Interest Total

Repayments
Month 0 47,984,767,898
- 47,984,767,898 - -
Month 1 47,984,767,898
- 47,984,767,898 799,746,132 799,746,132
Month 2 47,984,767,898
- 47,984,767,898 799,746,132 799,746,132
Month 3 47,984,767,898
- 47,984,767,898 799,746,132 799,746,132
Month 4 47,984,767,898
- 47,984,767,898 799,746,132 799,746,132
Month 5 47,984,767,898
- 47,984,767,898 799,746,132 799,746,132
Month 6 47,984,767,898
- 47,984,767,898 799,746,132 799,746,132
Month 7 47,984,767,898
2,665,820,439 45,318,947,459 799,746,132 3,465,566,570
Month 8 45,318,947,459
2,665,820,439 42,653,127,020 755,315,791 3,421,136,230
Month 9 42,653,127,020
2,665,820,439 39,987,306,582 710,885,450 3,376,705,889
33
Month 10 39,987,306,582
2,665,820,439 37,321,486,143 666,455,110 3,332,275,548
Month 11 37,321,486,143
2,665,820,439 34,655,665,704 622,024,769 3,287,845,208
Month 12 34,655,665,704
2,665,820,439 31,989,845,265 577,594,428 3,243,414,867
Month 13 31,989,845,265
2,665,820,439 29,324,024,826 533,164,088 3,198,984,527
Month 14 29,324,024,826
2,665,820,439 26,658,204,388 488,733,747 3,154,554,186
Month 15 26,658,204,388
2,665,820,439 23,992,383,949 444,303,406 3,110,123,845
Month 16 23,992,383,949
2,665,820,439 21,326,563,510 399,873,066 3,065,693,505
Month 17 21,326,563,510
2,665,820,439 18,660,743,071 355,442,725 3,021,263,164
Month 18 18,660,743,071
2,665,820,439 15,994,922,633 311,012,385 2,976,832,823
Month 19 15,994,922,633
2,665,820,439 13,329,102,194 266,582,044 2,932,402,483
Month 20 13,329,102,194
2,665,820,439 10,663,281,755 222,151,703 2,887,972,142
Month 21 10,663,281,755
2,665,820,439 7,997,461,316 177,721,363 2,843,541,801
Month 22 7,997,461,316
2,665,820,439 5,331,640,878 133,291,022 2,799,111,461
Month 23 5,331,640,878
2,665,820,439 2,665,820,439 88,860,681 2,754,681,120
Month 24 2,665,820,439 -
2,665,820,439 0 44,430,341 2,710,250,779
Total
47,984,767,898 12,396,065,040 60,380,832,938
34
24 MONTHS FORECAST
Principal 52,298,367,898
Tenor 24
Term Reducing Balance with 6 months
moratorium on Principal
Principal
47,984,767,898
Tenor 24
Term Reducing
Balance with 6
months
moratorium on
Principal
Total
Balance b/f Repayments Balance c/f Interest
Repayments
Month 0 - - -
52,298,367,898 52,298,367,898
Month 1 -
52,298,367,898 52,298,367,898 871,639,465 871,639,465
Month 2 -
52,298,367,898 52,298,367,898 871,639,465 871,639,465
Month 3 -
52,298,367,898 52,298,367,898 871,639,465 871,639,465
35
Month 4 -
52,298,367,898 52,298,367,898 871,639,465 871,639,465
Month 5 -
52,298,367,898 52,298,367,898 871,639,465 871,639,465
Month 6 -
52,298,367,898 52,298,367,898 871,639,465 871,639,465
Month 7
52,298,367,898 2,905,464,883 49,392,903,015 871,639,465 3,777,104,348
Month 8
49,392,903,015 2,905,464,883 46,487,438,131 823,215,050 3,728,679,933
Month 9
46,487,438,131 2,905,464,883 43,581,973,248 774,790,636 3,680,255,519
Month 10
43,581,973,248 2,905,464,883 40,676,508,365 726,366,221 3,631,831,104
Month 11
40,676,508,365 2,905,464,883 37,771,043,482 677,941,806 3,583,406,689
Month 12
37,771,043,482 2,905,464,883 34,865,578,599 629,517,391 3,534,982,275
Month 13
34,865,578,599 2,905,464,883 31,960,113,715 581,092,977 3,486,557,860
Month 14
31,960,113,715 2,905,464,883 29,054,648,832 532,668,562 3,438,133,445
Month 15
29,054,648,832 2,905,464,883 26,149,183,949 484,244,147 3,389,709,030
Month 16
26,149,183,949 2,905,464,883 23,243,719,066 435,819,732 3,341,284,616
Month 17
23,243,719,066 2,905,464,883 20,338,254,183 387,395,318 3,292,860,201
Month 18
20,338,254,183 2,905,464,883 17,432,789,299 338,970,903 3,244,435,786
Month 19
17,432,789,299 2,905,464,883 14,527,324,416 290,546,488 3,196,011,372
Month 20
14,527,324,416 2,905,464,883 11,621,859,533 242,122,074 3,147,586,957
Month 21
11,621,859,533 2,905,464,883 8,716,394,650 193,697,659 3,099,162,542
36
Month 22
8,716,394,650 2,905,464,883 5,810,929,766 145,273,244 3,050,738,127
Month 23
5,810,929,766 2,905,464,883 2,905,464,883 96,848,829 3,002,313,713
Month 24 -
2,905,464,883 2,905,464,883 0 48,424,415 2,953,889,298
Total
52,298,367,898 13,510,411,707 65,808,779,605
37

Blink 180 International Limited Feassibility Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Blink 180 International Limited Feassibility Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Blink 180 International Limited Feassibility Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International LTD

Blink 180 International Limited

RIVERS STATE GOVERNMENT MEGA CITY HOUSING ESTATE Page 0

1.1 STATEMENT PROBLEMS

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF SURVEYAND BENEFICIARIES

1.2.1 Objectives and beneficiaries of the project

STANDARD STAND ALONE DUPLEXES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')

DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')

CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')

CUBIC ROW HOUSES (with Penthouse & BQ)

ICONIC ROW HOUSES

LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS

ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS

1.3 STUDY AREA

Fig. 1: Map Showing the Study Area

2. THE PROJECT CONTEXT

2.1 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HOUSING POLICY

• Strengthen existing institutions involved in housing delivery at the Federal level.

3. MATERIALS AND METHOD

3.1. SURVEY FRAME WORK

Respondents were asked to rate their neighbourhoods by agreeing or disagreeing with

C = There is a lot of road traffic

E = There are too many strangers

F = The neighborhood is safe (crime rate is low)

G = The neighborhood is attractive

H = There is influx of commercial sex workers

Fig.5: Evaluation of neighborhood

Neither pleased nor displeased Series1

It was hypothesized that various personality attributes were important in determining

Regarding marital status:

With respect to age:

(Field survey, October, 2010)

Cost estimate shall be =N= 80b:

(a) Land Capitalisation Cost (Including all necessary documentations):

(d) Housing Units

STANDARD STAND ALONE DUPLEXES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')

(xiii) DELUX SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (5 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')(2 DUPLEXES

(xiv) CLASSIC SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES (4 Bedrooms & 2 Stewards')(2 DUPLEXES

(xvii) LINEAR BLOCK OF FLATS AND TOWERS 20 Flats on 10 Floors

(xviii) ANGULAR BLOCK OF FLATS AND TOWERS 20 Flats on 10 Floors

3.1.4 Financing and Reimbursement plan

3.1.5. Cost benefit analysis of the project

3.1.6. Risk assessment, mitigation measures

Component one, rental flats

Component two, mortgages

Component three, outright buy

IX. Comments and Recommendations

1) Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) at Rumumasi, Port-Harcourt.

2) Agip Oil Company at Nkpolu Oroworoko, Mile 4 Port-Harcourt.

3) TOTAL FINA ELF at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcour.t

4) Chevron Oil Company at Choba, Port-Harcourt.

5) Hallibutin Oil Company at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcourt.

6) SLUMBERGER Oil Company at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcourt.

7) WAOS Oil Company at Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port-Harcourt,

8) SAIPEM Oil Company at Rumulumnie, Port-Harcourt.

9) Noble Drilling, KM 10 Aba- Port-Harcourt Express Road, Rumuokwrisi.

10) Sea Truck Oil Nigeria Ltd. –Trans Amadi, Port-Harcourt.

11) Santa Sede Oil Drilling –Rumuomasi, Port-Harcourt.