Uganda UN Common Premises Business Case June 04 2015

25/3/2015
GbadeSigismondSmith
PROJECTMANAGER
UNCOMMONPREMISES
UN House Plot 11 Yusuf Lule Road
Kampala Uganda
Business Case
Green UN Common Premises Lubowa Uganda
BUSINESS CASE TEMPLATE VERSION 1.5

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:......................................................................................................................................6
BENEFITS OF PROPOSED COMMON PREMISES: ...................................................................................................8
RISK & MITIGATION:............................................................................................................................................8
BACKGROUND/ INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................10
CURRENT SITUATION:........................................................................................................................................10
RATIONALE FOR COMMON PREMISES: .............................................................................................................11
COST REDUCTION NARRATIVE: .........................................................................................................................11
SECURITY NARRATIVE:.......................................................................................................................................13
AGENCIES REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................................14
LIST OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES: ...................................................................................................................14
NON- RESIDENT AGENCIES WITH SMALL STAFF THAT ARE PARTICIPATING:........................................................14
DETAILED PROJECTED SPACE REQUIREMENTS & COST OF .................................................................................17
Table I: Cost estimation .....................................................................................................................................17
TABLE II: MOSS REQUIREMENTS........................................................................................................................18
TABLE III: BUILDING OPTIONS............................................................................................................................19
PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................................................21
SUMMARY:......................................................................................................................................................21
SITE LOCATION:.................................................................................................................................................21
PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND DESIRED OUTCOMES:...............................................................................................21
Project scope and works required .................................................................................................................................22
WORKS: ...........................................................................................................................................................22
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS................................................................................................................................24
SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................................24
ANALYSIS..........................................................................................................................................................25
TABLE VIII: CURRENT RENT AND EXPENSES BY PARTICIPATING UN AGENCIES IN KAMPALA ...............................26
TABLE IX: REPAYMENT AND EXPENSES AT PROPOSED UN COMMON PREMISES BY PARTICIPATING UN AGENCIES
.........................................................................................................................................................................26
.........................................................................................................................................................................27
Please note the reduction in Recurring Cost / m2 from $283.27 in the current situation, to $214.95 in the proposed
development. It’s important to observe that when the essential external built up areas including car parking at the
proposed new premises is added to the analysis the Recurring Cost / m2 at the proposed development reduces
further to $83.72 per square meter, while the cost of repayment and maintenance remains constant. (See annex 4
table IX.1) This indicates clearly that at new premises the UN will be getting more value while paying significantly
less. ..................................................................................................................................................................27
FIVE YEAR ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................27
TABLE X.1: FIVE YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS VERSUS LUBOWA
CONSTRUCTION REPAYMENTS .........................................................................................................................27
.........................................................................................................................................................................28
TEN YEAR ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................................................28
TABLE XI.1: TEN YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS VERSUS LUBOWA
.........................................................................................................................................................................28
15 YEAR ANALYSIS.............................................................................................................................................28
TABLE XII : 15 YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS VERSUS LUBOWA
UGANDA UN COMMON PREMISES BUSINESS CASE PAGE 3 OF 67

.........................................................................................................................................................................29
Economic Indicators ..........................................................................................................................................30
Section..............................................................................................................................................................31
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT & BENEFITS................................................................................................................31
DELIVER AS ONE AND DELIVER GREEN...............................................................................................................31
BENEFITS ..........................................................................................................................................................32
PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENT............................................................................................................................32
RISK ANALYSIS & MITIGATING MEASURES.......................................................................................................32
SECURITY REPORT ON LUBOWA PREFERRED OPTION........................................................................................33
BUSINESS & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS...............................................................................................................35
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT......................................................................................................................36
TABLE IV: ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN ..................................................................37
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................................................................38
CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................................................38
RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................................................39
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS & STRATEGY..........................................................................................40
ANNEXES AND DIAGRAMS..............................................................................................................................43
........................................................................................................................................................................43
Annex 1 - Agency Requirements.........................................................................................................................43
Annex 2 - Financial Component..........................................................................................................................43
Annex 3 - Security..............................................................................................................................................43
Annex 5 - Other items, which may be submitted at a later stage.........................................................................43
Annex 6 - Diagrams and images.........................................................................................................................43
Annex 7 – Real Estate data ...............................................................................................................................43
........................................................................................................................................................................43
Annex 1 - Agency Requirements.........................................................................................................................44
LIST OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES: ...................................................................................................................44
OTHER SMALLER AGENCIES THAT ARE PARTICIPATING:.....................................................................................44
LETTER OF INTEREST SIGNED BY ALL PARTICIPATING AGENCIES ........................................................................45
Annex 2 - Financial Component..........................................................................................................................47
TABLE IX.1: REPAYMENT AND EXPENSES AT PROPOSED UN COMMON PREMISES BY PARTICIPATING UN
AGENCIES (FOR THE OVERAL BUILT UP SPACE OF 32,760. INCLUDING CARPARK AND EXTERNAL BUILT UP AREAS )
.........................................................................................................................................................................47
TABLE X.2: FIVE YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS VERSUS LUBOWA
CONSTRUCTION REPAYMENTS (FOR THE OVERALL BUILT UP SPACE INCLUDING CAR PARK)...............................47
TABLE XI.2: TEN YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS VERSUS LUBOWA
TABLE XII.1: TWENTY YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS VERSUS LUBOWA
Annex 3 - Security..............................................................................................................................................51
UN LUBOWA PROJECT SITE SECURITY RISK ASSESMENT (SRA)............................................................................51
TABLE V: FINDINGS............................................................................................................................................52
TABLE VI: GENERAL THREAT CATEGORY / ENVIRONMENT..................................................................................55
TABLE VII: SUMMARY OF MOST SIGNIFICANT RISKS TO UN OPERATIONS (See SRA Matrix- UN Lubowa Project
Annex B)...........................................................................................................................................................56
.........................................................................................................................................................................57
Annex 4 – Topographic Site layout, Satelite Images, Site Photographs................................................................58
.........................................................................................................................................................................64

Annex 5 – Commercial Real Estate data for Uganda .........................................................................................65

Section
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1
UN House Common Premises Uganda
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This business case has been developed to establish the economic viability of constructing a Green purpose
built UN Common Premises at Lubowa 15 kilometers outside Kampala. This will in the long term provide
rent free, MOSS security compliant accommodation, for the UN all Agencies and programs operating in
Kampala. As opposed to the current situation in which UN agencies are scattered throughout the city leasing
ofﬁce accommodation separately from private individuals.
While value in cost reduction and enhanced security is critical, this business case recognizes the strategic
long-term programmatic and operational benefits of a common premises. Physical co-location of UN
agencies at the country level is a major catalytic component, enabling organizational reform that goes
beyond the reduction of operating costs, to assisting in building management capacity and connected
common services.
In anticipation of this opportunity the Uganda Green UN Common Premises will be designed to provide fit for
purpose, open office accommodations that will encourage integrating programmatic and operational
processes of co-locating UN entities beyond the immediate cost implications. Potentially this includes the
opportunity of the consequent elimination of duplicated functions and a re-organization of the UN system
according to its programmatic themes
A key stumbling block in the path of establishing a UN House’s has been funding , the UNCT Uganda has
overcome this problem by working closely with its host the Uganda Government, in a Public Private
Partnership (PPP) relationship with a semi private institution that has long term pension funds to invest in
real estate . The Government of Uganda, and the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) of Uganda have
agreed to undertake the funding of the construction of the UN common premises. The commitment is clear
in the allocation to the UN a 30-40 acre parcel of land at no cost, within its proposed 565 acre diplomatic &
residential real estate development at Lubowa outside Kampala. This site is designated for the construction
of UN common premises.
The NSSF through a Private Public Partnership with UN Country Team (UNCT) and Uganda Government
will fund the construction of the common premises. The cost of construction will be amortized by UNCT
through payment of a fixed sum at 0% interest, payment starts at the end of the construction, for a period of
not more than 15 years. After which the common premises will be handed over to the UN rent free.
Anticipated construction period is 24 months including defects correction and handover. The common
premises will consist of 5 interconnected buildings on three floors, designed to reflect the best practices of
Green sustainable buildings including natural ventilation, solar power, water recycling, rainwater harvesting
and sewage treatment that benefits the environment. The premises will be set in a lush green landscaped
environment that is irrigated with recycled rain water from ponds with fish and local plants to enhance the
sustainability of the premises.

The cost benefit analysis indicates that UN agencies currently occupy fourteen thousand five hundred and
seventy nine (14578) square meters of office space and pay two million five hundred and sixty thousand nine
hundred and sixty four million dollars ($ 2,563,964) in rent annually. Therefore UN is paying one hundred
and seventy five dollars ($175) per square meter for internal office space this does not include insurance,
parking and service charges. While At the proposed common premises the cost per square meter including
parking, 30 acres of landscaped grounds, security is $17 per square meter. It is important to note that the
fixed repayment amount on this project is USD 1,892,000 annually at 0% interest is for a total built up area of
30,000 square meters of purpose built Green office space in a secure prime location. Therefore UN will be
paying USD 671,964 less annually than the current rental situation. The repayment by UN does not start until
the end of the construction, after the defects liability period is over and when full handover is completed.
The analysis also indicates that overall current expenditure on premises which includes utilities .rental and
maintenance for UN organizations in Kampala is over four million one hundred and twenty thousand dollars
($4,129,462) annually, and increases by 5% at each lease renewal (2 years). It is pertinent to note that the
overall cost of leasing over nine years USD 37,165,158 million, would have paid for the cost of constructing
the proposed common premises which is USD $ 36,716,559 million with a net positive balance of USD
$ 448,599.00.
While at the proposed common premises the overall cost including fixed repayment, utilities and
maintenance, would be USD 2,742,735.00 annually. Therefore In ten years the repayment is the order of
USD 27,427,350million. While for the current leasing situation it is USD 41,294,620.00 million resulting in the
significant savings of USD 13,867,270.00 million, which could be applied to fund urgent UN programs in
Uganda. This analysis does not include the cost of replicating ICT and support services, and transport
logistics, which is estimated at four hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($450,000) annually. When these cost
are factored in the estimated cost of running the various premises occupied by UN agencies in Kampala is
over four million five hundred and seventy three million dollars ($4,573,000) million annually.
Based on security reports and recent terrorist attacks on premises and staff including UN buildings in
Nigeria, Somalia, Kenya, North Africa and Middle East, the need for the UN agencies to be located in
premises that are fully MOSS compliant is urgent. Currently none of the premises occupied by UN
organizations in Kampala comply with the security requirements of MOSS, thus increasing the risk and
endangering the lives of UN personnel and Ugandan citizens. It is clear that the status quo should not
continue. It is therefore essential to focus on a long term sustainable approach to accommodate UN
agencies.
Uganda UNCT had considered two other options for locating the new premises namely Nakasero UN village
and UNICEF property at Mbuya. However these were eliminated for the following reasons, there was no
interest free financing to be structured for these locations. The 2-3 acres of land available was insufficient.
Finally the locations could not be made compliant with MOSS security criteria. Hence we have focused on
the 30 acre Lubowa site as our preferred option in this business case. (See annex for topographical map and
the google satellite picture for location). The estimated ofﬁce space, circulation and common areas is 12760
square meters. While external built up areas including, car parking, security stations, generator house,
UNDSS, UN-clinic, cafeteria and storage facilities will be approximately 20,000 square meters bringing the
total built up area 32,760 square meters sitting in a landscape campus of 30 acres (121,000 square meters)
in extent. The cost of construction is estimated at USD 30,118,600 million. The total development cost
including indirect cost, Architect/Engineers, contingencies, project consultants and procurement is estimated
at USD 36,716,559.00 million, it estimated the project will take 24 -30 months to complete.

BENEFITS OF PROPOSED COMMON PREMISES:
The proposed Green Common Premises will allow the UN to improve safety and security for its staff,
enhance the environmental sustainability and improve the UN carbon/climate footprint. Purpose built premise
of this quality will help increase productivity, efficiency, motivation and innovation of the UN personnel and
partners. It will create a valuable asset for the host government, creating a lasting legacy of environmentally
sensitive buildings in the immediate community and the city at large. Furthermore it reduces the
administrative burden for UN organizations and partners by saving time, effort and money spent in
navigating the different systems utilized by each agency.
The quantitative and expected qualitative benefits from the proposed Green UN Common premises
are overwhelmingly in favor of the UN, these include but are not limited the following listed below:
• Harmonized UN presence in the country promoting greater confidence in the ability of the UN to
support Uganda’s sustainable social and economic goals.
• UN agencies avoid financial risk associated with price hikes in real estate market and period rent
increases of 5%. Accountability remains with participating UN agencies and risks are defrayed
through efficient & objective management.
• Reduce yearly recurring premises expenditure from $ 4.1million to $ 2.7 million with a saving of
$1.4 million per year,USD 13.8 million, in 10 years and $ 27.6 million in 20 years.
• Increased green credentials also offers the UN an opportunity to provide a more conducive and
innovative work environment with acceleration of its transition to a lower carbon footprint globally.
By the use of solar energy for water heating, use of special glass products to reduce UV exposure
and environmentally friendly design that caters for the use of natural air to reduce the need for
power generated air conditioning, and green spaces for recreation to improve staff wellbeing.
• Efficient Security monitoring and coordinated response to issues is greatly enhanced at one
location as opposed to several locations scattered throughout the city.
• Purpose built office buildings in a secure location, with certainty that the premises and buildings
meet and exceed MOSS requirement. Social amenities and landscaped environment to ensure
superior work life balance.
• Rent-free building with the UN being in full control of the quality of the development and the end
product.
• Efficiencies gained through services tied to common premises (cleaning/maintenance, guards, car
pool, etc.) Increased financial accountability through transparency in reporting and retiring cost of
services based on leveraging scale.
• UN agencies benefiting from purpose-built premises including more useable space to be used for
common facilities such as conference center which will save additional thousands in cost for
outsourcing and renting conferencing venues.
RISK & MITIGATION:
The common premises project team has assessed a range of risks that could affect the success of the
endeavor. The key risks were considered and assessed in the following categories Design,
Construction, Implementation, Business Operations, and Political risk. The analysis and mitigation are
outlined below;
Construction bonds
Many things can go wrong in a large construction/refurbishment project. Bearing this in mind, construction
bonds, also called construction surety bonds or contract bonds, are a mandatory prerequisite for any project
beyond a certain size. This proposed common premises would use the construction bond to mitigate risks
such as an adverse climatic event that causes disruptions, failure to complete the project due to insolvency
of the builders, or the job’s failure to meet contract specifications.
Design risk

To minimize cost exposure within the design process, the Project team will assembled a design team that
has significant real estate project development experience. All project architects and engineers will adhere to
design standards compatible with international best practice. The project team will also adopt UN standard
set of modules (beams, columns sizes etc.), which will be used in the design of all structures.
Construction risk
Usually manifests itself in the construction price variations, quality of materials and workmanship and
program delay. To mitigate the effect of this risk, we will require that the construction of all work packages are
procured via a series of fixed price contracts. The Construction Company will develop a program of quality
assurance measures which include locating quarries for aggregate and sand (to ensure quality of materials),
training program for staff and labor who will be employed on the Project and building an ample ‘float’ into the
construction program
Implementation risk
There will be ‘Implementation Risk’ if the Project Team is unable to smoothly transition from the construction
phase to operating phase. A smooth transition depends on all systems having been tested and passed, the
marketing program being effective and successful and the ongoing operations teams being in place from the
first day. To this end we will keep the implementation plan simple and our implementation team as small as
efficiently possible.
Business & operations risk
In recent years, the exchange rate between the US dollar and the Shilling has been relatively constant (1 US
dollar shilling 2850). Nonetheless, it cannot be assumed that this exchange rate will remain constant in the
future. We therefore propose to raise all capital required in US dollars, pay for the all the construction works
in US dollars. After the start of operations, we will continue to be exposed to fluctuations in the value of the
Shilling to Dollar exchange rate. In order to mitigate this we will establish the financial plan on the US Dollar.
All remittance by the UN to amortize the construction cost is paid directly to the Financier.
Political risk
Uganda has continued to consolidate democratic rule, and now enjoys a more open society. As a result of
these and other political achievements, Uganda outperforms 65% of African countries on measures of civil
liberty, political rights and political stability, the country has been ranked, amongst the top 15 reformers
globally by the World Bank's Doing Business team. The Government may default on its agreement with
the developer or financier. While the UN system may be shielded from financial exposure, there may
be a risk of eviction. This is mitigated in our proposal by ensuring that all remittance by the UN to
amortize the construction cost is paid directly to the Financier.
.
FUTURE REVENUE CENTER
While not included in this proposal, it is important to advise that the UN consider the Inclusion of recreation
facilities and a conference center. This would be both strategic and financially pragmatic, as revenue centers
both will generate significant income to supplement the cost of maintenance of the common premises. The
conference center will save the UN system considerable amounts that are current spent renting venues for
conferences sponsored by the UN. The proximity to the airport and Serena Victoria hotel ensure that there
will be a steady inflow of patronage for the conference center,
Similarly the recreation center will be a membership based facility open only to the diplomatic community
and other vetted members charging annual fees to all who use it. Both facilities will be located outside the
security perimeter of the common premises with their own security arrangements to allow none UN
member’s access without entering the main premises.
These facilities would ensure an optimum work life balance and increase productivity at the common
premises for all UN personal and partners. Reducing stress and worry over meeting is critical. It also reduces
the time and money lost in commuting between the common premises and various venues in Kampala
which is a major cost saving for UN system

Section
BACKGROUND/ INTRODUCTION
2
In response to the UN Secretary General’s appeal to Member States to establish UN Houses, the
Government of Uganda over 12 years ago offered land at Lubowa to the UN system for the construction of a
UN House. The Working Group responded to the Government at that time stating that the UN System was
not in a position, both for managerial and financial reasons, to undertake construction of a UN House. The
Working Group suggested that should the Government be in a position to deliver a turnkey project, i.e., not
only allocate land but identify an financier who would pay for all development and construction costs for the
UN House, it would favorably consider such a proposal.
CURRENT SITUATION:
Currently, UN organizations in Kampala are paying rent, with the exception of FAO which has been provided
rent-free accommodation by the Government. The current yearly recurring premises expenditure of UN
organizations in Kampala is over $4.1 million per annum this is for premises which don’t comply with MOSS,
or disabled user requirements and do not reflect UN space guidelines for open plan office.
The UN organizations are scattered throughout the city, negatively impacting on security and inter-agency
coordination. Reliable security reports indicate a high threat of Terrorist attacks on premises including UN
buildings. The recent incidents in Somalia, Kenya, Nigeria, Middle East and Pakistan highlight the urgent
need for the UN agencies to be located in premises that are fully MOSS compliant.
In order to achieve this objective, the Resident Coordinator (RCO) has hired a Project Manager (PM) for the
UN Common premises to work closely with UN Agencies and the Government to coordinate all aspects of
the project. The Ugandan Government as part of its input has allocated 30 acres of land and identified a
financier to fund the construction of the Common Premises. This financier National Social Security Fund
(NSSF) is a semi government agency and is the custodian of social security contributions for Uganda. NSSF
is mandated to invest money in secure risk adverse projects including real estate development. The
RC/UNCT has identified UNDP as the lead agency in this Common Premises effort. If competitive UNOPS
may be the UN agency on the procurement of Construction services for the project.
The Government has reconfirmed that through NSSF it has allocated 30-40 acres of land at no cost to the
entire UN System in Kampala, and had also succeeded in identifying a financier NSSF which is prepared to
pay for construction of the common premises at 0% interest. While Utilizing a Public Private Partnership
Funding arrangement in which the UN, NSSF and Government are partners. UN Agencies will amortize the
cost of construction by paying an agreed sum to NSSF for a number of years. Once the NSSF has been
repaid for funding the construction, the building and Land would be owned by the Government/UN, to be
made available to the UN System rent-free, where only maintenance and operating costs would be the
responsibility of UN organizations.

RATIONALE FOR COMMON PREMISES:
The consolidation of all UN Agencies into one UN House (Common Premises) is an important component of
the UN Secretary General's reform program “delivering as One UN”. A single UN House fosters security,
unity, coordination and cost efficient delivery of the mission at the country, regional and global level. While
value in cost reduction and enhanced security is critical, this business case for the establishment of a UN
Common premises, recognizes the long-term programmatic and operational benefits. The Physical co-
location of UN agencies at the country level is a major catalyst, component in enabling organizational reform
that goes beyond the reduction of operating costs, to assisting in building management capacity and some
connected common services.
Hence the Uganda Green UN Common Premises will be designed to provide the open plan office
accommodations that will encourage integrating programmatic and operational processes of co-locating UN
entities beyond the immediate cost reduction benefits. The feasibility includes the opportunity to
consequently eliminate duplicated functions and facilitate a re-organization of the UN system according to its
programmatic themes
The critical and urgent issues such as security and escalating rental cost have added impetus to the drive
and commitment of the Uganda UNCT to seek endorsement for the construction of a common UN premises.
Additionally there are issues of work life balance, energy conservation, environmental sustainability and
Green building agenda of the UN. These can be articulated under cost reduction and security as key
elements in the rational for the construction of a new common premises
COST REDUCTION NARRATIVE:
Cost Benefit Analysis indicates that the proposed new common premises over a five year period is
$6,986,833.00 more economic than the existing leasing option, discounted to present day values in terms of
costs. Over Ten year period it is 13,867,270.00 million more economic than the existing leasing option,
discounted to present day values in terms of costs.
There are several factors contributing to cost reduction at the proposed new premises, these include the
absence of the following standard charges which are levied by landlords in Kampala real estate market ;
Service charge $4/sq.m, Parking fees $50 per slot, 5% Escalation every 2 years or at renewal of lease .
Greater negotiating leverage with service providers including, Cleaning, Garbage collection, Gardening,
Power supply, Water, Maintenance and Security, because the co-location of several agencies at one
location translates to a larger scale and better bargaining power. The positive consequence of a new smart
building is that we need less maintenance hence lower cost. Water conservation and recycling to reduce
cost of water. Cross ventilation eliminates use air conditioners reduces cost of electricity. Renewable energy
using photo voltaic solar panels on the roof for powering the building and technology for regulating use of
electricity reduces utility cost. These key factors make the Lubowa Green common premises more energy
efficient and much cheaper to run and maintain.
Potentially relocation to a new common premises will provide opportunity to re-focus administrative and
management processes to be more cost effective by introducing new IT platforms and software, that will
facilitate monitoring and evaluation of the operational effort at the country level. Leading to streamlining
operational process, and reducing direct monetary cost for example it will be possible to leverage UN
System wide bargaining position when procuring goods and services for agencies under one roof.
Introduction of software such as BOSS (Business Operational Strategy System) that comes with a suite of
operational instruments which allow for enhanced identification of cost benefits of different initiatives, allowing
facts based decision making and prioritization would be possible at the Common Premises

Specific cost reductions:
With regards to the project, the cost benefit analysis indicates that the UN would immediately reduce its
annual expenditure on rent alone by USD 671,599 when it moves to the common premises. This is because
the fixed repayment amount on this project is USD 1,892,000 annually at 0% interest .While with the current
rental situation, the UN is paying USD 2,563,964 with a 5% increase every two years for office space which
does not have car parking or a perimeter security buffer zone that is MOSS compliant. In contrast at the
proposed common premises the UN is getting 12760 square meters of purpose built Green office space plus
20,000 square meters of external built up areas including car park for staff and visitors, security post, storage
facilities, rain water recycling, sewage treatment and PV solar power set in 30 acres of harmonized
landscaped environment in a secure prime location. In this scenario the UN cost per square meter is
estimated at USD 17 per square meter which is below the market rate for A grade office space in Kampala.
The cost benefit analysis indicates that total current expenditure on premises which includes rental, utilities,
and maintenance for UN organizations in Kampala is over four million one hundred and twenty thousand
dollars ($4,129,462) annually, and increases by 5% every two years. It is pertinent to note that the overall
cost of leasing over nine years USD 37,165,158.00 million, would have paid for the cost of constructing the
proposed common premises which is USD 36,716,559.00 million with a balance of $448,599 left over. While
at the proposed common premises the overall cost including fixed repayment, utilities, car parking, gardening
and maintenance would be USD 2,742,735 annually. In ten years the repayment is the order of USD
27,427,350million. Resulting in the significant savings of USD 13,867,270.00 million, when compared with
USD 41,294,620 which would be paid out in ten years in the rental scenario. This saving could be applied to
fund urgent UN programs in Uganda. This analysis does not include the cost of replicating ICT and support
services, including transport logistics, which is estimated at four hundred and fifty thousand dollars
($450,000). When this cost is factored in the estimated cost of running the various premises occupied by UN
agencies in Kampala is over four million five hundred and seventy three million dollars ($4,573,000) million
annually.
Further cost reduction would be realized from the following;
• Eliminating the recurring high cost of relocating and converting residential buildings to offices to
meet UN standards.
• Eliminate the recurring high cost of trying to make the individual properties MOSS compliant.
• Eliminate cost of logistics and Transportation to move from one Agency location to another within
the very congested traffic in Kampala. And reduce loss of productive man hours because of
difficulty of coordination between different agencies and in some case the same agency with
multiple location.
• The common Premises provides the opportunity of reducing the cost of funding for local Security
due to the reduction in number security personnel on duty at the common premises
• Reduction of duplication of work processes at the agency level by providing the service through a single
channel, rather than decentralized at the agency level (example ICT, Travel and building maintenance);
• Reduction of transaction costs (time spent on activities) for the UN and partners, including the host
government, due to harmonized operational procedures and standing agreements with vendors (e.g.
VISA processes and Joint Long Term Agreements);

SECURITY NARRATIVE:
The lethal attacks on UN personnel and premises by terrorist over the last 8 years including the most recent
in Somalia 2015 on UNICEF staff, Mogadishu 2013, Abuja 2011, WFP office Pakistan 2009, Algiers 2007
and Baghdad earlier is a stark reminder of the security risk facing the UN staff and local citizen in the vicinity
of the UN premises. The following can be argued in favor of the common premises:
The UN security management system is more effective in a common premises: As it stands now
because Agencies are scattered all over Kampala, separate premises security structures will continue
to exist, with a continuing potential for duplication and potentially dangerous confusion. A purpose
built UN Common Premises addresses this concern.
Security Information and Communications Technology: Information technology is not a luxury; it is a
central instrument for delivery of security services. At the common premises the opportunity exists for
a shared robust ICT center that will cater for the ICT requirement of UNDSS.
Enhancing Security execution: One common premises reduces the challenge of operationalizing
The Framework for Accountability and Creating a Culture of Security, This part of the responsibility for
the well-being of UN Personnel and their Dependents.
Supports Host Government efforts in carrying out their security responsibilities: Establishing a
common premise strengthens the central element of the cooperation and trust between the two sides
and makes information sharing about security conditions more efficient.
Crisis Management and Response center: At the common premises the addition of a properly
staffed and resourced 24/7 Crisis Management/Operations Centre capable of serving the entire
Uganda UN security community would greatly increase the crisis response capacity of DSS and
enhance program effectiveness.
Safety: Safety and security are mutually-reinforcing halves of the goal of improving Personnel and
Premises and emergency medical preparedness. This is better managed at one common premises
Safety is a vital aspect of the mandate of the Department of Safety and Security. DSS has indicated
that safety, particularly air safety, fire safety, and road safety, is a priority.

Section
AGENCIES REQUIREMENTS
3
LIST OF PARTICIPATING AGENCIES:
1. UNDP/ RCO
2. WHO
3. WFP
4. UNHCR
5. IOM
6. UNWOMEN
7. UNAIDS
8. UNFPA
9. OHCHR
10. UNICEF
NON- RESIDENT AGENCIES WITH SMALL STAFF THAT ARE PARTICIPATING:
11. UNESCO
12. MUNESCO
13. UNDSS
14. IFAD
15. UNCLINIC
16. PULSE LAB
17. UNIDO
The first table below shows the projected requirements based on the TTCP template and the UN office
space planning guide lines for more efficient utilization of space with open planning.
The second table shows the current space utilization data received from all the participating agencies
in response to the survey carried out in February 2015

Participating UN Agencies Office Space requirements
summary
UN Agencies Projected Space requirements
Agency
Signed
letter of
interest
JIU space matrix SQM overall office staff number
UNDP/RCO Yes Projected 1846 115
WFP Yes Projected 1600 100
UNICEF Yes Projected 2720 170
UNHCR Yes Projected 1920 120
OHCHR Yes Projected 352 22
UNAIDS Yes Projected 352 22
UNFPA Yes Projected 1040 65
UNWOMEN Yes Projected 560 35
WHO Yes Projected 1120 70
IOM Yes Projected 1250 80
Projected space 12760 799
Total includes space for non-resident UN agencies
UN Agencies Current Space requirements
Agency
Signed
letter of
interest
JIU space matrix SQM overall office staff number
RCO Yes Received 316 12
WFP Yes Received 1901 95
UNICEF Yes Received 3142 160
UNHCR Yes Received 1901 101
OHCHR Yes Received 493 17
UNAIDS Yes Received 337 17
UNDP Yes Received 2000 84
UNFPA Yes Received 1500 65
UNWOMEN Yes Received 643 25
WHO Yes Received 763 54
IOM Yes Received 1575 74
TOTAL space used 14578 723
This Includes space for non-resident UN agencies

Item Description Size Unit Rate Amount (USD) Remarks
4 Site Work and Services
Site Work Size Unit Rate Amount USD
(i) Driveways 10000 SM 75 750,000
(ii) Parking 20000 SM 75 1,500,000
(iii) Generators and Fuel Tanks
(2No.)
2 NR 200000 400,000
(iv) Bulk Storage & Overhead
Pressed Steel Water Tank
(including extraction,
treatment and reticulation)
1 SUM 1200000 1,200,000
(v) Site Sewer Treatment Plant
& reticulation System
1 SUM 1000000 1,000,000 Assumed
2km of
sewer line
(vi) WIFI and Telephony 1 SUM 400000 400,000 Provisional
Sum
(vii) Landscape development 1 SUM 500000 500,000 Provisional
Sum
(viii) Security and Surveillance 1 SUM 550,000 550,000 Provisional
Sum
(ix) Environmental conservation
development
45000 SM 10 450,000 Assumed
45% of plot
area
(x) Data Centre 100 SM 650 65,000
(xi) Vehicle Washing Bay 200 SM 450 90,000
(xii) Public/Common Toilets 100 SM 900 90,000
(xii) Gate/Guard House 100 SUM 100000 100,000 (Assumed 2
No)
(xiv) Boundary Wall complete with
electric fence
1700 LM 500 850,000 Approximate
Perimeter
for 30 Acres
(xv) Chain Link fencing & Razor
wire
1700 LM 100 170,000 Approximate
Perimeter
for 30 Acres
(xvi) Boom Gates 5 NR 5000 25,000
(xv
ii)
Vehicle Security Access
Control System
1 Item 600000 600,000 Provisional
Sum
Subtotal 8,740,000
5 Interior Design (ID)
(i) Partitioning & Ceiling
(ii) Structured Cabling & ICT
(iii) Blinds & Netting
(iv) Panels & work Stations
(v) Loose furniture? Agencies
(viii) Filing cabinets & compactors
(ix) Fire suppression, back-up
(x) Tilling & Painting
Sub Total 5,500,000
Construction Cost 30,118,600
6 Indirect Cost
(i) Fibre connectivity, Environmental tech control
systems , Renewable Energy, Water recycling
1,174,979
(ii) 10% Architects, Engineers, QS, Landscape,
Project management and procurement
3,615,320
(iii) Add 5 % Preliminaries & Contingencies,
Insurance, legal, finance
1,807,660
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 36,716,559

DETAILED PROJECTED SPACE REQUIREMENTS & COST OF
Estimated project cost
These are estimates provided by UNOPS are based on the preliminary space calculations table
provided by TTCP. Accurate figures will be determined from detailed drawings and bills of quantities.
Table I: Cost estimation
Item Description Size Unit Rate Amount
(USD)
Remarks
1 Office Spaces
(i) Office Space projections
FOR 10 UN Agencies
that signed letter of
interest using TTCP
template
11,796 Square
Meters
850 10,026,600 Include additional
space for growth
and non-resident
agencies
(ii) Board RM/ 2 large
conference rooms, 8
Small meeting rooms
1,500 SM 600 900,000 2 small meeting
rooms per
building
(iii)
Amenities ‐ toilets,
resource areas, Janitors
closet,
600 SM 600 360,000 Includes disable
toilets
(iv) 4 safe rooms for
personnel during attacks
800 SM 700 560,000 including food
storage
communication,
toilet , air-
conditioning
emergency
access
(v) Backup security control
and radio room
170 600 102,000
(vi) ICT switch and data
rooms
200 600 120,000
Subtotal 12,068,600
2 Support Spaces
(i) UN Clinic 1100 SM 600 660,000 Derived from data
provided UN
clinic
(ii) UN DSS 1100 SM 600 660,000 Derived from
areas provided by
UNDSS
(iii) External covered Large
gathering area
1200 SM 600 720,000 IOM,UNHCR
refuge spaces,
and training
(v) Reception Building 200 SM 600 120,000
(vi) Radio Room 50 SM 600 30,000
(vii) Security Equipment
Room
100 SM 600 60,000
(viii) Archives and File
Storage
150 SM 600 90,000

Item Description Size Unit Rate Amount
(USD)
Remarks
(ix) Bulk Stores 800 SM 600 480,000
(x) Generator/Transformer
Room
120 SM 750 90,000
xi Driver waiting area 200 SM 600 120,000
(xii) Child Care Centre 100 SM 600 60,000
(xiii) UNFCU Bank 200 SM 600 120,000
(xvi) External Safe Room 400 SM 600 240,000
Subtotal $3,450,000
3 Cafeteria
(i) 2 NO. Cafeteria
Including Kitchen and
Storage
600 SM 600 360,000
Subtotal $360,000
TABLE II: MOSS REQUIREMENTS
MOSS REQUIREMENTS COST/USD
 Security requirements
- Perimeter wall at least 2.5 meters high with
Electric/razor wire on top
- Perimeter intrusion detection
- Building intrusion detection system
- CCTV
- Baggage scanner
- Police guards/security guards
- Screening equipment (Wall through door/hand
held metal detectors)
- Compound/facility lighting
- Physical security of access points (windows and
doors)-bars, SRF, locks etc.
- Biometric/electronic access control
- Blast/ shatter Resistant Films
- Safe Haven/safe room (reinforcement type)
- Lightening arrestors
- Intercom
- Alarms/public address system
- Firefighting and suppression system (fire alarms,
fire plan, sensor, smock detectors, fire
extinguishers, hoses/sprinklers, water supply)
- Anti-ram devices/barriers/blocks/bollards
- Main gate (Sliding gate/hinged- automated)
- Cross bar/drop arm barriers
- Vehicle access control
- Pedestrian access control
- Vehicle parking (official, staff and visitors)
- ID system
- Key control (office/vehicles)
- Mail delivery and screening
- Building standoff distance
- Vehicle standoff distance from building
- Power supply (national grid/generator)
- Fuel (storage and type)
- Emergence communication
- Guard house
Note the security requirement are an integral part of the
project, the cost is included in the overall project
$4,270,000

estimate.
TABLE III: BUILDING OPTIONS
Building Options Ownership Rent
1
Lubowa Site: This plot of land is owned by the
NSSF and is located some 15 kilometers from
the city center on the main Kampala-Entebbe
Highway. In this option there are three parties
namely UN, Uganda Government and National
Social Security Fund (NSSF) its Public Private
Partnership.
National Social Security Fund (NSSF) as
financier. Uganda government facilitates the
allocation of 30 acres of land from NSSF to UN.
While UNDP/UNOPS manage procurement of
Project manager, Architects, Engineers, interior
designers, contractors and supervise
construction process. On Completion of
construction UN occupies the premises and
commences amortization of the cost of
construction through annual payments to the
NSSF. NSSF is responsible for providing
operations and maintenance (O&M) over the
project life cycle or until the loan is fully
amortized.
Land is owned by
NSSF. Transferred to
Government for offer to
UN which has use of
land in perpetuity as
long as UN is in Uganda
At the end of
construction period , UN
pays, fixed sum to
amortize cost of
construction.
When the cost of
construction fully is
amortized. UN
possession has Rent-
free.
2 Nakasero Site: Government owned land with
residential accommodation for UN staff village
built by UN. The land is small (under 2 acres).
Current buildings will have to be demolished
leading to loss of income to UNDP. Land size
will require the building of a multi-story tower
block increasing cost. And it cannot qualify for
planning approval for security reason. Mainly
because of its proximity to the Uganda
President’s state house it will pose a security
threat to the Uganda president. This Option is
Property owned by
Government /UNDP
UN pays rent at
commercial rates to
UNDP in perpetuity.
Construction will not
attract interest free
funding, hence
repayment is with full
interest to private
developer.

Building Options Ownership Rent
not viable
3
Mbuya Location: UN warehouse Premises
owned by Government/UNICEF and sub-leased
by some UN agency from UNICEF. Land is also
small. Not very accessible. Land is small and on
a slope increase cost of development. Proximity
to Nakawa court make it not compliant with
MOSS requirements house adds additional
security challenges. . Financing of construction
will be by private developer on commercial
terms that attracts full market interest rates. This
option is not viable.
Property owned by
Government/UNICEF
UN pays rent at
commercial rates to
UNCEF in perpetuity.
Construction will not
attract interest free
funding, hence
repayment is with full
interest to private
developer

Section
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
4
SUMMARY:
The project will be designed utilizing JIU standards for UN common premises, the goal is to provide a
Green purpose built UN Common Premises at Lubowa 15 kilometers outside Kampala. Which ensures
appropriate office accommodations facilities for UN agencies and in the long term is rent free. This will be a
MOSS security compliant accommodation, for the UN Agencies and programs operating in Kampala as
opposed to the current situation in which UN agencies are scattered throughout the city leasing ofﬁce
accommodation separately from private individuals, in Kampala with attendant security challenges and high
cost implications.
The Government of Uganda, through National Social Security Fund (NSSF) of Uganda has allocated to the
UN a 30 acre piece of land, within its proposed diplomatic & residential real estate development. This site is
designated for the construction of UN common Premises.
The NSSF through a Private Public Partnership with Uganda UN Country Team (UNCT) and Uganda
Government will fund the construction of the common premises. The cost of construction will be amortized
by UNCT through payment of subsidized rent for a period of not more than 30 years. After which the
common premises will be handed over to the UN. Anticipated construction period is 24 months including
defects correction and handover.
SITE LOCATION:
The Location proposed is at Lubowa in Wakiso district, Uganda and is situated some 15 kilometers from
Kampala city center off the main Kampala-Entebbe Highway. The site is between the Lubowa- Lubugumu
to Batabata road and Lubowa - Lweza roads, with a view of the lake on the North and the South, West and
East boundaries are residential estates on hills. (See Annex 8 for site location co-ordinates and diagrams)
The master site owned by NSSF consists of 563 acres and is currently proposed as the location of a major
3000 residential units and commercial real estate development by NSSF. 30-40 acres of this land has been
earmarked for the UN House. It is thus a prime opportunity for the UN System to identify its needs. The
Government, is prepared to finance any major upgrading of roads, electricity, sewage, etc. in order to
accommodate the UN. NSSF have offered to finance the construction of the UN common compound.
UNDP shall be lead Agency and project managers for the common premises. The procurement service
required are Architectural/engineering design, Quantity surveyors detailed tender/contract documents,
procurement of construction services and implementation this can addressed as follows. UNOPS is been
considered for some of the procurement services.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND DESIRED OUTCOMES:
Objectives
The objective of this project is to design and construct the first Green UN common compound in Uganda to
provide a sustainable working environment for the UN staff which best promotes programmatic and
functional efficiencies. It shall be built to include all facilities necessary to meet relevant international
construction industry standards and UNDSS applicable codes while adding security service screening
building facilities and providing adequate parking spaces.
Expected Outcomes
The establishment of a new UN common compound that enhances staff productivity by providing a better,
healthier and safer work environment.

Project scope and works required
The scope shall include;
• Procurement and contracting of necessary construction works
• Preparing the detailed works design, drawings and other specifications in accordance with the
UN design requirements, and its internal rules, regulations and policies including any of its
applicable design planning manuals.
• Preparing the construction and procurement strategy for undertaking the works.
• Procuring the Works in accordance with the construction and procurement strategy and its
rules, regulations and policies, including its Procurement Manual.
• Supervising the construction of the Works, implementing and supervising of Civil & Electro-
Mechanical Works in accordance with its rules, regulations and policies, including its Works
Contract(s), and completing the Project in accordance with the terms of the MOU, including
notifying defects to the Contractor(s) during the Defect Notification Period(s) and ensuring
that such defects are properly rectified.
• Supervising handing over the Works to UNDP upon Substantial Completion of the Works
Contractor shall not be responsible for their operation and maintenance beyond the defects
notification period.
• Obtaining and managing any design and/or construction permits/approvals and any
permit/certificate required from the authorities upon Final Completion of the Works.
WORKS:
C – Civil (site) work
• External utility distribution networks (power, gas, water)
• External sewerage network
• External storm water drainage network
• Exterior lighting
• Access roads
• Parking
• Landscaping
•
S/A – Structural and Architectural work
• Foundations
• Structural frame
• Seismic upgrade (renovation project only)
• Building envelope (exterior walls, windows, exterior doors and roof)
M/P – Mechanical and Plumbing work
• Heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system
• Interior gas distribution system
• Lifts
• Freight Lifts
• Interior plumbing and drainage system
• Plumbing fixtures
E – Electrical work
• Power distribution system
• Interior lighting system
• Emergency power supply (generator & connection cables)
• UPS (including connection cables)

•
FP – Fire Protection work
• Fire protection sprinkler system (if required)
• Fire protection reservoir and water distribution system
• Exterior hydrant network
• Fire protection water distribution network (external and internal)
• Fire/smoke detection systems
• Fire alarm system
SS – Special Systems
• LAN
• PABX
• Video conferencing system
SEC – Security Systems
• Window safety films
• Perimeter fence (if required by MOSS)
• CCTV
• Anti-intrusion alarm system
• Public address system
• Any other items included in the security assessment
ID – Interior Design
• Interior partitions
• Interior finishes (e.g. doors, drop ceiling, etc.)
• Common furniture
• Blinds
• Movable partitions (e.g. system furniture)
Engineering Support
• Project management (planning, design, construction and commissioning phases)
• Design

Section
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS
5
SUMMARY
This cost benefit analysis has been developed to establish the economic viability of developing a Green
purpose built Common Premises at Lubowa 15 kilometers outside Kampala. Which in the long term will
provide rent free accommodation, after amortization of construction cost for the UN all Agencies and
programs operating in Kampala. As opposed to continuing to lease office accommodation separately from
private individuals, at exorbitant rents. The cost benefit analysis indicates that UN agencies currently
occupy fourteen thousand five hundred and seventy eight (14578) square meters of office space and pay
two million five hundred and sixty thousand nine hundred and sixty four million dollars ($ 2,563,964) in rent
annually. Therefore UN is paying one hundred and seventy five dollars, sixty seven cents ($175.67) per
square meter for internal office space only this does not include parking. With rent increase of 5% every two
years or on renewal of lease. The analysis indicates that at the proposed common premises the fixed
repayment at 0% interest would be USD $1,892,559.00 annually for an overall built up area of 32,760
square meters which includes internal office space, parking , UN clinic, Rain water recycling, sewage
treatment perimeter security stations and buffer zone , landscaped gardens, and walking trails. Thus
resulting in immediate savings of USD $ 671,964 in rental expenses for a purpose built Green premises in a
secure prime location. The repayment by UN does not start until the end of the construction, after the
defects liability period is over and when full handover is completed.
The analysis also indicates that overall current expenditure on premises which includes utilities .rental and
maintenance for UN organizations in Kampala is over four million one hundred and twenty thousand dollars
($4,129,462) annually, and increases by 5% at each lease renewal (2 years). It is pertinent to note that the
overall cost of leasing over nine years USD 37,165,158 million, would have paid for the cost of constructing
the proposed common premises which is USD $ 36,716,559 million. With a balance of USD 448,599 left
over.
While at the proposed common premises the overall cost including fixed repayment, utilities and
maintenance would be USD 2,742,735.00 annually. Therefore In ten years the repayment is the order of
USD 27,427,350.00 million. While for the current leasing situation it is USD 41,294,620.00 million resulting
in the significant savings of USD 13,867,270.00 million, which could be applied to fund urgent UN programs
in Uganda. This analysis does not include the cost of replicating ICT and support services, and transport
logistics, which is estimated at four hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($450,000) annually. When these
cost are factored in the estimated cost of running the various premises occupied by UN agencies in
Kampala is over four million five hundred and seventy three million dollars ($4,573,000) million annually
Ideally as part of its obligations to the UN the host government provides appropriate accommodation with
security to the UN agencies in the country. In this case, the Uganda Government (UG) does not have the
resources (financial or infrastructure) to provide the UN with free accommodation that meets UN security
criteria. However UG has provided land free of charge at Lubowa and facilitated negotiations with a
developer for joint efforts to develop UN’s own offices in Uganda. The proposal is for the Government of
Uganda to provide land and identify a developer National Social Security Fund (NSSF) who will fund the
project. At the end of construction after full handover the UN would pay back through a fixed sum at 0%
interest, following amortization of the construction cost the property will be rent free to the UN. There is a
strategic incentive for the NSSF to offer the interest free financing to the UN. Specifically the UN presence
attracts foreign embassy tenants to the diplomatic enclave proposed as part of NSSF’s 563 acre high end
real estate development and this enhances the value of the real estate.
Uganda UNCT had considered two other options for locating the new premises Nakasero UN village and
UNICEF property in Mbuya. However both were eliminated for the following reasons,
1. There was no interest free financing to fund the development
2. land area available was insufficient 2-3 acres
3. The locations did not meet UN security criteria.

Hence we have focused on the 30 acre Lubowa site as our preferred option in this analysis. See the
attached topographical map and the google satellite picture for location. The estimated office space,
circulation and common areas is 12760 square meters. While the external built up areas including, car
parking, rain water recycling sewage treatment, security stations, cafeteria and storage facilities will be
approximately 20,000 square meters bringing the total built up area 32,760 square meters sitting in a
landscape campus of 30 acres (121,000 square meters) in extent. The cost of construction is estimated at
USD 30,118,600 million The total development cost including Architect/Engineers, contingencies, project
consultants and procurement is estimated at USD $ 36,716,559 million, the project construction will take
24 -30 months to complete.
The ten year analysis indicates that the present day overall cost of leasing under the existing lease will be in
the order of USD 41,294,620.00 million, whilst the ten year cost of repayment on a common premises built
to UN specifications, will be in the order of USD 27,427,350 million showing a saving in the order of USD
13,867,270.00 million. It is important to note that the overall cost of leasing over ten years USD
41,294,620.00 million, would have paid for the total cost of constructing the proposed common
premises which is USD 36,716,559.00 million. With a net positive balance of USD 4,578,061.00. In
addition to this saving on costs, qualitative analysis indicates additional savings and benefits from
harmonized and shared ICT platforms, improved work life balance from green eco-friendly campus, and
common facilities at the 30 acre site. Overall the report concludes that the economics of the UN moving into
its own premises are very positive; in the first five years significant savings of approximately USD 7,000,000
million will be realized and over ten years these savings amount to approximately USD 14,000,000 million.
As the occupancy extends to a period beyond of 18 years then the rent free period, will result in a only
nominal running cost for the UN in present day terms.
ANALYSIS
The objective of the analysis is to compare the current situation of renting office space with the proposal for
the construction at Lubowa of a new common premises. The standard principals of cost benefit analysis
have been applied with a present day value being applied to all calculations with a discount factor of 3.5%
being deemed fair and reasonable.
The analysis indicates that currently the UN pays USD 2,563,964 annually, at the proposed common
premises the fixed repayment would be USD $1,892,559.00 annually resulting in immediate savings of
USD $ 671,964.00 in rents.

TABLE VIII: CURRENT RENT AND EXPENSES BY PARTICIPATING UN AGENCIES IN KAMPALA
FEASIBILITYSTUDY
Prepared on: By:
UNDP/RCO UNFPA UNICEF WFP UNHCR UNAIDS WHO IOM UNWOMEN OHCHR Totals
No. 138 45 160 95 101 12 54 74 25 17 721
% 19.14% 6.24% 22.19% 13.18% 14.01% 1.66% 7.49% 10.26% 3.47% 2.36% 100.00%
m2
2,316.00 1,500.00 3,142.00 1,901.00 1,908.00 337.00 763.00 1,575.00 643.00 493.00 14,578.00
% 15.89% 10.29% 21.55% 13.04% 13.09% 2.31% 5.23% 10.80% 4.41% 3.38% 100.00%
UNDP/RCO UNFPA UNICEF WFP UNHCR UNAIDS WHO IOM UNWOMEN OHCHR Sub-Totals
$ 384,000.00 $ 221,400.00 $ 377,040.00 $ 589,387.00 $ 285,600.00 $ 108,821.00 $ 280,164.00 $ 84,000.00 $ 91,952.00 $ 141,600.00 $ 2,563,964.00
$ 25,992.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 41,248.00 $ 36,000.00 $ 40,913.00 $ 2,268.00 $ 14,097.00 $ 6,329.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 11,524.00 $ 198,371.00
$ 1,030.00 $ 873.00 $ 2,223.00 $ 1,550.00 $ 821.00 $ 147.00 $ 622.00 $ 500.00 $ 450.00 $ 400.00 $ 8,616.00
$ 377.00 $ 320.00 $ 813.00 $ 567.00 $ 300.00 $ 54.00 $ 228.00 $ 100.00 $ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 3,159.00
$ 102,000.00 $ 21,622.00 $ 36,000.00 $ 15,819.00 $ 60,000.00 $ 21,503.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 18,810.00 $ 58,038.00 $ 36,042.00 $ 399,834.00
$ 19,968.00 $ 38,193.00 $ 125,000.00 $ 74,040.00 $ 35,911.00 $ 6,419.00 $ 27,210.00 $ 21,678.00 $ 13,005.00 $ 5,492.00 $ 366,916.00
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
$ 8,629.00 $ 3,797.00 $ 96,665.00 $ 144,400.00 $ 7,033.00 $ 638.00 $ 10,238.00 $ 1,860.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 1,056.00 $ 279,316.00
$ 59,800.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 55,880.00 $ 38,968.00 $ 41,000.00 $ 15,765.00 $ 15,641.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 14,016.00 $ 21,216.00 $ 309,286.00
$ 601,796.00 $ 336,205.00 $ 734,869.00 $ 900,731.00 $ 471,578.00 $ 155,615.00 $ 378,200.00 $ 145,277.00 $ 187,661.00 $ 217,530.00 $ 4,129,462.00
CurrentCost/m2
283.27$
Power Supply
19/4/2015
Lease
Gbade Smith
Current SituationAnnualRecurringCostPro-RationSheet
Services
Cost Calculation Parameters
Totals
Employees
Area
Cleaning
Garbage collection & recycling
Security (premises only)
Water Supply
Gardening
Gas Supply
Maintenance
Analysis indicates that at the present day cost of leasing including utilities, cleaning and maintenance under
the existing lease arrangements UN pays in the order of USD 4,129,462 million.
Whilst the cost of repayment including utilities, cleaning and maintenance at the proposed common
premises at Lubowa, built to UN speciﬁcations will be in the order of USD 2,742,735.00 million showing a
saving in present day terms of USD 1,386,727.00.million annually.
TABLE IX: REPAYMENT AND EXPENSES AT PROPOSED UN COMMON PREMISES BY
PARTICIPATING UN AGENCIES

U.N. House / Common Premises
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Prepared on: By:
UNDP/RCO UNFPA UNICEF WFP UNHCR UNAIDS WHO IOM UNWOMEN OHCHR Totals
No. 115 65 170 100 120 22 70 80 35 22 799
% 14.39% 8.14% 21.28% 12.52% 15.02% 2.75% 8.76% 10.01% 4.38% 2.75% 100.00%
m2
1,846.00 1,040.00 2,720.00 1,600.00 1,920.00 352.00 1,120.00 1,250.00 560.00 352.00 12,760.00
% 14.47% 8.15% 21.32% 12.54% 15.05% 2.76% 8.78% 9.80% 4.39% 2.76% 100.00%
UNDP/RCO UNFPA UNICEF WFP UNHCR UNAIDS WHO IOM UNWOMEN OHCHR Sub-Totals
$ 273,717.24 $ 154,206.90 $ 403,310.34 $ 237,241.38 $ 284,689.66 $ 52,193.10 $ 166,068.97 $ 185,344.83 $ 83,034.48 $ 52,193.10 $ 1,892,000.00
$ 14,467.08 $ 8,150.47 $ 21,316.61 $ 12,539.18 $ 15,047.02 $ 2,758.62 $ 8,777.43 $ 9,796.24 $ 4,388.71 $ 2,758.62 $ 100,000.00
$ 1,447.29 $ 815.37 $ 2,132.51 $ 1,254.42 $ 1,505.30 $ 275.97 $ 878.09 $ 980.02 $ 439.05 $ 275.97 $ 10,004.00
$ 1,252.85 $ 705.83 $ 1,846.02 $ 1,085.89 $ 1,303.07 $ 238.90 $ 760.13 $ 848.35 $ 380.06 $ 238.90 $ 8,660.00
$ 14,766.70 $ 8,319.27 $ 21,758.08 $ 12,798.87 $ 15,358.65 $ 2,815.75 $ 8,959.21 $ 9,999.12 $ 4,479.61 $ 2,815.75 $ 102,071.00
$ 43,401.25 $ 24,451.41 $ 63,949.84 $ 37,617.55 $ 45,141.07 $ 8,275.86 $ 26,332.29 $ 29,388.71 $ 13,166.14 $ 8,275.86 $ 300,000.00
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
$ 11,573.67 $ 6,520.38 $ 17,053.29 $ 10,031.35 $ 12,037.62 $ 2,206.90 $ 7,021.94 $ 7,836.99 $ 3,510.97 $ 2,206.90 $ 80,000.00
$ 36,167.71 $ 20,376.18 $ 53,291.54 $ 31,347.96 $ 37,617.55 $ 6,896.55 $ 21,943.57 $ 24,490.60 $ 10,971.79 $ 6,896.55 $ 250,000.00
$ 396,793.79 $ 223,545.80 $584,658.24 $343,916.61 $ 412,699.94 $ 75,661.66 $ 240,741.63 $ 268,684.86 $ 120,370.82 $ 75,661.66 $ 2,742,735.00
Recurring Cost / m2 214.95$
Employees
Area
Services
Lubowa Kamapala, Uganda
Gbade Smith
Cost Calculation Parameters
Annual Recurring Costs Pro-Ration Sheet Option I Lubowa New Construction
19/4/2015
Totals
Lease
Cleaning
Garbage coll. & recycling
Gardening
Maintenance
Power Supply
Gas Supply
Water Supply
Security (premises only)
Please note the reduction in Recurring Cost / m2 from $283.27 in the current
situation, to $214.95 in the proposed development. It’s important to observe that
when the essential external built up areas including car parking at the proposed
new premises is added to the analysis the Recurring Cost / m2 at the proposed
development reduces further to $83.72 per square meter, while the cost of
repayment and maintenance remains constant. (See annex 4 table IX.1) This
indicates clearly that at new premises the UN will be getting more value while
paying significantly less.
FIVE YEAR ANALYSIS
The five year analysis indicates that the present day cost of leasing and operating under the current
situation will be in the order of USD 20,647,319.00 million. Whilst the cost of repayment on a new building
at Lubowa built to UN speciﬁcations, over five years, will be in the order of USD 13,713,675.00 million
showing a saving in the order of USD 6,933,944.00 million. This is a significant amount which could be
used to fund UN programs in Uganda.
TABLE X.1: FIVE YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL
PAYMENTS VERSUS LUBOWA CONSTRUCTION REPAYMENTS

Prepared on: 19/4/2015 By:
3.25% 5.00
i (1+i)
n
0.0381
(1+i)
n
-1 0.1734
Current Situation
Lubowa New
Construction
Nakasero New
Construction
Mbuya New
Construction
Annual Recurring Costs $4,129,462.00 2,742,735.00$ -$ -$
N/A -$ -$ -$
$4,129,462.00 2,742,735.00$ -$ -$
$20,647,310.00 13,713,675.00$ -$ -$
14,578.00 12,760.00 14,578.00 14,578.00
$283.27 214.95$ -$
N/A -$ -$ -$
$283.27 214.95$ -$ -$
$1,416.33 1,074.74$ -$ -$
$ 36,716,559 is the total estimated cost of development including Architects/Engineering fees & contigencies for Lubowa new construction option
TOTAL COSTS / m2
Gbade Smith
OPTION COMPARISON
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS / m2
Total Space (m2
)
Annual Cost of Capital Investment
Cost/m2
(capital investments)
Cost/m2
(annual recurring costs)
TOTAL COSTS
Lubowa Kamapala, UgandaU.N. House / Common Premises
Annual factor for investment cost calculation =
Option Cost Comparison
FEASIBILITY STUDY
0.2199
US Treasury current discount rate, per Year (i): Project Duration (years, max 7) (n):
TEN YEAR ANALYSIS
The ten year analysis indicates that the present day cost of leasing and operating under the existing lease
will be in the order of USD 41,294,620.00 million whilst the cost of repayment and operating a common
premises built to UN speciﬁcations, over ten years, will be in the order of USD 27,427,350.00 million
showing a saving in the order of USD 13,867,270.00 million which could be applied to fund UN programs.
Equally significant is the fact that the overall cost of leasing over nine years USD 37,166,158
million, would have completely paid for the cost of developing the proposed common premises
which is USD 36,716,559.00 million with a net positive balance of USD 448,599.00
TABLE XI.1: TEN YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS
VERSUS LUBOWA CONSTRUCTION REPAYMENTS
3.25% 10.00
i (1+i)
n
0.0447
(1+i)
n
-1 0.3769
Current Situation
Lubowa New
Construction
Nakasero New
Construction
Mbuya New
Construction
N/A -$ -$ -$
$4,129,462.00 2,742,735.00$ -$ -$
$41,294,620.00 27,427,350.00$ -$ -$
14,578.00 12,760.00 14,578.00 14,578.00
$283.27 214.95$ -$
N/A -$ -$ -$
$283.27 214.95$ -$ -$
$2,832.67 2,149.48$ -$ -$
$ 36,716,559 is the total estimated cost of development including Architects/Engineering fees & contigencies for Lubowa new construction option
TOTAL COSTS / m2
Gbade Smith
OPTION COMPARISON
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS
Total Space (m2
)
Cost/m2
Cost/m2
TOTAL COSTS
FEASIBILITY STUDY
0.1187
15 YEAR ANALYSIS
The 15 year analysis indicates that the present day cost of leasing under the existing lease will be in the
order of USD 61,941,930.00 million whilst the cost of repayment and operating the proposed premises built

to UN speciﬁcations, over fourteen years, will be in the order of USD 41,141,025.00 million showing a
significant saving in the order of USD 20,800,905.00 million.
TABLE XII : 15 YEAR COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE COMPARING RENTAL PAYMENTS
VERSUS LUBOWA CONSTRUCTION REPAYMENTS
3.25% 15.00
i (1+i)
n
0.0525
(1+i)
n
-1 0.6157
Current Situation
Lubowa New
Construction
Nakasero New
Construction
Mbuya New
Construction
N/A -$ -$ -$
$4,129,462.00 2,742,735.00$ -$ -$
$61,941,930.00 41,141,025.00$ -$ -$
14,578.00 12,760.00 14,578.00 14,578.00
$283.27 214.95$ -$
N/A -$ -$ -$
$283.27 214.95$ -$ -$
$4,249.00 3,224.22$ -$ -$TOTAL COSTS / m2
Gbade Smith
OPTION COMPARISON
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS
Total Space (m2
)
Cost/m2
Cost/m2
TOTAL COSTS
FEASIBILITY STUDY
0.0853
Please also note the reduction in Total Cost / m2 for the 5 year scenario from $1,416
in the current situation, to $1,074 in the proposed development. This indicates clearly
that at the proposed new premises the UN will be getting more value while paying
significantly less.
ADVANTAGES OF PROPOSED GREEN UN COMMON PREMISES
• Harmonized UN presence in the country promoting greater confidence in the ability of the UN to support
Uganda’s sustainable social and economic goals
• UN agencies avoid financial risk associated with price hikes in real estate market and period rent increases of
5%.Accountability remains with participating UN agencies and risks are defrayed through efficient & objective
management
• Reduce yearly recurring premises expenditure from $ 4.1 million to $ 2.7million with a saving of $1.4 million
per year and approximately $ 28 million in 20 years
innovative work environment with acceleration of its transition to a lower carbon footprint globally. By the
use of solar energy for water heating, use of special glass products to reduce UV exposure and
environmentally friendly design that caters for the use of natural air to reduce the need for power generated air
conditioning, and green spaces for recreation to improve staff wellbeing
• Efficient Security monitoring and coordinated response to issues is greatly enhanced at one location as
opposed to several locations scattered throughout the city
• Purpose built office buildings in a secure location, with certainty that the premises and buildings meet and
exceed MOSS requirement. Social amenities and landscaped environment to ensure superior work life
balance.
• Rent-free building with the UN being in full control of the quality of the development and the end product
• Efficiencies gained through services tied to common premises (cleaning/maintenance, guards, car pool, etc.)
Increased financial accountability through transparency in reporting and retiring cost of services based on
leveraging scale

• Efficient UN project management minimizes operational risks while UN agencies benefiting from
purpose-built premises
• The twenty year analysis indicates that once the cost of construction is amortized the building is paid for
then the costs to the UN are reduced to operating and utilities expenses only
• Additional benefits in terms of general working conditions such as single occupancy, customized space
planning, security, safety, flexibility and in house conference facilities
It should be noted that the costs and benefits of the proposed UN Common Premises option would
normally be considerably influenced by the issues of cost and availability of funds to finance the
construction. The impact of interest rates, taxes on the expenditure profile and the accumulation of equity
in the purchase of property, however, this does not apply in this case because of the 0% interest free
funding negotiated with NSSF and the unique exemptions and privileges available to the UN.
DIS-ADVANTAGES OF NEW CONSTRUCTION
• Property management becomes the owner’s liability.
• The costs of owning a property are more fragmented in terms of rates, insurance, maintenance of the
building, maintenance of equipment and general servicing such as cleaning and security.
• Possibility of restricted mobility should the needs of the institution change.
ADVANTAGES OF RENTING
• As a tenant, the institution can relocate at the end of the lease.
DISADVANTAGES OF RENTING
• As a tenant, the institution may be forced to relocate at the end of the lease.
• Market dictates rentals in the long term.
• The rent paid by UN agencies in Kampala increases by 5% at each renewal.
• There is no residual value accruing to the UN as the property value appreciates over time
Q4 2014 Economic Statistics:
Annual Core Inflation 6.7%
Real GDP 4.7%
Growth Annual Headline 1.8%
Real GDP per Capita 1.1%
CBR January 11%
2015 Average Exchange Ugx 2,854
91 day T-bills
180 day
364 day
10.56%,
12.31% and
12.09%
Economic Indicators
1. Uganda Inflation Rate 2014 — 6.95 %.
2. Currency exchange Rate – 2850.00 Uganda shillings to USD $1.00
3. Interest rate for real estate development 20-22 %
4. A grade office rentals in Kampala – USD $22.00 per square meter.
5. C grade office rentals in Kampala- USD $14 per square meter.

6. Property rental increase in Kampala- 5% every two years.
7. Property management- Taken as 7% of equivalent rentals.
CONCLUSION
The tables indicate that new build over a five year period is $6,986,833.00 more economic than the existing
leasing option, discounted to present day values in terms of costs. Over Ten year period is 13,867,270.00
million more economic than the existing leasing option, discounted to present day values in terms of costs.
And over Twenty year period is $25,574,540.00 more economic than the existing leasing option, discounted
to present day values in terms of costs.
However, there are additional beneﬁts in terms of general working conditions such as single occupancy,
customized space planning, security, safety, ﬂexibility which can be valued over the periods. In addition the
building itself will have accumulated value/equity over the period. From the above it can be seen that the
proposed Green Common Premises option at Lubowa is in the order of S $$6,986,833.00 million more
economic overall in 5 years and $25,574,540.00 more economic in twenty years.
Section
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT & BENEFITS
6
DELIVER AS ONE AND DELIVER GREEN
The consolidation of all UN Agencies into one UN House (Common Premises) is an important component
of the UN Secretary General's Delivering as One and deliver Green reform program. A single UN House
fosters harmonization, productivity and co-ordination in work at the country level. The Green UN Common
will represent a model for Uganda and other countries in the region demonstrating the viability of innovative
sustainable buildings and is an important component of the UN climate change advocacy. It is clear that the
eco-friendly and team-friendly Green UN House for all UN organizations is essential to integration,
coordination and the realization of greater synergies. The impetus for the intended move to a new premises
was informed by the exorbitant cost of accommodation in Kampala and the security risk. The UN as an
institution has strict criteria in terms of safety, security and reductions in costs at its facilities. Concerted
efforts have been made by the UNCT in Uganda to find accommodations that satisfies this criteria,
unfortunately there are no existing or under construction office building in Kampala that meet the criteria.

UN agencies have had to convert existing building, incurring higher cost, in the process only to find that the
conversions, don’t meet half the security criteria required for compliance with MOSS.
BENEFITS
Green Common Premises will allow the UN to improve safety and security for its staff, enhance the
environmental sustainability of the UN buildings and improve the climate footprint of UN AFPs on the way to
climate neutrality. Such tailor made buildings will help increase productivity, efficiency, motivation and
innovation of the UN personnel and partners. It will create a valuable asset for the host government that
creates a lasting legacy of environmentally friendly buildings in the immediate community and the city at
large. Furthermore it reduces the administrative burden for UN organizations and partners by saving time,
effort and money spent in navigating the different systems utilized by each agency.
The quantitative and expected qualitative benefits from the proposed Green UN Common premises are
overwhelmingly in favor of the UN. A harmonized UN presence in the country promoting greater confidence
in the ability of the UN to support Uganda’s sustainable social and economic goals. The benefits also
include the following;
• UN agencies avoid financial risk associated with price hikes in real estate market and rent
increases of 5%. Accountability remains with participating UN agencies and risks are defrayed
through efficient & objective management.
• Reduce yearly recurring premises expenditure from $ 4.1million to $ 2.7 million with a saving of
$1.4 million per year and $ 28 million in 20 years.
innovative work environment with acceleration of its transition to a lower carbon footprint
globally..
• Efficient Security monitoring and coordinated response to issues is greatly enhanced at one
location as opposed to several locations scattered throughout the city.
• Purpose built office buildings in a secure location, with certainty that the premises and buildings
meet and exceed MOSS requirement. Landscaped environment to ensure superior work life
balance.
• Rent-free building with the UN being in full control of the quality of the development and the end
product
• Efficiencies gained through services tied to common premises (cleaning/maintenance, guards, car
pool, etc.) Increased financial accountability through transparency in reporting and retiring cost of
services based on leveraging scale.
• Efficient UN project management minimizes operational risks while UN agencies benefiting from
purpose-built premises.
Disadvantages
• Property management becomes the owner’s liability.
• Short term costs can be much higher than rentals.
• Possibility of restricted mobility should the needs of the institution change.
Section
PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENT
7
Risk Analysis & Mitigating Measures
Introduction
The Project Team has considered a range of events that could affect its ability to either create the asset
and/or realize revenues from the asset. The key risks were considered and assessed in the following
categories Design, Construction, Implementation, Business Operations and Political risk. The analysis and
mitigation are outlined below
Design risk
To minimize cost exposure within the design process, an experienced design team that has at least 20
years of real estate project development experience will be assembled . All project architects and engineers
will adhere to design standards compatible with UN/international best practice. The project team will also

adopt a standard set of modules (beams, columns sizes etc.), which will be used in the design of all
structures.
Construction risk
Usually manifests itself in the construction price variations, quality of materials and workmanship and
program delay. To mitigate the effect of this risk, we will require that the construction of all work packages
are procured via a series of fixed price contracts. The Construction Company will develop a program of
quality assurance measures which include locating quarries for aggregate and sand (to ensure quality of
materials), training program for staff and labor who will be employed on the Project and building an ample
‘float’ into the construction program
Construction bonds
Many things can go wrong in a large construction/refurbishment project. Bearing this in mind, construction
bonds, also called construction surety bonds or contract bonds, are a mandatory prerequisite for any project
beyond a certain size. This proposed common premises would use the construction bond to mitigate risks
such as an adverse climatic event that causes disruptions, failure to complete the project due to insolvency
of the builders, or the job’s failure to meet contract specifications.
Implementation Risk
There will be ‘Implementation Risk’ if the Project Team is unable to smoothly transition from the
construction phase to operating phase. A smooth transition depends on all systems having been tested and
passed, the marketing program being effective and successful and the ongoing operations teams being in
place from the first day. To this end we will keep the implementation plan simple and our implementation
team as small as efficiently possible
Financial, Business & Operations Risk
In recent years, the exchange rate between the US dollar and the Uganda Shilling has been relatively
constant (1 US dollar to UG shilling 2850). Nonetheless, it cannot be assumed that this exchange rate will
remain constant in the future. We therefore propose to raise all capital required in US dollars, pay for the all
the construction works in US dollars. After the start of operations, we will continue to be exposed to
fluctuations in the value of the UG Shilling to Dollar exchange rate. In order to mitigate this we will establish
the financial plan on the US Dollar and receive revenues from sales in US Dollars until completion at which
time the exchange rate (excluding financing costs) would be determinable
Political Risk
Uganda has continued to consolidate democratic rule, and now enjoys a more open society. As a result of
these and other political achievements, Uganda performs well as compared to African countries on
measures of civil liberty, political rights and political stability.
Security Risk
High probability of terrorist attack, this is addressed by making sure that all aspects of the proposed
common premises comply fully with all UN MOSS requirements. And that during construction 24 hour
electronic surveillance and security presence is maintained on site at all times.
Section
SECURITY REPORT ON LUBOWA
PREFERRED OPTION8
A COMPREHENSIVE SECURITY ASSESSMENT WAS CONDUCTED IN 23-03-2015 SEE ANNEX 5
The UNDSS carried out an initial security assessment of the suitability of the site for the proposed
UN House in Lubowa, with a team of 5-7 Security Officers led by the Security Adviser visited the site
on 16.09.2014; a more comprehensive security assessment was conducted on 23-03-2015(See
Annex 5.)
Observations from initial assessment:
- The entire piece of NSSF land was about 500 acres, 30 of which has been offered by the
Government to the UN, for the UN house project.

- The 30 acres were offered based on the estimations obtained from agencies and programs.
- There is a valley in the middle reserved by NEMA as recreational ground/green and on the
layout some plots are demarcated; however this is not part of the UN-demarcated plot.
- Various UN teams had visited the site before; and 3 options of plots had been identified
with different developments and environmental considerations.
- Agencies and programs had been contacted in the past, to submit their space requirements
and specifications.
The SA clarified that the visit was not a security assessment and added that a security assessment
would be carried out at a later stage, with the availability of more information relating to the project
such as building plans, boundary marks etc.
Recommendation;
The Security Cell, having evaluated the accessibility, neighborhood, terrain and topography,
unanimously agreed that the selected location was ideal for the implementation of the UN common
premises. However;
Security considerations should be of paramount importance right from the beginning of the
project, starting with structural to the architectural designs to avoid gaps and security lapses
at later stages.

Section
BUSINESS & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS
9
A harmonized UN presence in the country enhance the capacity of the UN agencies to deliver
on the UNDAF. Simultaneously promotes a unified image, giving greater confidence in the
ability of the UN to support Uganda’s sustainable social and economic goals. UN agencies
avoid financial risk associated with price hikes in real estate market and periodic rent increases
of 5% every two years. Accountability remains with participating UN agencies and risks are
defrayed through efficient & objective management. The business and operational impacts are
highlighted below ;
• Reduce yearly recurring premises expenditure from $ 4.1million to $ 2.7 million with a
saving of $1.4 million per year and approximately $ 28 million in 20 years.
• Increased green credentials also offers the UN an opportunity to provide a more
conducive and innovative work environment with acceleration of its transition to a
lower carbon footprint globally.
• The use of solar energy for water heating, use of special glass products to reduce UV
exposure and environmentally friendly design that caters for the use of natural air to
reduce the need for power generated air conditioning, and green spaces for
recreation to improve staff wellbeing.
• Efficient Security monitoring and coordinated response to issues is greatly enhanced
at one location as opposed to several locations scattered throughout the city.
• Purpose built office buildings in a secure location, with certainty that the premises and
buildings meet and exceed MOSS requirement. Social amenities and landscaped
environment to ensure superior work life balance.
• Rent-free building with the UN being in full control of the quality of the development
and the end product.
• Efficiencies gained through services tied to common premises (cleaning/maintenance,
guards, car pool, etc.) Increased financial accountability through transparency in
reporting and retiring cost of services based on leveraging scale.
• Efficient UN project management minimizes operational risks while UN agencies
benefiting from purpose-built premises.
• The twenty year analysis indicates that once the cost of construction is amortized the
building is paid for then the costs to the UN are greatly reduced to running and service
expenses only.
• Additional beneﬁts in terms of general working conditions such as single occupancy,
customized space planning, security, safety, ﬂexibility and in house conference
facilities.

Section
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
10
Following a preliminary review of the planned housing development by NSSF at Lubowa in Wakiso District,
environmental impacts were identified by a firm in 2012. Potentially significant impacts largely arise due to
the scale and location of the development. Measures to address these have already been catered in design
and other project planning narratives to mitigate these environmental and social consequences.
The major areas of concern regarding the environment at Lubowa include:
1. Flow of traffic given the location is surrounded by institutions and residences; this being an
important issue both during the construction and operation phases of the Development.
Construction traffic may be particularly frustrating.
2. Limited road access with only the Entebbe – Kampala road servicing the greater
3. Lubowa development.
4. Limited potable water supply by the National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NWSC)
5. Lack of domestic waste treatment facility
6. Limited power supply

7. Noise nuisance during construction phase
8. Dust is likely to be a major problem during the construction phase, causing deterioration of
the quality of housing in the immediate vicinity of the development site.
9. Soil erosion is likely to occur given the gradient of the site; leading to siltation of wetlands
and streams at the bottom of the site.
However, most if not all of the above have now been responded to either by government providing
additional services e.g. road networks, improved water and electricity connectivity as well as health and
safety e.g. fire service.
TABLE IV: ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN

Section
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
11
CONCLUSIONS
The Uganda UNCT has selected the option that maximizes effectiveness and efficiency while minimizing
risk and cost. And complying with the requirements of UNDSS and MOSS to make every effort to safe
guard the lives of UN staff by been prepared against terrorist attacks.
With the repayment period starting after completion of construction and defects liability period , the tables
indicate that the proposed Green UN common premises, over a five year period is USD 6,933,944.00
million more economic than the existing leasing option, discounted to present day values in terms of costs.
Over Ten year period is USD 13,867,270.00 more economic than the existing leasing option, discounted to
present day values in terms of costs. And over fourteen year period is USD 19,414,178.00 more economic
than the existing leasing option, discounted to present day values in terms of costs.
However, there are additional beneﬁts in terms of general working conditions such as single occupancy,
customized space planning, security, safety, ﬂexibility and in house conference facilities which can be
valued over the periods. In addition the building itself will have accumulated value/equity over the period.
From the above it’s clear that the proposed Green Common Premises option at Lubowa is in the order of
USD 6,933,944.00 million more economic overall in 5 years and USD 19,414,178.00 more economic in
fourteen years.
Two other options were explored by the UN country team in Kampala , after due diligence, the
preferred solution, identified by the UNCT to address this critical situation, is to build a Green UN Common
Premises on 30 acres of land provided by the Uganda Government at Lubowa. The Ugandan government
as part of its commitment has allocated 30 acres of land and identified a financier to fund the construction of
the Common Premises this financier is a semi government agency called National Social Security Fund
(NSSF) which is the custodian of social security contributions for Uganda and is mandate to invest this
money in secure risk averse projects including real estate development.
The UNCT has identified UNDP as the lead agency in this Common Premises initiative and, a project
manager to coordinate and manage the selection of consultants and contractor for the construction
process. UNOPS is one of the UN agencies considered for the procurement services for the project.
Benefits
The proposed Green Common Premises will allow the UN to improve safety and security for its staff,
enhance the environmental sustainability of the UN buildings and improve the climate footprint of UN
AFPs on the way to climate neutrality. Such tailor made buildings will help increase productivity,
efficiency, motivation and innovation of the UN personnel and partners. It will create a valuable asset
for the host government that creates a lasting legacy of environmentally buildings in the immediate
community and the city at large. Furthermore it reduces the administrative burden for UN
organizations and partners by saving time, effort and money spent in navigating the different systems
utilized by each agency.
The quantitative and expected qualitative benefits from the proposed Green UN Common premises
are overwhelmingly in favor of the UN moving to the proposed common premises at Lubowa. The
Benefits include the following:
1. Harmonized UN presence in the country promoting greater confidence in the ability of the UN to support
Uganda’s sustainable social and economic goals
2. UN agencies avoid financial risk associated with price hikes in real estate market and constant rent
increases of 5% every 2 years. Accountability remains with participating UN agencies and risks are
defrayed through efficient & objective management.
3. Reduce yearly recurring premises expenditure from $ 4.1million to $ 2.7 million with a saving of $1.4
million per year and approximately $ 20 million in 14 years.

Uganda UN Common Premises Business Case June 04 2015

Uganda UN Common Premises Business Case June 04 2015

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (13)

Similar to Uganda UN Common Premises Business Case June 04 2015

Similar to Uganda UN Common Premises Business Case June 04 2015 (20)

Uganda UN Common Premises Business Case June 04 2015