CFL Finance Company Limited was evaluating a property, Yaba, Lagos as a potential replacement for its existing office in Ikoyi.
The proposed property was originally designed as a private residence and had subsequently been converted for commercial use. CFL had not yet committed to the lease and required professional judgement before making the decision.
The challenge was not simply whether the building could be renovated. It was whether the property could realistically support CFL’s projected workforce, operational structure and corporate requirements, and whether the required retrofit investment would make commercial sense alongside the proposed lease.
Should CFL proceed with leasing the property and invest in adapting it as its new corporate office?
The decision required consideration of more than the property’s physical condition.
We needed to establish:
- whether the available space could accommodate the projected workforce;
- how effectively the existing residential layout could be adapted to corporate use;
- whether senior management and departmental functions could be appropriately accommodated;
- what operational compromises would be required;
- what level of retrofit investment would be necessary; and
- under what conditions the property would remain commercially sensible over the intended lease period.
D.A.D assessed the property from four connected perspectives:
Spatial Capacity
CFL’s projected full-capacity structure comprised 39 personnel, including 31 core office personnel requiring permanent workspace.
The property’s estimated net productive workspace was approximately 116 sqm.
At conventional workspace densities, this was insufficient for the projected core workforce. Even with a compressed cluster arrangement using wall-mounted workstations, the property was operating close to its effective capacity.
Operational Fit
We mapped the projected departmental structure against the available rooms and considered how teams would interact, report and collaborate.
Particular attention was given to the workspace requirements of senior personnel, departmental adjacency and the effect of the building’s residential origins on commercial workflow.
Adaptive Reuse Potential
We examined whether the existing building could be reorganised rather than simply renovated room-by-room.
The analysis explored relocating the CEO’s workspace to the boys’ quarter, allowing the largest room in the main building to support senior operational functions while keeping the core teams within the main building.
The potential connection between the main building and the BQ, together with the use of the external area for water infrastructure and staff welfare, was also considered.
Retrofit & Long-Term Economics
We identified the major interventions required to bring the property to an appropriate corporate standard, including:
- BQ rehabilitation;
- workspace reconfiguration;
- electrical, mechanical and plumbing upgrades;
- water storage infrastructure;
- environmental improvements;
- staircase intervention;
- corporate fit-out;
- staff welfare facilities; and
- improved circulation between the main building and BQ.
A preliminary retrofit investment north of ₦45 million was identified.
We then considered these requirements alongside the lease economics, potential landlord contributions, staff growth and the duration over which the retrofit investment would need to be recovered.
The property was workable, but fundamentally constrained.
The central issue was not whether the building could physically be converted into an office. It could.
The issue was that CFL’s projected workforce already pushed the property to its effective spatial ceiling.
A compressed configuration could accommodate the projected core workforce, but this would leave limited room for growth and would require deliberate acceptance of tighter working conditions.
The assessment also identified four senior functions whose workspace requirements could not be comfortably resolved within the building under the available configurations: the General Manager, Chief Financial Officer, Operations Manager and Accounts Manager.
The property’s residential origins created further limitations in circulation, spatial hierarchy and departmental separation.
The analysis therefore established that the property could not be judged simply on its rent or its apparent physical condition. Its viability depended on whether CFL was willing to exchange spatial flexibility and some degree of workplace privacy for the property’s potential cost and location advantages.
D.A.D did not recommend proceeding or withdrawing from the property in isolation.
Instead, we established the conditions under which the property could represent a viable decision.
Proceeding could be justified if:
- the lease represented a meaningful and sustained cost advantage over CFL’s existing premises and comparable alternatives;
- management was comfortable with a compressed and clustered workplace arrangement;
- the retrofit investment could reasonably be amortised over the intended lease period;
- staff growth remained within the building’s practical capacity;
- the absence of enclosed workspaces for certain senior personnel was an accepted organisational trade-off; and
- the landlord was willing to negotiate appropriate rent-free or fit-out contribution terms.
The property would become increasingly unattractive if CFL anticipated significant workforce growth, required greater executive privacy, experienced increasing parking demand or needed greater departmental separation.
The recommendation was therefore to evaluate the property as a conditional opportunity rather than an automatic relocation solution, with lease economics, retrofit cost, operational efficiency, staff welfare and long-term scalability considered together.
The assessment changed the question from:
“Can this building be renovated into an office?”
to:
“Does this property make sense for CFL given what it will cost, how it will operate, and how long it can serve the organisation?”
That distinction was significant.
A building can be physically adaptable and still be the wrong property for an organisation.
By testing the property’s capacity, operational fit, retrofit requirements and long-term constraints before lease commitment, CFL could evaluate the decision with a clearer understanding of the trade-offs involved.
The value of the assessment was not in making the decision for CFL. It was in making the consequences of the decision visible before the commitment was made.