The Federal Government has approved the direct purchase of 600 four-bedroom terrace duplexes in Life Camp, Abuja, for personnel of the Nigerian Armed Forces.

The approval was granted by the Federal Executive Council (FEC) as part of the government’s efforts to improve the welfare and living conditions of military personnel.

The houses are located at Bristol City Development, Life Camp, and will be allocated to members of the Armed Forces under the Federal Government’s ongoing military housing intervention.

Minister of Housing and Urban Development, Muttaqha Rabe Darma, said the approval followed a memorandum presented by his ministry to the Federal Executive Council.

He described housing as an important component of the welfare package for military personnel, particularly given the demands placed on members of the Armed Forces.

According to the minister, the latest approval is part of President Bola Tinubu’s broader commitment to improving the welfare and living conditions of servicemen and women.

The 600 units approved in Life Camp are not an isolated intervention.

Darma said the Federal Government had previously secured approval for 1,556 housing units in Deidei, Abuja, for Armed Forces personnel.

With the latest 600 units, the number of units approved under the military housing intervention has risen to 2,156.

The government is targeting a much larger programme of 10,000 housing units for personnel of the Armed Forces.

The Federal Government’s decision reflects the growing recognition that accommodation is an important component of personnel welfare.

For military personnel, access to suitable accommodation can reduce the financial pressure associated with housing costs while improving living conditions for service members and their families.

The government has increasingly linked improved housing with broader efforts to strengthen welfare and conditions of service within the Armed Forces.

The Life Camp development also adds another substantial residential project to Abuja’s housing market.

The capital continues to experience strong demand for housing, while rising land, construction and rental costs have made decent accommodation increasingly expensive.

The addition of 600 four-bedroom homes therefore contributes to the city’s residential stock, although the units are specifically intended for military personnel rather than the general housing market.

The latest approval increases the number of housing units planned for military personnel, but approval is only the first stage.

The effectiveness of the programme will ultimately depend on how quickly the units are delivered, the quality of construction and how transparently they are allocated to eligible personnel.

The government will also need to demonstrate that the larger 10,000-unit target can move from approved projects to completed homes.

This is particularly important given the history of delays associated with some public housing projects.

With the 600 Life Camp units and the previously approved 1,556-unit Deidei project, the Federal Government now has 2,156 military housing units approved under the current intervention.

The government says the wider objective is to expand decent accommodation for members of the Armed Forces while strengthening their overall welfare.

For Nigeria’s housing sector, the programme also demonstrates how public-sector demand can be used to support large-scale residential development.

The bigger test, however, will be whether the government can sustain the pace of delivery and eventually achieve its 10,000-unit target.

The post Military Housing: FG Approves 600 Four-Bedroom Duplexes in Abuja appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The Federal Government has commenced construction of 250 housing units for federal civil servants in Dukpa, Gwagwalada, Abuja, as part of efforts to expand access to affordable accommodation for government workers.

The foundation for the estate was laid on August 19, 2026, by the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Esther Walson-Jack.

The project is being implemented through a partnership between the Federal Ministry of Housing and Urban Development and the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.

Estate to Include Two- and Three-Bedroom Homes

The planned estate will comprise 250 two- and three-bedroom bungalows.

Housing Minister Muttaqha Rabe Darma said the project is intended to provide affordable accommodation for civil servants while recognising their contribution to national development.

The project forms part of wider federal efforts to increase housing supply and improve access to decent accommodation for workers.

Housing Programme Reaches 600 Units for Civil Servants

The new estate will complement 350 housing units already provided under the Federal Integrated Staff Housing Programme.

With the addition of the 250 Gwagwalada units, the number of homes provided to federal civil servants under the initiatives will rise to 600 units.

The development comes as the Federal Government continues to expand its broader housing programme across the country.

The Housing Ministry has previously outlined plans for Renewed Hope Estates consisting of 250 units in selected states, alongside larger Renewed Hope Cities in major urban centres.

Head of Service Calls for Transparency

Walson-Jack called on state governors to consider replicating the housing initiative across the country.

She also stressed the importance of quality construction, affordability, transparency, accessibility and timely completion in housing projects.

Those factors will be particularly important as the government attempts to move beyond housing announcements and deliver completed homes to beneficiaries.

Government Lines Up More Housing Projects

Darma disclosed that the Housing Ministry has several projects scheduled for delivery between August and December across Lagos, Abuja and other locations.

He said the planned projects form part of the government’s effort to shift from policy announcements towards completed housing developments that can improve living conditions.

The minister also directed contractors, consultants and other stakeholders involved in the Gwagwalada project to maintain high construction standards and ensure the buildings can withstand long-term use.

Gwagwalada’s Housing Development Comes With Land Issues

The project is being developed in Dukpa, an area that has previously been involved in federal land and housing initiatives.

The Federal Government had allocated residential and service plots in the area under the Dukpa Site and Services Scheme in 1992.

Those allocations were subsequently revoked after the land was required for the National Housing Programme, with the government citing overriding public purpose.

The ministry has announced a verification exercise for affected allottees ahead of possible relocation to another site within Gwagwalada. The exercise is scheduled to begin on September 7, 2026.

The Bigger Question Is Affordability

The construction of another 250 housing units is positive for Abuja’s housing supply, but the bigger issue is whether the homes will be affordable to the civil servants they are intended to serve.

Housing affordability remains a major challenge for Nigerian workers as rents, land prices and construction costs continue to rise.

A housing programme for civil servants therefore needs to consider not only the cost of constructing the units but also the financing structure, eligibility requirements, payment terms and eventual cost to beneficiaries.

If workers cannot realistically afford the completed homes, increasing the number of units will have limited impact on the affordability problem.

Quality and Delivery Will Matter

The government has also placed emphasis on timely completion and construction quality.

That is important given previous concerns around delays in federal housing projects.

In Katsina, for example, a recent physical inspection by the Housing Minister found that only about 130 of 250 units described in briefing documents as completed were actually ready, highlighting the importance of independent verification and project monitoring.

For the Gwagwalada project, successful delivery will therefore depend not simply on breaking ground, but on completing the homes to the required standard and making them accessible to eligible civil servants.

The 250-unit estate represents another addition to Abuja’s housing stock. Its real impact, however, will ultimately be measured by how many workers can afford to own or occupy the homes and how quickly they are delivered.

The post FG Launches 250 Housing Units to Expand Affordable Homes for Civil Servants appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The housing affordability crisis confronting Nigeria and many African countries cannot be solved merely by increasing the number of houses constructed.

Housing becomes affordable when the entire financial architecture supporting its production, purchase and rental is deliberately structured for affordability.
Experience from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Singapore and Malaysia demonstrates that governments rarely expect low- and middle-income households to purchase homes produced entirely with expensive commercial land, commercial infrastructure, commercial development finance and commercial mortgages.

Instead, governments intervene at different points in the housing value chain.
They subsidise land.
They provide capital grants.
They supply infrastructure.
They offer low-interest development finance.
They guarantee mortgages.
They provide tax incentives to private investors.
They support social and affordable rental housing.
They give direct assistance to qualifying households.
They leverage government resources to attract much larger volumes of private and institutional capital.
The central finding of this report is therefore:
Affordable housing is created by affordable finance.
The United States relies heavily on tax credits, federal housing programmes, rental assistance and a sophisticated private housing-finance market.

The United Kingdom combines large-scale government grants with housing associations, local authorities, borrowing and private institutional capital.
Canada uses federal funding, concessional finance and partnerships with provinces, territories and municipalities.

Singapore integrates public land management, public housing development, household grants, compulsory savings and specialised housing loans.
Malaysia combines direct public housing programmes, construction subsidies, government-backed housing credit guarantees and public-private delivery mechanisms.
Nigeria does not need to copy any single country.

The stronger strategy would be to combine suitable elements from each model into a Nigeria Affordable Housing Finance Framework adapted to the country’s income structure, federal system, large informal economy and housing deficit.

1. INTRODUCTION: WHY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS REALLY A FINANCE QUESTION
Governments frequently announce affordable housing programmes by stating the number of houses they intend to construct.
But the more important questions are:
Who finances the land?
Who pays for infrastructure?
At what interest rate does the developer obtain construction finance?
How much equity must the developer contribute?
At what interest rate does the eventual purchaser borrow?
What happens to households that cannot qualify for conventional mortgages?
How are low-income households that should rent rather than purchase supported?
If these questions are not addressed, calling a development “affordable housing” does not make it affordable.

A developer who:
* purchases land commercially;
* finances infrastructure;
* borrows construction money at high interest;
* purchases expensive building materials;
* pays taxes and development charges;
* bears approval delays; and
* must recover capital and earn a reasonable return
cannot simply reduce the selling price because government labels the project affordable.
The countries examined in this report demonstrate a different approach.
They intervene before the house reaches the household.

2. UNITED STATES: USING TAX POLICY AND PRIVATE CAPITAL
The United States provides an important example of how government can stimulate affordable housing without directly constructing every home.
One of the country’s most significant affordable rental housing instruments is the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, or LIHTC.
HUD describes LIHTC as the most important resource for creating affordable rental housing in the United States. State and local allocating agencies currently receive the equivalent of approximately US$12 billion in annual budget authority to issue credits supporting the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of rental housing targeted at lower-income households. (HUD User⁠)
How the tax-credit mechanism works
Instead of government paying the entire construction cost:
Government creates a tax credit.
The credit is allocated to an eligible affordable housing project.
Investors provide equity to the project in return for the tax benefits.
The developer therefore needs less conventional debt.
Lower debt reduces the amount of rental income required to service financing.
That makes lower rents more financially feasible.
The important lesson is:
Government can finance affordable housing through the tax system, not only through direct budget expenditure.
This is particularly relevant to Nigeria.
Rather than depending entirely on annual housing appropriations, government could provide carefully designed tax incentives to pension-backed investment vehicles, banks, insurance companies, REITs and other qualified investors financing certified affordable rental projects.

3. THE AMERICAN MODEL ALSO SUPPORTS THE HOUSEHOLD
The United States demonstrates another important distinction in housing policy:
Supply subsidy versus demand subsidy.
A supply-side subsidy makes housing cheaper to produce.
A demand-side subsidy increases the household’s ability to pay.
America uses both.
Rental assistance programmes help eligible households meet rental costs, meaning government does not assume that every low-income household should immediately become a homeowner.
This is a critical lesson for Nigeria.
An effective national housing policy needs:
homeownership housing;
affordable rental housing;
social rental housing;
student and youth housing;
elderly housing;
worker housing;
and other tenure options.
Homeownership cannot be the only measure of housing success.

4. UNITED KINGDOM: CAPITAL GRANTS PLUS HOUSING PROVIDERS
The United Kingdom provides a strong example of using public money to reduce the capital cost of affordable housing.
Housing policy is devolved, so arrangements differ among England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This report focuses principally on England.
The government’s Social and Affordable Homes Programme 2026–2036 is a ten-year programme valued at £39 billion. (GOV.UK⁠)
Homes England is responsible for at least £27 billion of this funding outside London. (GOV.UK⁠)
The programme provides grant funding to support the capital cost of developing affordable housing for rent or sale. (GOV.UK⁠)
Why capital grants matter
Consider an illustrative affordable housing development costing £100 million.
If government provides £35 million as capital grant, the housing provider does not need to finance the entire £100 million through commercial borrowing.
It may finance the balance through:
* its own capital;
* bank borrowing;
* bonds;
* institutional investment;
* rental income; and
* other funding.
Reducing debt requirements makes lower rents economically sustainable.
This represents a fundamental principle:
Affordable rent often begins with lower-cost capital, not rent control.

5. HOUSING ASSOCIATIONS: AN IMPORTANT INSTITUTIONAL LESSON
The British system also demonstrates the importance of specialised housing providers.
Government does not necessarily have to become:
the developer,
the contractor,
the property manager,
the landlord,
the mortgage lender,
and the maintenance company.
Instead, government can create policy, provide subsidy, regulate affordability and work through qualified delivery institutions.
Nigeria could significantly expand the role of:
* housing cooperatives;
* nonprofit housing organisations;
* state housing corporations;
* private affordable housing providers;
* pension-backed rental housing companies; and
* professionally governed housing associations.
The objective should be to develop institutions capable of holding affordable housing assets for decades, not merely developers interested in selling units immediately after construction.

6. CANADA: FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, PROVINCES AND MUNICIPALITIES WORKING TOGETHER
Canada’s approach is particularly important for Nigeria because both countries operate federal systems.
Canada’s National Housing Strategy is currently a 10-plus-year programme exceeding C$115 billion . (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation⁠)
By July 2026, official CMHC reporting indicated that more than C$82 billion had been committed toward supporting the creation, acquisition or repair of hundreds of thousands of housing units. (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation⁠)
A major feature of the Canadian model is the participation of different levels of government.
The federal government provides financing.
Provinces and territories participate through bilateral agreements and matching arrangements.
Municipalities influence:
* land use;
* planning;
* permitting;
* density;
* development charges;
* infrastructure; and
* housing approvals.
The lesson for Nigeria is significant.
Affordable housing should not be treated as the responsibility of the Federal Ministry of Housing alone.
The Federal Government cannot solve Nigeria’s housing challenge if states control important land and planning functions but affordable housing policy is not integrated across levels of government.

7. A NIGERIAN VERSION OF FEDERAL-STATE COST SHARING
Nigeria could establish a framework in which access to federal affordable housing funds is conditional upon state participation.
For example:
Federal Government provides:
* affordable housing capital grant;
* long-term financing;
* mortgage guarantee;
* tax incentives.
State Government provides:
* land;
* title;
* planning approval;
* reduction or waiver of development charges;
* part of infrastructure.
Local Government provides:
* local infrastructure coordination;
* community integration;
* local planning support.
Private developer or housing provider provides:
* equity;
* technical delivery;
* construction;
* project management.
Financial institutions provide:
* development debt;
* mortgage finance;
* rental housing finance.
This allows government money to leverage other people’s money rather than becoming the only source of housing finance.

8. SINGAPORE: INTERVENING ACROSS THE ENTIRE HOUSING VALUE CHAIN
Singapore provides perhaps the most integrated example among the countries examined.
Its housing system is not based simply on subsidising mortgage interest.
Government intervention extends across:
* land;
* planning;
* development;
* pricing;
* household grants;
* housing finance;
* retirement savings; and
* resale conditions.
The Housing & Development Board plays a central role in public housing development.
Eligible first-time families may currently receive an Enhanced CPF Housing Grant of up to S$120,000 toward qualifying new or resale flat purchases. (HDB⁠)
Additional CPF housing grants exist for eligible resale purchases, including grants of up to S$80,000 under relevant family arrangements. (HDB⁠)
The lesson is not simply that Singapore gives people money.
The more important lesson is that Singapore addresses affordability systemically.

9. WHY LAND POLICY MATTERS
Housing affordability begins with land.
Where land prices become highly speculative, the cost ultimately appears in the selling price or rent.
Singapore demonstrates how strategic public control of land can support long-term housing objectives.
Nigeria’s public land should similarly be treated as an economic development instrument, not merely a revenue-generating commodity.
When government contributes land to an affordable housing project, that contribution should be valued transparently.
If land worth ₦5 billion is contributed, government has effectively invested ₦5 billion.
The public should receive a measurable affordability benefit in exchange.
That benefit could be:
* reduced selling prices;
* controlled rents;
* permanent affordable housing;
* shared ownership;
* rent-to-own housing;
* worker housing.
Public land should never be transferred cheaply for “affordable housing” and subsequently converted into luxury housing without the public recovering the value of its subsidy.

10. SINGAPORE’S SECOND LESSON: LINKING SAVINGS AND HOUSING
Singapore’s housing framework also demonstrates the power of connecting long-term household savings with housing finance.
This raises an important question for Nigeria:
Can the country’s enormous pools of long-term institutional savings play a greater role in housing without compromising the safety of contributors?
The answer should not be reckless withdrawal of retirement savings.
Instead, Nigeria should explore secure structures through which long-term capital can finance:
* mortgage-backed assets;
* affordable rental portfolios;
* infrastructure;
* housing bonds; and
* professionally managed residential investment.
The key requirement is strong regulation and appropriate risk management.

11. MALAYSIA: DIRECT SUBSIDY AND GOVERNMENT GUARANTEES
Malaysia offers highly relevant lessons for Nigeria because it combines support for low-income households with mechanisms to extend housing finance to people who may struggle to qualify under conventional banking rules.
Under Malaysia’s Program Perumahan Rakyat — PPR, qualifying low-income households can access public rental housing, with official information indicating rents as low as RM124 per month, excluding maintenance. (KPKT⁠)
This demonstrates that governments must sometimes accept that the poorest households cannot pay the full economic cost of housing.
Trying to solve extreme low-income housing solely through mortgages is unrealistic.

12. MALAYSIA’S RUMAH MESRA RAKYAT MODEL
Malaysia’s Rumah Mesra Rakyat programme is designed for qualifying households with low incomes who have suitable land but lack adequate housing.
The official programme currently lists a RM20,000 construction subsidy, with repayment arrangements extending over 16 to 25 years and estimated payments around RM300 monthly under the programme structure. (SPNB⁠)
This concept has considerable potential for rural Nigeria and smaller cities.
Millions of Nigerians may have access to family land or community land but lack sufficient capital to complete a decent home.
Rather than constructing entirely new estates everywhere, Nigeria could consider a properly controlled programme of:
Serviced Plot + Core Housing + Incremental Expansion Finance
Households could receive a structurally sound starter home that can be expanded as income improves.

13. MALAYSIA’S MORTGAGE GUARANTEE MODEL
Perhaps one of Malaysia’s most relevant innovations for Nigeria is the housing credit guarantee system.
SJKP explicitly aims to help Malaysians—including people without fixed incomes or conventional payslips—obtain housing finance from participating financial institutions. (SJKP⁠)
Under the SJKP MADANI scheme, mortgage financing can reach RM360,000, with financing periods of up to 35 years. The guarantee may cover financing up to a maximum of 120% of the residential property’s purchase price when specified ancillary costs are included. (SJKP⁠)
This addresses one of Nigeria’s biggest housing finance problems:
Millions of Nigerians have income, but they do not have payslips.
An entrepreneur may earn ₦800,000 monthly.
A trader may turn over millions of naira annually.
A driver may have reliable daily income.
A consultant may earn irregular but substantial income.
Yet conventional mortgage underwriting may reject them because their income does not resemble a traditional monthly salary.
Nigeria therefore needs to move from:
Salary-based mortgage assessment
toward:
Verified-income mortgage assessment.
Evidence could include:
* bank statements;
* verified business transactions;
* tax filings;
* rent-payment history;
* cooperative savings;
* digital payment records;
* audited business cash flow;
* verified contracts.
Government guarantees could absorb part of the lender’s credit risk while maintaining prudent underwriting.

14. COMPARING THE FIVE MODELS
Financing Instrument United States United Kingdom Canada Singapore Malaysia
Direct capital subsidy Yes Strong Strong Strong Strong
Tax incentives Very strong Used Used Less central Used
Government-supported loans Yes Strong Strong Very strong Yes
Mortgage guarantees Strong system Available through wider system Important Public finance structure Very relevant
Rental assistance/social housing Strong Strong Strong Strong Strong
Public/strategic land intervention Local/state Important Provincial/local Very strong Important
Household purchase grants Various Various Various Very strong Various
Private capital mobilisation Very strong Very strong Strong Complementary Strong
Dedicated affordable housing providers Yes Very strong Strong HDB Government agencies/PR1MA
Informal-income mortgage support Limited applicability Conventional market Conventional market Structured system Particularly relevant

TEN LESSONS FOR NIGERIA
Lesson One: Stop Measuring Housing Policy Only by Units Built
Government should measure:
* affordability;
* household income-to-housing-cost ratios;
* mortgage accessibility;
* rental burden;
* land cost;
* infrastructure cost;
* financing cost;
* occupancy;
* beneficiary income.
A million houses that intended beneficiaries cannot afford do not represent successful affordable housing policy.

Lesson Two: Establish a National Affordable Housing Finance Framework
Nigeria needs a coordinated financing architecture connecting:
Federal Government
State Governments
FMBN
FHA
NMRC
commercial banks
mortgage banks
pension funds
insurance companies
developers
housing cooperatives
institutional investors
development finance institutions
and households.

Lesson Three: Create a Nigerian Affordable Housing Tax Credit
Drawing inspiration from the American model, qualifying investors in approved affordable rental housing could receive tax incentives linked to:
* number of units delivered;
* duration of affordability;
* household income served;
* rents charged;
* location;
* energy performance.
The incentive should be performance-based.
No affordable unit delivered should mean no affordable housing tax benefit.

15. CREATE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAPITAL GRANT
Nigeria could adopt elements of the British model.
Instead of government constructing everything itself, qualifying projects could compete for capital grants.
The grant could be calculated according to affordability.
For illustration:
Market housing
No grant.
Workforce housing
Limited incentive.
Affordable housing
Moderate grant.
Social housing
Larger grant.
Housing for extremely vulnerable households
Highest subsidy.
The lower the household’s ability to pay, the larger the subsidy required.
This is more economically rational than pretending that every household can pay the same price.

16. CREATE A NATIONAL HOUSING CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATION
Nigeria should strongly consider a large-scale housing credit guarantee mechanism.
It should target:
* informal-sector workers;
* SMEs;
* self-employed professionals;
* young entrepreneurs;
* first-time homeowners;
* household

The post How Leading Countries Finance Affordable Housing appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The Federal Housing Authority (FHA) has announced plans to significantly scale up affordable housing construction across Nigeria in 2026, as it moves from groundwork to full-scale delivery under the Federal Government’s Renewed Hope Agenda.

Managing Director of the Authority, Oyetunde Ojo, disclosed that after laying institutional and structural foundations in 2025, the FHA will this year focus on massive housing construction nationwide to expand access to affordable homes for Nigerians.

Ojo spoke at the opening of a three-day management and staff retreat held at Warm Springs Resort, Ikogosi, Ekiti State, themed “Consolidating on the Gains of Positive Reforms.”

According to him, the retreat was designed to align staff with the Authority’s strategic direction and reinforce its mandate of affordable housing delivery in line with President Bola Tinubu’s policy priorities.

“The retreat is extremely key. It aligns with the vision of Mr President on the Renewed Hope Agenda. Housing delivery is our core mandate, and we are fully committed to it,” Ojo said.

He explained that the FHA used 2025 to reposition the organisation, acquire land nationwide, and improve staff welfare to ensure operational efficiency.

“Our first year was about preparation. We acquired land across the country and addressed staff welfare because motivated people deliver better results. This year is about full construction and delivery of the houses we promised Nigerians,” he added.

Ojo revealed that construction works have already commenced in Akwa Ibom and Kaduna states, while the Bwari housing project in Abuja, comprising about 400 housing units, is 86 percent completed and scheduled for commissioning in the first quarter of 2026.

He noted that the Bwari project, being executed under a zero-budget funding model, would be inaugurated by President Tinubu upon completion and would serve as one of the Authority’s flagship housing deliveries this year.

Between January and May 2026, the FHA plans to commission housing projects in Bwari (FCT), Odukpani (Cross River), Ajoda (Ibadan), and other states, while new construction and groundbreaking exercises are expected to commence in Ekiti and Abia states.

“Construction is going to be round the federation. It is construction-delivery, construction-delivery this year,” Ojo emphasised.

He encouraged Nigerians in both the formal and informal sectors to engage the Authority on its housing access framework, noting that 70 percent of the Bwari housing allocation was reserved for the informal sector.

Also speaking at the retreat, Executive Director, Finance and Accounts, Dr Mathias Byuan, disclosed that the FHA would begin large-scale construction across all 36 states from February 2026, following the completion of land acquisition and preparation nationwide.

Byuan explained that the Authority operates outside direct national budgetary allocations and relies on internally generated revenue and public-private partnerships (PPPs) to fund housing development.

“We are not on the national budget. This year, we are leveraging public-private partnerships to deliver affordable housing in all 36 states. Land has been secured and prepared nationwide, so construction will commence massively from February,” he said.

He added that abandoned housing projects inherited by the Authority have been completed and allocated at affordable rates, in line with the government’s housing inclusion agenda.

On Ekiti State, Ojo confirmed that work would soon begin on 200 housing units in Ado-Ekiti, following the allocation of 20 hectares of land by Governor Biodun Oyebanji, along with a Certificate of Occupancy issued free of charge.

“We are building 200 two-bedroom bungalows along Ekiti State University Road. We will start with 100 units. All documentation has been perfected, and construction will commence immediately,” Ojo said.

The post FHA Targets Nationwide Affordable Housing Push in 2026 appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The Ogun State Government has announced plans to demolish and reconstruct the state’s legislative and commissioners’ quarters, which were originally built in 1976.

According to Jamiu Omoniyi, the Commissioner for Housing, a recent technical evaluation revealed that the structures have become unsafe and uneconomical to maintain despite several repairs over the years.

Omoniyi said the decision complies with the National Building Code of Nigeria (2006), which mandates that public buildings meet minimum safety standards.

“The existing quarters were constructed nearly 50 years ago. Over time, maintenance efforts have proven inadequate, and the buildings are no longer fit for habitation,” he stated.

He added that the new quarters would feature modern, energy-efficient designs and upgraded utilities as part of the state’s broader urban renewal and housing development plan.

The commissioner described the initiative as a long-term investment in safety and administrative efficiency, emphasizing that the project would prioritize transparency and local job creation through the engagement of indigenous contractors.

The post Ogun to Rebuild 1976 Legislative and Commissioners’ Quarters appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Part of a public housing tower in the Bronx collapsed on Wednesday morning, but authorities reported no injuries.

The New York Fire Department said the incident occurred around 8:10 a.m. at the Mitchel Houses, after a suspected gas explosion destroyed an incinerator shaft in the 20-story building. Officials stressed that “no residential units were affected.”

“An investigation is underway to determine the cause of this event and the extent of any damage beyond the reported exterior damage to the chimney,” the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) said in a statement.

Footage from nearby residents showed one corner of the high-rise ripped open from ground to roof, with clouds of dust filling the street. Air conditioners were seen among the rubble, apparently torn from windows by falling bricks.

Mayor Eric Adams, who was briefed on the collapse, urged residents to “please avoid the area for your safety.” Police confirmed receiving multiple 911 calls, with officers, firefighters, city inspectors, and Con Edison securing the site. “Upon arrival, officers observed a partial building collapse,” the NYPD said.

The collapse has revived concerns over the condition of New York’s aging public housing stock. About half a million people live in NYCHA buildings, many dating back to the mid-20th century. Tenants have long complained of rodents, mold, heating failures, and structural decay.

A federal monitor appointed in 2019 to address chronic problems concluded his term last year, noting that the biggest challenge remained the “poor physical state of NYCHA’s buildings.”

The post Bronx High-Rise Partially Collapses, No Injuries Reported appeared first on Housing TV Africa.