The mandate
A downtown high-rise residential project required a model that connected the construction programme, funding structure and unit sales. The sponsor needed to understand not only total profitability but also the timing of deposits, construction expenditure, financing and completions.
The model was intended to support the construction-financing package and partner review. The project and parties remain anonymous, and the case study does not state an approval, loan amount or realised return.
How the model was structured
The development schedule linked construction stages to cost drawdown and modelled the funding requirement through the project timeline. Unit and sales assumptions captured mix, pricing, sales pace, deposits and completion proceeds. This made timing differences visible rather than compressing all revenue into the completion year.
Financing schedules tracked the contribution of equity and debt, interest accumulation and repayment. Profitability, cash requirement and return outputs were calculated from the connected project cash flow. A partner waterfall showed how distributions could change across return scenarios.
Sensitivity cases focused on construction cost, programme delay, pricing and absorption. The model also separated project performance from financing effects, allowing the sponsor to compare alternative capital structures on the same operating assumptions.
How the model supported the decision
The completed model organised the project assumptions into a format suitable for construction-financing review. It provided a clear line from the programme and unit schedule to peak funding, debt repayment and partner returns.
The sponsor could update the same workbook as construction, sales and financing assumptions developed, reducing the risk of inconsistent schedules across the financing package. The model supported analysis and communication; it did not replace lender diligence or specialist advice.
That continuity mattered as timing information evolved. Deposits, construction draws, completions and debt movements could be updated in their source schedules while the headline funding and return outputs remained tied to the same mechanics, making each review cycle easier to reconcile with the previous case.
Confidentiality note
This case study uses only previously published, non-confidential facts. Names, precise locations, deal values and realised results are withheld.