new

docx

School

Cambridge College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

Subject

Industrial Engineering

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by MinisterHeron3339

Task 2 The objective of the client is to establish a residential dwelling while maintaining a strong foothold in terms of economic feasibility. Two distinct design alternatives have undergone meticulous evaluation: the Single-Storey Single Unit (Option A) and the Double-Storey Combined Unit (Option B). Option A: Single-Storey Single Unit This design proposition revolves around the creation of a single-level residential unit. Its primary merit lies in the reduction of construction expenditures. By eliminating the necessity for a second storey along with its associated structural components like stairs and supplementary support systems, a marked decrease in overall material and labor costs can be realized. This appeal is particularly pronounced when viewed through the lens of the client's immediate budgetary constraints. The diminished construction costs can be attributed to several factors, including the curtailed requirement for vertical expansion materials, the simplification of foundation prerequisites, and the minimization of labor hours. Furthermore, this option promises lower maintenance costs over the building's lifespan due to the uncomplicated nature of its design. With fewer components vulnerable to wear and tear and the absence of a second floor's intricacies, maintenance tasks are rendered less intricate and costly. Option B: Double-Storey Combined Unit The double-storey configuration provides an enticing advantage in terms of amplified floor space within a relatively compact land footprint. While the upfront construction costs might be elevated owing to the additional materials and labor associated with the second storey, the augmented floor area offers the prospect of enduring advantages. The supplementary space can translate into heightened comfort and utility for inhabitants, potentially resulting in an enhanced property valuation and heightened market desirability. Option B's lasting value lies in its capacity to potentially generate elevated rental income or resale worth on account of the expanded living space it offers. The additional floor area can accommodate additional bedrooms or living spaces, appealing to a broader spectrum of potential occupants or purchasers. Nonetheless, it is pertinent to acknowledge that the construction procedure may entail greater intricacies, possibly resulting in marginally heightened labor expenses. The structural intricacies linked with a second storey necessitate additional engineering and construction efforts, leading to escalated labor hours and augmented material quantities.

Considered Economic Factors: Several economic variables assume a pivotal role in determining the most pertinent design selection: Construction Costs: The focal point centers on the initial outlay necessitated for construction. While Option B holds promise for enduring advantages, Option A stands out for its immediate affordability, aligned harmoniously with the client's fiscal limitations. Option A's initial investment is notably diminished due to the truncated material and labor requisites, rendering it a viable selection for a budget-conscious client. Materials and Labor: Option A's uncomplicated nature begets reduced material and labor expenses. The absence of a second storey and the accompanying structural prerequisites significantly diminish the quantities of materials demanded, spanning from concrete and steel to insulation and finishing components. Simultaneously, the uncomplicated construction procedure mandates fewer labor hours, culminating in attenuated labor costs. Option B's structural complexity dictates supplementary materials and labor, resulting in amplified upfront disbursements. Long-Term Value: Option B's augmented floor area can bestow enriched living space and conceivably augmented property value over time. The surplus space can emerge as a compelling selling point, particularly within a competitive real estate landscape. Larger living spaces frequently hold sway over families or occupants, thus rendering Option B a valuable long-term investment. Nevertheless, this latent enduring value necessitates prudent calibration against immediate budgetary constraints. In the case of the proposed residential project, Option A: Single-Storey Single Unit emerges as the most economical design choice. This recommendation is underpinned by the reduction in construction costs, simplicity of design, lower maintenance expenses, and the quick return on investment. Cost Comparison 1. Cost of construction for single storey single unit GFA = 205 m 2 No. of unit = 10 Cost per sq.m. = 180 AUD (assumed)

No. of storey=1 Total cost of construction = GFA * No. of units * Cost per sq.m. * No. of storey = 205*10*180*1= 369, 000 AUD 2. Cost of construction for double storey combined unit GFA = 205 m 2 No. of unit = 10 Cost per sq.m. = 180 AUD (assumed) No. of storey=2 Total cost of construction = GFA * No. of units * Cost per sq.m. * No. of storey = 205*10*180*2= 738000 AUD After evaluating the construction costs for both options, it's evident that the Single-Storey Single Unit design incurs a total construction cost of 369,000 AUD. On the other hand, the Double-Storey Combined Unit design results in a higher total construction cost of 738,000 AUD. The percentage rise in cost between the two design options is 100%. This significant difference in construction costs clearly favors the Single-Storey Single Unit design. Recommendation Given that the project is situated in Kingscote, an area classified as belonging to other remote area characterized by modest land costs, sparse population density, and limited housing demand, the optimal choice is the single-storey-single unit design. This selection enables the construction of more expansive and roomy units on larger plots of land, thereby augmenting the worth and comfort of each individual unit. Additionally, this alternative might attract potential buyers and renters seeking superior quality and privacy. Additionally, there's another avenue to maximize cost savings: by embracing fundamental, standardized, and energy-saving designs. This approach involves adopting practical and straightforward design elements that have proven to be efficient and effective in various contexts.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version