750
Cost and Time Analysis: First Cost
If the dimensions of the multi-bed rooms, the corridors and the core
cannot be reduced, the only way to simplify the perimeter is to eliminate
the recess and arbitrarily assign the added space to the one-bed rooms. It
can be assumed that since to new rooms are added and room function
does not change, no additional services are required. It is further
assumed that the reduced building perimeter compensates for the added
space as far as HVC requirements are concerned. Dimensions are based
on the Prototype Design, e.g., floor-to-floor height is seventeen feet. The
same reasoning given in Section 751.3.2 above concerning deductions
from basic construction cost applies to this case except that certain
adjustments must be made for the effect on the exterior wall.
Add:
Interior partitions
(without doors)
9 lf @ .00 = 5
Deduct:
Exterior wall
153 sf @ $ 6.00 = 0
Corners
68 lf @ $ 6.00 = 400
Interior furring
80 sf @ $ 1.00 = 80
00
This amounts to an additional deduction of 75 distributed over 216
square feet, or .45 per square foot. Subtracting from the figure given in
751.3.2, we have .60 - .45 = .15 per OGSF, or about 48% of
base construction cost. The effect of this kind of incremental space on the
total cost of the hospital obviously depends on how much of it is added in
any particular case, but it would typically be of the same order of
magnitude as that indicated in 751.3.2 above.
751.3.4
Beams vs. Trusses
The beam and suspended ceiling approach for providing a deep service
zone was preferred to a truss and directly attached ceiling for the
Prototype Design primarily for functional reasons. Also, it was assumed
that since for planning purposes spans over sixty feet were not required,
beams would always be more economical than trusses. In fact, it was this
very consideration of a cost break that led to a careful planning study of
how interior columns could be located to minimize the constraints to
planning and adaptability.
3 - 199
Previous Page
