|
THE ANDERSON HALL PI
'q'L
ILZ
h
.4.4 ''A4 4, ~~
-,F,. Zr
i---P
~~~AZ~~~"YY44" **-* A
:- 4 ev
4 h.r '
,Ir
Llf Ii. 2 2t LI ,x
*r~ ~s ',h' Ir :-F 4:t4,.
*4. hK-
J\ k 4
*4 .' . . 44.''. II. .1~ cL 4 ~ I r 1
i-4T -; .- 444 '4 '1 Ar %.
4r 'rt'rE ;;i'f'r 'Jr
<44 LL ''
J l "' ..Q 1.j~~i
^*a t/4f54Vi It '* i
ro..bs..,,
7 (
4 ~'1
-t
-
~-I.< --
4 _ 4 -44 44
4._ 4444 ---
'vs
!.I-I
} 4 41
'44 d 44
bK
4444
4;'
"p
'di.
ii ''4
4''_ i.
. '
4 .r~ II -
.44 "'i~
-. .-. -44~
'1 44
44
Si>/ c
-S, 'Ig'S" i ( .i
44*.. .fl C '" '.. ::,: m,,,
4- -. '47 r' "''. 4 4 3' " . ' '- "4 *144'4.4' 'I "' "' ;''. .. ."l ^' :=
-.. .. :. 'o. .. . .. ,..
1 II
_ _ I ~ II
I
J
PRELIMINARY COST ANALYSIS
ANDERSON HALL
EXISTING SPACE CONDITIONS
square footage b'ment 1st 2nd 3rd total
gross area 9700 9700 9700 9100 38,200
net usable area 8900 8900 8900 6300 33,000
circulation 2250 1760 1510 1510 7,030
lavatories 400 200 200 200 1,000
used area 6250 6940 7190 4590 24,970
building efficiency % 70.2% 78.0% 80.8% 72.9% 75.7%
PROPOSED SPACE CONDITIONS
square footage b'ment 1st 2nd 3rd total
gross area 9900 9900 9900 9300 39,000
net usable area 8900 8900 8900 6300 33,000
circulation 2200 2200 1830 1830 8,060
lavatories/mechanical 400 400 400 350 1,550
used area 6300 6300 6670 4120 23,390
building efficiency % 70.8% 70.8% 74.9% 65.4% 70.8%
The proposed space conditions include bringing the building up to
all applicable codes ( restrooms and access for handicapped, mechanical
spaces, elevator and proper means of egress )
EXISTING TO REMAIN
* foundation system
* exterior bearing wall system
* exterior window and door openings
* roof truss system and satisfactory roof surface
EXISTING TO REMOVE
* all interior structure, framing and partition systems
* all exterior windows and doors
* electrical system
* plumbing system (including steam heat)
* exterior fire stair at the east facade
* fire damaged roof truss system
* fire damaged roof surface
* all interior finishes
NEW BUILDING ELEMENTS AND FINISHES
* steel column and beam system supporting an open-web bar joist structure
with metal deck and lightweight concrete topping
* new mechanical air handling units with appropriate ductwork
* new electrical system
* new plumbing system
* new elevator and exterior fire stair
* new interior fire stair
* new monumental stair
* rigid board insulation with gypsum finish at the interior of all exterior walls
* steel stud partition system with gypsum wall surface as interior partitions
* vinyl asbestos tile floor
* suspended acoustic tile ceiling
* new lighting system
* pneumatic message system
* fire sprinkler system throughout
* new double glazed window system
* new exterior and interior doors
* new plaza and landscaping (may be separate project and contract)
COST ESTIMATE
1) exterior work..................................$
2) exterior elevator and fire stair..................$
3) utility work................. ................. $
4) interior demolition .............................. $
5) interior work................................$
6) repair of fire damage............................ $
7) hardware ................... ............... .. .....$
8) finishes .........................................$
9) mechanical
plumbing....$120,120
HVAC.........$342,420
electric ....$229,320
TOTAL.......$691,860................... $
10) social security and insurance at 7,1/2%..........$
11) general conditions at 5%........................ $
12) profit at 10%........ .................... ....$
13) contingencies at 10%...........................$
121,397
55,000
11,500
247,500
213,078
288,650
41,975
180,205
691,860.....1,851,165
138,837.....1,990,002
99,500.....2,089,502
208,950.....2,298452
229,845.....2,528,297
TOTAL COST
SQUARE FOOT COST
For specific work to be performed under each category
consult the outline specifications.
$2,528,297
$64.83
New Building Cost (projected).............$2,029,170
Demolition of Existing Anderson Hall......$ 247,500
contingencies at 5%......................$ 12,375
$2,289,045
The complete renovation of Anderson Hall is projected to be approx.
10.45% more expensive than the cost of new construction on the same site
at the present time. It should be kept in mind however, that the
proposed renovation is probably the most expensive alternative
available. A careful examination of the structure by experienced
structural professionals would no doubt reveal several much cheaper
alternatives. Even so, the 10.45% cost overrun of new construction is
exactly at the level of cost differences currently being experienced in
the major cities of the south-eastern portion of the countrywhere
the re-use of older buildings is being attempted.
It would appear that the cost figure, especially if it could
be trimmed, when viewed in conjunction with the cost of construction
in general, and coupled with the historical background of Anderson
Hall, makes this project at least feasible enough to be considered
seriously.
|