PSI - Issue 44

Giuseppina De Martino et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 44 (2023) 1800–1807 Giuseppina De Martino et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2022) 000–000

1805

6

The costs include: building safety measures; demolition and removal, including transportation costs and landfill disposal; repair interventions; repair and finishing works relevant to strengthening interventions (only for E building); testing of facilities; technical works for health and hygiene improvement; technical works to improve facilities; construction and work safety costs; design and technical assistance of practitioners; furniture moving, global strengthening intervention .The costs are inclusive of charges for the design and technical assistance of practitioners and do not include value added tax (VAT). The mean unitary costs of repair and global strengthening intervention are summarized in Table. 1, together with the number of buildings and AMU as function of reconstruction model and localization. The repair and global strengthening costs related to funding requests approved by Filiera on average were similar to those of approved by USRC (768.0€/m 2 vs 771.16€/m 2 ) and lower than those of approved by USRA (768.0€/m 2 vs 1099.00€/m 2 ).

Table. 1 - Number of AMU, number of buildings and relevant mean unitary repair and global strengthening unitary costs in function of reconstruction model and localization

Reconstruction model I – analytical model II parametric model

Localization Number of AMU

Number of buildings

Mean repair and strengthening costs [€/m 2 ]

313 1513 3122 4981

768.0

OHC

-

IHC L’Aquila IHC Other

459 630

1099.00 771.16 934.11

Total

1131

Fig. 4 shows that the mean costs of AMU are highly influenced by the usability rating. The mean repair and strengthening unitary costs related to funding requests of mono-rating AMU are higher than those related to funding requests of multi-rating both for historical center of L’Aquila and of the other municipalities. This is due to the presence in the same AMU of buildings with both slightly (A, B or C usability rating) and severe damage (E usability rating).

947,73

Multi-rating

694,64

AMU tipology

1.206,81

Mono-rating

976,57

768,00

0

250 500 750 1000 1250 1500

Mean repair and strength. cost [€/m 2 ]

IHC

IHC

OHC

Other

L'Aquila

Fig. 4 – Mean repair and global strengthening costs of OHC buildings and IHC AMU in function of usability rating.

The higher the percentage of building surface within the AMU with E usability rating is, the higher the mean repair and global strengthening intervention costs [see Fig. 5]. The dashed line of Fig. 5represents the mean unitary repair and global strengthening costs allocated for OHC buildings with E usability rating.