Article from Newsletter No.17 July 2004

STUDY CONFIRMS STEEL AS BEST VALUE OPTION

A new study comparing steel and concrete building costs reveals the size of the competitive gap that has opened up between steel and concrete.  The study - "Comparative Structure Cost of Modern Commercial Buildings (2004 Revision)"  - confirms that despite price rises, the frame and floor costs for multi storey commercial buildings show a 30% cost advantage for structural steelwork based solutions compared to the reinforced concrete based alternatives.

The study, which is published in June 2004, is based on Q4 2003 prices, but the favourable competitive situation which it reveals is largely unchanged by the recent steel price rises. The report was prepared with input from Ove Arup & Partners, MACE, Davis Langdon and the Steel Construction Institute.  It is the latest in a series of steel versus concrete cost comparison studies for offices that goes back to 1993. The original 1993 study considered several different steel and concrete based framing options for a four storey, 2600m2 developers specification building, and an eight storey, 18000m2 prestige office building. The detailed specification, particularly for services, and locations, have been modified over time to reflect the evolution of client requirements.

All of the steel schemes considered are faster and more cost effective than all the concrete alternatives.  In 1995, the typical cost advantage for steel was around 10%; by the end of 2003 this had widened to 32%.  Considering inflation and using department of trade and industry cost indices reveals that the cost of the steel schemes has reduced by 14% in real terms. Over the same period the real cost of the concrete options has increased by 16%.