VALUE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS ON ANDALUSIA HOUSING
PROY GRIYA GIRI PHASE II IN GRESIK DISTRICT
Muhammad, Budi Witjaksana, Hanie Teki Tjendani
Universitas
17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya, Indonesia
Email:
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
|
KEYWORDS value engineering, housing projects,
advantages, alternative design, comparative, site plan |
ABSTRACT The need for housing continues to increase as
the number of inhabitants increases. Housing development as one of the
efforts to meet the needs of the community for residential houses.� The Andalusian Griya
Giri housing estate in Gresik Regency was built
with a type. However, with the vast area in���
Gresik Regency and the fierce competition of housing developers who
offer housing in a higher segment and at prices that do not differ much, it
can be concluded that this housing is a waste of costs in development.
Therefore, a way is needed to overcome this problem, namely by applying Value
Engineering. This study aims to analyze the optimization of the calculation
of the cost budget plan without reducing the quality and function of the
building with the Value Engineering method. The analysis technique in Value
Engineering of this study uses a comparative method with cost analysis. This
method compares the profit price of the landcape
design before it is redesigned with the design that has been redesigned, namely� changing the
house plan, appearance and number of house compositions / site plans so that
maximum profit is obtained. This analysis uses the stages of the Value
Engineering plan, namely the information stage, stage, creative, analysis
stage, recommendation stage and presentation stage. Based on the results of
the Value Engineering analysis at the Griya Giri Andalusian Housing Project in Gresik district, the
most profitable design alternative was to use Design C with the change of
type 38/72 housing units to 36 units. The profit price after redesigning from
the original design, the production price of the type 38 house is Rp. 122.2
40. 00,000 becomes Rp. 9 0.728.514. The amount of profit increased generated
after the redesign of the original design and the change in the number of
house compositions / site plans was carried out amounting to Rp
7,864.960.� 000 becomes Rp.� 9,981,773,496. |
INTRODUCTION
The
house becomes a place to live to shelter from the outside weather and a
gathering place for a family. Not only that, the house is also a place to rest,
carry out daily activities and a place to show identity for the individual
himself.
�� Gresik Regency is the most prospective area
in East Java for the property sector in the Gerbangkertosusila
Metropolitan area. The type and shape of this house will affect the
construction of the house itself. The most visible influence is the use of
building materials and materials which are differences in the type of building
materials and the quantity of building materials used. The event that may occur
is the waste of building materials and materials that can affect the price of
the house. One of the disciplines of civil engineering, namely Construction
Engineering Management (MRK), learns about how to save on project construction
costs. This method is known as Value Engineering.
�� Andalusian Griya Giri Housing Developed by PT. Manzilah
Visi Mulia has a
comfortable residential area with a total area of 4.600 m2.located
near the Gressmall shopping center in GKB Gresik
regency.
�� Based on these conditions, the ongoing
development project requires a large enough allocation of funds so it is
necessary to consider that the design used has been optimal so that the price
remains competitive with competitors. Therefore, it is necessary to review the
design of development projects so that it is possible to make cost savings so
that production prices can be lowered by identifying and reducing unnecessary
costs without reducing the quality and function of the project.
Value Engineering
In
general, the definition of Value Engineering is a technique commonly used to
increase profits by blocking creative ideas in order to reduce production costs
by� not reducing
function and quality or by increasing production costs followed by increasing
the product.
�� The meaning of Value Engineering is� widely stated
by� experts,� namely Value Engineering� is a concept that is neatly arranged in a
system and uses the technique of finding�
the function of a product or service that can be reduced in production
costs by not reducing the function of the product or service (the most
economical). (Imam Soeharto, 2001 quoted from� Society Of
American Value Engineers)
Understanding Home
The
definition of a house is a shelter or shelter from the influence of surrounding
natural conditions (rain, sun, etc.) and serves as a place of rest after
serving in the context of daily needs.
The
interpretation of the house from experts is that a house is not only a building
(structural), but also a place of residence that meets the conditions of a
decent life, seen from various aspects of life. Home as a place to shelter,
enjoy life, rest and rejoice with family. The resident gets an early impression
of his life in this world in the house. The house must guarantee the interests
of the family, among other things to develop, live in harmony with its
neighbors and surroundings, and more than that, the house must give tranquility,
pleasure, happiness, and comfort to every incident in its life. (Hartanto
Wibowo, 2001)
Definition of Design and Site
Plan
Design
is taken from the English word, namely "Design", which means to form
a plan or design before making an object, system, component and structure.� Meanwhile, the Site Plan is a situation plan.
The definition of a site plan is a� two-dimensional drawing that shows the
details of the plan� to be carried out on
a land plot, both regarding the layout of the house, road plan, utilities,
electricity, clean water, dirty water, social facilities and public facilities
RAB (Cost Budget Plan)
According
to Suyitno (2006) the cost budget is the cost of matrial and building materials that are calculated
carefully, meticulously, and qualified. The Cost Budget Plan is the calculation
of the costs required for materials and wages and other costs in the
implementation of a construction or a project.
Profit
Profit
is a profit derived from a reduction in cost of goods produced, other costs,
and losses from income or operating income so that it is expected to be
sufficient to represent the company.�
Profit is also called net income or net earnings.� (Faturohman, 2005)
Previous Research
Here are some of the previous
studies relevant to this study:
Pottu,
Y.E.� (2014), with the title Application
of Value Engineering in the Polyclinic and Veterinary Medicine Building
Construction Project, Universitas Brawijaya Malang.
Alternative selection, analysis of column dimensions and alternative costs of
Wide Flange Profile Steel (WF) after design changes were made was Rp. 1,927,192,938,- of the total cost of Rp� . 1,927,938,- of the
total cost of�� Rp.� 2.715.032.033,- Cost
savings�� generated by Rp.� 787,839,095,-
(amounting to 29.02% of the initial�
design cost) and� in terms of� analysis of the selection of� alternatives the global priority weight�� with a total value of 12,247. So that the
recommendation for the design of the middle structure of the Polyclinic and
Medicine Building, Universitas Brawijaya Malang uses
a span column dimension of�
4 m with a profile section�
of WF 300x300x10x15 and WF 250 x250x�
9x� 14,�� dimensions of 6 and 7 m� span beams with WF profile sections� 200 x 200 x 8 x 12, spans 3 and 5 m with WF
profile sections 175x175x7.5 x 11.
RESEARCH METHOD
This study collects references on
matters related to the process and implementation of cost management on a good
construction project from various sources, including: literature, both books
and journals.
This informal field observation
is in the form of a case study on the Andalusia Griya Giri Housing Development
Project Phase II, which is to conduct direct interviews with staff / employees
1.
Land Area = 4,200 m2
2.
Land Area that can be built 65% x 4,200 = 2,730 m2
3.
Fasum Fasos
Area 35% x 4,200 = 1,470 m2
4.
Types of houses based on Andalusian Griya
Giri housing plan� :
a.
Type 38/72
Site Plan Plan Image
Figure 1 Site Plan
Original Andalusian Housing Griya Giri
Source: PT. Manzilah Noble Vision, 2021
Figure 1 is the original site plan of Andalusian Griya Giri housing with an
area of 4. 600 m 2 with a total of 3 2 houses consisting of 1
house type and 1 same land area, namely type 38/72.
����������� Figure 4. 2 House plan and appearance type 38/72
Source : PT. Manzilah
Noble Vision, 2021
1. Foundation�� : Stone times, Foot plate & Srtrauss Pile
2. Wall������������ : Bata red & Lightweight Brick
In aci and Paint
3. Roof tile������ : Flat
Concrete
4. Ceramics����� : Room
4 0 x4 0, Wall Km 2 0 x25, Floor Km 2 0 x2 0 0
5. Sills������������� : Aluminum
6. Ceiling�������� : Gypsum finishing hollow frame paint
7. Door������������ : Main
Solid HD, KM PVC
8. Sanitair������� : Ktoilet
seat, PVC bathtub, Water faucet
9. Electricity��� : (T38)
1300 Watts
Cost Budget Plan
(RAB)
Cost of Goods Built (HPPL)
Table 1 Cost of Goods
Built on Land
|
Description |
theft |
sat |
�unit price |
amount of price |
|
Land Acquisition
& Legality |
||||
|
Lahan production |
4,600 |
m2 |
1. 000. 000 |
2,520,000,000 |
|
BPHTB |
4,600 |
m2 |
59,782 |
275, 000,000 |
|
PPH |
4,600 |
m2 |
30,000 |
138,000,000 |
|
SUM |
2,933, 000,000 |
|||
Table 2
Cost of Goods Built on Land
|
Description |
Theft |
Sat |
�Unit Price |
Total Price |
|
|
Land Acquisition
& Legality |
|||||
|
Licensing &
LEGALITY |
|||||
|
parent/reverse
certificate name |
4,600 |
m2 |
7,050 |
32,430,000 |
|
|
Site plan
attestation |
4,600 |
m2 |
420 |
1,932,000 |
|
|
UKL-UOL/AMDAL |
4,600 |
m2 |
630 |
2,898,000 |
|
|
splitzing certificates |
32 |
Unit |
2,415,000 |
77,280,000 |
|
|
IMB parent & splitzing IMB |
32 |
Unit |
630,000 |
20,160,000 |
|
|
UN parent
& splitzing UN |
32 |
Unit |
26,250 |
840, 000 |
|
|
AJB notary fee
& back name |
32 |
Unit |
2,100,000 |
67,200,000 |
|
|
BPHTB |
32 |
Unit |
2,625,000 |
84, 000,000 |
|
|
Pph |
32 |
Unit |
1,312,500 |
42, 000, 000 |
|
|
PPn |
32 |
Unit |
10,783,500 |
345, 072, 000 |
|
|
SUM |
673,812, 000 |
||||
|
PRODUCTION |
|||||
|
Measurement and
maturation of land area 4600 m2 |
1 |
Ls |
221. 040.� 000 |
221. 040.� 000 |
|
|
�road paving |
1.284.80 |
m2 |
125.433,69 |
161.157.201.33 |
|
|
Mobile fencing work |
242,43 |
m2 |
1.435.375,67 |
347.978.123.33 |
|
|
���������������������������������������������� �Channel Work 80x80 |
295, 07 |
m2 |
629.979.10 |
185.887.932,95 |
|
|
SUM |
|
|
|
916. 063.256 |
|
Table 3 Cost of Goods Developed Land
|
Description |
Theft |
Sat |
Harga |
Total Price |
|
electricity |
||||
|
PLN Electricity Connection |
32 |
Unit |
1,750.� 000 |
56, 000,000 |
|
Road Description |
12 |
Letter |
2.500.� 000 |
80.635,000 |
|
SUM |
136,635,000 |
|||
|
PDAM Water |
||||
|
�PDAM water installation |
32 |
Unit |
1.500.� 000 |
48, 000, 000 |
|
Well |
2 |
Unit |
7.500.� 000 |
15,000,000 |
|
SUM |
63, 000, 000 |
|||
|
TOTAL |
4,664,537,416 |
|||
Table 4 Pareto Analysis Test Results of House Type 38
|
No. |
Work |
Total Price (Rp.) |
Percentage (%) Price |
Percentage (%) Compulsive |
|
1 |
Roof Work |
14,245,700 |
11. 71% |
11. 71% |
|
2 |
�Wall Work |
25.526.199.63 |
20,98% |
14,69% |
|
3 |
Foundation and soil
work |
15.147.153.6 |
12,45% |
27,14% |
|
4 |
Structure Work |
18.968.149,34 |
15,59% |
42,73% |
|
5 |
�Floor Work |
8.722.533,57 |
7,2% |
49,93% |
|
6 |
�Ceiling Work |
4.058.250,00 |
3,4% |
53,33% |
|
7 |
Sills work |
22. 070.� 000 |
18,132% |
71,462% |
|
8 |
Paint jobs |
7.922.466.61 |
6,5% |
77.962% |
|
9 |
Sanitair work |
1.755. 000 |
1,45% |
79,412% |
|
10 |
Clean water
installation work |
2.002.617 |
1,65% |
81, 062% |
|
11 |
Dirty water
installation work |
2,608.687.� 00 |
2,15% |
83,212% |
|
12 |
Electrical work |
3,230.� 000 |
2,7% |
100% |
|
Total Cost |
121,723, 000 |
|
|
|
Site Plan and Plan Images After Redesign
Figure 2 Site Plan
Design A After Redesign
Based on Figure 2 Site Plan
design A housing with an area of� 4,600 m2 with an initial planning of
32 housing units after redesigning to 33 units maximizes land use by
changing some area.
Figure 3 Site Plan Design B After Redesign
Figure 3 is a residential B
design site plan with an area of 4,600 m2 with an initial
planning of 32 housing units after redesigning to 34 units, this change
was obtained after changing the garden next to plot D10 into plots / units. So
that a greater profit is obtained than the previous design.
Figure 4 Site Plan
Design C After Redesign
Figure 4 is a residential C
design site plan with an area of 4.
600 m 2 with the initial planning of 3 2 housing units after redesigning �to 36 units, this change was obtained
after changing the garden / fasum next to the plot D1
0,C9,C1 into a plot / unit .� So that a
greater profit is obtained than the previous design.
Figure 5 3Plan and HouseView type 38
after redesign
Figure 5 The above 7 is a
comparison of the floor plan, location of the room and the front view of the
original type 38 house building� and after redesign.
Budget Plan (RAB) After Redesign
|
No. |
Work |
Total
price Original
Design |
Total
price After
Redesign |
||
|
1 |
Preparatory work |
Rp |
491,694, 00 |
|
Rp.791. 700 |
|
2 |
Roof Work |
Rp |
2.880. 000 |
Rp |
7.955.975 |
|
3 |
�Wall Work |
Rp |
11.747.339,81 |
Rp |
20.689.323 |
|
4 |
Foundation and soil
work |
Rp |
18.285.799,24 |
Rp |
12.927.405 |
|
5 |
Structure Work |
Rp |
25. 071.661,111 |
Rp |
15.139.440 |
|
6 |
�Floor Work |
Rp |
9.641.557.57 |
Rp |
4.212.946 |
|
7 |
�Ceiling Work |
Rp |
4. 058.250. 00 |
Rp |
2.819. 000 |
|
8 |
Sills work |
Rp |
15.764.366,67 |
Rp |
11. 053.900 |
|
9 |
Paint jobs |
Rp |
22. 070. 000. 00 |
Rp |
5.139.430 |
|
10 |
Sanitair work |
Rp |
7.922.466.61 |
Rp |
595. 000 |
|
11 |
Clean water
installation work |
Rp |
1.755. 000. 00 |
Rp |
1.509.253 |
|
12 |
Dirty water
installation work |
Rp |
2. 002.617.50 |
|
2.466.550 |
|
13 |
Electrical work |
Rp |
2.608.687.50 |
|
2.610. 000 |
|
TOTAL |
Rp. |
122.220.� 000 |
Rp. |
90,728. 514 |
|
Table 5 Comparison of
House Cost Budget Plan Type 38 House Production Price House Type
after Redesign Each Unit
|
No. |
�House Type |
Building Price Before Redesign (RP.) |
Building Price After
Redesign (RP.) |
Land Price |
Building + Land Price (Before Redesign) |
Building + Land Price (After Redesign) |
Keuntung an |
|
(a) |
(b) |
( c ) |
(d) |
(e) |
(f) |
(g) |
(h) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
f =
c + (e* moons ground) |
g =
d + (e * land area) |
h =
f - g |
|
1 |
38/72 |
122.220.� 000 |
90.728.514 |
1.� 000.�
000 |
194.220.� 000 |
162.728.514 |
31,491,486 |
Table 6 House Type Prices
After Redesign
Landscape Design / house composition After redesign
|
No |
Type |
House Composition |
|||
|
Original Design |
Design A |
Design B |
Design C |
||
|
1 |
38/72 |
32 |
33 |
34 |
36 |
|
Total |
32 |
33 |
34 |
36 |
|
Table 7 Landscape Design
Selling Price before Redesign
|
(a) |
(b) |
(c) |
(d) |
(e) |
(f) |
|
No |
Type |
Unit |
Building Price + Land Before Redesign |
Selling Price of Buildings + Soil |
Total Profit |
|
f = ((e-d) x c ) |
|||||
|
1 |
38/72 |
32 |
194,220,000 |
440.� 0000 |
245.780.� 000 |
|
Total |
7,864,960.� 000 |
||||
Table 8 Selling Price
Before Redesign
Selling Price after Redesign
|
(a) |
(b) |
(c) |
(d) |
(e) |
(f) |
|
No |
Type |
Unit |
Building Price + Land After Redesign |
Selling Price of Building + Land |
Total Advantage |
|
f = ((e-d) x c ) |
|||||
|
Design A |
38/72 |
33 |
162,728,514 |
440,000,000 |
112,447,481 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
33 |
|
|
9,149,959. 038 |
|
|
Design B |
38/72 |
34 |
162,728,514 |
440,000,000 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
34 |
|
|
9,427,230.524 |
|
|
Design C |
38/72 |
36 |
162,728,514 |
440,000,000 |
68,040,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
36 |
|
|
9,981,773.496 |
|
Continued Table 9
Design of House Unit Changes�� after Redesign Profit Chart
|
No. |
Design |
Production Price Rp. |
Selling Price Rp. |
Advantage Rp. |
Percentage Advantage |
|
1 |
Original Design |
6,215,040,000 |
14, 080,000,000 |
7,864,960.� 000 |
0.00% |
|
2 |
Design A |
5,370, 040,962 |
14,520,000,000 |
9,149,959, 030 |
37.98% |
|
3 |
Design B |
5,532,769,476 |
14,960,000,000 |
9,427,230,524 |
99.46% |
|
4 |
Design C |
5,858,226,504 |
15,840,000,000 |
9,981,773.496 |
107.87% |
�
Based on figure
graph 9 obtained the best and more profitable alternative is the C design
composition, with the change of the previous type 38/72 32 units to 36
units.� The amount of profit increased
generated after the redesign of the
original design was originally Rp.�
7,864.960.� 000 becomes Rp.� 9,981,773,496. The increase in profit after
the redesign is Rp.� 2,116,813,496 or 107.87% of the initial
profit.
CONCLUSION
The�� most profitable design alternative is to use
Design C, which is type 38/72 with a total of 36 units.
Alternative design of house type
38 housing Andalusia Griya Giri,
namely changing the original design� with a cheaper� design and changing the� composition of the� house�
on the site plan. The alternative design carried out is to redesign the
original shape of the plan and appearance of the building without changing the
function of the building, as�
well as changing the number�
of house compositions on the siteplan using 1
type of� house, namely type 38 and land
area of 72 m2. Cost reduction obtained after redesign from the original
production price of type 38 houses initially Rp.122,240,00,000 to
Rp.90,728,514.
The profit price after changing the design of each type
of house, namely for type 38 design, a production profit of Rp.� 9,981,773,496. Increased profit from the
original design of Rp 7,864,960. 000 after redesign to Rp.� 9,981,773,496.
REFERENCES
�Dipohusodo,
Istimawan. 1996. Project and Construction Management. Yogyakarta:
Kanisius.
Ervianto, Wulfram.
2005.
Construction Project Management.� Yogyakarta:
Andi.
Frick, Heinz and
Widmer Petra. 2006. Building, Shaping, Inhabiting,
Introduction to Architecture. Semarang: Kanisius.
Giatman, M.
2006. Engineering Economics. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo
Persada.
Handi, Gunawan.
2015
"Application of Value Engineering with Housing Landscape Design Graha
Petromaks Bandung" Thesis of Padjajaran University.
Iskandar, MH.
2018.
Application of Value Engineering in the Laboratory Building Structure of the
Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Jember. Final Project. Jember: Department of
Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Jember.
Kodoatie, Robert
J. 2005. Technical Economic Analysis. Yogyakarta: Andi
Offset.
Kuswartojo,
Tjuk and Dwi Rosnarti. 2005. Housing and Settlements in Indonesia. Bandung: Bandung
Institute of Technology. Guidelines
for Unit Price Analysis of Public Works Works.
Regulation
of the Minister of Public Works and Public Housing No.28/PRT/M/2016.
Regulation
of the Minister of Public Housing No.10/PERMEN/2012.� Implementation of Housing and Residential
Areas with Balanced Housing.
Pottu, Y.E.
2014.
Application of Value Engineering in the Polyclinic and Veterinary Medicine
Building Construction Project, Universitas Brawijaya Malang. Final Project.
Malang: Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and
Planning, Malang National Institute of Technology.
Pratiwi, Nur A.
2014.
Value Engineering Analysis on the Research Building Project and the Energy and
Mineral Museum of the Bandung Institute of Technology. Journal of Civil and
Environmental Engineering Vol.2, No.1, March. Sriwijaya University.
Literature,
Suparno, M. and Endi Marlina. 2005. Housing Planning
and Development.� Yogyakarta: Andi.
Suharto, Imam.
2001.
Project Management.� Jakarta:
Erlangga.
Firstborn,
Anggita Princess. 2018. Value Engineering on Puri Delta Housing
Project 6.� Final Project. Semarang:
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Sultan Agung Islamic
University.
Tino, Haryanto
Pitulungan, 2013. Application of Value Engineering in
Bintang Metropol Bekasi Housing. Final Project. Jember: Faculty of Engineering,
University of Jember.
Law No. 4
of 1992. Residential Housing.
Wibowo, Kartono.
2014.
Project Management. Textbooks. Semarang: Department of Civil Engineering, Sultan
Agung Islamic University.
Yuslim, Silia.
2003.
Construction Value Engineering Program for Project Cost Efficiency.� Journal of Civil Engineering No. 1 Year IX �
March. Tarumanegara University, Jakarta.
Copyright Holders:
Muhammad, Budi Witjaksana, Hanie Teki Tjendani (2023)
First publication
right:
Devotion - Journal
of Research and Community Service
This article is licensed under
a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International