APPLIED RESEARCH

Research on the influence of architectural and planning solutions on the organization of construction production and economic indicators of the implementation of construction projects

Authors

  • Andrei V. Reshetnikov Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, 129337, Moscow, Yaroslavskoe shosse, 26
  • Aleksey A. Luzgin Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, 129337, Moscow, Yaroslavskoe shosse, 26
  • Nikita A. Doroshko Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, 129337, Moscow, Yaroslavskoe shosse, 26
  • Vladislav L. Balakin Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, 129337, Moscow, Yaroslavskoe shosse, 26
  • Roman A. Kuzmin Moscow State University of Civil Engineering, 129337, Moscow, Yaroslavskoe shosse, 26

How to cite

GOST Reshetnikov A. V., Luzgin A. A., Doroshko N. A., Balakin V. L., Kuzmin R. A. Research on the influence of architectural and planning solutions on the organization of construction production and economic indicators of the implementation of construction projects // STROITEL'NYE I DOROZHNYE MASHINY. 2026. Vol. 70. No. 2. P. 144-157.
APA Reshetnikov, A. V., Luzgin, A. A., Doroshko, N. A., Balakin, V. L. & Kuzmin, R. A. (2026). Research on the influence of architectural and planning solutions on the organization of construction production and economic indicators of the implementation of construction projects. STROITEL'NYE I DOROZHNYE MASHINY, 70(2), 144-157.

Abstract

The relationship between architectural and planning solutions and the organization of construction production and the economic indicators of construction projects is characterized by stable statistical dependencies manifested through the configuration of building plans, their number of floors, the degree of unification of structural elements, and geometric complexity. The plan configuration determines the possibilities for placing lifting mechanisms, traffic patterns, and the sequence of works, with the geometric complexity index, ranging from 1.00 to 1.87, correlating with the specific labor intensity of erecting the above-ground part with a coefficient of 0.847, leading to an 86.5 percent increase in labor intensity when transitioning from simple rectangular forms to complex curvilinear ones, as well as a 92.1 percent increase in the duration of erecting a typical floor and an almost twofold increase in the consumption of crane machine time. The number of floors affects the requirements for mechanisms, vertical transport, safety, and the structure of the cost price, where the share of works on erecting the frame and load-bearing walls increases from 23.6 to 35.8 percent with increasing height, while the share of foundation works decreases from 18.4 to 10.1 percent, although in absolute terms the cost of foundations for high-rise objects is 4.27 times higher. The coefficient of typification of structural elements demonstrates a strong inverse relationship with the specific cost of construction and installation works, equal to -0.812; when the coefficient decreases from 0.93 to 0.44, the cost increases by 67.7 percent, the costs for formwork increase by 4.41 times, and the deviation of the actual cost from the estimated one reaches 18.2 percent, significantly increasing financial risks. The comprehensive indicator of architectural and planning complexity reveals an increase in the coefficient of excess of actual duration over the normative one up to 1.40 and the share of conditionally fixed costs up to 22.1 percent for the most complex objects. Multiple regression analysis establishes that these parameters explain 78.4 percent of the variation in specific cost, with the greatest contribution from the typification coefficient, followed by the geometric complexity index, number of floors, and the area of a typical floor, demonstrating the scale effect and interaction of factors. The nonlinear nature of the dependencies with threshold values of the complexity index above 1.35 and the typification coefficient below 0.70 indicates points of accelerated cost growth. The obtained dependencies emphasize the need to account for production constraints at the early stages of design through integration into information modeling systems to optimize solutions, reduce costs by 8–25 percent, minimize technological pauses, and increase the predictability of the economic results of implementing construction projects for various purposes.

Keywords

architectural and planning solutions organization of construction production economic indicators geometric complexity typification coefficient

References

Беляева С.В., Смородина Е.П., Быковская С.А. Бизнес-планирование предпринимательского проекта строительной отрасли в условиях нестабильной ценовой динамики // Цифровая и отраслевая экономика. 2023. № 1 (29). С. 82–90.

Борисов А.Н. Развитие системы управления городским строительством // Вестник Воронежского государственного технического университета. 2005. Т. 1. № 9-1. С. 80–82.

Гранев В.В. Архитектурно-строительные решения промышленных предприятий, зданий и сооружений // Промышленное и гражданское строительство. 2006. № 2. С. 6–9.

Гущина Ю.В. Организационно-ориентированный подход к определению стоимости строительства с учетом фактора времени // Вестник ИНЖЭКОНа. Серия: Экономика. 2008. № 1 (20). С. 380–384.

Залунина О.М. Экономическое измерение управленческих решений в строительном секторе // ScienceRise. 2015. Т. 9. № 1 (14). С. 42–46.

Караогланов В.Г. Оценка эффективности организационно-технологических решений реконструкции зданий // Промышленное и гражданское строительство. 2006. № 12. С. 47–48.

Киселев Д.Е. Концессионная модель реализации крупных строительных проектов // Современные аспекты экономики. 2004. № 14 (65). С. 35–40.

Лапидус А.А. Влияние современных технологических и организационных мероприятий на достижение плановых результатов строительных проектов // Технология и организация строительного производства. 2013. № 2. С. 20–25.

Марков А. Организационно-экономические факторы и их использование в управлении строительным комплексом // Предпринимательство. 2009. № 4. С. 119–121.

Менейлюк А.И., Менейлюк И.А. Изменение стоимости и продолжительности гражданского строительства при разных организационно-финансовых условиях // Строительное производство. 2019. № 2. С. 20–25.

Прохорова О.В., Султанов А.В., Труфанов А.В., Лукьянов В.Н. Проект организации строительства и его влияние на формирование сметной стоимости строительства // Проблемы экономики и управления нефтегазовым комплексом. 2019. № 8 (176). С. 47–50.

Розанцева Н.В. Аспекты организации строительства в современных условиях городской уплотнительной застройки // Строительное производство. 2023. № 3. С. 28–34.

Сидоренко С.Ю. Критерии отбора строительных организаций для исполнения проектов жилищного строительства // Сибирская финансовая школа. 1997. № 6 (11). С. 37–38.

Стадникова Т.А. Совершенствование финансово-экономической модели оценки эффективности инвестиционных проектов в жилищном строительстве // Экономика строительства. 2014. № 4 (28). С. 24–33.

Яцевич А.В. Проектное управление на предприятиях строительного комплекса // Экономические науки. 2008. № 47. С. 241–243.

Metrics

97 views
0 downloads
Want to publish with us?
Submit an article

Machine-readable metadata

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)