A framework for predicting the residual load carrying capacity of concrete structures exposed to aggressive environments

Reinforced concrete structures are susceptible to a variety of deterioration mechanisms due to creep and shrinkage, alkali-silica reaction (ASR), carbonation, and corrosion of the reinforcement. The deterioration problems can affect the integrity and load carrying capacity of the structure. Substantial research has been dedicated to these various mechanisms aiming to identify the causes, reactions, accelerants, retardants and consequences. This has improved our understanding of the long-term behaviour of reinforced concrete structures. However, the strengthening of reinforced concrete structures for durability has to date been mainly undertaken after expert assessment of field data followed by the development of a scheme to both terminate continuing degradation, by separating the structure from the environment, and strengthening the structure. The process does not include any significant consideration of the residual load-bearing capacity of the structure and the highly variable nature of estimates of such remaining capacity. Development of performance curves for deteriorating bridge structures has not been attempted due to the difficulty in developing a model when the input parameters have an extremely large variability. This paper presents a framework developed for an asset management system which assesses residual capacity and identifies the most appropriate rehabilitation method for a given reinforced concrete structure exposed to aggressive environments. In developing the framework, several industry consultation sessions have been conducted to identify input data required, research methodology and output knowledge base. Capturing expert opinion in a useable knowledge base requires development of a rule based formulation, which can subsequently be used to model the reliability of the performance curve of a reinforced concrete structure exposed to a given environment.

Challenges in residual service life assessment for refurbishment

A need for an efficient life care management of building portfolio is becoming increasingly due to increase in aging building infrastructure globally. Appropriate structural engineering practices along with facility management can assist in optimising the remaining life cycle costs for existing public building portfolio. A more precise decision to either demolish, refurbish, do nothing or rebuilt option for any typical building under investigation is needed. In order to achieve this, the status of health of the building needs to be assessed considering several aspects including economic and supply-demand considerations. An investment decision for a refurbishment project competing with other capital works and/or refurbishment projects can be supported by emerging methodology residual service life assessment. This paper discusses challenges in refurbishment projects of public buildings and with a view towards development of residual service life assessment methodology

Evaluation of valuation of noise amelioration treatments within and outside the road reserve

In urban environments road traffic volumes are increasing and the density of living is becoming higher. As a consequence the urban community is being exposed to increasing levels of road traffic noise. It is also evident that the noise reduction potential of within-the-road-reserve treatments such as noise barriers, mounding and pavement surfacing has been exhausted. This paper presents a strategy that involves the comparison of noise ameliorative treatments both within and outside the road reserve. The noise reduction resulting from the within-the-road-reserve component of treatments has been evaluated using a leading application of the CoRTN Model, developed by the UK Department of Transport 1988 [1], and the outside road reserve treatment has been evaluated in accordance with the Australian Standard 3671, Acoustics – Road traffic noise intrusion – Building sitting and construction [5]. The evaluation of noise treatments has been undertaken using a decision support tool (DST) currently being developed under the research program conducted at RMIT University and Department of Main Roads, Queensland. The case study has been based on data from a real project in Queensland, Australia. The research described here was carried out by the Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation [9], in collaboration with Department of Main Roads, Queensland, Department of Public Works, Queensland, Arup Pty. Ltd., Queensland University of technology and RMIT University.

Selected elements of housing affordability impacting otherwise potentially sustainable communities

It is widely held that strong relationships exist between housing, economic status, and well being. Therefore, recent events emerging from the United States, culminating in widespread housing stock surpluses in that country and others, threaten to destabilise many aspects related to individuals and community. However, despite global impact, the position of housing demand and supply is not consistent. The Australian position provides a strong contrast whereby continued strong housing demand generally remains a critical issue affecting the socio-economic landscape. Underpinned by strong levels of immigration, and further buoyed by sustained historically low interest rates, increasing income levels, and increased government assistance for first home buyers, this strong housing demand ensures elements related to housing affordability continue to gain prominence. A significant, but less visible factor impacting housing affordability – particularly new housing development – relates to holding costs. These costs are in many ways “hidden” and cannot always be easily identified. Although it is only one contributor, the nature and extent of its impact requires elucidation. In its simplest form, it commences with a calculation of the interest or opportunity cost of land holding. However, there is significantly more complexity for major new developments - particularly greenfield development. Analysis suggests that even small shifts in primary factors impacting holding costs can appreciably affect housing affordability. Those factors of greatest significance not only include interest rates and the rate of inflation, but even less apparent factors such as the regulatory assessment period. These are not just theoretical concepts but real, measurable price drivers. Ultimately, the real impact is felt by the one market segment whom can typically least afford it – new home, first home buyers. They can be easily pushed out of affordability. This paper suggests the stability and sustainability of growing, new communities require this problem to be acknowledged and accurately identified if the well being of such communities is to be achieved.

Can Risk Management boost the supply of Affordable Housing Development and Management?

A shortage of affordable housing is a major problem in Australia today. This is mainly due to the limited supply of affordable housing that is provided by the non-government housing sector. Some private housing developers see the provision of affordable housing for lower income people as a high risk investment which offers a lower return than broader market-based housing. The scarcity of suitable land, a limited government ‘subsidy’, and increasing housing costs have not provided sufficient development incentives to encourage their investment despite the existing high demand for affordable housing. This study analyses the risk management process conducted by some private and not-for-profit housing providers in South East Queensland, and draws conclusions about the relationship between risk assessments/responses and past experiences. In-depth interviews of selected non-government housing providers have been conducted to facilitate an understanding of their approach to risk assessment/response in developing and in managing affordable housing projects. These developers use an informal risk management process as part of their normal business process in accordance with industry standards. A simple qualitative matrix has been used to analyse probability and impacts using a qualitative scale - low, medium and high. For housing providers who have considered investing in affordable housing but have not yet implemented any such projects, affordable housing development is seen as an opportunity that needs to be approached with caution. The risks associated with such projects and the levels of acceptance of these are not consistently identified by current housing providers. Many interviewees agree that the recognition of financial risk and the fear of community rejection of such housing projects have restrained them from committing to such investment projects. This study suggests that implementing improvements to the risk mitigation and management framework may assist in promoting the supply of affordable housing by non-government providers.

Property and valuation education : an analysis of UWS property students from 1994 to 2006

The valuation and property is an evolving industry and the participants within the industry are also changing. This change is due to improved technology and construction, global nature of business today, professional standards, legal and accounting issues and environmental matters. Throughout this change in the property industry, there has also been significant change in the structure and content of tertiary property courses in Australia. Over the past thirteen years each first year cohort commencing study in the property program at the University of Western Sydney have been surveyed in relation to their background, reasons for course selection and job expectations. This paper will review this annual survey and the profile of all first year students who commenced their studies in the Bachelor of Business (Property) degree [formerly Bachelor of Commerce (Property Economics) and Bachelor of Commerce (Land Economy)] for years commencing 1994 to 2006. The paper will also provide a detailed analysis of the type of student entering the property industry and their exposure to the valuation and property sectors prior to commencing their studies.

The true cost and performance of individual residential property investment and the implication on real estate agency practice

Investment in residential property in Australia is not dominated by the major investment institutions in to the same degree as the commercial, industrial and retail property markets. As at December 2001, the Property Council of Australia Investment Performance Index contained residential property with a total value of $235 million, which represents only 0.3% of the total PCA Performance Index value. The majority of investment in the Australian residential property market is by small investment companies and individual investors. The limited exposure of residential property in the institutional investment portfolios has also limited the research that has been undertaken in relation to residential property performance. However the importance of individual investment in residential property is continuing to gain importance as both individuals are now taking control of their own superannuation portfolios and the various State Governments of Australia are decreasing their involvement in the construction of public housing by subsidizing low-income families into the private residential property market. This paper will: • Provide a comparison of the cost to initially purchase residential property in the various capital city residential property markets in Australia, and • Analyse the true cost and investment performance of residential property in the main residential property markets in Australia based on a standard investment portfolio in each of the State capital cities and relate these results to real estate marketing and agency practice.

The role of rural land in mixed asset investment portfolios

Rural land has not always been considered as a major long-term investment with both institutional investors and absentee owners in countries such as U.K. and Australia. Although rural land is included in both single asset and mixed asset portfolios in the U.S, it is not at the same levels as either commercial or industrial property. Rural land occupies over 50% of the total area of Australia, and comprises over 115,000 economic farm properties (excludes rural residential, hobby farms and rural lifestyle blocks. However, less than 1.6% of the total economic farm numbers are actually owned by corporate or institutional investors. This low level of corporate involvement in the Australian rural property market has limited both the investment performance research and inclusion of this rural land type in both property and mixed asset investment portfolios. In the U.S. rural land is also the most extensive real estate type based on total area occupied. The United States Department of Agriculture statistics (1998) show that in 1997 there were 2.06 million farms in the U.S., covering 968 million acres, with a total value of $912 billion and generating an annual income of $202 billion. The level of corporate ownership of farms in the U.S. is also higher than the level of corporate farm ownership in Australia. This high level of institutional ownership in rural land in U.S has provided the opportunity for the rural property asset class to be analysed in relation to it’s investment performance and possible role in a mixed asset or mixed property investment portfolio.

Total rural land performance in a free trade economy

The importance of agriculture in many countries has tended to reduce as their economies move from a resource base to a manufacturing industry base. Although the level of agricultural production in first world countries has increased over the past two decades, this increase has generally been at a less significant rate compared to other sectors of the economies. Despite this increase in secondary and high technology industries, developed countries have continued to encourage and support their agricultural industries. This support has been through both tariffs and price support. Following pressure from developing economies, particularly through the World Trade Organisation (WTO), GATT Uruguay round and the Cairns Group Developed countries are now in various stages of winding back or de-coupling agricultural support within their economies. A major concern of farmers in protected agricultural markets is the impact of a free market trade in agricultural commodities on farm incomes and land values. This paper will analyse the capital and income performance of the NSW rural land market over the period 1990-1999. This analysis will be based on land use and will compare the total return from rural properties based on world agricultural commodity prices.

An analysis and comparison of rural land sales

Rural land prices, in developed, free trade real estate markets, are influenced not only by prevailing economic conditions but also physical factors such as climate, topography and soil type. In broad acre farming and grazing operations, both commodity price and yields determine farm income. Yields, in turn, are a function of climate, topography and soil type. The strength of a rural land market is influenced by the overall rural economy in a Country, State or region. These differences in rural land markets can also vary within smaller regions. It has been held that rural land, in relative safe production areas, is less effected by adverse economic and climatic factors than land in more marginal agricultural areas. This paper will analyse rural land sales in both traditional cropping areas and marginal cropping areas for the period 1975 to 1996. The analysis will determine the overall trend in rural land prices over the period, compare the average annual return between marginal and established farming areas and determine which economic and production factors have influenced this change. The impact of this analysis will also be discussed in relation to rural land appraisal.

Comparing subjective and objective measures of health : Evidence from hypertension for the income/health gradient

Economists rely heavily on self-reported measures to examine the relationship between income and health. We directly compare survey responses of a self-reported measure of health that is commonly used in nationally representative surveys with objective measures of the same health condition. We focus on hypertension. We find no evidence of an income/health greadient using self-reported hypertension but a sizeable gradient when using objectively measured hypertension. We also find that the probability of a false negative reporting is significantly income graded. Our results suggest that using commonly available self-reported chronic health measures might underestimate true income-related inequalities in health.