The document provides an evaluation of a sitting area located on the right side of the main entrance of the PTUT building. It analyzes the environment, materials used, spatial layout, views, and location. The analysis finds the sitting area has an uncomfortable and rough construction with unsustainable materials in a bad location that is not attractive. It also provides costing details for repair materials totaling 18,500 with additional 2000 for transport. The conclusion is that the sitting area has uncomfortable sittings, incomplete construction, uses unsustainable materials, and does not look attractive due to its location and material choices.

1. Sitting Area
Evaluation
Location; Right Side of the Main Entrance of PTUT Building

2. PUNJAB TIANJIN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY LAHORE
TEACHER NAME: Ar. AHSAN KHALIL
SUBJECT; PROJECT EVALUTION
01 04
12 13
MUHAMMAD ARSLAN MUZAMIL FAQI
ADEEFA HASSAN FARHAN ULLAH

3. PROJECT DOCUMENTATION COST EVALUATION
OBJECTIVES COSTING MATERIAL
ANALYSIS COMPLETION ANALYSIS
 ENVIRONMENT DETAIL ANALYSIS
 MATERIAL CONCLUSION
 SPATIAL ANALYSIS
 VIEW ANALYSIS
 LOCATION ANALYSIS
CONTENTS

4. PROJECT DOCUMENTATION
MAP AND LOCATION
UNIVERSITY BUILDING
16’ WIDE ROAD
SITTING AREA

5. PROJECT DOCUMENTATION

6. OBJECTIVE
Project evaluation is a systematic and objective assessment of an
ongoing or completed project. The aim is to determine the
relevance and level of achievement of project objectives,
development effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability

7. ANALYSIS
 ENVIRONMENT
Sun Orientation
Greenree
Natural Environment
Harmful Environment
South face
 MATERIAL
Bricks
Cement
Sand and Aggregates
Wooden Strips
White Stone
Planters
Stone

8. ANALYSIS
 SPATIAL ANALYSIS
Congested Space
Interactions bw Spaces
 VIEWS ANALYSIS
Location South Face
Bad Materila
Very Rough Constructed Not Provide
Roof & Sheeds Sittings are not good
Rough Floor

9. ANALYSIS
 LOCATION ANALYSIS
Right side of Building Entrance
Interactions bw Spaces
Enable peoples to easily see.
Level of Education
Unsustainable

10. COST EVALUATION & COSTING
ITMES Qty. PRICE LABOUR OTHERS TOTAL
BRICKS 350 5600
1 MASON
1 LABOUR
// 8900
CEMENT 1/2
BAG
600 // // 600
PLASTER
OF PARIS
2
PACK
100 // // 100
SAND & AGGR. 3’+3’ 450 // // 450
STONE 3 BAG 450 // // 450
PLANTERS 2+1 500+1000 // // 1500
WOODEN
STRIP
7 4200 // 300 POLISH 4500
G.TOTAL 18500
TRANSPORT 2000

11. COMPLETION ANALYSIS

12. CONCLUSION
UNCOMFORTABLE SITTINGS
UNCOMPLETE AND ROUGH CONSTRUCTION
UNSUSTAINABLE
BAD MATERIAL CHOICE
UNCOMFORTABLE LOCATION
NOT LOOKING ATTRACTIVE

13. THANK YOU