Maximising a development’s function-to-cost ratio.
Delivering the same performance, or better, with lower investment and lower life-cycle cost.
Technical design optimisation is a systematic methodology for maximising a development’s function-to-cost ratio: delivering the same performance, or better, at a lower investment and life-cycle cost.
It should not be confused with cost-cutting. Function and quality are maintained or improved. What is removed is only the cost that generates no value.
At A400, this is not an isolated spreadsheet exercise. It is a direct consequence of our integrated full-service model. Structures , MEP, Sustainability and BIM Management work within the same team, which makes it possible to arbitrate trade-offs between disciplines that a set of independent practices cannot capture:
These decisions only emerge when the disciplines think together and from an early stage, something only possible with a genuinely integrated approach.
The rigour of technical design optimisation at A400 rests on three foundations of our own:
1. Native BIM model since 2014
Our native BIM model provides reliable quantities in real time, allowing solution scenarios to be compared accurately at the level of cost per m², per system and per discipline. Our in-house BIM2BOQ tool attaches the corresponding CO₂ footprint to each scenario, and FEM (slab analysis) supports structural optimisation at element level. The decision stops being qualitative and becomes measurable.
2. Cost read across the life cycle, not only as CAPEX
The cheapest solution to build is rarely the most efficient in operation and energy. Our Green by Default culture and our standing as a LEED Residential Provider place operating cost, energy consumption and certification within the same optimisation equation. This framing sets A400 apart from those who read the tender price alone.
3. Intervening at the right moment
The window of greatest impact is the concept stage, where system decisions determine the largest share of the final cost. In pre-construction, optimisation reconciles the developer’s target budget with the tender submissions. Timing defines the return.
Technical design optimisation is not a promise. It is a result that shows up on the invoice and in CO₂ avoided.
| Project | Saving | Environmental Impact |
| The Oitavos Hotel | €1,4M | 2.600 t CO₂ avoided |
| Intercontinental Cascais | €700k | — |
| EXEO Lumina | €2M | — |
| NOVA Business School | €2M | — |
Every euro that generates no value in a project is a euro that can be given back to the development as quality, sustainability or profitability.
That is the arithmetic we work with at A400.
More value. Less cost without function. The same performance, or better. Decisions measured, not estimated.
We start from the target budget, the functional requirements and the development’s objectives to identify the systems and elements that carry the most weight in the final cost. We define where technical and economic optimisation delivers the highest return and at which stage it should act, focusing effort on the decisions that truly drive the investment.
We compare design scenarios using real-time quantities from the BIM model, at cost per m², per system and per discipline. Our BIM2BOQ tool assigns a CO₂ footprint to each scenario, so choices are made on cost and environmental impact rather than estimates alone.
We resolve trade-offs between structures [TEMP], MEP, envelope and sustainability within the same team: revising the column grid to simplify foundations, adjusting the envelope to reduce installed capacity, or extending a span to free up service routes. These are value engineering gains that only emerge when disciplines decide together.
We assess each option on life-cycle cost, adding energy, maintenance and certification requirements to the initial investment. At pre-construction stage, we reconcile the developer’s target budget with contractor bids, ensuring that construction cost savings do not compromise function, quality or future performance.
