1 - Trent Global€¦ · Web viewThe quantity surveyor will search through the analyses listed and photocopy or download the analyses which seem to be most appropriate. From there,

BCIS - A Worked Example3.1 The spreadsheets used

The worked example is illustrated here with printouts from the spreadsheets used to carry out all the tedious arithmetic. Once again, it has to be emphasised that these spreadsheets make no decisions for the quantity surveyor. At best they only relieve the quantity surveyor of some of the boredom but still require the quantity surveyor to make judgements about the accuracy of the figures input on the spreadsheets and the results that they show. One of the principal features of any good software is the building in of checking procedures which automatically throw up any errors in input of data and perhaps anomalous results. Such checks are present in the spreadsheets where appropriate. Building in these checks has to be undertaken with care and is best left to the minimum appropriate. Too many and the user can be lulled into a false sense of security and may even cause errors themselves e.g. by being too restrictive when an input outwith the criteria could be perfectly legitimate – just not thought of when the software was designed. (Remember the fuss about the year 2000 and computer programs not able to cope? This was caused by software written to cope only with dates in the range 01 to 99 and in one century.)

The data used in the exercise comes from the BCIS files with kind permission of the RICS.

3.1.1 The client and the briefBefore the quantity surveyor can do a cost plan he needs a client who needs a building who needs advice! So here is the client’s brief as agreed at feasibility stage:

The client is a local health board, which wishes to procure a health centre on the outskirts of a major city. For this example we have used Edinburgh, the capital of Scotland, UK.

The centre must be capable of accommodating between four and six general practitioners (GPs), two practice nurses, a chiropodist and have two treatment rooms, patient waiting area, reception, offices, dispensary, private and public toilets. It should include all up-to-date provisions for disabled patients.

Security will feature highly on the list of services provided with panic alarms in all staff areas, CCTV in all public areas and circulation areas, an intruder alarm system and a fire alarm system together with a sprinkler system. In all a GFA of around 800–900 m2

over two storeys is envisaged. The building is to be built in masonry with solid concrete ground floor, a pitched roof with a profiled metal covering and edge trims.

So, now that we have that brief, the quantity surveyor can look up the database and find what data is being held on health centres. These can be found in Section 421 of the BCIS: Health centres, clinics, group practice surgeries. Whether access is by paper copy or by computer, the reference 421 always applies to this building type.

3: The Building Cost Information Service - BCIS1

BCIS - A Worked Example

The quantity surveyor will search through the analyses listed and photocopy or download the analyses which seem to be most appropriate. From there, the spreadsheets are used as follows:

The first spreadsheet, ‘Analysis1’, is used to gather some basic data, bring costs to current costs and allow that data to be sorted into increasing or decreasing levels of cost. From that data the quantity surveyor can choose a cost per m2 of GFA which can be used for the proposed building. It may also be possible to choose just one analysis, which is very close to the proposal; it may not! The quantity surveyor’s task is very much easier if the former is the case but there are ways to deal with the corollary.

The second spreadsheet, ‘Analysis2’, is used to help the quantity surveyor determine what the distribution of cost across the elements should be. To do this, the spreadsheet has all the cost data (from two or three of the analyses already listed on the previous spreadsheet) input and the individual cost of each element is then expressed as a percentage of the total tender cost less contingencies.

The third spreadsheet, ‘Analysis3’, is used to prepare the cost plan and calculate the realistic first estimate. Once the client and the other members of the design team have agreed that first estimate, the die are cast; there is no going back; recall what was said earlier about egg on faces – particularly quantity surveyors’ faces etc.

The percentage breakdowns from the second spreadsheet are also incorporated here and assist the quantity surveyor in making the allocation of the total cost across the elements and sub-elements. This spreadsheet includes for the first time percentage allowances for Price and Design Risk and Contingencies. Note that these are in addition to the bare total of element cost and Preliminary works.

Note that all the spreadsheets incorporate a ‘contract name’ and a ‘contract reference’. Note also that a date has to be given on every piece of paper printed out and that a time is also included. The latter may seem like just a little too much detail, however, consider that with a spreadsheet, the calculation work is a press of a button away then it can be seen that the quantity surveyor could produce several versions of the cost plan in a single day. Indeed this is done using one of the great features of the spreadsheet ‘What if?’ Not all of the spreadsheets need be saved for posterity, but several ‘What ifs?’ can be made up and even presented to the client/design team meeting for approval.

The remaining two spreadsheets will be discussed a little later when we move to the detail design stage and the cost checking which follows.

When you start work on the spreadsheets from the CD, you will notice that the text is in colour. The colour is significant. Red for the main title of the sheet, Green for instructions, Black for text which you should not alter or is the result of calculations. Pale blue shaded cells are used where there is a formula embedded – whatever you do, don’t change cells with pale blue shading! Text you enter will come up black. Cells with error messages will be highlighted as we work through the individual sheets.



3.2 The exercise

Part of the first spreadsheet with details of seven analyses taken from the BCIS files is shown below. This spreadsheet is concerned only with gathering the bare details of any analyses which the quantity surveyor thinks may be useful in his later deliberations. The first of these is to determine what should be used as the cost/m2 of GFA to be used when setting up the cost limit for the new project. With this in mind, let us look at the analyses broadly to see if any one is more suitable than the others as a basis from which to work. If no single analysis is found then the quantity surveyor must decide on the level of price he is to use and go on from there. The analyses date back some 5–6 years from the situation current at the time of writing. This is ideally about as far back as one would wish to go. The longer the period of time over which an up date to current cost is applied, the less accurate it becomes and then remember, this cost has to be forecast up to the tender date on even less reliable data. Because of the paucity of data on buildings with this particular end use, all available analyses have been included in the list above. It is interesting to note that two are in Edinburgh but even worrying that the current costs given are £1067 and £1477 per m2 of GFA.



UPDATE OF ANALYSES - GFA COST ONLY

Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh

Date: 05-Mar-03

Job reference HC321 Time: 16:48:38

Current cost index: 199

Job Location Factor: 0.98There is space for 20 analyses

Original Updated Original Original Costs per Costs perLIST ANALYSES REFERENCES Analysis Location m2 of m2 of

below, starting in row 11 Index Factor GFA GFAC-1-455, Swinton South Yorkshire 129 0.94 £600.18 £965.26C-1(2)-849, Mossend, Motherwell 192 0.96 £994.66 £1,052.40C-2(1)-2,136, Craigmiller, Edinburgh 137 0.98 £734.71 £1,067.21A-2-881, Wilsden, West Yorkshire 154 0.87 £739.78 £1,076.82C-1-432, East Bridgeford, Notts. 147 0.94 £870.16 £1,228.10D-1(2)-309, Dennistoun, Glasgow City 137 1.00 £932.12 £1,326.88C-2-747, Liberton, Edinburgh 154 0.98 £1,143.19 £1,477.24 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

#DIV/0!

Figure 3.1 Update of the Cost/m2 of GFA only of selected analyses

From the TPIs (Tender Price Indices) in each case you will note that the Craigmiller centre was built well before the Liberton one but at about the same time as the Glasgow one which is about as expensive as the Liberton one! The Motherwell building is about the same cost/m2 of GFA as the Craigmiller one, although built several years apart. What are we to make of all this? The situation is ‘up for grabs’, and the quantity surveyor has to look now at more detail – specificational detail and facilities offered in each of the analysed buildings – to see if one is close to what the client wants. Let us look first at the Motherwell and Craigmiller buildings. There must be something which brings their current costs so close together and which might provide a basis from which to work.

Before we go on, note that the date and time the sheet was made up is printed automatically for you. Save the spreadsheet under a unique file name and print out a copy for your files.

Element Craigmiller Motherwell3: The Building Cost Information Service - BCIS

4


Substructure RC founds, plain concrete beds, PCC plank flooring

Plain strip and pad; plain conc. GF slab; Visqueen 1200 DPM

Frame Steel columns and beams 10.66 tonnes column and beam with intumescent paint giving 60 min fire protection

Upper floors PCC plank decking 191 m2 contractor designed PCC/composite conc. sus slab floor

Roof Timber structure, metal covered, aluminium guttering

841 m2 18 degree timber trussed roof with sarking, conc. interlocking tiles; uPVC gutters and downpipes: Velux roof lights

Stairs Steel in 3 flights PCC/composite with steel balustrades.

External walls Facing brick/insulated cavity, 140 block inner skin and 9 no glass bock screens

Facing brick/block cavity walls; 45mm polystyrene insulation; Catnic steel lintels

Wdws/Ext drs Contractor designed wdws, 5 flush s/w doors

DG powder ctd al. wdws, doors and screens

Int walls/parts 100, 140 & 190 block generally, glass block, timber and metal stud parts. WC cubicles, glazed timber screens

Block parts; 66m 30 min fire resist metal stud partition; folding partition to staff room.

Int doors Solid core flush doors in s/w frames

Flush doors

Wall finishes Plasterboard, plaster, ceramic tiles

226m2 gypsum wallbrd; 448 m2 Thistle hardwall to blkwrk; 4 m2 ceramic tiles; 510 m2 vinyl silk emulsion to plaster and 820m2 to p/brd

Floor finishes Isocrete Gyvlon screed, lino, ceramic tiles, carpet

188 m2 cem/sand screed; 469 m2 levelling screed; 529 m2 carpet; 114 m2 vinyl sheet.

Ceiling finishes Plasterboard, steel & plasterbrd sus. ceilings

401 m2 P/brd; 448 m2 vinyl silk emulsion; 153 Gyproc MF sus. clg; 119 m2 Ecophon white min. fibre sus. Clg.

Fittings Reception desks, shelving, wrktops, kit. fttgs

Shelving, mirrors etc.

San Appl 16 whb; 3 clnrs sinks; 2 shower units; 16 WCs; 1 urinal bowl; 15 inset basins; 5 SS sinks

Vitreous china WCs & whbs; SS sinks; shower unit; bathroom accessories.

Disposal Inst Aluminium R/W; uPVC SVP uPVC SVPHeat source Gas boiler Gas boilerSpace htg/air trtmnt

LPHW htg; ventilation system LPLTHW central htg sys with rads.

Elect inst Light and power Light and power; Distribution £9803; lighting £12543; power £10002; containment £3835; mech servs. £225

Gas installation ? Natural gas installationLift and conveyor Lift N/AProtective inst Door entry, security network Lightening protection £2528Comms inst Computer conduits; TV;

telephone; call sys; disabled sys; general call sys; audio/visual door sys.

Fire, intruder, panic alarms; data cabling; CCTV



Special inst Panic alarm sys Satellite TV; BMS

Builders work General General

Site works Macadam roads; PCC paviors and slabs; seeding and turfing; steel fencing

1219 m2 macadam paving; 144 m2 PCC blocks; seeding turfing and planting; timber fencing

Drainage 494m clay and uPVC pipe; 19 gullies; 10 m/holes

UPVC pipe; 7 brick m/holes

Ext services Gas; water; electricity; telephone Gas; water; electricity; telephone; street lighting

Prelims 3.62% of remainder of contract 12.89% of remainder of contract.GFA 2136 m2 849 m2

Storeys 2 2Contract JCT private with quantities;

selected competition; 7 tenderers; base June 1997; firm offers

JCT private with quantities; negotiated; firm offers; base April 2002.

Contract period 15 months 9 monthsMeasured work* 94% 74%Prime cost and Prov. sums*

5% 26%

Preliminaries and Contingencies

7% 26%

*As a % of contract sum less Preliminaries and Contingencies

Figure 3.2 Comparison of specification etc. of two updated analyses

There are a number of very significant differences between the two contracts and one of these will make the difference between using one of these analyses or not for the next stage of the cost plan, setting the cost limit. The differences are:

Craigmiller’s foundations are of a more expensive construction. Frame is comparable. Upper floors are comparable. Craigmiller’s roof just slightly more expensive. Stairs are comparable. External walls comparable. Windows and External doors comparable. Internal walls and partitions are comparable. Internal doors are comparable. Finishes are comparable. Fittings are comparable. Services are comparable. External works are comparable. Preliminaries are very much cheaper for the Craigmiller centre. GFA of Craigmiller is much larger and yet there is more detailed work in the bill of

quantities used for tender purposes (see Measured Work). Both are two storey buildings. Longer contract period on Craigmiller centre reflects larger building.

Measured work on the Craigmiller centre represents 94% of the contract sum less Prelims and Contingencies against 74% at Motherwell. This means that the detail of the Craigmiller job was well thought out before tender stage and the quantity surveyor could



give a more accurate forecast of the likely tender cost. This is borne out by the very large percentage for Prime Cost and Provisional Sums in the Motherwell contract – 26%. Also the Preliminaries at almost 13% for Motherwell and 3.62% for Craigmiller reflect on how much better Craigmiller was planned ahead of time. Contingencies on Motherwell are approximately 13%. Much too high a figure if the job had been well planned.

Add to all this that the Craigmiller job was awarded on selective tendering while the Motherwell job was negotiated and not well planned in advance. It might even suggest that the Motherwell job was really too expensive at the end of the day!

So what are we to conclude? The facts and figures suggest that the two jobs are as different as chalk and cheese and certainly the Motherwell figures could not be used with any degree of confidence as the basis for a cost plan. So the fact that the cost/m 2 of GFA was almost identical in these two analyses was nothing more than coincidence. But could we use the Craigmiller figures? On the face of it, yes, but it would be better to go through the same sort of comparison process with some of the other analyses which we have listed on our first spreadsheet.

The obvious choice for a first comparison would be the Liberton centre with a GFA of 747 m2 but current cost of a m2 of GFA is £1477.24 against £1067.21 at Craigmiller. So what is cause of the difference? Examination of the analysis for Liberton shows that the contract was tendered for on JCT with quantities but, the amount of Provisional and Prime Cost sums accounted for 23% of the contract sum less prelims and contingencies while the prelims and contingencies are very ‘round’ figures of £10,000 and £30,000 each, accounting for almost 5% on the same basis. The fact that the PC and Provisional sums are so large indicates once again that the design was not complete before the bill of quantities was prepared and this accounts for the relatively large sum required for contingencies.

The only other analysis which is close in terms of GFA cost to Craigmiller is the one for the centre in Wilsden, West Yorkshire at £1076.82. Examination of the analysis for Wilsden shows a building of 881 m2 tendered for on JCT with contractor’s design, 1998. Provisional and Prime Cost sums account for a little less than 1%, the Preliminaries for around 7.6%, the contingencies for zero(0) and the measured work for 99%. This is a well thought out design which has been fairly complete before the bill of quantities was prepared. Finding this seems to confirm that the Craigmiller and Wilsden analyses could form the basis for a cost limit.

So, we will make the decision to start off with a cost/m2 of GFA of £1080.00. Don’t jump the gun and try to work out the cost limit just yet. There is a spreadsheet just for that purpose which guides the quantity surveyor through various steps in making allowances for Price and Design Risk and Contingencies as well as allowing him to make the first breakdown of cost across the elements and sub-elements. The blank sheet is ‘Analysis3’ and we will move to that shortly. Before that it would be as well to put the details of the two analyses we found into spreadsheet ‘Analysis2’ which will give us the percentage breakdowns of their elements and sub-elements.

These follow on the next few pages: Figures 3.3 and 3.4.



UPDATE OF A SINGLE ANALYSIS: Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following: Analysis reference: C-1(2)-2,136 Craigmiller Date: 05-Mar-03Analysis index: 137 Time: 21:57:48Current cost index: 199 Analysis Location Factor: 0.98 Job Location Factor: 0.98

Analysed Building GFA m2: 2136 Updated and re-located Costs:

Element Original Total per Per m2 % ofELEMENTS/Sub elements Costs Element of GFA Tot costs1. Substructure £203,923.00 £296,209.32 £138.67 12.99 2. Superstructure a. Frame £25,398.00 £36,891.99 £17.27 1.62 b. Upper floors £28,613.00 £41,561.95 £19.46 1.82 c. Roof £170,814.00 £248,116.69 £116.16 10.88 d. Stairs £16,308.00 £23,688.26 £11.09 1.04 e. External walls £91,066.00 £132,278.35 £61.93 5.80 f. Wdws/Ext doors £69,429.00 £100,849.42 £47.21 4.42 g. Int walls/partitions £101,921.00 £148,045.83 £69.31 6.49 h. Internal doors £47,263.00 £68,652.09 £32.14 3.01 3. Internal Finishings a. Wall finishings £49,967.00 £72,579.80 £33.98 3.18 b. Floor finish £43,355.00 £62,975.51 £29.48 2.76 c. Ceiling finish £26,134.00 £37,961.07 £17.77 1.67 4. Fittings & Furnishings £86,122.00 £125,096.92 £58.57 5.49 5. Services. a. Sanitary appliances. £12,552.00 £18,232.47 £8.54 0.80 b. Services equipment £0.00 £0.00 0.00 c. Disposal installation £7,811.00 £11,345.91 £5.31 0.50 d. Water installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 e. Heat source £0.00 £0.00 0.00 f. Space heating £111,374.00 £161,776.83 £75.74 7.10 g. Ventilation system £0.00 £0.00 0.00 h. Electrical installation £227,246.00 £330,087.26 £154.54 14.48 i. Gas installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 j. Lift installation £18,153.00 £26,368.23 £12.34 1.16 k. Protective installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 l. Communications inst. £0.00 £0.00 0.00 m. Special installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 n. Builder work £26,842.00 £38,989.47 £18.25 1.71 o. Profit & Oncost on 'n.' £0.00 £0.00 0.00 6. External Works a. Site work £121,479.00 £176,454.90 £82.61 7.74 b. Drainage £20,234.00 £29,390.99 £13.76 1.29



c. External services £8,510.00 £12,361.24 £5.79 0.54 d. Minor building works £0.00 £0.00 0.00

Preliminaries £54,835.00 £79,650.84 £37.29 3.49ENTER TOTAL £1,569,349.00 - - -'Check' £1,569,349.00 £2,279,565.34 £1,067.21 100.00 £0.00 OK

Figure 3.3 Percentage breakdown of elements for Craigmiller centre

What to see on this spreadsheet:

In the heading area the quantity surveyor must enter the job name and reference and then enter some standard information which will apply to the analysis which he is filling in to this spreadsheet:

1. Analysis reference – so that he can refer back to the printout or paper copy of the analysis in the BCIS database.

2. Analysis TPI and3. Current TPI so that the costs he enters and which are calculated can be updated to

current cost.4. Analysis location factor and5. Job location factor so that these same costs as 2 and 3 are brought to a common

location – where the job is being built.6. Analysed building GFA because he wants to know what the cost/m2 is for every

sub-element etc.

Below this the sheet is divided into five columns:1. Lists the elements and sub-elements2. Is blank and it is here that the quantity surveyor enters the elements or sub-

element costs from the analysis. Note, that if there are sub-elements there is no need to enter the element total cost. To do so will cause an ERROR message to occur.

3. Full of formulae which updates and re-locates the costs from the analysis to current totals applicable to the new building’s location.

4. The costs from column 3 divided by the analysis GFA to give a current and relocated cost/m2 of GFA.

5. The cost of each element or sub-element expressed as a % of the total cost of the building including preliminaries but excluding contingencies – this is what we are looking for to help with our breakdown of the cost limit into cost targets.

Near the bottom line there is an instruction ‘ENTER TOTAL’ which means just that. The quantity surveyor must enter the total given on the analysis which falls between Preliminaries and Contingencies. The spreadsheet has been busy all the time he has been inputting information, adding up the figures and if he has entered the figures correctly the total he enters should match the one calculated and an ‘OK’ appears in the cell at the bottom of the third column. If he has made an input error, the word ‘ERROR’ appears in that cell and the cell at the bottom of column 2 shows the amount of the error. Once he has an ‘OK’, he must save the spreadsheet under a unique file name, print out a copy and go on to the next analysis which he wants to fill in to the spreadsheet.



Our next analysis is shown on the page below: Figure 3.4.

UPDATE OF A SINGLE ANALYSIS: Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following: Analysis reference: A-2-881 Wilsden Date: 05-Mar-03Analysis index: 154 Time: 22:34:08Current cost index: 199 Analysis Location Factor: 0.87 Job Location Factor: 0.98

Analysed Building GFA m2: 881 Updated and re-located Costs:

Element Original Total per Per m2 % ofELEMENTS/Sub elements Costs Element of GFA Tot costs1. Substructure £38,063.00 £55,404.14 £62.89 5.84 2. Superstructure a. Frame £16,303.00 £23,730.49 £26.94 2.50 b. Upper floors* £20,394.00 £29,685.31 £33.70 3.13 c. Roof £69,111.00 £100,597.31 £114.19 10.60 d. Stairs incl in 2b £0.00 £0.00 0.00 e. External walls £41,925.00 £61,025.63 £69.27 6.43 f. Wdws/Ext doors £27,056.00 £39,382.45 £44.70 4.15 g. Int walls/partitions £23,221.00 £33,800.26 £38.37 3.56 h. Internal doors £15,248.00 £22,194.84 £25.19 2.34 3. Internal Finishings a. Wall finishings £27,238.00 £39,647.37 £45.00 4.18 b. Floor finish £12,815.00 £18,653.39 £21.17 1.97 c. Ceiling finish £14,267.00 £20,766.91 £23.57 2.19 4. Fittings & Furnishings £39,211.00 £57,075.15 £64.78 6.02



5. Services. a. Sanitary appliances. Incl in 5f £0.00 £0.00 0.00 b. Services equipment £0.00 £0.00 0.00 c. Disposal installation Incl in 5f £0.00 £0.00 0.00 d. Water installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 e. Heat source £0.00 £0.00 0.00 f. Space heating £67,634.00 £98,447.40 £111.75 10.38 g. Ventilation system £0.00 £0.00 0.00 h. Electrical installation £58,634.00 £85,347.09 £96.88 9.00 i. Gas installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 j. Lift installation £13,653.00 £19,873.18 £22.56 2.09 k. Protective installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 l. Communications inst. £0.00 £0.00 0.00 m. Special installation £0.00 £0.00 0.00 n. Builder work £4,953.00 £7,209.54 £8.18 0.76 o. Profit & Oncost on 'n.' £0.00 £0.00 0.00 6. External Works a. Site work £71,214.00 £103,658.41 £117.66 10.93 b. Drainage £36,213.00 £52,711.29 £59.83 5.56 c. External services £8,300.00 £12,081.40 £13.71 1.27 d. Minor building works £0.00 £0.00 0.00 Preliminaries £46,289.00 £67,377.82 £76.48 7.10ENTER TOTAL £651,742.00 - - -'Check' £651,742.00 £948,669.39 £1,076.81 100.00 £0.00 OK

Figure 3.4 Percentage breakdown of elements for Wilsden centre

What we now need is to save this next spreadsheet under a unique file name and then print out a copy for the file.

Before filing these two printouts away however we have to use the data from them – from the last column in fact – to help with the breakdown of our cost limit into cost targets. Before going on to do this, a word about this breakdown. It is not the final breakdown which will be produced because as the quantity surveyor proceeds with the cost checking, the individual cost targets will be continuously adjusted. Only after the bill of quantities has been prepared and priced an analysed by the surveyor himself, will the cost targets be finalised.

The next spreadsheet, ‘Analysis3’, is the one used to prepare the first cost plan, to set a cost limit for the job and a preliminary breakdown of that limit into cost targets. The spreadsheet with the CURRENT cost/m2 of GFA we have chosen is shown on the next few pages.

Note that the heading part is similar to the previous sheet with standard data to be entered across the top but with one or two additions! We will look at these after we view the spreadsheet partly filled up as Figure 3.5:

COST PLAN BY 3: The Building Cost Information Service - BCIS

11


PERCENTAGE: Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following:

Current cost index: 199Current Cost

Limit

Expected Tender date index: 209 £1,061,486

Planned Building GFA m2: 860Projected

Tender Amt.

Current Cost/m2 of GFA: £1,080.00 £1,114,827 % for Price & Design Risk: 7.50

% for Contingencies: 5.00

Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont & P&D Risk £1,234.29 Date: 09-Mar-03 Time: 05:23:24 PM Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements % Adjusted Current Projected brkdn % Cost Target Tender Ex 100% brkdn breakdown breakdown 1. Substructure 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 2. Superstructure a. Frame 0.00 £0.00 £0.00

Figure 3.5 Third spreadsheet, ‘Analysis3’, with the heading only filled up

We have now entered sufficient data to give some idea of the cost limit – £1,061,486 at current prices – and if we project that to the last quarter of 2003 when we expect to take in tenders, the projected cost limit will be £1,114,827.

The percentages entered for P&D Risk and Contingencies have to be set by the quantity surveyor himself. The arguments for the differing amounts which could be used have already been rehearsed and in this worked example we have chosen fairly typical figures where not much trouble is expected from either the design team or on the site later still. The allowance for P&D risk also gives reasonable cover for any price fluctuations – perhaps even a Middle Eastern conflict.

But the quantity surveyor will not be reporting that figure just yet. There is still the matter of the preliminary breakdown into cost targets to carry out and he would want to see that before committing the design team to a cost limit in front of the client.

To arrive at the breakdown, he would place the printouts of the previous two spreadsheets side by side and look at the two columns of percentage breakdown. From these columns he would select a percentage to put into the second column of the spreadsheet, ‘Analysis3’. The percentages he enters are not averages; they are his assessment of how the breakdown should go based on his knowledge, experience and what he has found out about the site.

The completed spreadsheet is shown on the next two pages, Figure 3.6.

COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE: 3: The Building Cost Information Service - BCIS

12


Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following:

Current cost index: 199 Current Cost Limit


Planned Building GFA m2: 860Projected Tender Amt.

Current Cost/m2 of GFA: £1,080.00 £1,114,827% for Price & Design Risk: 7.50% for Contingencies: 5.00

Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont & P&D Risk £1,234.29 Date: 06-Mar-03 Time: 12:26:24 PM Input

ELEMENTS/Sub elements % Adjusted Current Projected brkdn % Cost Target Tender Ex 100% brkdn breakdown breakdown1. Substructure 7.00 6.13 £65,016.00 £68,283.14 2. Superstructure

a. Frame 2.00 1.75 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 b. Upper floors 2.60 2.28 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 c. Roof 11.00 9.63 £102,168.00 £107,302.07 d. Stairs 2.00 1.75 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 e. External walls 5.00 4.38 £46,440.00 £48,773.67 f. Windows/Ext. doors 4.00 3.50 £37,152.00 £39,018.93 g. Int walls/partitions 2.60 2.28 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 h. Internal doors 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 3. Internal Finishings 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Wall finishings 3.60 3.15 £33,436.80 £35,117.04 b. Floor finish 2.25 1.97 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 c. Ceiling finish 1.65 1.44 £15,325.20 £16,095.31 4. Fittings & Furnishings 2.50 2.19 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 5. Services. a. Sanitary appliances 2.10 1.84 £19,504.80 £20,484.94 b. Services equipment 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 c. Disposal installation 0.60 0.53 £5,572.80 £5,852.84 d. Water installation 2.25 1.97 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 e. Heat source 1.35 1.18 £12,538.80 £13,168.89 f. Space heating 4.50 3.94 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 g. Ventilation system 2.50 2.19 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 h. Electrical instaltn 14.00 12.25 £130,032.00 £136,566.27 i. Gas installation 0.10 0.09 £928.80 £975.47 j. Lift installation 3.50 3.06 £32,508.00 £34,141.57 k. Protective inst. 1.15 1.01 £10,681.20 £11,217.94 l. Communication inst. 1.00 0.88 £9,288.00 £9,754.73 m. Special installation 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 n. Builders work 1.20 1.05 £11,145.60 £11,705.68 o. Profit & Oncost 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 6. External Works a. Site work 6.00 5.25 £55,728.00 £58,528.40



b. Drainage 4.50 3.94 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 c. External services 1.55 1.36 £14,396.40 £15,119.84 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Preliminaries 7.50 6.56 £69,660.00 £73,160.50 NOTE: Percentages for P&D Risk and Cont. are copied down Price & Design Risk ** 7.50 £79,611.43 £83,612.00Contingencies ** 5.00 £53,074.29 £55,741.34 CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100 100 100.00 CHECK CURRENT COST LIMIT: £1,061,486 Error = CHECK PROJECTED TENDER; £1,114,827 Error =

Figure 3.6 Third spreadsheet, Analysis3, completed.

And there is the completed spreadsheet with the percentage breakdown entered in the second column. Note that the spreadsheet then takes into account that there are two further entries to be added in – P&D Risk and Contingencies – and it promptly recalculates the percentage breakdown and puts the results in column 3. Columns 4 and 5 are then calculated automatically to give cost targets at current prices and tender date prices respectively.

The quantity surveyor has entered 7% for Element 1, Substructures. His visit to the site revealed a sloping green field site of about 0.75 hectares. The slope was estimated to be approximately 1:18. There are no over or under ground services. The site lies in a raised position giving adequate natural drainage and ground water should not be a major problem. The local Building Control Officer confirmed that neighbouring developments used strip foundations on buildings up to three storeys and that the ground conditions generally did not include any running sand, silt or rock. Because of the slope the building may have to be either dug in to the site, built up above it or a combination of the two. For this reason 7% for substructure and 6% for site works seems reasonable. Services were found in the road adjacent to the site except for sewerage which is approximately 100 m from the site but still in the road. The road is a public road, fully adopted by the local authority and has adequate street lighting. Informal discussion with the Local Authority Highways Department confirmed that no special provisions would be required to provide vehicular access to the site providing adequate off street parking was provided. The Local Authority Archaeologist reports that there is no evidence that anything of interest to his Department will be found on the site and the Environmental Health Officer confirmed that the site has not been used as a dump for any waste – other than occasional fly tipping. The ground is covered in a mixture of rough grass, weeds and shrubs with 15 trees which will have to be felled and the timber removed off site. The Planning Officer confirms that felling will not be a problem.

If the quantity surveyor is happy with the breakdown, the allowances for risk and the overall cost/m2 of GFA first allowed then it is time to face the design team and the client with the figures. There will undoubtedly be some horse trading at that meeting but let us assume that the cost limit is agreed to as well as the quantity surveyors warning that the



cost agreed to will build a decent building without being over the top in terms of design, shape and finishes.

So the way is clear now for the design team to start on the detail design. Probably the first things to be given consideration will be the overall shape of the building. The client wishes to have a two storey building and this will free up a considerable area of ground round the building for off street parking and still leave a little for landscape work. The plan shape now needs to be addressed and whatever decision is made on this will certainly affect the cost of the building. Section 13 of these notes explores some of the ideas about shape which affect cost. Note that our analyses used to arrive at a cost limit did not give any information regarding plan shape nor did we take that into account when making up our first cost plan. Unless the design team comes up with the idea of building a circular building with a glass dome on top for a roof, the plan is safe enough. But there are some decisions which have to be made now. Will the building be square or rectangular on plan; will it be ‘L’ shaped, ‘T’ shaped or ‘H’ shaped. Once that has been decided the quantity surveyor must consider whether or not this will affect his breakdown of the cost limit.

Having passed the hurdle of shape versus cost, the choice of general materials and construction form must be addressed. Here there is a vast choice and the quantity surveyor, to be able to give proper advice, must be given the first choices of the design team and then be allowed time to put prices on them and test whether or not the choices made will upset the cost targets and ultimately the cost plan. To do this he will require to either: 1. Work up some Approximate Quantities or 2. Find EUQs and EURs from analyses of similar work.

All of this work will be done on current rates using spreadsheet ‘Analysis5’, transferred over to the to the spreadsheet ‘Analysis4’ and the result on the Tender Date costs noted. These spreadsheets have to be saved with unique file names and printed out each time they are used or updated and the copies filed away.

Let us look at each of these spreadsheets in turn following which we will show how to carry out a cost check.

First, ‘Analysis5’ because this spreadsheet has to be prepared before working out a cost check. This is shown, blank, in Figure 3.7.



COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE: Second stage Give Job Name in this row from columns A – E Give the following:

Current cost index: Current Cost Limit incl Cont. & P&D Risk Tender date index: £0.00 Planned Building GFA m2: Projected Tender Amt. Incl Cont. & P&D Risk Current Cost/m2 of GFA: #DIV/0! % for Price & Design Risk: % for Contingencies: Date: 06-Mar-03 Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont. & P&D Risk: £0.00 Time: 02:52:06 PM Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements percentage Original Amended

breakdown Current Amendment Current Projected ANALYSIS 3 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANALYSIS 985 Ddt breakdown breakdown1. Substructure

£0.00

£0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! 2. Superstructure a. Frame £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! b. Upper floors £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! c. Roof £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! d. Stairs £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! e. External walls £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! f. Windows/Ext. doors £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! g. Int walls/partitions £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! h. Internal doors £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! 3. Internal Finishings £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! a. Wall finishings £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! b. Floor finish £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! c. Ceiling finish £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! 4. Fittings & Furnishings £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! 5. Services. £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! a. Sanitary appliances £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! b. Services equipment £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! c. Disposal installation £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! d. Water installation £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! e. Heat source £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! f. Space heating £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! g. Ventilation system £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0!


Taken from previous spreadsheet - Cost Check of an Individual Element

Taken from previous spreadsheet -Cost Plan by Percentage - copy over %s from the THIRD column of that sheet. Spacings are the same on both sheets.

Entered by QS


h. Electrical instaltn £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! i. Gas installation £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! j. Lift installation £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! k. Protective inst. £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! l. Communication inst. £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! m. Special installation £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! n. Builders work £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! o. Profit & Oncost £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0!

6. External Works £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! a. Site work £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! b. Drainage £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! c. External services £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! d. Minor building works £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! Preliminaries £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0!

Note: The adjustment for P&D Risk is calculated automatically

Price & Design Risk 0.00 £0.00 Nett +/- £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0!Contingencies 0.00 £0.00 - £0.00 £0.00 #DIV/0! CHECK AMENDED CURRENT COST TARGET£0.00

CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100

0.00 Error CHECK PROJECTED COST TARGET: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

Figure 3.7 Blank ‘Analysis5’ spreadsheet

What is seen here is an extended version of the spreadsheet ‘Analysis3’ – Cost Plan by Percentage. In this second stage of cost planning the amended percentage figures are merely copied in to column 2 and the standard data in the heading is also copied over. The sheet would then be as illustrated on the next two pages.


MUST total 100%


COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE: Second StageProposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following:

Current cost index: 199 Current Cost Limit incl Cont. & P&D Risk

Tender date index: 209 £1,061,485.71

Planned Building GFA m2: 860 Projected Tender Amt. incl Cont. & P&D Risk

Current Cost/m2 of GFA: £1,080.00 £1,114,826.70 % for Price & Design Risk: 7.50 % for Contingencies: 5.00 Date: 06-Mar-03 Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont. & P&D Risk: £1,234.29 Time: 03:22:41 PM Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements percentage Original Total Amended

breakdown Current Amendment Current Projected ANALYSIS 3 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANALYSIS 4 Ddt breakdown breakdown1. Substructure 6.13 £65,016.00 £0.00 £65,016.00 £68,283.14 2. Superstructure a. Frame 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 b. Upper floors 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 c. Roof 9.63 £102,168.00 £0.00 £102,168.00 £107,302.07 d. Stairs 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 e. External walls 4.38 £46,440.00 £0.00 £46,440.00 £48,773.67 f. Windows/Ext. doors 3.50 £37,152.00 £0.00 £37,152.00 £39,018.93 g. Int walls/partitions 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 h. Internal doors 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 3. Internal Finishings 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Wall finishings 3.15 £33,436.80 £0.00 £33,436.80 £35,117.04 b. Floor finish 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 c. Ceiling finish 1.44 £15,325.20 £0.00 £15,325.20 £16,095.31 4. Fittings & Furnishings 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 5. Services. £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Sanitary appliances 1.84 £19,504.80 £0.00 £19,504.80 £20,484.94 b. Services equipment 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 c. Disposal installation 0.53 £5,572.80 £0.00 £5,572.80 £5,852.84 d. Water installation 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 e. Heat source 1.18 £12,538.80 £0.00 £12,538.80 £13,168.89 f. Space heating 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 g. Ventilation system 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 h. Electrical instaltn 12.25 £130,032.00 £0.00 £130,032.00 £136,566.27 i. Gas installation 0.09 £928.80 £0.00 £928.80 £975.47 Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements percentage Original Amended

breakdown Current Amendment Current Projected ANAL963 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANAL964 Ddt breakdown breakdown



j. Lift installation 3.06 £32,508.00 £0.00 £32,508.00 £34,141.57 k. Protective inst. 1.01 £10,681.20 £0.00 £10,681.20 £11,217.94 l. Communication inst. 0.88 £9,288.00 £0.00 £9,288.00 £9,754.73 m. Special installation 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 n. Builders work 1.05 £11,145.60 £0.00 £11,145.60 £11,705.68 o. Profit & Oncost 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 6. External Works £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Site work 5.25 £55,728.00 £0.00 £55,728.00 £58,528.40 b. Drainage 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 c. External services 1.36 £14,396.40 £0.00 £14,396.40 £15,119.84 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Preliminaries 6.56 £69,660.00 £0.00 £69,660.00 £73,160.50 Price & Design Risk 7.50 £79,611.43 Nett +/- £0.00 £79,611.43 £83,612.00Contingencies 5.00 £53,074.29 - £0.00 £53,074.29 £55,741.34 CHECK AMENDED CURRENT COST LIMIT £1,061,485.71 CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100100.00 Error £0.0000 CHECK PROJECTED COST LIMIT: £1,114,826.70 Error £0.0000

Figure 3.8 Cost Plan by Percentage on ‘Analysis5’ – Working spreadsheet

This is the spreadsheet prepared now to use for cost checking. Note that the heading information has been copied over as well as the percentage breakdown figures. On ‘Analysis3’, these breakdown figures were calculated so if you simply copy them over you copy the formulae, not the numbers. Of course the formulae now refer to an empty cell and all you get are zeros. You will also get the blue infill copied over. The trick is to copy and paste special. When you do this, a sub menu will appear asking what type of paste you wish to carry out. Click on the box which refers to Values then click on ‘OK’. Only the calculated numbers will go over and the blue infill is ignored.

Looking at the bottom of the new sheet above, you will see two ‘Error’ messages. There is an error and the amount is shown to four places of decimals of £1 in the cell below. It doesn’t even register there but there is an error; the spreadsheet calculates to umpteen places of decimals and the rounding which takes place means there has to be a slight error. The quantity surveyor would only pay attention should the amount start showing a significant amount of monetary error.

There is a serious error of omission on the spreadsheet in Figure 3.6 – can you see it? You will be shown how to correct this a little later.

As he carries out cost checks, the quantity surveyor costs out whole element(s) and enters the new total for the element into the fourth column – Amendment from ‘Analysis4’. The spreadsheet immediately calculates the effect of that new total, showing whether it is a positive or negative change, the amount of the change and up 3: The Building Cost Information Service - BCIS

19


dates the cost plan at current and tender date costs. The quantity surveyor now has a record of what new cost target does to the plan and this must be saved under a unique file name and printed out for filing. If the effect on the cost plan is financially drastic then the quantity surveyor must take some action. Perhaps the cost target for the element is pushed over the original amount. He may wish to report to the design team on the situation and ask that the detail design for the element be reconsidered. If he does this it is best if he offers some options which the team could consider and which would bring the cost target into line. The idea of offering options must be carried out diplomatically. He must not be seen to be trying to usurp the other members design integrity or ability – he might be told to, ‘Design the thing yourself!’ If the change is very small he might well decide to use a little of the P&D Risk sum and this should then be entered on the spreadsheet as a new total amount for P&D Risk. This will be illustrated in the next part of the exercise.

The general arrangement elevations, elevations and perhaps a general section should be prepared by this time, principally by the architect and should afford the quantity surveyor the opportunity to start some general cost checks.

Let us assume that the floor plans indicate that there will be a specific number of toilets, bathrooms, kitchens, cleaner’s rooms etc. and that from this the quantity surveyor can work out the number of sanitary appliances: not just an all-embracing total but also the actual number of each type. Using EUQs and EURs it should be possible to put a quick check on element 5a, Sanitary Appliances.

From the drawings a schedule can be drawn up which might look something like this:



Location WC whb urinal SS sink Shower Labsink

Slop sink

Clnrs sink

Staff, GF, male 2 2 1 - 1 - - -Staff, GF, female 3 2 - - 1 - - -Staff, 1stF, male 2 2 1 - - - - -Staff, 1stF, female 3 2 - - - - - -Public, GF, male 2 2 2 - - - - -Public, GF, female 3 2 - - - - - -Public, 1stF, male 2 2 2 - - - - -Public, 1stF, female 3 2 - - - - - -Cleaner, GF & 1stF - - - - -- -- - 2Kitchen GF only - - - 1 - - -Treatment rooms - 2 - - - - 2 -Doctors - 4 - - - - - -Nurses - 2 - - - 2 - -Dispensary - 1 - - - 1 - -Totals 20 26 6 1 2 3 2 2

Figure 3.9 First estimate of likely number of sanitary appliances

A total of 62 sanitary appliances! This is a large number by any standard and the feeling right now is that the cost target is in severe danger.

For these ‘quantities’ the quantity surveyor can start looking for EURs and then price out the amended cost target using the final spreadsheet, ‘Analysis4’.

The most obvious EUR is from the Craigmiller analysis and on the spreadsheet portion reproduced below it can be seen that the quantity surveyor has done the calculation required and put in the EUR from the analysis at the 1997 values. The spreadsheet, ‘Attempt 1’ in Figure 3.10, has the TPIs included so calculates the Original Analysis costs and the Current Cost in the heading. That Current Cost is taken into ‘Analysis5’.

Before he does that the quantity surveyor will try some other analyses to see what the effects are. The results of these are printed out in succeeding sheets.



COST CHECK OF AN INDIVIDUAL ELEMENT

Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321

Give the following:

Analysis reference: Craigmiller(Source of element if any)

Analysis Index: 137 Current index: 199 Date: 06-Mar-03 Planned Building GFA m2: 850 Time: 12:00:00 AM Sanitary appliances Total Cost/m2 Element Element cost of of unit unit Element & design criteria element GFA quantity rate

ONLY ENTER element unit quantity in Cell D11 on this part of the screen

Original Analysis Costs from £13,417.42 £15.79 62 £216.41 end of this spread-sheet

Current Costs to Cost Plan

on ANALYSIS 5 £19,489.54 £22.93 62 £314.35 Instructions

Using the cells below enter the specification of the various items

which make up the element, giving an element unit quantity and all-in

unit rates as applicable.

Two lines are left for specification in each section plus part of the

third line. Put sub-qty and all-in unit rate on third line ONLY

in the boxes provided Element All-in unit unit Specification sub-qty rate £0.001 Craig miller had 58 san fttgs for £12552 = £216.41 each so new centre with 62 san fttgs at same price Seems that this incl. H&C water piping 62 £216.41 £13,417.422 £0.003

Figure 3.10 ‘Attempt 1’





Give the following:

Analysis reference: Swinton C-1-455(Source of element if any)











in the boxes provided Element All-in unit unit Specification sub-qty rate £0.001 Swinton has 22 San fttgs and the EUR is given The EUR does not incl. H&C water piping 62 £176.23 £10,926.262 £0.003


Two sums to compare; £19,500 from Craigmiller incl. H&C pipe and £11,000 from Swinton without H&C pipe. The Cost Target presently stands at £20,484.94 without H&C piping.

There are no others available so what the QS could do now is attempt a take-off in Approximate Quantity terms and price this out. The reason for doing this is that the EURs used so far put the cost target in danger. There is one other thing to do at the moment. Approach the design team with the idea that there is an over provision of sanitary fittings. If this was to be followed up constructively, the schedule might well look like Figure 3.12.



Location WC whb urinal SS sink Shower Labsink

Slop sink

Clnrs sink

Staff, GF, male 1 1 1 - 1 - - -Staff, GF, female 2 1 - - 1 - - -Staff, 1stF, male 1 1 1 - - - - -Staff, 1stF, female 2 1 - - - - - -Public, GF, male 1 1 1 - - - - -Public, GF, female 2 1 - - - - - -Public, 1stF, male 1 1 2 - - - - -Public, 1stF, female 2 1 - - - - - -Disabled 1 1Cleaner, GF & 1stF - - - - -- -- - 2Kitchen GF only - - - 1 - - -Treatment rooms - 2 - - - - 2 -Doctors - 4 - - - - - -Nurses - 2 - - - 2 - -Dispensary - 1 - - - 1 - -Totals 13 18 5 1 2 3 2 2

Figure 3.12 Second attempt to assess number of sanitary appliances

A total of 46 sanitary appliances. The quantity surveyor can now put this into the spreadsheet Anal 984 once he has arrived a new cost target. To this he needs to work up ‘Analysis4’ with costs based on both Craigmiller and Swinton are. This is shown in Figures 3.13 and 3.14 below.





Give the following:

Analysis reference: Craigmiller(Source of element if any)











in the boxes provided Element All-in unit unit Specification sub-qty rate £0.001 Craig miller had 58 san fttgs for £12552 = £216.41 each so new centre with 46 san fttgs at same price. Seems that this incl. H&C water piping 46 £216.41 £9,954.862






Give the following:

Analysis reference: Swinton C-1-455(Source of element if any)











in the boxes provided Element All-in unit unit Specification sub-qty rate £0.001 Swinton has 22 San fttgs and the EUR is given The EUR does not incl. H&C water piping 46 £176.23 £8,106.582


‘Attempt 3’ in Figure 3.13 shows the revised cost target based on the Craigmiller figures and ‘Attempt 4’ in Figure 3.14 is based on the Swinton figures. On current figures, the cost plan shows a target amount of £19,505.00. Based on the Craigmiller figures which include the H&C supply piping the amended target would be £14,460. On the Swinton figures which do not include H&C piping, the target would be £12,507.

The difference between the two proposed targets should, in an ideal world, represent the cost of the H&C piping however, it would be naïve to even think that this is the case. First, the quantity surveyor cannot be sure that the collation of the cost information into the element in both analyses has been carried out correctly. There could well be some waste piping included in one or other of them and not all the H&C piping might be in the Craigmiller costs! Secondly, the quantity surveyor might be able to obtain plans for both buildings analysed and could see if there were cost significant differences in the layout of the compartments with the sanitary fittings but he has no way of knowing how the new building is being laid out. Will it be set up so that there are one or more service 3: The Building Cost Information Service - BCIS

26


cores around which compartments using the services are set or will it just be set out to fit with some other criteria and the services will have to take care of themselves?

The former would make H&C and waste piping much cheaper than the latter. Then there are all the other things that go with supplying hot and cold water such as cold water storage, hot water storage, overflows, drain downs etc. Where does the cost for these appear in the elemental breakdown given for both Craigmiller and Swinton?

While we would hope the well-planned layout will prevail it would be prudent for the quantity surveyor not to go with either of these cost checks just yet – at least not in their entirety. The Craigmiller cost might be the cost to go with if we allow that we will ignore the fact it includes H&C piping and leave the cost target for Water installation intact.

So, let us enter a new cost target of £14460 into Anal985 and conclude that this will only cover sanitary appliances for the moment. Note the effect in the printout on the next page: Figure 3.14.



COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE:Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following:

Current cost index: 199 Current Cost Limit incl Cont. & P&D Risk


Planned Building GFA m2: 860 Projected Tender Amt. incl Cont. & P&D Risk

Current Cost/m2 of GFA: £1,080.00 £1,114,826.70 % for Price & Design Risk: 7.50 % for Contingencies: 5.00 Date: 07-Mar-03

Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont. & P&D Risk: £1,234.29 Time: 01:51:54 PM Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements percentage Original Total Amended

breakdown Current Amendmnt Current Projected ANALYSIS 3 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANALYSIS 4 Ddt breakdown breakdown1. Substructure 6.13 £65,016.00 £0.00 £65,016.00 £68,283.14 2. Superstructure a. Frame 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 b. Upper floors 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 c. Roof 9.63 £102,168.00 £0.00 £102,168.00 £107,302.07 d. Stairs 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 e. External walls 4.38 £46,440.00 £0.00 £46,440.00 £48,773.67 f. Windows/Ext. doors 3.50 £37,152.00 £0.00 £37,152.00 £39,018.93 g. Int walls/partitions 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 h. Internal doors 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 3. Internal Finishings 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Wall finishings 3.15 £33,436.80 £0.00 £33,436.80 £35,117.04 b. Floor finish 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 c. Ceiling finish 1.44 £15,325.20 £0.00 £15,325.20 £16,095.31 4. Fittings & Furnishings 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 5. Services. £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Sanitary appliances 1.84 £19,504.80 £14,460.00 -£5,044.80 £14,460.00 £15,186.63 b. Services equipment 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 c. Disposal installation 0.53 £5,572.80 £0.00 £5,572.80 £5,852.84 d. Water installation 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 e. Heat source 1.18 £12,538.80 £0.00 £12,538.80 £13,168.89 f. Space heating 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 g. Ventilation system 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 h. Electrical instaltn 12.25 £130,032.00 £0.00 £130,032.00 £136,566.27 i. Gas installation 0.09 £928.80 £0.00 £928.80 £975.47 j. Lift installation 3.06 £32,508.00 £0.00 £32,508.00 £34,141.57 k. Protective inst. 1.01 £10,681.20 £0.00 £10,681.20 £11,217.94

Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements percentage Original Amended

breakdown Current Amendmnt Current Projected ANAL963 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANAL964 Ddt breakdown breakdown l. Communication inst. 0.88 £9,288.00 £0.00 £9,288.00 £9,754.73



COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE:

m. Special installation 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 n. Builders work 1.05 £11,145.60 £0.00 £11,145.60 £11,705.68 o. Profit & Oncost 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 6. External Works £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Site work 5.25 £55,728.00 £0.00 £55,728.00 £58,528.40 b. Drainage 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 c. External services 1.36 £14,396.40 £0.00 £14,396.40 £15,119.84 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Preliminaries 6.56 £69,660.00 £0.00 £69,660.00 £73,160.50 Price & Design Risk 7.50 £79,611.43 Nett +/- £5,044.80 £84,656.23 £88,910.31Contingencies 5.00 £53,074.29 - £0.00 £53,074.29 £55,741.34 CHECK AMENDED CURRENT COST LIMIT £1,061,485.71CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100 100.00 Error £0.0000 CHECK PROJECTED COST LIMIT: £0.0000

Figure 3.15 Cost Plan by percentage – first amendment

To note on this spreadsheet:

The new cost target figure of £14,460 has been entered – see the previous page and the sheet has calculated that this is a saving of £5,044.80. The new cost target is then entered in the next column and the tender date figure is given in the final column. In the lower part of the spreadsheet – above – it should be noted that the P&D Risk ‘target’ shows an increase of £5,044.80 and the tender date target for P&D Risk is now £88,910.31. The spreadsheet did this automatically. Any saving or overspend on the elements and sub-elements above, is reflected in an increase or decrease in the P&D Risk amount.

What is of fundamental importance is that the Cost Limit figures at the bottom of the spreadsheet remain unchanged and the error on the sheet is still zero.

The quantity surveyor can now save the spreadsheet under a unique name and print out a copy for the files. He can now present this information to the design team with the exhortation to save money on the services piping by grouping the rooms with sanitary appliances around cores with vertical runs of water and waste pipe work.

Let us assume that the design team have been working on some solutions for the design of the outer walls. Although the brief states that the outer walls will of masonry construction, so large a building almost dictates that there will be a frame of some kind and the masonry walls will either be an infill to that frame or will work alongside the frame. For example, the outer walls are mass masonry supporting ends of beams, trusses etc., and a frame is used internally to provide intermediate support for the same beams,



trusses etc as well as the lift(s), service core(s) and stair(s). So now the design team want their ideas costed out.

There has been general agreement that the building will end up at no more than 900 m 2

GFA and the first thing the QS has to do is see if that is achievable without going back to the client raising the spectre of additional funding being required. Looking back to Figure 3.8, the Cost Plan by Percentage, we see that our initial estimate was for a building of 860 m2 GFA.

COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE: Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following:

Current cost index: 199 Current Cost Limit


Planned Building GFA m2: 860Projected Tender

Amt.


% for Contingencies: 5.00 Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont & P&D Risk £1,234.29

Figure 3.16: First attempt at cost plan. Heading as Figure 3.8

What we must do now is take that spreadsheet and put in 900 m2 GFA and then keep adjusting the cost per m2 of GFA we first entered until we arrive at (fairly closely!) the budget figure of £1,114,827 and then allow the spreadsheet to re-allocate all the individual cost targets. Then we must look at the revised figure we put in for the sanitary fittings to see if it still makes the large projected saving of £5044.00 we saw in Figure 3.15.

The adjusted Cost Plan by Percentage sheet is shown on the next page, Figure 3.17.



COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE: Proposed Health Centre, Dalkeith Mains Edinburgh. Job Ref HC321 Give the following:

Current cost index: 199Current Cost

Limit


Planned Building GFA m2: 900Projected

Tender Amt.


% for Contingencies: 5.00 Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont & P&D Risk £1,179.43 Date: 07-Apr-03 Time: 08:40:25 PM Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements % Adjusted Current Projected brkdn % Cost Target Tender Ex 100% brkdn breakdown breakdown 1. Substructure 7.00 6.13 £65,016.00 £68,283.14 2. Superstructure a. Frame 2.00 1.75 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 b. Upper floors 2.60 2.28 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 c. Roof 11.00 9.63 £102,168.00 £107,302.07 d. Stairs 2.00 1.75 £18,576.00 £19,509.47 e. External walls 5.00 4.38 £46,440.00 £48,773.67 f. Windows/Ext. doors 4.00 3.50 £37,152.00 £39,018.93 g. Int walls/partitions 2.60 2.28 £24,148.80 £25,362.31 h. Internal doors 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 3. Internal Finishings 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 a. Wall finishings 3.60 3.15 £33,436.80 £35,117.04 b. Floor finish 2.25 1.97 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 c. Ceiling finish 1.65 1.44 £15,325.20 £16,095.31 4. Fittings & Furnishings 2.50 2.19 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 5. Services. a. Sanitary appliances 2.10 1.84 £19,504.80 £20,484.94 b. Services equipment 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 c. Disposal installation 0.60 0.53 £5,572.80 £5,852.84 d. Water installation 2.25 1.97 £20,898.00 £21,948.15 e. Heat source 1.35 1.18 £12,538.80 £13,168.89 f. Space heating 4.50 3.94 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 g. Ventilation system 2.50 2.19 £23,220.00 £24,386.83 h. Electrical instaltn 14.00 12.25 £130,032.00 £136,566.27 i. Gas installation 0.10 0.09 £928.80 £975.47 j. Lift installation 3.50 3.06 £32,508.00 £34,141.57 k. Protective inst. 1.15 1.01 £10,681.20 £11,217.94 l. Communication inst. 1.00 0.88 £9,288.00 £9,754.73 m. Special installation 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 n. Builders work 1.20 1.05 £11,145.60 £11,705.68 o. Profit & Oncost 0.00 £0.00 £0.00



6. External Works a. Site work 6.00 5.25 £55,728.00 £58,528.40 b. Drainage 4.50 3.94 £41,796.00 £43,896.30 c. External services 1.55 1.36 £14,396.40 £15,119.84 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Preliminaries 7.50 6.56 £69,660.00 £73,160.50 NOTE: Percentages for P&D Risk and Cont. are copied down Price & Design Risk ** 7.50 £79,611.43 £83,612.00 Contingencies ** 5.00 £53,074.29 £55,741.34 CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100 100 100.00 CHECK CURRENT COST LIMIT: £1,061,486 Error = £0.00 CHECK PROJECTED TENDER; £1,114,827 Error = £0.00

Figure 3.17: Revised cost plan by percentage for amended GFA of 900 m2

By sheer chance, and after just four or five attempts, it was found that a cost of £1032 per m2 of GFA would result in the original budget figure being retained to the nearest £1.00 – a happy coincidence but will the resulting breakdown of cost targets stand up to the decisions made by the design team?

First of all check out the Sanitary fittings element. Original cost target was £19504.80, the revised figure in Figure 3.15 was £14460 and it is now shown as £19505.00. So a saving on the breakdown of plan by percentage is still achievable. So let us take the revised cost plan by percentage as shown in Figure 3.17 and transfer the figures over into the fifth spreadsheet and apply first of all the revised cost target for the Sanitary Appliances sub-element. See below, Figure 3.18.



COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE: CONTINUING COST CHECKS Give Job Name in this row from columns A - E Give the following:

Current cost index: 199Current Cost Limit incl Cont. & P&D Risk


Planned Building GFA m2: 900Projected Tender Amt.incl Cont. & P&D Risk

Current Cost/m2 of GFA: £1,032.00 £1,114,826.70 % for Price & Design Risk: 7.50

% for Contingencies: 5.00 Date: 07-Apr-03 Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont. & P&D Risk: £1,179.43 Time: 08:58:15 PM Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements percentage Original Amended

breakdown Current Amendment Current Projected ANALYSIS3 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANAL964 Ddt breakdown breakdown1. Substructure 6.13 £65,016.00 £0.00 £65,016 £68,283 2. Superstructure a. Frame 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 b. Upper floors 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,149 £25,362 c. Roof 9.63 £102,168.00 £0.00 £102,168 £107,302 d. Stairs 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 e. External walls 4.38 £46,440.00 £0.00 £46,440 £48,774 f. Windows/Ext. doors 3.50 £37,152.00 £0.00 £37,152 £39,019 g. Int walls/partitions 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,149 £25,362 h. Internal doors 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 3. Internal Finishings 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Wall finishings 3.15 £33,436.80 £0.00 £33,437 £35,117 b. Floor finish 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898 £21,948 c. Ceiling finish 1.44 £15,325.20 £0.00 £15,325 £16,095 4. Fittings & Furnishings 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220 £24,387 5. Services. £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Sanitary appliances 1.84 £19,504.80 £14,460.00 -£5,044.80 £14,460 £15,187 b. Services equipment 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 c. Disposal installation 0.53 £5,572.80 £0.00 £5,573 £5,853 d. Water installation 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898 £21,948 e. Heat source 1.18 £12,538.80 £0.00 £12,539 £13,169 f. Space heating 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796 £43,896 g. Ventilation system 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220 £24,387 h. Electrical instaltn 12.25 £130,032.00 £0.00 £130,032 £136,566 i. Gas installation 0.09 £928.80 £0.00 £929 £975 j. Lift installation 3.06 £32,508.00 £0.00 £32,508 £34,142 k. Protective inst. 1.01 £10,681.20 £0.00 £10,681 £11,218 l. Communication inst. 0.88 £9,288.00 £0.00 £9,288 £9,755 m. Special installation 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 n. Builders work 1.05 £11,145.60 £0.00 £11,146 £11,706



o. Profit & Oncost 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 6. External Works £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Site work 5.25 £55,728.00 £0.00 £55,728 £58,528 b. Drainage 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796 £43,896 c. External services 1.36 £14,396.40 £0.00 £14,396 £15,120 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 Preliminaries 6.56 £69,660.00 £0.00 £69,660 £73,161


Price & Design Risk 7.50 £79,611.43Nett +/- £5,044.80 £84,656 £88,910Contingencies 5.00 £53,074.29 - £0.00 £53,074 £55,741 CHECK AMENDED CURRENT COST LIMIT £1,061,486 CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100 100.00 Error CHECK PROJECTED COST LIMIT £1,114,827 Error

Figure 3.18: Revised Cost Plan with amended cost target for Sanitary Fittings Sub-element

It would appear that the budget figure will be safe even with the addition of 5% to the overall floor area. What we need to know from the design team is what sort of shape they have been working on. Of course the quantity surveyor would have been party to these discussions advising on the cost consequences of selecting a particular shape for the plan and for the whole of the building. The team has come up with the following general data on the building shape so far:



GFA 900 m2

GF to FF storey height 3.70 m including a floor thickness of 250 mm and a service void below it of 450 mm

FF ceiling height 3.00 mTotal DPM to wall head height of 6.70 mGF area 450 m2

Plan length 25 mPlan width 18 mPerimeter wall on inside face 86 mGross wall area assuming a thickness of 300 mm

584 m2

Window/Ext door area % 10Wdw/Ext door area 58.4 m2 (doors 8 m2, wdws 50.5 m2)Wall area – Nett 526 m2

From all of this we can work out some probable costs for the External Wall Element and the Windows and External Doors Element looking in each case at one or two possible alternatives for the Design Team and finally incorporating the results in our ‘running’ Cost Plan.

In practice the quantity surveyor will have a wide range of sources of current cost available to him – current contracts being the most valuable and most accurate. However, when things get ‘unusual’ or not experienced before there has to be another approach. This could take the form of asking suppliers and manufacturers for the industry if they have an up to date cost for something and then estimating the builders likely cost in terms of labour, plant, oncost and profit thus building up a rate to be applied to the work I question. Another approach is the use of Price Books such Spons and Laxtons Etc. These are valuable sources of data for the quantity surveyor and builder’s estimator alike. However the rtes quoted must be used with caution. These books usually give two sets of rates for (measured) work in place – minor works and major works – and define what is categorised as such. The rates quoted are sometimes London Rates although most price books give national average rates – if there is ever such a thing! The point is that the quantity surveyor using these books must read the introductory chapter/paragraphs and learn what the source and basis of the rates quoted really is. Provided the authors have been consistent, the books offer a very comprehensive store of comparative data and this is where the real strength of these publications lies.

The design team wish to have an external wall surface of facing brick and have indicated that they want a facing brick costing around £330.00 per thousand, delivered site. With this in mind the quantity surveyor will price out this option as well as a few alternatives if only to test out the alternative costs! The figures which follow are the quantity surveyor’s priced take-off for four external walls. The options priced will serve as external walls with or without a frame, the 10% addition for sundries being sufficient to cover the cost of pilasters on the inner leaf for mass masonry construction or building the inner leaf around columns.

ItemDescription Ddt Add Ext Qty Unit Rate £0.00



External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Facing Brick £350/thousand

1100 thick Aac block, 1:2:9 cem/lime mortar 1 m2 £25.04 £25.04

2

Facing brick £350/thousand, cem/lime mortar 1:2:9, half brk thk, stretcher bond 1 m2 £58.72 £58.72

3Form cavity incl wall ties and 75 mm Dritherm cavity insulation 1 m2 £16.00 £16.00

4Weather pointing, raking out joints, coloured mortar 1:2:9 1 m2 £15.50 £15.50 £115.26 External Wall 525 m2 £115.26 £60,511.50 Expansion joints 56 m £16.00 £896.00 £61,407.50 Sundries 10.00% £6,140.75 Total £67,548.25

Figure 3.19



Item Description Ddt Add Ext Qty Unit Rate 0.00 External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Facing brick £200/thousand

1100 thick Aac block, 1:2:9 cem/lime mortar 1m2 £25.04 £25.04

2

Facing brick £200/thousand, cem/lime mortar 1:2:9, half brk thk, stretcher bond 1m2 £48.73 £48.73

3Form cavity incl wall ties and 75 mm Dritherm cavity insulation 1m2 £16.00 £16.00

4Weather pointing, raking out joints, colooured moratar 1:2:9 1m2 £15.50 £15.50 £105.27 External Wall 525m2 £105.27 £55,266.75 Expansion joints 56m £16.00 £896.00

£56,162.75 Sundries 10.00% £5,616.28 Total £61,779.03

Figure 3.20



Item Description Ddt Add Ext Qty Unit Rate 0.00 External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Common Brkwrk/Dry Dash


2

Common brickwork, cem/lime mortar 1:2:9, joints raked out for rendering, half bk thk, stretcher bond 1m2 £41.23 £41.23

3 15 Dry dash render 1m2 £14.42 £14.42


5Weather pointing, raking out joints, coloured mortar 1:2:9 1m2 £15.50 £15.50 £112.19 External Wall 525m2 £112.19 £58,899.75 Expansion joints 56m £16.00 £896.00

£59,795.75 Sundries 10.00% £5,979.58 Total £65,775.33

Figure 3.21



Item Description Ddt Add Ext Qty Unit Rate 0.00 External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Reconstructed Stone


2

100 thick reconstructed stone blocks, cem/lime mortar 1:2:9, stretcher bond - Marshalls Mono Ltd. Cromwell coursed random length, split face. 1m2 £54.00 £54.00


4Weather pointing, raking out joints, coloured mortar 1:2:9 1m2 £15.50 £15.50 £110.54 External Wall 525m2 £110.54 £58,033.50 Expansion joints 56m £16.00 £896.00 £58,929.50 Sundries 10.00% £5,892.95 Total £64,822.45

Figure 3.22

In summary we have the following costs for sub element 2e, External walls:

External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Facing Brick £350/thousand £67,548.25

External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Facing brick £200/thousand £56,162.75

External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Common Brkwrk/Dry Dash £65,775.33

External Wall - Frame Infill No 1 Reconstructed Stone £64,822.45

The amount set as the Cost Target for the sub element is £46,440.00

Taking the design team’s original option would result in an increase of just over £21,000 in the cost target, whereas the cheapest option – reducing the PC for the Facing brick to £200/thousand would result in an increase of just under £10,000. Probably the best option at this stage would be to allow the design team to proceed on this basis with the caveat that they must not let the PC rise further than £350/thousand and, if possible, try to save on it! The wide discrepancy between original and new cost targets should, however, start warning bells ringing for the quantity surveyor. All is not well with the original breakdown!



Lets take then the sum of £67,550 and put that into our continuing cost plan spreadsheet and note the effects.

The most important effect is the reduction of the sum for Price and Design Risk by approximately £16,000 – a large drop, so the quantity surveyor will look carefully at any possibility of savings in other elements. Of course, the ultimate budget cost remains the same. See Figure 3.23.








% for Contingencies: 5.00 Date: 08-Apr-03 Current Cost/m2 GFA incl Cont. & P&D Risk: £1,179.43 Time: 11:49:24 AM Input ELEMENTS/Sub elements percentage Original Amended

breakdown Current Amendment Current Projected ANALYSIS3 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANAL964 Ddt breakdown breakdown1. Substructure 6.13 £65,016.00 £0.00 £65,016 £68,283 2. Superstructure a. Frame 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 b. Upper floors 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,149 £25,362 c. Roof 9.63 £102,168.00 £0.00 £102,168 £107,302 d. Stairs 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 e. External walls 4.38 £46,440.00 £67,550.00 £21,110.00 £67,550 £70,944 f. Windows/Ext. doors 3.50 £37,152.00 £0.00 £37,152 £39,019 g. Int walls/partitions 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,149 £25,362 h. Internal doors 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 3. Internal Finishings 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Wall finishings 3.15 £33,436.80 £0.00 £33,437 £35,117 b. Floor finish 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898 £21,948 c. Ceiling finish 1.44 £15,325.20 £0.00 £15,325 £16,095 4. Fittings & Furnishings 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220 £24,387 5. Services. £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Sanitary appliances 1.84 £19,504.80 £14,460.00 -£5,044.80 £14,460 £15,187 b. Services equipment 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 c. Disposal installation 0.53 £5,572.80 £0.00 £5,573 £5,853 d. Water installation 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898 £21,948 e. Heat source 1.18 £12,538.80 £0.00 £12,539 £13,169 f. Space heating 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796 £43,896 g. Ventilation system 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220 £24,387 h. Electrical instaltn 12.25 £130,032.00 £0.00 £130,032 £136,566 i. Gas installation 0.09 £928.80 £0.00 £929 £975 j. Lift installation 3.06 £32,508.00 £0.00 £32,508 £34,142 k. Protective inst. 1.01 £10,681.20 £0.00 £10,681 £11,218 l. Communication inst. 0.88 £9,288.00 £0.00 £9,288 £9,755 m. Special installation 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 n. Builders work 1.05 £11,145.60 £0.00 £11,146 £11,706



o. Profit & Oncost 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 6. External Works £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Site work 5.25 £55,728.00 £0.00 £55,728 £58,528 b. Drainage 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796 £43,896 c. External services 1.36 £14,396.40 £0.00 £14,396 £15,120 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 Preliminaries 6.56 £69,660.00 £0.00 £69,660 £73,161


Price & Design Risk 7.50 £79,611.43Nett +/- -£16,065.20 £63,546 £66,740Contingencies 5.00 £53,074.29 - £0.00 £53,074 £55,741 CHECK AMENDED CURRENT COST LIMIT £1,061,486 CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100 100.00 Error CHECK PROJECTED COST LIMIT £1,114,827 Error

Figure 3.23: Revised cost plan by percentage with new cost target for External walls



Among the statistics supplied by the design team was the figure of 10% of the enclosing vertical envelope being windows and doors so the quantity surveyor could now explore the idea of alternative costings for sub element 2f, Windows/Ext Doors.

In consultation with the team it has been established that the ideal equipment for the main entrance doors would be would a white powder coated door about 1.20 metres wide sliding back across a sidelight and frame in the same material. Door and sidelight would be double-glazed and the door would be opened by automatic gear. A steel security shutter would be required over the outside of this. This is a fairly expensive specification and the costing for it is given below in Figure 3.24.

Item Description Ddt Add Ext Qty Unit Rate £0.00

External Doors - Main Entrance 01

1

1.20 m width sliding door, double glazed with automatic opening gear, white powder coated aluminium framed and frame with double glazed sidelight 1 nr £6,000.00 £6,000.00

2PCC lintels 2.70 long 5.4 m £40.00 £216.00

3Closing cavity 75 wide 4.5 m £3.00 £13.50

4DPC at lintels, threshold & cavity closure 5.5 m2 £6.00 £33.00

5PCC threshold 2.7 m £40.00 £108.00

6Security shutter over door 1 nr £1,500.00 £1,500.00

£7,870.50 Sundries 10.00% £787.05 Total £8,657.55

Figure 3.24: White powder coated door and sidelight with automatic door gear

Two further options are given below; a galvanised steel hinged door pair and a hardwood hinged door pair both with the same steel security grille in front.





1

Galv steel, powder ctd, door and frame; Crittall Duralife o/a 1143 x 2056 NA25 incl ironmongery 1 nr £1,275.00 £1,275.00




5PCC threshold 2.15 m £40.00 £86.00


£3,073.50 Sundries 10.00% £307.35 Total £3,380.85

Figure 3.25: Galvanised steel hinged door pair





1838 x 1981 h/w doors each two glazed panels 2 nr £365.00 £730.00

2h/w door frames plugged to masonry 9.352 m £40.00 £374.08




5PCC threshold 2.2 m £40.00 £88.00


7Ironmongery to h/w door 1 PC £75.00 £75.00

£2,983.58 Sundries 10.00% £298.36 Total £3,281.94

Figure 3 26: Hardwood door pair

Before we make decisions on which doors to incorporate into the cost plan we must consider the windows. Ground floor windows will be set high in the wall and will not be of any great height for security reasons. Upper floor windows will be of more normal proportions. The costing below is for a window in white powder coated galvanised steel, double glazed incorporating a toughened glass pane. From this the quantity surveyor can derive a cost/m2 of window and apply this to the overall area of windows. How accurate this will be depends to some extent on what basic window size is priced out in the first instance. The example below is a 997 × 1218 mm high, side hung opening casement window with locking handles.




Window

1

Galvanised steel, powder coated, 997 x 1218 mm high, side hung opening casement window with locking handles. 1 nr £190.00 £190.00



4DPC at lintels, sill & cavity closure 2.6 m2 £6.00 £15.60

5PCC sill 1.45 m £40.00 £58.00

6D/glazed unit, one pane armoured glass 1.22 m2 £136.00 £165.92

£553.02

Sundries - internal joinery finishes, pointing etc. 7.50% £41.48

Total £594.50 Area of window 1.21435 m2 Cost/m2 £489.56

Figure 3.27: Window

Using the above costing for a m2 of window sub element 2f will cost 50 × £490 plus the cost of an appropriate door:

Door 1, £24,500 + £8,658 = £33,158Door 2, £24,500 + £3,381 = £27,881Door 3, £24,500 + £3,281 = £27,781

What we haven’t considered yet are fire escape doors but let us look at what we have got so far against the cost target from Figure 3.23. The cost target is £37,152. Bearing in mind the need to include fire doors it is obvious that the quantity surveyor need to keep the above prices under strict control so we should probably err on the side of caution and recommend that the design team choose Doors 2 or 3; £6000 is too much to pay for automatically opening doors. So, they could be useful for physically handicapped patients but a strategically placed door bell to reception could summon help on the few occasions it is required at a much lower cost.

Fire doors are costed out below:

Item Description Ddt Add Ext Qty Unit Rate £0.00 Fire Door



1 838 x 1981 external flush panel door 1 nr £350.00 £350.00

2 h/w door frames plugged to masonry 5.676 m £40.00 £227.04

2 PCC lintels 1.15 long 2.3 m £40.00 £92.00

3 Closing cavity 75 wide 4 m £3.00 £12.00


5 PCC threshold 1.15 m £40.00 £46.00

7 Ironmongery to fire door 1 PC £110.00 £110.00

£850.84 Sundries 10.00% £85.08 Total £935.92

Figure 3.28 Fire door

If we allow two fire doors our revised cost target would now be, say,

£28,000 + (2 × £1,000) = £30,000.

The result of inputting this on the continuing cost plan spreadsheet is shown below on Figure 3.29.

So the decision was reached not to include the expensive automatic door! This is not the quantity surveyors decision but has to be made by the design team. The new cost target allows the choice of either a different white powder coated metal door and sidelight or a pair of hardwood doors, all fully glazed and including a steel security shutter to close over the front of the main door.









breakdown Current Amendment Current Projected ANALYSIS3 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANAL964 Ddt breakdown breakdown1. Substructure 6.13 £65,016.00 £0.00 £65,016 £68,283 2. Superstructure a. Frame 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 b. Upper floors 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,149 £25,362 c. Roof 9.63 £102,168.00 £0.00 £102,168 £107,302 d. Stairs 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 e. External walls 4.38 £46,440.00 £67,550 £21,110.00 £67,550 £70,944 f. Windows/Ext. doors 3.50 £37,152.00 £30,000 -£7,152.00 £30,000 £31,508 g. Int walls/partitions 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,149 £25,362 h. Internal doors 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0

c. External services 1.36 £14,396.40 £0.00 £14,396 £15,120 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 Preliminaries 6.56 £69,660.00 £0.00 £69,660 £73,161 Price & Design Risk 7.50 £79,611.43Nett +/- -£8,913.20 £70,698 £74,251Contingencies 5.00 £53,074.29 - £0.00 £53,074 £55,741 CHECK AMENDED CURRENT COST LIMIT £1,061,486 CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100 100.00 Error CHECK PROJECTED COST LIMIT £1,114,827 Error

Figure 3.29 Revised cost plan by percentage with new cost target for Windows/External doors

The effect of that entry for sub element 2f is that the sub element itself is saved from an overspend and the overall cost plan benefits by an increase of about £7,000 on the Price and Design Risk element.



Continuing work by the design team will bring ever more challenges for the quantity surveyor but he has a set of tools to help with the task and all he requires is patience and tact in dealing with his colleagues in convincing them that the cost is important but not necessarily detrimental to a building with a good design and appearance.

3.2.1 Some questions1. Was it wise of the quantity surveyor to allow the design team to adopt the very

expensive external wall design?2. Did the quantity surveyor get the initial breakdown of the cost limit correct in

relation to the cost target for external walls and did the discrepancy between what was first set and what was finally agreed not warrant a rethink of the whole of the breakdown?

3. Why is there no cost target for sub element 2h, Internal doors?4. What should be done about that?5. What was that omission form the original cost plan?



3.2.2 Some Answers and CommentsIt was NOT wise of the quantity surveyor to allow this although the under estimate of the cost target could be laid at his door in the first place. There should have been a re-appraisal of the overall breakdown at this stage and the P&D risk sum would not have been put at risk at all!

No, the quantity surveyor did not get the breakdown correct as noted previously and this is amply illustrated by the omission of a cost target for the internal doors – the omission. Another VERY good reason for doing the breakdown all over again.

Another breakdown is essential even if the quantity surveyor does not own up to the errors and merely swiftly puts some newer figures together for the design team. He might even retain some credibility. On the subject of a new breakdown, he need only find 1% of the current cost limit to have in excess of £10,000 in hand to redistribute and to restore the P&D risk Leaving the external walls at £67,550, takes up £21,000, 2% of the current cost limit. Allocating 2–3% to the internal doors gives up to £60,000 for that sub element which could just see the plan survive! Internal flush panel veneer face doors cost around £60 each plus frame, facings and ironmongery. Fire doors cost around £120 plus frame, facings and ironmongery. Quite a number of each could be installed for £60,000. So the quantity surveyor is looking to ‘skim’ around 5% off all the other sub elements. There are 26 of them so it should not make too much of mess of the plan!

One sub element which would appear to be quite high is 5h, Electrical installation at 12.25%: £130,032. This is ‘quite high’ when it is taken together with 5k and 5l for Protective and Communications installations totalling almost 2%: £20,000. Before we start paring however, the quantity surveyor must do some costings wherever he can and there are one or two sub elements where this could be done even at this early stage. As we stated earlier he has visited the site in order to determine what the it was like from a Substructure point of view. The sub element is worth 6.13%: £65,016 and might show a saving as might wall finishings at 3.15%: £33,436; the space heating at 3.94%: £41,796; Site works at 5.25%: £55,728 and Drainage at 3.94%: £41,769.

As a first example, let us take Wall finishings. The perimeter of the inside face of the external walls is 86 m and the floor/ceiling heights are both 3.00 m so the gross area is 516 m2 less of course the doors and windows of 58 m2 giving us a nett area for finishing of 458 m2. At this stage in the design teams deliberations there has to be some notion of what the building plan is going to be even in balloon format. Figure 3.30 on the next page shows a notional layout.

From this it is possible to see that there are probably 2 East/West partitions and 3 North/South partitions on each floor which can be translated into an area of partition to which finish would be applied as shown in Figure 3.31 below.



Figure 3.30: Notional layout of 900 m2 GFA

Dr: Doctor’s roomTrtmnt: Treatment Room/Clinic SpaceS: Service ductStaff: Staff toiletsPublic: Public ToiletsClnr: Cleaner



Internal Partition AreeaEW NS

Ground floor 2 3First Floor 2 3Total 4 6Length of each in m 18 25Total lengths 72 150Grand total 222Height finished 3Total area of partition 666Deduct Internal doors:say 30 int doors @ 1.7 m2 51

Nett area of partition. 615 m2

Figure 3.31: Nett area of partition for finishings

This gives us an area of 1230 m2 to be finished plus 458 m2 of external wall – 1688 m2

total.This can then be costed out as follows:

Item Description Qty Unit Rate £0.00

Wall Finishings 01

115 mm gypsum plaster on aac blockwork 1688 m2 £8.20 £13,841.60

2 Do in narrow width 50 m £4.00 £200.00

3 2 cts emulsion paint 1388 m2 £1.80 £2,498.40

4 Do. In narrow widths 12 m £0.91 £10.92

5 White ceramic wall tiles 300 m2 £35.00 £10,500.00

6 Do. in narrow widths 8 m £16.00 £128.00

£27,178.92

Sundries 10.00% £2,717.89

£29,896.81

Figure 3.32: Costing of Wall finishings

Now let us compare that figure with the cost target in the Cost Plan. There sub element 3a is shown as £33,437 so adoption of the new costing would show a saving of some £3,600. This will not be entered into the cost plan just yet – remember, we are only testing out some possible savings to offset against the omission of a cost target for internal doors.



We worked out the possible wall finishes which incidentally involved the calculation of some quantities for internal partitions. If we refer back to Figure 3.31 we see that we have a length of these partitions totalling 222 metres. Half of that length will be 3.00 metres high and the other half will be 3.45 metres high so our gross area will be 716 m2

less of course the area of the internal doors, 51 m2, giving a nett total of 665 m2. The partition round the lift shaft might be 150 - aac block and the rest 100 mm thick so we could then cost out the internal partitions as follows in Figure 3.33.


Internal Partitions

1100 aac blockwork, 1:2:9 cem/lime mortar 620 m2 £25.00 £15,500.00

2 150 do. Do. 45 m £31.00 £1,395.00

£16,895.00

Sundries 10.00% £1,689.50

£18,584.50

Figure 3.33: Costing for internal partitions

The cost target in our Cost Plan is £24,148 so adoption of the above would give us a saving of approximately £5,500.

So far then we have identified possible savings totalling £9,100 in only two sub elements. But we could go further with the internal partitions. There really is no need for the general partitions to be of 100 thick aac blockwork. A thickness of 75 mm would be quite adequate and this would translate into a saving of a further £4,000.




Internal Partitions 02

175 aac blockwork, 1:2:9 cem/lime mortar 620 m2 £19.00 £11,780.00

2 150 do. Do. 45 m £31.00 £1,395.00

£13,175.00

Sundries 10.00% £1,317.50

£14,492.50

Figure 3.34: Alternative costing for internal partitions

Now we are considering savings totalling approximately £13,100 and we have only looked at two sub elements!

We’ve got the figures handy, so let us look at another sub element – 2h, the Internal doors and try to ascertain what sort of money we should be looking for to make up for the omission.

The total number of doors we assumed in Figure 3.31 was 30 with an area of 51 m2. The area doesn’t matter now. It was accurate enough when we were calculating the wall finishings. But of these 30 doors how many are going to fall into the category of ordinary pass doors, fire doors etc. This is crucial to our costing. The fire doors are going to be those which give onto the common floor area round the lifts on each floor. The rest can be taken as ordinary pass doors. Our costing would look like Figure 3.35.




Internal Doors 01

1

Internal fire door, 838 x 1981 with glazing aperture 584 x 584, Magnet FDG30 1 nr £103.60 £103.60

2 Ex 100 x 50 s/w rebated frame 4.9 m £9.00 £44.10

3 Ex 100 x 20 s/w architrave 10 m2 £5.19 £51.90

4 Intumesccent strip 4.9 m £6.85 £33.57

5 3 cts oil paint 4.4 m2 £6.55 £28.82

£261.99

Sundries 5.00% £13.10

£275.08

Internal Doors 02

1Internal door, 838 x 1981, Magnet Trade 1 nr £58.20 £58.20

2 Ex 100 x 50 s/w rebated frame 4.9 m £9.00 £44.10 3 Ex 100 x 20 s/w architrave 10 m2 £5.19 £51.90 4 3 cts oil paint 4.4 m2 £6.55 £28.82 £183.02

Sundries (fix only ironmongery etc.) 5.00% £9.15

£192.17 Fire doors 20 nr £275.08 £5,501.69 Pass doors 10 nr £192.17 £1,921.71 PC Sum for ironmongery £1,200.00

£8,623.40

Figure 3.35: Costing for Sub element 2h – Internal doors

£8,623.00 is a modest sum for the internal doors and should probably be put a little higher – say £10,000. Still only 1% of the cost limit at current costs.

And so the quantity surveyor would go on costing out as much as possible on the information available to him and you will see that Figure 3.36 below shows that the 3: The Building Cost Information Service - BCIS

55


percentage inputs for 2g and 3a have been adjusted to give cost targets a little over the figures calculated for them above. Also, 2h has been entered as 0.95% giving a target of just over £10,000. To bring this exercise to a close at this point, the sub element 5h has been given an amended cost target of £119,500 plus there has been some adjustment of the percentages on other sub elements but this has had the effect of restoring the P&D Risk target to just above the original figure.



COST PLAN BY PERCENTAGE: CONTINUING COST CHECKS Give Job Name in this row from columns A – E Give the following:






breakdown Current Amendment Current Projected ANALYSIS3 Cost Target from Add/ Cost Target Tender col 3 breakdown ANAL964 Ddt breakdown breakdown1. Substructure 6.30 £66,873.60 £0.00 £66,874 £70,234 2. Superstructure a. Frame 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 b. Upper floors 2.28 £24,148.80 £0.00 £24,149 £25,362 c. Roof 9.00 £95,533.71 £0.00 £95,534 £100,334 d. Stairs 1.75 £18,576.00 £0.00 £18,576 £19,509 e. External walls 5.50 £58,381.71 £67,550.00 £9,168.29 £67,550 £70,944 f. Windows/Ext. doors 3.50 £37,152.00 £0.00 £37,152 £39,019 g. Int walls/partitions 1.45 £15,391.54 £0.00 £15,392 £16,165 h. Internal doors 0.95 £10,084.11 £0.00 £10,084 £10,591 3. Internal Finishings 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Wall finishings 2.85 £30,252.34 £0.00 £30,252 £31,773 b. Floor finish 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898 £21,948 c. Ceiling finish 1.44 £15,325.20 £0.00 £15,325 £16,095 4. Fittings & Furnishings 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220 £24,387 5. Services. £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Sanitary appliances 1.50 £15,922.29 £14,460.00 -£1,462.29 £14,460 £15,187 b. Services equipment 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 c. Disposal installation 0.53 £5,572.80 £0.00 £5,573 £5,853 d. Water installation 1.97 £20,898.00 £0.00 £20,898 £21,948 e. Heat source 1.18 £12,538.80 £0.00 £12,539 £13,169 f. Space heating 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796 £43,896 g. Ventilation system 2.19 £23,220.00 £0.00 £23,220 £24,387 h. Electrical instaltn 12.00 £127,378.29 £119,500.00 -£7,878.29 £119,500 £125,505 i. Gas installation 0.09 £928.80 £0.00 £929 £975 j. Lift installation 3.06 £32,508.00 £0.00 £32,508 £34,142 k. Protective inst. 1.01 £10,681.20 £0.00 £10,681 £11,218 l. Communication inst. 0.88 £9,288.00 £0.00 £9,288 £9,755 m. Special installation 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 n. Builders work 1.05 £11,145.60 £0.00 £11,146 £11,706


reduced

added

reduced

reduced

Larger floor area


o. Profit & Oncost 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 6. External Works £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 a. Site work 5.20 £55,197.26 £0.00 £55,197 £57,971 b. Drainage 3.94 £41,796.00 £0.00 £41,796 £43,896 c. External services 1.36 £14,396.40 £0.00 £14,396 £15,120 d. Minor building works 0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0 £0 Preliminaries 6.70 £71,119.54 £0.00 £71,120 £74,693 Note: The

adjustment for P&D Risk is calculated automatically

Price & Design Risk 7.50 £79,611.43Nett +/- £172.29 £79,784 £83,793Contingencies 5.00 £53,074.29 - £0.00 £53,074 £55,741 CHECK AMENDED CURRENT COST LIMIT £1,061,486 CHECK PERCENTAGE = 100 100.00 Error CHECK PROJECTED COST LIMIT £1,114,827 Error

Figure 3.36: The End of the Exercise


P&D Risk factor retained

Documents

1 - Trent Global€¦ · Web viewThe quantity surveyor will search through the analyses listed and photocopy or download the analyses which seem to be most appropriate. From there,