Estimate Memorandum/ Basis of Estimate

Transcription

1 Estimate Memorandum/ Basis of Estimate To: From: Mary Ann Lasch, FASLA Eric Link, CCT Date: March 14, 2012 Subject: Tiger Grant Pedestrian Walkway and Parking Garage- Conceptual, Rough Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Estimate Overview This Cost Estimate is based on the provided drawings and sketches for the Pedestrian Walkway/ Parking Garage project located in Cleveland, Ohio. The documents were received by URS Pittsburgh Cost Estimating Department between 03/06/2012 and are dated 03/14/2012. In addition, other details and clarifications provided by the client and/or design team are incorporated. Estimate Purpose Conceptual Estimate With conceptual estimating methods, the independent variables used in the estimating algorithm are generally something other than a direct measure of the units of the item being measured. They usually involve simple or complex modeling (or factoring) based on conferred or statistical relationships between costs and other, typically design-related, parameters. Often the cost estimating relationships used in conceptual estimating methods are somewhat subject to conjecture. Conceptual Estimating Using PACES Parametric Cost Engineering System (PACES) software is a cost engineering tool used to assist with the development of planning and budgeting facility and infrastructure construction and renovation costs. PACES is an integrated PCbased software system that prepares parametric cost estimates for new facility construction, renovation, and life cycle cost analysis. PACES uses pre-engineered model parameters and construction criteria to accurately predict construction costs with limited design information. PACES is a parametric cost-estimating system for conventional construction projects and is targeted to government and conventional construction estimators. Predefined and documented engineering relationships link the primary parametrics to detailed engineering quantities. Quantities and most model assumptions can be changed by users. PACES estimates are recognized by the Congressional Budget Office as accurate up to the 35% design stage, and they have been validated to be within 7 1/2% of final, actual costs. If needed, estimates can be refined at later stages of design. The database used is the Army Corps of Engineers Unit Price Book. Conceptual estimating methods that were used in the preparation of the cost estimate are:

2 Eric Link 03/14/2012 Page 2 + Capacity Factor Method: A capacity factored estimate is one in which the cost of a new facility is derived from the cost of a similar facility with known (but usually different) capacity. This method relies on the nonlinear relationship between capacity and cost. Ratio or Factor Methods: Ratio or factored estimating methods are used in situations where the total cost of an item or facility can be reliably estimated from the cost of a primary component. For example these methods are commonly used when estimating the cost of specialized process equipment that makes up the significant portion of the total project cost. The Parametric Method: A parametric model is a mathematical representation of cost relationships that provides a logical and predictable correlation between the physical or functional characteristics of a project and its resultant cost. A parametric estimate is developed using cost estimating relationships and other estimating functions that provide logical and repeatable relationships between independent variables, such as design parameters or physical characteristics; and the dependent variable, cost. Project Request/ Long Range Planning Estimate Similar Industry Terms for this Level of Estimate: Feasibility, Top Down, Capacity Factored Accuracy Range: -50% to +100% AACE Estimate Classification: Class 5 Development: The project request/long-range planning estimates will be developed using information gathered from the client and/or design team. The estimate is compiled to determine the Preliminary Design Report and Capital Budget. The estimate is built using capacity factored modules based on comparative historical data. Statistical data is collected and compiled and a relative algorithmic curve was established for each of the project. The cost curves are incorporated in the statistical module and applied to the project. The estimate is defined by the module and is adjusted by the estimator to incorporate complexities anticipated with the project. This adjustment will relies on the collective experience of the Estimating Group. The estimate is presented in Capacity Factored Units with lines encoded into Work Breakdown Structure. Planning Level Design Estimate Similar Industry Terms for this Level of Estimate: Rough Order of Magnitude, Budget, Scope Development, Concept Study Accuracy Range: -30% to +50% AACE Estimate Classification: Class 4 Development: The planning level design estimates are developed using information gathered from the client and/or design team. This estimate is developed when an initial construction budget is required. The accuracy of the planning level design estimate depends on several factors including the level of project definition, the quality of past historical cost data used in development, and the judgment and experience of the Estimating Group. The estimates will be organized is organized by a Work Breakdown Structure with estimate lines coded in the CSI Masterformat 2004 classification system. Estimate Contingencies/ Markups Contractor s Overhead: This is the cost of doing business. The Estimating Group calculates this percentage by gauging the amount of annual construction work of the contractor performing the work, on the particular project size and complexity, as well as the knowledge of what historically has been used on similar project of this type. Contractor s Profit: This includes the cost amount as compensation for risk and efforts to undertake and complete the project. This percentage is based directly on economic conditions for local construction

3 Eric Link 03/14/2012 Page 3 industry, the individual contractor s overhead costs, and their perception of the risk of losing money on the project. Design Contingency: As the design progresses through the project design life cycle, a percentage is typically added to the estimate to account for uncertainties inherent in the estimating process. This percentage is anticipated by the estimator as the relative stability of the design documents, project scope, and assumptions upon which the estimate is based are assessed. The design contingency percentage should decrease as the design life cycle progresses. The design contingency percentage calculates off of the raw capital cost in the estimate. Items typically covered by design contingency are: Design that may not be complete enough to determine final quantities at the time of estimate preparation. Some items may defy precise quantification as to what is required to be estimated. Some items to be quantified that are generally computed by factors for other conceptual methods. Mid-Project Escalation: This is a provision for an increase in the cost of equipment, material, and labor above the costs specified in the contract, due to continuing price changes over time. The Estimating Group trends market conditions to temper and forecast escalation percentages. Construction Contingency: The construction contingency amount relies upon the technical ability of the estimator or the estimating team, and is used in the estimate to deal with the uncertainties inherent in the project design process. It is the responsibility of the estimator to assess all of the documents used to assemble the estimate to verify completeness and accuracy. From this assessment, the estimator will formulate the project contingency amount for the estimate. The project contingency amount is applied using a percentage variable that calculates off of the initial construction raw costs, plus markups and escalation. Construction contingency is a factor added to the estimate to account for the estimators anticipated overrun of the estimate due to the following: Errors and omissions in the design process. Design that may not be complete enough to determine final quantities at the time of estimate preparation. Labor productivity variability. Labor availability, skills, and productivity that may vary from the fact originally assumed. Estimator assumed change orders that may be inherent within the project design. Estimating Team Leonard Calianno, CEP Manager of Pre- Construction Services (Direct) (Cell) leonard.calianno@urs.com Role in estimate: QA/QC Eric Link, CCT Senior Cost Estimator (Direct) (Cell) eric.link@urs.com Role in estimate: Pedestrian Walkway, Parking Garage (Capacity Factor Portion)

4 Eric Link 03/14/2012 Page 4 Russell Link, CCT Cost Estimator (Direct) russell.link@urs.com Role in estimate: Parking Garage (PACES/ Parametric Portion)

5 Conceptual Cost Estimate - Rough Order of Magnitude Project: Tiger Grant Pedestrian Bridge and Parking Garage Location: Cleveland Ohio 3/14/2012 Item Code Description Quantity UOM Unit Cost Total Cost 1 Pedestrian Walkway LS $8,039, General Conditions 1 LS $748, $748, Earthwork 1 LS $291, $291, Pier Foundations 1 LS $960, $960, Bridge Piers 1 LS $820, $820, Pier Cross Girders 1 LS $110, $110, Walkway Box Beams 1 LS $362, $362, Walkway Deck 1 LS $862, $862, Walkway Topping Slab 1 LS $235, $235, Masonry Work 1 LS $468, $468, Guard Masonry Walls 1 LS $205, $205, Ramp to Science Center Area 1 LS $750, $750, Enclosed Walkway 1 LS $1,900, $1,900, Miscellaneous Site Demo 1 LS $180, $180, Miscellaneous Utility Work 1 LS $50, $50, Miscellaneous RR Track Work 1 LS $98, $98, Parking Garage - 4 Level LS $27,921, Substructure 1 LS $634, $634, Superstructure 1 LS $15,401, $15,401, Exterior Closure 1 LS $1,235, $1,235, Roofing 1 LS $9, $9, Interior Construction 1 LS $260, $260, Interior Finishes 1 LS $54, $54, Conveying System 1 LS $106, $106, Plumbing System 1 LS $857, $857, HVAC System 1 LS $1,560, $1,560, Fire Protection System 1 LS $1,593, $1,593, Electrical Systems 1 LS $2,784, $2,784, Sitework 1 LS $3,420, $3,420, Sub Total Escalation to 2013 Sub Total Sub-Contractor Overhead and Profit (Assumes 90% 15%) Sub Total General Contractor Overhead and Profit Sub Total Design Contingency Total Construction Cost Administrative Fees Design Fees Construction Contingency (Reserved For Change Orders) Total Capital Cost $35,960, % $719, $36,679, % $3,961, $40,640, % $2,032, $42,672, % $4,267, $46,939, % $1,408, % $3,285, % $3,285, $54,919, Low End Construction Cost (Assumes +/- 20% Level Of Accuracy For Conceptual Estimate) Total Construction Cost High End Construction Cost (Assumes +/- 20% Level Of Accuracy For Conceptual Estimate) $37,551, $46,939, $56,327,938.87

6 Conceptual Cost Estimate - Rough Order of Magnitude Project: Tiger Grant Pedestrian Bridge and Parking Garage Location: Cleveland Ohio 3/14/2012 Item Code Description Quantity UOM Unit Cost Total Cost 1 Pedestrian Walkway LS $8,039, General Conditions 1 LS $748, $748, Earthwork 1 LS $291, $291, Pier Foundations 1 LS $960, $960, Bridge Piers 1 LS $820, $820, Pier Cross Girders 1 LS $110, $110, Walkway Box Beams 1 LS $362, $362, Walkway Deck 1 LS $862, $862, Walkway Topping Slab 1 LS $235, $235, Masonry Work 1 LS $468, $468, Guard Masonry Walls 1 LS $205, $205, Ramp to Science Center Area 1 LS $750, $750, Enclosed Walkway 1 LS $1,900, $1,900, Miscellaneous Site Demo 1 LS $180, $180, Miscellaneous Utility Work 1 LS $50, $50, Miscellaneous RR Track Work 1 LS $98, $98, Parking Garage - 3 Level LS $22,545, Substructure 1 LS $495, $495, Superstructure 1 LS $12,021, $12,021, Exterior Closure 1 LS $964, $964, Roofing 1 LS $7, $7, Interior Construction 1 LS $203, $203, Interior Finishes 1 LS $42, $42, Conveying System 1 LS $83, $83, Plumbing System 1 LS $669, $669, HVAC System 1 LS $1,219, $1,219, Fire Protection System 1 LS $1,244, $1,244, Electrical Systems 1 LS $2,173, $2,173, Sitework 1 LS $3,420, $3,420, Sub Total Escalation to 2013 Sub Total Sub-Contractor Overhead and Profit (Assumes 90% 15%) Sub Total General Contractor Overhead and Profit Sub Total Design Contingency Total Construction Cost Administrative Fees Design Fees Construction Contingency (Reserved For Change Orders) Total Capital Cost $30,584, % $611, $31,196, % $3,369, $34,565, % $1,728, $36,293, % $3,629, $39,923, % $1,197, % $2,794, % $2,794, $46,710, Low End Construction Cost (Assumes +/- 20% Level Of Accuracy For Conceptual Estimate) Total Construction Cost High End Construction Cost (Assumes +/- 20% Level Of Accuracy For Conceptual Estimate) $31,938, $39,923, $47,907,757.17

7 Total Building Cost Building Cost Per Total Non-Building Non-Building Cost Total PROJECT Total Project Cost - Cleveland $ - SF- Cleveland $ - Cost - Cleveland $ - Per SF- Cleveland COST - Cleveland $ Per SF- Cleveland Project Actual Location Actual GSF Escalated GSF $ $ Pensacola Regional Aiport FL- Other 537, ,000 $34,254, $92.58 $7,628, $20.62 $41,882, $ Trump Taj Mahal Hotel Parking NJ- Atlantic City 883, ,000 $15,898, $42.97 $1,020, $2.76 $16,919, $45.73 Mercy Health Parking Garage PA- Pittsburgh 220, ,000 $20,750, $56.08 $1,488, $4.02 $22,239, $60.11 Trenton State College PK Structure NJ- Trenton 264, ,000 $10,678, $28.86 $1,002, $2.71 $11,681, $31.57 Parking Deck and Data Center AL- Birmingham 280, ,000 $48,426, $ $4,037, $10.91 $52,463, $ One Westside Parking Garage CA- Los Angles 292, ,000 $20,848, $56.35 $2,216, $5.99 $23,064, $62.34 Renaissance Parking Garage MA- Boston 301, ,000 $34,856, $94.21 $3,420, $9.24 $38,276, $ Nova SE Health Parking Garage FL- Other 414, ,000 $14,434, $39.01 $4,630, $12.51 $19,064, $51.53 Tenth Street Place CA- Other 472, ,000 $38,801, $77.60 $4,343, $8.69 $43,145, $86.29 SUMMARY ** All Costs are escalated to 2012 Cleveland Ohio $$ LOW $10,678, $28.86 $1,002, $2.76 $11,681, $31.57 MEDIAN $20,848, $56.35 $3,420, $8.69 $23,064, $62.34 AVERAGE $26,549, $68.73 $3,309, $8.61 $29,859, $77.33 HIGH $48,426, $ $7,628, $20.62 $52,463, $141.79

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16