const cost & Bid project

Cost estimate in construction

Name

Institution

Introduction

This technical paper is construction estimate on direct and indirect costs associated with requirements and conditions for a building project. Each construction project has its own general requirements and conditions that depends on the size, location, duration, and phasing of the said project (Ashworth, 2010). This is a big project and, therefore, these cost must be identified and individually priced. The task was achieved by studying the drawing design, plan and specifications which suit the client’s needs. Moreover, the estimate is based on the scope and intent of work proposed by the project management team (Flyvbjerg, Holm, & Buhl, 2010). The estimator did project schedule with pre-determined start and finish dates and address the details all items including the bid pro procurement, construction activities, phasing, sub awards, and miles. Moreover, the estimator did project logistical plans which shows access needed to achieve the project objectives and the location of temporary facilities. This approach helped the estimator account for item required. The entire project is multiphase and in this case, the estimate will cover the floor plan.

Assumption

The assumptions made when drafting the construction estimate are: the building project is in an existing public school located in California seeking to construct a new 105 square feet (SF) building floor. It is also assumed that that the client has employed a construction manager to offer preconstruction and construction services.

Cost to consider

Estimating the cost and conditions for a construction work involves figuring out both direct and indirect cost. The direct cost in this project include permit, pre-construction fee by hours, insurance, temporary power lighting, temporary fencing, temporary partitions, scaffolding, temporary access roads, cleaning, layout & survey, and field personnel (by day, week or month). Pre-construction fee include, (1) producing estimates throughout different stages of design documents, (2) providing construction review of documents, (3) and offering value engineering (Anderson, Molenaar, & Schexnayder, 2007). Billable field personnel hourly rates are the combination of worker basic salary, benefits, overhead and profit. Permit cost rates are defined by Building department and vary from place to place.

Calculations

When computing the general conditions and requirements, the material quotes were obtained from supplier. The rental rates of equipment were obtained from renting companies. The labor cost is calculated on hourly basis. The following figures help in calculation:

· 8 hours normal work days and five days in a week, this translate to 40hrs in a week.

· Owner will cater for inspection and testing costs.

· Labor rates include 30% overhead and profit.

· The project construction cost is estimated to be $1,000,000

· The project is tax exempt and subject to current wage rates.

· The pre-construction period is 60 days.

Cost of labor

Description	Hourly Rate (Incl. O&P) in $
Project manager	$5
Principal cost Estimator	$4
Department Foreman	$2
machine Operator	$1
Carpenter	$0.50
Worker	$0.50
Carpenter Foreman	$1
Surveyor	$2
Accountant	$1
Superintendent	$2
Clerk	$1
Assistant Project Manager	$3

Below is a break down takeoffs by equipment, labor, and material. To determine the labor and equipment costs per square foot (SF) associated with the floorplan, the following calculation will apply

Crew needed to construct the access road at a rate of 2,000 SF/Day:

· 3 Equipment Operator @ $3per Hour X 8-hr/day = $72per day

· 5 Foreman @ $4per Hour X 8-hr/day = $160 per day

· 30 Laborers @ $2per Hour X 8-hr/day = $480 per day

Daily Crew Labor Hourly Cost=

1) Productivity Rate

2) Labor cost for leveling to form and forming camber

Labor Cost per SF

=

Cost of equipment

The duration of the excavation activity with quality of 3000m3 using Backhoe Loader with production rate of 200m3 per day will be (3000/200) and this equal to 15 days. The cost of the excavation will be

Factors that influenced the hiring of the backhoe over excavator are site conditions and nature of work (Pratt, 2018). The site conditions in this case are the site distance and material to be removed.

Cost for Water browser

Units = (M³ per day)

Task rate= 73.5

Productivity=0.0136

Unit price= $ 100

Therefore the amount will be (100*0.136) = $13.61 per day

Cost of pedestrian roller

Units = (M³ per day)

Task rate= 73.5

Productivity= 0.136

Unit price=$ 100

The cost will be $13.61 per day

Cost of Material

Material	Unit	Task rate	unit	Amount in $
Stone	M ³	900	$3	2700.00
Cement	bags	200	$7	1400.00
Sand	M ³	600	$2	1200.00
Water	liters	2400	$0.5	1200.00
Subtotal	6500.00

Indirect Costs 

The indirect cost for this construction work are calculated as a percentage of the total direct cost. These cost should be checked for number of labor hours needed for the design depending on the complexity of the construction work. The insurance cost is a percentage of the total cost.

· The unit rate Contractor establishment is $5000.00

· The cost of insurance is $2,370.00

· The cost of safety and health provision is $500.00

Risk consideration

The supply of construction material are subject to supply availability and competition in the market. The budget may be interrupted by unforeseen site conditions and these can affect the cost estimate.

Summary

	Item	Cost in $
1	Labor	712.00 per day
2	Equipment	387.22 per day
3	Material	6500 (entire floor)
4	Insurance	$2,370.00
5	Mobilization fee	$5000.00
6	Safety and health	$2,370.00

References Anderson, S., Molenaar, K., & Schexnayder, C. (2007). NCHRP Report 574: Guidance for Cost Estimation andManagement for Highway Projects During Planning, Programming, and Preconstruction. TransportationResearch Board. Ashworth, A. (2010). Cost Studies of Building (5 ed.). London, UK,: Pearson Prentice Hall. Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. S., & Buhl, S. (2010). Underestimating Costs in Public Works Projects: Error or Lie? Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(3), 279–295. doi:10.1080/01944360208976273