""V" WRIGHT ON QUANTITIES A PLEA FOR A BETTER SYSTEM OF ESTIMATING COST OF BUILDINGS IN THE UNITED STATES. BY G. ALEXANDER WRIGHT (Member San Francisco Chapter American Institute of Architects ; Member Technical Society of the Pacific Coast ; Honorary Member Quantity Surveyors Association, London; (author of "Building Arbitrations.") (Fifty Cents per Copy. (By the Same Author) BUILDING ARBITRATIONS (Second Edition) A Manual for Architects, Students, Contractors and Construction Engineers CONTENTS Chapter 1. Introduction. " 2. Building Arbitration and its Advantages. 3. Arbitration Its Place in the Work of the Architect, Contractor and Engineer. " 4. Arbitrators Their Qualifications, Duties, etc. 5. The Submission. " 6. Mode of Procedure, Evidence, etc. 7. The Award. 8. Arbitrators' Compensation. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONVENIENT FORMS Demanding Arbitration Agreement to Submit Differences Acceptance and Oath of Arbitrators and Umpire Oath and Affirmation for Witnesses Notice of Hearing^and Award, etc., etc. ': Kjay Mail' .04 b'aisr)! Copyrighted. 1913, by G. ALEXANDER WRIGHT 571 California Street San Francisco, Cal. An Address given before the GENERAL CONTRACTORS' ASSOCIATION, OF SAN FRANCISCO, April 10th, 1913, by G. ALEXANDER WRIGHT, Architect. A PLEA FOR A BETTER SYSTEM OF ESTIMATING THE COST OF BUILDINGS. Before touching- on my subject this evening, may I say a word or two to those gentlemen present whom I have not the pleasure of knowing person-ally? Although an architect by pro- fession, it may perhaps be stated that I have had opportunity of closely studying the practice of estimating upon bills of quan- tities, or, as it is more popularly termed, the Quantity System. Indeed, it is a subject in which I have always taken an active interest. I mention this, however, simply by way of ex- planation, which seems to be necessary, for I believe this is the first occasion in the history of San Francisco, and probably in the United States, when a practising architect has been honored with an invitation to address a body of contractors upon such a practical theme as Estimating a subject which, perhaps, in some quarters, architects are not supposed to know much about, and I regard it as a good sign when a contractor's organization is broad enough, and progressive enough, to invite an architect to address them upon such a practical and important topic. I regard the invitation as a great compliment. It gives me the greatest pleasure to be with you this evening, and I trust that we may have a full discussion of the subject at the close of my remarks. The ever-increasing amount of unproductive time, and usually money, which contractors are called upon to expend in preparing, gratuitously, quantities, as well as prices, often for an owner's benefit, suggests that the time has arrived when all concerned should take up, and seriously consider, the possi- bility'*o'f ; adopting a : moV&rrf-and more sensible system of esti- mating, such, for example, as has been long in successful operation in older communities. Not a mere copying of such methods, for I advocate the creation of a standardized method of our own an American system, practical above all things; a system that will be in line with our otherwise progressive build- ing methods ; a system that shall be clear and accurate, and that shall stand for square dealing between contractor and owner in short, a system that shall give every man his due, no more and no less; a progressive system, free from the defects of other systems, such as unnecessary elaboration, and yet one that will reveal to the bidder, at a glance, the actual quantity of material and labor in- a structure, in any individual trade. When bidders are invited to submit bids, they are theoretically asked of course to submit competitive prices, but in actual practice their bids are based upon competitive quantities, be- fore the competition in prices commences ; which, in my opinion, is as unjust to the contractor as it is ridiculous. A building can only contain a certain amount of material, and no amount of figuring by contractors against each other can make that quantity any more or any less. Where, then, is the sense in a dozen or more general contractors competing against each other in taking quantities? One or more bidders, through being hurried, or being unable to take off the quantities accurately, leaves something out. What happens? Their bids are conse- quently low, and the owner benefits, at the low bidder's ex- pense, whilst the competent or more careful bidder loses the job, because his quantities are more accurate, or because there may have been room for uncertainty when figuring the plans and specifications. Not long ago, a general contractor (whom I have known over twenty years) told me that if contractors figured to do competitive work just exactly as plans and specifications called for, a man would not get "one job in fifty." Now, if this is true, and personally I believe it is, there is something very rotten in our methods. In my judgment it lies in our antiquated estimating practices. Those of us who know something of the unsatisfactory conditions under which bidders are often obliged to figure, 2 time after time without result, have realized that hundreds of thousands of dollars in time and money are taken from con- tractors' pockets every year, simply because they do not, so far, limit competition between themselves to the matter of prices. They go on competing, and I suggest gambling, with each other as to the quantity of material a building will take, whereas I contend that that is a question of fact, and that com- petition in- the quantities between contractors never can, and never will, in any way, change the fact that a certain fixed quantity of material and labor is necessary to do every job. There can be no legitimate competition in taking off quantities of materials, except that unfortunate competition which bidders make themselves when they take off too much, or, as too often happens, too little. The legitimate competition can only come in where one man can handle a job better than another, or one man may have some advantage over another in buying, and so forth. All this kind of competition is legitimate enough, but it must be obvious that no amount of figuring can reduce the real quantity of material which a building will take, and so my contention is that it would be proper and fair to start all bidders figuring upon the same basis, by furnishing each with a schedule, or bill of quantities, showing accurately and clearly the different quantities and kinds of materials which the bidder is invited to figure upon; and even then there would be plenty of com- petition left, in placing profitable prices against each item. Our present method (or rather, want of method) in esti- mating, and the rapid strides being made in- construction, are, as I have said, forcing upon the contractor, more and more every year, an increasing waste of time and money in figuring out quantities. This senseless waste and competition cannot go on for ever. It has already brought men to bankruptcy all over the country, and has often prevented the making of a proper and legitimate profit among those who do succeed in keeping their heads above water. This is a live question, and it deserves the earnest con- sideration of all contractors' associations and architectural so- cieties from the Atlantic to the Pacific Coast. 3 No new or untried principle is involved. It is simply that of a definite quantity of work, for a definite amount of money. In substance the owner says, "I want this quantity of work done. The drawings and specifications show you how this quantity of work is to be assembled or put together: Now, tell me how much money will this cost? I want you to do the quantity of work called for; no more, no less." At present, the successful bidder often says, in effect, to an owner, "I will erect your building according to plans and specifications," but mentally he says, "I do not figure that it will take as much flooring, concrete, plastering or painting as my competitors think it will !" Let me ask, Is this a proper or fair competition between contractors themselves? Is it fair to their own interests? There is only one individual who stands to gain anything under such imperfect methods, the owner, and not always he. It may be stated that the Quantity System is equally applicable to engineering works, such as railroad work, sewer- age disposal schemes, canals, pumping stations, etc. Before proceeding to a further consideration of this sub- ject, I may be pardoned perhaps for expressing the opinion, after having had over twenty years' intimate experience with the workings of the Quantity System of estimating, and over another twenty years in San Francisco (without any such sys- tem), that I know of nothing in connection with the work of the contractor that would be more beneficial than the adoption of some equitable recognized system of estimating upon bills of quantities, and these latter would be equally valuable, whether sub-contracts were eventually let or not. It is not the idea that we accept the methods of any par- ticular country the author hopes he is too much of an American citizen to suggest that but where contractors in older communities favor a certain system to the exclusion of the very thing we practice here, then I suggest that we might well stop for a moment and take notice of what is being done. For example, in the year 1909 a conference was held in Great Britain between the National Federation of Building Trade Employers, the Institute of Builders and the London Master 4 Builders' Association, and a resolution was adopted recom- mending contractors who were members of these powerful organizations to decline to bid in competition against each other, unless bills pf quantities were supplied for their use at the owner's expense. A deputation from these contractors' organizations afterwards attended before the principal body of architects, who promised to further the aims of the contractors as far as was within their power; and today the Quantity System is in full operation, not only in the case of private owners, but in all building work for government and municipal authorities, and upon the principle that it is impossible to ob- tain accurate bids without accurate quantities. There must be some good reason for all this, and I suggest that it is worth consideration by any body of men, architects or contractors, who are endeavoring to get and to do better work, and thus elevate the building business to the honorable position which it is entitled to occupy, and to bring about such conditions as will cause owners to hold the competent architect, as well as the contractor, in higher esteem, and not regard him, as is too often the case now, with suspicion. Now let us consider, for a moment, a few of the disad- vantages of existing methods : First The time usually given for figuring is far too short for the accurate taking off of quantities, in addition to the pric- ing and figuring out of the many items. A bidder usually has contract work in progress, and other matters to be attended to during the daytime ; other plans are to be figured by a cer- tain time, and but little can be accomplished in the eight-hour working day, and so advantage must be taken of the night hours, sometimes all night, and even Sundays (as I happen to know), and any other time. Only those who have worked under these conditions and over blue prints at night, hour after hour, taking off items, can appreciate the many difficulties, pitfalls, and liability to error through figuring against time, after the real work of the business day is over. But the plans must be returned first thing in the morning, or the bid must be in by a certain hour the next day. Nothing but hurry hurry hurry. In not a few cases more information is necessary; some- thing is not quite clear. The plans and specifications do not 5 agree on some point. Which is right? There is no time to find out, the only person who can enlighten you is asleep, per- haps, while the careful estimator is burning the midnight oil, and wrestling with problems which can be avoided and entirely eliminated under a more modern system of estimating. Again, the careful bidder who honestly tries to get in all the items, and figures to do the work as called for, is frequently beaten by a less competent bidder, who forgets something, or who, maybe, is willing to take a chance anyway, in order to get the job. True, omissions in lists of materials are sometimes unavoidable, under existing methods, which unfortunately aim at speed rather than accuracy. It is, to say the least, disappointing to a careful bidder on a large job to find his bid just above the lowest, and after the low man has signed up the contract, it develops that the painting, or some such item, was left out. This, however, could not occur with the Quantity System. This is no overdrawn picture, as I know from personal ex- perience. The competent bidder who gets in all his items to- day is usually under a disadvantage, unless he happens to be figuring against men of his own stamp. Meanwhile it would appear that the chances are in favor of the owner, most of the time, and it seems to be a case of "heads I win, tails you lose." Surely it is time there was a change. The existence of present conditions, whilst much to be re- gretted, is due to a blind continuance of early-day custom. It is in no way up to date, nor conducive to progress, nor to that business success to which a bona fide contractor is entitled. It is entirely unsuited to modern construction and modern methods. The tallow candle, years ago, was a great invention, but how many of us would light our homes today by this method? And yet our estimating methods of today date from the same identical period as the tallow candle. Other countries have long ago graduated from such primitive methods, but we are content to stand still, and we are, in this respect, away be- hind the times. It seems to be almost inconceivable that shrewd business men are still willing to spend their time, all going over the same ground, figuring against each other on quantities, know- ing all the time that they are all, save one (and sometimes even 6 that one), simply wasting their time. By the adoption of some sensible system, all this quantity taking could be done by one competent person. The great difference we find in bids arises, in my opinion, not so much in tfre prices or money values placed against the quantities, as it does from errors in the quantities themselves, the accurate preparation of which calls for special training and continuous concentration of mind, which the busy contractor of today can seldom find time to acquire. Now we will investigate a bill of quantities, such as we are considering. What is it? and how is it used? First of all, it is a document, handed free of expense to each bidder, lithographed or similarly duplicated, in order that all bidders' copies may be exactly alike. It will contain every- thing which it is essential for a contractor to know when mak- ing up a figure, with a separate section for each trade, such as excavation, concrete, brickwork, and so forth. A general sum- mary is provided at the end of the bill, in which is entered the net cost of each trade; this summary is footed up, the profit the bidder expects to make is added, plus the cost of the quantities, the result being, of course, the amount of the bid. The methods of measurement must conform to the stand- ards used by each individual trade, and through the bill the greatest care is taken to have everything systematized; all cubic, square and lineal feet, and numbers of items, will be found all together under their respective heads. In this way, immediate reference may be made to any item required, even though the entire bill may contain hundreds of items, and so every item has its proper place nothing is left to chance. De- tail sketches also appear in the margins whenever necessary, to show a bidder at a glance what is required. These, as we know, are of more value to an estimator than the long written descriptions one sometimes finds in specifications. The key- note of the Quantity Surveyor is accuracy. In going through the drawings and specifications he has come across all those doubtful questions which always crop up when figuring under present methods. He will have taken them all up with the architect, and adjusted them, before the quantities are handed to bidders, so that everything is all plain sailing. 7 Nothing is "near enough" for a Quantity Surveyor he scrutinizes every part of the work closely, clears up any doubts, or anything capable of a double interpretation, and his work leaves no loopholes for either the owner, the contractor or the architect to take advantage of. The result is that it is seldom necessary for a bidder to ask questions of the architect when making up a figure. If he should wish to do so probably he would be referred to the surveyor, who is familiar with every minute detail of the work. Further, and right here, lies one of the greatest advantages of the Quantity System. It is not necessary, except in a gen- eral way, for a bidder to study the drawings and specifications at all, and he certainly does not have to figure them. He simply prices the bill of quantities, and, in these days of hurry and bustle, this is as much as a contractor can be expected to do for nothing. This enables the competent contractor (the one who has unit prices at his finger ends) to make up a bid for, say a $100,000 building, in a few hours, and he has the satisfaction of knowing, when the unit price is placed against each item, that nothing has been forgotten; in other words, he only contracts to furnish so much material and labor and surely this is abso- lutely right in principle. Good reasons exist why the general contractor should have faith in his own judgment and .accustom himself to price items in every trade which goes to make up the building business. It is the only consistent method of esti- mating, for anyone who claims to be a general contractor. Experience has taught most competent men that it pays to do it. The mere getting together of figures from sub-bidders, and footing up the totals of the lowest, is not estimating at all. That is mere schoolboy work. However, I am led to believe that this is now the exception among general contractors in San Francisco rather than the rule. The ideal contractor is the one who makes up his own estimates, and not he who is de- pendent, for any reason, upon sub-contractors, who thus become the real estimators. If every general contractor would keep a prime-cost book of all trades, and quantities were supplied to him, he would soon be in a position to give a fairly close figure upon any sized structure, without first taking sub-bids, and this I suggest is the most consistent, satisfactory, and profitable method to pursue, when bidding upon work as a whole; but of course it requires care and experience. Further, one of the greatest arguments in favor of letting contracts as a whole^, is, of course, the fact that a general con- tractor has the ability to figure all trades in his own office, and that he knows how to, and will supervise the work of sub- contractors, if any. If architects can be assured of this being done, it would be better for all concerned. In general practice I believe the accuracy of the bill of quantities should be guaranteed. Such a document might well be made the basis of the contract, equally with the drawings and specifications ; if this were done, the chief cause of disputes between owner and contractor would be removed. This, I submit, is entirely logical and right a certain quan- tity of work for a certain sum of money, the owner to determine the former and the contractor to fix the latter. Surely this is morally just and fair. It may be asked, Where are these competent surveyors to be found? And it would be a natural inquiry, as it is no part of the duty of architects to prepare such quantities. In fact, the relation of the architect to the contractor should preclude him from having anything to do with furnishing quantities. This should be attended to by a disinterested specialist the quantity surveyor. In older countries, young men of education are now apprenticed to practising surveyors, and it has become a recog- nized profession. Years ago these quantity surveyors frequently came from the ranks of the architects ; others possessing the nec- essary education were possibly contractors, building superin- tendents or estimators. I have known contractors' representa- tives who commenced life in the workshop, who, after securing the advantages of special training, made experienced and very competent quantity surveyors. There must be a beginning to every thing, and doubtless there are many men in this country who, after some little training in the technique of this work, should make reliable quantity surveyors. The principal qualifications are honesty of purpose and a knowledge of architecture and con- struction. The surveyor should be a neat draftsman and have actual experience in conducting building operations. He should 9 possess the ability to readily detect discrepancies or conditions which might give rise to misunderstandings during construction, and last but not least, the necessary mentality to act disinter- estedly. He must do what is right in measuring, as between the contractor and the owner. The usual custom is for the archi- tect to furnish the quantity surveyor with a set of the drawings and a draft specification, and the latter then commences work in his own offices. During this period the architect and sur- veyor are in frequent consultation, to the end that all uncertain- ties are cleared up and adjusted upon the drawings and specifica- tions. In short, no effort is spared to obtain perfect clearness and accuracy before bidders commence figuring. Such uncertainties are bound to crop up ; they are unavoid- able. They nevertheless perplex the contractor when he is fig- uring, and his foreman on the job, and create unnecessary trouble and sometimes bitter disputes; and then, in such cases, one of the parties to the contract is usually a loser. Now that we have briefly considered the qualifications of a quantity surveyor, let us take note of what the preparation of a bill of quantities involves. It may well be said that during the last forty years it has been brought to a mathematical science, and yet it is really surprising what a vague idea exists concern- ing the methods, objects and uses of the Quantity System. The fact remains, however, that, where the system has been adopted, responsible contractors refuse to figure without it. Some day that will be the attitude of contractors in this country when they fully realize the folly of wasting their time and money in competing against each other on quantities as well as on prices. But to return : Three distinct processes are involved, and each process calls for different operations. First "Taking off" and entering every item (or "dimen- sion," as it is called) upon the dimension sheets. This is always done in exactly the same order, in every building; no dimension, however small, is omitted no guess-work of any kind is per- mitted. The exact location in the building of every dimension taken is carefully noted, and every figure or note taken is care- fully preserved for future reference. It is impossible to illustrate here the work in detail involved 10 in taking off each trade, but the following may serve to show the general idea: Let us follow a surveyor for a moment in taking off his dimensions for a few items of we will say com- mon brick work. He always commences taking dimensions at the same point on each floor plan; every length of wall from one angle to the next is measured separately and the dimensions entered in "waste," as it is termed. We will assume that it takes say fourteen dimensions to go clear around a building these fourteen dimensions and their locations are permanently re- corded, footed up, and the total lineal feet is then placed imme- diately below this, and a line drawn across the column to sep- arate it from the next item. The dimension is squared, i. e., the number of square feet these figures represent is figured out, and opposite to the total we find a description, thus, for example : 21-inch wall of standard common brick work laid up with lime, mortar and Portland cement, gauged three to one, pointed with flat joints one side for whitewash and raked out the other side for cementing. In good practice it might be best to give the number of square feet superficial of wall, and give the thickness. The same method is adopted with each story, with its varying thicknesses of walls, every dimension being entered in precisely the same order, with its particular location noted. Then we come to deduction of openings. Those with inside and outside reveals (as in the case of box-frame windows) are taken separately, door openings the same. Those of one size and one thickness of wall are "timesed," as we say, and entered Mn the dimension column, so: "Ddt. 9/3 feet 9 inches x 7 feet 13 nch outside wall, fifth floor." Then should follow an item, "extra labor," to so many 8- inch common brick segment arches in say three half-brick row- locks to 4-foot 6-inch openings with 3-inch rise in 8-inch wall, include for cutting skewbacks, etc., and for wood-turning piece and setting and striking. In case richer mortar was specified for arches, it would be so stated, and the proportions. When rough cutting to brick work is required, every square foot of it would be measured. Brick work in footings or founda- 11 tions, or walls below ground or at unusual heights, should be all segregated and given separately, with full descriptions. Such items as the following are then taken by the square yard or square foot viz., selected common brick facing. If joints are struck and cut (as face work), it is taken as a separate item, as should be the case with any portions that are to be pointed with special or colored mortar. Cementing by the square yard if on ordinary plain surfaces, but if in widths of 12 inches or under, then this is separated and taken by lineal foot ; should this work occur on circular surfaces, it would be so described, kept separate, and the radius given. Lineal dimensions are taken of all rough splays and chamfers, flues, pointing to flashings, pro- jecting courses, with the number of mitres, splays, or stops in same; brick sills, with the returns, are numbered, if any. The labor of forming quoins, square or splayed, and (in certain cases) the lineal feet of plumbing angles and reveals, might be taken, also leveling up for joists, bond iron and the like. The foregoing applies to common brick work, as before stated. Now, where "face" brick are used, the entire surface of such facing is measured by the square foot, including reveals and soffits (but openings deducted), the kind of mortar and the labor of pointing being given. Here would be taken such items as face arches. Fair cutting by the square foot on same prin- ciple as mentioned for common brick work. Then come lineal feet of each course, of which figured sketches should appear. Raking mouldings or belts separate; then follow the number of external, internal, raking, skew or other mitres ; also square ends, etc. (if any). All other lineal feet items follow in their proper order, and then in a similar way, concluding with numbered items, which would be described and (if necessary) sketched in the margin. I am aware that this is but a very elementary illus- tration of the detailed method of taking off, but the principle applies throughout every department, in every trade, from the excavator to the painter, but it would be too great an under- taking to go fully into details here in each case. Surveyors' quantities are usually measured net, and it is so stated in the preamble of the bill upon the understanding that the unit price for each item is to be made, by the contractor, to cover trade customs, etc., which differ in each locality. 12 The before-mentioned dimension sheets are usually checked over with the drawings by a second person, and then all totals are abstracted; that is to say, they are transferred to abstract sheets, under separate headings. In this way many similar items of the same value are collected together and footed up and checked. This reduces the number of items which appear event- ually in the finished bill, which is written direct from those ab- stract sheets, and any further sketches or descriptions necessary for the bidder to thoroughly understand what is required are then finally added. When completed, a sufficient number of copies of these bills are lithographed, or otherwise duplicated, and a copy is sent by the surveyor to the list of prospective bid- ders, whose names and addresses have been previously furnished him by the architect. Some of the advantages of the Quantity System of esti- ating to the contractor are as follows : 1. Saving of time and money. 2. Greater precision in measuring. 3. No uncertainty as to interpretation of plans or specifications (the quantities should govern). 4. No visits to the architect's office when figuring, for explana- tions or otherwise. 5. No other work is contracted for except the quantity set forth in the quantities. 6. The contractor, if he so desires, can check up the quantities before signing a contract. In an American system of esti- mating, the quantities should, I think, form part of the con- tract. 7. No bidder can inadvertently leave out anything, and so in this way arrive at too low a figure. 8. Not having to spend time taking out his quantities, the con- tractor has time to attend to more profitable business. 9. Systematically arranged bills of quantities duly priced (whether work has been secured or not) form excellent data for making future estimates. 13 Before an American system can be put into operation it will be necessary: First That a committee of representative contractors be selected to standardize a method of measurement to be univer- sally followed by all contractors and architects. Second That competent men, mutually satisfactory to con- tractors and architects, be retained in such numbers as the vol- ume of work may demand. These men, or quantity surveyors, could be placed under bond, covering their competency and in- tegrity until they have been proved and assured ; such appoint- ments to be permanent, except for good cause; the compensa- tion of these surveyors to be fixed at a certain percentage upon the total of each estimate; each bidder, of course, adding this amount to his bid. Third I suggest, also, that a law be passed requiring that a bill of quantities be furnished (free of expense to bidders) upon all State and other public buildings. I advocated this as far back as the year 1893, and it may interest you to know that such a law is actually in effect in the State of Pennsylvania, and has been since 1895. It does not, however, go quite far enough, as the quantities furnished have no guarantee as to their accuracy. Quantity question is attracting much attention at the present moment among contractors in Boston, New York and other cities, and I may mention, perhaps, that a program is now being formulated to bring this Quantity System question to the atten- tion of every building contractors' association and every archi- tects' society in this country. Fourth In connection with the Quantity System I still advo- cate (as I did in a brochure on arbitration which I published in 1894) the creation of a technical tribunal, or court of arbitra- tion, where nothing but building suits and disputes shall be de- termined and adjusted. (See also the American Architect, April 13, 1901.) Such court is to be presided over by a specially se- lected judge and at least two other persons of practical expe- rience in the actual construction of buildings, and in estimating the value of builders' work, and familiar with building trade meth- ods, terms, processes and customs. I maintain that such technical matters as building construction, values, etc., should not be de- 14 cided solely by technical law, nor by laymen alone, however skilled in other ways, notwithstanding the custom of calling expert witnesses before them. I consider that it would be an advantage to disputants if a majority on the bench had a first- hand practical knowledge of building construction and methods, such as I have indicated, where technical disputes might be de- termined in a few days, once and for all, and without delays, which only tire the contractor out and thereby force him to accept a settlement more or less unjust, from a practical stand- point. I am hoping to shortly see a committee appointed in every building employers' organization in this country, to take up and seriously consider such matters as I have touched upon this evening. Nothing, in my judgment, will tend to elevate the building business and to promote a feeling of mutual confidence and respect between the architect, the contractor and the owner more than the Quantity System of estimating, which, as I think I have shown, aims at absolutely square dealing between the man who pays for the structure and the man who builds it. Gentlemen, I fear I have kept you too long, but I hope there will be a full discussion of the subject. In what I have said, be- lieve me it is prompted solely by practical experience and a sin- cere desire to see better estimating methods adopted. In conclusion, during a recent trip East and to Europe, it was my privilege, through your courteous secretary, to be kept in touch with your activity and the progress recently being made by this organization. I wish to extend to your president, direct- ors and members my sincere congratulations upon the progres- sive methods you have so far adopted, and to tender you my best wishes for continued success. I would like to add, as President Wilson is reported to have put it recently, that "nothing is done today as it was done twenty years ago." That is the essential fact. I read somewhere the other day that this age we are living in today is a new age, an age in which everybody all over the world is doing new things, with interesting, important, wonderful new devices, new meth- ods, new machines to make new products; new proofs of the 15 power of the human mind to conceive and to control, and the human hand to construct instruments with which to conquer the forces of nature and bring them to the service of humanity these are the characteristics of the age we live in. Never have the creative forces of mankind moved so fast as in the lifetime of us who are now on earth. Never before have there been so many people in the world eager to know what the world is doing and how it is doing it. Gentlemen, I thank you. NOTE The Author will, upon application, be pleased to send a copy of this pamphlet free of charge, for library purposes, to the Secretary of any Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, or of any other Architectural or Students' Society. Also to the Secretary of any Engineering Society, or Builders' Exchange, Contractors' Association, or similar Organization. 16 BUILDING PRESS NOTICE. The May (1913) number of the General Contractors' Association Review, of San Francisco, has the following: THE QUANTITY SYSTEM. On April 10th, Mr. G. Alexander Wright, architect, addressed the Associa- tion on the very interesting subject of "Quantity Estimating," The large attendance present at the meeting testified to the interest taken in the subject, and while for many reasons it may not be practical or possible to get this plan of estimating work adopted in the architects' offices, it is, nevertheless, a subject upon which the contractors should be fully informed, and it is worthy of note that a large number of the big con- tractors in this city today are employing estimators to assist them in figuring their work. We now have several associate members in the Association who are quantity esti- mators of more or less experience, and two have joined during the last month, Mr. Wright himself having induced one of them to make application for member- ship, with a view to his services being of use to the members on the floor. Mr. Wright, in his address, did not recommend a mere copying of the methods in use in England, but rather suggested an American system which would be prac- tical for local conditions. At the close of the address numerous intelligent questions were asked Mr. Wright, and a number of those present seemed to favor the system, having worked under it in other countries. The objection is made that the owners could probably not be induced to pay the fee for a quantity survey on their job be- fore it is put out for figures. Then, too, it is thought by some that the architect, with quantities of the work in front of him, might be tempted to go still further into the contracting business than some of them have already seen fit to do, and that the information might, therefore, be used to the disadvantage of the contractors. Of course, conditions vary in different coun- tries and different localities, and while there may be some architects here who would take advantage of obtaining infor- mation as to the quantities of work and material in their buildings, there would probably not be many of such, and, in any event, it is finally the question of cost which must settle the awarding of a con- tract; and it is a well known fact that some contractors are able to obtain slightly better prices than others for their ma- terials, and, again, others are able to con- struct buildings at a less cost than others, owing to their more efficient management. One thing is certain if all architects thought and dealt squarely and honestly the adoption of the system would undoubt- edly be of advantage to all the contractors. It may be well to state that this system of estimating is now under consideration by other organizations of builders in other parts of the country, and there seems to be a general tendency among up-to-date contractors throughout the country to adopt a more careful and accurate system of estimating the cost of a contract. The old days when a contractor practically cubed up a building and put in his bid, trusting to good fortune to make a profit on the work, have gone by. More money is spent for plumbing fixtures, electric lights, fixtures, wiring, etc., today than was ever thought of twenty years ago, and the man who roughly estimates the cost of a building at this time gets a job only when he has made a mistake. The system is no experiment, and is being followed, and has been followed, for years past in several countries of the world, and the Association owes a vote of thanks for the intelligent and courteous manner in which Mr. Wright placed the subject before the stockholders. However, he, himself, states that it is impossible to attempt to give a thorough understanding of the question in one lecture. Readers are also referred to "The Amer- ican Architect," of January 23, 1897, page 27 ''Estimating on Bills of Quantities, and of May 28, 1898, "Quantity Surveying,' and to other articles by the author in the same magazine. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW 30w-l,'15 PWStt? inHH YC 14773 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY