Case Studies

How We Work in Practice

Three engagements illustrating how EstimaBuild delivers estimates, VE analysis, and GC workflow support, with real process and real outcomes.

Three Concept Options, One Defensible Budget

An architecture firm in early schematic design had three different massing concepts for a mixed-use civic project. The owner needed to select one, but without cost data, every option felt like a guess. EstimaBuild produced parallel Class 4 cost estimates for each scheme: same assumptions, same exclusions, same format. Each estimate was tied to a specific design decision (structural bay, floor-to-floor height, envelope type) so the team could see exactly what drove the delta.

The deliverable wasn't three separate reports. It was a single dashboard, a side-by-side comparison matrix with total project cost, cost-per-SF, hard cost vs. soft cost split, and a scenario sensitivity ribbon showing how each option responded to scope changes. The A/E presented it directly to the owner's board. Option 2 was selected. It was $4.2M less than Option 1 and $1.1M more than Option 3, but the board understood exactly why.

Request a Multi-Option Estimate

Concept Option Comparison, Schematic Design

Option A
$22.4M$318/SF

4-story concrete frame, curtain wall

Option BSELECTED
$18.2M$258/SF

3-story steel frame, composite panel

Option C
$17.1M$242/SF

3-story CMU hybrid, standard glazing

Key Cost Drivers

Structural system$2.8M delta (A vs B)
Envelope / glazing ratio$1.4M delta (A vs B)
MEP density increaseMinimal, all options equiv.

VE That Didn't Kill the Project, It Saved It

A GC's CD-stage estimate came in 14% over the owner's established budget. The reflex response, value engineer everything, risked compromising scope the owner cared about. EstimaBuild ran a structured VE analysis using our VE Optimizer: a line-item review that scores each scope element by cost impact, schedule sensitivity, and design intent risk.

The output is a ranked VE candidate list with estimated savings, risk flags, and a 'do not touch' column. The owner used it to facilitate a focused one-hour design review. Seven items were acted on. Budget gap closed by 11.3%. The other 3% was covered by contingency release tied to completed permitting, a separate recommendation from EstimaBuild's schedule analysis.

VE Optimizer, Ranked Candidates

Scored by savings impact × design risk

Budget gap to close$1.82M of $2.3M target

Roof assembly, R-30 → R-25

Low design risk · Fast decision

−$340K

Lobby finishes, stone → LVT

Low design risk · Owner to review

−$210K

Curtain wall grid reduction

Medium risk · Arch review required

−$480K

MEP controls, BAS scope reduction

High risk · Do not act without MEP eng.

−$190K

🚫Structural, reduce slab thickness

Do not touch, code-minimum

,

More Bids, Faster, Without Adding Headcount

A mid-size GC was chasing more work than their estimating team could keep up with. They were winning roughly 1 in 6 bids, not because of price, but because they couldn't get accurate takeoffs completed fast enough to bid competitively on every opportunity. Estimating bottlenecks meant walking away from viable jobs.

EstimaBuild came in as an extension of their in-house team. We handled quantity takeoffs for concrete, framing, and MEP rough-in on two concurrent bid packages, producing traditional L/M/E breakdowns with productivity factors sourced from RSMeans, calibrated to local labor rates. The GC's PMs reviewed and signed off. Both bids went out on time. One was awarded.

Separately, we helped them evaluate two AI-assisted takeoff tools, assessing accuracy on their specific project types before they committed to a subscription. They kept one, skipped the other, and saved the equivalent of four months of software fees in the first year.

GC Estimating Support, What's Included

Quantity Takeoffs

Concrete, framing, MEP rough-in, sitework, CSI-formatted, by trade

L/M/E Breakdowns

Labor, material, equipment, with RSMeans productivity factors and local wage adjustments

Bid Package Support

Scope gap review, sub leveling, alternates analysis before you submit

AI Tool Evaluation

Vendor-neutral assessment of takeoff and estimating tools before you buy

Typical turnaround for bid support

48 – 72 Hours

for small-to-mid scope packages

See What This Looks Like for Your Project

Every engagement starts with a 30-minute scoping call. No commitment, no boilerplate, just a conversation about your project and what you need.