Report on Ground Improvement Costs for Cleared

Sites in the Canterbury Area

Prepared for Earthquake Commission

22 June 2015
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................. 3
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT ........................................................................................... 3
1.2 THE COST STRUCTURE AND RATES ............................................................................. 3
1.3 GROUND IMPROVEMENT METHODS .......................................................................... 3
1.4 CALCULATION OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT RATES ................................................... 4
2.0 RATES TABLES .......................................................................................... 5
2.1 GROUND IMPROVEMENT WORKS COST STRUCTURE................................................. 5
2.2 DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT FEES .............................................................................. 5
2.3 BUILDING AND RESOURCE CONSENT COSTS .............................................................. 6
2.4 GROUND IMPROVEMENT RATES TABLE ..................................................................... 7
3.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME ................................................... 8
3.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 8
3.2 SCIENCE TRIALS ........................................................................................................... 8
3.3 THE PILOT PROJECT ..................................................................................................... 9
4.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT COSTS AND FEES ............................................. 10
4.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF COSTS ....................................................................................... 10
4.2 PRECONSTRUCTION COSTS AND CONSULTANTS’ FEES ............................................ 11
5.0 TENDER PROCESS FOR GROUND IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS .................... 15
5.1 TENDERING ............................................................................................................... 15
5.2 TENDER PROGRAMME .............................................................................................. 16
5.3 INITIAL TENDER RESPONSES ..................................................................................... 16
5.4 TENDERS AWARDED.................................................................................................. 17
5.5 POST-TENDER ANALYSIS OF THE TENDER PROCESS ................................................. 18
6.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT METHODS AND COSTINGS .............................. 19
6.1 GROUND IMPROVEMENT METHODS ........................................................................ 19
6.2 CALCULATION OF COSTS ........................................................................................... 19
6.3 TREATMENT AREAS ................................................................................................... 20
7.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT RATE CALCULATIONS ...................................... 21
7.1 STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a) ............................................................................ 21
7.2 DRIVEN TIMBER POLES (MBIE ref. G5b) .................................................................... 25
7.3 REINFORCED SOIL-CEMENT RAFTS – ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a) 29
7.4 REINFORCED GRAVEL RAFTS 1,200mm Deep (MBIE ref. G1d) ................................. 35
8.0 SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 39
8.1 COST EFFECTIVENESS ................................................................................................ 39
8.2 CONSERVATISM OF THE RATES ................................................................................. 39
8.3 INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM TENDERS ............................................................... 39
8.4 MBIE GUIDELINES...................................................................................................... 39
9.0 APPLICABILITY OF LIMITATIONS .............................................................. 40
10.0 APPENDIX A – RATE CALCULATION SCHEDULES ....................................... 41

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 2 of 69
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

The Ground Improvement Programme (GIP) is an EQC-led, internationally collaborative
research programme which informs more affordable and practical ways of making
residential land less vulnerable to liquefaction.
The GIP was divided into two main work streams:
 The Ground Improvement Trials – ‘Science Trials’
 The Ground Improvement Pilot Projects – ‘the Pilot’
The Science Trials developed, tested and verified affordable shallow ground improvement
methods in the residential red zone, which can be used to strengthen residential land
vulnerable to liquefaction. The Pilot applied Science Trial learnings to residential properties
to determine the costs and practicalities associated with the various methods.
The purpose of this report is to establish a cost structure and rates for undertaking ground
improvement works on cleared sites with liquefaction vulnerability in the Canterbury area.

1.2 THE COST STRUCTURE AND RATES

The cost structure and rates for ground improvement works have been sourced from
residential properties that had liquefaction-related damage and were part of the Pilot.
The contracts were procured by both open and closed tenders, and carried out under
standard industry contract terms to establish market-related prices under normal
construction conditions.
The costs for undertaking the ground improvement works are structured into four areas:
Design and Management Fees, Building and Resource Consent Costs, Enabling Works, and
Ground Improvement Rates.

1.3 GROUND IMPROVEMENT METHODS

During the period covered by this report (January 2014 to January 2015), the Science Trials
results were internationally peer reviewed and analysed resulting in significant
advancements in residential ground improvement methods.
In April 2015 the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) updated section
15.3 of their guidance document ‘Repairing and rebuilding houses affected by the
Canterbury earthquakes’ to include the results of the Science Trials after they had been
peer reviewed.
This report outlines the ground improvement methods incorporated into the MBIE
guidance:
 Stone columns

 Driven timber poles

 Reinforced soil-cement raft – rotovated mixed ex-situ

 Reinforced gravel rafts.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 3 of 69
1.4 CALCULATION OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT RATES
The ground improvement rates for different methods have been established from tenders
received. The tenders were let with a schedule of prices and relevant information so that
the designs included in MBIE’s guidance could be priced. The actual costs to complete the
awarded contracts were also included in the rates calculation.
The Appendices include:
 the schedule of rates and the quantities of the various contract awards
 adjusted schedules showing how MBIE’s recommended designs, based on the four
ground improvement methods, have been priced.
The approach to establishing rates for ground improvement works is on the basis of
conservatism in order to achieve balanced results relevant to current prices that could be
proven to be representative of this form of work. To achieve the conservative approach
and obtain a representative evaluation, costs have been reviewed over as many different
Pilot projects as possible.
It should be noted that all cost information throughout this report is GST exclusive.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 4 of 69
2.0 RATES TABLES

2.1 GROUND IMPROVEMENT WORKS COST STRUCTURE

The costs for undertaking the ground improvement works are structured into four areas:
a. Design and Management Fees – the consultancy fees for establishing and managing
the project
b. Building and Resource Consent Costs – the costs associated with the Local and
Regional Authority consenting process
c. Enabling Works Costs – site specific costs required to clear the site or prepare the
property for the ground improvement works and the costs to restore the property to
its pre-construction condition
d. Ground Improvement Rates – the construction costs associated with undertaking
ground improvement works
Rates tables have been established for Design and Management Fees, Building and
Resource Consent Costs and Ground Improvement Rates.
The costs associated with enabling works on the property are specific to each site. These
costs, which may include the demolition of a dwelling, removal and re-establishment of
fencing, repairs to damaged footpaths, protection or removal of trees and so on, cannot be
quantified to a standardised rate and are therefore excluded from this report.

2.2 DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT FEES

Costs in respect of geotechnical and engineering services have been established for the
variety of site situations and conditions that are expected to be experienced. These costs
apply to all projects and are scaled to the degree of complexity that the respective
properties require.
The following table indicates the costs of providing the geotechnical and engineering
services required for ground improvements.

GEOTECHNICAL & ENGINEERING FEES Level of Design Complexity

Low Medium High

(MBIE Endorsed) (Bespoke Design) (Bespoke Design)
Engineering Design Fees
Site investigation $1,650 $2,150 $3,150
Detailed design and specifications $2,000 $3,000 $4,000
Survey $2,000 $2,000 $2,000
Design alterations for services and access $750 $1,150 $1,650
Senior review $750 $750 $750
Construction Fees
IPENZ CM3 level of construction monitoring $1,400 $1,900 $2,500
Contractor briefs/works start-up $350 $550 $750
Construction management $2,350 $3,450 $4,600

TOTAL COST $11,250 $14,950 $19,400

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 5 of 69
 Note:
Low level of design complexity: These are based on MBIE-endorsed ground improvement methods with standard designs.
Medium and high levels of design complexity: These require bespoke designs.

2.3 BUILDING AND RESOURCE CONSENT COSTS

The requirement for a building and/or resource consent is dependent on the property
features and the nature of the ground improvement methods.

CONSENT COSTS Consent Costs if Required

Always Specifically
Low Med High
Required Required

Building Consent Application

Exemption $550
Application fee $400 $1,500 $1,500
Specification preparation $200 $400 $400
Preparation of application
$200 $400 $400
package
Additional consent costs –
$300 $600 $600
compliance inspections
Resource Consent Application
Application fee preparation $5,800 $7,800 $11,000
Archaeologist assessment
$1,200
and permit
Arborist assessment report $1,200
Groundwater assessment
$7,500
report
Traffic management fees
$1,800
and permit

TOTAL COST $550 $1,100 $5,800 $2,900 $7,800 $2,900 $11,000

Note:
A building consent exception is always required on MBIE-endorsed ground improvement methods by Christchurch City
Council.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 6 of 69
2.4 GROUND IMPROVEMENT RATES TABLE
The following table schedules the rates that have been calculated for the four ground
improvement methods assessed as being the leading options for carrying out this work.
GROUND IMPROVEMENT RATES TABLE

Distance
Treatment Rate Treatment Around Treatment
Treatment Method
in $/m² Area Building Cost
Footprint

Stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a)

Stone columns 700mm diam. with 12% replacement ratio $146.41 270m² 2m $39,530.70

Stone columns 900mm diam. with 16% replacement ratio $166.23 270m² 2m $44,882.10

Stone columns 900mm diam. with 18% replacement ratio * $180.30 270m² 2m $48,681.00

Stone columns 900mm diam. with 20% replacement ratio * $201.69 270m² 2m $54,456.30

Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b)

Timber poles (uglies) 250mm diam. SED 3.8m long at 1.2m $208.23 270m² 2m $56,222.10
centres, 200mm gravel layer

Timber poles (uglies) 250mm diam. SED 3.8m long at 1.1m * $242.24 270m² 2m $65,404.80
centres, 200mm gravel layer

Timber poles (uglies) 250mm diam. SED 3.8m long at 1.0m * $271.31 270m² 2m $73,253.70
centres, 200mm gravel layer

Rotovated soil mixing (MBIE ref.G2a)

Excavate 1200mm deep, replace and cement stabilise in * $183.73 204m² 1m $37,480.92
position with 8% cement ratio (work above water table)

Rotovated soil mixing (MBIE ref.G2a)

Excavate 1200mm deep, replace and cement stabilise in * $209.33 204m² 1m $42,703.32
position with 8% cement ratio (work below water table)

Reinforced gravel rafts (MBIE ref. G1b)

Excavate 1200mm deep, compacted hardfill 1200mm deep * $175.64 204m² 1m $35,830.56
(work above water table)

Reinforced gravel rafts (MBIE ref. G1b)

Excavate 1200mm deep, compacted hardfill 1200mm deep * $204.53 204m² 1m $41,724.12
(work below water table)

Notes
* MBIE-endorsed methods.

Rates are compiled from tendered ground improvement pilot projects.

Rates were calculated from tenders received over a period from January 2014 to
January 2015. An escalation factor is required to be added to these rates to allow
for cost increases after these dates.
All rates exclude GST.

See Appendix A for the establishment of these rates.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 7 of 69
3.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME

3.1 BACKGROUND
The CES of 2010-2011 generated significant liquefaction-related damage to both land and
buildings, exacerbating the economic impact of those events and accounting for a third of
the total cost of the recovery.
Building homes on liquefaction vulnerable land requires expensive and robust foundation
systems. These enable the building to meet acceptable standards of earthquake resilience
but do not improve the ground condition. In contrast, ground improvement methods
stiffen and/or thicken the near-surface soil crust providing a non-liquefying building
platform for a less expensive foundation system to improve the resilience of both the
building and the land. While ground improvement methods existed, these were for large-
scale commercial builds and are often too expensive and impractical for small residential
sites.
EQC initiated GIP to develop and verify affordable residential ground improvement
methods so that liquefaction vulnerable properties could be made more resilient in future
earthquakes.
The GIP included:
 Science Trials – a world leading research project to develop, test and verify
residential ground improvement methods

 The Pilot – ground improvement construction contracts undertaken on residential

properties to determine the associated practicalities and costs.

3.2 SCIENCE TRIALS

In 2013, Science Trials were undertaken in the red zone to develop and test the
effectiveness of various shallow ground repair methods in creating a non-liquefying crust.
Destructive and non-destructive repair methods were investigated in representative
Canterbury soils.
Destructive methods require clearance directly above the treatment area. This means they
can only be used on cleared sites (where the original building and in-ground services have
been removed). This report focuses on the costs that are associated with destructive
methods (cleared sites).
Non-destructive methods were investigated for properties where the buildings remained
and were capable of being repaired. Very few options are available for such sites. The
Science Trials led to the development of a new method, Horizontal Soil Mixing, which was
successfully tested and further developed in a separate pilot project. The costs associated
with this method are documented in the report ‘Ground Improvement Pilot Project,
Horizontal Soil Mixed Beams “Proof of Concept” Completion Report’ (in press) and are not
within this report.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 8 of 69
3.3 THE PILOT PROJECT
The Pilot studied actual construction projects on residential properties vulnerable to
liquefaction that were procured under competitive tender conditions. It set out to achieve the
following objectives:

 Determine an appropriate cost structure for MBIE-endorsed ground improvement

methods that can be applied to differing soil types for liquefaction vulnerable
residential properties in Canterbury

 Establish whether there are adequately skilled and equipped contractors to carry
out residential ground improvement in Canterbury that will encourage a
competitive market and ensure that the repair methods are affordable and can be
practically applied
 Raise the level of stakeholder confidence in the viability of residential ground
improvement methods. These stakeholders include EQC, MBIE, private insurers,
homeowners, consenting authorities, consulting engineers and the wider building
industry
 Study issues, associated problems and concerns that could be encountered during
the process of undertaking ground improvements on individual properties.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 9 of 69
4.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT COSTS AND FEES

4.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF COSTS

A process has been set up to identify the particular requirements of an individual property to
undergo ground improvement and to establish the most cost-effective and practical method of
construction. The following processes establish the costs of remediating a property:

 A site review process establishes the condition of the property and the inspections or
reports that are required for the property to undergo ground improvement.
 If the site is listed on Environment Canterbury (ECan) records as being a Hazardous
Activities and Industries List (HAIL) site an environmental desktop study and/or a
Detailed Site Investigation (DSI) report is required. The type of contamination will also
determine which ground improvement method is most appropriate.
 The geotechnical information on the property is established. The Canterbury
Geotechnical Database may give sufficient geotechnical information on the subject
property or may only give general information on the surrounding area. If the
information is insufficient, additional geotechnical investigations may be required to
ascertain the true nature of the ground conditions.
 From the inspections and site reports, a geotechnical engineer can then decide on and
specify the most appropriate improvement method for the site, whether it be an MBIE-
specified method or a bespoke design. Detailed design will be undertaken and
drawings and specifications produced for the ground improvement method selected
for the property. Standard specifications and drawings are expected to be referenced.
 Waimakariri District Council (WDC) does not require building consent or an application
for an exemption from building consent for any of the ground improvement methods
endorsed by MBIE. On completion of ground improvement work, WDC requires a
Statement of Professional Opinion on the Suitability of Land for Building Construction
and as-built drawings for its records.
 Christchurch City Council (CCC) requires an application for building consent exemption
before any ground improvement works can begin. On completion of ground
improvement work CCC requires a statement of suitability and as-built drawings for its
records. (If the ground improvement method is endorsed by MBIE an exemption can
be obtained. (CCC’s current building consent exemption application fee is $550.)
 If resource consent is required for ground improvement works, a consent application
needs to be prepared for the property, usually by a planning consultant, and lodged
with the relevant council for processing.

 Site-specific enabling works are required before the ground remediation work can
begin. These could include forming access to the work site, isolating services and
protecting or removing trees, garden features, swimming pools, etc.

 The appropriate ground improvement works assessed by the geotechnical engineer as

being required are then undertaken to remediate the site.
 Site visits are to be undertaken by the geotechnical engineer during the construction of
the ground improvements, so that they can observe that the improvement works are

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 10 of 69
 being undertaken in accordance with the design requirements and issue a Statement
of Professional Opinion on the Suitability of Land for Building Construction.

 The ground improvement contractor repairs any property that is disturbed or damaged
during construction.

4.2 PRECONSTRUCTION COSTS AND CONSULTANTS’ FEES

HAIL Sites
ECan maintains a database of properties where activities on the Ministry for the
Environment’s HAIL have more than likely taken place. This database is referred to as the
Listed Land Use Register (LLUR). If a property is identified on the LLUR as being potentially
contaminated, a DSI is required to confirm the presence and extent of any ground
contamination.
Costs associated with the preparation of a DSI will vary depending on the types of activity
that have been identified as having taken place on the site and the number of soil samples
required for the reporting process. The property-specific assessment form will identify the
expected cost category for preparation of a DSI report.

Surface Surface Surface + Deep Surface + Deep

Small Site Large Site Small Site Large Site

Detailed Site
$3,600 $4,100 $4,200 $4,700
Investigation

Further costs associated with the management of contaminated soil are to be assessed as
required.
Resource consent is also required under the Resource Management (National
Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect
Human Health) Regulations 2011 for any properties that are listed on the LLUR. Costs
associated with the resource consent application are identified as part of the resource
consent cost assessment discussed in Section 4.2.4 below.

Geotechnical Engineering Fees

A geotechnical engineer is required to assess the ground conditions in order to recommend
the most suitable ground improvement method. If available information from the
Canterbury Geotechnical Database is insufficient, further geotechnical investigation is
required. The engineer also arranges the contract, observes the construction process and
issues a Statement of Professional Opinion on the Suitability of Land for Building
Construction on completion.
With the issuing of the revised MBIE guidelines and the New Zealand Geotechnical Society
Ground Improvement Standard Specification, together with the expected volume of
ground improvement work, there will be competition amongst geotechnical engineers,
with repetition of work and the standardisation of drawings and specifications.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 11 of 69
 Results from the ground improvement pilot confirmed that the majority of cleared sites
liquefaction vulnerable properties are capable of being repaired using the designs
recommended in the MBIE guidance update of 2015.
The following table summarises the cost structure for the geotechnical and engineering
fees. These are based on three levels of design complexity. ‘Low’ includes MBIE-endorsed
ground improvement methods as well as bespoke designs where there are no site specific
issues. The other two categories require bespoke design and have more complex design
requirements.

GEOTECHNICAL & ENGINEERING FEES Level of Design Complexity

Low Medium High

Engineering Design Fees

Site-specific investigation $1,650 $2,150 $3,150
Detailed design and specifications $2,000 $3,000 $4,000
Survey $2,000 $2,000 $2,000
Design alterations for services and access $750 $1,150 $1,650
Senior review $750 $750 $750
Construction Fees
IPENZ CM3 level of construction monitoring $1,400 $1,900 $2,500
Contractor briefs/works start-up $350 $550 $750
Construction management $2,350 $3,450 $4,600

TOTAL COST $11,250 $14,950 $19,400

Resource Consents
Ground improvement works may require resource consent from any of the following
authorities:

 ECan
 CCC

 WDC
Resource consent requirements are based on the nature of the ground improvement
method and site features. Proposals must be assessed against the provisions in the
relevant statutory plan(s).
Rules have been developed that are specific to land repair activities. These new land repair
rules were inserted in the Christchurch City Plan, the Natural Resources Regional Plan and
the proposed Land and Water Regional Plan via section 27 of the Canterbury Earthquake
Recovery Act 2011. The provisions were reviewed and updated to become operative on 5
September 2014.
As a result of these updates to the land repair rules in the Christchurch City Plan, the
Natural Resources Regional Plan and the proposed Land and Water Regional Plan on 5
September 2014, the majority of land repair works on liquefaction vulnerable sites do not
require resource consent from CCC and/or ECan.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 12 of 69
 There are currently no specific land repair rules in the Waimakariri District Plan, therefore
the ‘general provisions’ in the Waimakariri District Plan apply.
Resource consent cost categories include fees for a planning consultant to prepare a
resource consent application, and council consent processing fees. The preparation and
processing of resource consent applications will vary in complexity, depending on which
rules have triggered the requirement for resource consent. The property-specific
assessment forms will identify the expected level of complexity for consent preparation
and processing and whether a technical assessment will be required to accompany an
application for resource consent.
On completion of the ground improvement works, documentation on the extent of the
work undertaken and accompanying engineering certification is lodged with the respective
councils as records on their property files.
As the ground improvement pilot began before consenting changes were implemented by
the consenting authorities, resource consent applications were required on all pilot
properties. This provided a comprehensive understanding of the costs associated with
gaining ground-repair-related consents.
The following table summarises the costs associated with obtaining any necessary building
and/or resource consents to undertake land repair works:

CONSENT COSTS Consent Costs if Required

Always Specifically
Low Med High
Required Required

Building Consent Application

Exemption $550
Application fee $400 $1,500 $1,500
Specification preparation $200 $400 $400
Preparation of
$200 $400 $400
application package
Additional consent costs
$300 $600 $600
– compliance inspections
Resource Consent
Application fee and
resource consent $5,800 $7,800 $11,000
preparation
Archaeologist
$1,200
assessment and permit
Arborist assessment
$1,200
report
Groundwater assessment
$7,500
report
Traffic management fees
$1,800
and permit

TOTAL COST $550 $1,100 $5,800 $2,900 $7,800 $2,900 $11,000

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 13 of 69
 Site-Specific Enabling and Completion Works
Each property will need to be assessed for any work that is required. The enabling work
may include the dwelling removal, which could have already been carried out to allow
access, isolate services and enable tree protection or removal or other enabling work. On
completion restorative works will be required with the replacement of fences, repairs to
damaged footpaths and the like.
As the enabling work cannot be defined due to the unique nature of each site, for the
purposes of this cost analysis these costs have been excluded.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 14 of 69
5.0 TENDER PROCESS FOR GROUND IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

5.1 TENDERING
A series of tenders for single and batches of properties was arranged in order to encourage
as much participation as possible by local and national construction companies, with a view
to establishing not only competitive tendering for each project but also a database of
companies for the various ground improvement methods.
Tender documentation fully specified the technical requirements of various ground
improvement methodologies, and required detailed information to be submitted with the
tender submissions that would enable the tender evaluation team to assess fully the
suitability of each tenderer. The tender procurement procedures, overseen by a
government probity specialist, were fully documented throughout the tender process by
the tender evaluation team to ensure that the resulting tender recommendations were
correctly established.
The conditions of contract included in the tender documents were those of NZS 3910:2003
Conditions of Contract for Building and Civil Engineering Construction, with special
conditions relevant to the specific nature of the projects.
The tenders were focused on specific ground improvement methods, but also allowed
tenderers to offer alternative methods on the proviso that those methods could be proven
by the tenderers to be technically viable. This provided for a good cross-section of all
technically suitable methods to be reviewed and, where appropriate, be taken to
construction.
As a means of establishing that a particular method met the criteria of the specification, a
thorough testing regime was included in the contract. The results of the testing processes
undertaken before the start of construction enabled the engineer to confirm the adequacy
of the specification in relation to the particular soil makeup. Testing at the completion of
construction gave the engineer confidence that the specification had produced the
predicted results.
The initial strategy under the pilot programme was to tender four packages of
approximately ten sites per package. The package sizes were later refined to suit available
sites and the requirement to focus on selected construction methods in an effort to give
additional costing results to substantiate the costs of each of the methods that were
reviewed.
After the conclusion of the work on the projects in the pilot programme, a further ground
improvement method and a refinement to an existing method were identified as being
likely to be published in MBIE guidelines. Tenders were called for the rotovated mixed ex-
situ technique of constructing a 1.2m reinforced soil-cement raft. Two projects were let to
identify the costs and efficiency of the method. From these projects and subsequent
discussions with the two contractors, costs were established for the refined 1.2m
reinforced gravel raft method.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 15 of 69
5.2 TENDER PROGRAMME
In all, 10 separate batches of properties were tendered covering 29 properties. This was
reduced and contracts were awarded in nine batches of 28 properties through the
withdrawal of one property and the amalgamation of two tenders.
The first tender gave contractors the choice of tendering on various options of ground
improvement and the opportunity to offer their own alternative methods. Subsequent
tenders linked properties with similar soil types, thereby providing a basis for targeting
selected ground improvement methods while still leaving options open for obtaining
alternative methodologies.

5.3 INITIAL TENDER RESPONSES

The following table records the initial tender responses against various ground
improvement methods. It should be noted that some of the tenders received did not meet
engineering requirements and are not included in the pricing. Only construction methods
that met the tender evaluation criteria are reported in the table below.

Tender Properties No of Range of Initial Prices Stated

Improvement Method Type
Tenderers in Area of Improvement

T1 Fuller St 4 Reinforced gravel raft $208.72 – $379.91/m²

3 In-situ mixed-soil cement raft $222.04 – $283.35/m²
1 Driven timber poles $414.85/m²
T2 Bower Ave 1 4 Stone columns $134.35 – $546.16/m²
1 In-situ mixed-soil cement raft $280.81/m²
T3A Wilson Rd 2 In-situ mixed-soil cement raft $247.29 – $351.73/m²
McBratneys Rd
Niven St 1
Barbadoes St
3B Redwood Pl 1 In-situ mixed-soil cement raft $307.27/m²
3C Speight St 2 Reinforced gravel raft $208.24 – $280.98/m²
Tavendale Pl
T4 Landy St 1 Stone columns $143.15/m²
2 Reinforced gravel raft $296.09 – $622.68/m²
Palmers Rd 1 Stone columns $122.11/m²
T5
Bower Ave 2
T6A Chardale St 2 Stone columns $105.06 – $227.27/m²
Niven St 2 5 Timber poles $176.68 – $294.22/m²
Northaw St 6 Driven timber poles 1.2m c/c $177.49 – $355.88/m²
T6B
Pages Rd
T7 Tavendale Pl 3 Driven timber poles 1.2m c/c $190.49 – $210.93/m²
Hendon St 3 Driven timber poles 1.2m c/c $197.87 – $287.35/m²
T8
McFaddens Rd

A tender evaluation team was established to review the tenders when received for aspects
of compliance with technical criteria, the conditions of tender and probity. Tenders
deemed to be technically unsuitable were eliminated and the lower-priced complying
tenders were reviewed for compliance with regard to work experience, resources and
personnel, methodology and management systems, and adherence to programme. Tender

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 16 of 69
 tags were reviewed and referred back to the tenderers where necessary for explanation,
and removal as appropriate, in order to obtain complying tenders.

5.4 TENDERS AWARDED

Tenders received and checked for technical viability confined the methods to four
solutions, namely:

 Stone columns
 Driven timber poles

 In-situ mixed-soil cement rafts

 Reinforced gravel rafts.
In assessing the acceptability of construction methods, reference was made to existing
MBIE guidelines and methods that had demonstrated good performance in the Science
Trials carried out in the residential red zone in 2013. Tenders were received from
contractors for alternative options, but due to non-conformity with specifications,
technical reasons, other deviations from the expected MBIE guideline revisions and cost,
the following methods were not considered at the time:

 Rammed aggregate piers 2.5m deep

 Driven timber poles using ‘ugly’ (non-shaven) poles
 Large-diameter driven timber poles placed at greater than 1.2m centres
 Continuous flight auger columns.
The decision to exclude these options was due to uncertainty at the time around
regulatory endorsement. MBIE has now endorsed the use of ‘ugly’ poles and large-
diameter poles placed at greater than 1.2m centres for ground improvements. It has also
provided increased tolerances for diameters and lengths of poles, which should reduce
material costs.
Tenders were awarded to contractors on nine projects as detailed in the following table:

Contract
Expected
Tender Properties Contractor Award Improvement Method
Final Amount
Amount

T1 Fuller St Contractor 1 $547,900 $689,725 Reinforced gravel raft

T2 Bower Ave 1 Contractor 2 $55,756 $58,495 Stone columns
Wilson Rd
$761,136
McBratneys Rd In-situ mixed-soil cement
T3A Contractor 3 $467,946 (additional
Niven St 1 raft
site added)
Barbadoes St
T4 Landy St Contractor 2 $72,433 $97,161 Stone columns
Palmers Rd
T5 Contractor 2 $125,081 $145,106 Stone columns
Bower Ave 2
Chardale St
T6A Contractor 2 $125,026 $112,616 Stone columns
Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 17 of 69
 Speight St
T6B Contractor 4 $192,093 $268,970 Driven timber poles
Pages Rd
T7 Tavendale Pl Contractor 4 $206,486 $291,823 Driven timber poles
Hendon St
T8 Contractor 4 $163,840 $221,561 Driven timber poles
McFaddens Rd

5.5 POST-TENDER ANALYSIS OF THE TENDER PROCESS

Low tender responses and high and inconsistent pricing were characteristics of the tenders
received. The lack of a developed market for ground improvement work and multiple
contractors vying for specific methods led to a limited source of rates for the different
ground improvement methods.
A post-tender analysis of these tenders and information gathered from tenderers at post-
tender debriefs suggested several reasons for this:
 There is a general lack of specialist civil engineering contractors in the market at this
time to undertake these small-scale types of residential ground improvement works.

 The ground improvement methods are generally untried and unproven due to a lack of
demand in residential situations, although similar work has been undertaken on
commercial projects. The lack of demand has discouraged the large capital investment
required of companies to obtain the specialised plant and equipment necessary for
applying these ground improvement methods.

 The procurement procedures and tender conditions required by EQC to be

incorporated in the tenders were perceived by some tenderers as excessive for
projects of this type, size and complexity. The formal tender approach discouraged
smaller contracting companies that were not conversant with these formal tender
conditions, even though they might have had the ability to use the simpler ground
improvement methods.

 There is no established market for the ground improvement methods. With most of
the improvement methods recently developed, contractors had little historical
information in order to establish the production factors for pricing the resource
elements they would be using. This led to contractors taking a conservative approach
in committing to the fixed rates required on these projects.
 There are intellectual property issues with some construction methods. These
appeared to have inflated prices among those contractors who sought to capitalise on
them and recover some of their development costs.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 18 of 69
6.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT METHODS AND COSTINGS

6.1 GROUND IMPROVEMENT METHODS

Not all types of ground improvement can be applied to all sites. Stone columns and driven
timber poles have restrictions in their use on all soil types, either through geotechnical
constraints or through practical installation.
Stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a)
Stone column ground improvement involves adding vertical columns of stone into the
ground to a depth of at least 4m below the ground surface. A layer of compacted gravel
can then be put over the top of the columns, ready for the construction of new house
foundations.
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b)
Driven timber poles are installed vertically in the ground in a triangular grid patter to at
least 4m below the ground surface. A layer of compacted gravel can then be placed over
the top of the installed poles, ready for the construction of new house foundations.
Reinforced soil-cement rafts (MBIE ref. G2a and MBIE ref. G2b)
Reinforced soil-cement rafts involve the construction of a 1.2m thick compacted crust
made of cement-stabilised soil with reinforcing mesh called a geogrid. There are three
methods: Ex-situ soil-cement mixing (MBIE ref. G2a), rotovated mixed ex-situ (MBIE
ref.G2a) and in-situ soil mixing (MBIE ref. G2b).
Only the in-situ soil mixing method was trialled (to a depth of 2.1m, with 1.6m depth of soil
treated). The ex-situ soil-cement raft was not trialled due to the difficulties likely to be
encountered on sites with high ground water levels and the requirement to support the
excavation sides.
Reinforced gravel rafts (MBIE ref. G1b)
Reinforced gravel rafts involve the construction of a 1.2m deep compacted ‘raft’ of
engineered aggregate (gravel).
The ground improvement pilot specified a 2.1m deep treatment. At this depth there were
construction difficulties encountered on the selected site, with high ground water levels
and a requirement to support the excavated sides. The site required sheet piling the sides
of the excavation, dewatering the excavation during excavation and the hardfill replaced.
The recent MBIE endorsement of a geogrid reinforced raft with reduced 1.2m thick
treatment directly under the house footprint has led to a desktop estimate of the costs of
this method.

6.2 CALCULATION OF COSTS

Ground improvement works in the Pilot were contracted on a ‘measure and value’ basis.
The tender process required granular pricing of materials, quantities, labour and
equipment in order to allow the pricing to be applied to ground improvement methods in a
future MBIE guidance update.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 19 of 69
 The ground improvement rates are expressed as a square metre rate inclusive of all the
contract costs to be multiplied by the intended treatment area. The site requirement for
ground improvements is proportional to the time required to install the improvements. As
such, the preliminary and general costs (which are largely time related) have been included
in the square metre rates.
The tendered schedule has been used as the basis for calculation of the rates. An analysis
of the costs were undertaken to ensure that any additional work or contract variations
were included in the rates table. Any variations to the contract that were site specific and
not particular to the technique of installing the method have been excluded from the
calculations.

6.3 TREATMENT AREAS

Treatment areas of ground improvement have been defined as the building footprint of
the MBIE representative floor plan as indicated below, plus the allowance defined by MBIE
guidelines for extending the treatment area beyond the perimeter foundation line.

8m 6m

6m
13m

Example Foundation Plan - 146 sq.m.

7m

14m

The treatment area for stone columns is the house footprint of 146m² plus a 2m perimeter,
giving a total treatment area of 270m².
The treatment area for driven timber poles is the house footprint of 146m² plus a 2m
perimeter, giving a total treatment area of 270m².
The treatment area for reinforced soil-cement raft is the house footprint of 146m² plus a
1m perimeter, giving a total treatment area of 204m².
The treatment area for reinforced gravel raft is the house footprint of 146m² plus a 1m
perimeter, giving a total treatment area of 204m².

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 20 of 69
7.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT RATE CALCULATIONS

7.1 STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

Stone columns provide a technically effective method and have proven to be one of the
cheaper solutions for ground improvement. The process of installing stone columns
requires a specialised vibroflot rig forcing aggregate in a predetermined replacement ratio
into the ground, resulting in the densification of the natural ground to the predetermined
depth.
The construction method for stone columns is shown in the following drawing and is as
described in the latest MBIE guidelines.

The rates applicable to the stone column method have been calculated from the following
sequence of work:
• Strip topsoil typically 200mm thick
• Stone columns are installed in a triangular grid at centres to achieve the required area
replacement ratio to suit the soil classification. The columns are typically 4.25m long
and, depending on the soil, the area replacement ratios are adjusted to 12%, 16%, 18%
or 20%
• The top 200mm of the stone columns are rotovated and mixed with the existing soils to
form a blanket layer
• The top surface is compacted with a heavy roller to achieve 95% maximum dry density
• The topsoil is reinstated or removed.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 21 of 69
 Tenders
The following table records prices received in square metres of treated area in tenders that
were technically acceptable for stone column ground improvement.

Contract Treatment Cost per m² of

Tender Property Contractor Total Cost
Awarded Area Treated Area

T6a Niven St 2 Contractor 2 Yes 587m² $105.03/m² $61,651 ¹

T6a Chardale St Contractor 2 Yes 603m² $105.10/m² $63,374

T5 Bower Ave 2 Contractor 2 Yes 563m² $128.93/m² $72,588 ¹

T2 Bower Ave 1 Contractor 2 Yes 415m² $134.35/m² $55,755 ¹

T4 Landy St Contractor 2 Yes 506m² $143.15/m² $72,434 ¹

T5 Palmers Rd Contractor 2 Yes 365m² $143.81/m² $52,493 ¹

T1 Fuller St Contractor 5 2,625m² $173.62/m² $455,753 ²

T1 Fuller St Contractor 1 2,625m² $215.73/m² $566,291 ²

T2 Bower Ave 1 Contractor 5 415m² $473.88/m² $196,660 ²

T2 Bower Ave 1 Contractor 4 415m² $546.16/m² $226,656 ²

T2 Bower Ave 1 Contractor 1 415m² $601.17/m² $249,486 ²

¹ Tender tags reviewed, referred back to tenderer and adjusted to comply with tender requirements.
² Tender tags reviewed not referred back to tenderer due to price disparity.

The tenders received stated the plant that was to be used, the replacement ratios and the
methodology to be employed in the ground improvement works.
As can be analysed from the above table, there is a distinct difference between the prices
received from Contractor 2 and those from the three other tenderers on smaller residential
treated areas. It is also relevant that the other three tenderers did not submit tenders after
the second tender. These three tenderers have undertaken commercial work with larger
plant installing stone columns, highlighting the inefficiency and costs of using large plant on
residential sites. Contractor 2 was awarded all of the stone column projects.

Construction
During the preconstruction and construction phases of the projects, some administrative
difficulties were encountered with regard to the detailed contractual requirements. This
meant increased involvement by Tonkin + Taylor in managing these issues. With repetition
and the streamlining of the methodology these issues should diminish.
From a construction perspective the work was generally reported as being carried out
successfully from site observations by Tonkin + Taylor. Although quality control was initially
a problem on the first site, better quality control was introduced by Contractor 2 on the
later projects and no further problems with respect to this issue have been reported.
Additional post-construction verification testing costs and bespoke engineering fees are
required when using replacement ratios not specified in the MBIE guidance update.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 22 of 69
 The following table schedules the respective rates for the projects completed, with
adjustments to suit the MBIE-endorsed method and the redefined treatment areas.
GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION
CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
SUMMARY FOR STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G2)

Treatment Area 2m Surrounding Structure Cost of Treated Area ($/m²)

Lot Area Treatment

Treatment Method Location 12% 16% 18% 20%
(m²) Area (m²)

Stone columns 700mm

diam. with 12%
replacement ratio Bower Ave 2 (ex HAIL) 572 270 $111.57
Palmer Rd (ex HAIL) 653 270 $135.72
Bower Ave 1 508 270 $133.61
Average $126.97
Contractor 5 270 $145.28
Contractor 6 270 $163.40
Contractor 7 270 $149.99
Stone columns 900mm
diam. with 16%
replacement ratio Bower Ave 1 508 270 $121.80
Niven St 2 782 270 $136.50
Chardale St 706 270 $136.50
Average $131.60
Contractor 5 270 $168.93
Contractor 6 270 $190.00
Contractor 7 270 $174.41
Stone columns 900mm
diam. with 18%
replacement ratio Bower Ave 1 508 270 $130.13
Niven St 2 782 270 $140.72
Chardale St 706 270 $140.72
Average $137.19

Contractor 5 270 $184.98

Contractor 6 270 $208.05
Contractor 7 270 $190.98
Stone columns 900mm
diam. with 20%
replacement ratio Landy St (ex HAIL) 607 270 $172.08

Contractor 5 270 $201.03

Contractor 6 270 $226.10
Contractor 7 270 $207.55

Average 270 $146.41 $166.24 $180.30 $201.69

Note: Bespoke engineering design and additional post-construction verification testing will be required for replacement ratios
below 18% as specified in the MBIE guidelines.

All rates exclude GST.

Refer to Appendix A for the calculation of the rates.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 23 of 69
 Conclusions and Concerns
The following influence the rates for this ground improvement method:
 There is concern that of the four stone column tenderers Contractor 2 stood out from
the others from a price perspective. It is also a concern that in a market-related
environment there will likely be a move to capitalise on this situation, and future prices
will likely increase to conform with the rest of the market.
 Given the tender responses and a study of the contractors that could potentially be
capable of carrying out stone column construction should large-scale work be required,
there are likely to be sufficient specialised resources to undertake this work in the
short to medium term. There are now three stone piling rigs in use in the Canterbury
area and a further rig is available to be brought in if there is demand.
 As Contractor 2 is still developing in the market, there is a risk in terms of the
sustainability of Contractor 2’s rates.

 Contractor 2’s equipment is new. The long-term usage, maintenance and depreciation
costs have not been studied and the effects of these costs on the rates have not been
established.

 Although Contractor 2 was the only successful stone column tenderer, there are other
contractors undertaking work using similar systems that are likely to comply with the
MBIE guidelines. The market is still developing and once the extent of future work is
established more contractors will enter this market.

Schedule of Rates
Whilst Contractor 2 has performed well on the projects, the above concerns need to be
taken into account in order to establish rates that can be sustained and defendable. In
order to substantiate the Contractor 2 rates, supporting data on costing has been gathered
from three other contractors that can or can potentially carry out stone column
construction. We consider it prudent to include the rates from the three contractors as
well as the Contractor 2 rates in order to obtain a more robust market-related rate for
stone columns.
Contractor 5
Contractor 5 offered a price on Tender 1 (Fuller St). Its tender was not considered due to
its non-availability to perform the work due to other commitments. The cost established
for this work was $168.93/m² for a replacement ratio of 16%. The tender was for a large
site, which suggests that the price would have been lower than for a smaller site.
Contractor 6
Contractor 6 offered prices for rammed aggregate piers, a similar method of construction
to stone columns, on Tender 1 (Fuller St) at a rate of $216.62/m² and Tender 2 (Bower Ave
1) at $521.46/m². These prices were not considered at the time of tender as they were high
in relation to other tender offers for the same projects.
Further prices were obtained informally from work carried out by Contractor 6 at Meadow
St, Kaiapoi. These indicated a rate, when adjusted to exclude the engineering services
provided, of approximately $190/m² at a replacement ratio of 16%.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 24 of 69
 Contractor 7
Contractor 7 has been very involved in developing ground remediation techniques in the
past two years in Christchurch. It currently has plant in Christchurch that will be used for
stone columns. Its research into the operations required for stone poles has led it to offer a
rate of $150-$180/m³ for stone columns. When converted to square metres, this would
equate to $174.41/m² at a replacement ratio of 16%.

7.2 DRIVEN TIMBER POLES (MBIE ref. G5b)

Methodology
Driven timber poles provide a technically effective method of ground improvement in
ground that is too silty to enable the construction of stone columns or rammed aggregate
piers. The process of installing timber poles requires a specialised piling rig, which vibrates
or drives the timber poles vertically into the soil to a predetermined depth.
The construction method for driven timber poles is shown in the following drawing and is
as described in the latest MBIE guidelines:

The rates applicable to driven timber poles have been calculated from the following
sequence of work:
• Strip topsoil typically 200mm thick

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 25 of 69
 • Drive 3.8m long x 250mm diameter SED H5 (ex 4.2m long) timber poles to a depth of
4.0m below natural ground level in a triangular grid at centres either 1.2m or 1.0m to
suit the soil classification of the site and/or MBIE requirements
• A 200mm thick compacted gravel blanket is provided over the top of the timber poles
• Topsoil is reinstated or removed.

Tenders
The following table records prices received in square metres of treated area from tenders
that complied with the tender documents and were deemed technically acceptable at the
time.

Contract Cost per m² of Total

Tender Property Contractor Treated Area
Awarded Treated Area Cost

T6A Chardale St Contractor 4 603m² $173.49/m² $106,614 ²

T6B Northaw St Contractor 4 541m² $175.26/m² $94,816 ²

T6A Niven St 2 Contractor 4 587m² $179.25/m² $105,220 ²

T7 Tavendale Pl Contractor 4 Yes 1,084m² $190.49/m² $206,486 ¹

T6B Pages Rd Contractor 4 Yes 420m² $193.71/m² $81,357 ¹

T1 Fuller St Contractor 8 2,625m² $182.38/m² $478,748 ²

T6B Pages Rd Contractor 4 Yes 420m² $193.71/m² $81,357

T8 Hendon St Contractor 4 Yes 424m² $197.33/m² $83,670 ¹

T8 McFaddens Rd Contractor 4 Yes 404m² $198.45/m² $80,172 ¹

T7 Tavendale Pl Contractor 9 1,084m² $200.30/m² $217,125 ²

T8 Hendon St Contractor 9 424m² $201.62/m² $85,487 ²

T8 McFaddens Rd Contractor 9 404m² $201.19/m² $81,281 ²

T7 Tavendale Pl Contractor 10 1,084m² $210.94/m² $228,659 ²

T6A Chardale St Contractor 1 603m² $213.19/m² $128,554 ²

T6A Chardale St Contractor 10 603m² $237.36/m² $143,128 ²

T6B Northaw St Contractor 10 541m² $238.69/m² $129,131 ²

T6B Pages Rd Contractor 10 420m² $245.29/m² $103,022 ²

T6A Niven St 2 Contractor 10 587m² $251.66/m² $147,724 ²

T6A Chardale St Contractor 8 603m² $257.79/m² $155,447 ²

T6B Northaw St Contractor 8 541m² $260.37/m² $140,860 ²

T6A Niven St 2 Contractor 8 587m² $263.78/m² $154,839 ²

T6B Pages Rd Contractor 8 420m² $276.48/m² $116,122 ²

T6A Niven St 2 Contractor 1 587m² $279.74/m² $164,207 ²

T6A Chardale St Contractor 9 603m² $290.05/m² $174,900 ²

T6A Niven St 2 Contractor 9 587m² $298.50/m² $175,220 ²

T6B Northaw St Contractor 9 541m² $306.31/m² $165,714 ²

T6B Pages Rd Contractor 9 420m² $328.78/m² $138,088 ²

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 26 of 69
 T6B Northaw St Contractor 11 541m² $345.84/m² $187,099 ²

T6B Pages Rd Contractor 11 420m² $354.17/m² $148,751 ²

¹ Tender tags reviewed, referred back to tenderer and adjusted to comply with the tender requirements.
² Tender tags reviewed, not referred back to tenderer due to price disparity.

Information received with the tenders detailed the plant, equipment and methodology to
be used in the installation. The disparity between the rates highlighted these differences.
Several of the tenderers had completed commercial projects using their particular plant for
which it was better suited.
Contractor 4 was awarded all of the driven timber pole contracts. Tenders received from
other contractors indicated a relatively competitive market for the timber poles.

Construction
As the installation method is relatively simple and the plant and equipment standard and
available, Contractor 4 was able to work on multiple sites concurrently.
Prior to construction, concerns were raised by Tonkin & Taylor that the specified spacing of
the poles at 1.2m centres may not be sufficient to meet future MBIE requirements. The
specification was consequently changed and poles at 1.0m centres were specified for all
sites.
There proved to be a problem encountered on the Pages Rd site, where a dense layer of
soil was encountered at approximately 3.0m deep that meant the poles were unable to be
driven into the ground to the depth specified. An engineering decision was made to install
shorter poles on this site. The instalment method carried out by Contractor 4 was not well
suited to the soil conditions at site and alternative methods of pile installation could have
overcome this problem.
Rate information for the two different pole spacings of 1.2m and 1.0m centres was
requested in the tender documentation. Rates of poles at 1.1m centres were later
calculated to align with the recommendations in the 2015 MBIE guidelines update.
During the pilot programme poles called ‘uglies’, which are unshaved poles, were not
considered suitable. The MBIE guidelines now permit their usage and the rates have been
adjusted by the reduced cost of these poles.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 27 of 69
 The following table schedules the respective rates for the projects completed, with
adjustments to suit the MBIE-endorsed method and the redefined treatment areas.
GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY FOR
CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
DRIVEN TIMBER POLES (MBIE ref. G5b)

Treatment Area 2m Surrounding Structure

Cost of Treated Area ($/m²)
Lot Area Treatment
Treatment Method Location 1.2m ctrs 1.1m ctrs 1.0m ctrs
(m²) Area (m²)

Driven timber poles (uglies) Tavendale Pl 1273 540 $206.97

250mm diam. SED 3.8m long Speight St 711 270 $199.02
at 1.2m centres Pages Rd 512 270 $207.00
Hendon Rd 511 270 $216.20
McFaddens Rd 495 270 $211.98

Driven timber poles (uglies) Tavendale Pl 1273 540 $242.24

250mm diam. SED 3.8m long
at 1.1m centres

Driven timber poles (uglies) Tavendale Pl 1273 540 $269.28

250mm diam. SED 3.8m long Speight Rd 711 270 $273.34
at 1.0m centres

Average $208.23 $242.24 $271.31

All rates exclude GST.

Refer to Appendix A for the calculation of the rates.

Conclusions and Concerns

The following have influence on the rates for this ground improvement method:

 During the tender discussions with Contractor 4 it became apparent that the local
supply of 250mm SED poles, 3.6m long was possibly heading towards being short.
Poles from the North Island would need to be brought in to supplement the supply.
This did not eventuate for these contracts, but there is an ongoing risk that there will
be increased supply costs for the product. The updated MBIE guidelines provide
increased tolerances for dimensions of timber poles.

 Whilst there was a wide range of prices for the driven timber poles method, the
method is relatively simple and equipment is not particularly specialised. It is envisaged
that, once the method is more fully understood in the industry, there will be several
more players entering the market. This will generate competition, and with the
adaptation of more specialised equipment will overcome soil density problems in
driving the poles.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 28 of 69
7.3 REINFORCED SOIL-CEMENT RAFTS – ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)

Methodology
A further method of ground improvement has been endorsed by MBIE since the pilot
projects were completed. The method provides a 1.2m deep stabilised layer beneath the
building platform, achieving the principal objectives of rafting out differential settlements,
confining the underlying liquefiable soils and reducing potential ejection.
The construction method for reinforced soil-cement rafts – rotovated mixed ex-situ (above
the ground water table) – on site is shown in the following drawing and is as described in
the MBIE guidelines:

The rates applicable to \reinforced soil-cement rafts have been calculated from the
following sequence of work:
• Strip topsoil and dispose off-site
• Excavate to 1,100mm below natural ground level across the treatment area and
stockpile
• Spread the measured 8% cement by dry mass over the excavation base and rotary hoe
the cement evenly over the in-situ material to a depth of 100mm and compact

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 29 of 69
 • Place 100mm layer of material ex-stockpile, spread the measured 8% cement by dry
mass over the excavation base, and rotary hoe the cement evenly over the in-situ
material and compact
• Place one layer of high-strength bi-directional geogrid over the first layer
• Replace series of 100mm layers, mix in cement and compact to natural ground level.
The construction method for reinforced soil-cement rafts – rotovated mixed ex-situ (below
the ground water table) – on site is shown on the following drawing and is as described in
the MBIE guidelines:

The rates applicable to reinforced soil-cement rafts have been calculated from the
following sequence of work:
• Strip topsoil typically 100mm thick and dispose off-site
• Excavate to 1,000mm below natural ground level across the treatment area and
stockpile
• Excavate to 1,200mm below natural ground level across the treatment area and dispose
off-site
• Supply and place 200mm thick layer of imported AP40 M4 aggregate and compact

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 30 of 69
 • Spread the measured 10% cement by dry mass over the excavation base and rotary hoe
the cement evenly over the hardfill and compact
• Place two layers of high-strength bi-directional geogrid over the hardfill
• Replace series of 100mm layers, mix in cement and compact to natural ground level.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 31 of 69
 Tenders
Tenders were invited from five contractors to trial the rotovated soil mixing method on
two red zone sites at Keller St 1 & 2, Avondale. The aim of the trial was to provide factual
information on the constructability of the method whilst achieving the stated performance
criteria and providing pricing information based on tendered conditions. The tender
allowed for re-establishing the topsoil over the worked areas.
For practical reasons, due to the sites on which the work was undertaken, tenders were
awarded for a 900mm deep raft with 300mm topsoil/fill cover over.
The following tenders were received:

Contract Cost per m² of

Contractor Treated Area Total Cost
Awarded Treated Area

Contractor 12 Yes 204m² $121.49/m² $24,784

Contractor 13 Yes 204m² $176.10/m² $35,924

Contractor 14 204m² $189.23/m² $38,603

Contractor 15 204m² $234.09/m² $47,754

Contractor 7 204m² $370.96/m² $75,676

The two lowest prices were reviewed and referred back to the tenderers to comply with the tender
requirements.

Construction
Contracts were awarded to Contractor 12 on Keller St 1 and Contractor 13 on Keller St 2.
Both contractors completed their respective work efficiently and to the specified
standards. Each contractor used its own method of mixing and rotovating the material and
both completed their contracts in a reasonably short timeframe.
Rates for this method have been calculated for situations where the base of the excavation
is either above or below the water table. Rates have been averaged between the two
contractors that were awarded the two contracts. It was considered prudent to average
the two prices as the difference between them suggested that the price from Contractor
12 was too low.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 32 of 69
 The following tables schedule the respective rates for the projects completed, with
adjustments to suit the MBIE-endorsed method and the redefined treatment areas.
GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY FOR
CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
WORK ABOVE WATER TABLE
Treatment Area 1.0m Surrounding Structure

Lot Area Treatment Cost of Treated Treatment

Treatment Method Location
(m²) Area (m²) Area ($/m²) Cost

Rotovated mixed Ex-situ

Excavate 1100mm deep, stabilise

and compact 100mm in-situ layer,
replace excavated material and
cement stabilise in position with 8%
cement ratio (No retention or
dewatering required) Keller St 2 642 204 $156.42 $31,909.68

Keller St 1 642 204 $211.04 $43,052.16

Average $183.73 $37,480.92

Rates exclude GST.

GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY FOR

CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
WORK BELOW WATER TABLE
Treatment Area 1.0m Surrounding Structure

Lot Area Treatment Cost of Treated Treatment

Treatment Method Location
(m²) Area (m²) Area (S/m²) Cost

Rotovated Mixed Ex-situ

Excavate 1100mm deep, place

200mm layer crushed concrete, lay
geogrid, replace excavated material
and cement stabilise in position with
8% cement ratio 1m outside building
footprint (no retention or
dewatering required) Keller St 1 642 204 $233.63 $47,660.52

Keller St 2 642 204 $185.04 $37,748.16

Average $209.33 $42,704.34

Rates exclude GST.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 33 of 69
 Refer to Appendix A for the calculation of the rates.

Conclusions and Concerns

The following have influence on the rates for this ground improvement method:
 The advantage of mixing the cement with material in position in the excavation is that
a higher degree of quality control can be achieved with the cement dosing rate applied.
 The method of mixing the cement into the soil by rotary hoeing is simple and can be
performed without specialist plant and the associated establishment charges. Without
the required capital outlay for expensive equipment, it is considered that smaller
contractors could be encouraged to develop this method of ground improvement.
 Owing to the shallow excavation, dewatering and/or retaining the sides of the
excavation is generally not required for most sites.

 The nature of this method, where the excavated area is exposed during construction,
leaves it susceptible to rainfall and storm-water run-off, which can cause significant
delays and repeated work.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 34 of 69
7.4 REINFORCED GRAVEL RAFTS 1,200mm Deep (MBIE ref. G1d)

Methodology
A further method of ground improvement has been endorsed by MBIE since the pilot
projects were completed. The method provides a 1.2m deep compacted raft of engineered
aggregate (gravel) beneath the building platform. This aims to achieve the principal
objectives of rafting out differential settlements, confining the underlying liquefiable soils
and reducing potential ejection.
The construction method for reinforced gravel rafts (above the ground water table) on site
is shown in the following drawing and is as described in the MBIE guidelines:

The rates applicable to the 1,200mm gravel raft have been calculated from the following
sequence of work:
• Strip topsoil typically 100mm thick and dispose off-site
• Excavate to 1200mm below natural ground level across the treatment area and
stockpile
• Supply and place 200mm thick layer of imported AP40 M4 aggregate and compact
• Place two layers of high-strength bi-directional geogrid separated by 200mm thick of
imported AP40 M4 aggregate and compact

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 35 of 69
 • Supply and place series of 100mm thick layers of imported AP40 M4 aggregate and
compact to natural ground level.

The construction method for reinforced gravel rafts (below the ground water table) on site
is shown in the following drawing and is as described in the MBIE guidelines:

The rates applicable to the 1,200mm gravel raft have been calculated from the following
sequence of work
• Strip topsoil typically 100mm thick and dispose off-site
• Excavate to 1200mm below natural ground level across the treatment area and
stockpile
• Supply and place 200mm thick layer of imported AP40 M4 aggregate and compact
• Spread the measured 10% cement by dry mass over the excavation base and rotary hoe
the cement evenly over the hardfill and compact
• Place two layers of high-strength bi-directional geogrid separated by 200mm thick of
imported AP40 M4 aggregate and compact
• Supply and place series of 100mm thick layers of imported AP40 M4 aggregate and
compact to natural ground level.

Calculation of Rates

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 36 of 69
 This work was not tendered, but given its similarity to the tender for the rotovated mixed
ex-situ work, it was considered viable to request the two contractors on Keller St to
provide additional rates for the shallow reinforced gravel raft.
In order to confirm the validity of the rates received, a desktop review of the rates was
carried out by Kingston Partners Limited.
The following table schedules the respective rates for the projects, completed with
adjustments to suit the MBIE-endorsed method and the redefined treatment areas.
GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY
CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
FOR REINFORCED GRAVEL RAFT (MBIE ref. G1b)
WORK ABOVE WATER TABLE
Treatment Area 1.0m Surrounding Structure

Lot Area Treatment Cost of Treated Treatment

Treatment Method Location
(m²) Area (m²) Area ($/m²) Cost

Reinforced gravel raft

Excavate 1200mm deep, replace
with imported hardfill (no retention Keller St 1
or dewatering required) (theoretical) 642 204 $190.01 $38,761.24

Keller St 2
(theoretical) 642 204 $161.27 $32,899.80

Average $175.64 $35,830.52

The costing and constructability of this method are theoretical and have not been proven by tender and
site trials.
Rates exclude GST.

Refer to Appendix A for the calculation of the rates.

Conclusions and Concerns

The following have influence on the rates for this ground improvement method:
 The method of importing and placing the reinforced gravel raft can be performed
without specialist plant and the associated establishment charges. Without the
required capital outlay for expensive equipment, it is considered that smaller
contractors could be encouraged to develop this method of ground improvement.

 Owing to the shallow excavation, dewatering and/or retaining the sides of the
excavation are not required in most cases.

 The nature of this method, where the excavated area is exposed during construction,
leaves it susceptible to rainfall and storm water run-off, which can cause significant
delays and repeated work.
 Without the defensibility of calculating rates from an actual project delivered under
tender conditions, the calculated rates could be challenged. However, the rates
received were consistent with predicted costs through desktop analysis.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 37 of 69
  The method is generally limited to sites where the groundwater is below 1m or able to
be controlled with a sump pump.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 38 of 69
8.0 SUMMARY

8.1 COST EFFECTIVENESS

In summarising the various ground improvement options, four methods stand out as being
applicable to the various soil types and site situations, and more cost effective than the
other methods. These methods are:
 Stone columns
 Driven timber poles
 Reinforced soil-cement rafts – rotovated mixed ex-situ
 Reinforced gravel rafts.
It has been established through geospatial repair selection that reinforced soil-cement
rafts and reinforced gravel rafts can feasibly be used on the majority of liquefaction
vulnerable cleared sites. The recent inclusion of 1,200mm thick reinforced gravel rafts in
the revised guidelines makes them a universal method depending on the practicality of the
sites and the height of the water table.
Other methods, whilst not as cost effective, may be required as ground improvement
solutions where none of the above methods is considered suitable.

8.2 CONSERVATISM OF THE RATES

The ground improvement rates have been calculated using information provided in tenders
and information obtained from the contracts undertaken. Under different tender
conditions, with more contractors participating and proven techniques streamlined over
time, it should be expected that better rates would be obtained for the various methods.

8.3 INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM TENDERS

Low tender responses and high and inconsistent pricing were characteristics of the tender
process. The lack of a developed market for ground improvements and multiple
contractors vying for specific methods led to a limited source of rates that could be utilised
in the ground improvement methods that have been established.

8.4 MBIE GUIDELINES

The Ground Improvement Pilot Project was undertaken concurrently with the peer review
of the Science Trials and the development of the MBIE guidance update. With the 2015
MBIE guidance update now available, the rates have been calculated on these latest
method designs.
The ground improvement rates have been calculated independently of any foundation and
other reconstruction work.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 39 of 69
9.0 APPLICABILITY OF LIMITATIONS

This report has been prepared by Kingston Partners Limited for the sole benefit of the
Earthquake Commission. It should not be relied upon by any other party and covers the full
extent of the due diligence that we have carried out to date.

KINGSTON PARTNERS LIMITED

T N COE M J CASEY
Associate Director

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 40 of 69
10.0 APPENDIX A – RATE CALCULATION SCHEDULES

EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION

GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION

CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
SUMMARY FOR STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G2)

Treatment Area 2m Surrounding Structure Cost of Treated Area ($/m²)

Lot Area Treatment

Treatment Method Location 12% 16% 18% 20%
(m²) Area (m²)

Stone columns 700mm

diam. with 12%
replacement ratio Bower Ave 2 (ex HAIL) 572 270 $111.57
Palmer Rd (ex HAIL) 653 270 $135.72
Bower Ave 1 508 270 $133.61
Average $126.97
Contractor 5 270 $145.28
Contractor 6 270 $163.40
Contractor 7 270 $149.99
Stone columns 900mm
diam. with 16%
replacement ratio Bower Ave 1 508 270 $121.80
Niven St 2 782 270 $136.50
Chardale St 706 270 $136.50
Average $131.60

Contractor 5 270 $168.93

Contractor 6 270 $190.00
Contractor 7 270 $174.41
Stone columns 900mm
diam. with 18%
replacement ratio Bower Ave 1 508 270 $130.13
Niven St 2 782 270 $140.72
Chardale St 706 270 $140.72
Average $137.19

Contractor 5 270 $184.98

Contractor 6 270 $208.05
Contractor 7 270 $190.98
Stone columns 900mm
diam. with 20%
replacement ratio Landy St (ex HAIL) 607 270 $172.08

Contractor 5 270 $201.03

Contractor 6 270 $226.10
Contractor 7 270 $207.55

Average 270 $146.41 $166.24 $180.30 $201.69

Note: Bespoke engineering design and additional post-construction verification testing will be required for replacement ratios
below 18% as specified in the MBIE guidelines.

All rates exclude GST.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 41 of 69
 TENDER 2 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Bower Ave 1
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 Incl -
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 100.00 100.00
1.1.7 Pre-construction condition surveys LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile m² 415 1.00 415.00
1.2.2 Cut to waste m² 415 5.00 2,075.00
1.2.3 Undercut & Replace (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 83 40.00 3,320.00
1.2.4 Geofabric to subgrade (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m² 415 2.20 913.00
1.2.5 Drainage blanket m² 415 25.00 10,375.00
1.2.6 Re-use site-won material (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 83 10.00 830.00
1.2.7 Geofabric to draiange blanket m² 415 2.20 913.00
1.2.8 Re-spread topsoil m² 415 1.00 415.00

1.3 Stone Columns

Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam.
1.7.1 16% replacement. No 105 300.00 31,500.00
1.7.2 Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00

Accepted Tender Value $ 55,756.00

TENDER 2 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Bower Ave 1 4.5m Column x 700mm diam x 12%

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 Incl -
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 100.00 100.00
1.1.7 Pre-construction condition surveys LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile m² 270 1.00 270.00
1.2.2 Cut to waste m² 270 5.00 1,350.00
1.2.3 Undercut & Replace (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 54 40.00 2,160.00
1.2.4 Geofabric to subgrade (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m² 270 2.20 594.00
1.2.5 Drainage blanket m² 270 25.00 6,750.00
1.2.6 Re-use site-won material (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 54 10.00 540.00
1.2.7 Geofabric to drainage blanket m² 270 2.20 594.00
1.2.8 Re-spread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00

1.3 Stone Columns (MBIE ref. G5a)

Construct stone columns 4.5m long 700mm diam.
1.7.1 12% replacement. (Rate 548 Bower) No 84 210.00 17,640.00
1.7.2 Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00

Adjustments
Omit
Cut to waste m² -270 5.00 (1,350.00)
Undercut & Replace m³ -54 40.00 (2,160.00)
Geofabric to subgrade m² -270 2.20 (594.00)
Drainage blanket m² -270 25.00 (6,750.00)
Re-use site-won material m³ -54 10.00 (540.00)
Geofabric to drainage blanket m² -270 2.20 (594.00)
Add
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00
CPT Tests 4 No 750.00 3,000.00

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 30,125.00 270 m² $ 111.57 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 12% = 32.4m²
700mm diam col = 0.385m²
32.4 /.385 = 84 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 42 of 69
 TENDER 5 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Palmer Rd (Non HAIL Equivalent)

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 3,700.00 3,700.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 incl
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 2,850.00 2,850.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 incl
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 900.00 900.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 incl
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
Strip 100 topsoil to landfill m³ 36.5 50.00 1,825.00
Construct stone columns 4.5m long 700mm diam. to
16% replacement No 152 220.00 33,440.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 365 10.00 3,650.00
Supply & place geogrid m² 365 2.20 803.00
Import topsoil m² 365 5.00 1,825.00

$ 52,493.00

TENDER 5 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Palmer Rd (Non HAIL Equivalent) 4.5m Column x 700mm diam x 12%

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 3,700.00 3,700.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 incl
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 2,850.00 2,850.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 incl
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 900.00 900.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 incl
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 1.00 270.00
Construct stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a) 4.5m long
700mm diam. to 12% replacement No 84 220.00 18,480.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00

Adjustments
CPT Tests 4 No 750.00 3,000.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 36,645.00 270 m² $ 135.72 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 12% = 32.4m²
700mm diam col = 0.385m²
32.4 /.385 = 84 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 43 of 69
 TENDER 5 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Bower Ave 2 ( HAIL)

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 3,700.00 3,700.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 incl
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 2,850.00 2,850.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 incl
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 900.00 900.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 incl
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
Strip 100 topsoil to landfill m³ 56.3 50.00 2,815.00
Construct stone columns 4.5m long 700mm diam. to
16% replacement No 234 210.00 49,140.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 563 10.00 5,630.00
Supply & place geogrid m² 563 2.20 1,238.60
Import topsoil m² 563 5.00 2,815.00

Accepted Tendered Value $ 72,588.60

TENDER 5 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Bower Ave 2 (Non HAIL Equivalent) 4.5m Column x 700mm diam x 12%

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 3,700.00 3,700.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 incl
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 2,850.00 2,850.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 incl
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 900.00 900.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 incl
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
Strip topsoil and stockpile. m³ 270 1.00 270.00
Construct stone columns 4.5m long 700mm diam. to
12% replacement No 84 210.00 17,640.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm (rate from m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00

Adjustments
CPT Tests 4 No 750.00 3,000.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 36,075.00 270 m² $ 133.61 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 12% = 32.4m²
700mm diam col = 0.385m²
32.4 /.385 = 84 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 44 of 69
 TENDER 2 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Bower Ave 1
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 Incl -
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 100.00 100.00
1.1.7 Pre-construction condition surveys LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile m² 415 1.00 415.00
1.2.2 Cut to waste m² 415 5.00 2,075.00
1.2.3 Undercut & Replace (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 83 40.00 3,320.00
1.2.4 Geofabric to subgrade (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m² 415 2.20 913.00
1.2.5 Drainage blanket m² 415 25.00 10,375.00
1.2.6 Re-use site-won material (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 83 10.00 830.00
1.2.7 Geofabric to draiange blanket m² 415 2.20 913.00
1.2.8 Re-spread topsoil m² 415 1.00 415.00

1.3 Stone Columns

Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam.
1.7.1 16% replacement. No 105 300.00 31,500.00
1.7.2 Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00

Tendered Total $ 55,756.00

TENDER 2 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Bower Ave 1 4.5m Column x 900mm diam x 16%

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 Incl -
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 100.00 100.00
1.1.7 Pre-construction condition surveys LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile m² 270 1.00 270.00
1.2.2 Cut to waste m² 270 5.00 1,350.00
1.2.3 Undercut & Replace (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 54 40.00 2,160.00
1.2.4 Geofabric to subgrade (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m² 270 2.20 594.00
1.2.5 Drainage blanket m² 270 25.00 6,750.00
1.2.6 Re-use site-won material (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 54 10.00 540.00
1.2.7 Geofabric to draiange blanket m² 270 2.20 594.00
1.2.8 Re-spread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00

1.3 Stone Columns (MBIE ref. G5a)

Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam.
1.7.1 16% replacement. No 68 300.00 20,400.00
1.7.2 Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00

Adjustments
Omit
Cut to waste m² -270 5.00 (1,350.00)
Undercut & Replace m³ -54 40.00 (2,160.00)
Geofabric to subgrade m² -270 2.20 (594.00)
Drainage blanket m² -270 25.00 (6,750.00)
Re-use site-won material m³ -54 10.00 (540.00)
Geofabric to draiange blanket m² -270 2.20 (594.00)
Add
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only
External administrative assistance sum 3,000.00
CPT Testing No 4 750.00 3,000.00

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 32,885.00 270 m² $ 121.80 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 16% = 43.2m²
900mm diam col = 0.636m²
43.2 / .636 = 68 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 45 of 69
 TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Niven St 2

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 587 1.00 587.00
Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam. to
16% replacement No 157 330.00 51,810.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 587 2.50 1,467.50
Respread topsoil m² 587 1.00 587.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Tendered Value $ 61,651.50

TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Niven St 2 4.5m Column x 900mm diam x 16%

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00

1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 1.00 270.00
Construct stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a) 4.5m long
900mm diam. to 16% replacement No 68 330.00 22,440.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Adjustments
CPT Tests 4 No 750.00 3,000.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00

Adjusted cost of project $ 36,855.00 270 m² $ 136.50 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 16% = 43.2m²
900mm diam col = 0.636m²
43.2 / .636 = 68 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 46 of 69
 TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Chardale St

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 603 1.00 603.00
Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam. to
16% replacement No 162 330.00 53,460.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 603 2.50 1,507.50
Respread topsoil m² 603 1.00 603.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Accepted Tendered Value $ 63,373.50

Rotary hoe rate from T6 Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 Niven St 2

TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Chardale St 4.5m Column x 900mm diam x 16%

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00

1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 1.00 270.00
Construct stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a) 4.5m long
900mm diam. to 16% replacement No 68 330.00 22,440.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Adjustments
CPT Tests 4 No 750.00 3,000.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00

Adjusted cost of project $ 36,855.00 270 m² $ 136.50 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 16% = 43.2m²
900mm diam col = 0.636m²
43.2 / .636 = 68 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 47 of 69
 TENDER 2 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Bower Ave 1
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 Incl -
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 100.00 100.00
1.1.7 Pre-construction condition surveys LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile m² 415 1.00 415.00
1.2.2 Cut to waste m² 415 5.00 2,075.00
1.2.3 Undercut & Replace (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 83 40.00 3,320.00
1.2.4 Geofabric to subgrade (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m² 415 2.20 913.00
1.2.5 Drainage blanket m² 415 25.00 10,375.00
1.2.6 Re-use site-won material (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 83 10.00 830.00
1.2.7 Geofabric to draiange blanket m² 415 2.20 913.00
1.2.8 Re-spread topsoil m² 415 1.00 415.00

1.3 Stone Columns

Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam.
1.7.1 16% replacement. No 105 300.00 31,500.00
1.7.2 Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00

Tendered Total $ 55,756.00

TENDER 2 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Bower Ave 1 4.5m Column x 900mm diam x 18%
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 Incl -
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 200.00 200.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 100.00 100.00
1.1.7 Pre-construction condition surveys LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile m² 270 1.00 270.00
1.2.2 Cut to waste m² 270 5.00 1,350.00
1.2.3 Undercut & Replace (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 54 40.00 2,160.00
1.2.4 Geofabric to subgrade (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m² 270 2.20 594.00
1.2.5 Drainage blanket m² 270 25.00 6,750.00
1.2.6 Re-use site-won material (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ 54 10.00 540.00
1.2.7 Geofabric to drainge blanket m² 270 2.20 594.00
1.2.8 Re-spread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00

1.3 Stone Columns (MBIE ref. G5a)

Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam.
1.7.1 18% replacement. No 76 300.00 22,800.00
1.7.2 Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00

Adjustments
Omit
1.2.3 Undercut & Replace (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ -54 40.00 (2,160.00)
1.2.4 Geofabric to subgrade (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m² -270 2.20 (594.00)
1.2.5 Drainage blanket m² -270 25.00 (6,750.00)
1.2.6 Re-use site-won material (PROVISIONAL ITEM) m³ -54 10.00 (540.00)
1.2.7 Geofabric to drainge blanket m² -270 2.20 (594.00)
Add
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only
Additional administrative assistance Sum 3,000.00
CPT Testing No 2 750.00 1,500.00

Adjusted cost of project $ 35,135.00 270 m² $ 130.13 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 18% = 48.6m²
900mm diam col = 0.636m²
48.6 / .636 = 76 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 48 of 69
 TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Niven St 2
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 587 1.00 587.00
Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam. to
16% replacement No 157 330.00 51,810.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 587 2.50 1,467.50
Respread topsoil m² 587 1.00 587.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Accepted Tendered Value $ 61,651.50

TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Niven St 2 4.5m Column x 900mm diam x 18%
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m³ 270 1.00 270.00
Construct stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a) 4.5m long
900mm diam. to 18% replacement No 76 330.00 25,080.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Adjustments
CPT Tests 2 No 750.00 1,500.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00
Adjusted cost of project $ 37,995.00 270 m² $ 140.72 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 18% = 48.6m²
900mm diam col = 0.636m²
48.6 / .636 = 76 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 49 of 69
 TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Chardale St

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 603 1.00 603.00
Construct stone columns 4.5m long 900mm diam. to
16% replacement No 162 330.00 53,460.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 603 2.50 1,507.50
Respread topsoil m² 603 1.00 603.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Accepted Tendered Value $ 63,373.50

TENDER 6 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Chardale St 4.5m Column x 900mm diam x 18%

Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 2,500.00 2,500.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m³ 270 1.00 270.00
Construct stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a) 4.5m long
900mm diam. to 18% replacement No 76 330.00 25,080.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Over-supply and under supply stone for columns m³ 65.00 rate only

Adjustments
CPT Tests 2 No 750.00 1,500.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00
Adjusted cost of project $ 37,995.00 270 m² $ 140.72 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 18% = 48.6m²
900mm diam col = 0.636m²
48.6 / .636 = 76 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 50 of 69
 TENDER 4 - STONE COLUMNS
CONTRACTOR 2 Tendered Area
Landy St (Non Hail equivalent)
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 800.00 800.00
1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 5,000.00 5,000.00
1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks

Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 506 1.00 506.00

Construct stone columns 4.5m long 800mm diam. At
20% replacement. No 203 270.00 54,810.00
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 506 2.50 1,265.00
Respread topsoil m² 506 1.00 506.00

Accepted Tender Value $ 67,087.00

TENDER 4 - STONE COLUMNS (MBIE ref. G5a)

CONTRACTOR 2 MBIE House Area + 2m
Landy St (Non Hail equivalent) 4.5m Column x 800mm diam x 20%
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 incl
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 400.00 400.00
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 800.00 800.00

1.1.7b Pre-construction condition survey - buried services PS 1 5,000.00 5,000.00

1.1.8 Setting-out of works on site and as-built survey LS 1 500.00 500.00

1.2 Earthworks

Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 1.00 270.00

Construct stone columns (MBIE ref. G5a) 4.5m long
800mm diam. At 20% replacement. No 108.3 270.00 29,246.44
Stone Column Trial (extra over item) LS incl
CPT & SPT Testing LS incl
Rotary hoe and recompact upper 250mm m² 270 2.50 675.00
Respread topsoil m² 270 1.00 270.00
Adjustments
CPT Tests 4 No 750.00 3,000.00
Additional administrative assistance sum 3,000.00

Adjusted cost of project $ 46,461.44 270 m² $ 172.08 /m²

Calculation of reduced treatment area

270 m² at 20% = 54.0m²
800mm diam col = 0.503m²
54.0 / .503 = 108.3 columns

Rotary hoe rate from T6 - Niven St 2

Respread topsoil from T6 - Niven St 2

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 51 of 69
 EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION

GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY FOR

CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
DRIVEN TIMBER POLES (MBIE ref. G5b)

Treatment Area 2m Surrounding Structure

Cost of Treated Area ($/m²)
Lot Area Treatment
Treatment Method Location 1.2m ctrs 1.1m ctrs 1.0m ctrs
(m²) Area (m²)

Driven timber poles (uglies) Tavendale Pl 1273 540 $206.97

250mm diam. SED 3.8m long Speight St 711 270 $199.02
at 1.2m centres Pages Rd 512 270 $207.00
Hendon Rd 511 270 $216.20
McFaddens Rd 495 270 $211.98

Driven timber poles (uglies) Tavendale Pl 1273 540 $242.24

250mm diam. SED 3.8m long
at 1.1m centres

Driven timber poles (uglies) Tavendale Pl 1273 540 $269.28

250mm diam. SED 3.8m long Speight Rd 711 270 $273.34
at 1.0m centres

Average $208.23 $242.24 $271.31

All rates exclude GST.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 52 of 69
 TENDER 7 - TIMBER POLES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
Tavendale Pl
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 8,671.99 8,671.99
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 434.56 434.56
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 560.00 560.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 609.28 609.28
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 6,406.40 6,406.40
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
20,490.23
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 1084 - -
1.3.2 Driven timber poles 3.6m long 250mm diam 1.2m cc No 958 194.15 185,995.70
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 371 -
Respread topsoil m² 1084 - -

Accepted Tender Value $ 206,485.93

TENDER 7 - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
Tavendale Pl 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.2m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.5 8,671.99 4,336.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 434.56 434.56
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 560.00 560.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 609.28 609.28
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 6,406.40 6,406.40
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
16,154.24
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 540 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.2m centres No 478 183.68 87,799.04
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 478 -
Respread topsoil m² 540 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 108 72.30 7,808.40

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 111,761.68 540 m² $ 206.97 /m²

Adjustments
Time reduction 540/1084 = 0.50

Piles 958 / 1084 = 0.884 No per m²

540m² x 0.884 = 478 piles

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 53 of 69
 TENDER 6B - TIMBER PILES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
22 Speights
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,232.00 1,232.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 4,336.00 4,336.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 2,660.00 2,660.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
9,645.92
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 609 - -
Driven timber piles 3.6m long 250mm diam. 1.2m
1.3.2 centres. No 523 193.29 101,090.67
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 523 - -
Respread topsoil m² 609 - -

Accepted Tender Value $ 110,736.59

TENDER 6B - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
22 Speights 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.2m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,232.00 1,232.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.44 4,336.00 1,907.84
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 2,660.00 2,660.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
7,217.76
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). s ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.2m centres No 232 183.68 42,613.76
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 232 - -
Respread topsoil m² 270 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 54 72.30 3,904.20

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 53,735.72 270 m² $ 199.02 /m²

Adjustments
Time reduction 270/609 = 0.44

Piles 523 / 609 = 0.859 No per m²

270m² x 0.859 = 232 piles

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 54 of 69
 TENDER 6B - TIMBER PILES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
Pages Rd
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,232.00 1,232.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 4,336.00 4,336.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 2,660.00 2,660.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
9,645.92
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 420 - -
1.3.2 Driven timber piles 3.6m long 250mm diam No 371 193.29 71,710.59
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 371 -
Respread topsoil m² 420 - -

Accepted Tender Value $ 81,356.51

TENDER 6B - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
Pages Rd 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.2m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,232.00 1,232.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.64 4,336.00 2,775.04
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 2,660.00 2,660.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
8,084.96
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.2m cc No 239 183.68 43,899.52
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 239 -
Respread topsoil m² 270 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 54 72.30 3,904.20

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 55,888.68 270 m² $ 207.00 /m²

Adjustments
Time reduction 270/420 = 0.64

Piles 371/ 420 = 0.883 No per m²

270m² x 0.883 = 239 piles

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 55 of 69
 TENDER 8 - TIMBER PILES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
Hendon St
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 4,336.00 4,336.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 3,203.20 3,203.20
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
10,861.12
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 424 - -
1.3.2 Driven timber piles 3.6m long 250mm diam x 1.2m cc No 375 194.15 72,806.25
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 375 -
Respread topsoil m² 424 - -

Accepted Tender Value $ 83,667.37

TENDER 8 - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
Hendon St 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.2m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.63 4,336.00 2,731.68
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 3,203.20 3,203.20
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
9,256.80
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.2m cc No 239 189.18 45,214.02
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 239 -
Respread topsoil m² 270 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 54 72.30 3,904.20

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 58,375.02 270 m² $ 216.20 /m²

Adjustments
Time reduction 270/424 = 0.63

Piles 375/ 424 = 0.884 No per m²

270m² x 0.884 = 239 piles

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 56 of 69
 TENDER 8 - TIMBER PILES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
McFaddens Rd
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 4,336.00 4,336.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 3,203.20 3,203.20
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
10,861.12
1.3
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 404 - -
Driven timber piles 3.6m long 250mm diam x 1.2m
1.3.2 centres. No 357 194.15 69,311.55
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 357 -
Respread topsoil m² 404 - -

Accepted Tender Value $ 80,172.67

TENDER 8 - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
McFaddens Rd 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.2m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.67 4,336.00 2,905.12
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 3,203.20 3,203.20
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
9,430.24
1.3
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.2m cc No 239 183.68 43,899.52
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 239 -
Respread topsoil m² 270 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 54 72.30 3,904.20

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 57,233.96 270 m² $ 211.98 /m²

Adjustments
Time reduction 270/404 = 0.67

Piles 357/ 404 = 0.884 No per m²

270m² x 0.884 = 239 piles

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 57 of 69
 TENDER 7 - TIMBER PILES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
Tavendale Pl
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 8,671.99 8,671.99
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 434.56 434.56
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 560.00 560.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 609.28 609.28
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 6,406.40 6,406.40
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
20,490.23
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 1084 - -
Driven timber piles 3.6m long 250mm diam 1.2m
1.3.2 centres No 958 194.15 185,995.70
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 371 -
Respread topsoil m² 1084 - -

Adjusted Tender Value $ 206,485.93

EOT payment Sum 2,228.28

Additional piles to 1.0m centres No 337 194.15 65,428.55

$ 274,142.76

TENDER 7 - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
Tavendale Pl 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.1m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.5 8,671.99 4,336.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 434.56 434.56
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 560.00 560.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 609.28 609.28
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 6,406.40 6,406.40
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
16,154.24
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 540 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.1m centres No 540 183.68 99,187.20
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 540 -
Respread topsoil m² 540 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 108 72.30 7,808.40
Adjustment
Extra time $2228.23 x 540/958 Sum $ 1,256.00

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 130,812.24 540 m² $ 242.24 /m²

Time 540/1084 = 0.50

Piles (958+ 1295)/2/ 1127 = 1.0 No per m²

540m² x 1.0 = 540

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 58 of 69
 TENDER 7 - TIMBER PILES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
Tavendale Pl
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 8,671.99 8,671.99
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 434.56 434.56
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 560.00 560.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 609.28 609.28
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 6,406.40 6,406.40
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
20,490.23
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 1084 - -
Driven timber piles 3.6m long 250mm diam 1.2m
1.3.2 centres No 958 194.15 185,995.70
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 371 -
Respread topsoil m² 1084 - -

Adjusted Tender Value $ 206,485.93

EOT payment Sum 2,228.28

Additional piles to 1.0m centres No 337 194.15 65,428.55

$ 274,142.76

TENDER 7 - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
Tavendale Pl 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.0m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.67 8,671.99 5,810.23
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 1,904.00 1,904.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 434.56 434.56
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 560.00 560.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 609.28 609.28
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 6,406.40 6,406.40
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
17,628.47
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 540 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.0m centres No 645 183.68 118,473.60
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 719 -
Respread topsoil m² 540 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 108 72.30 7,808.40
Adjustment
Extra time $2228.23 x 645/958 Sum $ 1,500.22

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 145,410.69 540 m² $ 269.28 /m²

Time 645/958 = 0.67

Piles 1295/ 1084 = 1.195 No per m²

540m² x 1.195 = 645 piles

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 59 of 69
 TENDER 6B - TIMBER PILES
CONTRACTOR 4 Tendered Area
Speight Rd
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,232.00 1,232.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 4,336.00 4,336.00
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 2,660.00 2,660.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
9,645.92
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 609 - -
Driven timber piles 3.6m long 250mm diam. 1.2m
1.3.2 centres. No 523 193.29 101,090.67
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 523 - -
Respread topsoil m² 609 - -

Accepted Tender Value $ 110,736.59

EOT payment Sum 1,701.75

Additional piles to 1.0m centres No 217 193.29 41,943.93

$ 154,382.27

TENDER 6B - Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b).

CONTRACTOR 4 MBIE House Area + 2m
Speight Rd 3.8m Pile 250mm SED 1.0m centres
Unit Quant Rate Amount

1.1 Preliminaries and General

1.1.1 Site establishment LS 1 1,232.00 1,232.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 0.63 4,336.00 2,731.68
1.1.3 Site cleanup and demobilisation LS 1 616.00 616.00
1.1.4 Temporary fencing and signage LS 1 217.28 217.28
1.1.5 Site entry protection, repair & traffic management LS 1 280.00 280.00
1.1.6 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 304.64 304.64
1.1.7a Pre-construction condition survey LS 1 2,660.00 2,660.00
1.1.8 Survey LS 1 - -
8,041.60
1.3.1 Strip topsoil and stockpile. m² 270 - -
Driven timber poles (MBIE ref. G5b). ex 4.2m long
1.3.2 250mm diam 1.0m centres No 330 183.68 60,614.40
Site won material backfill over driven piles No 330 - -
Respread topsoil m² 270 - -
Gravel layer 200mm thick (AP 65) m³ 54 72.30 3,904.20
EOT adjustment $1,701.75 x 0.73 Sum 1,242.28

Adjusted cost of project (270m² treatment area) $ 73,802.48 270 m² $ 273.34 /m²

Adjustments
Time 330/523 = 0.67

Piles 740/609 = 1.22 No per m²

270m² x 1.22 = 330 piles

South Island Poles less $15.97 each

Uglies less $5.00 per pole

4.2m pile add $10.50 per pole supply & cut to size

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 60 of 69
 EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION

GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY FOR

CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
WORK ABOVE WATER TABLE
Treatment Area 1.0m Surrounding Structure

Lot Area Treatment Cost of Treated Treatment

Treatment Method Location
(m²) Area (m²) Area ($/m²) Cost

Rotovated mixed ex-situ

Excavate 1100mm deep, stabilise

and compact 100mm in-situ layer,
replace excavated material and
cement stabilise in position with 8%
cement ratio (No retention or
dewatering required) Keller St 2 642 204 $156.42 $31,909.68

Keller St 1 642 204 $211.04 $43,052.16

Average $183.73 $37,480.92

Rates exclude GST.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 61 of 69
 ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
Keller St 2
CONTRACTOR 12 Work above water table

Unit Quantity Rate Amount

Site Establishment
1.1.1a All plant required for the works LS 1 750.00 750.00
1.1.1b Welfare facilities - toilet & lockable site office LS 1 850.00 850.00
1.1.1c Lockable storage for plant, materials, equipment LS 1 incl
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 900.00 900.00
1.1.3 Site clean up and demobilisation LS 1 725.00 725.00
1.1.4 Site fencing (2m high mesh with palstic sheeting) LS 1 1,080.00 1,080.00
1.1.5 Fencing of site compound LS 1 520.00 520.00
1.1.6 Site entry protection, repair, signage & tm LS 1 450.00 450.00
1.1.7 Provision for skip and disposal LS 1 incl
1.1.8 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 650.00 650.00
Sub Total $ 5,925.00
Earthworks
Strip topsoil to 100mm depth over treatment area &
1.2.1 dispose m³ 20.4 33.25 678.30
1.2.2 Excavate in-situ to 1.1m below NGL & stockpile m³ 183.6 7.92 1,454.11
Import sand/silt for cement stabilising to replace
1.2.3 disposed m³ 20.4 48.25 984.30
Sub Total $ 3,116.71
ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (RSM)
Supply cement, place, spread & mix in-situ (8%
1.3.1 128kg/m³) & compact 1st lift. m³ 20.4 93.42 1,905.77
Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils
from stockpile, supply cement, place, spread & mix
1.3.2 in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) second lift & compact m³ 20.4 93.42 1,905.77
Supply & place two layers of Triax TX160 on top of
1.3.3 second lift. m² 408 5.48 2,235.84
Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils
from stockpile onto geogrid , supply cement, place,
1.3.4 spread & mix in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) & compact. m³ 20.4 93.42 1,905.77
Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils
from stockpile, supply cement, place, spread & mix
in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) and compact to ground
1.3.5 level. m³ 183.6 75.79 13,915.04

Testing sum 1,000.00

Sub Total $ 22,868.19

Total $ 31,909.90 204 $156.42 per m²

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 62 of 69
 ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
Keller St 1 Work above water table
CONTRACTOR 13
Unit Quantity Rate Amount
Site Establishment
1.1.1a All plant required for the works LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.1b Welfare facilities - toilet & lockable site office LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.1c Lockable storage for plant, materials, equipment LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,775.00 1,775.00
1.1.3 Site clean up and demobilisation LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.4 Site fencing (2m high mesh with palstic sheeting) LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.5 Fencing of site compound LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.6 Site entry protection, repair, signage & tm LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7 Provision for skip and disposal LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.8 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 -
Sub Total 7,175.00
Earthworks
Strip topsoil to 100mm depth over treatment area &
1.2.1 dispose m³ 20.4 24.00 489.60
1.2.2 Excavate in-situ to 1.1m below NGL & stockpile m³ 183.6 17.00 3,121.20
Import sand/silt for cement stabilising to replace
1.2.3 disposed m³ 20.4 59.00 1,203.60
Sub Total 4,814.40
ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (RSM)
Supply cement, place, spread & mix in-situ (8%
1.3.1 128kg/m³) & compact 1st lift. m³ 20.4 209.80 4,279.92
Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils
from stockpile, supply cement, place, spread & mix
1.3.2 in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) second lift & compact m³ 20.4 209.80 4,279.92
Supply & place two layers of Triax TX160 on top of
1.3.3 second lift. m² 408 5.20 2,121.60
Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils
from stockpile onto geogrid , supply cement, place,
1.3.4 spread & mix in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) & compact. m³ 20.4 209.80 4,279.92
Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils
from stockpile, supply cement, place, spread & mix
in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) and compact to ground
1.3.5 level. m³ 183.6 82.25 15,101.10

Testing sum 1,000.00

Sub Total $ 31,062.46

Total $ 43,051.86 204 $211.04 per m²

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 63 of 69
 EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION

GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY FOR

CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
WORK BELOW WATER TABLE
Treatment Area 1.0m Surrounding Structure

Lot Area Treatment Cost of Treated Treatment

Treatment Method Location
(m²) Area (m²) Area (S/m²) Cost

Rotovated Mixed Ex-situ

Excavate 1100mm deep, place

200mm layer crushed concrete, lay
geogrid, replace excavated material
and cement stabilise in position with
8% cement ratio 1m outside building
footprint (no retention or
dewatering required) Keller St 1 642 204 $233.63 $47,660.52

Keller St 2 642 204 $185.04 $37,748.16

Average $209.33 $42,704.34

Rates exclude GST.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 64 of 69
 ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
Keller St 2 Work below water table
CONTRACTOR 12
Unit Quantity
Site Establishment
1.1.1a All plant required for the works LS 1 750.00 750.00
1.1.1b Welfare facilities - toilet & lockable site office LS 1 850.00 850.00
1.1.1c Lockable storage for plant, materials, equipment LS 1 incl
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 900.00 900.00
1.1.3 Site clean up and demobilisation LS 1 725.00 725.00
1.1.4 Site fencing (2m high mesh with palstic sheeting) LS 1 1,080.00 1,080.00
1.1.5 Fencing of site compound LS 1 520.00 520.00
1.1.6 Site entry protection, repair, signage & tm LS 1 450.00 450.00
1.1.7 Provision for skip and disposal LS 1 incl
1.1.8 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 650.00 650.00
Sub Total $ 5,925.00
Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil to 100mm depth over treatment area &
dispose m³ 20.4 33.25 678.30
1.2.2 Excavate in-situ to 1.0m below NGL & stockpile m³ 183.6 7.92 1,454.11
Excavate in-situ to 1.2m below NGL & dispose m³ 40.8 33.25 1,356.60
Supply and place A19 geo textile m² 204 3.80 775.20
Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in layers 200mm
thick. m³ 40.8 75.00 3,060.00
Stabilise 200mm thick hardfill with 10% cement m³ 40.8 97.00 3,957.60
1.2.3 Import sand/silt for cement stabilising to replace disposed
topsoil m³ 20.4 48.25 984.30
Provide dewatering pump sum 500.00

Sub Total $ 12,766.11

ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
1.3.3 Supply & install two layers Triax TX160 on top of crushed
concrete. m² 408 5.48 2,235.84
1.3.4 Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils from
stockpile onto geogrid , supply cement, place, spread & mix
in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) & compact. m³ 20.4 93.42 1,905.77
1.3.5 Place layers of 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ
soils from stockpile, supply cement, place, spread & mix in-
situ (8% 128kg/m³) and compact to ground level. m³ 183.6 75.79 13,915.04

Testing sum 1,000.00

Sub Total $ 19,056.65

Total $ 37,747.76 204 $185.04 per m²

ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)

Keller St 1 Work below water table
CONTRACTOR 13 Unit Quantity Rate Amount

Site Establishment
1.1.1a All plant required for the works LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.1b Welfare facilities - toilet & lockable site office LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.1c Lockable storage for plant, materials, equipment LS 1 500.00 500.00
1.1.2 Contract administration LS 1 1,775.00 1,775.00
1.1.3 Site clean up and demobilisation LS 1 1,500.00 1,500.00
1.1.4 Site fencing (2m high mesh with palstic sheeting) LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.5 Fencing of site compound LS 1 1,000.00 1,000.00
1.1.6 Site entry protection, repair, signage & tm LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.7 Provision for skip and disposal LS 1 300.00 300.00
1.1.8 Erosion & sediment and dust control LS 1 Incl -
Sub Total $ 7,175.00
Earthworks
1.2.1 Strip topsoil to 100mm depth over treatment area &
dispose m³ 20.4 24.00 489.60
1.2.2 Excavate in-situ to 1.0m below NGL & stockpile m³ 183.6 17.00 3,121.20
Excavate in-situ to 1.2m below NGL & dispose m³ 40.8 24.00 979.20
Supply and place A19 geo textile m² 204 5.20 1,060.80
Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in layers 200mm
thick. m³ 40.8 50.68 2,067.74
Stabilise 200mm thick hardfill with 10% cement m³ 40.8 209.80 8,559.84
1.2.3 Import sand/silt for cement stabilising to replace disposed
topsoil m³ 20.4 59.00 1,203.60
Provide dewatering pump sum 500.00

Sub Total $ 17,981.98

ROTOVATED MIXED EX-SITU (MBIE ref. G2a)
1.3.3 Supply & install two layers Triax TX160 on top of crushed
concrete. m² 408 5.20 2,121.60
1.3.4 Place 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ soils from
stockpile onto geogrid , supply cement, place, spread & mix
in-situ (8% 128kg/m³) & compact. m³ 20.4 209.80 4,279.92
1.3.5 Place layers of 100mm compacted depth of silty in-situ
soils from stockpile, supply cement, place, spread & mix in-
situ (8% 128kg/m³) and compact to ground level. m³ 183.6 82.25 15,101.10

Testing sum 1,000.00

Sub Total $ 22,502.62

Total $ 47,659.60 204 $233.63 per m²

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 65 of 69
 EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION

GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY

CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
FOR REINFORCED GRAVEL RAFT (MBIE ref. G1b)
WORK ABOVE WATER TABLE
Treatment Area 1.0m Surrounding Structure

Lot Area Treatment Cost of Treated Treatment

Treatment Method Location
(m²) Area (m²) Area ($/m²) Cost

Reinforced gravel raft

Excavate 1200mm deep, replace
with imported hardfill (no retention Keller St 1
or dewatering required) (theoretical) 642 204 $190.01 $38,761.24

Keller St 2
(theoretical) 642 204 $161.27 $32,899.80

Average $175.64 $35,830.52

The costing and constructability of this method are theoretical and have not been proven by tender and
site trials.
Rates exclude GST.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 66 of 69
 Reinforced gravel rafts (MBIE ref. G1b) Above Water Table
Keller St 1
CONTRACTOR 12 Unit Quant Rate Amount

Preliminary & General

1 As Contractor 12 rotovated tender 5,925.00

Earthworks
8 Excavate over the site to remove average
100mm thick layer of topsoil, cart off site
site. 20.4 m3 33.25 678.30
-
10 Excavate to 1200mm deep below NGL and
cart off-site. 224.4 m3 33.25 7,461.30
-
11 Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in
layers 200mm thick. 244.8 m3 87.80 21,493.44
-
12 Geogrid Triax TX160 or similar laid over
first 200mm layer. 408 m2 5.40 2,203.20
-
13 Compaction tests on layer works. sum 1,000.00

$ 38,761.24
204 190.01 /m²

Reinforced gravel rafts (MBIE ref. G1b) Above Water Table

Keller St 2
CONTRACTOR 13 Unit Quant Rate Amount

Preliminary & General

1 As Contractor 13 rotovated tender 7,175.00

Earthworks
8 Excavate over the site to remove average
100mm thick layer of topsoil, cart off site
site. 20.4 m3 17.00 346.80
-
10 Excavate to 1200mm deep below NGL and
cart off-site. 224.4 m3 17.00 3,814.80
-
11 Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in
layers 200mm thick. 244.8 m3 75.00 18,360.00
-
12 Geogrid Triax TX160 or similar laid over
insitu layer. 408 m2 5.40 2,203.20

13 Compaction tests on layer works. sum 1,000.00

$ 32,899.80
204 161.27 /m²

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 67 of 69
 EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION

GROUND IMPROVEMENT COMPILATION SUMMARY

CLEARED SITES - NON-HAIL
FOR REINFORCED GRAVEL RAFTS (MBIE ref. G1b)
WORK BELOW WATER TABLE
Treatment Area 1.0m Surrounding Structure

Lot Area Treatment Cost of Treated Treatment

Treatment Method Location
(m²) Area (m²) Area ($/m²) Cost

Hardfill Raft 1200mm Deep

Excavate 1200mm deep, replace with

imported hardfill (No retention or Keller St 1
dewatering required) (theoretical) 642 204 $224.14 $45,725.18

Keller St 2
(theoretical) 642 204 $184.92 $37,724.60

Average $204.53 $41,724.89

Rates exclude GST.

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 68 of 69
 1200MM DEEP, REINFORCED GRAVEL
RAFTS (MBIE ref. G1b) Below Water table
Keller St 1
CONTRACTOR 13 Unit Quant Rate Amount

Preliminary & General

1 As Contractor 13 rotovated tender 5,925.00

Earthworks
8 Excavate over the site to remove average
100mm thick layer of topsoil, cart off site
site. 20.4 m3 33.25 678.30

10 Excavate to 1200mm deep below NGL and

cart off-site. 183.6 m3 33.25 6,104.70

Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in

layers 200mm thick. 40.8 m3 50.68 2,067.74

Stabilise 200mm thick hardfill with 10%

cement 40.8 m2 209.80 8,559.84

Supply & place A19 geotextile 204 m2 3.80 775.20

11 Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in

layers 200mm thick. 204 m3 87.80 17,911.20

12 Geogrid Triax TX160 or similar laid over

insitu layer. 408 m2 5.40 2,203.20
-
Provide for sump and dewatering sum 500.00

13 Compaction tests on layer works. sum 1,000.00

$ 45,725.18
204 224.14 /m²

1200MM DEEP, REINFORCED GRAVEL

RAFTS (MBIE ref. G1b) Below Water table
Keller St 2
CONTRACTOR 12 Unit Quant Rate Amount

Preliminary & General

1 As Contractor 12 rotovated tender 7,175.00

Earthworks
8 Excavate over the site to remove average
100mm thick layer of topsoil, cart off site
site. 20.4 m3 17.00 346.80

10 Excavate to 1200mm deep below NGL and

cart off-site. 183.6 m3 17.00 3,121.20

Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in

layers 200mm thick. 40.8 m3 75.00 3,060.00

Stabilise 200mm thick hardfill with 10%

cement 40.8 m2 97.00 3,957.60

Supply & place A19 geotextile 204 m2 5.20 1,060.80

11 Supply and place AP40 M4 and compact in

layers 200mm thick. 204 m3 75.00 15,300.00

12 Geogrid Triax TX160 or similar laid over

insitu layer. 408 m2 5.40 2,203.20

Provide for sump and dewatering sum 500.00

13 Compaction tests on layer works. sum 1,000.00

$ 37,724.60
204 184.92 /m²

Report on Ground Improvement Costs

Prepared for Earthquake Commission
22 June 2015 Page 69 of 69