Ash Creek Elementary outline specifications compared with the template

The project's outline specifications are compared paragraph by paragraph with the template outline specifications that the estimate is priced against. Of 29 paragraphs, 20 differ in text and one is affected by a changed condition. Seven differences affect cost, a net estimated −$252,700 against the template estimate.

Outline Specifications Rev B, Oct 28, 2026, 46 pagesTemplate K-8 Outline Specifications v4.1, Feb 2024, 38 pagesDesign-build, Ash Creek School District, Ash Creek, OregonPrepared Nov 5, 2026

Summary

Codes and standards · sections 1.2 and 1.3

Template is on the 2022 OSSC and 90.1-2019, the project on the 2025 codes

The project cites the 2025 OSSC (2024 IBC) and the 2025 OEESC (ASHRAE 90.1-2022 with Oregon amendments). 90.1-2022 adds Section 11 energy credits, so the template's energy compliance basis has to be redone and the structural basis reviewed against the 2024 IBC (+$24,000). The 31 section references move from MasterFormat 2020 to MasterFormat 2026, which reorganizes 617 listings.

Re-map cost codes and package scopes before buyout.

Conditional requirement · sections 6.1 and 7.2

Central plant hot water makes ductless splits in MDF/IDF rooms binding

Paragraph 7.2 is word for word the same in both documents, but its condition, “where the building has no heat pump system,” is triggered when 6.1 replaces the ground-source heat pumps with central plant hot water. Five ductless split systems (MDF N+1 and three IDF rooms) add $117,500 and take back 28% of the $420,000 savings.

Price the units, or ask whether MDF/IDF cooling may come from the chiller.

Photovoltaics · section 9.1

One rewritten sentence turns a solar-ready roof into a 60 kW system

The template calls for a solar-ready roof. The project requires a rooftop PV system of at least 60 kW DC. It is the largest single cost increase, +$165,000. The OPR (p. 17) requires on-site PV but sets no size.

Ask whether 60 kW DC is the Owner's requirement.

Outline specifications side by side

Choose which differences to show. Struck-through words appear only in the template, highlighted words only in the project outline specifications. Click a paragraph for document locations, the cost estimate and what to ask.

Show
View
Paragraphs compared
Text differences + triggered conditions
Differences with cost impact
Net against the template estimate, 6 quantified
wordTemplate only wordProject only conditionCondition triggered by another change

Cost impact against the template estimate

Estimated direct cost, without markups for general conditions, contingency and fee. Click a row for the basis.

Sources and method

Sources

  • AshCreek_ES_Outline_Specifications_RevB_2026-10-28.pdfProject outline specifications, Sections 1–1146 pages
  • DB_Template_K-8_Outline_Specifications_v4.1.docxFirm template that the estimate is priced against38 pages
  • DB_Template_K-8_Estimate_Basis_v4.1.xlsxTemplate estimate, quantities and unit costs412 rows
  • AshCreek_SD_RFP_Appendix_C_OPR.pdfAsh Creek School District Owner's Project Requirements with space program24 pages

Method

  1. Both documents were read section by section, and paragraphs were paired by section number and heading.
  2. Each pair was compared word for word. Differences in spacing, line breaks and formatting only were not counted.
  3. Each difference was classified as editorial (same requirement, different wording), technical with no cost impact (changed requirement the template estimate already covers) or cost impact.
  4. Conditional requirements in the template were tested against the other sections of the project outline specifications, so identical paragraphs with a triggered condition were also caught.
  5. Cost differences were valued with quantities and unit costs from the template estimate and quantities from the OPR. The basis of each requirement was checked against the OPR.

Assumptions and limitations

  • Amounts are estimated direct costs at 2026 Oregon pricing, without markups for general conditions, contingency and fee.
  • Roof and window areas are taken from the template estimate's reference school, whose gross area is within 3% of the project's.
  • The re-map of section references to MasterFormat 2026 is not quantified.
  • Unit costs from the template estimate have not been checked against current market pricing and should be confirmed by the estimator before the proposal is submitted.
  • The exclusion of the 90.1-2022 on-site renewable energy minimum is taken from NEEA's summary, not from BCD's amendment text. How the green energy technology requirement applies to the PV system should be confirmed with the District and a licensed PE.
  • Code applicability should be confirmed with the Owner and the building official before the proposal is submitted.