Understanding takeoffs

Quantity Takeoff Example: A Flooring Takeoff, Room by Room

September 2026 · 7 min read · Reviewed by the OptiView product team

Abstract definitions only go so far. Here is what a small commercial flooring takeoff actually looks like on paper — net areas, waste factors, order quantities and the counted items — using a fictional project, plus the checks a reviewer would run before relying on any of it.

The scenario

A 1,980 SF office tenant improvement, drawing set Revision B, addendum 1 acknowledged. Four areas: two offices in luxury vinyl tile, a corridor in sheet vinyl, and a break room in porcelain tile laid diagonally. Wall base throughout, six transitions where materials change. The takeoff author measured from the floor plan sheets and the finish schedule; the quantities below are what a reviewer would receive.

The takeoff sheet

Linear and counted items ride alongside the areas: 420 LF of 4-inch wall base (net measured perimeter, ordered at 441 LF with a 5% allowance), six transition strips, and two outside-corner details at the corridor junction. Each line names its source sheet — A-101 for dimensions, A-601 for the finish schedule — so a reviewer can find the evidence without hunting.

How each line was derived

• Net area comes from the measured room polygon on the plan, less columns and casework footprints called out on A-101.
• Waste factor follows the material: 7% for straight-lay LVT, 10% for sheet vinyl where seams and roll width drive cuts, 12% for diagonal-set tile where every perimeter cut is angled.
• Order quantity is net area multiplied by one plus the waste factor, rounded up to a clean ordering unit.
• Sheet vinyl adds a roll-layout note: 12 ft roll width, seams planned along the corridor length to avoid cross-seams in the traffic path.

What a reviewer checks on this sheet

This is where the takeoff becomes a reviewed takeoff. A reviewer does not re-measure everything — they interrogate the sheet against its sources: that Revision B is actually the governing set and addendum 1 did not change the finish schedule; that Room 102 was not double-counted where plan sheets overlap; that the corridor material matches the schedule and not just “vinyl”; that the diagonal tile carries the higher waste factor the layout demands; and that the roll-layout note is consistent with the seam locations a competent installer would accept.

Anything that fails those checks becomes a finding with its evidence attached — “Break room waste factor is 7% but tile is diagonal-set per A-601; confirm allowance” — and comes back as a correction the reviewer verifies. Only then does a senior reviewer approve the sheet as the reviewed version.