Buildcorp Contracting is the foundation division of the Buildcorp Group. Established in 1990, Buildcorp Contracting delivers specialist new

Transcription

1 Contracting

2 2 Buildcorp Contracting is the foundation division of the Buildcorp Group. Established in 1990, Buildcorp Contracting delivers specialist new construction services in the health, industrial, commercial, Government, community and tertiary education markets.

3 GENERAL MANAGER S MESSAGE Delivering specialty new construction services in the health, industrial, commercial, Government, community and tertiary education markets. Buildcorp Contracting is the foundation division of the Buildcorp Group. Established in 1990, Buildcorp Contracting delivers specialist new construction services in the health, industrial, commercial, Government, community and tertiary education markets. Over the past 25 years we have won numerous MBA awards and have delivered buildings for some of the nation s most well known organisations including: ING, Investa, Goodman, GPT and the Australian Red Cross Blood Service. Throughout our projects, we are committed to delivering our clients best value by building a better way. Over the past 20 years, we have repeatedly applied this commitment and delivered clients cost savings, time savings, increased space and greater performance from their facilities than was initially specified. We believe that, as a builder of 20 years, we offer our clients a special set of skills and experience. On a personnel level, we employ specialist managers in the areas of services design, sustainability and safety to ensure the best outcome in each of these areas. Our experience and capability is reflected in our accreditations including ISO/ANZS accreditations for safety, quality and environmental management, as well as the Federal Safety Commissioner accreditation required for Federally funded projects. BRAD BENNETT GENERAL MANAGER 3

4 OUR SERVICES Buildcorp offers six essential services to give you a best value better way construction solution. The backbone to our recent successes is the long term relationships we hold with our partners aligned with our team of motivated, experienced professionals willing to challenge the norm in creating award winning solutions. Buildcorp offers alternatives to reduce cost, suggesting innovative materials to exceed sustainability targets or finding smarter ways to build it faster. We facilitate workshops with stakeholders to increase understanding of the critical drivers of a project to enable us to offer best value to our clients and deliver it by building a better way. We call this process Buildcorp s Best value Better way approach. DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION SOLUTIONS SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT Design & Construction Solutions make sure your project ultimately works as it was designed to. We ensure the pieces of the puzzle: fit together; are documented correctly; communicated accurately to subcontractors and suppliers to minimise variations; and can be built in an effective manner. Sustainable Construction adopts a common sense approach to NABERS and Green Star targets, while ensuring the actions of everyone involved during the project are sustainable. Procurement Management finds the balance between quality and value from our extensive database of subcontractors and suppliers. INTEGRATION MANAGEMENT TIME MANAGEMENT SITE MANAGEMENT Integration Management minimises the impact of live environment construction for the community and stakeholders, while maintaining safe construction practices. Time Management that develops accurate forecasts and identifies critical path elements to ensure the project is delivered on time. Site Management ensures work is completed safely, sensitively to environmental considerations and to the quality expectations of everyone involved. 4

5 OUR EXPERTISE We are a partner in the construction process, providing advice, value adding alternatives and delivering best value by building it a better way. Specialising in complex projects for owner occupiers and commercial developers, delivering projects between $10m and $100m. Health After 45 health projects over 18 years, we understand how different they are. Commercial Maximising the building but minimising the cost gets your commercial project over the line. Education Masters in multi purpose, multi facility, multi discipline, education campuses. Industrial 1,000,000m2 under roof has given us the know-how to optimise your facility from the ground up. Special Use Never been done before - no problem. Buildcorp loves the challenge of complex, one off solutions for projects that have a truly special purpose. Government Buildcorp understands that the construction of council and government projects are often the last step in what as been a long and involved process 05

6 GREEN BUILDING CAPABILITIES Buildcorp consistently goes beyond legislative and regulatory environmental standards to minimise any negative impacts on the environment that might result from our workplace activities and projects. Environmental achievements Buildcorp has developed a number of commercially viable sustainable solutions. Buildcorp understands the design and approval process of sustainable projects and can help any project to achieve its green goals. Buildcorp has achieved Silver Partner recognition through the Sustainability Advantage program in acknowledgement of its significant environmental achievements. Buildcorp is leading the way and are the first company in the property and infrastructure cluster to be awarded the silver status. In December 2012 we were also awarded CitySwitch Green Office Signatory of the Year for our own tenancy achievements in energy efficiency achieving 4.5 Star NABERS Tenancy Energy rating. We walk the talk Buildcorp use an Environmental Management System (EMS) in accordance with global best practice guidelines: ISO 14001:2004. Our EMS is applied across our business. Through ongoing review, training and auditing we ensure that it is both well understood and adopted throughout our day-to-day operations. In our head office we minimise our reliance on non renewable resources by using solar power, sensor lighting, efficient water systems and recycling programs that both reduce our environmental footprint and operational costs. Education is the key We believe that staff education is an integral part of delivering green buildings. We have over 30 employees that are Green Star Accredited Associates or Professionals. Our employee experience in Green Star and NABERs accredited projects have been the key to the delivery of Buildcorp s many high quality projects. Environment ISO

7 WORKPLACE 6, DARLING ISLAND Workplace6 is the first 6 Star Green Star as-built rated building in NSW. The design and construct project was won through a competitive design and tender process, requiring the Buildcorp team to develop the best method of delivering something that had never been built before. The final value of the project was $56m featuring trigeneration and uses water from Sydney Harbour for cooling. NAB HOUSE CENTRAL PLANT AND BUILDING UPGRADE The NAB House project, with a construction cost in excess of $40m, is one of the largest green building upgrades in the Sydney CBD. Targeting a 4.5 star NABERS rating, the building works included 19 floors of base building service upgrade, a major upgrade of the central plant and a full refurbishment of the building s foyer. THE GPT GROUP FIT-OUT AND BASE BUILDING REFURBISHMENT Buildcorp was commissioned to develop a design and construct solution for the fit-out works, which were integrated with a base building upgrade. The development incorporated extensive demolition works to create openings for two new structural steel stair cases installed between the three tenanted floors and cutting through the core wall to create new plant rooms and work areas. Awarded 6 Star Green Star Interiors which is the first time this rating has been achieved within a building that has not undergone a complete refurbishment. GOLDMAN SACHS REFURBISHMENT AND CONSOLIDATION This project was a three floor refurbishment and consolidation of the Goldman Sachs tenancy in Governor Phillip Tower Sydney. The scope of the works include lift lobby upgrades, open plan workstations installations, client bathrooms and showers, meeting rooms, executive offices upgrades, installation of energy efficient lighting throughout and upgraded services and systems across all floors. The project is targeting LEED Gold Certification for Commercial Interiors. 237

8 EARLY CONTRACTOR INVOLVEMENT Buildcorp understands there is a significant difference between a cost planning exercise and an effective ECI. Throughout the Early Contractor Involvement period Buildcorp will work hand in hand with the Client to reduce the project risk profile and optimise key areas of the project and development feasibility. The ECI process will consider both internal and external demands and ensure the base building design can accommodate the latest evolution of the Client s product at the most economical capital investment. Early Involvement allows Buildcorp to test the feasibility of various design solutions and methodology options for each key building element, to ensure we can offer the best outcome for the the project. To do this, the ECI process will focus in on five key areas of design development: 1. Floor layout & room configuration Buildcorp has undertaken numerous ECI projects leading to an open-book GMP and has developed a proven methodology of mitigating project risk and cost controls during the ECI period. Buildcorp s ability to translate design and project specifications into individual subcontractor packages, is a critical component in securing best value. Buildcorp s in house QS team provide a rated bill of quantities supported by an accurate scope of works making it as easy as possible for a subcontractor to understand exactly what is required upfront. The outcome is a GMP that includes the best prices from market, including internationally procured supply items and value engineered solutions where they are proven to make a difference. 2. Structure & façade 3. Building services 4. Fitout & finishes 5. Approvals, methodology & program 8

9 CLIENT DESIGN BUDGET METHODOLOGY COST PLAN 1 BASELINE WORKSHOP 1 DESIGN REVIEW Design options explored with consultants, key subcontractors and suppliers Market investigation Methodology & program COST PLAN 2 OPTIONS WORKSHOP 2 OPTION AGREEMENT Design development & prototypes Market testing Engagement with authorities & stakeholders 80% Design COST PLAN 3 Final methodology & program ECI SUBMISSION & MARKET TESTED GMP 9

10 ECI DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Buildcorp has developed a design management system specifically tailored to maximise the potential of ECI engagement: Buildcorp breaks the project into not only its stages but it major components ie structure and footings, façade, services, layout etc Each component goes through a design development process with the relevant parties As the design of each major component progresses Buildcorp validates decisions or potential decisions for their budget, methodology, compliance, quality and program effect before agreeing to a specific direction This process of focused development, validated decision making ensures an efficient and optimised process Throughout the Early Contractor Involvement period Buildcorp will work hand in hand with the client to reduce the project risk profile and optimise key areas of the project and development feasibility. Early Involvement allows Buildcorp to test the feasibility of various design solutions and methodology options for each key building element, to ensure we can offer the best outcome for the client. 10

11 11

12 12 DA concept design The process begins with an analysis of the design intent of the original DA design RISK PROFILING FAÇADE SYSTEMS - URBANEST HAYMARKET FAÇADE SYSTEM NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCAFFOLD NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCREENS LOAD BEARING PRECAST + SCREENS UNITISED CURTAIN WALL + SCREENS METHODOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS Nth, Wst, Sth Elevations Scaffold East Elevation - Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Complete Façade From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Complete Façade From Swing Stage - Top Down All Elevations - Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) External Access Only Required For Cleaning Risk of Construction Methodology Approval HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology requires establishment of scaffold over the boundary line and into the Rail Corridor which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. 2) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology allows for use of a static screen at Ground Level to separate the site from the Rail Corridor, whilst jump screens can be used internally of the static screen to precede the construction of the structure. Use of the screens would enable the construction of this facade system without necessitating access into the Rail Corridor, or erection of any temporary works within the Rail Corridor. 2) The facade system is loaded onto floor plates via landing platforms which could be located on the Eastern side of the building. Panels are subsequently installed into their final position via crawler crane located within the consent approved building parameter zone. This enables facade installation without requiring aerial operations over the rail corridor, and without heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor. Time Risk for Methodology Approval HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology requires establishment of scaffold over the boundary line and into the Rail Corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. 2) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) Although the facade system does not require scaffold concession, the facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) Although the facade system does not require scaffold concession, the facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining construction 1) This façade system and methodology will not require concession approval as can be made to be compliant with the heavy Rail Standards Risk of Maintenance Methodology Approval MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would be a complete and prefinished system consisting glass and a composite aluminium or similar. Maintenance therefore is limited to cleaning only at intervals as required by Urbanest. A risk assessment associated with Facade cleaning would present a lower risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring painting and joint sealing works in addition to cleaning as with precast concrete. Requirement to Amend Consent LOW HIGH HIGH LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a low level of risk of requiring amendment to the approved consent. 1) The facade system can be fabricated to comply with the design intent of the facade approved under the development consent. Minor risk of amendment exists given opening windows are also required by the consent, however these require mullion sections within the glazing zone of windows which are currently not reflected on DA consent documents. This façade concept presents a High level of risk for amending the Development Consent. 1) The facade concept design does not allow for the use of Perimeter Screens in it's current layout. To effectively combine perimeter screens and precast walls, openings in walls need to be full height (slab-to-slab) and at a width that allows coordination of screen needles to be connected to the floor slabs through openings. To enable this change in facade design, a revised DA submission would be required. This façade concept presents a High level of risk for amending the Development Consent. 1) The facade concept design does not allow for the use of Perimeter Screens in it's current layout. To effectively combine perimeter screens and precast walls, openings in walls need to be full height (slab-to-slab) and at a width that allows coordination of screen needles to be connected to the floor slabs through openings. To enable this change in facade design, a revised DA submission would be required. This façade system presents a low level of risk of requiring amendment to the approved consent. 1) The facade system can be fabricated to comply with the design intent of the facade approved under the development consent. Minor risk of amendment exists given opening windows are also required by the consent, however these require mullion sections within the glazing zone of windows which are currently not reflected on DA consent documents. Delivery to Site Risk - Overall LOW LOW LOW MEDIUM Risk Rating (1-5) Buildcorp risk analysis Whilst reviewing the original concept four options were assessed, across a number of project risk items, developed in partnership with the client. This process aimed to verify the most appropriate solution for this element on this project. These included time, cost, quality and approval criteria along with a whole of life performance assessment. ate Hospital Sydney Redevelopment 1 November 2014 Y esign management le outlines the analysis or an upcoming project N Architect Project Drawing Title Scale Drawing No. Issue Proj. No. 79 Myrtle Street Chippendale NSW 2008 AUSTRALIA pl fx ABN e or transmitt in any form, or by any means without the express permission of Allen Jack + Cottier Architects. Nominated Architects: Michael Heenan 5264, Peter Ireland 6661, Reginald Smith 3312 PLOT DATE & TIME: PLOTTED & CHECKED BY: REF: 4 19/02/2014 6:57:44 PM C:\Users\mariotti\Documents\12023_Master_mariotti.rvt PERSPECTIVE - VIEW FROM PIER STREET (NORTH EAST) DA0003 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION URBANEST HAYMARKET NEW STUDENT ACCOMMODATION Author THE HAYMARKET, SYDNEY, NSW COST COMPARISON OF FAÇADE SYSTEMS - URBANEST HAYMARKET FAÇADE SYSTEM NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SWING STAGE NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCREENS LOAD BEARING PRECAST + SCREENS UNITISED CURTAIN WALL + SCREENS NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST INTERNAL WALL WITH WINDWS IN PRECAST. LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED LIGHT WEIGHT INTERNAL WALL FRAMING LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED SYSTEM & METHODOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS PT Nth, Wst, Sth - Leading Edge Precast East Elevation - Perimeter Screens Complete From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter Screens Complete From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter Screens Complete From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter Screens External Access Only For Cleaning Full Perimeter Scaffold Full Perimeter Scaffold Façade + Internal Wall Framing Material Cost System Cost - Comparative Scope $ 6,845, $ 6,845, $ 7,306, $ 6,931, $ 8,141, $ 6,904, Preliminary Related Costs; Screens $ 70, $ 190, $ 190, $ 190, $ - $ - Scaffold N/A N/A N/A N/A $ 400, $ 400, Craneage Included Included $ 50, $ 50, Included -$ 50, Mast Climbers/Swing Stage $ 180, $ 180, $ 180, N/A N/A N/A Cost Adjustments to suit façade Type; Slab Edge Position Adjustment - For Comparison From Grids A, 1, 8 $ 130, $ 130, $ 120, $ - $ - $ 130, Slab Construction E/O to suit Façade (change to conventional reinforcement) N/A N/A $ 263, N/A N/A N/A Deletion Of Internal Columns N/A N/A -$ 240, N/A N/A N/A Add Back Lightweight Wall where columns deleted N/A N/A $ 50, N/A N/A N/A Adjustment to Size of Level 2 Transfer Ring Beam N/A N/A $ 30, $ 25, N/A -$ 25, Fire rating details between SOU's and façade N/A N/A N/A $ 150, N/A $ 90, Subtotal 7,225, $ 7,345, $ 7,949, $ 7,196, $ 8,541, $ 7,449, $ Development Consent related costs New DA submission if applicable N/A $ 30, $ 30, N/A N/A N/A Architectural costs to document revised façade concept N/A $ 120, $ 120, N/A N/A N/A Total 7,225, $ 7,495, $ 8,099, $ 7,196, $ 8,541, $ 7,449, $ FAÇADE SYSTEM - SUMMARY NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SWING STAGE NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCREENS LOAD BEARING PRECAST + SCREENS UNITISED CURTAIN WALL + SCREENS NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST INTERNAL WALL WITH WINDWS IN PRECAST. LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED LIGHT WEIGHT INTERNAL WALL FRAMING LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED Summary: Represents the current 'Base Case' cost plan. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Approximate Costs only for revised consent. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Approximate Costs only for revised consent. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Presents most feasible solution for façade system for this project. Rates assume use of a composite cladding material to the non glazed areas. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. RISK PROFILING FAÇADE SYSTEMS - URBANEST HAYMARKET FAÇADE SYSTEM NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCAFFOLD NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCREENS LOAD BEARING PRECAST + SCREENS UNITISED CURTAIN WALL + SCREENS METHODOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS Nth, Wst, Sth Elevations Scaffold East Elevation - Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Complete Façade From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Complete Façade From Swing Stage - Top Down All Elevations - Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) External Access Only Required For Cleaning Risk of Construction Methodology Approval HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology requires establishment of scaffold over the boundary line and into the Rail Corridor which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. 2) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology allows for use of a static screen at Ground Level to separate the site from the Rail Corridor, whilst jump screens can be used internally of the static screen to precede the construction of the structure. Use of the screens would enable the construction of this facade system without necessitating access into the Rail Corridor, or erection of any temporary works within the Rail Corridor. 2) The facade system is loaded onto floor plates via landing platforms which could be located on the Eastern side of the building. Panels are subsequently installed into their final position via crawler crane located within the consent approved building parameter zone. This enables facade installation without requiring aerial operations over the rail corridor, and without heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor. Time Risk for Methodology Approval HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology requires establishment of scaffold over the boundary line and into the Rail Corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. 2) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) Although the facade system does not require scaffold concession, the facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) Although the facade system does not require scaffold concession, the facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining construction 1) This façade system and methodology will not require concession approval as can be made to be compliant with the heavy Rail Standards Risk of Maintenance Methodology Approval MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would be a complete and prefinished system consisting glass and a composite aluminium or similar. Maintenance therefore is limited to cleaning only at intervals as required by Urbanest. A risk assessment associated with Facade cleaning would present a lower risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring painting and joint sealing works in addition to cleaning as with precast concrete. Requirement to Amend Consent LOW HIGH HIGH LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a low level of risk of requiring amendment to the approved consent. 1) The facade system can be fabricated to comply with the design intent of the facade approved under the development consent. Minor risk of amendment exists given opening windows are also required by the consent, however these require mullion sections within the glazing zone of windows which are currently not reflected on DA consent documents. This façade concept presents a High level of risk for amending the Development Consent. 1) The facade concept design does not allow for the use of Perimeter Screens in it's current layout. To effectively combine perimeter screens and precast walls, openings in walls need to be full height (slab-to-slab) and at a width that allows coordination of screen needles to be connected to the floor slabs through openings. To enable this change in facade design, a revised DA submission would be required. This façade concept presents a High level of risk for amending the Development Consent. 1) The facade concept design does not allow for the use of Perimeter Screens in it's current layout. To effectively combine perimeter screens and precast walls, openings in walls need to be full height (slab-to-slab) and at a width that allows coordination of screen needles to be connected to the floor slabs through openings. To enable this change in facade design, a revised DA submission would be required. This façade system presents a low level of risk of requiring amendment to the approved consent. 1) The facade system can be fabricated to comply with the design intent of the facade approved under the development consent. Minor risk of amendment exists given opening windows are also required by the consent, however these require mullion sections within the glazing zone of windows which are currently not reflected on DA consent documents. Delivery to Site Risk - Overall LOW LOW LOW MEDIUM Risk Rating (1-5) of the design intent of the Original execution concept in precast concrete The team began exploring the potential of achieving the design in pre cast concrete panels as recommended by the architect for the DA Buildcorp risk analysis Whilst reviewing the original concept four options were assessed, across a number of project risk items, developed in partnership with the client. This process aimed to verify the most appropriate solution for this element on this project. These included time, cost, quality and approval criteria along with a whole of life performance assessment. Buildcorp cost comparison Market tested cost analysis identified the real value of the potential options. In this case the spread varied from $7.1M to $8.5M highlighting the importance of design decisions made during this phase of the project. Importantly design decision cannot be made in isolation so this analysis included the methodology and programming implications of each option. ign management utlines the analysis n upcoming project N Architect Project Drawing Title Scale Drawing No. Issue Proj. No. E: PLOTTED & CHECKED BY: REF: 4 19/02/2014 6:57:44 PM C:\Users\mariotti\Documents\12023_Master_mariotti.rvt PERSPECTIVE - VIEW FROM PIER STREET (NORTH EAST) DA0003 URBANEST HAYMARKET NEW STUDENT ACCOMMODATION Author THE HAYMARKET, SYDNEY, NSW COST COMPARISON OF FAÇADE SYSTEMS - URBANEST HAYMARKET FAÇADE SYSTEM NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SWING STAGE NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCREENS LOAD BEARING PRECAST + SCREENS UNITISED CURTAIN WALL + SCREENS NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST INTERNAL WALL WITH WINDWS IN PRECAST. LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED LIGHT WEIGHT INTERNAL WALL FRAMING LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED SYSTEM & METHODOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS PT Nth, Wst, Sth - Leading Edge Precast East Elevation - Perimeter Screens Complete From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter Screens Complete From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter Screens Complete From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter Screens External Access Only For Cleaning Full Perimeter Scaffold Full Perimeter Scaffold Façade + Internal Wall Framing Material Cost System Cost - Comparative Scope $ 6,845, $ 6,845, $ 7,306, $ 6,931, $ 8,141, $ 6,904, Preliminary Related Costs; Screens $ 70, $ 190, $ 190, $ 190, $ - $ - Scaffold N/A N/A N/A N/A $ 400, $ 400, Craneage Included Included $ 50, $ 50, Included -$ 50, Mast Climbers/Swing Stage $ 180, $ 180, $ 180, N/A N/A N/A Cost Adjustments to suit façade Type; Slab Edge Position Adjustment - For Comparison From Grids A, 1, 8 $ 130, $ 130, $ 120, $ - $ - $ 130, Slab Construction E/O to suit Façade (change to conventional reinforcement) N/A N/A $ 263, N/A N/A N/A Deletion Of Internal Columns N/A N/A -$ 240, N/A N/A N/A Add Back Lightweight Wall where columns deleted N/A N/A $ 50, N/A N/A N/A Adjustment to Size of Level 2 Transfer Ring Beam N/A N/A $ 30, $ 25, N/A -$ 25, Fire rating details between SOU's and façade N/A N/A N/A $ 150, N/A $ 90, Subtotal 7,225, $ 7,345, $ 7,949, $ 7,196, $ 8,541, $ 7,449, $ Development Consent related costs New DA submission if applicable N/A $ 30, $ 30, N/A N/A N/A Architectural costs to document revised façade concept N/A $ 120, $ 120, N/A N/A N/A Total 7,225, $ 7,495, $ 8,099, $ 7,196, $ 8,541, $ 7,449, $ FAÇADE SYSTEM - SUMMARY NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SWING STAGE NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCREENS LOAD BEARING PRECAST + SCREENS UNITISED CURTAIN WALL + SCREENS NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST INTERNAL WALL WITH WINDWS IN PRECAST. LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED LIGHT WEIGHT INTERNAL WALL FRAMING LIGHT WEIGHT EXTERNAL FRAMING + CLADDING FULLY SCAFFOLDED Summary: Represents the current 'Base Case' cost plan. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Approximate Costs only for revised consent. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Approximate Costs only for revised consent. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Presents most feasible solution for façade system for this project. Rates assume use of a composite cladding material to the non glazed areas. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. Notes: *Includes allowances for unresolved detailing. *Includes allowances for unresolved fire engineering strategy of façade/boundary interface. RISK PROFILING FAÇADE SYSTEMS - URBANEST HAYMARKET FAÇADE SYSTEM NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCAFFOLD NON LOAD BEARING CLIP-ON PRECAST + SCREENS LOAD BEARING PRECAST + SCREENS UNITISED CURTAIN WALL + SCREENS METHODOLOGY CHARACTERISTICS Nth, Wst, Sth Elevations Scaffold East Elevation - Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Complete Façade From Swing Stage - Top Down Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) Complete Façade From Swing Stage - Top Down All Elevations - Full Perimeter 11m High (Natform) External Access Only Required For Cleaning Risk of Construction Methodology Approval HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology requires establishment of scaffold over the boundary line and into the Rail Corridor which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. 2) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor, and with heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor to position the facade panels on the facade line again which we now know RailCorp are not likely to entertain. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology allows for use of a static screen at Ground Level to separate the site from the Rail Corridor, whilst jump screens can be used internally of the static screen to precede the construction of the structure. Use of the screens would enable the construction of this facade system without necessitating access into the Rail Corridor, or erection of any temporary works within the Rail Corridor. 2) The facade system is loaded onto floor plates via landing platforms which could be located on the Eastern side of the building. Panels are subsequently installed into their final position via crawler crane located within the consent approved building parameter zone. This enables facade installation without requiring aerial operations over the rail corridor, and without heavy crane lift loads on the boundary of the rail corridor. Time Risk for Methodology Approval HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) This construction methodology requires establishment of scaffold over the boundary line and into the Rail Corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. 2) The facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) Although the facade system does not require scaffold concession, the facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a high level of risk for gaining construction 1) Although the facade system does not require scaffold concession, the facade panel installation requires aerial operations over the rail corridor which we now know requires concession approval. Minimum of 6 weeks. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining construction 1) This façade system and methodology will not require concession approval as can be made to be compliant with the heavy Rail Standards Risk of Maintenance Methodology Approval MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a medium level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would require maintenance at regular intervals for jointing, flashings and painting therefore a risk assessment associated with a greater level of Facade maintenance works would present a higher risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring no painting or joint sealing works. This façade system presents a low level of risk for gaining maintenance 1) The facade system would be a complete and prefinished system consisting glass and a composite aluminium or similar. Maintenance therefore is limited to cleaning only at intervals as required by Urbanest. A risk assessment associated with Facade cleaning would present a lower risk profile to that compared with a facade system requiring painting and joint sealing works in addition to cleaning as with precast concrete. Requirement to Amend Consent LOW HIGH HIGH LOW Risk Rating (1-5) Comment: This façade system presents a low level of risk of requiring amendment to the approved consent. 1) The facade system can be fabricated to comply with the design intent of the facade approved under the development consent. Minor risk of amendment exists given opening windows are also required by the consent, however these require mullion sections within the glazing zone of windows which are currently not reflected on DA consent documents. This façade concept presents a High level of risk for amending the Development Consent. 1) The facade concept design does not allow for the use of Perimeter Screens in it's current layout. To effectively combine perimeter screens and precast walls, openings in walls need to be full height (slab-to-slab) and at a width that allows coordination of screen needles to be connected to the floor slabs through openings. To enable this change in facade design, a revised DA submission would be required. This façade concept presents a High level of risk for amending the Development Consent. 1) The facade concept design does not allow for the use of Perimeter Screens in it's current layout. To effectively combine perimeter screens and precast walls, openings in walls need to be full height (slab-to-slab) and at a width that allows coordination of screen needles to be connected to the floor slabs through openings. To enable this change in facade design, a revised DA submission would be required. This façade system presents a low level of risk of requiring amendment to the approved consent. 1) The facade system can be fabricated to comply with the design intent of the facade approved under the development consent. Minor risk of amendment exists given opening windows are also required by the consent, however these require mullion sections within the glazing zone of windows which are currently not reflected on DA consent documents. Delivery to Site Risk - Overall LOW LOW LOW MEDIUM Risk Rating (1-5) e design intent of the Original execution concept in precast concrete The team began exploring the potential of achieving the design in pre cast concrete panels as recommended by the architect for the DA Buildcorp risk analysis Whilst reviewing the original concept four options were assessed, across a number of project risk items, developed in partnership with the client. This process aimed to verify the most appropriate solution for this element on this project. These included time, cost, quality and approval criteria along with a whole of life performance assessment. Buildcorp cost comparison Market tested cost analysis identified the real value of the potential options. In this case the spread varied from $7.1M to $8.5M highlighting the importance of design decisions made during this phase of the project. Importantly design decision cannot be made in isolation so this analysis included the methodology and programming implications of each option. To demonstrate Buildcorp s design management process the following example outlines the analysis and evolution of the façade for an upcoming project for Urbanest

13 7.0 PROPOSED methodology 4 5 Curtain Curtain wall wall selection and and functionality options The The client client chose chose to to proceed with with the the development of a of curtain a curtain wall wall system. system. Buildcorp then then worked worked with with a long a long term term subcontractor to add to add functionality to the to the façade façade system, system, assessing options options for for their their value value for for money. money. The The DA DA conditions requested the the inclusion of of operable windows. The The above above sketch sketch shows shows the the cost cost implications of of addressing this this requirement. The The difference between the the two two is is $300,000. Importantly the the fixed fixed panel panel option option increases the the functionality for for a project a project featuring variable variable room room configurations. This This was was cross cross checked for for its its implication to the to the mechanical requirement and and environmental performance of the of the building and and the the informed decision was was made made to to proceed. Early Contractor Involvement for St Vincent s Private Hospital Sydney Redevelopment Buildcorp Group Pty Ltd - Tender Submission - 21 November 2014 Buildability review The façade then went into detailed installation and the proposed concept was assessed for its buildability, safety risk profile and materials handling requirements. Buildcorp made a slight detail modification adding a hook connection to the slab edge fixing. This addition halved the craneage requirements for panel installation. VIEW FROM HAY ST PROPOSED 6 Current status of design The outcome is a facade d that has been assessed fo DA requirements have bee process has been optimise URBANEST HAYMARKET STUDEN ACCOMMODATION C:\Users\mariotti\Documents\12023_Master_mariotti.rv lity e Buildability review The façade then went into detailed installation and the proposed concept was assessed for its buildability, safety risk profile and materials handling requirements. Buildcorp made a slight detail modification adding a hook connection to the slab edge fixing. This addition halved the craneage requirements for panel installation. s e d. ney Redevelopment Current status of design The outcome is a facade design representative of the original DA concept, that has been assessed for its potential risk and market tested, the additional DA requirements have been cost effectively incorporated and the installation process has been optimised. URBANEST HAYMARKET STUDENT ACCOMMODATION C:\Users\mariotti\Documents\12023_Master_mariotti.rvt 13

14 14

15 HEALTH After 45 health projects over 18 years, we understand how different they are. After 45 health projects over 18 years, we understand how different they are In a world where mistakes mean life or death, you simply can t afford to interrupt the flow of activity to knock down a wall or lay some concrete. Traditional construction is often about creating something new, turning a patch of dirt or a dilapidated building into a state of the art manufacturing plant, a new office or a new home. By contract, the majority of health projects are about growing, expanding, maximising or updating an existing facility, without even being noticed. Buildcorp has learnt from its extensive experience in this ultimate live environment that any construction activity needs to be adapted to this world, not the other way around. Historically, health projects have represented over 23% of the Buildcorp business, working with industry leaders such as Sydney Adventist Hospital, St Vincent s and Mater Health, GE and Ramsay Health Care. Buildcorp s health experience includes: New hospital construction Hospital car parks Ward and Operating Theatre refurbishment and upgrades Hospital patient care alterations and additions Cancer care facilities Imaging facilities including CT scans and MRI s Health Specialist consulting suites Hydrotherapy pools Construction and refurbishment of hospital support services Pathology laboratories Angio theatres Day surgery centres We have appreciated Buildcorp s flexibility which has enabled our management team to assess the best options available and make the right choices for our business. We have worked hard together to deliver the best result for the hospital. We look forward to the finished physical product being delivered in a most efficient and cost effective manner and reflecting our business objectives clearly in its design and operation. DR LEON CLARK, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SYDNEY ADVENTIST HOSPITAL 15

16 16

17 COMMERCIAL Maximising the building but minimising the cost gets your commercial project over the line. The commercial realties of development and construction come to the fore driving decision making in the search for investment return. All projects seek to offer something special but are often controlled by external factors such as: cap rates; rental returns; and historical rental data. Buildcorp understands its role in getting deals over the line, with extensive experience in offering structural alternatives to maximise net lettable areas or derisking projects by taking over the design process. For over 20 years we have delivered commercial projects that attract marquee tenants and record rent rates. Recently, Buildcorp has worked with major developers such as GPT, Dexus, Goodman International, Citta, Investa, ING and AMP in finding commercially viable solutions no matter what the development cycle. Buildcorp s commercial experience includes: Premium CBD commercial buildings A, B & C grade commercial buildings Full design and construction projects Green Star and NABERS construction Tight access sites Multi level below sea level excavations Accelerated programmes Alternative design solutions Inner city sites and multi storey excavations Multi stage commercial precincts In order to win this project, deemed to be one of the most difficult builds in Sydney, we needed a flexible consortium team. In a short period of time, Buildcorp fully explored all creative options across design, program and cost, to help find a winning point of difference. STEVE MCMILLAN MANAGING DIRECTOR CITTA PROPERTY GROUP 17

18 18

19 EDUCATION Masters in multi purpose, multi facility, multi discipline, education campuses. As varied as the educations these campuses offer, today s expanding University campuses require the full spectrum of construction services. New facilities, upgrades to old buildings with little to no documentation, the fit-out of teaching spaces or a one off, first of its kind, state of the art teaching and research environment are just some of the varied products Buildcorp has delivered for our University clients. Universities are open for business 24/7, as young adults live, learn, explore and challenge everything they know and researchers push the boundaries of what we thought possible. Operating a construction site among these curious minds adds additional challenges. Safety, security, traffic coordination, stakeholder communication, deliveries and material handling are the subjects of our 15 year degree in University construction. The findings of which can be seen in our construction approach that minimises the impact on staff, students and the day to day operations. Buildcorp s long term relationships with the teams at UWS, Sydney Uni, University of NSW, UTS and Macquarie University are testament to our ability to deliver everything these campuses need with the precision of the Sydney Uni backline on finals day. Buildcorp s tertiary education experience includes: Laboratories Teaching environments Lecture theatres Libraries Sporting facilities Administration buildings Buildcorp was able to effectively mobilise the required resources in order complete the project, whilst ensuring communication in a full and frank manner throughout the course of the works. Through this endeavour, they have demonstrated an expertise in the construction of complex tertiary buildings. NEIL HOGAN SENIOR MANAGER, MAJOR PROJECTS THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY 19

20 20

21 INDUSTRIAL 1,000,000m 2 under roof has given us the know-how to optimise your facility from the ground up. Since the days of the industrial revolution, businesses have sought commercial advantage through efficiencies in the production process. Today, modern revolutionaries continue to push the boundaries of production efficiency with state-of-the-art plant and equipment, de-centralised distribution networks and out sourced warehousing facilities. For over 20 years, Buildcorp has taken the efficiency concept one step further to the design and construction of the buildings charged with the responsibility to deliver these advantages. Efficiency in structural design, site preparation, pad layouts, bay widths, racking heights and even hard stand, all add up to buildings made to perform from the ground up. Working with industry heavy weights such as Toll, Woolworths, Bunnings, Metcash, Goodman International, Blum and Recall has meant that over 1,000,000m 2 of Australia is covered by a Buildcorp Shed. Buildcorp is increasingly engaged for its capability in design and construction projects, with designs for a 10,000m2 office/warehouse starting at less than $500 per m 2. Not all projects run according to plan. On our project, Buildcorp never lost sight of their delivery obligations, even when complications arose. They solved the problem amicably and professionally, and actively avoided litigious or aggressive actions. We would welcome them on future projects. GLENN FAGAN GENERAL MANAGER GROUP PROPERTY METCASH Buildcorp s industrial experience includes: Corporate head quarters Multi purpose facilities Manufacturing plants Warehouses and cold stores Distribution centres 21

22 22

23 SPECIAL USE Never been done before - no problem. Buildcorp loves the challenge of complex, one off solutions for projects that have a truly special purpose. Buildcorp s experience include: Sydney Airport A380 air bridges The largest blood processing facilitiy in Australia The first 6 star Green Star commercial building in NSW 23

24 LANE COVE LIBRARY 24

25 GOVERNMENT Buildcorp understands that the construction of council and government projects are often the last step in what as been a long and involved process of funding applications, community consultation and stakeholder approvals. Such high profile, high stake construction requires a partner that has been there and done it before. Nothing can replace the value of experience under the pressure of the public spot light. Buildcorp understands this pressure and the importance of delivering these projects on time and under budget. Buildcorp s Government experience includes: Aquatic centres and sports fields Administration facilities Parks and public spaces Car parks Substations and infrastructure support building Libraries Civic centres and cultural spaces 25

26 CLIENT TESTIMONIALS In our business, if the developer, the builder and the subcontractors aren t working together as partners, we can anticipate problems. We like to work with Buildcorp because of their commitment to partnership and teamwork. ROB MACKAY, HEAD OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ING I was impressed at how profoundly Buildcorp adopted the principles of the Council to achieve Corporate Green Star Accreditation. They were prepared to provide the opportunity for all of their staff, their consultants and even their clients to become Green Star Professionals by facilitating the necessary courses and examination. At all times the Buildcorp team were easy to deal with, openly communicative and pro-active in their problem solving. I have no doubt that the culture of your project team was instrumental to the successful completion of this project. ROB THOMAS, SENIOR DEVELOPMENT MANAGER INVESTA COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS ROMILY MADEW, GM GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL OF AUSTRALIA 26

27 Buildcorp have been exceptional in relation to the quality of their work and finished product. Equally important however has been their excellent communication and relationship skills. The internal Hospital redevelopment work has required the ability to manage all aspects of the building work, whilst still allowing a very busy hospital to maintain optimal services. Buildcorp were outstanding in this regard. Buildcorp was able to effectively mobilise the required resources in order complete the project, whilst ensuring communication in a full and frank manner throughout the course of the works. Through this endeavour, they have demonstrated an expertise in the construction of complex tertiary buildings. NEIL HOGAN, SENIOR MANAGER, MAJOR PROJECTS THE UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY Our new sports facility has received great support from our school community, as well as winning the prestigious MBA Excellence in Construction Award. We are enormously proud of the building and we are grateful to Buildcorp for their eye for quality and attention to detail. DR TIMOTHY HAWKES HEADMASTER THE KING S SCHOOL ROBERT CUSACK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ST VINCENT S PRIVATE & MATER HOSPITALS 27

28 Naming rights sponsor of the 2014 Buildcorp NRC Australian Rugby unleashed

29 SPORT SPONSORSHIPS Buildcorp provide grassroots support including sponsorship, mentoring of players, provision of cadetships and a Buildcorp Rugby Scholarship for the clubs that we sponsor. Since 1992, Buildcorp has sponsored rugby, beginning with Sydney University Football (Rugby) Club and growing in line with our business sponsoring Queensland University Rugby Club, University of Newcastle Rugby Union Club and Melbourne University Rugby Football Club as our footprint expanded. A proud equal opportunity employer we are very proud to also sponsor the Sydney University Women s Rugby Club. In 2011 we introduced the Buildcorp Rugby Scholarship, which supports a young rugby player playing at Sydney University Football Club, undertaking study that might be relevant to work at Buildcorp. Our commitment as naming rights sponsor for the Buildcorp National Rugby Championship a third tier platform for the development of Australian rugby is an extension of our grass roots support to a national scale reflective of our broader business footprint. SYDNEY UNIVERSITY CRICKET CLUB

30 TIM & JUDY SHARP RAISING AWARENESS FOR AUSTISM AT THE PARTY 2014 CHEQUE PRESENTATION FOR LIFESTART - THE PARTY 2014 CHEQUE PRESENTATION FOR AEIOU FOUNDATION - THE PARTY

31 BUILDCORP CHARITABLE FUND At Buildcorp, we make a concerted effort to provide long-term support to issues affecting our staff, our community and industry. In 2012, Buildcorp launched the Buildcorp Charitable Fund as a sub-fund of The Trust Company Foundation. This is a charitable structure through which staff financially support our community. We fundraise, donate and have a workplace-giving program, where staff contributions are matched dollar-for-dollar by Buildcorp. The mission of the Buildcorp Charitable Fund is to provide a common vehicle to maximise the impact of the collective giving spirit of our team and business partners, to those initiatives and organisations dear to the Buildcorp community. Together giving more Autism directly affects members of our Buildcorp team, so it goes without saying that we are is delighted that over the past 12 months The Buildcorp Charitable Fund has fundraised over $200,000 and as a result we were able to make two significant donations to two charities working with children with autism. We purchased two scholarships for two children to attend AEIOU in Brisbane, a school that works with early intervention programs for kids. We also sponsored a full Hanen Parent Program, which is a program run by Lifestart NSW for the parents and carers of 8 families living with a child with autism

32 32 At Buildcorp we accurately capture our reported health and safety data, measure it, manage it and ultimately improve our health and safety in order to ensure that everyone on every Buildcorp site goes home safe every day.

33 SAFE. SUSTAINABLE. SUCCESSFUL. Buildcorp has built a strong and sustainable company, based on five foundational principles: safety as a first priority; an unwavering commitment to quality; environmental responsibility; strong financial capabilities; and employing the best people. Safety At Buildcorp, safety is our first priority. Nothing is more important than ensuring a safe working environment for our subcontractors, project team, clients and the public as reflected by our MBA safety awards. To maintain our excellent safety record, Buildcorp uses a comprehensive health safety and environment (HSE) management system, which links with HSE site management plans, risk assessment registers and safe work method statements implemented across all business units and across all projects. Our HSE management system completely satisfies all legislative and WorkCover requirements and complies with all national and industry codes of practice. We also deliver every project under an AS/ NZS 4801:2001 accredited system, which includes a site-specific HSE plan prepared by the project manager. This plan outlines and highlights specific procedures for each trade, during each construction phase, and must be adhered to by all Buildcorp and subcontractor employees. Quality When it comes to quality, Buildcorp strives to surpass client expectations and industry standards by: leveraging advanced quality management technologies; using disciplined project review processes; and instilling a strong quality culture, led by the active involvement of senior management in every project. Our quality management processes are supported by a $2 million, internally developed, integrated management system called intrabuild. The management systems housed within intrabuild include our certified systems for ISO 9001:2008, ISO 14001:2004 and AS/ NZS 4801:2001. intrabuild provides a platform across the Group that ensures consistent processes and quality outcomes for all projects We also believe repeat business is a clear indicator of a strong quality culture. In 2010 financial year, 52% of annual revenue across the Buildcorp group was generated through repeat business. 33

34 Buildcorp believe that staff education is an integral part of delivering green buildings. Environmental management Buildcorp consistently goes beyond legislative and regulatory environmental standards to minimise any negative impacts on the environment that might result from our workplace activities and projects. We use an Environmental Management System (EMS) in accordance with global best practice guidelines: ISO 14001:2004. Our EMS is applied across our business. Through ongoing review, training and auditing we ensure that it is both well understood and adopted throughout our day-to-day operations. Buildcorp is committed to protecting the environment. In our head office, we minimise our reliance on nonrenewable resources, by using solar power, sensor lighting, efficient water systems and recycling programs, which both reduce our environmental footprint and operational costs. However, our head office is only a tiny proportion of our total environmental footprint, which we view as extending to every project site. It is here that environmental management is most critical, requiring rigorous assessment, planning and management as well as mitigation strategies. Since 2005, we have had fewer than five environmental incidents over the 730+ projects completed in that period. Our people At the heart of Buildcorp s success is our ability to attract and retain the best people. Buildcorp employs approximately 220 people who contribute to our competitive advantage through their passion, talent, and capability. Buildcorp strives to provide interesting, challenging work and the potential for career progression. We have a succession and talent management program to develop our future leaders and ensure Buildcorp s sustainability. At the start of a project, we work hard to assemble the right team for the right job. We match the skills, experience and personalities of the team to best fit the client s requirements. This is a key plank in our project quality, where both our employees and clients share in our achievements. We aim to treat our people fairly and equitably and be an employer of choice. We value a diverse workforce and focus on motivating and developing our people. Importantly, we actively encourage employee feedback and suggestions for improving our business. Above all, we believe that working at Buildcorp should be a safe, mutually rewarding and enjoyable experience. Quality ISO 9001 Environment ISO

35 We have over 30 employees that are Green Star Accredited Associates or Professionals. 35