Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By AHS
Scoured the regulations as prospective PC wants to split the project into 2 parts because he doesnt want to deal with the demolition part.
I dont think that is legal but cant hunt down anything in the ACOP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By anon1234
You can have different PCs for different phase of the job E.g. demolition, construction, fit-out
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AHS
Thx can you reference that information for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Number of solutions are available for this
1) Client can agree to undertake the demolitions as a totally separate project
2) PC can follow contract and organise his own demolition contractor but he is still the PC.
3) Determine the contract and get the current PC to pay the abortive costs and any additional contract sum due above his own contract price.
The regulations do not make splitting in cases like this illegal but they do expect control to be exerted. The current PC placed a tender on the basis of managing the demolition work so obviously the contract sum will need to be reduced by any demolition costs incurred by the client.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By MAK
Ive currently got a project going on now where one PC is doing the demolition, when that ends another PC will be appointed for the build.
Depends on your client. Does he want to have to go to tender twice? options include that the one PC you have can subcontract the demoltion out to a specialist contractor but this will lead to some fee going his way to manage the next contractor effectively.
I think you may have been thinking of where you cant have 2 Principal Contractors on the same site at the same time. "There can be only one". to use a well-known quote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AHS
"project" means a project which includes or is intended to include construction work and includes all planning, design, management or other work involved in a project until the end of the construction phase;
Thats the thrust of my argument otherwise clients could avoid site notification in some cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Crim
I'm currently working for a P C on a 2 storey extension to an existing building, where a demolition aspect has recently been introduced involving a separate building owned by the client. We wanted to have the demolition as a separate project, (same P C with a new CDM Plan), but the client demanded it to be part of the original project.
We now have a demolition contractor on board who will carry out the demolition under our control.
Only change is an amendment to the F10 to include the demolition for a 2 week period.
I believe we could have had the demolition as a separate project with the same CDM C and P C but with new pre construction info and CDM Plan and a separate H & S file.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AHS
Just spoken to the HSE Basingstoke they feel that one project should not be split from a CDM 2007 viewpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete Longworth
I work for a compnay that manufactures and installs printing presses for the newspaper industry. It is normal practice for us to operate as principal contractor for the installation stage only. There is a separate principal contractor for the construction of the press hall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
AHS
Wrt your friday posting above the HSE response concerns the issue of clients trying to breakdown what is clearly a continuous construction project into small chunks to avoid notification. To be honest some of the key issues apply to all comnstruction work and so it only creates a hassle to make the break. But the split between demolition and site clearance v construction can be such that creating 2 projects can be the only and best way forward. I personally do not think the HSE has a problem at this latter level whilst they do know the former is a significant issue.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Andrew Brown
AHS
Re your ref to Regulations and ACOP.
ACOP para 73 and 74 are relevant and say you should keep the same PC for the duration with a few exceptions.
Regulation 14(3)however allows for changes in appointments.
I would still argue for splitting this on the grounds of competence, in that a PC who is build only can argue he is not competent to deal with the demolition phase even if it is only to supervise it. Many demolition contractors are geared up to act as PC for demolition work and I see no reason why they cannot fulfill this role.
A clear site is an obvious break point in the project and should not produce too many handover problems between PCs.
Similarly competence for CDM-C for complicated demolition work, demolition requires design (see 'in court' this months SHP) how many CDM-Cs are competent to carry out a design review on demolition? Again the demolition contractor may also offer this service for this phase of the project. Provided they have competent engineers and safety people again no problem.
Many Clients particularly developers look to split projects to export risk and Demolition (include asbestos strip here to) is known to be hazardous, from a Corporate Risk Management point of view why would you want to be a PC overseeing a demolition sub contractor if you don't have to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David G C
One other point to consider is whether the PC has adequate insurance cover for contractors onsite.. one issue i believe, sometimes gets overlooked.
we have a similar refurbishment project with one principal contractor but two clients - one client is the landlord (building owner)for the external CAT A works and the other client (occupier of 12 floors)for the internal fit out CAT B works both running con-current with each other - each with the same architect but with different project managers/EA - with the kind assistance of the HSE we identified 2 notifications for this project.
Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AHS
Demolition is high risk and in most cases takes less than 6 weeks therefore even more reason to include it as it needs to be controlled more fully hence CDM 2007 will apply.
If a site is cleared ready to be built upon at a later stage then I can accept it is a different project.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Smiff
I work in the brownfield remediation sector and it is common and indeed appropriate to have different PCs for logical blocks of work. Often there are three stages; Demo, soil & groundwater treatment, and putting up the new building(s). Demo guys are the best PC for their phase, hand over to us to manager the contamination, and then Mr housebuilder/commercial developer does what he knows best and is PC for the above ground construction. We have also had a site split in two down the middle with Electrical Service laying chaps doing a new substation and cables on the clean side of the site, and us PC for the contaminated side. This is not to avoid notification, just commonsense and having the most competent party running appropriate bits of the job. Remember the spirit of CDM is to get us to plan and manage the job, and certainly not to be forced into a structure that makes things more complicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AHS
Interesting point but from a health and safety view I believe it is less complicated having one HS plan/File and it makes sure that the HSE is aware of the project from the start; not that I dont trust the chaps in Demolition of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.