Bruce Shaw Handbook 2010

Handbook 2010
A special thanks to all those involved in this years publication. Editorial Team Derry Scully, John Carleton, Michelle Quinn Contributors Willie Aherne, Stephen Ashe, Paul Boylan, Gerard Campbell, Gary Comerford, Steven Cooke, Niall Cox, Niall Harrington, Mark Keane, Paul Kehoe, Tony Kelly, Jamie McDonagh, Saran OByrne, Jack OSullivan, Michael Riordan, Brian Thackaberry, Mark Wearen, Terence Woulfe-Flanagan
Foreword/Welcome
Foreword/Welcome
Welcome to the new look Bruce Shaw Handbook. With the wealth of resources in the Irish construction Industry now looking at locations around the world to display their talents we have changed the content of our handbook to reflect this growing internationalisation of our industry. This year we include a review of the world players and construction output around the world and for the first time we take a closer look at the U.S.A. I hope you find the new sections useful and informative. We have kept the best of the Irish section which is a regular check point for many and always receives good feedback. New services on offer this year from Bruce Shaw include BER assessments , quantum support in legal work, solvency assistance and specialist services on sustainability projects such as wind farms etc. details of which can be found in the handbook and on our web site BRUCESHAW.IE. Id like to take this opportunity to thank all the contributors to this years edition and hope you find the 2010 Handbook as useful as its predecessors.
Bruce Shaw Handbook 2010
Section One: Global Construction Market 2010 The Year of the Tiger? Global Construction Output Index of International Construction Costs Top International Contractors Top International Design Firms Global Inflation Overview of Percentage Change in Global Output 2008 Oil Production 2008 Oil Consumption Section Two: Europe Market Review Europe Production Index in the Construction Sector Construction Output Annual Variation Top European Contractors Top European Design Firms Construction Cost New Residential Buildings Index Consumer v Construction Inflation EU Procurement Timescales EU Procurement Thresholds EU Labour Costs and Productivity Currency Movements Euro v Various European Currencies Section Three: Ireland Bruce Shaw Tender Price & Cost Indices SCS Tender Price Index Consumer v Construction Price Inflation Employment in Construction Bruce Shaw Average Irish Construction Costs Basic Hourly Wage Rates Basic Hourly Wage Rate Mechanical & Electrical Top Irish Main Contractors Top Irish Services Sub-Contractors Section Four: United Kingdom Market Review U.K. U.K. Construction Output Resource Cost Index of Non-Housing Building Output by Type of Work (New Build) Contractors Output by Region Top U.K. Contractors Top U.K. Architectural Firms Top U.K. Engineering Firms Euro v Pound Exchange Rates Section Five: Middle East Market Review GCC Countries Active Projects in Gulf Region GCC Key Statistics Outline Construction Cost Comparisons GCC Nations Main Contractors Middle Eastern Design Firms Sustainability GCC Single Currency Update
6 7 7 8 9 10 10 11 11
14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19
22 23 23 23 24 26 26 27 27
30 31 31 32 32 33 34 34 35
38 38 39 40 41 42 43 43
Contents
Section Six: United States Market Review U.S. Value of Construction Output Public/Private U.S. Construction Output by Type of Work Annual Construction Cost Index U.S. Regional Building Cost Index Total U.S. Employment in Construction Change in U.S. Employment in Construction U.S. Earnings in Construction Average Earnings of Nonsupervisory Workers in Construction Median Hourly Wages of the Largest Occupations in U.S. Construction Top U.S. Contractors Top U.S. Design Firms Euro v Dollar Exchange Rates Section Seven: Irish Statistics Construction Output Commentary Value of Construction Output Construction Output Gross National Product Public/Private Breakdown Sectoral Breakdown Breakdown of Construction Output Regional Breakdown of Construction Output Sectoral Breakdown of General Contracting Construction Purchasing Managers Index Property Performance Annual Housing Completions New Housing Completions by Type New Housing Completions by Region Society of Chartered Surveyors House Rebuilding Costs Planning Charges Fire Certificate Charges Section Eight: Topical Issues Whole Life Costing in Design Risk Management International Estimating Section Nine: About Bruce Shaw Cost Management Services Project Management Services Consultancy Services Procurement Safety Management Bruce Shaw Senior Personnel Our Clients Office Locations
46 46 47 47 47 48 48 49 49 49 50 51 51
54 54 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 59 59 59 60 61 61
64 66 68
72 74 75 76 77 78 80
Cuisine de France, Grange Castle
SECTION 1
Global Construction Market
2010 The Year of the Tiger?

2009 is finally behind us and the international consensus appears to be that GDP will return to growth on a global scale in 2010. The optimists are hoping that at the end of 2010, we will be reflecting that the recent trend in global economics was best represented by a V pattern. Some believe however that we are facing a period of further uncertainty which will see a growth pattern more akin to a W curve with further downturns to come. This uncertainty hinges on a number of key factors including whether or not the international community is capable of implementing real change in the manner in which financial markets and banking are regulated. This is not yet clear and how it develops could well shape growth patterns for the short to medium term. Any recovery is still fragile and reflects the fiscal stimuli many governments have injected into their economies. The boom came to a sudden halt in late 2008 when the U.S. housing bubble burst, inflicting economic distress on financial institutions worldwide. The resulting chaos in the credit markets caused projects around the world to be cancelled or deferred, sending the global construction industry into recession. While the recession has taken its toll on construction markets, many large contractors are being buoyed by infrastructure orders. Civil Engineering is less impacted than building and we are seeing that stimulus packages, especially in the U.S. and the U.K., have started to kick in. Large government financed infrastructure projects have kept the construction industry afloat in many countries. Once the stimulus packages finish, the private sector will hopefully pick up and new work will emerge from growing interest in climate and sustainability issues. The outlook is for little growth in the short term and possibly some further contraction. Figures for the final quarter of 2009 indicate that the recovery has already taken hold with the true tiger economy that is China powering ahead. Experts believe that this is a pattern that will be repeated in the other BRIC countries Brazil and India. Commodities prices which had seen some recovery in 2009 will probably start to rise again in 2010 given the projections of a sustained increase in growth in the BRIC economies in particular, but also in wider global markets. Not surprisingly, local costs in those markets which have suffered the most like Ireland have fallen the most dramatically other markets not so severely affected but still facing a slowdown are only now seeing prices fall as demand slumped towards the end of 2009. The continuous drop in tender levels in Ireland since early 2007 has led to significant changes over the last two years in comparative costs between Ireland and other nations, particularly those benefiting from financial stimuli. Ireland has not benefited from such a stimulus. Because of this and other local factors, it is likely that the extent of the fall in construction costs seen in Ireland will be greater than other developed nations. For many firms diversity is the key. The financial crisis has had its greatest impact on smaller, less capable construction firms. The impact of the worldwide recession is not evenly distributed but rather market oriented. Bruce Shaw is taking advantage of these opportunities in the World market and has experience of working in over 130 cities in 40 countries. The most recent projections for world construction output are shown on the map opposite, alongside our index of International Construction Costs.
Government financed infrastructure projects have kept the construction industry afloat in many countries.
SECTION 1 Global Construction Market
Global Construction Output U.S.$4.8 trillion

U.S.$bn Sweden/ Norway/ Finland 78 Canada 156 U.S.A. 1163 Europe 1540 Turkey 12.5
Russia 90 Japan 436
Middle East 125 India 81
N. Africa 28 Africa 70 S. America 101 S. Africa 15
China 321
Korea 107
Hong Kong 19
Malaysia 12 Australia 76 New Zealand 14
All figures are based upon 2008 annual output with exchange rates as at October 2009. Source of data: Reading University References: Asia Construct, Euroconstruct and national statistics
Index of International Construction Costs 2009

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Spain UK Sweden Romania Hungary Czech Republic Poland Greece Ireland Australia Germany France Japan China UAE USA Italy Switzerland India
Source: Bruce Shaw Partnership Note: Construction costs are subject to many variables which can be related to location (e.g. local legislation, custom and geographic position) and many others which are Client specific (e.g. specification). The ranges stated above are therefore indicative only and any international cost comparison will depend on the identification and quantification of these variables and adequate consideration of project specifics, exchange rates and current market conditions. Bruce Shaw is available to assist Clients working to benchmark costs internationally by ensuring that project specifics and location factors are identified and addressed.
Top 20 International Contractors

(Based on Total Firm Contracting Revenue) 2009 2 4 6 8 7 5 3 1 Rank 2008 3 1 Firm VINCI, France Revenue $ bn 49.90 34.40 29.30 26.00 24.00 23.30 21.70 27.70 32.40 34.50
4 5 7
10 12 14 16 18 17 15 13 11
12 11 9
GRUPO ACS, Spain BECHTEL, U.S.A. FCC, Spain
CHINA COMMUNICATIONS CONST. GROUP, China
CHINA STATE CONST. ENGINEERING CORP., China
HOCHTIEF, Germany
CHINA RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION CORP., China
BOUYGUES, France
CHINA RAILWAY GROUP, China
CHINA METALLURGICAL GROUP, China
10 20 18 14 ** 13 15
STRABAG, Austria
SKANSKA, Sweden
20.60 20.30 19.10
KAJIMA CORP., Japan FLUOR CORP., U.S.A. EIFFAGE, France
SHIMIZU CORP., Japan
19.00 17.90 17.30
OBAYASHI CORP., Japan BILFINGER BERGER, Germany BALFOUR BEATTY, U.K.
20
19
19 17
15.90 15.20
16.50 15.80
(Based on Contracting revenue from Projects Outside Home Country) 2009 2 4 6 8 7 5 3 1 Rank 2008 2 3 1 Firm HOCHTIEF, Germany Revenue $ bn 26.18 15.95
4 6 5 7
SKANSKA, Sweden BECHTEL, U.S.A. SAIPEM, Italy BOUYGUES, France
STRABAG, Austria
VINCI, France
18.49 15.05 13.57 11.67
13.98
10 12 15 17 13 11
9 10 13 11 8
BOVIS LEND LEASE, Australia FLUOR CORP., U.S.A. KBR, U.S.A. FCC, Spain
TECHNIP, France
BILFINGER BERGER, Germany
10.70
10.76 9.24 8.53 7.97 7.14 9.14
16 18
20
19
20 16 19
18
14
12
15
ROYAL BAM GROUP, The Netherlands CHINA COMMUNICATIONS CONST. GROUP, China CONSTRUTORA NORBERTO ODEBRECHT, Brazil GRUPO ACS, Spain CONSOLIDATED CONTRACTORS GROUP, Greece BALFOUR BEATTY, U.K.
6.04
5.86 5.47 5.10 5.53
2009 ranking is based on 2008 construction contracting revenue Source: Engineering News Record
Top 20 International Design Firms

(Based on Total Firm Revenue) 2009 2 4 6 8 7 5 3 1 Rank 2008 4 5 6 7 1 2 Type EAC EAC EC EC E EA JACOBS, U.S.A. Firm Revenue $ bn 5.50 5.22 5.21
AECOM TECHNOLOGY CORP., U.S.A. URS CORP., U.S.A. FLUOR CORP., U.S.A. CH2M HILL, U.S.A AMEC PLC, U.K.
11 10 8 3 9
EAC E
WORLEYPARSONS, Australia
4.29 3.89 3.73 3.18 3.17
10 12 14 16 18 17 15 13 11
EC EC E EA EC EC EAC EC E E E E
FUGRO, The Netherlands
THE SHAW GROUP, U.S.A. WS ATKINS, U.K
SNC-LAVALIN INTERNATIONAL, Canada ARCADIS, The Netherlands BECHTEL, U.S.A. KBR, U.S.A. TETRA TECH, U.S.A.
3.06
3.07
16 20 25 21 17
14
12
13
2.69 2.45 2.16 1.57 2.55
2.26
MOTT MACDONALD GROUP, U.K. PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF, U.S.A. ARUP GROUP, U.K.
1.69 1.55
20
19
22
DAR AL-HANDASAH CONSULTANTS, Egypt WSP GROUP, U.K.
1.40
1.46
(Based on revenue from Projects Outside Home Country) 2009 1 2 4 6 8 7 5 3 Rank 2008 1 2 3 7 Type E EC EC EA E E Firm FUGRO, The Netherlands WORLEYPARSONS, Australia FLUOR CORP., U.S.A. AECOM TECHNOLOGY CORP., U.S.A. SNC-LAVALIN INTERNATIONAL, Canada ARCADIS, The Netherlands JACOBS, U.S.A. AMEC PLC, U.K. Revenue $ bn 2.96 2.39 2.08 2.02 1.85 1.78 1.32 1.13 1.95 2.33 2.76
14 4 5
EAC
10 12 14 16 18 17 15 13 11
6 10 12 16 20 22 25 23 19 15 11 9 8
EC EC EA
EC
KBR, U.S.A
EC EC E E
FOSTER WHEELER, U.S.A. POYRY, Finland
BECHTEL, U.S.A.
DAR AL-HANDASAH CONSULTANTS, Egypt
1.46
TECNICAS REUNIDAS, Spain MOTT MACDONALD GROUP, U.K.
0.966 0.962 0.892 0.879 0.831 0.813
0.995
E E
WSP GROUP, U.K.
ARUP GROUP, U.K.
20
19
EAC
EC
HATCH GROUP, Canada HOCHTIEF, Germany URS CORP., U.S.A.
0.867
2009 ranking is based on revenue for design services performed in 2008. Key to Type of Firm: A - architect; E - engineer; C - contractor Source: Engineering News Record
Global Inflation %
5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2002 2003 2004 Emerging economies 2005 World 2006 2007 Advanced economies 2008 2009
Note: Graph is based on core inflation Source: International Monetary Fund
Overview of Percentage Change in Global Output

Region Advanced Economies United States Euro area Germany France Italy Spain Japan United Kingdom Canada Emerging & Developing Economies Africa Central & Eastern Europe Russia China India Middle East Brazil Mexico World output
Source: International Monetary Fund
January, 2010
2010 (f) 2.7% 1.0% 1.5% 1.4% 1.0% -0.6% 1.7% 1.3% 2.6% 4.3% 2.0% 3.6% 10.0% 7.7% 4.5% 4.7% 4.0% 3.9% 2011 (f) 2.4% 1.6% 1.9% 1.7% 1.3% 0.9% 2.2% 2.7% 3.6% 5.3% 3.7% 3.4% 9.7% 7.8% 4.8% 3.7% 4.7% 4.3%
2008 0.4% 0.6% 1.2% 0.3% -1.0% 0.9% -1.2% 0.5% 0.4% 5.2% 3.1% 5.6% 9.6% 7.3% 5.3% 5.1% 1.3% 3.0%
2009 -2.5% -3.9% -4.8% -2.3% -4.8% -3.6% -5.3% -4.8% -2.6% 1.9% -4.3% -9.0% 8.7% 5.6% 2.2% -0.4% -6.8% -0.8%
10
2008 Oil Production

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Russia United States Iran China Canada Mexico United Arab Emirates Kuwait Venezuela European Union Norway Country Saudi Arabia Barrels/Day 10,780,000 9,790,000 8,514,000 4,174,000 3,973,000 3,350,000 3,186,000 3,046,000 2,741,000 2,643,000 2,538,000 2,466,000 Rank 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Brazil Iraq Algeria Nigeria Angola Libya United Kingdom Kazakhstan Qatar Indonesia India Azerbaijan Country Barrels/Day 2,422,000 2,385,000 2,180,000 2,169,000 2,015,000 1,875,000 1,584,000 1,429,000 1,208,000 1,051,000 883,500 875,200
2008 Oil Consumption

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Country United States European Union China Japan India Russia Germany Brazil Saudi Arabia Canada Korea, South Mexico Barrels/Day 19,500,000 14,440,000 7,999,000 4,785,000 2,940,000 2,800,000 2,569,000 2,520,000 2,380,000 2,260,000 2,175,000 2,128,000 Rank 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 France Iran United Kingdom Italy Indonesia Spain Netherlands Taiwan Australia Thailand Singapore Venezuela Country Barrels/Day 1,986,000 1,755,000 1,710,000 1,639,000 1,564,000 1,562,000 962,900 959,000 953,700 942,000 896,000 760,000
Source: CIA World Factbook
11
Digital Realty Trust, St. Denis, Paris
SECTION 2
Europe
Market Review Europe

During 2009, the European construction industry took a deep breath whilst it experienced its worst year in more than a decade. Construction output in the EU fell by as much as 7.7% and for 2010 we expect that a further, although lesser decline, will occur. However, some countries within the EU maintained positive growth for the year, albeit, not to the same degree as previous years, namely, Poland, Czech Republic and Germany whilst Ireland and Spain experienced the greatest decline in output. With the EU economy now emerging from recession and with GDP growth returning to positive figures, our long term view is of a gradual recovery. As a result, it is anticipated that the fall in EU construction industry will be around 2.2% for 2010, with further countries to be added to the list of positive growth in output such as Romania and Slovakia. Lack of credit availability affected private sector development immensely in 2009, in particular the residential sector. With the more developed western markets being worst affected and having a large oversupply of units. Conversely, in Eastern Europe, demand still exists for new units, but increased unemployment, credit availability and affordability has stalled the market and considerable re-adjustment of sales prices is occurring. Smaller, lower risk and more sustainable developments of all types are being given the green light by funding institutions, although the requirements being asked are more stringent than before. From our network of offices throughout Europe, Bruce Shaw have been working on both the Client and funding side to restructure projects of various types and sizes. Government intervention in the construction market has varied from country to country. Government guaranteed mortgages and investment incentives for multi-national companies being just some of the methods used. The European Union Cohesion and Structural funds 2007-2013, which averages approximately 60 Billion investment per year divided amongst the 27 member states, provides good opportunities for work in the Public Sector. Member states have however scaled back their expenditure on capital projects due to the crisis and this action is having an effect on the absorption rate for EU funds which is currently on average 9%. The low absorption rate is being addressed by member states who are looking at alternative means of financing capital projects such as PPPs or concessions and it is worthy to note that public sector civil engineering is the only market segment which has not declined in 2009 and is expected to increase again in 2010. We are currently involved with various government institutions in Europe in relation to PPP projects and EU fund management. Generally the Construction Sentiment Indicator within the EU rose over the last year and the outlook for 2010 is not as gloomy as 2009, although its still far from being positive. It is expected that by 2011, construction output will be back in positive territory and in 2012 the construction sector should outperform GDP growth.
The Construction Sentiment Indicator within the EU rose over the last year and the outlook for 2010 is not as gloomy as 2009.
14
SECTION 2 Europe
Production Index in the Construction Sector 2000 - 2009

110
105
100
95
90
04-2006
04-2009
04-2008
04-2004
07-2006
07-2009
04-2002
04-2005
07-2008
04-2003
07-2004
04-2007
10-2000
07-2002
10-2006
01-2006
Euro area, seasonally adjusted series
Trendline
EU27, seasonally adjusted series
Trendline
The production in construction index shows the output and activity of the construction sector. It measures changes in the volume of output on a monthly basis. Construction includes building construction and civil engineering. Source: Eurostat
Construction Output Annual Variation

Country
% change compared with the same quarter of the previous year Belgium Q4-08 -8.8% -2.8% -7.2% Q1-09 -5.5% -5.3% Q2-09 -10.7% -16.8% -28.3% -37.8% -11.6% -11.2% -32.4% -4.0% -2.0% -3.1% n/a -9.1% 4.0% 1.6% -9.4% Q3-09 -16.9% -16.7% -28.5% -14.2% -17.8% -8.0% n/a 3.3% 0.8% -6.2%
Ireland Spain Italy Greece
Estonia
Germany
Denmark
Czech Republic
Bulgaria
-6.6% -22.4% -33.7% -19.7% -6.9% -11.4% -9.2% -3.8% 3.0% -2.0% 2.7% -2.1% 4.3% 1.6% 1.3% -4.9% -1.5% -3.8% -2.4%
-10.5% -12.2% -31.3% -11.1% -7.0% n/a
-11.4%
-35.5% -10.9% -12.6% -29.8% -42.8% -4.5% -3.8% 3.3% 1.7% 1.2% 0.8%
-36.9%
France Cyprus
-4.7%
-13.6% -36.8% -49.3% -4.0% -5.4% -7.4% 8.6% 5.3%
Hungary Malta
Luxembourg
Lithuania
Latvia
-48.0% -0.7%
Poland
Austria
Netherlands
-5.6% -4.3% -19.1%
-6.9% 0.4% -15.1% -5.4% -1.3% -3.5%
-0.9% -4.9%
Sweden
Finland
Slovakia
Slovenia
Romania
Portugal
14.6% 14.0% -5.1% 1.7%
-13.8% -16.1% -4.3%
-19.0% -19.0% -12.4% -11.3% 3.5% -8.4%
-24.4% -10.6% -8.5% -2.3% -7.2%
-21.6%
Civil engineering Average

Source: Eurostat
Building Average
EU Average
United Kingdom
-8.0% -8.4% -7.3%
-10.7% -12.8% -1.4%
-13.8%
-4.0%
-12.0% 3.2%
-8.8%
10-2009
01-2009
07-2005
07-2003
07-2007
10-2008
01-2008
10-2004
01-2004
04-2001
10-2002
01-2002
10-2005
01-2005
10-2003
10-2007
01-2003
01-2007
07-2001
10-2001
01-2001
85
15
The Top 15 European Contractors based on Total Revenue

Rank 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 HOCHTIEF, Germany VINCI, France STRABAG, Austria SKANSKA, Sweden BOUYGUES, France SAIPEM, Italy BILFINGER BERGER, Germany TECHNIP, France FCC, Spain ROYAL BAM GROUP, The Netherlands BALFOUR BEATTY, U.K. CONSILIDATED CONTRACTORS GROUP, Greece GRUPO ACS, Madrid EIFFAGE, France PETROFAC, U.K. 17.92 12.66 10.92 10.30 9.29 7.99 7.36 7.33 5.84 4.89 4.14 3.74 3.49 2.39 2.28 Firm Revenue bn
2009 ranking is based on 2008 construction revenue
The Top 15 European Design Firms based on Total Revenue

Rank 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 E E EA E E E E EC E E E EC EC E EC AMEC, U.K. FUGRO, The Netherlands WS ATKINS, U.K ARCADIS, The Netherlands MOTT MACDONALD, U.K. ARUP GROUP, U.K. WSP GROUP, U.K. SAIPEM, Italy GRONTMIJ, The Netherlands POYRY, Finland RAMBOLL GRUPPEN, Denmark TECNICAS REUNIDAS, Spain HOCHTIEF, Germany HALCROW GROUP, U.K. EGIS, France 2.18 2.17 1.84 1.74 1.15 1.06 0.96 0.89 0.83 0.83 0.76 0.75 0.62 0.60 0.48 Type Firm Revenue bn.
2009 ranking is based on revenue for design services performed in 2008. Key to Type of Firm: A - architect; E - engineer; EC - engineer-contractor Source: Engineering News Record
16
SECTION 2 Europe
Construction cost New Residential Buildings Index (2005=100)

Country Belgium 108.62 Q1-07 Q3-07 110.40 110.07 Q1-08 110.97 111.40 Q3-08 113.80 112.19 Q1-09 112.30 112.14 Q3-09 112.20 107.40 116.30 91.03 N/A 111.58
Spain Italy
Greece
Ireland
Estonia
Germany
Denmark
Czech Republic
109.33e 104.00 121.20 113.85
106.20
112.89e 105.50 125.80 110.93
105.90 128.50 107.47 111.90
113.78e
115.56e 108.80 129.90 116.90 101.20
113.78e 107.00 122.50 97.19
France
108.47e 109.08 145.70 118.18 N/A
110.29e
107.50
109.60 110.76e 110.71 N/A 112.31e
113.69e 115.86 N/A
113.25e
120.46e 118.43e 121.86 N/A
118.68e 116.51e 120.28 127.98 N/A
114.00
118.72e 116.68 N/A
114.40
Latvia
Cyprus
Poland
Austria
Netherlands
Hungary
Luxembourg
Lithuania
165.40 105.71e 107.87 132.51
108.80e 106.47 107.83
105.02e
113.40e 109.77 107.24
107.53e 117.10e 112.20 113.84 109.71 111.30 110.10
139.36
181.80
188.60 109.86e 120.80e 113.47 117.14 143.86
185.00 110.03e 113.26e 116.30 141.50e 114.50 116.70 113.54 115.13
165.70 118.01 N/A
119.69
122.30e
124.70e 112.20e 115.96 115.63 111.53 114.20 112.70 N/A
104.43 104.69 106.50 106.70 107.57 117.39e
109.66 123.48e 108.80 112.59e 125.90e 109.59 112.00 108.90 110.63 109.50
116.40 149.53e 115.60 118.64e 142.20e 114.25 118.16 109.50 115.10 116.20 113.98
Finland
Slovakia
Slovenia
Romania
Portugal
132.63e 112.20
111.24
European Union Average

Source: Eurostat
Norway
Turkey
United Kingdom
Sweden
108.95e 124.50e 108.04 108.30 108.50
114.08e 138.80e 116.07 111.26 111.20
112.70
116.90 119.14e
135.40e 119.67 111.25
101.20e
118.31e
102.00e 137.40e 120.69 111.12e
e=Estimated value
Consumer v Construction Inflation

6%
4%
2%
-2%
-4%
2007
2008 European Union Average Consumer Inflation
2009 New Residential Const Cost
Source: Eurostat
17
EU Procurement Timescales 2010

Prior Indicative Notice (PIN) Publish at least 52 days prior to date contract notice is dispatched to avail of reduced time limits (max. 12 mths) Open Procedures Time Limit for Receipt of Tender If no PIN: not less than 52 days If PIN: General rule minimum time 36 days and in any case not less than 22 days from date contract notice is dispatched Restricted Procedure Time Limit for Receipt of Expressions of Interest Not less than 37 days from date contract notice is dispatched Time Limit for Receipt of Tenders If no PIN: Not less than 40 days If PIN: General rule minimum time 36 days, but in no circumstances less than 22 days from the date invitation to tender is dispatched Accelerated Restricted Procedure Time Limit for Receipt of Expressions of Interest n Not less than 15 days from date contract notice is dispatched Time Limit for Receipt of Tenders n Not less than 10 days from date invitation to tender is dispatched Negotiated Procedure with Prior Publication of a Contract Notice Time Limit for Receipt of Application n Not less than 37 days from date contract notice is dispatched Negotiated Accelerated Procedure with Prior Publication of a Contract Notice Time Limit for Receipt of Application n Not less than 15 days from date contract notice is dispatched Contract Award Notice Time Limit for Receipt of Issue n 48 days from award of contract
EU Procurement Thresholds 2010

Works Contract Notice/PIN 4,845,000 Threshold applies to Government Departments and Offices, Local and Regional Authorities and other public bodies. 125,000 Threshold applies to Government Departments and Offices 193,000 Threshold applies to Local and Regional Authorities and public bodies outside the Utilities sector. 4,845,000 For entities in Utilities sectors covered by GPA
Supplies and Services Contract Notice Contract Notice Utilities Works Contracts/Prior Indicative Notice Supplies and Services
387,000 For entities in Utilities sectors covered by GPA
Note: The above thresholds are valid until 31st December 2011. Source: www.etenders.gov.ie
18
SECTION 2 Europe
EU Labour Costs and Productivity 2009

Country Austria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Productivity 83 n/a 45 80 40 81 97 92 59 44 100 75 Hr/Cost Country 18.61 Latvia 17.27 Lithuania 6.68 Luxembourg 28.04 Netherlands 6.63 Poland N/A Portugal 24.58 Romania 18.92 Slovakia 12.09 Slovenia 4.51 Spain 18.18 Sweden 16.94 U.K. Productivity n/a n/a 142 101 38 50 n/a 55 n/a 78 84 82 Hr/Cost 4.54 4.90 19.33 26.11 7.42 9.21 3.01 4.28 12.35 13.75 29.57 21.75
Source: Productivity figures are from OECD for 2008 and based on GDP per hours worked for the whole labour market Hr/Cost data source Eurostat up to 3rd Qtr of 2009, except for: Italy 2nd Qtr; Luxembourg & Netherlands 1st Qtr
Currency Movements Euro v Various European Currencies

Bulgarian lev Croatian kuna Czech koruna Danish krone Estonian kroon Polish zloty Romanian leu Russian Rouble
2010* 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005
1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96
7.30 7.34 7.22 7.34 7.32 7.40
26.06 26.44 24.95 27.77 28.34 29.78
7.44 7.45 7.46 7.45 7.46 7.45
15.65 15.65 15.65 15.65 15.65 15.65
4.04 4.33 3.51 3.78 3.90 4.02
4.13 4.24 3.68 3.34 3.53 3.62
41.93 44.14 36.42 35.02 34.11 35.19
* Note: Based on January and February exchange rates Source: European Central Bank
19
Mary Immaculate College
SECTION 3
Ireland
Bruce Shaw Tender Price & Cost Indices 2000 - 2010

The Bruce Shaw tender price index, which is shown graphically below, shows that, on average, construction prices fell by 17% during 2009. As the year progressed and as new projects became increasingly scarcer, contractors were forced to bid for projects at ever lower prices, in order to maintain jobs for their key employees. This has led to a situation where by the end of the year, contractors were bidding for work at 15% to 20% below cost. The private sector market is almost stagnant at the moment with an oversupply in most areas and the public sector capital programme has been cut back significantly. As a consequence there is an extreme shortage of new projects coming to the market this year. Competition will therefore remain fierce and we are predicting that tender prices will fall by a further 5%-6% during 2010. This represents an overall fall from the peak in 2007 of over 30% and offers exceptional value for Clients for the few projects that do proceed. However it must be realised that below cost tendering is completely unsustainable in the long term and measures will have to be taken to guard against the inevitable result of company failures. It is important to distinguish between tender prices and construction input costs. The former are subject to market pressures while the latter reflect the actual costs of labour and materials. With the exception of electricians, who obtained an increase following an industrial dispute last year, there have been no increases in construction labour rates since 2008 and none are anticipated during 2010. Material prices are reducing somewhat but by less than the general decline in output since manufacturers costs actually rise as a result of smaller production volumes. Overall we anticipate that input costs will reduce by 3% in 2010 following a 2.5% reduction last year.
On average, construction prices fell by 17% during 2009.
Bruce Shaw Tender Price & Cost Indices 2000 - 2010

190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010 (f)
Average Tender Price
Construction Input Cost
2001 Tender % Cost % 6 9
2002 -2 3
2003 -4 3
2004 4 2
2005 4 3
2006 3 3
2007 0 3
2008 -12 3
2009 2010 (f) -17 -2 -5 -3
Source: Bruce Shaw Partnership
22
SECTION 3 Ireland
SCS Tender Price Index 2000 - 2009

155 150 145 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 1h 00 2h 00 1h 01 2h 01 1h 02 2h 02 1h 03 2h 03 1h 04 2h 04 1h 05 2h 05 1h 06 2h 06 1h 07 2h 07 1h 08 2h 08 1h 09 2h 09
Source: Society of Chartered Surveyors
Consumer v Construction Price Inflation 1997 - 2009

15 10
-5
-10
-15
-20
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Construction Price Inflation
Consumer Price Inflation
Source: Central Statistics Office/Bruce Shaw Partnership
Employment in Construction (000s)

280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140
Jan-Mar 07
Jul-Sep 07
Jan-Mar 04
Oct-Dec 04
Jan-Mar 05
Oct-Dec 05
Jan-Mar 06
Oct-Dec 06
Oct-Dec 07
Apr-Jun 04
Jul-Sep 04
Apr-Jun 05
Jul-Sep 05
Apr-Jun 06
Jul-Sep 06
Apr-Jun 07
Jan-Mar 08
Apr-Jun 08
Jul-Sep 08
Oct-Dec 08
Jan-Mar 09
Apr-Jun 09
Source: Central Statistics Office
Jul-Sep 09
23
Bruce Shaw Average Irish Construction Costs 2010

The average construction costs table is generated using Bruce Shaws Cost Database and sets out typical building construction costs. Our database is the largest construction cost database in Ireland. Average Costs Commercial Offices Suburban Naturally Ventilated Shell & Core Developer Standard Extra for Air Conditioning City Centre Air Conditioned Shell & Core Developer Standard Office Fit Out 95% Open Plan, No Catering 75% Open Plan, Limited Catering 60% Open Plan, Full Catering Corporate HQ Open Plan Work Station High Tech Industrial Shell & Core Developer Standard Residential Estate House (Approx. 100m2) Developer Standard Apartments Individual House Rebuilding Costs Shopping Centres Anchor Unit Unit Shops Mall Retail Fit Out Site Development Business Parks Roads & Primary Services Warehouses Without Offices With 10% Offices Healthcare Acute Hospitals, Average Costs Ward Blocks General Operating Theatres Nursing Homes Accident & Emergency 2,300 1,900 3,400 1,650 2,400 2,650 2,250 6,400 2,400 3,400 per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. 550 650 700 1,000 per sq.m. per sq.m. 150,000 470,000 per hectare 650 800 1,450 1,100 800 1,200 2,550 1,600 per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. 950 1,200 1,200 1,800 per sq.m. per sq.m. 800 700 1,250 1,250 per sq.m. per sq.m. 400 600 800 1,250 950 650 800 1,200 1,600 2,700 per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. each 20-30% 25-35% 20-30% 25-35% 1,450 1,650 2,100 2,350 per sq.m. per sq.m. 20-25% 15-20% 1,100 1,200 150 1,500 1,600 300 per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. 15-20% 10-15% Cost Range M&E
20-25% 25-45%
10-20%
10-20%
see section seven 10-15% 20-25% 25-30% 8-12% 10-15%
10-15% 20-30% 45-60% 20-25% 25-30% 20-25%
24
SECTION 3 Ireland
Average Costs Car Park Surface Multi-Storey Single Level Basement Double Level Basement Education Primary Level (DOE Nov 09) Second Level (DOE Nov 09) Third Level Leisure Hotel Building FF&E Restaurant Cinema Sports Hall Swimming Pool Municipal Fire Station Prison Courthouse
Notes Costs are based on January 2010 prices.
Cost Range 1,000 8,500 12,000 16,000 1,350 1,250 17,000 27,000 35,000 per space per space per space per space per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m. per sq.m.
M&E -
10-15%
990* 990* 2,150
20-25% 25-35% 25-35% -
15-20%
1,450 250 1,550 1,200 850 1,950
2,400 650 2,350 2,000 1,300 2,700
20-30% 20-35% 15-25% 10-15%
1,800 1,650 2,400
2,200 2,350 3,050
20-30% 20-30%
Average costs as indicated should not be used for insurance or other property valuation purposes. The costs are representative of typical specifications for each type of project. Unique designs or challenging sites may not be within the cost range shown. The rates shown are average construction build costs only and do not include VAT, professional fees or allow for future inflation. *Basic Building Cost only (incl. VAT). External allowances of 12.5% and abnormal costs should be added.
25
Basic Hourly Wage Rates

Craftsman Grade A 1st October 2005 1st April 2006 (3%) 1st October 2006 (2%) 1st July 2007 (2.5%) 1st January 2008 (2.5%) *1st October 2008 (3.5%) *1st April 2009 (2.5%) 16.85 17.36 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.25 19.73 16.34 16.84 17.18 17.61 18.04 18.67 19.13 General Operative Grade B 15.33 15.80 16.12 16.52 16.93 17.52 17.95 Grade C 14.83 15.28 15.58 15.97 16.37 16.94 17.36 Grade D 13.48 13.89 14.17 14.52 14.88 15.40 15.78
* NOTE: The draft pay proposals outlined in the national wage agreement Towards 2016 have not been implemented. Rates of pay at January 2010 remain as 1st January 2008. Source: Registered Agreement for the Construction Industry
Basic Hourly Wage Rate Mechanical & Electrical

Mechanical 1st October 2005 1st April 2006 (3%) 1st October 2006 (2%) 1st July 2007 (2.5%) 1st January 2008 (2.5%) *1st October 2008 (3.5%) *1st April 2009 (2.5%)
* NOTE: The draft pay proposals outlined in the national wage agreement Towards 2016 have not been implemented. Rates of pay at January 2010 remain as 1st January 2008.
16.85 17.36 17.71 18.15 18.60 19.25 19.73
Electrical 1st April 2004 1st April 2005 1st April 2006 1st April 2007 1st September 2009** 1st January 2010** 18.98 19.72 20.39 21.49 22.03 22.56
** NOTE: These rates were agreed following an industrial dispute during 2009. In December 2009 an enquiry under the Industrial Relations Act recommended that new rules should be drafted for the National Joint Industrial Council for the Electrical Contracting Industry and that the Registered Employment Agreement should be reviewed and updated. Source: MEBSCA/ECA
26
SECTION 3 Ireland
Top Irish Main Contractors

Rank 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 2008 1 5 2 4 3 6 7 10 8 11 14 15 9 13 12 17 18 16 John Sisk & Son Ltd. BAM Contractors (Formerly Ascon) M. McNamara & Co. Birmayne (Pierse Contracting) Roadbridge Ltd. P.J. Hegarty & Sons Elliott Holdings Ltd SIAC Construction Ltd. P.J. Walls Ltd. Bowen Construction Ltd. Laing ORourke Bennett (Construction) Ltd. J.J. Rhatigan & Co Ltd. G&T Crampton Ltd. John Paul Construction Holdings Ltd. Murnane & OShea Ltd. Coffey Construction Ltd. Cleary & Doyle Ltd. 1,139.65 460.70 457.50 439.35 388.15 344.20 293.40 272.74 246.31 217.60 215.30 186.80 180.56 138.80 135.20 92.05 89.08 81.89 Firm Revenue m
Top Irish Services Sub-Contractors

Rank 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 2008 1 3 5 4 9 7 6 8 10 15 12 14 17 Mercury Engineering Group Jones Engineering Ltd. Kirby Group Engineering Ltd. Suir Engineering Ltd. Dornan Engineering Ltd. Winthrop Engineering Ltd. L. Lynch & Co Ltd. Rotary M & E Services (Ireland) Ltd. Designer Group JRE Group Lynskey Engineering Ltd. T. Bourke & Co Ltd. Precision Electric (Ireland) Ltd. 410.69 178.59 90.84 64.30 51.90 51.42 51.21 41.16 40.18 33.96 28.80 28.11 21.37 Firm Revenue m
2009 ranking is based on 2008 construction revenue Source: Individual Companies Auditors/Companies Registration Office
27
Bruce Shaw are delighted to be part of the project team on Primark Bristol which was awarded Store Design of the Year 2009. Bruce Shaw are working with Primark on their continued growth across a number of European countries.
Primark Bristol
SECTION 4
United Kingdom
Market Review U.K.

The U.K. construction industry has been badly affected by the general economic downturn, but it appears the U.K. economy is beginning to show some signs of economic recovery albeit slowly. In the last 12 months the Government has implemented further fiscal easing to bring the total asset purchase close to 200 billion in early 2010. This combined with the previous interest rate reduction to its lowest recorded level of 0.5% is an attempt to limit the impact of one of the deepest recessions the U.K. economy has experienced. On a positive, if cautious note, the number of people unemployed in the U.K. fell to 2.46 million in the last quarter of 2009, the first quarterly fall for 18 months, prompting some commentators to suggest that the decline in the labour market has stabilised. Economists have warned however that employment in the construction sector is still falling sharply and will continue for much of 2010, even if the pace of decline is expected to be much slower than in 2009. The Construction Products Association (CPA) in its annual review has reported a fall of more than 12% in construction output covering all sectors in 2009. This represents the largest fall in a single year since the mid 1950s!. Further analysis also shows that in some construction sectors the fall has been much more significant with the commercial and retail areas showing reductions of up to 26% for the year. The outlook for construction output in 2010 is a further decline of up to 3%. The residential market has also suffered with a further fall off in the supply of new build homes in 2009. 2008 was one of the worst years on record for house building. Figures published by the NHBC show the number of homes completed in the U.K. fell from 148,000 in 2008 to 116,000 in 2009. The last quarter of 2009 did however show an increase in house build registrations from the same period in 2008, which is positive news going into 2010. In line with other commentators, we forecast that the downward trend in tender prices will continue in 2010 with prices continuing to fall in the short term following the estimated 7-8% drop in tender price inflation for 2009. Our outlook for 2010 is a further fall of up to 4-5% over the full year. However we could well see a recovery of sorts in the first quarter of 2011 with an expected 1.1% increase to the first quarter of 2012. It is expected to be a slow recovery through which could take until 2014 for the construction industry as a whole to achieve consistent positive growth. One area of positive growth in construction activity has been in infrastructure/PFI investment. The 16 billion Crossrail project for London and the South East is due to start main construction works later in 2010. The new 840 million 2000 bed super-hospital in Glasgow is also due to begin construction later this year, while the 355 million 1300 bed super-hospital facility in Peterborough is due for completion in September 2010. A further 20 billion of public funding has also been earmarked for rail network infrastructure in the coming years. An important focus for the U.K. construction industry is the general election which is due to take place in May 2010. Public spending policy and continued investment will be very much determined by the outcome of the next government.
The downward trend in tender
prices will continue in 2010. Our of up to 4-5% over the full year
outlook for 2010 is a further fall
30
SECTION 4 United Kingdom
U.K. Construction Output bn

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 New Work 2005 2006 2007 2008
Repair & Maintenance
Source: Construction Statistics Branch, Office for National Statistics.
Resource Cost Index of Non-Housing Building

220
200
180
160
140
120
100 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 BSP (f)
Combined Index
Labour & Plant
Materials
Source: Construction Market Intelligence, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
31
2008 Output by Type of Work (New Build) bn

Public Sector Private Sector
New housing 3.96 Infrastructure 2.70 Industrial 0.11 Education 6.53 Health 2.03 Offices 1.07 Entertainment 1.18 Misc. 1.24
Private Sector
2008 Contractors Output by Region bn

North East 5.3 Yorkshire & the Humber 10.0 East Midlands 7.8 East of England 23.9 Greater London 19.9 South East 37.3 South West 10.0 West Midlands 9.9 North West 13.1 Wales 4.6 Scotland 10.8
32
Top 20 U.K. Contractors

Rank 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2008 1 2 3 4 8 5 7 6 10 9 13 11 16 12 15 14 25 17 20 18 Balfour Beatty Laing ORourke Carillion Kier Morgan Sindall Bovis Lend Lease Skanska Construction Newarthill Keller Galliford Try Interior Services Group BAM Construct U.K. Vinci Wates Group Costain Bowmer & Kirkland Willmott Dixon Interserve VolkerWessels U.K. Shepherd Building Group 8.93 3.45 2.56 1.65 1.61 1.53 1.48 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.11 1.07 1.02 0.99 0.91 0.89 0.84 0.77 0.72 0.72 Firm Revenue bn
Turnover refers to group total, including joint ventures Firms based in the U.K. have had their international operations included in the figures. Those based overseas, such as Bovis Lend Lease and Vinci, have only had their U.K. subsidiarys activities included. Source: Building Magazine
Four Seasons Hotel, Park Lane, London
33
Top U.K. Architectural Firms

2009 2 4 6 8 7 5 3 1 Rank 2008 2 6 8 7 5 3 1 Practice Building Design Partnership Staff 417 271
Capita Symonds Aedas
Foster & Partners
Atkins
278 255 162
20
Nightingale Associates PRP Architects Austin-Smith: Lord
239 145 121 115
10 12 14 16 = 18 = 18 = 20 15 13 11
16 47 23 22 21 15 11 17 9
14
13
RMJM
Broadway Malyan Sheppard Robson
Aecom
144 119 106 93
3DReid
Scott Brownrigg Stride Treglown
PM Group/Deverux Architects
104 90 83 83
16 =
Hamiltons Architects Lewis & Hickey
NPS Property Consultants
82 82 81
Fairhursts Design Group
Note: Ranking is based on numbers of Chartered Architectural staff
Top U.K. Engineering Firms

2009 2 4 6 8 7 5 3 1 Rank 2008 2 3 7 1 Practice Atkins Staff 2,661 1,760 1,427 1,216 1,207 804 682 1,214 1,357 1,554
9 4 8 5
Halcrow Group Aecom
Scott Wilson Group
Mott MacDonald
Mouchel Group
10 12 14 16 18 17 15 13 11
6 12 14 16 15 17 13 11
Arup
Jacobs
WSP Group
Parsons Brinckerhoff White Young Green Grontmij
Waterman Group
Capita Symonds
1,194 747 611
19 24 27 21
20
19
Mace Group Gifford TPS
WA Fairhurst & Partners
Buro Happold
MWH
496 458 383 241
190 176 182
Note: Ranking is based on total numbers of Engineering Staff Source: Building Magazine
34
0.90
0.80
0.66
0.68
0.86
0.64 0.92 0.88 0.84 0.70 0.76 0.74 0.82 0.78 0.72
0.94
0.62 Jan-04 Apr-04 Jul-04 Oct-04 Jan-05 Apr-05 Jul-05 Oct-05 Jan-06 Apr-06 Jul-06 Oct-06 Jan-07 Apr-07 Jul-07 Oct-07 Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10
Acute Hospital Enniskillen
Euro v Pound Exchange Rates
35
Al Reem Island, Sector 4, Plots C49 / C50, Abu Dhabi
SECTION 5
Middle East
Market Review GCC Countries

Growth decelerated across the board in the six member Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region (which includes Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and Bahrain) in 2009 due to the fluctuations in oil prices and cutbacks in production. However, the price of oil made a strong recovery in 2009 with the price of a barrel nearly doubling, commencing the year at approximately $40 per barrel and ending 2009 at just below $80 per barrel. Through 2009 the GCC countries experienced a sharp contraction in worker remittances, tourism, and foreign direct investment. However, after a slowing to approximately 2.25% percent in 2009, growth in the region is expected to pick up in 2010 but this will depend on the pace of the global recovery. Inflation has subsided, returning to single digits for the region as a whole, a silver lining in what, for most, was a very difficult 2009. 2010 started off in spectacular fashion with the opening of The Burj Khalifa, the worlds tallest building, on January 4th 2010. The development of this half-mile edifice began in September 2004 with an overall development cost reported to be in excess of $1.5 billion dollars. Developed by Emaar Properties and designed by SOM this vertical city holds a number of world records. The UAEs troubles relating to the widely publicised Dubai World debt are unlikely to damage growth elsewhere in the Gulf region as countries such as oil-powered Saudi Arabia are less leveraged than Dubai. Even though many lenders in the region were exposed, financial institutions have broadly proven their resilience to external stresses throughout 2009. It is worth noting that Dubais economy accounts for only 8% of the total GDP of the GCC states. Saudi Arabia and the UAE continue to be the dominant economic forces of the region. Looking at the construction sector, both have seen major activity in recent years and this looks set to continue. Figures published by the Arab Monetary Fund (AMF) in December 2009 proportioned the UAE construction sector to account for around a fifth of the total Gulf construction sectors value of $94.1bn in 2008. An upsurge in public and private investments boosted the UAEs building activity by more than 20% during this period. Saudi Arabia, the largest economy of the region, had dominated construction activity in the previous years. While the global financial downturn in midSeptember of 2008 saw a reduction in this level of activity, the UAE construction sector still remains buoyant. In a recent report, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimated the total value of projects planned in the UAE at a staggering $918bn in construction, oil and gas, petrochemicals, real estate, industry and other sectors. The following table illustrates the value of construction output in each of the GCC countries:
Active Projects in Gulf Region

Country Bahrain Kuwait Oman Quatar Saudi Arabia UAE Nr of Projects 232 160 116 186 847 1,853 Value $ bn 40.2 142.7 38.5 48.2 417.8 661.4
Source: Streamline Marketing Group (November 2009)
Growth in the region is
expected to pick up in 2010.
38
SECTION 5 Middle East
GCC Key Statistics

Subject Descriptor BAHRAIN GDP, current prices GDP per capita, current prices Inflation, average consumer prices Population Current account balance KUWAIT GDP, current prices GDP per capita, current prices Inflation, average consumer prices Population Current account balance OMAN GDP, current prices GDP per capita, current prices Inflation, average consumer prices Population Current account balance QATAR GDP, current prices GDP per capita, current prices Inflation, average consumer prices Population Current account balance SAUDI ARABIA GDP, current prices GDP per capita, current prices Inflation, average consumer prices Population Current account balance UAE GDP, current prices GDP per capita, current prices Inflation, average consumer prices Population Current account balance
Note: Estimated figures Source: International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2009
Units U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Units Annual % change Persons, Millions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Units Annual % change Persons, Millions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Units Annual % change Persons, Millions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Units Annual % change Persons, Millions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Units Annual % change Persons, Millions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Billions U.S. $ Units Annual % change Persons, Millions U.S. $ Billions
2009 19.4 24,355 3.0 0.795 0.724 114.9 32,491 4.7 3.536 33.74 52.3 18,718 3.3 2.796 -0.239 92.5 75,956 0.0 1.218 9.992 379.5 14,871 4.5 25.519 15.389 228.6 46,584 2.5 4.907 -3.579
2010 21.6 26,598 2.5 0.811 1.344 135.4 37,536 4.4 3.606 47.827 59.7 21,134 3.0 2.823 2.884 128.1 94,783 4.0 1.352 32.436 442.8 16,927 4.0 26.157 50.687 256.2 50,688 3.3 5.054 13.375
39
Outline Construction Cost Comparisons

With offices in the UAE, Bahrain and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Bruce Shaw is successfully working on a large volume of projects within the GCC region. Tabled below is a summary of indicative current construction costs:
Regional Building Cost Comparison (USD/m2)

Ref. Building Type Parking Podium Car Parking Basement Car Parking 2 Residential Sector Medium Quality Villa Units Medium Quality High Rise High Quality Low Rise Aparts High Quality High Rise 3 Commercial/Office Sector 2/3 Developer Standard/ Investment Offices Low Rise Medium Rise Medium Rise High Rise Owner Occupier Standard Offices Low Rise Medium Rise Medium Rise High Rise 4 Hotel & Leisure/Retail Sector Regional Shopping Centre 2 Budget/3 Star 4 5 Star
4
Date : January 2010

Manama, Bahrain Riyadh, KSA
1
Abu Dhabi, UAE from to Base

1
from
to Index
from
to Index 1
$630 $720
$770 $880
100 100
$450 $500
$550 $610
71 69
$430 $450
$530 $550
69 63
$1,260
$1,540
100 100
$950 $1,130
$1,160 $1,380 $1,760
75 97 107 106
$810 $950 $900 $1,130
$990 $1,160 $1,100 $1,380
64 81 67 72
$1,170 $1,430 $1,350 $1,650 $1,580 $1,930
100 $1,440
100 $1,670 $2,040
$860 $1,050 $1,350 $1,650
100 100
$900 $1,130
$1,100 $1,380
105 84
$810 $990
$990 $1,210
94 73
$1,130
$1,380
100
$990
$1,210 $1,540
88 80
$950 $1,130
$1,160 $1,380
84 72
$1,580 $1,930
100 $1,260
$1,440 $1,490 $2,570
$1,760 $1,810 $3,140
100
$990
$1,210 $1,760
69 97
$1,220 $1,490 $1,350 $1,650
85 91 84 84
100 $1,440
100 $2,250 $2,750 100 $2,840 $3,470
88 $2,160 $2,640 96 $2,480 $3,030
5 Star Resort 4 5 Health Sector 5 District General Hospital 6 Manufacturing Sector Light Industrial Heavy Industrial
$2,960 $3,610
$3,060 $3,740
100 $2,790 $3,410
91 $2,970 $3,630
97
$590 $790
$720 $970
100 100
$630 $680
$770 $830
107 86
$430 $570
$530 $690
73 72
Notes: Costs subject to site specifics, design and specification They exclude Land Acquisition Costs, External Works Costs & Professional Fees Base Index @ 100 = UAE; Index calculated on average of stated cost range Excl. super high rise (Low/Medium = upto 15; High Rise +15; Super High Rise +45 storeys) 3 Shell & Core Only; with public areas finished 4 Incl. FF+E; Excl. OS+E 5 Excl. Medical Equipment
1 2
40
GCC Nations Main Contractors

Tabled below is a selected list of major contractors currently working within the GCC region: Company Saudi Oger Limited Saudi Binladin Group Al-Arrab Contracting Company A.A. Turki Group of Cos (ATCO) Al-Ajmi Company Al-Bianli Al Mabani GCC KSA Al-Jaber Group Al-Habtoor Leighton Group Arabtec Construction Al-Shafar General Contracting Al-Meraikhi Group Al-Hamad Contracting Company ACTCO ETA Ascon Larsen & Toubro/ECC Consolidated Contracting Company (CCC) Multiplex Mid Mac Contracting Company Al-Kazem Group Arabian Construction Company China Harbour Engineering Company Jan De Nul Six Construct Bilfinger Berger Royal Bam Carillion Laing ORourke Interserve Samsung Corporation Mushrif Trading & Contracting Co Nurol
Source: MEED
Country of Origin Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia UAE UAE UAE UAE UAE UAE UAE UAE India Greece Australia Qatar Qatar Lebanon China Belgium Belgium Germany Netherlands U.K. U.K. U.K. South Korea Kuwait Turkey
41
Middle Eastern Design Firms

Tabled below is a selected list of Design Firms currently working within the GCC region: Company Worley Parsons Ahmed Janahi Architects Arab Architects MSCEB Architects Snc-Lavalin International Dar Al-Handasah Consultants Oger International Dorsch Gruppe Kling Consult Technip JGC Corp KEO Khatib & Alami CEG Tecnicas Reuindas Norr Group Arup Atkins Foster & Partners Mott McDonald RMJM WSP Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Aecom Aedas Fluor Corp. HOK KBR Kling Stubbins NBBJ SOM The Shaw Group
Source: Constructionweekonline/Engineering News Record
Country of Origin Australia Bahrain Bahrain Bahrain Canada Egypt France/Lebanon Germany Germany Italy Japan Kuwait Leabanon Qatar Spain UAE U.K. U.K. U.K. U.K. U.K. U.K. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A. U.S.A.
42
Sustainability
Unlike the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, the World Future Energy Summit, held shortly after Copenhagen in Abu Dhabi, did seem to revive hopes on mitigating climate change threats. Sustainability is continuing to become more and more prevalent in all aspects of design with Clients becoming more aware of the potential long term benefits of greener buildings. the introduction of Estidama is an initiative at an advanced stage in development by the Urban Planning Council in Abu Dhabi. Estidama (which means sustainability in Arabic) is a building design methodology for constructing and operating buildings and communities more sustainably. The program remains a key aspect of the Plan Abu Dhabi 2030 drive to build the city of Abu Dhabi according to innovative green standards.
GCC Single Currency Update

Originally, all six Gulf Cooperation Council countries agreed in 2001 to the monetary union that was expected to be completed within a 10-year timeline. However, at present a single currency for the Gulf is unlikely to be introduced before 2013. Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar are pressing ahead with plans for the Gulf monetary union, despite the abrupt withdrawal of the UAE in May of 2009. It is still undecided if the Gulf Arab countries will peg their planned single currency to a currency basket or the U.S. dollar alone. With the exception of Kuwait, which dropped its dollar peg in favour of a currency basket in 2007, the other three union members Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain currently have their currencies pegged to the dollar. Furthermore, the remaining members still need to reach agreement on a number of technical issues and have to meet several convergence criteria. Issues relating to inflation and budget deficits could yet pose further problems in 2010. The following table compares the U.S. Dollar to the individual currencies of the GCC member states:
Country Bahrain Kuwait Oman Qatar Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates
Currency Bahraini Dinar Kuwaiti Dinar Omani Rial Qatari Riyal Saudi Riyal United Arab Emirates Dirham
Symbol BHD KWD OMR QAR SAR AED
Conversion from $ 1 USD = 0.38 1 USD = 0.29 1 USD = 0.39 1 USD = 3.65 1 USD = 3.75 1 USD = 3.67
Note: Figures are based on January 2010 average.
43
The Stockyard
SECTION 6
United States
2009 Ronnie Norton
Market Review U.S.

2009 saw the U.S. Construction Industry in sharp decline. New Construction was down 25% in dollar value. This is on top of declines in 2007 and 2008. New housing construction, while still ongoing, dropped significantly. The recession has impacted on all areas of construction with the largest decline in the Hospitality Sector. 2009 has also seen a continued decline in construction costs and with contractors backlogs at greatly reduced levels the market has seen at cost and below cost tendering. Prices fell slightly in the last three months for gypsum products, flat glass, ready-mix and millwork and increased only marginally for metal components, concrete products and machinery. Overall, U.S. manufacturing production is expanding rapidly, but significant sales gains will not reach construction materials manufacturing until late in 2010. Metal scrap prices had significant increases in December and are continuing to rise. This will most likely lead to increases in steel prices. The national unemployment rate at December was above 10.0 percent which is 2.6 percentage points higher than the same time in December 2008. Construction unemployment climbed to over 20% during the year, its highest level in a decade. On a positive note The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act was passed in late 2009 and the aim of the act is to create new jobs as well as saving existing ones together with investing in long-term economic growth. This $787 billion stimulus package will see the U.S. economy grow. However the problems of high unemployment, tight credit markets and inflationary fears have not yet been fixed and it may be some time before they are. It may be 2011 before any real gains are seen in the sector.
It may be 2011 before any real gains are seen in the sector.
Value of Construction Output Public/Private $bn

1400.0
1200.0
1000.0
800.0
600.0
400.0
200.0
0.0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009 (f)
Total Public Construction
Total Private Construction
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
46
SECTION 6 United States
U.S. Construction by Type of Work $bn, 2009

Private Sector
Residential 250.7 Commercial 97.1 Health care 34.3 Educational 15.2 Misc. 11.6 Infrastructure 105.2 Manufacturing 65.7
Public Sector
Residential 8.2 Commercial 18.9 Health care 9.8 Educational 83.5 Misc. 30.3 Infrastructure 125.9 Manufacturing 41.7
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Annual Construction Cost Index 2000 - 2009 (1913 = 100)

8,600 8,300 8,000 7,700 7,400 7,100 6,800 6,500 6,200 5,900 5,600
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Source: Engineering News Record
U.S. Regional Building Cost Index

7,000 6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0 Atlanta Chicago San Francisco Los Angeles Philadephia Cincinnati New Orleans Birmingham Cleveland Kanas City New York Minneapolis Pittsburgh Baltimore St Louis Denver Seattle Boston Detroit Dallas
Source: Engineering News Record
47
Total U.S. Employment in Construction Dec 1999 - Dec 2009

7,900 7,700 7,500 7,300 7,100 Employees 000s 6,900 6,700 6,500 6,300 6,100
7,900 7,700 7,500 7,300
7,100 5,900 Employees 000s 6,900 5,700 6,700 5,500 6,500 6,300 6,100
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (e)
5,900 5,700 5,500
e = estimate Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

-40
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (e)
-20
Change in U.S. Employment in Construction Jan 2008 - Nov 2009 Seasonally Adjusted in Thousands -80
-60
0
-100
-20
-120
-40
-140
-60
-160 Feb-08 Mar-08 Apr-08 May-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jan-08 Jun-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09
-80
-100
-120
-140
-160 Jan-08 Feb-08 Mar-08 Apr-08 May-08 Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
48
U.S. Earnings in Construction

Earnings in construction are higher than the average for all industries (see table below). In 2008, production or nonsupervisory workers in construction averaged $21.87 an hour, or about $842 a week.
Average Earnings of Nonsupervisory Workers in Construction, 2008

Industry Total, private industry Construction Construction of buildings Nonresidential building Residential building Heavy and civil engineering construction Utility system construction Highway, street, and bridge construction Other heavy construction Land subdivision Specialty trade contractors Building equipment contractors Building finishing contractors Other specialty trade contractors Building foundation and exterior contractors
$/Hour 18.08 21.87 21.39 23.1 19.47 22.00 22.31 22.11 21.78 18.73 21.99 23.56 20.87 20.86 20.54
$/Week 608 842 813 914 707 924 941 931 947 702 835 918 783 795 747
Median Hourly Wages of the Largest Occupations in U.S. Construction, May 2008
Occupation Buildings $/Hour 37.45 28.49 22.83 21.26 20.48 19.17 17.41 15.41 14.35 Civil Engineering $/Hour 39.87 28.1 21.27 22.85 20.02 19.42 17.13 16.84 14.29
Construction managers First-line supervisors Plumbers & pipefitters Electricians Operating engineers Carpenters Masons & concrete finishers Painters Construction laborers
49
Top 20 U.S. Contractors

Rank 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2008 1 2 3 5 4 6 12 7 8 10 9 11 18 13 14 19 16 22 27 15 The Turner Corp. Bovis Lend Lease Perini Corp. Skanska U.S.A. The Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. Clark Group Hensel Phelps Construction Gilbane Building JE Dunn Construction Group McCarthy Holdings Structure Tone Balfour Beatty Construction Hunt Construction Group Webcor Builders Swinerton M.A. Mortenson Construction Brasfield & Gorrie Suffolk Construction Co. The Flintco Cos. Opus Group 8.93 5.14 5.08 4.04 3.85 3.72 2.94 2.92 2.75 2.61 2.51 2.24 2.13 1.94 1.87 1.85 1.84 1.57 1.56 1.53 Firm Revenue $ bn
Note: Ranked by domestic revenue; 2009 ranking is based on 2008 revenue Source: Engineering News Record
50
Top 20 U.S. Design Firms

Rank 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2008 2 3 1 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 13 9 16 11 15 14 21 18 22 23 EAC EA EAC EC EAC EC EC E EC EC EAC EC EA EC EC EC EC EAP EA E Jacobs Aecom Technology Corp. URS Corp. Fluor Corp. CH2M Hill The Shaw Group Bechtel Tetra Tech KBR AMEC Parsons Brinckerhoff, New York Parsons, Pasadena HDR Foster Wheeler Black & Veatch MWH Global Mustang Engineering Louis Berger Group HNTB Arcadis 5.50 5.22 5.21 4.29 3.73 3.07 2.45 2.26 2.16 1.97 1.57 1.34 1.28 1.23 1.18 1.05 1.01 0.97 0.86 0.85 Type Firm Revenue $ bn
Note: 2009 ranking is based on revenue for design services performed in 2008. Key to Type of Firm: A - architect; E - engineer; C - contractor; P - planner Source: Engineering News Record
Euro v Dollar Exchange Rates

1.60 1.55 1.50 1.45 1.40 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.05 Apr-06 Oct-08 Jan-05 Apr-05 Jul-05 Oct-05 Jan-06 Jul-06 Jan-08 Jul-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-04 Oct-06 Jan-07 Apr-07 Oct-07 Apr-08 Oct-09 Jan-04 Apr-04 Jan-10 Jul-04 Jul-07 1.00
51
University College Dublin, Science Centre West
SECTION 7
Irish Statistics
Construction Output Commentray

Spring of 2010 will see the completion of the few remaining large public sector projects in Ireland the inter-urban motorway network, the Lansdowne Road stadium redevelopment, Terminal 2 in Dublin Airport and the Conference Centre Dublin. Unfortunately there are no major projects in the pipeline to replace these flagship projects and the Public Capital Programme was reduced further in Budget 2010. The private sector market is almost stagnant there is oversupply in the commercial offices, retail and residential sectors, the transfer of loans to NAMA has taken longer than initially expected, foreign direct investment companies have been affected by the global downturn and there is an absence of funding and lack of business confidence generally Arising from this lack of new projects we predict that the output of the industry this year is likely to fall to between 12 and 13 billion and will decline further in 2011 to less than 10 billion. These levels of output will see the industry falling well below its longer term sustainable level of 18 billion.
The output of the industry peaked in 2007 at 38 billion which represented 24% of GNP, largely fuelled by the massive rise in residential development. This was clearly an unsustainable level and a subsequent fall was inevitable. However the extent of the fall is unprecedented and unless some form of Government stimulus is introduced to arrest it at, or close to, its sustainable level of 18 billion (a level last seen in 2000) there will be the unfortunate consequence of a further 100,000 job losses on top of those lost already. Skills necessary to construct major Foreign Direct Investment projects, built up over the last ten years, will also be lost and this will slow overall economic recovery.
Output of the industry this year is likely to fall to between 12 and 13 billion and will decline further in 2011 to less than 10 billion.
Value of Construction Output 2000 - 2011 m

40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
DKM 2009 (f)
BSP 2009 (f)
BSP 2010 (f)
BSP 2011 (f)
DKM / Dept. of Environ. '09 Forecast
Bruce Shaw Forecast
Source: DKM/Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government/Bruce Shaw Partnership
54
SECTION 7 Irish Statistics
Construction Output 2005 - 2009

2005 Value of Output at Current Prices (m) Change in Value of Output (%) Value of Output (constant 07 Prices m) Change in Volume of Construction Output % Construction Output as % of GNP
Source: DKM/Department of the Environment
2006 37,611 11% 38,278 5% 25%
2007 38,361 2% 38,361 0% 24%
2008 2009 (f) 32,037 -16% 34,399 -10% 21% 19,857 -38% 23,290 -32% 15%
33,778 18% 36,406 14% 25%
Gross National Product (GNP) 2005 - 2009

2005 GNP at Current Prices (m) % Change in GNP GNP at Constant 07 Prices (m) % Change in GNP
Source: CSO
2006 152,529 11% 154,519 6%
2007 161,244 6% 161,243 4%
2008 154,598 -4% 156,761 -3%
2009 Q1-3 98,925 -15% 104,192 -12%
137,188 9% 145,306 6%
Public/Private Breakdown 2005 - 2009

2005 Public sector new construction output Value of output (constant 2007 prices, m) Change in volume of construction output (%) As % of total construction output 6,893 -2% 19 2005 Private sector new construction output Value of output (constant 2007 prices, m) Change in volume of construction output (%) As % of total construction output 22,899 22% 62 23,970 5% 63 22,866 -5% 60 16,518 -28% 47 6,425 -61% 26 6,865 0% 18 2006 7,575 10% 20 2007 9,260 22% 27 9,321 1% 40 2006 2007 2008 2009 (f)
2008 2009 (f)
Source: DKM/Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government
55
Sectoral Breakdown (m) 2005 - 2009

Sector RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION 2005 m 21,456 1,152 3,637 266 523 73 5,652 1,863 768 159 1,388 365 257 4,800 726 464 371 309 1,869 33,778 2006 m 24,045 876 4,356 380 706 76 6,394 2,083 891 182 1,484 334 307 5,282 782 328 401 379 1,889 37,611 2007 m 22,716 718 4,711 869 1,172 82 7,553 2,417 991 308 1,097 586 367 5,765 900 367 557 503 2,327 38,361 2008 m 16,559 1,242 2,980 1,008 1,083 76 6,389 2,862 1,043 438 1,152 705 415 6,616 845 435 603 591 2,473 32,037 2009(f) m 7,945 735 1,568 245 622 72 3,242 2,666 1,077 619 1,080 568 327 6,338 965 354 467 546 2,333 19,857
NON RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION Industry Commercial Agricultural Tourism Worship Sub Total PRODUCTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE Roads Water Services Airports/Seaports
100 Energy
Communications Sub Total SOCIAL

60 Education 70 80
Transport 90
Health 50 Other Social Sub Total TOTAL ALL CONSTRUCTION

10 0 20 30
Public Buildings 40

2005 Residential 2006 2007 Productive Infrastructure 2008 2009 (f)
Breakdown of Construction Output (m) 2005 - 2009

40,000 35,000 22% 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5, 000 0 64% 64% 59% 22% 14% 14% 26%
General Contracting
28% 15% 20% 28%
32% 52% 40%
2005
2006 Residential
2007 Productive Infrastructure
2008 General Contracting
2009 (f)
Note: General Contracting = Non Residential + Social Source: DKM/Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government
56
Regional Breakdown of Construction Output
Dublin as % of Total 2008 2007 2006 2005 2007

Dublin 26% Border 13% South-West 13% South-East 12% Mid-East 10% West 10% Mid-West 9% Midland 8%
27% 26% 23% 25% 27% 29% 31% 33% 34%

Dublin 27% South-West 14% Border 11% South-East 11%
2004 2003 2002 2001 2000
2008
Mid-East 10% West 10% Mid-West 9% Midland 7%
Sectoral Breakdown of General Contracting
Commercial 34% Industrial 14% Tourism 12% Agriculture 11% Education 10% Public Buildings 7% Other Social 7% Health 5% Worship 1%
Commercial 28% Education 17% Industrial 13% Tourism 11% Other Social 10% Public Building 8% Health 6% Agriculture 4% Worship 1%
2008
2009 (f)
Commercial 34%
Commercial 28% Education 17% Industrial 13% Tourism 11% Other Social 10% Public Building 8% Health 6% Agriculture 4% Worship 1%
Industrial 14%
Tourism 12%
Agriculture 11%
Education 10%
Public Buildings 7%
Other Social 7%
Health 5%
Worship 1%
2009 (f) Source: DKM/Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government
57
Construction Purchasing Managers Index Report June 2000 - February 2010

70 50 = no change on previous month
60
50
Increasing rate of growth Increasing rate of contraction
40
30
20
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Ulster Bank Construction PMI Total Activity (graphed above) Housing Commercial Civil Engineering
Source: Ulster Bank
Sep-08 32.2 25.5 34.6 35.8
Dec-08 27.4 23.1 25.9 33.7
Mar-09 28.1 26.7 28.3 28.5
Jun-09 36.3 33.4 38.5 30.9
Sep-09 34.2 33.8 34.9 31.3
Dec-09 33.1 32.6 32.3 33.8
Historical Property Performance Total Return % Per Quarter 2003 - 2009

15
10
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25 Mar-05 Dec-03 Mar-04 Jun-04 Sep-04 Dec-04 Jun-05 Sep-05 Dec-05 Mar-06 Jun-06 Sep-06 Dec-06 Mar-07 Jun-07 Sep-07 Dec-07 Mar-08 Jun-08 Sep-08 Dec-08 Mar-09 Jun-09 Sep-09 Dec-09
All
Retail
Office
Industrial
Source: IPD/Society of Chartered Surveyors
58
Annual Housing Completions 2000 - 2009

Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Social 3,155 4,875 5,763 6,133 5,146 5,559 5,208 6,671 6,801 N/A % 6.3% 9.3% 10.0% 8.9% 6.7% 6.9% 5.6% 8.5% 13.1% N/A Private 46,657 47,727 51,932 62,686 71,808 75,398 88,211 71,356 44,923 N/A % 93.7% 90.7% 90.0% 91.1% 93.3% 93.1% 94.4% 91.5% 86.9% N/A Total 49,812 52,602 57,695 68,819 76,954 80,957 93,419 78,027 51,724 26,820
New Housing Completions by Type 2000 - 2009

Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Note: Totals exclude conversions
House 40,526 41,576 45,657 53,580 60,448 62,522 73,073 58,936 38,513 21,272
% 82.0% 79.6% 79.7% 78.3% 79.0% 77.6% 78.6% 75.9% 75.0% 80.5%
Apartment 8,886 10,626 11,638 14,839 16,106 18,035 19,946 18,691 12,811 5,148
% 18.0% 20.4% 20.3% 21.7% 21.0% 22.4% 21.4% 24.1% 25.0% 19.5%
Total 49,412 52,202 57,295 68,419 76,554 80,557 93,019 77,627 51,324 26,420
New Housing Completions by Region 2008 - 2009

Region Dublin Wicklow/Meath/Kildare GREATER DUBLIN AREA Cork Galway Kerry Wexford Mayo Limerick Waterford Balance Total 2008 No. 11,342 4,976 16,318 6,092 2,877 1,961 1,998 1,774 1,937 1,247 17,120 51,324 % 22.1% 9.7% 31.8% 11.9% 5.6% 3.8% 3.9% 3.5% 3.8% 2.4% 33.4% 100.0% 2009 No. 5,288 2,768 8,056 3,306 1,472 866 1,024 1,032 807 635 9,222 26,420 % 20.0% 10.5% 30.5% 12.5% 5.6% 3.3% 3.9% 3.9% 3.1% 2.4% 34.9% 100.0%
Source: Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local Government
59
Society of Chartered Surveyors House Rebuilding Costs per m2 March 2010

Bedrooms No. of Typical Size Dublin Area Area Cork Galway Waterford Area Area Limerick Area
Terraced Semi Detached Detached Detached Bungalow
2 3 3 4 4 4
70 m2 95 m2 95 m 118 m 118 m
2 2 2
1,932 1,840 1,908 1,748 1,804 1,708
1,474 1,987 1,472 1,320 1,349 1,314
1,494 1,403 1,429 1,327 1,337 1,277
1,434 1,363 1,454 1,301 1,347 1,253
1,491 1,383 1,480 1,279 1,384 1,392
146 m2
Source: Society of Chartered Surveyors
The table is a guideline based on a typical speculative built, estate type house in the Dublin, Cork, Galway, Waterford and Limerick Areas 1. The figures shown in the table are a minimum base cost guide for your house insurance. and any other items not normally included in an estate type house (e.g. fire alarm). 4. House contents such as carpets, curtains, furniture, etc. are not covered by the figures. 5. No allowance has been made for the cost of out-buildings, patios or boundary walls. The figures do however allow for a concrete path around the house, for driveway repairs and regrassing. 6. The figures allow for demolition costs, professional fees incurred in reinstatement and VAT at 13.5% on building costs and 21% on professional fees. 7. The amounts included for professional fees have been calculated to cover the following services: Building Surveyor/Architect and Quantity Surveyor. 8. The costs are based on building rates ruling in March 2010 and do not include for inflation during the duration of the policy and the period between any loss occurring and reinstatement.
2. The figures are based on estate type houses built since the 1960s. They exclude; (a) Properties with more than 2 storeys or with basements or habitable attics (b) One-off houses with special design features or period houses (c) Apartment/residential flats because of split responsibilities for shared areas. The insurance of apartments is covered in the block service charge. Owners should confirm with their management companies/ agents that their apartment block has been valued for insurance purposes, and that the insured value is current. 3. The figures assume a basic quality specification with normal foundations, brick or block walls, concrete tiled roof, concrete ground floor and timber first floor, soft wood flush doors and hardwood double glazed windows, painted plaster to walls, plastered ceilings, standard electrics and central heating. The sum insured should be increased to allow for better than average kitchen fittings, built-in wardrobes, finishes
60
Planning Charges 2010

Class of Development Most Building Types New Houses House Alterations Golf Courses Outline Planning Permission Charge 80 or 3.60 per m2 whichever is greater 65 for each dwelling 34 50 per hectare 75% of full planning permission charge Charge 38,000 28,500 125,000
Maximum Scale of Charges for Planning Applications Full Application Most Building Types Outline Application Most Building Types Retention Application
Source: Local Planning Authorities
Fire Certificate Charges 2010

On the 1 October 2009, sections 5 and 6 of the Building Control Act 2009 came into operation. These new regulations provide more options for applying for a Fire Safety Certificate. These options can be summarised as follows: Option 1 Making a Fire Safety Certificate application as per the status quo. In this case work cannot commence until the Fire Safety Certificate is granted and for 14 days after a commencement notice is served. The local authority fee of 2.90/ m2 up to a maximum of 12,500 still applies. Option 2 A 7 day notice A 7 day notice is a new procedure where an applicant can submit to the local authority their intention to start work in 7 days time. The notice must be accompanied by: (a) A valid Fire Safety Certificate Application (b) An Application form (c) A 7 Day Statutory Declaration Form. This effectively is a declaration that any works carried out before the grant of the fire cert, will comply with the Building Regulations and an undertaking to carry out any modifications required under the grant. The local authority fee increases to 5.80/m2 with a maximum fee of 25,000. Option 3 A revised Fire Safety Certificate Application This option provides a vehicle to revise a previously granted Fire Safety Certificate, where the design has significantly changed or due to a requirement of planning. The procedure and fee scale is the same as the normal route in option 1 Option 4 A Regularisation Fire Safety Certificate Application This type of application applies where works have started or completed, without either a normal Fire Safety Certificate Application or a 7 day notice application. Unlike an application for a design, this will need to confirm that the completed building complies with the Building Regulations. The local authority can also inspect the premises. A statutory declaration is also required stating that the works carried out to date do comply with the Building Regulations and that the applicant will comply with any modifications or conditions on the grant within 4 months. In addition the local authority fee in this case increases to 11.60/m2 up to a maximum of 50,000.
Source: Local Planning Authorities
61
Chartered Accountants Ireland, Headquarters
SECTION 8
Topical Issues
by Willie Aherne and Stephen Ashe
Whole Life Costing in Design

Not only can Whole Life Costing be used as a tool for assessing the total cost commitment of investing in and owning an asset, it can also support decision making in a number of ways including: n Establishing trade-offs between performance, cost, time and quality n Reducing energy use and lengthening a maintenance cycle n Achieving a balance between initial capital costs and future revenue costs n Identifying opportunities for greater cost effectiveness n Assessing alternative options identified for sustainability n Allowing comparisons to be made against other investment options n Identifying and benchmarking actual costs incurred in operating assets To put the importance of Whole Life Costing into perspective, the operating cost of a hospital consumes the equivalent of the capital cost every two to three years. This can continue for 40 years or more. The operating cost of a school can consume the equivalent of the capital cost every four to five years and can remain in service for a century1. The chart overleaf2 illustrates the components of whole life costing and the graph2 illustrates how the ability to optimise cost reduces in time. As can be seen the ability to optimise the Whole Life Cost is greatest at the design stage of the project. In fact 70-80% of the cost of running, maintaining and repairing a building is determined at the design stage. Although Whole Life Costing can be done at any stage of the project, the potential of its effective use is greatest during early design stages.
Bruce Shaws approach to Whole Live Costing considers and optimises the full range of costs which accrue from the construction of an asset right through its anticipated life span. The focus of PPP and PFI on long term operation, risk and the lifecycle replacement of key components make Whole Life Costing a necessity. Whole Life Costing is also becoming a key driver in both public and private sector works. Bruce Shaw help Clients establish the most cost effective investment decision by focusing not only on capital costs but on the total cost of an asset. It is not simply the lowest Whole Life Cost alone (which would compromise quality and availability), but the lowest Whole Life Cost at minimum risk and maximum asset value. In order to do this we undertake a detailed exercise, preferably at initial design stage, which establishes trade-offs on capital, maintenance and operations/occupancy costs. A simple example of this is the choice of floor finish in the design solution. The cheapest finish day one may have the highest Whole Life Cost in net present value terms when cleaning and replacement costs are factored in. Typical areas of expenditure which are included in calculating the whole-life costs are: n Planning n Design n Construction/Acquisition n Operations n Maintenance n Renewal/rehabilitation n Cost of finance n Replacement or disposal With the advent of spiralling energy costs, carbon taxes and the sustainability agenda, the need for a clear, reliable and transparent Whole Life Cost model has become a higher priority for our Clients.
1 2
BSRIA Brierley Stubbs Limited
64
SECTION 8 Topical Issues
Whole Life Costing should be considered by all Clients involved in construction projects. These include: n Public sector clients (Contracting Authorities) n Private sector clients (owners, developers, tenderers) n FM service providers n Fund providers Being a serious player in the PPP/PFI market, Bruce Shaw recognises the importance of
optimising Whole Life Costs when tendering for projects. In many cases the approach to managing costs over the operating period of an asset is the difference between winning and losing major PPP/PFI contracts. Bruce Shaw can produce Whole Life Cost models that incorporate an industry accepted cost structure which is compliant with ISO 15686-5. The bespoke software incorporates BCIS and our own in-house data which allows us to inform decision makers throughout all stages of a project.
Generators of Whole Life Cost Building & Infrastructure Assets

Whole Life Cost
Decommission & Disposal
Capital Investment
Maintain
Operate/Occupancy
Projects/ Realisation
Capital Maintenance
Depreciation
Planned/ Cyclic
Equipment Warranties
Reactive Maintenance
Supply Management
Technical Efficiency
HS&E
Life Cycle Replacement
Minor Projects, Upgrades, Refurbish
Statutory
Discretionary
Asset Protection
Monitoring Driven
Customer Driven
Ability to Optimise Cost

100% Percentage of WLC Committed WLC Actual WLC
70-80% Ability to optimise WLC
Design
Construction
FM/Occupancy
65
Risk Management
by Jack OSullivan The preparation of an effective Risk Management Strategy (RMS) outlining the timely identification, quantification and the implementation of risk management procedures is now widely regarded as an essential Project and Cost Management tool and has been successfully implemented by Bruce Shaw on a wide range of Public and Private sector projects, providing clients with greater project control and increased cost certainty. Risk can be defined as the possibility of an uncertain event or condition occurring which, if it occurs, will have a discernable effect on a projects objectives. Dealing with risk should therefore be addressed by both Clients and Contractors in a structured and systematic manner at all stages of project delivery if project objectives are to be met or even exceeded. The aim of a successful RMS is to provide the structured framework for risk identification, analysis and management, through each stage of project delivery to occur. An effective RMS will essentially minimise the impact of risks, maximise opportunities to improve scheme objectives, facilitate long term project planning and enable detailed forecasting of final outturn cost. An efficient RMS should be grounded on timely identification of risks; quantification of risks; risk response planning; and the response and management of strategies adopted for each risk. As RM and Value Management (VM) are linked, a structured approach to RM can lead to better financial opportunities. One of the key criteria for a successful RMS is ensuring that certain procedures are implemented and deliverables produced at the appropriate time during the life cycle of a project. For the Client, the majority of the RM work is typically carried out pre-tender at the project appraisal and planning stages. This facilitates the timely: identification; quantification; and management of project risks. Ideally risks are assessed qualitatively at appraisal stage and quantitatively during the planning stage. At the project appraisal stage, when uncertainty is greatest and correct decision making is crucial, the viability of all options can be fully assessed through the identification and scoring of the high level risks on a project. A qualitative analysis based on a basic scoring system (e.g. placing a positive/negative impact against each risk and comparing against other possible alternatives) can be sufficient at this stage. This approach begins the identification and management processes mentioned above and provides Clients with an appreciation of the risks associated with the project and greater confidence in decision making. Once the decision has been made to take a project through to tender and, depending on the procurement route, the design and budgets are completed, a risk workshop or brainstorming session should be carried out. Independently facilitated and with the key project stakeholders in attendance, the quantitative analysis carried out at the risk workshop effectively identifies the risks, financially quantifies the potential impacts based on cost and probability and apportions/ transfers the risks and the risk impact amounts to the party who will then manage the risk. The extent of risk transfer can be particularly important when considering procurement options (e.g. in the Public Sector Works Contract (PWC) many risks have already been transferred within the Contract Conditions). The risk register is the main deliverable from this process and becomes a live document for the team to use when managing risk and change during the construction stage. At Bruce Shaw we place particular importance on the final quantified output in the form of the potential financial impact on the project budget which we calculate using computer modelling software called @Risk. This output is used to calculate the project contingency which can be set at a confidence level to match the Clients appetite for risk. In the current economic climate, an effective Risk Management Strategy will play a major role in the successful delivery of construction projects both on time and on budget.
66
Risk Management Processes

Stage 1. Project Appraisal Identification, analysis of Need Development of Objectives 2 & 3. Planning (Initial & Developed) Outline Design, Procurement Develop Outline Cost Plan 4. Implementation Construction Stage, manage change, etc n Risk Transfer in Tender Documents n Manage Risk Register & Contingency 5. Review Project Review n Document & Quantify Actual Risks n Produce Final Risk Report
Sources: Project Stages Capital Works Framework GN 1.1
Risk Management Structure
Objective
n Risk Identification & Ranking n Identify key constraints
n Qualitative Risk Register n Risk Scoring Table
n Mitigation n Risk Workshop: Quantitative Risk Analysis
n Quantitative Risk Register n Determine Risk Contingency
PROJECT LIFECYCLE
n Updated Risk Register
n Final Risk Report
67
International Estimating
by Niall Cox As global economies develop and entwine it is becoming evident that large and complex construction projects rely on expertise from all corners of the world. Continued growth and influence of multi-national companies along with the lowering of trade barriers is pushing the globalization of construction at a startling pace Bruce Shaw has been involved in numerous high profile large scale overseas developments, in a variety of world markets, providing incisive cost advice at all stages to help our Clients achieve maximum return on their projects. With an extensive Bruce Shaw database and wide ranging experience we play an active role in construction cost estimating at all stages of projects; budget estimating, cost planning and tender pricing. Our dedicated procurement teams specialise in major building elements including external envelope/facades, structural frames/steel, services installations and vertical transportation. This ensures our database is constantly updated with live construction cost data from international markets Bruce Shaw personnel work closely with each client at every stage of a project (in house and/or externally) and define clear aims and objectives at the outset. This ensures that the right decisions are made at the right time and implemented according to a set agenda. At Bruce Shaw we encourage the Client and design team to constantly challenge the design to ensure we achieve the best solutions. Understanding that each market and region has unique characteristics, Bruce Shaw will advise on and adapt to individualities, on a case by case basis. International estimating requires experience and expertise on a wide range of issues, such as: n Assessing market capacity n Raw materials/resources n Labour force availability n Database of contractors & companies operating in market n Currency conversions n Inflation/Currency Fluctuations n Method of Measurement adopted n Local Taxes and Duties n Language/Communication n Differing traditions n Construction Technology n Regulatory environment/Building regulations As well as leading the procurement of major international projects for our clients, Bruce Shaw through application of Value Engineering techniques ensure that the most economically effective design solutions are applied, and the correct balance between cost and functionality is adopted by all parties. With increasing worldwide pressures for lower costs, greater economies of scale and efficiencies our International Estimating expertise draws on our in-house knowledge bank and wealth of experience from specialist teams including our Civil Engineering, Services Installations/MEP, Vertical Transportation, External Envelope (Facades/ Curtain Walling) and Tall Buildings.
68
Case Study
Bruce Shaw has recently provided estimating services for a prestigious landmark tower in the Middle East. The aim for this 100 storey plus development is to operate as a world-class development through its design, construction and operation. The 400m high tower is mixed use and has an overall gross floor area of approximately 500,000 sqm comprising; 4,500 space 6 level basement carpark, retail, conference, offices, hotel and mosque. The Bruce Shaw team actively managed and procured 50 major works packages within a very tight timeframe. At Bruce Shaw we prepared Bills of Quantities for each package and issued these to the international market which involved over 400 companies/sub-contractors in 20 countries. Once the tenders were returned the results were analyzed, tender reports were prepared and the results collated into an overall GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price) proposal for our client. The Bruce Shaw service on this project also included an overall advisory role on the GMP commercial offer, review of the scope of works and specification documents; costs of programme and scheduling alternatives; preparation of a change management procedure & methodology; inflation and currency fluctuation control; risk review and the identification of possible value engineering solutions. An elemental breakdown of the tower costs is shown below.
Tower Elemental Breakdown

Demolition, Site Work, Drainage & Services 2.59% Preliminaries 14.48%
Demolition, Site Work, Drainage & Services 2.59% Preliminaries 14.48% / Basement 11.66%
Substructure / Basement 11.66% Superstructure 17.80% Substructure Roof 0.87%
External Walls / Completions 11.33% Internal Walls / Completions 9.41% Roof 0.87% Wall, Floor, Ceiling Finishes 4.71% Fittings 2.78%
Superstructure 17.80%
External Walls / Completions 11.33% / Completions 9.41%
Internal M&E Services 22.50% Walls

Lifts and Escalators 0.59% BWIC Services 1.28%
Wall, Floor, Ceiling Finishes 4.71% Fittings 2.78% M&E Services 22.50% Lifts and Escalators 0.59% BWIC Services 1.28%
69
Central Park Block G
SECTION 9
About Bruce Shaw
Bruce Shaw
Bruce Shaw is one of Europes leading construction consultancy practices, with a staff complement in excess of 350 people. Our experience spans over 35 years and we are currently working on projects in all sectors, providing the full spectrum of our construction services to clients in 130 cities in over 40 countries. Our services are internationally accredited to the NSAI 9001 quality standards. During the past year, Bruce Shaw has expanded with new offices opening up in Abu Dhabi, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Paris and Manchester. The new offices are in addition to our already established offices located in the U.K., Ireland, Romania and Barbados. The Bruce Shaw organisation is structured into a multiplicity of dedicated project service teams with specific skill sets, which are tailored to the particular requirements of clients and project types. These teams include Quantity Surveying/Cost Management, Project Management, Safety Management Consultancy, Public Private Partnership Consultancy, Procurement Consultancy, Legal Technical Support, Insolvency Technical Support, Sustainability and BER Assessments. Bruce Shaw uses the latest technology on the market to achieve superior accuracy, high quality and fast delivery for our clients. Our specially developed in-house documentation and IT infrastructure is tailored to the specific needs of our clients and has been central to our success. We have recently introduced and now use the CostX software, which is the most accurate, time efficient and up-to-date project measurement and costing tool for construction projects, of any type and size. Bruce Shaw selects the highest calibre staff for our projects and our teams of professionals are amongst the highest regarded in the industry. We recruit only the best personnel and we have an established Graduate Training Scheme which provides practical experience for those wishing to prepare for their final examinations, such as the Assessment of Professional Competence or Masters in Strategic Procurement. Bruce Shaw continues to be at the forefront in providing expert advice and services to our clients throughout all stages of projects. This in turn leads to faster project delivery, greater cost efficiency and maximum value for money from the built asset investment.
Quantity Surveying/ Cost Management Services

Quantity Surveying/Cost Management Services is one of the core services that Bruce Shaw has provided over the past 35 years. Our Quantity Surveying/Cost Management Services are structured around specific specialist divisions comprising Healthcare, Education, Retail, Commercial, Civil Engineering, Mechanical & Electrical Services and Process Engineering. Each of these divisions is led by a partner who in turn has the support of a dedicated team, along with the full infrastructural support and back-up of the Bruce Shaw organisation. These specialist divisions are unique to Bruce Shaw and ensure that we can provide maximum and efficient cost control on all projects, no matter where they are located in the world or how specialised they are. At an early stage of any appointment, the requirements of the project are carefully examined by a number of partners of the practice and depending on its specific nature, it will be allocated to one of the specialised teams. Throughout all stages of the project the partners maintain a policy of close personnel involvement and close attention is paid to the quality and standard of the work produced and issued. Below is a typical approach taken in providing our services on a project: i) Pre Contract Stage Initial Cost Advice/Feasibility Studies To obtain the best value for money, the viability of each project is carefully examined. Cost must be weighed against aesthetics, quality, space and time, and an acceptable budget agreed. Close collaboration at this stage between the project team members will bring maximum benefits to the client. Bruce Shaw will lead this process and explore all possibilities. In our experience we have identified that decisions made at this critical stage impact on over 70% of overall development costs. Budget Estimating & Cost Planning We establish the initial budget cost by reference to cost data derived from previous projects and by measurement and pricing of the key elemental quantities. The budget is allocated amongst the various building elements to establish limits within which each element is allowed develop. As the scheme progresses, each element is checked to ensure it remains within its limit and the overall scheme remains within
72
SECTION 9 About Bruce Shaw
budget. Our role is to challenge the design/ design choices on behalf of the client, to ensure all cost limits are maintained/achieved. Benchmarking Bruce Shaws bespoke database is one of the largest construction cost databases in Europe. Developed over the last decade, it is a central source of live project data and can be utilised to produce detailed elemental benchmarking studies at various stages of construction development. This ensures the best possible international standards are met and value is achieved at early Budget Estimating and Cost Planning stages. Value Engineering We implement the most up to date Value Engineering techniques during the design stages of the project in order to ensure that the most economically effective solutions are adopted, consistent with the design and operational requirements of the Client. We convene and chair specific Value Engineering Workshops during the early stages of the project. These workshops ensure that a correct balance between cost and functionality is achieved and adopted by all parties. Risk Assessment At all stages of the project we will review the relevant risks pertaining to that stage of the project. We utilise Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) techniques in assessing these risks. Risks may include construction cost overrun, programme risks, changes in legislation or unforeseen site difficulties. The results will be presented using the latest @ Risk software. This will present a combination of possible scenarios utilising a statistical simulation process and ensure informed decisions can be made at critical project junctures. Lifecycle Costing Bruce Shaws approach to lifecycle costing considers the full range of costs which accrue from construction of a building right through its anticipated life span. Factors such as initial capital costs, subsequent operating and maintenance costs and element replacement cycles require simultaneous evaluation at project development stage. When working on a project, we seek to; establish the most cost effective investment decision; identify factors which drive whole life costs; optimize trade-offs between performance, cost, time and quality; provide predictable cost profiles; deliver NPV
savings thereby reducing capital requirements and smooth lifecycle expenditure. Advice on Contract Procedures We examine all possible contract/procurement options and will advise on the most appropriate option for the specific project. Contractual/tendering options include the traditional method of tendering, two-stage tendering, negotiated contract, management contracts, design and construct contracts and construction management contracts. Preparation of Contract Documentation At this stage of the project we prepare the conditions under which contractors will tender the project including Preliminaries/General Conditions. We also provide advice on the adequacy of the levels of insurance, liquidated damages, dates for completion etc. Finally we prepare the tender documents including detailed Bills of Quantities, Instructions to Tenderers and Forms of Tender. ii) Post Contract Stage Cost Control During Construction Central to cost control during the construction stage is the determination to complete the project within the original budget. Changes are continuously monitored and cost reports updated to show the current position to the client as established by good record keeping and good physical control in the field. In the event of a projected cost over-run, evasive action is taken by making design adjustments to achieve the necessary cost reductions. Valuation of Work Monthly valuations of work-in-progress are carried out in order to make stage payments to the contractor. This includes the physical measurement of the work on the site and materials delivered. Cash flow projections are provided to indicate the clients anticipated monthly expenditure throughout the construction stage. Settlement of Final Account We negotiate with the Contractor to sign-off the cost of work as each element is complete. The advantage of this approach to the Client is that there is a rolling Final Account with can be speedily agreed upon project completion with no surprises. The further advantage to the contractor is that he is paid in full for variations completed and agreed as the project proceeds.
73
Project Management Services

Bruce Shaw provides an all embracing, single point of contact project management service for all types of construction projects. Bruce Shaw see Project Management as the overall planning, co-ordination and control of a project from inception to completion aimed at meeting a clients requirements in order to produce a functionally and financially viable product that will be completed on time, within authorised cost and to the required standards. Bruce Shaw believe that their Project Management Service adds significant and specific value to the process of delivering construction projects by the application of a set of generic project-orientated management principles throughout the life of a project. Key to our success is the quality of the people we employ, our team of professional project managers are amongst the most experienced in the industry having worked on a variety of landmark, pioneering projects throughout Europe and the Middle East. Bruce Shaw Project Management have extended our international office network to include Romania, Poland, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. We are currently working on several projects in these locations, working in different environments, with different contracts and regulations and on different project types. Our typical Project Management services include: n Assisting in preparing the Project Brief n Develop project strategy n Prepare PEP n Develop Consultants Briefs n Devise Project Programme n Establish Management structure n Co-ordinate design process n Appoint Consultants n Select Procurement System n Arrange Tender Documentation n Participate in Contractor selection and appointment n Organise control systems n Monitor Progress against programme n Arrange Meetings n Authorise Payments n Organise communication/reporting systems n Provide total co-ordination n Address environmental aspects n Arrange pre-commissioning and commissioning n Organise handover and occupation n Monitor the agreement of the Final Account n Organise Maintenance Manuals n Develop Maintenance Programme
Managing Design Team Activities

Design Information produced to requirements Monitor progress against agreed schedule Contractor to produce Information Required Schedule (IRS) Identify Potential problems Resolve problems before they occur Report and/or action
Information available to Contractor
Agree IRS with Design Team
Monitor progress against IRS
Report and/or action
Costs contained within Budget
Set up Monthly Reporting Systems
Report and/or action Report and/or action Report and/or action
Monitor fee applications from Design Team
Monitor Design against Cost Plan
74
Consultancy Services
Public Private Partnership (PPP) Bruce Shaw has developed a strong track record in PPP and is now working on several high profile projects both for the private sector and a number of Contracting Authorities including the National Development Finance Agency. Bruce Shaw has also been very active outside of the Republic of Ireland and has been successful on a number of major projects. For our clients, Bruce Shaw offers a range of specialist services which cover all steps in a PPP projects lifecycle, from initial concept and business case development through to final delivery and operation. For the Public Sector Bruce Shaw has expert knowledge of all forms of procurement and is currently procuring projects using competitive dialogue and the negotiated procedure. We assist clients with the structuring of PPP projects, determining the most appropriate procurement strategy and then taking a hands-on approach to managing the procurement process. The multidisciplinary nature of our business allows us to fully consider market trends in construction, finance, operations and consortia appetite for taking bid cost risk and investing in a project. Bruce Shaw is experienced with the critical path items such as: preliminary and detailed appraisals; public sector benchmarks, risk allocation matrices; development of procurement documents; managing the entire procurement process; shadow bid analysis; and value for money reporting. For the Private Sector Bruce Shaw provides bid management support on design, build, finance and operate projects. Our typical scope of work includes: coordinating pre-qualification and tender submissions; managing the technical, financial and legal aspects of a tender; managing risk; developing the construction, lifecycle, facility management, and SPV strategies and budgets; and interacting with Contracting Authorities. We can also develop the financial model, raise funding and act as SPV Manager and Employers Agent on projects. Technical Support for Insolvency Work In the case of a construction related receivership, examinership or liquidation process, Bruce Shaw can provide technical support to maximise recovery of amounts due through the application of expert knowledge in: n n n n n Construction Contracts Bonds & collateral warranties Remedies Value engineering processes
Technical Support to the Legal Process Bruce Shaw provides technical support to those involved in legal action. The services we provide include services of expert witness and compiling expert reports; assessment of quantum and technical assistance with dispute resolution We also provide professional assistance to both the Public & Private Sector Employer and the Contractor in all construction related matters including status reports on construction portfolio, preparation of pricing documents, value engineering, interim and final accounts and assistance in relation to nomination or re-nomination of Sub-Contractors. Cost Benefit Analysis Government guidance for the appraisal and management of capital expenditure in the public sector requires that all capital expenditure proposals for projects over a defined monetary threshold should be subject to a Cost Benefit Analysis. Bruce Shaws in-house team is experienced in preparing these reports and in developing a detailed assessment of capital costs, ongoing operating costs, direct and indirect revenues, and the macroeconomic benefits and costs of proceeding with a project. Bank Advisory Service Bruce Shaw works in a technical advisory and project monitoring capacity for leading financial institutions seeking independent advice on development proposals both prior to formal commitment of funding being made or during the drawdown phase until construction completion. Reflective of the current economic climate, several of our current appointments are associated with banks and borrowers preparations relating to the activity of the National Asset Management Agency (NAMA) in Ireland. Being experts in construction, Bruce Shaws activities typically concentrate on the core issues of cost, cost to complete, risk and programme, always highlighting any potential problem areas and recommending solutions. Should difficulties arise, we often liaise with the project company on behalf of the funders to clarify matters and if appropriate, make recommendations to funders on the necessary courses of action to maximise lender recovery and minimise risk.
75
Procurement
Procurement is an essential part in the delivery of services. Top class business needs to be supported by high quality procurement practices and supplier relationships. Bruce Shaw can support clients in developing a strategic approach to procurement to maximise efficiency and effectiveness in their procurement processes. In addition, public procurement is subject to mandatory adherence to public procurement rules. These are contained in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and additionally, where contract values exceed EU thresholds, the European Procurement Directives and national regulations transposing these directives into national law. There are also various government policies with which clients are required to comply. Clients should be aware of important developments in public procurement and in particular the new Remedies legislation (Directive 2007/66/ EC), which gives unsuccessful bidders more scope to challenge. Significant features of this legislation include n The sufficiency of information provided to candidates who have not been selected to tender or tenderers who are not considered successful and the adequacy of reasons given to them for the decision. n A Contracting Authority being precluded from awarding a contract where a challenge is initiated through the Courts. This stops the contract award until such time as the court has made a decision or the proceedings are discontinued or otherwise disposed of. n Contracts that were not awarded in compliance with certain public procurement rules being declared ineffective by the court, the consequences of which being the termination of all unperformed contractual obligations. The court may, in particular circumstances, impose alternative penalties. Our specialist procurement consultancy services include: n Advice and guidance on general public procurement issues n Procurement strategies (business planning, procurement planning, networking, approaches to market, categorisation, aggregation, framework agreements) n Compliance with procurement regulations and guidelines n Framework agreements and supplier lists n Contract award procedures options n Drafting notices for advertising; Prior information, contract and award notices n Developing scoring matrixes, qualitative selection and award criteria and weightings n Bidder selection; Developing pre-qualification documentation n Drafting tender and contract documentation n Tender management; Conducting tender competitions, tender evaluations n Debriefing of tenderers n Contract award and contract management including limitations of extensions of existing contracts n Resolving contract disputes or, if unsuccessful, managing formal resolution process, e.g. mediation, arbitration, legal proceedings n Record keeping n Freedom of Information Act requests and responses n Post-project review and reporting n Procurement auditing and reporting n Drafting and maintaining procurement policies and procedural manuals
76
Safety Management
Overview Bruce Shaw Safety Management (BSSM) provide specialist safety services in design safety management, particularly in regard to Project Supervisor (Design Process) (PSDP) as well as construction safety management i.e. assessing & evaluating contractor performance on health & safety There is a significant volume of safety legislation for all new construction projects, primarily aimed at the clients commissioning the works and the designers involved in their design. Safety is a critical element in the design, construction, use and maintenance of the building under design and it is vital that risks are identified and resolved from an early stage. Current Trends Trends in design & construction safety are constantly being updated due not only to legislation and experience but also in light of a lessons learnt approach from completed works. This approach can provide an invaluable insight in improving inputs in the design and planning process for new projects. Key considerations include: n Constructability an essential requirement in design is to ensure that a new structure can be constructed safely n Documented approach to risk assessment & evaluation highlighting the approach by which potential risks are identified evaluated and controlled n Access & maintenance an effective assessment in design can significantly reduce risks and costs to the client and end user Services Provided BSSM services include: n Advice on guidance on all aspects of health & safety legislation n Project Supervisor (Design Process) (PSDP) n Design Safety Co-ordination n Construction Safety Management, safety auditing and compliance BSSM experience in providing design safety management services extends across a wide range of sectors including retail & commercial, healthcare, education and general safety management assuring clients of a professional and comprehensive service in health & safety
Design Risk Assessment Process (DRA)

Designers Principles of Prevention
Identify Hazard
People Property Environment
Eliminate
Assess Risks
Reduce
Control Measures Measure to control Reduce risks BSSM as PSDP
Inform
Control
77
Bruce Shaw Senior Personnel

Brendan OMara brendan.omara@bruceshaw.ie Des OBroin des.obroin@bruceshaw.ie
Derry Scully derry.scully@bruceshaw.ie
Steven Cooke steven.cooke@bruceshawgroup.com
Gerard Campbell gerard.campbell@bruceshaw.ie
Brian McCay brian.mccay@bruceshaw.ie
Peter McHale peter.mchale@bruceshaw.ie
Gary Comerford gary.comerford@bruceshaw.ie
Richard Joyce richard.joyce@bruceshaw.ie
Jonathan Cooke jonathan.cooke@bruceshaw.ie
Paul Boylan paul.boylan@bruceshaw.ie
Neil Doyle neil.doyle@bruceshaw.ie
Colm Buckley colm.buckley@bruceshaw.ie
Michael Riordan michael.riordan@bruceshaw.ie
Saran OByrne saran.obyrne@bruceshaw.ie
Mark Wearen mark.wearen@bruceshaw.ie
Niall Greene niall.greene@bruceshaw.ie
Stephen Ashe stephen.ashe@bruceshaw.ie
78
Tony Madden tony.madden@bruceshaw.ie
Patrick Ryan patrick.ryan@bsplim.ie
Niall Cox niall.cox@bruceshaw.ie
Chris Matthews chris.matthews@bsplim.ie
Willie Aherne willie.aherne@bruceshaw.ie
John Ballance john.ballance@bspm.ie
Pat McDevitt pat.mcdevitt@bruceshaw.ie
Kevin Kinsella kevin.kinsella@bspm.ie
Terence Woulfe-Flanagan terence.woulfeflanagan@ bruceshaw.ie
Tony Kelly tony.kelly@bspm.ie
Tony ORegan tony.oregan@bspcork.ie
Niall Canning niall.canning@bspm.ie
Timothy Cahalane tim.cahalane@bspcork.ie
Niall Harrington niall.harrington@bssm.ie
Frank OSullivan frank.osullivan@bsplim.ie
Mark Keane mark.keane@bruceshaw.ro
Aidan Walsh aidan.walsh@bsplim.ie
Austin Hickey austin.hickey@bspbar.com
79
Our Clients
Abbott International ABN Amro Albany Properties Al Khozama Management Company A&L Goodbody Allied Irish Bank Aramco Overseas Arnotts Arthur Cox Aryzta AG Athlone Institute of Technology Amgen Bahrain Bay Developments Ballymore Properties Bank of Ireland Bank of Scotland BD Medical Bord Gis Eireann Blood Transfusion Services Board BT Telecom ByrneWallace Caelum Developments Carlow Institute of Technology Castlethorn Construction Central Bank & Financial Services Authority of Ireland Chase Manhattan Chartered Accountants Ireland Childrens University Hospital, Temple Street Citibank Communicorp Cork County Council Cork Institute of Technology Cork University Hospital Crosbie Properties D2 Properties Dalkia Dell Department of Education & Science Ireland Depfa Bank Deutsch Bank Diageo Global Supply Digital Realty Trust Dublin Airport Authority Dublin City Council Dublin Docklands Development Authority Dublin Institute of Technology Easons Elan Electricity Supply Board Ellier Developments Explore Investments Fluor Four Seasons Hotels Glen Dimplex Group Grattan Property Green Property Company Greencore Guidant Health Services Executive Hewlett Packard Hilton Hotels Hypo Real Estate Holding AG IBM Intel Investec Irelandia Irish Aviation Authority Irish Prison Service Johnson & Johnson JP Morgan KPMG Lidl Macquarie Capital Menolly Homes Marks & Spencer Mary Immaculate College Matheson Ormsby Prentice Mater and Childrens Hospital Development McCann Fitzgerald Merrill Lynch Merrion Hotel Microsoft Mount Juliet Properties National Development Finance Agency National Institute for Bioprocessing Research and Training National Maternity Hospital National Roads Authority National University of Ireland, Maynooth Nissan Ireland Northern Ireland Healthcare Group Novartis O2 Office of Public Works Oger International Park Developments Pedra Developments Premier Group WLL Pfizer Pricewaterhouse Coopers Primark/Penneys Ritz Carlton Roads Service Northern Ireland Royal Dublin Society Royal Sun Alliance Saudi Aramco Saudi Oger Ltd. St. Patricks College, Drumcondra St. Vincents Healthcare Group Tamouh Investments Treasury Holdings Trinity College Dublin Ulster Bank University College Cork University College Dublin University College Galway Warner Chilcott Wicklow County Council William Fry Windsor Motors Wyeth Medica
80

Bruce Shaw Handbook 2010

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Bruce Shaw Handbook 2010

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Handbook 2010