CFT 3686 - Proposed Age Friendly Social Housing Development consisting of 5 residential units at 62 Sarsfield Park, Lucan, Co. Dublin
Value
€3.0m
Deadline
23 Oct
23 Oct 2024
Value
€3.0m
Deadline
23 Oct
Development of 5 age-friendly residential units in Lucan, Co. Dublin
Development of 5 age-friendly residential units in Lucan, Co. Dublin
Bidder profile
Ideal for firms experienced in public sector construction projects with robust insurance and compliance capabilities.
Risks & flags
- Information asymmetry
- Compliance risks
- Timeline compression
Briefing
AI-generated analysis of the documents. Check the official notice and any amendments for current submission details.
1. At a glance
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Buyer | South Dublin County Council |
| Title | CFT 3686 - Proposed Age Friendly Social Housing Development consisting of 5 residential units at 62 Sarsfield Park, Lucan, Co. Dublin |
| CPV / category | works / Construction & Civil Engineering |
| Estimated value | €3000000.00 |
| Per-year (if multi-year) | not stated |
| Procedure type | not stated |
| Lots | not stated |
| Location | Standard.zip] Content from the zip file /tmp/tmpnv2k5q3e.zip: |
| Contract length | not stated |
| Submission deadline | 2024-10-23T15:00:00+00:00 |
| Go-live / start | not stated |
2. Scope of Work
This procurement covered the supply scope described in the tender pack for CFT 3686 - Proposed Age Friendly Social Housing Development consisting of 5 residential units at 62 Sarsfield Park, Lucan, Co. Dublin. The contract shape pointed to operational delivery against buyer demand, documented ordering, and conformance with specification, quality, and administrative requirements set out in the RFT documents. The package indicated a formal competition route with standard Irish public-procurement controls around qualification, response formatting, and deadline compliance.
- Contract title and category indicate supply activity for Construction & Civil Engineering under buyer workflows in South Dublin County Council.
- Submission package must align with the RFT structure published through the buyer's procurement channel.
- Day-to-day obligations include order fulfilment, documentation, and conformance with specification, quality, and administrative requirements.
- Technical and commercial responses must map directly to mandatory requirements and the pricing schedule format in the tender pack.
- Evidence trail must be maintained for declarations, eligibility proofs, and any product or service specifications named in attachments.
- Numerical obligations surfaced in the verified extract: 1b are left in or deleted the default text for the sub-clause is “The Specialist shall maintain professional indemnity insurance in the amount of at least €6,500,000.00 on an annual aggregate limit until a dat; rk: Yearly Turnover arising from the area of work specified: General Construction € 3,000,000 per annum on average for 3 previous years Minimum level of Professional Indemnity Insurance required for € 1.5m Maximum permissible excess on Prof; Minimum level of Public Liability Insurance required in respect of any one accident: € 6,500,000 Maximum level of excess for property only* for any one incident below which the will bear the cost: € 10,000 Minimum level of Employer’s Liabili
The source material indicated that bidders had to ground claims in tender forms and supporting evidence, rather than generic company profiles. Where the verified extract provided numerical conditions, those figures were treated as the binding baseline for suitability. Where the extract did not provide a number, the requirement remained not specified at briefing stage and required direct review of the underlying attachment before pricing sign-off.
3. Background & buyer context
The buyer ran this competition to secure a structured procurement route for the stated category and keep continuity of supply under public-sector purchasing controls. The tender format suggested a compliance-led process with a defined close date and a document trail through the procurement portal. The context indicated a need for contract certainty, auditable supplier selection, and predictable service or goods availability during the contract term. No explicit incumbent detail was surfaced in the verified extract provided to this worker, so incumbent advantage had to be assessed from full attachment review and clarification responses.
4. Eligibility & selection criteria
- Turnover requirement — Turnover arising from the area of work specified: General Construction € 3,000,000 per annum on average for 3 previous years Minimum level of Professional Indemnity Insurance required for € 1.5m
- Insurance
- Public Liability — €6,500,000
- Employer's Liability — €13,000,000
- Professional Indemnity — €6,500,000.00
- Motor — €6.5m
- Certifications — not specified for this tender
- Past experience — not specified for this tender
- Personnel — not specified for this tender
- Geographic / facility constraints — not specified for this tender
Binding numerical extract used for this section: 1b are left in or deleted the default text for the sub-clause is “The Specialist shall maintain professional indemnity insurance in the amount of at least €6,500,000.00 on an annual aggregate limit until a dat; rk: Yearly Turnover arising from the area of work specified: General Construction € 3,000,000 per annum on average for 3 previous years Minimum level of Professional Indemnity Insurance required for € 1.5m Maximum permissible excess on Prof; Minimum level of Public Liability Insurance required in respect of any one accident: € 6,500,000 Maximum level of excess for property only* for any one incident below which the will bear the cost: € 10,000 Minimum level of Employer’s Liabili
5. Award criteria & scoring
The award model followed MEAT-style evaluation where published criteria and weights governed scoring after qualification. The exact weighting structure required confirmation from the pricing and quality schedules if not explicit in the extract below.
| Criterion | Weight (%) | Sub-criteria | Minimum threshold |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | not stated | not stated | not stated |
| Quality / Technical merit | not stated | not stated | not stated |
Price/quality split: not stated.
6. Submission requirements
- Method statement / response document — complete the buyer template and answer each requirement in the order requested; page limits not stated in the extract.
- CVs — provide role-based CVs where requested; page count not stated.
- Pricing schedule — submit the issued pricing schedule in its required format; alternative layouts were not stated as acceptable.
- Case studies — number and value bands not stated in the extract.
- Declarations — include ESPD or equivalent declarations, tax and legal standing confirmations, and conflict disclosures where requested by the pack.
- Mandatory site visit — not stated in the extract.
- Submission portal — submit via eTenders or the named portal before the stated deadline; late submissions are typically non-compliant.
7. Key dates & process
| Milestone | Date / timing |
|---|---|
| RFT issued | not stated |
| Clarification deadline | not stated |
| Mandatory site visit | not stated |
| Tender deadline (date + time) | 2024-10-23T15:00:00+00:00 |
| Expected award | not stated |
| Contract start | not stated |
| Go-live / mobilisation | not stated |
8. Contract terms that matter
The contract term and extension mechanics were not fully stated in the extracted metadata, so bidders had to read the form of contract and schedules for binding duration language. Payment timing, service levels, and remedies for non-performance were also attachment-driven in this pack. IP, subcontracting permission, and any security instruments such as bonds or guarantees were not explicit in the verified extract supplied here. The practical implication was that commercial risk sat in the contract appendices, and bid/no-bid confidence depended on reviewing those clauses before final pricing.
9. Risks, red flags & unusuals
The main risk in this competition was information asymmetry between headline metadata and full contractual detail. Numerical gates for insurance appeared in the verified extract, but other qualification thresholds were not explicitly surfaced, so an under-scoped response could fail on compliance before scoring. Another risk was timeline compression if clarification timing and mobilisation expectations were tighter in the attachments than in the metadata view. No specific unusual legal mechanism was confirmed in the extract provided to this worker; the red-flag check therefore depended on line-by-line attachment review.
10. SME fit assessment
This tender looked most accessible to firms that already operated in the stated category and could evidence public-procurement compliance at submission stage. A credible bidder profile was a supplier with documented quality controls, tender-writing capacity, and insurance levels aligned to the verified figures where listed. Consortium or named subcontracting arrangements were not specified in the extract and needed confirmation in the RFT rules. Bid-preparation effort was typically several working days for data gathering, drafting, pricing, and internal approvals, with additional time if technical attachments were extensive. Pwin signals from this extract alone were neutral because incumbent status and prior winners were not explicitly surfaced.
11. Where to dig deeper
- Source RFT file(s): SDCC Invitation to Tender memo.pdf, Schedule.pdf
- eTenders CFT ID: 3686
- Clarification contact / portal: [email protected]
- Priority attachments: SDCC Invitation to Tender memo.pdf, Schedule.pdf
This tender has been awarded
- Cleary and Doyle Construction Ltd · 22 Jan 2025
- Cleary and Doyle Construction Ltd · 17 Dec 2024
Can you bid?
Required certifications
- ISO 9001
Minimum turnover
€3,000,000
Public liability insurance
€6,500,000
Professional indemnity insurance
€6,500,000
Scoring
Most Economically Advantageous Tender
Cost
Quality
Lots (1)
Specialist works requiring design input and adherence to health and safety standards.
Documents (77)
5729 Inspection Notification Framework.pdf
89.5 KB · Specification
Structural & Civil Engineering Design Report (Issue 2).pdf
185.2 KB · Specification
22027_ITT-W2-v2.5-01-08-2023-1SDCC1.docx
143.6 KB · RFT / Invitation to Tender
SDCC Invitation to Tender memo.pdf
141.0 KB · RFT / Invitation to Tender
Tender & Schedule.pdf
794.6 KB · RFT / Invitation to Tender
3.4.1-HS-Works-Contractor-v3.0-28-07-2023.docx
46.9 KB · Contract / Agreement / Terms
3.4.2-HS-PSCS-v3.0-28-07-2023.docx
42.4 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
3.4.3-HS-Works-Specialist-with-Design-v3.0-28-07-2023.docx
44.0 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
Appendix-A-Applicants-Self-Declaration-re-Regulation-57.docx
37.8 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
Appendix-B2-Certificate-of-Satisfactory-Project-Execution.docx
26.0 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
Appendix-B3-Certificate-of-Satisfactory-Delivery-of-Services.docx
25.6 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
Appendix-E-Declaration-in-relation-to-Russian-Sanctions.docx
24.0 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
Appendix-F-Declaration-re-International-Procurement-Instrument.docx
22.9 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
GDPR note (1).docx
15.8 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
QW-Part-2-v1.0-28-07-2023-2.docx
70.0 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
QW2-Part-1-v2.0-28-07-2023-1.docx
191.4 KB · Form / Declaration / Certificate
6299 Sarsfield Park Draft SI Report REV1.pdf
2.6 MB · Other
00_Employers Requirements.zip
3.9 MB
01_Architects.zip
26.0 MB
02_Civil & Structural Eng.zip
11.8 MB
03_M&E Eng.zip
21.2 MB
04_Additional Reqirements.zip
59.8 MB
2041C SDCC Sarsfield Park - ESB Application - Submitted 20th May 2024.pdf
136.6 KB
22027 Proposed Structure Type & Components schedule- ER Appendix 2.doc
108.5 KB
22027 Quality Tender Assessment Document.pdf
188.2 KB · Tender Response Template
22027_01 Sarsfield Park S179A CA Report.pdf
2.0 MB
22027_02 ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS.pdf
5.8 MB
22027_03 JBA -Sarsfield_Park_AA_Screening.pdf
2.1 MB
22027_04 PD-38D-24 - Sarsfield Park_AA Determination.pdf
46.6 KB
22027_05 JBA -Sarsfield_Park_EIA_Screening.pdf
1.3 MB
22027_06 PD-38C-24 - Sarsfield Park_EIA Determination.pdf
49.3 KB
22027_07 JBA -Sarsfield FRA.pdf
2.1 MB
22027_08 Sarsfield Park_S179A_Newspaper_Notice (Echo).pdf
211.2 KB
22027_100 Site Location - Standard.zip
1.0 MB
22027_101 Existing Site Plan - Constraints - Standard.zip
15.2 MB
22027_102 Site Survey - Standard.zip
382.1 KB
22027_103 Proposed Site Plan - Standard.zip
1.8 MB
22027_200-205 Plans_Sections_Elevations - Standard.zip
2.8 MB
22027_300-204 Apartemnts Types & Floor Finish - Standard.zip
7.2 MB
23009ROI Proposed Infill Social Housing Development, Sarsfield Park, Lucan, County Dublin - GI Report.pdf
24.9 MB
5729 Inspection Plan.pdf
94.4 KB · Appendix / Annex
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YA-4000_P1 Site Location Map.pdf
316.5 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YA-4001_P1 Existing Site layout Map.pdf
150.2 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YA-4002_P1 Proposed Site layout Map.pdf
181.4 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YA-4100_P1 Proposed Ground floor and 1st floor plan.pdf
224.1 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YA-4200_P1 Proposed Elevations and Sections.pdf
331.0 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YF-3000_P1 Site Location Map.pdf
316.3 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YF-3100_P1 Existing & Proposed Site Plan.pdf
225.7 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YF-3102_P1 Ground & First Floor Plans.pdf
443.6 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-DR-YF-3103_P1 Elevations & Section.pdf
350.4 KB
5729-MCE-00-XX-RP-YF-0001_P1 Fire Safety Cert Compliance Report.pdf
479.6 KB
5729-MCE-XX-XX-RP-YA-0002_P1 Disability Access Compliance Report.pdf
412.7 KB
5729-Preliminary Safety & Health Plan Rev PSHP-1.0.pdf
13.4 MB
6299 Sarsfield Park Lucan - Additional Site Investigation Report (Draft).pdf
2.3 MB
AF1 Form (submitted on line - 02-07-2024).pdf
35.6 KB
Appendix-B1-List-of-Previous-Works-Projects-which-is-CEE.docx
31.3 KB · Appendix / Annex
Appendix-C-Bankers-Letter.docx
29.9 KB · Appendix / Annex
Appendix-D1-QW1-Letter-of-Undertaking-re.-Bond.docx
33.2 KB · Appendix / Annex
Appendix-D2-QW2-Letter-of-Undertaking-re.-Bond.docx
26.8 KB · Appendix / Annex
CDS24005099 COF.pdf
330.7 KB
DIV24174 - 62A to 62E Sarsfield Park, Lucan - Diversion Agreement.pdf
3.0 MB
DIV24174 Next Steps Guide.pdf
269.4 KB
Diversion Commencement Notice.pdf
115.4 KB
ER for Detail Design of Quality Housing.pdf
2.0 MB
GDPR clauses CWMF personal data.docx
15.0 KB
MF-1.10-09-04-2020.docx
52.9 KB
MF-1.12-09-04-2020 (13).docx
68.4 KB
MF-1.13-09-04-2020 (1).docx
47.5 KB
MF-1.4-03-08-2010-rev (3).docx
55.8 KB
MF-1.6-09-04-2020 (9).docx
57.1 KB
O.na6-v1.3-18-07-2023.docx
44.0 KB
plot.log
768 bytes
PW-CF2-v2.7-01-05-2024.pdf
1.3 MB
Sarsfield Park Job Sheet.pdf
14.3 MB
Sarsfield Park Report.pdf
1.4 MB
SDCC Health Safety File List Rev1.docx
25.2 KB
Volume C Pricing Doc.pdf
1.6 MB
Original notice text
This tender involves the construction of five age-friendly residential units at Sarsfield Park, Lucan, ensuring compliance with public procurement standards and quality specifications.
AI analysis updated 4 months ago
Value
€3.0m
Deadline
23 Oct
Location
62 Sarsfield Park, Lucan, Co. Dublin
Procedure
Open
Clarification
25 Sep 2024
eTenders ID
4218276
Ask AI
Knows this tender's documents
Example only — sign up to ask about this tender