[200WILLIAM-EC SP67851] FW: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

[cscl at optusnet.com.au]

Hello Sarah,

 

Thank you.

It would behove us to also get a quote from Noviion, for a comparison of charges. They provided the report on the cladding, and they also provide reports as structural engineers.

 

John and Kylie, I have used your personal email addresses as I know you are not receiving some emails at the ec at 200william.com <mailto:ec at 200william.com>  address.

Best wishes,

Craig

 

 

 

From: ec <ec-bounces at mailman.perkins.id.au> On Behalf Of Sarah | AscendCorp Strata
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:22 PM
To: matt at perkins.id.au; Kylie Curtis <kyliempearce at icloud.com>
Cc: EC Mailing List <ec at 200william.com>
Subject: Re: [200WILLIAM-EC SP67851] FW: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

 

Hi All,

 

I have MJ Engineering on standby to proceed with the inspection and report of the exterior façade of the building as per their fee proposal. I am just waiting to pass the motion at the BMC AGM as a formality and will then issue a work order.

 

 

Kind regards,

 

SARAH WALMSLEY | MANAGING DIRECTOR & LICENSEE IN CHARGE

FELLOW STRATA COMMUNITY MANAGER (FSCM)

 

ASCENDCORP STRATA PTY LTD

P  02 9799 1111  |   E   <mailto:sarah at ascendcorpstrata.com.au> sarah at ascendcorpstrata.com.au   |   W  <http://www.ascendcorp.com.au/> www.ascendcorp.com.au   

PO Box 419 NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2059  |  A  100 Walker Street, NORTH SYDNEY NSW 2060

 

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

 



 

From: ec <ec-bounces at mailman.perkins.id.au <mailto:ec-bounces at mailman.perkins.id.au> > On Behalf Of matt at perkins.id.au <mailto:matt at perkins.id.au> 
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 5:13 PM
To: Kylie Curtis <kyliempearce at icloud.com <mailto:kyliempearce at icloud.com> >
Cc: EC Mailing List <ec at 200william.com <mailto:ec at 200william.com> >
Subject: Re: [200WILLIAM-EC SP67851] FW: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

 

Hi Kylie,
 I cant see why we cant use the same engineer.  It's my understanding that Sarah has already (or is at least about to ) engage the engineer to look over the building as a hole.  Im not sure if she has given them the final briefing as yet as she may be waiting for the BMC AGM. Im sure she will chime in and let us know.

Warm Regards


Matt

On 5 Sep 2023 at 3:13 PM +1000, Kylie Curtis <kyliempearce at icloud.com <mailto:kyliempearce at icloud.com> >, wrote:

Thank you Matt. 

 

That’s a very succinct description.

 

Can we just engage the one engineer that we had coming out anyway? Kill two birds, that kind of thing?

 

I’m available for a Zoom call on Thursday after work if we all need to jump on a call?

 

Warm regards, 

Kylie

Sent from my iPhone

 

On 5 Sep 2023, at 1:39 pm, matt at perkins.id.au <mailto:matt at perkins.id.au>  wrote:

 

Hi Kylie,
I think Paul is overseas at the moment, so perhaps tonight is out. I have attached the report for you to have a look.

The recommendations are fairly basic. It would seem that under the act, we are required to replace the panels if they are category A, which are panels that consist of 30% or more polymer material. The lab results confirm that the panels in our building are 29% polymer. The engineer in this case has recommended we replace them, but by my reading, there is no requirement. As the replacement of the panels is extremely costly, the NSW government introduced a scheme in which we could get an interest-free loan to pay for the work. We applied for that loan, and it was rejected as we do not qualify (as the panels are not required to be replaced).

Going forward, an engineer has been engaged to assess the entire state of the facade, mostly to do with water leaks and deteriorating render, but I have no objections to the replacement of the panels being considered as part of the rectification work that will come from that assessment, which has been previously agreed upon by the committee. One of the biggest factors in any of these renovations is Sydney council's requirement for holding and scaffolding, the price of which could be a significant cost of the project.

Here's the full text of the recommendations.


ACP LABORATORY RESULTSBased on the laboratory results provided, it is interpolated that approximately 29% of the core material is low density polyethylene. Polyethylene cores typically are not fire-rated and the panels themselves would therefore not conform with current Australian Standards. 
Under section 9(1) of the Building Products (Safety) Act 2017, the act prohibits the use of aluminium composite panels (ACP) with a core comprised of greater than 30% polyethylene (PE) by mass in any external cladding and wall. That act states the installation of non-compliant cladding in accordance with the act is retrospective and as such requires to be adequately remediated. 
The laboratory results have identified the Aluminium Composite Panels to have a polyethylene core slightly less than 30% by mass. However, based on the high combustibility and unknown manufacturer of the installed product, it is recommended that all ACP cladding to the façade be replaced with a suitable non-combustible material. 

This assessment has only considered the likelihood of Aluminium Composite Panels (ACP) panelling being installed on the building facade. 

 

Warm regards
Matt

On 5 Sep 2023 at 12:42 PM +1000, Kylie Curtis <kyliempearce at icloud.com <mailto:kyliempearce at icloud.com> >, wrote:

Hi all 

 

It seems my email didn’t go through to the EC inbox as it says I’m not a member!

 

Pls see my email below.

Warm Regards, 

Kylie

Sent from my iPhone


Begin forwarded message:

From: Kylie Curtis <kyliempearce at icloud.com <mailto:kyliempearce at icloud.com> >
Date: 5 September 2023 at 12:19:06 pm AEST
To: matt at perkins.id.au <mailto:matt at perkins.id.au> 
Cc: Paul Mooney <paulmooney at manxpm.com.au <mailto:paulmooney at manxpm.com.au> >, cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> , ec at 200william.com <mailto:ec at 200william.com> 
Subject: Re: [200WILLIAM-EC SP67851] FW: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

 Hi all 

 

I’m available for a Zoom call on Friday between 12-2pm or can meet in lobby to discuss this tonight after work or Thursday night this week ?

 

It sounds like it makes sense to have one engineer give us recommendations however would be good to understand more so I can make an informed judgement.

 

Warm Regards, 

Kylie

Sent from my iPhone

 

On 5 Sep 2023, at 11:51 am, matt at perkins.id.au <mailto:matt at perkins.id.au>  wrote:

 

Im not in Sydney from the 23rd if you want to have a face to face meeting. I can usually move things around for a zoom.  

I think Paul makes a valid point in that the engineer that we have engaged to look at the building could also consider the cladding as part of that. The  report includes the lab data so one engineer should be able to consider that just as well as the other.   In engineering reports there are always recommendations and requirements.   I have made recommendations in engineering reports that an electrician change a light bulb but i dont really expect them to do it.   But it covers me insurance wise and helps to puff out the report.   


Matt

On 5 Sep 2023 at 11:09 AM +1000, cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> , wrote:

Again, happy to have an EC meeting.

 

There would not be a situation where we would be “setting two experts on a conflicting course”. Noviion also provide structural engineering reports, so I don’t understand your point, Paul.

 

A zoom meeting……..would everyone like to give me some times/dates when you are available and I’ll set one up?

Cheers.

 

From: Paul Mooney <paulmooney at manxpm.com.au <mailto:paulmooney at manxpm.com.au> >
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 10:57 AM
To: cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> 
Cc: matt at perkins.id.au <mailto:matt at perkins.id.au> ; ec at 200william.com <mailto:ec at 200william.com> 
Subject: Re: [200WILLIAM-EC SP67851] FW: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

 

Dear EC etc,

 

I also disagree with this move considering that we have already agreed to engage a structural engineer to inspect the overall building. It would seem to be setting two experts on a conflicting course.

Let’s get the engineers report and then plan accordingly.

I also agree with Matt that an EC meeting is appropriate, it should not be led by one person, seems the whole point of having a collective committee.

 

I think one step at a time and get it right.

 

Regards

 

Paul

Sent from my iPhone

 

On 5 Sep 2023, at 7:44 am, cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au>  wrote:



Hi Matt,

I’m happy to have an EC meeting. I’m interested as to why you don’t accept the expert’s (the Engineer) and the report’s recommendation?

Okay………..let’s organize an EC asap everyone.

Cheers,

Craig

 

From: matt at perkins.id.au <mailto:matt at perkins.id.au>  <matt at perkins.id.au <mailto:matt at perkins.id.au> >
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 10:24 AM
To: ec at 200william.com <mailto:ec at 200william.com> ; cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> 
Subject: Re: [200WILLIAM-EC SP67851] FW: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

 

No Craig,
 I do not agree. I think we should have a EC meeting to discuss the matter. 


Matt

On 5 Sep 2023 at 10:16 AM +1000, cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> , wrote:

Good morning,

 

As some of you may be aware, ZENITH Residences, above the Coca Cola sign, are presently having cladding removed from their building because they do not meet the <30% legal requirement.

 

We have a report, dated July 13, 2021, from Noviion Engineering, based on a core sample which was taken from our building. I wanted to ensure that we do in fact meet the requirements, so I read the report and became very concerned. There is alarming information, under “Recommendation”. Please see emails below.

 

I spoke to George Dahrie, the Principal Engineer from Noviion, this morning and he stated he has been waiting to hear from us, since the initial recommendations were made in their report to us. Presently, even though we are <30%, from the core sample they took from our building, we still do not meet the legal requirements. Noviion need to verify the type and brand of cladding, which we presently don’t know. A whole panel must be removed to find the cladding brand name.  Once we know the maker’s name, Noviion will assess the panel (name) and provide us with engineering advice.

 

Darren, would you please find a suitable contractor to take out a whole panel please and have the maker’s name given to me. I will then contact George Dahrie and provide him with the panel maker’s name.

 

Unless anyone has any questions, I’m sure you’ll agree, it is essential that we follow through with this matter asap.

 

Regards,

Craig

 

From: George Dahrie <george.dahrie at noviion.com.au <mailto:george.dahrie at noviion.com.au> >
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:22 AM
To: cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> 
Subject: RE: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

 

Hi Craig,

 

Thank you for the email.

 

Regarding the report, to be compliant the ACP needs to both have testing data and <30% PE.

At the time of assessment, no information could be located to verify the type and brand of cladding.

As such, our recommendation is to replace the cladding to meet current Australian Standards.

 

If a panel is removed and we are provided the brand, we can research the testing data and advise on its compliance.

The cost of the assessment and engineering advice will be $2,540+GST.

 

If you wish to proceed or require additional information, please do not hesitate to ask.

 

Kind Regards,

George Dahrie 
Principal Engineer

BE(Civil & Env) CPEng(IEAust)

NACE (8264278)

Design Practitioner -DEP0001192

 

 

<image001.png>

 

<image001.png>

  george.dahrie at noviion.com.au <mailto:george.dahrie at noviion.com.au> 

<image002.png>

  0414 448 660

<image003.png>

  9635-9789

<image004.png>

  noviion.com.au <http://noviion.com.au/> 

 

<image005.png>

The contents of this e-mail and its attachments are confidential and may be subject to legal professional privilege and copyright.

It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this e-mail and its attachment by anyone else is unauthorised. No representation

is made that this e-mail or any attachment is free of viruses and other defects. Virus scanning is recommended and is the

responsibility of the recipient. If you are not the intended addressee, any disclosure, usage, copying, distribution or any action

taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please advise the

sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message from your computer. Thank you for your cooperation.

 

From: cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au>  <cscl at optusnet.com.au <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> >
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2023 2:03 PM
To: Noviion Client Services <admin at noviion.com.au <mailto:admin at noviion.com.au> >
Subject: ATTENTION RICK - RE: MARQUIS APARTMENTS, 200 WILLIAM STREET, WOOLLOOMOOLOO N.S.W.

 

 

 

Dear Rick,

 

Client: SP 67851, Client Address 200 William Street, Woolloomooloo - Job # 21288

 

Thank you for your time today.

 

As I mentioned, I have reviewed the above job # 21288 report, and would like to further investigate two points:

 

The report states on page 8: “Recommendation - Based on the laboratory results provided, it is interpolated that approximately 29% of the core material is low density polyethylene. Polyethylene cores typically are not fire-rated and the panels themselves would therefore not conform with current Australian Standards. Under section 9(1) of the Building Products (Safety) Act 2017, the act prohibits the use of aluminium composite panels (ACP) with a core comprised of greater than 30% polyethylene (PE) by mass in any external cladding and wall. That act states the installation of non-compliant cladding in accordance with the act is retrospective and as such requires to be adequately remediated. The laboratory results have identified the Aluminium Composite Panels to have a polyethylene core slightly less than 30% by mass. However, based on the high combustibility and unknown manufacturer of the installed product, it is recommended that all ACP cladding to the façade be replaced with a suitable non-combustible material. This assessment has only considered the likelihood of Aluminium Composite Panels (ACP) panelling being installed on the building façade.

 

You agreed with me that there is slight ambiguity in the recommendations. Would you please confirm if your company is recommending that we should remove all cladding on our building, despite the ACP having a less than 30% mass. The report does state, because there is unknown material in the ACP, it is Noviion’s recommendation “that all ACP cladding to the façade be replaced with non-combustible material.”

 

Are we required under present regulations (2023) to remove all our cladding, because the percentages of the ACP, with a core (may) have been reduced i.e. lower than 30% mass?

 

Thank you, Rick. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.

 

Best regards,
Craig Laforest

Chairman – Body Corporate

Marquis Apartments

 

--
ec mailing list
ec at mailman.perkins.id.au <mailto:ec at mailman.perkins.id.au> 
http://mailman.perkins.id.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ec

--
ec mailing list
ec at mailman.perkins.id.au <mailto:ec at mailman.perkins.id.au> 
http://mailman.perkins.id.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ec

--
ec mailing list
ec at mailman.perkins.id.au <mailto:ec at mailman.perkins.id.au> 
http://mailman.perkins.id.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ec

<1040255 Marquis Cladding Testing Report 20210713.pdf>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.perkins.id.au/pipermail/ec/attachments/20230905/20cb80c2/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 5846436 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.perkins.id.au/pipermail/ec/attachments/20230905/20cb80c2/attachment-0001.gif>