Question:
Good Morning,

We are very interested in submitting a tender for this project although we currently hold a Medium Rise QBCC Licence.

I note that Part D of the Tender documents nominates an Open Building Licence requirement, we do not believe an Open licence is required for this project.

Would Council accept submissions from Medium Rise builders?

Answered on 22/Dec/2025 10:14 AM:


Council confirms it will accept tender submissions from contractors who hold a Medium Rise QBCC Licence.

Part D will be amended to reflect this change.

Question:
Could you please clarify whether a Quantity Surveying firm is permitted to apply for the tender independently, or if the submission must be made under a Builder?

Answered on 22/Dec/2025 10:23 AM:


Suppliers are welcome to submit conforming tenders, provided they meet the mandatory criteria and address the evaluation criteria in the response schedules.

Demonstrated previous experience in the delivery of similar projects and overall capability is a major element of the evaluation criteria, and tender submissions will be competitively evaluated against this criterion.

Question:
I would like to put Konnect Fastening and Building Supplies forward for this project.

As a Supplier will you be interested in Konnect supplying building products only to this project?

Thank You

Dean Cooper

Answered on 22/Dec/2025 10:26 AM:


No, Council is not seeking a supplier to supply the building products only.

Question:
Hello

Can you please double check that a Builder Medium Licence is allowed to undertake the project - here is the QBCC guideline: https://www.qbcc.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/guide-building-classes-licence-requirements.pdf

here is an extract

"Building work that consists of non-structural work on a building, regardless of— (a) the class for the building; or (b) the gross floor area of the building."

I assume this will be a Type A construction as defined by the NCC, which requires fire rating

My understanding is that Builder Medium cannot perform structural works on a Class 9 building or perform works on a Type A.

Thanks in advance

Answered on 29/Dec/2025 07:04 AM:


Council has requested that tenderers provide two budgeted options and also welcomes the submission of alternative design solutions.

Please note it is the tenderer’s responsibility to confirm the licence class required based on the certified design, construction methodology and NCC classification to ensure compliance with QBCC requirements. The successful tenderer is responsible for the full design and construction scope including building approvals and certification (refer to Part C Specifications sections 2.3.6 and 2.3.7).

Tenderers are responsible for ensuring that they, and any subcontractors engaged, hold the relevant QBCC licences necessary to deliver their proposed solution in compliance with all statutory and regulatory requirements.

The principal cannot confirm licence eligibility without the final design and certification details.

Question:
Can you please clarify item 3.2.2 d? it states that:



d) Spectator seating for the show court only but design and provisions shall be to include future

expansion of seating for the second court.

For future expansion where do you recommend spectator seating for court two as the area surrounding the court is quite limited. Do you propose a single row of chairs placed along the back wall?

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:13 PM:


For the provision fo future expansion of spectator seating to Court 2, tenderers are advised that the final seating layout is at the discretion of the contractor as part of their design solution.

In reference to Section 3.2.2(d) of 'Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification' the design is to have spectator seating for the show court and provision should be made for future spectator seating for the second court, however it does not mandate a specific arrangement. Tenderers should ensure their proposed design accommodates future seating capacity within the project constraints.

Question:
Hello,

Can you please provide timing for when the below drawings will be distributed?

A003 A3001 A5001 A5002 A6001 A6002 A7001 A7002

Thanks

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:15 PM:


The drawings listed (A003, A3001, A5001, A5002, A6001, A6002, A7001, A7002) form part of the concept design package. As noted on Drawing A001 (Cover Page) in Attachment A – Concept Design, these drawings are marked WIP – Not for Construction and will be developed during the Design & Approval Phase in accordance with Section 2.3 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification. No further drawings will be issued at tender stage.

Question:
Hi,

Section 3.2.1 "Must Have" f) says that there must be 2 change rooms per field and there are 2 field so a total of 4 change rooms are required. In section 3.2.3 "Like to have" b) says Provide sufficient space to allow for expansion so that a total of four change room facilities can be constructed. Section 3.2.4 "Must not have" d) says the the proposed facilities shall not exceed the footprint provided. Can you please give us some clarity as to iff the 4 change rooms are must have's or lie to have's and if we can increase the building footprint if required.

Thanks

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:16 PM:


"To clarify section 3.2.1(f), a minimum of one change room facility per court (two in total) is a 'Must Have' requirement.

To clarify section 3.2.3 (b), the facility 'Should Have' an additional 2 changeroom facilities (4 in total) or provision for future expansion to 4 changeroom facilities. These should also service planned future outdoor courts where possible.

All requirements must be achieved within the available land area, and designs must comply with the site constraints and project footprint identified in Section 1.2 and Section 3.2.4(d)."

Question:
Hello,

RFI 1 – Ceiling / Clearance Heights

Please confirm the required minimum clearance height for the building. The current architectural drawings indicate the lowest point of 6,040 mm; however, once structural elements and services are incorporated, the effective clearance height will be reduced.

Reference is made to Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Works and Specification, Section 3.4 Performance Requirements: “Must Have” items:

i) “Height of building to meet the minimum requirements for conducting competitions of the listed sporting activities without constraints”

Please confirm the required clearance height.

l) “All floor inserts in floors for future extension to nets for Volleyball, Tennis, Cricket, or other facilities for which the Beaudesert Indoor Sports Centre is intended to serve.”

Please confirm whether the required clearance heights take these future extensions into consideration.



RFI 2 – Mezzanine / Spectator Areas

Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Works and Specification Section 3.2.2 “Should Have” – item d):

“Elevated spectator areas (mezzanine) covering each court in equal numbers and viewing convenience.”

Please provide further detail on what you envision the mezzanine to be like?



RFI 3 – Development Approval (DA)

Please confirm the current DA status of the project, and whether a DA is required?

Thanks,

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:19 PM:


RFI 1: Minimum clearances must satisfy competition requirements for the nominated sports under Section 3.4(i) of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification. The contractor is responsible for determining compliant structural and services clearances through design development.

Future net extensions referenced in Section 3.4(l) must also be accommodated within the required functional height envelope.

RFI 2: Section 3.2.2(d) of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification identifies elevated spectator areas as a Should Have item. No specific mezzanine configuration is mandated. Tenderers are responsible for proposing a suitable design that satisfies viewing, safety, structural, and accessibility requirements.

RFI 3: As confirmed in Section 2.3.7 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification, development on Lot 165 SP131520 is defined as Accepted Development under the Scenic Rim Planning Scheme because Council is the trustee. Accordingly, a DA is not required; however, the contractor must address all other required building approvals and permits.

Question:
Could you please advise whether a Superintendent or Project Manager has already been appointed for this project?

If not, we would appreciate any insight into the intended procurement approach, as we have experience delivering projects across a range of sectors, including sporting and community facilities, and would be interested in submitting a proposal should an opportunity be available.

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:21 PM:


A Superintendent has not yet been appointed for this project. Procurement of superintendent or project management services will be undertaken separately in accordance with Council’s procedures. No further details are available at this stage.

Question:
The Vendor Panel Outline of the project states the Tender Due Date and Time is 13 Feb 5:00pm and the Scope Document states 2:00pm. Could you please confirm?

For reference, it is both the responsibility of the contractor and the client to determine the eligibility of those who can tender the project. The Contractor should only tender work that its licence allows and the Client to stipulate in its documents. It would seem under the QBCC definitions and guidelines that only a contractor with an Open Licence could deliver this project. If there is any doubt, can the client seek clarification from QBCC?

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:22 PM:


The correct Tender Submission Deadline is Friday, 13 February 2026 at 14:00 AEST, as stated in Request for Tender – Part A – Tender Particulars.

Regarding QBCC licensing, Council reiterates that it is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure they hold the appropriate licence for the final certified design in accordance with Section 4.2 of Request for Tender – Part B – Conditions of Tender and Section 4.2 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification. Council cannot confirm eligibility without the final design and approvals.

Question:
RFI: There seems to be missing drawings on the cover page, namely A003, A3001, A5001, A5002, A6001, A6002 & A7002 (window sch). Could you please confirm they will be sent?

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:24 PM:


The drawings identified on the cover sheet of Attachment A – Concept Design are provided as indicative only and marked WIP – Not for Construction. No additional drawings will be issued at tender stage. Final design documentation will be developed by the contractor in accordance with Section 2.3 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification.

Question:
RFI: Is there a Fire Engineering Report or specification that details what type of Fire System is going to be required for this project? Without this information it will be difficult to provide an accurate price.

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:24 PM:


A Fire Engineering Report has not been prepared for the concept design. Tenderers are responsible for developing a fully compliant fire safety design and any necessary performance solutions in accordance with Section 2.3.5 and Section 3.5 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification, and all relevant codes and standards.

Question:
The following drawings are noted in the document register but are not in the drawing set. Can they please be provided?

A5001

A5002

A6001

A6002

A7001

A7002

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:41 PM:


The drawings identified on the cover sheet of Attachment A – Concept Design are provided as indicative only and marked WIP – Not for Construction. No additional drawings will be issued at tender stage. Final design documentation will be developed by the contractor in accordance with Section 2.3 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification.

Question:
Finishes Schedules: the current schedules nominate specific sanitary fittings and fixtures. Is there a supporting schedule nominating the documented sports equipment, flooring, wall finishes etc?

Answered on 11/Feb/2026 05:26 PM:


Attachment F – Building Finishes Schedule provides the sanitary fixtures and fittings only. No separate schedule has been issued for sports equipment, wall finishes or other internal fit-out items. As outlined in Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification, Sections 2.4.1(g), the contractor is responsible for developing the full finishes and fit-out schedule as part of their design. Court flooring requirements are specified within Part C – Sections 3.2.

Question:
Please confirm if we are required to upgrade any existing inground services beyond the boundary as part of the works

Answered on 11/Feb/2026 05:25 PM:


Where service connections or authority requirements necessitate works outside the site boundary, the contractor must allow for these works as part of a complete, functional solution. This includes any upgrades required by service authorities as a condition of connection or approval. All such works must be incorporated within the contractor’s design, approvals and coordination responsibilities. This may be nominated as a provisional sum.

Question:
In regards to the Beaudesert Indoor Sports Centre tender and the design requirements, we have read through Part C – Scope of Works and Specification Documents and note:

1) 3.2.4 “ Must not have”

d) The proposed facilities shall not exceed the footprint provided

2) 3.3 Functional Requirements

3.3.1 ‘Must Have”

c) Each court shall as a minimum have a runout space of 6m at both ends and 3.3m at both sides of court to allow for the safe playing of all the sports listed as required for a state level competition.

i) The runout space shall not be a shared space for storage, officials’ facilities, spectator, official or competitor circulation space or setting up of the team benching space

The plans provided showing the current footprint does not allow for the runout space for each court. It allows approx. 2m all the way around. The courts can’t be reconfigured to allow for the full runout space allowing for two courts. Can we undertake the following:

1) Make the footprint larger (This will increase cost significantly)? or

2) Reduce to one court rather than two and keep the same footprint size? or

3) Reduce the runout space?

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:24 PM:


With regards to the proposed options in the tender query please see responses below:

1) Make the footprint larger (This will increase cost significantly)? Yes, Council is open to this option provided the cost stay within the nominated budget amounts in Part C – Scope of Work and Specification

2) Reduce to one court rather than two and keep the same footprint size? No Part C - Scope of Work and Specification Section 3.2.1 specifies the facility must have a minimum of two multi sports compliant fields plus minimum runout spaces suitable for all indoor sport activities listed in this document


3) Reduce the runout space? No, Section 3.3.1(c) of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification prescribes the mandatory runout distances, which take precedence over any concept drawings in accordance with the order of precedence in Section 1.4.1.

Tenderers should ensure their design complies with the specification requirements within the project constraints.

Question:
In regards to the Beaudesert Indoor Sports Centre tender and the design requirements, we have read through Part C – Scope of Works and Specification Documents and note: 1) 3.3 Functional Requirements

3.3.1 "Must have"

The facilities must be suitable for indoor sports including Basketball, Futsal, Volleyball, Pickleball and Badminton

Drawing A3002-A shows a minimum elevation height of 6.1m rising to 8m, of the above sports badminton requires a minimum court height of 8.8m or 12m for competition.

Are we able to raise the building height from the springing point to 8.8m or are the courts to be used for competition badminton and thus have a minimum court height of 12m?

Volleyball has a minimum height of 7m from court surface and thus are we still able to increase the building height?

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:31 PM:


Part C – Scope of Work and Specification Section 1 advises the concept design (Attachment A) has been provided for reference only. It should not be regarded as a constraint or directive in shaping the facility's design preference.

Minimum clearances must satisfy competition requirements for the nominated sports under Section 3.4(i) of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification. The contractor is responsible for determining compliant structural and services clearances through design development.

Future net extensions referenced in Section 3.4(l) must also be accommodated within the required functional height envelope.

Question:
Can you please confirm what takes precedence in developing a design?

1. The scope of works calls for runbacks of 6m at both ends of the courts and 3.3m to each side, but the concept drawings show 2m run off at the ends of the court and 3m between. This can mean a significant change in floor area, which is preferred?

2. The scope of works calls for two change room facilities per court, but the concept drawings only show 1 set of male and female changerooms. Which is preferred?

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:34 PM:


1. The scope of works calls for runbacks of 6m at both ends of the courts and 3.3m to each side, but the concept drawings show 2m run off at the ends of the court and 3m between. This can mean a significant change in floor area, which is preferred?

Section 3.3.1(c) of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification prescribe the mandatory runout distances, which take precedence over any concept drawings in accordance with the order of precedence in Section 1.4.1.

Tenderers should ensure their design complies with the specification requirements within the project constraints.

2. The scope of works calls for two change room facilities per court, but the concept drawings only show 1 set of male and female changerooms. Which is preferred?

To clarify section 3.2.1(f), a minimum of one change room facility per court (two in total) is a 'Must Have' requirement.

To clarify section 3.2.3 (b), the facility 'Should Have' an additional 2 changeroom facilities (4 in total) or provision for future expansion to 4 changeroom facilities. These should also service planned future outdoor courts where possible.

All requirements must be achieved within the available land area, and designs must comply with the site constraints and project footprint identified in Section 1.2 and Section 3.2.4(d).

Question:
Hi,

Can we please have an extension to the submission date?

Thanks

Answered on 11/Feb/2026 05:42 PM:


Unfortunately, due to strict funding deadlines associated with this project, Council is unable to grant any extensions to the tender closing date.

Question:
We note the provided concept architectural design does not meet the "must have" requirements in the specification (i.e. the building footprint is too small and other must have items are missing). Please confirm that the provided concept architectural plans are to be disregarded, and that pricing is to be driven by the Specification Must Have requirements with the "Should Have" and "Like to Have" as the additional items.

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:37 PM:


Part C – Scope of Work and Specification Section 1 advises the concept design (Attachment A) has been provided for reference only. It should not be regarded as a constraint or directive in shaping the facility's design preference.

Question:
Contract Queries:

1. What will be the trigger for the SP2 civil design?

2. What mechanism does the Principal intend to utiliise for the stated GO / NOGO gateway as detailed in RFT Part 3 s2.3.5.2 (o) please?

General Queries:

3. Technical requirements 3.4.1 (h) "must haves" include - "ice and water to be available for sports and first aid". Please confirm that the tenderers are only allowing for this spatially and for the provision of services only eg stoptap on wall.

4. Please provide details of the nominated Council system for CCTV [refer Like to Have item 3.3.3 (I)]

Answered on 11/Feb/2026 05:12 PM:


1. As outlined in Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification Sections 2.3.3 and 2.3.5, the sequencing of SP2 (carpark and external works) design follows the completion and acceptance of the SP1 Concept Design (30%). The intent of the separable portions is to manage different practical completion deadlines, not to create a separate financial or approval gateway. SP2 design can therefore commence once SP1 design has progressed sufficiently to confirm building footprint, interfaces, and service requirements.

2. Section 2.3.5.2(o) refers to a Principal Gateway Review following acceptance of the 30% Concept Design. This is an internal governance step used by Council to confirm that the overall project remains viable, affordable, and aligned with funding requirements before Detailed Design proceeds. The mechanism is an internal Principal approval process, not a contractual hold point for SP2 specifically.

3. Part C, Section 3.4.1(h) is a Performance Requirement and states that “ice and water are to be available for sports and first aid.” This requirement applies to the completed facility and is not limited to spatial or service provision only. Tenderers must therefore allow for operational ice and water facilities within their design and pricing.

4. No specific Council CCTV system has been nominated. As referenced in Request for Tender – Part C, Section 3.3.3(i), tenderers should allow for generic CCTV infrastructure provisions (conduits, pathways, mounting points) suitable for future integration into Council systems. Full system supply is only required if tenderers elect to include it as a Like to Have enhancement.

Question:
Hi Phillip

I'm following up on the RFIs we sent on 14 January. Could we please get a response?


14/Jan/2026 05:00 PM RFI: Is there a Fire Engineering Report or specification that details what type of Fire System is going to be required for this project? Without this information it will be difficult to provide an accurate price. No answer provided...

14/Jan/2026 04:58 PM RFI: There seems to be missing drawings on the cover page, namely A003, A3001, A5001, A5002, A6001, A6002 & A7002 (window sch). Could you please confirm they will be sent? No answer provided...

14/Jan/2026 04:50 PM The Vendor Panel Outline of the project states the Tender Due Date and Time is 13 Feb 5:00pm and the Scope Document states 2:00pm. Could you please confirm? For reference, it is both the responsibility of the contractor and the client to determine the eligibility of those who can tender the project. The Contractor should only tender work that its licence allows and the Client to stipulate in its documents. It would seem under the QBCC definitions and guidelines that only a contractor with an Open Licence could deliver this project. If there is any doubt, can the client seek clarification from QBCC? No answer provided...

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:44 PM:


14/Jan/2026 05:00 PM RFI: Is there a Fire Engineering Report or specification that details what type of Fire System is going to be required for this project? Without this information it will be difficult to provide an accurate price. No answer provided...

Response: A Fire Engineering Report has not been prepared for the concept design. Tenderers are responsible for developing a fully compliant fire safety design and any necessary performance solutions in accordance with Section 2.3.5 and Section 3.5 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification, and all relevant codes and standards.

14/Jan/2026 04:58 PM RFI: There seems to be missing drawings on the cover page, namely A003, A3001, A5001, A5002, A6001, A6002 & A7002 (window sch). Could you please confirm they will be sent? No answer provided...

Response: The drawings identified on the cover sheet of Attachment A – Concept Design are provided as indicative only and marked WIP – Not for Construction. No additional drawings will be issued at tender stage. Final design documentation will be developed by the contractor in accordance with Section 2.3 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification.

14/Jan/2026 04:50 PM The Vendor Panel Outline of the project states the Tender Due Date and Time is 13 Feb 5:00pm and the Scope Document states 2:00pm. Could you please confirm? For reference, it is both the responsibility of the contractor and the client to determine the eligibility of those who can tender the project. The Contractor should only tender work that its licence allows and the Client to stipulate in its documents. It would seem under the QBCC definitions and guidelines that only a contractor with an Open Licence could deliver this project. If there is any doubt, can the client seek clarification from QBCC? No answer provided...

Response: The correct Tender Submission Deadline is Friday, 13 February 2026 at 14:00 AEST, as stated in Request for Tender – Part A – Tender Particulars.

Regarding QBCC licensing, Council reiterates that it is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure they hold the appropriate licence for the final certified design in accordance with Section 4.2 of Request for Tender – Part B – Conditions of Tender and Section 4.2 of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification. Council cannot confirm eligibility without the final design and approvals.

Question:
Attention: Phillip Mueller, Acting Manager Infrastructure Recover

Can you please confirm if the tender is due at 2:00pm (in tender documents) or 5:00pm (on Vendor Panel)?

Thanks

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:45 PM:


The correct Tender Submission Deadline is Friday, 13 February 2026 at 14:00 AEST, as stated in Request for Tender – Part A – Tender Particulars.

Question:
Hi,

Can SP2 finish at the same time as SP1 as we note the anticipated finish date of SP2 is 27/11/2027 which would prolong the program dramitcally.\

Thanks

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:56 PM:


Yes, the SP2 finish date can be brought forward and finish at the same time as SP1 provided it does not delay the completion of SP1 and the SP1 practical completion date meets the funding deadline date of 1 June 2027 as stated in Section 11 of Part A - Tender Particulars

Question:
Hi

My previous question:

Hi, In section 3.3.1 "Must Have" c) of the Scope of Works document, it states in the that each court must have a runout space of 6m at each end of the court and 3.3m to both sides. Currently there is around 2m in the concept drawings provided. Section 3.2.4 "Must Not Have" d) states that the proposed facilities shall not exceed the footprint provided but Section 1.4.1 Order of Precedence of the Scope of Works document states that Part C Scope of Works takes precedence over any provided drawings. Can you please clarify what is to take precedence. Thanks

seems to have be anwser with a repeat answer of the previous questions.

Thanks

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:34 PM:


Hello,

Apologies for the confusion. The previous answer has been edited to address the correct tender query.

Confirming Section 1.4.1 Order of Precedence of the Scope of Works document states that Part C Scope of Works takes precedence over any provided drawings

Question:
Hi,

In section 3.3.1 "Must Have" c) of the Scope of Works document, it states in the that each court must have a runout space of 6m at each end of the court and 3.3m to both sides. Currently there is around 2m in the concept drawings provided. Section 3.2.4 "Must Not Have" d) states that the proposed facilities shall not exceed the footprint provided but Section 1.4.1 Order of Precedence of the Scope of Works document states that Part C Scope of Works takes precedence over any provided drawings.

Can you please clarify what is to take precedence.

Thanks

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 03:17 PM:
(edited on 05/Feb/2026 03:31 PM)


Section 3.3.1(c) of Request for Tender – Part C – Scope of Work and Specification prescribes the mandatory runout distances, which take precedence over any concept drawings in accordance with the order of precedence in Section 1.4.1.

Tenderers should ensure their design complies with the specification requirements within the project constraints.

Question:
Hello,

Thank you for your response regarding the Superintendent appointment.

Further to this, we would appreciate clarification on Council’s standard procedure for the appointment of a Project Manager and/or Superintendent. Specifically, could you please advise whether such appointments are typically procured through VendorPanel, an alternative procurement portal, or via direct engagement with Council.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Answered on 05/Feb/2026 05:59 PM:


No comment can be made on the appointment of a Project Manager as this tender relates to the Beuadesert Indoor Sports Centre - Design and Construction and not the Project Management of the project

Question:
Hi,

As the responses are more than 3 weeks after my queries, that have significant impact on the design/pricing of this tender and the council requriements for this project, are we able to have a 3 week extension to the tender due date cover this delay and the now confirmed approach to this project?

Thanks

Answered on 11/Feb/2026 05:42 PM:


Unfortunately, due to strict funding deadlines associated with this project, Council is unable to grant any extensions to the tender closing date.

Question:
Hello, can we have a response to our previous queries please and these new queries below:

1. Technical requirements 3.4.1 (h) "must haves" include - "ice and water to be available for sports and first aid" confirm that the tenders are only to allow for this spatially and for the provision of services only

2. Please provide details for the Council security system nominated in Like to Have item 3.3.3 (I)

3. Please advise if allowance for the minimum number of carparking required to meet BCA requirement are to be included in SP1 pricing or, if ALL carparking is funded under SP2

4. The SoW document 2.7.3 (e) states that we need to include provisional allowances for fees and then refers to 2.3.4.3 (d). Can you clarify 2.3.4.3 (d) please as it doesn't appear to be in the document.

Answered on 12/Feb/2026 09:19 AM:


1. Part C, Section 3.4.1(h) is a Performance Requirement and states that “ice and water are to be available for sports and first aid.” This requirement applies to the completed facility and is not limited to spatial or service provision only. Tenderers must therefore allow for operational ice and water facilities within their design and pricing.

2. No specific Council CCTV system has been nominated. As referenced in Request for Tender – Part C, Section 3.3.3(i), tenderers should allow for generic CCTV infrastructure provisions (conduits, pathways, mounting points) suitable for future integration into Council systems. Full system supply is only required if tenderers elect to include it as a Like to Have enhancement.

3. All carparking will be funded under SP2

4. The reference referred to (located in section 2.3.7 (e) opposed to 2.7.3(e) in the query) is noted to be incorrect, as the clause (2.3.4.3 (d)) does not exist in the document.

However, the intent of the requirement is addressed within the section, which confirms that the contractor is responsible for obtaining all required approvals and permits, with associated application fees to be included as provisional sums.

No additional obligation is intended beyond this requirement.