Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 4 Hansard (3 April) . . Page.. 1465 ..

Mr Stanhope: The answer to the member's question is as follows:

(1) ACT Procurement Solutions has been engaged by the Department of Justice & Community Safety to manage the procurement of design and documentation services relating to the following works;

Disabled access requirements at the Supreme Court building

Actively managing self-harm risks associated with the internal balcony areas at the Magistrates Court

The successful Architect at select tender is currently undertaking design and documentation of the required amenities to improve disability access at the Supreme Court. Feasibility studies, including Final Sketch Plans and Document Readiness, for each of the floors and the basement areas are proceeding to determine compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act, the Building Code of Australia and the relevant Australian Standard (AS1428).

The study will prioritise and cost all of the works to enable the Department to make decisions regarding a final scope of work to be undertaken. It is anticipated that the project outcomes will include:

suitable public access for disabled persons between all floors in the building;

suitable restricted access for disabled persons between all floors in the building, potentially also improving secure access for judicial staff, court staff and prisoners in custody.

disabled access through the main public entrances.

disabled access to all functional areas of at least one courtroom, including modification of the jury box, jury room, toilet and associated amenities

disabled access compliance with all other areas of the Court building including corridors and basement library storage areas.

(2) The project initially commenced in July 2002. In September 2002 public tenders were called for design, documentation and construction to agreed specifications. Prior to the tender evaluation process being completed, the project was suspended as Government was considering a proposal to completely replace the existing Supreme Court building with a new facility. $6,500.00 was expended as project management fees for the work done to that point.

(3) The project was reactivated in February 2003 when it became clear that the capital funds required for a new Supreme Court building were unlikely to be available in the medium term. ACT Procurement Solutions was retained to manage a select tender process to advance both capital projects to full documentation stage, including costing for each segment of the projects. Since that time, a further $12,500.00 in fees have been incurred, out of a total committed project management cost of $77,143.00.

(4) The suspension of the project between September 2002 and February 2003 means that the entire project is running behind the original schedule. However, the re-

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .