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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (26 November) . . Page.. 4655 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

for converting to APUs below standard, refurb, $4.472 million, demolish; $7.975 million.

for upgrade with no change (the minimum work) refurb, $4.148 million; demolish, $7.8 million.

for what I have called the deluxe option (although it results in two fewer units and costs slightly less), refurb, $76,000 per unit

These figures are in 1998 dollars. Could we get the same results for less? That is the question the government has to answer in detail.

In January 2001, Asset Services prepared the Report on the installation of a new lift and refurbishment and/or replacement options for the existing lifts at the Currong apartments for ACT Housing. This was clearly a more detailed investigation of the lifts, which had also been addressed in the earlier report. This report pointed out that the lifts did not meet current safety standards and identified means to build new lifts which would meet the standards. The report advised that the lifts were overdue for new technology to improve performance, safety, comfort and reduce maintenance down time. This was in 1998. The option of basic upgrade to statutory requirements would then have cost $50,000 for four lifts. This included one stretcher-capable lift.

In March 2002 there was another interesting report. Cox Humphries Moss, Snedden Hall and Gallop, John Rainieri and Associates, Tennant Hydraulics Consulting Services and Wilde and Woollard prepared the Report on the cost estimates and range of works required to unit title Currong flats, part block 1, section 52 Braddon for ACT Housing. The only reason for unit-titling is of course to facilitate the selling of the units. This report again highlighted the fire safety and lift issues, together with a range of other improvements and legal or planning requirements. The five-year minimal works budget, which doesn't obviously, though I may have missed it, include dealing with the leaking façade and windows, is $7.512 million, with the increased estimates. The estimates include GST.

The final report in my list is from May 2001. Cox Humphries Moss Steward Fagan, Wilde and Woollard, Egan National Valuers, Fire Safety Science, Tennant Hydraulics and AWT Consulting Engineers prepared Refurbishment and feasibility report, Currong flats, section 52, Currong Street, Braddon for ACT Housing. The costs here are prepared alongside the plan for some units to be sold off. I won't go into the details here, but the cost per unit for the upgrade to a mix of two-bedroom APUs, three-bedroom APUs and small two-bedroom APUs was, respectively, per unit: $81,000, $90,000 and $70,000. This, as I say, assumed that not all of Currong would be retained as public housing, something that is problematic for other reasons.

In June 2001, Cox Humphries Moss's Supplementary "5-year"option report-Currong flats, Braddon, section 52, as I have said, looked only at the costs for immediate necessary works. The proposal to convert to older persons units would address what we know is a growing demographic change. However, single person's accommodation for younger people is also a need. That is often the difficult tenancies, but it is no less important.

The question is not only how much would it cost, the question, as the Ecumenical Housing report pointed out, is also what alternative outcomes would be gained by using

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