[CAN] New Courts Precinct | $500m

[Nathan]

Total floor space of 55,000sqm. Shame it's being split into two buildings

They should keep it all in the one tower and make a new tallest out of it, just 135m and Westpac House becomes the 2nd tallest!

Which brings us back to the JPE proposal.

[Will]

Total floor space of 55,000sqm. Shame it's being split into two buildings.

I agree, a 55 000 sqm2 building would generate a new tallest building.

Sadly, though I suspect we'll end up with 2 medium-rise boxes.

[[Shuz]]

I know a new tallest building is purely aesthetics, but it would be good if the State Government could just at least recognize that they'd be better off building this as one whole building and go for a new tallest, so to help shake off some of the negative connotations associated with the State Bank / Westpac House building and also give some sense of pride for our city that we are growing up and building up.

[Ho Really]

Would be nice for something around the 135 metre mark. It would look good at the end of the square and would spread height in the skyline, but I think in the end practicality will end up dictating a much lower main tower. If there are compromises, I would be happy with a 100 metre main tower and a secondary 30-40 metre block. Just being realistic.

Cheers

[SRW]

I'm not sure how the ABC concluded such a dire headline from what John Rau actually said, but I do wonder if having decided to proceed with an upgrade of the Festival Centre has left the government with not enough to see the new courts through.

New courts precinct for Adelaide appears doomed, SA Government considering options
Nick Hamsen, ABC News Online, 4 March 2015

A multi-million-dollar plan to build a new courts precinct in Adelaide's CBD appears doomed for failure, with the State Government admitting it is now considering other options.

The State Government promised a $500 million courts precinct would open in Victoria Square in two years' time, with construction due to start early this year.

While the ageing courtrooms are in dire need of an overhaul, months after contracts were due to be signed with a private builder, the Government remained locked in negotiations with little hope of success.

Law Society president Rocky Perrotta said the legal profession had been left in the dark about the progress of the new development.

"There are some things that can't be in the public domain, we understand that," Mr Perrotta said.

"But we just don't know what's happening.

"The Supreme Court is the top court in our land and if anybody ventured into any other jurisdiction interstate ... then they'd see what facilities they have.

"It's not about living in the lap of luxury. These are facilities that are important to the proper functioning of the courts and more efficient functioning of the courts.

"It needed to happen many years ago."

Mr Perrotta said new courts buildings were crucial to improving the tired system and the constant backlog of cases.

"Part of those delays could, we believe, be alleviated or fixed if there was more money spent," he said.

Negotiations tied up for months

Three groups of companies put forward proposals to fund and build the courts precinct under a model where the Government would agree to rent the courtrooms on a long-term lease.

The process was later narrowed down to a single consortium, which has been locked in negotiations for months.

Attorney-General John Rau said there had been no successful resolution at this point in time.

The ABC has been told the key issue was price.

"Any government has to be responsible in its use of public funds," Mr Rau said.

"We do need to consider all options. And again, that's basically a matter which will be resolved as a part of any budget process."

Opposition spokeswoman Vickie Chapman said the looming September closure of the Holden Hill Magistrates Court would only add to the urgency.

"That will put an enormous burden into Victoria Square particularly," Ms Chapman said.

"We need to get this right and we need to get some answers form the Government."

[phenom]

I'm not sure how the ABC concluded such a dire headline from what John Rau actually said, but I do wonder if having decided to proceed with an upgrade of the Festival Centre has left the government with not enough to see the new courts through.

Agree.

Looks like a combination of funds tipped into the Riverbank area making things tighter than expected but also good negotiating technique at play here. It's funny that Chapman is complaining about this... I mean, does she want the Government to reveal its hand and get dudded on a contract [oh wait...]. More fodder for the moaning AdelaideNow commenters to rant over for the next few years.

I'd guess it's probably being delayed, if nothing else, and possibly downsized. But really, who knows what the means? Given two large buildings are envisaged, what's so bad about one of those being built (and leaving the space for the second to be built at a later date). The use of the word 'doomed' seems melodramatic.

[Pikey]

It's dead.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 7259924462


THE State Government has decided to terminate the proposed $500 million redevelopment of the courts precinct, the developer that won the project tender has announced.

A Lend Lease spokeswoman today told The Advertiser the much-hyped project, slated to have begun earlier this year for completion by 2017, would not go ahead.

“We are aware of the decision by the State Government to terminate the Courts Precinct Renewal Process, which did not reflect on the high quality of our proposal,” she said.

“Lend Lease looks forward to working with the Government on future capital projects, including other options for renewal of the Courts Precinct.”

The Advertiser has sought comment from Attorney-General John Rau.

Opposition deputy leader Vickie Chapman said the government must now reveal how much it had spent on the “abandoned” proposal.

“There was $300,000 spent on a scoping study, and we estimate millions have been spent on expressions of interest and to ensure there were staff overseeing this process,” she said.

“The process has now been abandoned — we want to know why, we want to know how much has been spent.

“We want the government to issue a timeline for any restart to this process.”

Mr Rau, Premier Jay Weatherill and then-Infrastructure Minister Tom Koutsantonis announced the project in September 2013, calling it the centrepiece of a “massive” justice system reform.

The announcement followed a $300,000 “scoping study” in 2012 to ascertain the need for redevelopment.

Judges and lawyers have long called for an upgrade of the facility, which features malfunctioning elevators, limited disability access, cracked walls and crumbling exteriors.

Its IT systems are more than 25 years old and considered to be at “high risk” of failure, with the cost of upgrading them alone estimated at more than $50 million.

In March 2014, Mr Rau said contracts would be signed by December of that year, construction would begin in 2014 and the building would be finished by 2017.

By January, however, work had yet to begin on the project and, in February, a Parliamentary Committee was told it faced significant delays and would not be completed on schedule.

Lend Lease was part of the Activate 408 consortia chosen, by the government, as its “preferred negotiating partner” for the tender.

The consortia also included developer and financier Capella Capital, design and project manager Mott MacDonald Australia and engineers Aurecon.

Today, top barrister David Edwardson, QC, said the situation was “appalling”.

He has previously dubbed SA’s court system “the worst in the nation” due to “chronic” under-resourcing by the government.

“All the promises in the world turned out to mean nothing,” Mr Edwardson said.

“We are in a worse position now than we were when I made those comments because more time has passed, we have fewer judges and even longer trial lists.”

He said the outdated state of the courts posed real safety risks.

“In a recent trial, several high-security prisoners had to be moved from the dock to the jury box because they could not see a DVD of evidence that was being played,” he said.

“Can you imagine that, in 2015? It’s breathtaking.”

Ms Chapman said Lend Lease’s announcement would prompt “many questions” in State Parliament next week.

She said the redeveloped courts precinct was supposed to be a centralised location for courts, the Attorney-General’s department and prosecutors, as well as an opportunity for private business.

“There are a lot of unhappy parties that have presented, to the government, to be part of this precinct,” she said.

“This was to be a major opportunity, a major development, and for it to just be abandoned would be very, very disappointing.”

Law Society of SA president President Rocco Perrotta called the revelation “a regrettable development for the justice system”.

“The state is in dire need of new courts facilities and it seems we will have to wait significantly longer for our tired, inefficient courts infrastructure to be revamped,” he said.

Mr Perrotta said the proposed redevelopment had “somewhat mitigated our grave concerns” about the “chronic underfunding” of the courts.

He said that, if it were not going ahead, then IT systems should be overhauled and upgraded “as a matter of urgency”.

“This should be an absolute priority — it is inexplicable that well into the 21st century files have to be hand delivered to the court,” he said.

“Backlogs in the court are not going away ... the government must confront the problems facing our court system and come up with some solutions.”

However, Mr Perrotta said he expected the government would “remain committed to building a new courts precinct”.

[Patrick_27]

It's dead.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 7259924462


THE State Government has decided to terminate the proposed $500 million redevelopment of the courts precinct, the developer that won the project tender has announced.

A Lend Lease spokeswoman today told The Advertiser the much-hyped project, slated to have begun earlier this year for completion by 2017, would not go ahead.

“We are aware of the decision by the State Government to terminate the Courts Precinct Renewal Process, which did not reflect on the high quality of our proposal,” she said.

“Lend Lease looks forward to working with the Government on future capital projects, including other options for renewal of the Courts Precinct.”

The Advertiser has sought comment from Attorney-General John Rau.

Opposition deputy leader Vickie Chapman said the government must now reveal how much it had spent on the “abandoned” proposal.

“There was $300,000 spent on a scoping study, and we estimate millions have been spent on expressions of interest and to ensure there were staff overseeing this process,” she said.

“The process has now been abandoned — we want to know why, we want to know how much has been spent.

“We want the government to issue a timeline for any restart to this process.”

Mr Rau, Premier Jay Weatherill and then-Infrastructure Minister Tom Koutsantonis announced the project in September 2013, calling it the centrepiece of a “massive” justice system reform.

The announcement followed a $300,000 “scoping study” in 2012 to ascertain the need for redevelopment.

Judges and lawyers have long called for an upgrade of the facility, which features malfunctioning elevators, limited disability access, cracked walls and crumbling exteriors.

Its IT systems are more than 25 years old and considered to be at “high risk” of failure, with the cost of upgrading them alone estimated at more than $50 million.

In March 2014, Mr Rau said contracts would be signed by December of that year, construction would begin in 2014 and the building would be finished by 2017.

By January, however, work had yet to begin on the project and, in February, a Parliamentary Committee was told it faced significant delays and would not be completed on schedule.

Lend Lease was part of the Activate 408 consortia chosen, by the government, as its “preferred negotiating partner” for the tender.

The consortia also included developer and financier Capella Capital, design and project manager Mott MacDonald Australia and engineers Aurecon.

Today, top barrister David Edwardson, QC, said the situation was “appalling”.

He has previously dubbed SA’s court system “the worst in the nation” due to “chronic” under-resourcing by the government.

“All the promises in the world turned out to mean nothing,” Mr Edwardson said.

“We are in a worse position now than we were when I made those comments because more time has passed, we have fewer judges and even longer trial lists.”

He said the outdated state of the courts posed real safety risks.

“In a recent trial, several high-security prisoners had to be moved from the dock to the jury box because they could not see a DVD of evidence that was being played,” he said.

“Can you imagine that, in 2015? It’s breathtaking.”

Ms Chapman said Lend Lease’s announcement would prompt “many questions” in State Parliament next week.

She said the redeveloped courts precinct was supposed to be a centralised location for courts, the Attorney-General’s department and prosecutors, as well as an opportunity for private business.

“There are a lot of unhappy parties that have presented, to the government, to be part of this precinct,” she said.

“This was to be a major opportunity, a major development, and for it to just be abandoned would be very, very disappointing.”

Law Society of SA president President Rocco Perrotta called the revelation “a regrettable development for the justice system”.

“The state is in dire need of new courts facilities and it seems we will have to wait significantly longer for our tired, inefficient courts infrastructure to be revamped,” he said.

Mr Perrotta said the proposed redevelopment had “somewhat mitigated our grave concerns” about the “chronic underfunding” of the courts.

He said that, if it were not going ahead, then IT systems should be overhauled and upgraded “as a matter of urgency”.

“This should be an absolute priority — it is inexplicable that well into the 21st century files have to be hand delivered to the court,” he said.

“Backlogs in the court are not going away ... the government must confront the problems facing our court system and come up with some solutions.”

However, Mr Perrotta said he expected the government would “remain committed to building a new courts precinct”.

What a joke. This is key infrastructure. Surely there are federal government grants that could assist with the proposal?

In regards to Vicky Chapman's comments; what does it matter if money has been spent on the planning process? So they can rally voters against the government? The plans are there to be rehashed in the future when the money is available - so the money for planning has not been wasted, simple.

[ml69]

Has the money allocated for this courts upgrade been diverted to an earlier-than-expected upgrade of the Festival Theatre?

If that is the case, I agree with the government's decision. Adelaide stands to reaps substantially more benefit from a Festival Theatre and Riverbank upgrade than the courts upgrade.

[crawf]

Has the money allocated for this courts upgrade been diverted to an earlier-than-expected upgrade of the Festival Theatre?

If that is the case, I agree with the government's decision. Adelaide stands to reaps substantially more benefit from a Festival Theatre and Riverbank upgrade than the courts upgrade.

While our court system continues to develop into a more shambolic state. In one form or another, this court expansion needs to happen for good of the state.

[SRW]

What a joke. This is key infrastructure. Surely there are federal government grants that could assist with the proposal?

In regards to Vicky Chapman's comments; what does it matter if money has been spent on the planning process? So they can rally voters against the government? The plans are there to be rehashed in the future when the money is available - so the money for planning has not been wasted, simple.

This particular federal government is pretty miserly when it comes to grants for the states, though in this particular instance I don't see why they would/should contribute money to an area so clearly in the state's jurisdiction. One of the good things Abbott has done (and possibly the only good thing) is commission a white paper on the reform of the federation, which might hopefully resolve some of the hopeless imbalances and useless duplications that presently complicate our Commonwealth.

As to Vicki. Yeah, drivel. But she does hint at the fact that this should be the perfect public/private partnership, so it's curious why the government could come to terms.

[SRW]

Article from the ABC with far more details than that 'tiser BS. It appears that it was the PPP model that did not sit well with the Government, which is interesting because there was an argument that the PPP arrangement used for the new RAH actually meant it would cost more to government over time than simply funding the build on its own. Kudos to Rau if he's actually being judicious.

Anyway, read for yourself:

Plan for new courts precinct in Adelaide abandoned, SA State Government confirms
12 March 2015, ABC News Online

A multi-million dollar plan to redevelop the courts precinct in Adelaide's CBD has been abandoned, the South Australian Government has confirmed.

Construction on the $500 million project was due to start early this year, and the precinct was supposed to be up and running in Victoria Square in 2017.

Three groups of companies put forward proposals to fund and build the courts precinct under a model where the Government would agree to rent the courtrooms on a long-term lease.

The process was later narrowed down to Lend Lease with negotiations with the State Government locked for months.

Lend Lease released a statement which said they were aware of the decision by the State Government to terminate the courts precinct renewal process but said it did not reflect on the high quality of their proposal.

A statement from the Attorney-General's office said the plans for the project did not provide enough value for money.

"The actual build proposed was fit for purpose, however it did not achieve the value for money proposition needed by Government for the project to go ahead," the statement said.

"Further consideration of a courts precinct development and IT provision will now occur in the context of budget deliberations."

Law Society president Rocco Perrotta said he was disappointed the much-needed upgrade would not be going ahead.

"One gets one's hopes up after all these years of having to deal with the court system as it is, and particularly the IT system," Mr Perotta said.

"But particularly the judges themselves, they're working in dilapidated buildings and conditions.

"It can't be an efficient environment in which to work."

Mr Perrotta said the Law Society hoped the Government would at least stay on track on updating the IT system.

State Government considering other options

Attorney-General John Rau said the original proposal was to organise an appropriate building to accommodate the future needs of the courts at an affordable and reasonable price.

"We wound up with a proposition which basically ticked the boxes as far an appropriate solution to our requirements, but in the end didn't stack up as a value for money proposition, when compared with an alternative of a more conventional funding model," he said.

"Ultimately our view was that it would not be a responsible allocation of taxpayers' funds to continue with that funding model."

Mr Rau said the Government accepted the current infrastructure was "inadequate, decaying and not fit for purpose for even medium-term requirements of the courts".

But he said they were no longer contemplating going out for another tender process which involved a public private partnership arrangement.

"There is no change in the fundamental position which is that the existing infrastructure is in urgent need of attention and replacement and this is not a decision which means we will not be proceeding at any time with something," he said.

Mr Rau said the failed project had cost the Government $300,000 on a scoping study.

[serca]

why can't some of the capital investment be privatised?

what about everyone who tendered for the project??? Big tenders like this cost well into the hundreds of thousands .

[[Shuz]]

If the ABC article is to go by, is the Government seriously suggesting they go on the Courts project alone and finance the entire $500m project themselves?

Where is this money coming from?! I get that we absolutely need this project and associated IT infrastructure, but then again we have a state debt of god knows how many billions now.

Off-topic: Whens the next State Budget due to be handed down?

[phenom]

If the ABC article is to go by, is the Government seriously suggesting they go on the Courts project alone and finance the entire $500m project themselves?

Where is this money coming from?! I get that we absolutely need this project and associated IT infrastructure, but then again we have a state debt of god knows how many billions now.

SA's debt as a per cent of our GSP is similarly low to most states and well below Queensland, Tasmania and NT.

$500m of extra debt at the rate a State Govt can borrow at is a lot cheaper than any public private partnership deal. Of course the current debate in Australian politics is so phobic of 'debt' (just as long as it's public, we don't mind astronomically high private debt) that the pressure is on to not borrow effectively and instead do deals that cost the taxpayer more but 'look better'.

The SA economy is around $100bn and current debt is about $10bn (net debt, after balancing against State assets, is only $4bn). The projected surplus alone (at the last update), even in the face of federal govt cuts and a slowing economy, is around $265m for the 2015-2016 year, $700m in 2016-17 and $872m in 2017-18.

In other words, $500m is a decent chunk of change but not that much in the scheme of things - particularly as it will leave the State with a valuable asset afterwards.

Off-topic: Whens the next State Budget due to be handed down?

The State Govt doesn't usually have a fixed date well in advance like the Federal Government but it would generally be around mid-June.