T09678 Project Brief

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

ACT PROCUREMENT SOLUTIONS

ENGINEERING PROJECT BRIEF FOR CANBERRA INTEGRATED URBAN WATERWAYS SEPARABLE PART A NEW WETLAND, PONDS & RETICULATION AT DICKSON & LYNEHAM

PROJECT NO: ............…………………… FILE NO: ………………………………….

Infrastructure Procurement Level 3 North Dame Pattie Menzies House 16 Challis Street, Dickson ACT PO Box 818 Dickson ACT 2602

Cleared by Client ………………………Date…………. Cleared by ACT PS Delegate………………..……..Date…………. Page 1 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

CONTENTS 1.0 -2.0 2.0 3.0 4.0

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 3 OBJECTIVES................................................................................................... 3 OBJECTIVES................................................................................................... 4 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................... 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................. 8 4.1 SITE .......................................................................................................... 8 4.2 DESCRIPTION OF WORK...................................................................... 8 4.2.1 Planning, Site Reviews ......................................................................... 9 4.2.2 Environmental & Stakeholder / Public Consultation............................ 10 4.2.3 Engineering Assessment .................................................................. 10 4.3 SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................ 11 4.3.1. Ponds Design Options Study ........................................................... 11 4.3.2 Master Plans N/A............................................................................. 11 4.3.3. Preliminary Sketch Plan (PSP) - Conceptual Design ...................... 11 4.3.4 Conceptual Design (PSP) Presentation Material ............................. 11 4.3.5. Development Application Submission (for works outside NCA Designated Areas) .......................................................................................... 12 4.3.6 Details for Works Approval (for works within NCA Designated Areas) ......................................................................................................... 12 4.3.7 Preliminary Assessment N/A........................................................... 12 4.3.8 Consultation..................................................................................... 12 4.3.9 Final Sketch Plan (FSP) - Draft Design........................................... 12 4.3.10 Draft Design (FSP) Presentation Material N/A ............................... 13 4.3.12 Final Design..................................................................................... 13 4.3.13 Construction Administration ........................................................... 13 4.3.14 Partnering Workshop N/A ............................................................... 14 5.0 DESIGN INFORMATION .............................................................................. 14 5.1 STANDARDS........................................................................................... 14 5.2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION REFERENCE MATERIAL............. 14 6.0 PROGRAM ....................................................................................................... 15 7.0 BUDGET ........................................................................................................... 15 7.1 PROGRAM PROVISION......................................................................... 15 7.2 DATE TO WHICH PROJECT ESTIMATES ARE TO BE ESCALATED 15 7.3 FEE PROPOSAL ...................................................................................... 15 7.4 PRICING SCHEDULE ............................................................................. 16 8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE ................................................................................ 16 8.1 INFRASTRUCTURE PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS ................. 16 8.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS................... 18 9.0 APPROVALS .................................................................................................... 18 10 GLOSARY OF TERMS................................................................................... 18 QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FORM USF944 .................................................... 19 DOCUMENT SUBMISSION................................................................................... 1 DESIGN VERIFICATION METHODS.................................................................. 1 DESIGN REVIEW POINTS ................................................................................... 2 MEASUREMENT / DESIGN DATA ....................................................................... 2 TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS...................................................................... 3 NOTIFICATION:- .............................................................................................................. 4 SERVICING WORK ................................................................................................. 5 Servicing Activity .......................................................................................... 5 Page 2 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

ENGINEERING PROJECT BRIEF 1.0

INTRODUCTION

The brief for this project comprises this Project Brief together with the Basic Brief for Construction Works. The Project Brief details project specific requirements, the Basic Brief details the general requirements and administrative procedures (including content of submissions), and the Reference documents provide guidance on technical matters. The following indicates how this document relates to other key documents used in the engagement of the Consultant.: Letters of Offer and Acceptance Agent's Agreement Project Brief Basic Brief for Construction Works

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES Standard Specification for Urban Infrastructure Works (TAMS) Design Standards for Urban Infrastructure (TAMS) ActewAGL Water Supply and Sewerage Standards ACT Procurement Solutions Guidelines for the Production of Tenders and Contracts for Construction Projects using AS2124 1992 General Conditions of Contract Agents Circulars NATSPEC National standards and guidelines (eg Building Code of Australia, Australian Standards, AUSTROADS etc)

-

Page 3 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

2.0

OBJECTIVES The objective of this brief is to: 2.1

2.2

2.3

Accelerate the program of restoring stormwater drains by constructing urban creek and wetland systems in Sullivans Creek Catchment by the design and construction of wetland ponds at Dickson (Bill Guy 14) and at Lyneham (Bill Guy 9, 10 & 11). The ponds were identified in the Sullivans Creek Catchment Management Plan and further assessed in the Review of Infrastructure Planning for Sullivans Creek Catchment, Bill Guy and Partners July 2003, and later further assessed in the Lyneham and Dickson Wetlands Feasibility Study, Final Report, Bill Guy and partners, 2005; Design reticulation infrastructure for the distribution of water from the Dickson and Lyneham ponds to irrigators in the area, whilst complementing DECCEW’s existing program for non potable water reticulation from Flemington Road Ponds by design connections into the reticulation network; and Support a range of water demand management activities.

This design and future construction of Lyneham and Dickson wetlands, ponds and associated reticultation is being undertaken on behalf of the ACT Government represented by three key agencies: • Sustinability Programs, Department of Environment Climate Change, Energy and Water • ACT Planning & Land Authority • Sport and Recreation Services, Territory and Municipal Services. The asset owner and maintenance organisation/s for the project will be Territory and Municipal Services. 3.0

BACKGROUND

The Canberra Integrated Urban Waterways project (CIUWP) was announced in November 2006 and is funded by the Commonwealth Government through the Department of Environment, Climate Change, Heritage and the Arts’ Water Smart Australia Program ($10.2m) and ACT Government ($6.8m). The project is focusing on integrating urban waterway management by investigating opportunities for investment in stormwater harvesting ponds and aquifer storage and recovery. The objective of the project is to replace 1.5 gigalitres / year of potable water by 2010 with alternative water sources for irrigation. The project is aiming to meet a longer term target of 3gigalitres / year of potable water displacement by 2015. The context for the CIUWP is embedded in two major policy initiatives: 1. Think water, act water released in April 2004, sets a number of targets to which the ACT Government is committed to achieving. These are: • A 12% reduction in mains water usage per capita by 2013, and a 25% reduction by 2023 (compared with 2003), achieve through water efficiency, sustainable water recycling and use of stormwater and rainwater; • By 2013, increase the use of treated wastewater (reclaimed water) from 5% to 20%; • The level of nutrients and sediments entering ACT waterways is no greater than from a wellmanaged rural landscape; and Page 4 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

•

Reduce the peak flow and volume of urban stormwater flows so that the runoff event that occurs, on average, once every 3 months, is no larger than it was prior to development.

2. “Where Will We Play” strategy released in October 2007 details that the ACT Government is committed to developing and implementing a sportsground master plan that will deliver the vision of : • By 2013 no sportsground in public or private ownership in the ACT will rely solely on the use of potable water to guarantee sporting operations Two major decisions will impact significantly on the feasibility of CIUWP and the Sport and Recreation Services (SRS) initiatives. 1. In October 2007, the ACT Government announced a range of new water supply projects, which ACTEW is now working to implement. The aim of ACTEW’s Water Security Program is to increase supply to ensure a 95% volumetric reliability. That is that temporary water restrictions will be not need to be applied more than 5% of the time, equivalent to once in twenty years. •

The major projects currently underway include the Enlarged Cotter Dam and the Murrumbidgee to Googong Water Transfer, which will significantly increase potable water supply.

•

ACTEW was asked to further progress the Tantangara Transfer and the Design of a Demonstration Water Purification Plant. The Tantangara Transfer would also significantly increase potable water supply.

•

ACTEW finalised a Recycled Water Strategy for Canberra in July 2008, that if implemented in the medium term (1-4 years) would substitute 4.3 gigalitres and in the long term (5-10 years) would substitute 5.3 gigalitres. Strategies include possible extension of Southwell Park Water Mining Facility and/or North Canberra Effluent Recycling Scheme (NCERS) and reticulating recycled water sourced from Lower Molonglo Water Quality Control Centre (LMWQCC) into the city to meet irrigation demands. Further design and costing work is required for Government to make a decision regarding the implementation of the Recycled Water Strategy.

Studies Undertaken There are some studies completed and some concurrent studies progressing the results of which will be relevant to and made available to this project. Studies include: Bill Guy and Partners, Review of Infrastructure Planning for Sullivans Creek Catchment Final Report (Volumes 1-3), July 2003 Bill Guy and Partners, Lyneham and Dickson Wetlands Feasibility Study, March 2005 Bill Guy and Partners, Flemington Road Ponds, Contract Documents and Specification, Stage 1 construction, 2007 Bill Guy and Partners, Flemington Road Ponds, Contract Documents and Specification, Stage 2 construction, 2008 Page 5 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

Cardno Young, Flemington Road Pond / Aquifer Recharge, Non Potable Reticulation –June 2009 Cardno Young, Weston Creek Pond Non Potable Reticulation, June 2009 Water Management Plan for ACT Sportsgrounds – Parsons Brinckerhoff for Sport & Recreation Services May 2009 Canberra Integrated Waterways: Feasibility Study, CSIRO, April 2009 ActewAGL, Recycled Water Planning: Recycled Water Strategy for Canberra, July 2008

The CIUWP commenced with a feasibility study by CSIRO that has analysed stormwater harvesting and aquifer storage and recovery options for the ACT. The CSIRO report and addendums provides details, and ranked the least expensive stormwater harvesting projects (and aquifer storage and recovery options) across the urban area of Canberra. Master Plans have been produced, that if implemented would see 3.4 gigalitres per annum of substituted potable water, equivalent to15.88% of the 2023 potable water savings target. The substituted water would used for irrigation by both private and public sports and recreational organisations and be abstracted from new ponds and existing lakes / ponds. Two master plans have been developed by CSIRO, one that would provide 85% volumetric reliability and the other 95% reliability. The 95% reliability map is shown is Appendix B. The CSIRO projects have all been costed in generic terms to enable comparison for ranking. Capital costs for each project and levelised costs to supply water to each end user are identified. Once projects are selected then all possible end users are to be again considered, within scheme constraints, including water balance, cost effectiveness, equity of access and government priorities. CSIRO’s overall analysis shows that non potable water costs to end users are generally below the cost of potable water. A policy position related to using the appropriate source of water for various uses, that is “fit for purpose” has been articulated by Government as demonstrated by the “Where will we play Strategy”. Increasingly, there is a view within the broader community that continuing to use potable water for irrigation or flushing toilets in new developments is inappropriate if an alternative source is available. Further assessment of costs and benefits is required in addition to the work that CSIRO has undertaken. Many of the proposed new ponds are required for attenuation (flood protection) and water quality control purposes under the Water Sensitive Urban Design code, and as such the actual cost of stormwater harvesting would not normally include the cost of pond construction. The ponds in this brief are those identified by the CSIRO report as being viable. The relative costs and benefits of using stormwater to provide non potable water to end uses have not yet been fully analysed in detail. Two feasibility designs have been completed for Flemington Road Ponds, North Weston Pond and reticulation from lakes and ponds in Tuggeranong. This work will be progressed to detailed design and development application stage by June 2010. The Bill Guy 2005 feasibility report for Dickson & Lyneham wetland ponds showed that the wetlands were viable. Since then, as noted above, the options to include stormwater harvesting are now a component of these new wetland ponds.

Page 6 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

The 95% water reliability Cost Projections (extended to identify works in place or in hand) for possible projects CSIRO and node Map with possible end users & least cost modes can be found at Appendices B&C The Department of Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water (DECCEW) is presently determining the conditions of supply. It is anticipated that these conditions of supply will developed during 2009 and provided to the consultant on finalisation. DECCEW has commenced liaison with potential end users with the view to securing their commitment to participate in the reticulation schemes. . The general locality plan of lakes and ponds relevant to the program is project is shown at Appendix A. Preliminary lists of potential end users from these existing non potable water ponds are shown on the attached Map Appendix D. The Dickson & Lyneham new wetland ponds will be connected into the current Flemington Road pond system with possible additional end users. It is anticipated that the confirmed lists of end users demand for non potable water will be provided to the consultant in 2009. This project considers only the Dickson & Lyneham wetland/ponds with connections and extensions to the Flemington road network Key ACT Planning Policies National Capital Plan The National Capital Plan provides a general policy framework for land use and planning in the Territory, and more specifically guides the planning, design and development of areas of the Territory that have been identified as having national capital importance (Designated Areas). Territory Plan The Territory Plan is the key statutory planning document in the ACT, providing the policy framework for the administration of planning in the ACT. The purpose of the Territory Plan is to manage land use change and development in a manner consistent with strategic directions set by the ACT Government, Legislative Assembly and the community. It must not be inconsistent with the National Capital Plan. The Territory Plan includes broad principles and policies that guide development, through land use specific objectives and policies. Canberra Spatial Plan The Canberra Spatial Plan (2004) outlines a strategic direction that will help manage change and provide for growth to achieve the social, environmental and economic sustainability of Canberra. Concurrent Studies There are concurrent studies progressing the results of which will be relevant to and made available to this project. They are: - Flemington Road ponds 1 & 2 construction (Bill Guy 18) – previously identified as priority 2 in the Bill Guy 2003 (BG) report on Sullivans Creek catchment to improve water quality and flood / retarding benefits. - Flemington Road pond / aquifer recharge, non-potable reticulation – Cardno Young. Draft - Weston Creek pond non-potable reticulation – Cardno Young. PSP. - Concept Design Report - Tuggeranong North and South Stormwater Irrigation Schemes – Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) for SRS. Page 7 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

- Water Quality Review - Lake Tuggeranong Stormwater Irrigation Scheme – Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) for SRS. - Urban Infrastructure Design Standards Irrigation Pump systems Review – Redbox Design Group for SRS. These will be made available progressively as received. Available Funds to Undertake Work In addition to $10.2 million available through the Commonwealth’s Water Smart Australia Program, the following appropriations have been made by the ACT Government under the 2009-10 Budget process to progress stormwater harvesting initiatives in Canberra. Major appropriations include: $16 million to Sport and Recreation Services (SRS). SRS has developed a stormwater harvesting scheme for Tuggeranong which will be progressed to detailed design; $13 million to the Department of Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water (DECCEW) to construct two new ponds in Lyneham and Dickson and reticulate non potable water to local end users; $1 million to the ACT Planning and Land Authority (ACTPLA) to undertake feasibility design studies for the reticulation of non potable water from existing lakes and ponds to local end users; 4.0

4.1

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

SITE

The general sites of the works are indicated on Appendix A (Dickson & Lyneham components) and on the local attached plans. The extent of the site works will be determined following identification and determination of customers. 4.2

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

The consultancy is to design and construct new wetland ponds with reticulation connections at Dickson (BG14) and Lyneham (BG9, 10 & 11) connecting to the Flemington Road pond design. (Appendix D). Additional end users may be identified by DECCEW in consultation with SRS in addition to those currently in the Cardno report.

This project

New Wetlands / Ponds

For two new wetland / ponds at Dickson & Lyneham Preparation of option plans for consultation Preliminary Sketch Plan (PSP) Final Sketch Plan (FSP) Development Application (DA) Design Ready Plans & Construction Administration

Page 8 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

Dickson Lyneham wetland / ponds covers – Approvals, Design & Construction Administration for 2 new wetland / ponds at Dickson & Lyneham provide inter connections to Flemington Road pond proposed reticulation as proposed in the Cardno report and allow for reticulation to possible additional end users. Carry out, Preparation of pond option plans & stakeholder consultation & assist with community consultation Preliminary Sketch Plan (PSP) Final Sketch Plan (FSP) Development Application (DA) Design Ready Plans & Construction Administration. This will be commenced on awarding of the tender, with construction of the ponds / wetlands and reticulation connection proposed for commencement in February 2010 and proposed completion by February 2011. 4.2.1 Planning, Site Reviews Review the following reports and other relevant information: Canberra Integrated Waterways: Feasibility Study, CSIRO, April 2009 Bill Guy and Partners, Review of Infrastructure Planning for Sullivans Creek Catchment Final Report (Volumes 1-3), July 2003 Bill Guy and Partners, Lyneham and Dickson Wetlands Feasibility Study, March 2005 Cardno Young, Flemington Road Pond / Aquifer Recharge, Non Potable Reticulation – June 2009 (Draft) and updates as they become available Particular attention is required to achieve the water quality and aesthetic aspects for improving Sullivans Creek. The allowable drawdown level for each new pond is to be designed for optimum wetland / pond performance (ie drawdown levels of new ponds are not subject to drawdown legislation applicable to existing ponds). Water Resources, Environment Protection Authority, will need to approve the purchase of a Water Access Entitlement to the maximum yield available. The sustainable yield may be less than the maximum yield. Works scope to include: • • • • • •

Resolve the preferred locations and dimensions of infrastructure components within the general locations identified, including possible water quality improvements and visual wetland aspects. Review the Cardno draft report of Flemington road reticulation to identify any technical difficulties in linking with that system and identify possible additional end users in consultation with DECCEW. For each pond identify the alignment of pipes to connect to the Cardno design and possible additional end users. Identify requirements for access roads, legal access to the sites and service relocations. Outline existing tenure of lands and tenure requirements for the future facilities, based on agency and operation authority requirements, including requirements if any for any easements to be retained or created. Identify requirements to comply with any planning overlay. Page 9 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

4.2.2 Environmental & Stakeholder / Public Consultation 1. Identify and investigate potential environmental impacts of the proposals in consultation with ACTPLA and other agencies. 2. Review tree survey of affected trees with reference to the Tree Act and identify the ecological value of trees. 3. Review and identify aesthetic / amenity outcomes to ensure significant environmental improvements. 4. Develop detailed landscape plans. Include pathways, viewing points and furniture such as seating. 5. Note: Past experience at David Street Wetland showed that the community were eager to participate in the planting. This was extremely important in developing ongoing community ownership of the pond/wetlands. In the David Street project DECCEW organised the volunteers and Canberra firm Seeds and Plants Australia supplied the plants and were successful in working with the volunteers. 6. It is anticipated that the contractor would be required to set up a similar regime for planting with DECCEW organised volunteers. 7. Consultation with relevant Government agencies and regulatory bodies is to be included within the study. This would include, but not be limited to various departments within TAMS (including, SRS), DECCEW, ACTPLA, and ActewAGL. 8. Identify stakeholders, who may be affected, and in particular adjoining properties and any lease holders in affected area. Arrange meetings to outline the benefits of the wetlands / ponds. If possible incorporate their suggestions into the design. Where not possible, such as conflicting priorities; identify matters that cannot be mitigated. 9. Develop draft Interpretative Signage for pond sites outlining the scheme key features and community benefits 4.2.3 Engineering Assessment 1. Build on the Bill Guy work to identify preferred options for ponds / wetland configuration. 2. Review water quality with the view to improving outcomes identified to date of watercourse discharges. 3. Identify options for provision of gross pollutant traps including in ground (not surface exposed) solutions. 4. In reviewing water quality identify treatment possibly necessary for adding to the non potable reticulation network. 5. Review and identify storm retardation possibilities 6. Review / and identify flow velocities to check potential scour zones and proposed solutions that meet aesthetic / amenity aims. 7. Confirm / reanalyse the water balance. 8. Build on the Cardno work for Flemington Road ponds reticulation with interconnections into that network. 9. Where non potable water reticulation is designed the reticulation network shall be in accordance with water supply principles including provision of scour valves, air valves and shut off valves to enable isolation of various segments of the network. Note that there may be some periods where there may be no pumping, resulting in no water pressure in the mains. 10. Where practicable ActewAGL standard fittings shall be used in order to minimise stock holdings for maintenance. 11. It is envisaged that a telemetry system will be incorporated into the design being capable and linked into the existing COMTROL computerised irrigation management system used by SRS. That system would include provision of remote switching of valves at metres of end users. Page 10 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

12. Note to allow for the possible future incorporation of accepting treated effluent from the ActewAGL network. 13. Prepare survey plans based on available data and supplemented with new ground survey where necessary to allow for this and subsequent stages in the planning and design process. 14. Provide details of all structures proposed including size, height and siting. 15. Identify fencing requirements (if any) for the sites, visual screening and other landscaping requirements / enhancements such as board walks and viewing points. . 16. Identify any infrastructure relocations necessary including power lines/cables, water mains, sewer mains (gravity and rising), stormwater, gas, telecommunications and other services. 17. Review topography and identify natural drainage lines. 18. Provide for erosion, sediment control, water quality protection. 19. Identify geotechnical issues and prepare spoil management proposals. 20. Documentation to include options with costings for review, including life cycle costing, NPV comparisons and levelised costs. That is, similar to those shown in the Cardno Flemington Road Ponds planning document. 21. Provide a draft construction program. 22. Prepare full documentation for construction. 4.3

SCOPE OF SERVICES

The scope of this brief is the provision (in accordance with the Standard Agreement between the Territory and the consultant) of the following services relating to the works described in section 4.2. 4.3.1.

Ponds Design Options Study

The following are the numbers of copies required: 4 copies of the report 4 A3 copies of drawings 10 CDs with full study information

4.3.2

Master Plans N/A

4.3.3.

Preliminary Sketch Plan (PSP) - Conceptual Design

The Consultant is to prepare and submit a Conceptual Design Report comprising a report and conceptual design plans (PSPs) which addresses scope of work as detailed within the above Section 4.2 and the issues noted in Section 3.4 of the Basic Brief. The following are the numbers of copies required: 4 copies of the report 4 A3 copies of drawings 10 CDs with full PSP information, report and design drawings 4.3.4

Conceptual Design (PSP) Presentation Material

Page 11 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

A photo montage showing the proposed works is to be prepared. It shall consist of a colour photograph not less than B1 size, showing an oblique view of the site, with the proposed wetlands and ponds superimposed with the adjacent landscape. One copy of this montage is required.

4.3.5.

Development Application Submission (for works outside NCA Designated Areas)

A Development Application submission (to the requirements of ACTPLA) is to be prepared for signature by the proponent and submission to ACTPLA following approval of the FSP. 4.3.6

Details for Works Approval (for works within NCA Designated Areas)

Details of works within Designated Areas suitable for submission to the NCA is required following approval of the FSP submission. 4.3.7

Preliminary Assessment N/A

4.3.8

Consultation

This brief requires a full process of consultation with all relevant government agencies and stakeholders. (Refer to requirements for stakeholders and public consultation under 4.2.2.) It is recommended that allowance be made for two meetings with Government Agencies and two public consultation meetings, inclusive of all the costs, (venue hire, etc); The ACT Procurement Solutions Project Officer is Snjezana Torbica Ph (02) 6205 9838 Fax 6207 5468 email [email protected] mailto:

The ACT Planning and Land Authority Project Officer is Jack Garside, Infrastructure Planning Section, Planning Services Branch, Ph: 6205 2402, Fax: 6207 2587, email: [email protected]. The Department of Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water Project Officer for the “Canberra Integrated Urban Waterways” program is Jennie Gilles, Ph: 6207 2141, Fax: 6207 2255, email: [email protected]. The Sport and Recreation Services, Territory and Municipal Services Project Officer for the Tuggeranong Non Potable water irrigation scheme is David Jeffrey, Ph: 6207 5815, Fax: 6207 2071, email: [email protected].

4.3.9

Final Sketch Plan (FSP) - Draft Design

The Consultant is to prepare and submit a Draft Design Report comprising a report and draft design plans (FSPs) which addresses the issues noted in Section 3.5 of the Basic Brief. The following are the numbers of copies required: 4 copies of the report 4 A3 copies of drawings 10 CDs with full FSP information, report plus design drawings Page 12 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

4.3.10

Draft Design (FSP) Presentation Material N/A

4.3.12

Final Design

Final Design and Documentation and Analysis of Tenders is required. Provision of Traffic Management Concept Drawings in the Tender Documents is required. The following are the numbers of copies required: 4 copies of the final design report 4 A3 copies of draft tender drawings 10 CDs with draft tender and final design information 2 copies of the tender documents are required for review. 2 hard copies and of the tender analysis are required. 10 A3 copies of drawings and documents for tenderers are to be initially printed and allowed for in fee proposal (additional copies at extra cost) Four copies of bound contract documents are required. 4.3.13

Construction Administration

General The superintendence of construction to completion including co-ordination of the necessary ancillary works and preparation of works as executed drawings is required. If the NSW RTA Technical Specification is applicable to this project, then the appropriate level of contract administration should be allowed for. In any case, the AUSTROADS Publication “Guide to Field Surveillance of Quality Assured Contracts” indicates the level of administration required. Payment for Construction Phase Services Payment for Technical Superintendence and Contract Administration are included in the fixed total Lump Sum Fee. The Lump Sum Fee shall include a Lump Sum for the Superintendent's role in providing assurance of the quality of the contract works and other construction phase services. The Lump sum fee amount may be only be adjusted where there is substantiated reason for the change and contract period estimated in the project program. The proposal for the construction phase services shall give due consideration to and complexity of proposed works and the extent and nature of the verification activities to assure the quality of the project works. The Consultant is required to provide assurance that works accepted are to specified requirements whether indirectly by verifying the effectiveness of the Contractor's Project Quality System or superintending additional testing by an independent NATA register testing specialist. It shall be a requirement of the construction contract that the contractor operates an effective project quality management system and the Consultant’s responsibility to ensure all quality requirements are adequately detailed in the tender documents. Page 13 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

The proposal shall cover the contract administration of construction throughout all stages of the proposed contract and over the Defects Liability Period to Financial Completion and include advice on: •

Assurance activities to be undertaken;

•

The Consultants construction phase personnel together with details of their powers, duties, discretions and authorities to be exercised;

•

Make up of the proposed sum, ie a priced itemised list of assurance and other activities;

•

Where applicable details of specialists for civil, structural, mechanical, electrical or other specialists to be engaged.

A qualified Landscape Architect shall be engaged by the consultant to superintend and certify compliance all aspects of the landscape infrastructure construction, consolidation and Final Acceptance, as required in the brief and Design Standards and Specifications for Urban Infrastructure. Progress payments for the construction phase services will be made on a monthly basis calculated with reference to the assurance and other activities undertaken. 4.3.14 5.0 5.1

Partnering Workshop N/A

DESIGN INFORMATION STANDARDS

Works are to comply with all current standards and guidelines together with all relevant legislation currently in force in the ACT in particular with TAMS Design Standards for Urban Infrastructure, ACTEW’s Water Supply and Sewerage Standards and the ACT Waterways Code, refer also Basic Brief. 5.2 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION REFERENCE MATERIAL “Canberra Integrated Urban Waterways draft report”, CSIRO, November 2008 Draft North Weston Pond reticulation - Cardno Young, concurrent Draft Flemington Road Pond reticulation - Cardno Young, concurrent Review of Infrastructure for Sullivans Creek Bill Guy July 2003 Feasibility Dickson & Lyneham Wetlands Bill Guy July 2005 Water Management Plan for ACT Sportsgrounds – Parsons Brinckerhoff April 2009

NOTE: Tenderers are advised to contact Procurement Solutions’ nominated Project Officer to obtain CD with all the above mentioned reference material and appendices to this brief, (referenced under 3.0 Background)

Page 14 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

6.0

PROGRAM

The preliminary timeline for this study is as follows: Call tenders Engage selected consultant

July 2009 August 2009

New Wetlands / Ponds Review & confirm documentation

September 2009

Option plans Design Agency workshop & consultation Preliminary Sketch Plan (PSP) Final Sketch Plans (FSP) Development Application (DA) Design Ready Call Construction Tenders

September 2009 October 2009 October 2009 November 2009 November 2009 January 2010 February 2010

Duration Construction

Est.12 months

Extensions of time normally expected

1 month

Defects Liability Period

12.months

7.0 7.1

BUDGET PROGRAM PROVISION

The program provision for construction of this project, including all ancillary works, is $13M (GST inclusive). This includes the cost of landscaping and other associated works The consultant is to report on the adequacy of this amount early in the design process and is to progressively refine and update the estimate as the design is developed. Estimates must include all work necessary to make the project function properly (eg. alteration to services, traffic control devices, etc).

7.2

DATE TO WHICH PROJECT ESTIMATES ARE TO BE ESCALATED

Estimates of cost are to be based on costs expected to apply at the program call tender date. 7.3

FEE PROPOSAL

Whilst a tender is required to be submitted as set out in the brief, the consultant may advise an alternative which can be accomplished within the time &/or budget, and the time &/or budget required to complete the study. The consultant shall provide a fee proposal that includes all sub-consultant fees, travel, report printing and production costs and other disbursements. The consultant is required to provide a breakdown of the Page 15 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

costs and allocation of fees for the project including a breakdown of hourly rate and anticipated time input from each person nominated. This should be provided in a spreadsheet or table format. The fee proposal should also provide a cost break up of the different tasks to be undertaken in the scope of works. As the project proceeds a task may be not required and would then be deleted with the fees for that task being deleted. No additional fees shall be paid except with the written agreement of the Territory and on the basis of a written application together with supporting information from the consultant. If the fee is beyond the budget resources it may be deemed necessary to adjust the level of detail required for elements of the study brief in discussion with the preferred consultant. ACT Procurement Solutions reserves the right to negotiate on behalf of the Territory with the successful tenderer to modify the scope of work and the associated fees if required. 7.4

PRICING SCHEDULE

Prices are to be inclusive of all items required to execute the work such as dispersements, incidentals, travel etc. The Tenderer is expected to amortise overhead and start-up costs over the proposed period of the contract. Prices quoted are to be in Australian dollars, and are to be inclusive of GST. The pricing schedule is a required summary of a more detailed fee breakdown to be provided by tenderers for the project, refer Section 8 of the tender document. In addition, tenderers should provide a breakdown of people intended for each task, their charge rate and the total fees per task and per person on the project. A table or spreadsheet format is suggested for this purpose. Payment for services for each stage will be in accordance with the pricing schedule, as submitted, reflecting the anticipated input required for each part of the project stage.

8.0

QUALITY ASSURANCE

8.1

INFRASTRUCTURE PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS

General The Consultant shall undertake the design in accordance with Quality Assurance requirements detailed in Attachment 'A' (forms USF944 and USF960 as applicable). A Project Quality Plan for the Design Phase is required to be submitted within 2 weeks of engagement. Design Verification In particular, the Consultant shall submit a design plan and/or a design verification plan in accordance with Quality Requirements - Document Submission Form USF960. Design Changes The consultant shall notify Infrastructure Procurement in writing where the need for a significant design change becomes evident and shall obtain Infrastructure Procurement’s written approval for any significant design change. Page 16 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

New wetlands, ponds and reticulation at Dickson and Lynahem, V2

A significant design change is a change to an Infrastructure Procurement approved design which; (i) (ii)

significantly affects the basis of the Infrastructure Procurement design approval, or significantly affects a formal commitment regarding the design made directly by ACT Projects to another agency, or (iii) affects Infrastructure Procurement’ specified requirements. At final design (Document Readiness) stage the consultant is to certify that the design meets all statutory requirements and Brief requirements. Superintendence and Contract Administration Within 2 weeks of contract award, the Superintendent is to submit a detailed plan for assuring the quality of the contract works and administering the contract (ie Project Quality Plan for Superintendence Phase). Design Validation The Consultant shall plan and undertake validation of the design in accordance with the requirements below to ensure that the works conform to defined user needs and/or requirement. USE ASPECT

STAGE VALIDATION REQUIRED

Submissions on design validation shall be lodged in accordance with the requirements for document submission set out in Form USF960. Certificate of Compliance (Form USF957) The Certificate of Compliance, Form USF957, is used with progress claim submissions and at Practical Completion to monitor the completion stages of work and the provision of relevant Quality Records. The Superintendent / Superintendent's Representative shall review the submitted form USF957 and associated documentation against the contractor's approved schedule of Quality records for completeness and acceptability and, as applicable, take appropriate action on non -complying or outstanding matters. The Superintendent / Superintendent's Representative shall complete the relevant part of Form USF957 and distribute copies as appropriate. The Superintendent is to confirm the Contractor’s verification/certification that the Works As Executed drawings and Asset Lists are being progressively prepared to ensure that there is minimum delay in the formal submission of those mandatory quality records at completion of the project.

Page 17 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

8.2

REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS

When the estimated cost for the lump sum contract is above $100,000 the Consultant shall determine the quality requirements to be included in the tender documents. Where the Technical Specification is not an integrated QA type specification, these requirements shall be detailed in forms USF944 and USF960 and shall incorporate any Infrastructure Procurement specified requirements that apply to construction works. (Refer 8.1 above). 9.0

APPROVALS

Approvals required as part of this project include: •

Development Application from the ACT Planning and Land Authority, (refer Section 4.3.5). It is important to consult with ACTPLA, DECCEW and TAMS throughout the project to ensure that Development Application requirements are known and met.

•

Support in principle for design acceptance from TAMS for assets which belong to the ACT Government.

•

In consultation with DECCEW obtain TAMS, Environment & Recreation Environment Protection & Heritage Water Resources, - Water Access Entitlement(s) for the pond(s) if the project has not already obtained the entitlement. 10

GLOSARY OF TERMS ACT ACTEW ActewAGL Authority DECCEW PCL NCA SRS TAMS

Australian Capital Territory ACT Electrical and Water. Owners of Potable Water and Sewerage assets. Operating company for potable water, sewerage services. ACT Planning and Land authority (ACTPLA) Department of Environment, Climate Change, Energy and Water Parks Conservation and Lands (a division of TAMS) National Capital Authority Sport and Recreation (a division of TAMS) Department of Territory and Municipal Services

Attachment A – Quality Requirements Tables as necessary. Attachment B – TAMS Requirements for Works As Executed Quality Records - Ref No. 08. Attachment C – Site/Location Plan (if required).

Page 18 of 19 Version 4 of 1 October 2008

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FORM USF944 PROJECT : __________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ CLIENT:_________________________________________PROJECT No :_______________ SERVICE ROLE:____________________________________________ (insert as applicable) [Project Director, Project/Construction/Works Manager, Consultant, Contractor] QUALITY STANDARD : AS/NZS ISO 9001:2008 (as interpreted by HB90.3-2000)

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS INDEX Where information is to be specified enter YES in Column 1 Details to be Specified

Table / Form Title Table 1 - Document Submission Table 2 - Design Verification Methods Table 3 - Design Review Points Table 4 - Measurement/Design Data Table 5 - Notification of Intention to Commence Project Activities Table 6 - Traceability Requirements Table 7 - Processes Requiring Validation Table 8 - Witness / Hold Points Table 9 - Principal Supplied Products Table 10 - Servicing Work Table 11 - Quality Records USF957 - Certificate of Compliance

Doc No: USF944

Edition No: 6

30 July 2007

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 1 (formerly USF945) DOCUMENT SUBMISSION Document

No. of Copies

When to be Submitted

Quality Plan Procedure

1

with proposal/tender.

PQP for Design Phase, or the Total Project.

2

14 days after award of Consultancy.

PQP for the Superintendence Phase

1

14 days after award of Const’n Contract.

1

at PC.

To be Available for Inspection on Request

Comments

Quality Records (refer to specific table)

Certificates of Compliance

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 2 (formerly USF946) DESIGN VERIFICATION METHODS The Consultant/Project Manager shall provide in the Design Verification Plan(s) to undertake design verification of the following components in accordance with the nominated method(s). Such verification shall not relieve the Consultant/Project Manager of the responsibility for design. (Refer ISO 9001:2008 Cl 7.3.5 and see HB90.3-2000 Page 60 for examples of design verification methods).

Design Components

Doc No: USF960 (formerly USF945 - 956)

Nominated Design Verification Method

Edition No: 6

06 August 2007

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 3 (formerly USF947) DESIGN REVIEW POINTS The Consultant/Project Manager shall include in their Design Verification Plan the following Design Reviews and the involvement of the parties nominated below. Such Design Reviews shall be arranged by the service provider and all parties are to be notified ten working days prior to the Design Review. (Refer ISO 9001:2008 Cl 7.3.4 and HB90.3-2000 Pages 58-59 for guidance).

Design Component

Stage of Design

Nominated Parties to Participate in Design Review

Comments

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 4 (formerly USF948) MEASUREMENT / DESIGN DATA The following measurements and/or design data are to be submitted for verification of adequacy. Note: Such verification shall not relieve the Project Director / Consultant / Subconsultant / Specialist Consultant / Contractor (delete as applicable) of responsibility for providing design services/constructed works in accordance with the specification requirements. (Refer ISO 9001:2008 Cl7.3.2 and HB90.3-2000 Pages 55-56 for guidance)

Required Data

Doc No: USF960 (formerly USF945 - 956)

Date to be Submitted

Edition No: 6

Entity to be submitted to

06 August 2007

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 5 (formerly USF949) NOTIFICATION OF INTENTION TO COMMENCE PROJECT ACTIVITIES The .................................... shall notify the ...................................... in writing of the intention to commence the following project activities (eg WorkCover, Environment ACT etc):

Activity

Required Notice (Days)

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 6 (formerly USF950) TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS Enter details of items for which it is necessary to trace the history, application, or location by means of recorded identification. Refer to Quality Record Requirements (Table 11) for more specific requirements of Records of Traceability. (Refer ISO 9001:2008 Cl7.5.3 and HB90.3-2000 Page 72 for guidance).

Item

Extent of Trace Start

Doc No: USF960 (formerly USF945 - 956)

Edition No: 6

Finish

06 August 2007

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 7 (formerly USF951) PROCESSES REQUIRING VALIDATION "Validated processes" are those processes which cannot be fully verified by subsequent inspection and testing or processes where the deficiencies may only become apparent when the product is in use. (Refer ISO 9001:2008 Cl7.5.2 and HB90.3-2000 Page 71 for guidance).

Process

Validation Requirements

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 8 (formerly USF952) WITNESS / HOLD POINTS NOTIFICATION:...…...... working days notice of Witness (W) points is required. .....….... working days notice of Hold (H) points is required. Note : The Service Provider shall arrange Hold Point inspections. (Refer ISO 9001:2008 Cl8.2.4 and HB90.3-2000 Pages 88-90 for guidance).

Stage of Project

Doc No: USF960 (formerly USF945 - 956)

Witness Point

Edition No: 6

Hold Point

Release by Whom

06 August 2007

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 9 (formerly USF953) PRINCIPAL SUPPLIED PRODUCTS Include here, or reference attached schedule(s) of, products to be supplied free issue to the contractor for incorporation into the project works. The required method of handover/acceptance and the documentation to be completed is as follows. (Refer ISO 9001:2008 Cl7.5.4 and HB90.3-2000 Page 73 for guidance).

Product

Quantity

Special Handling, Delivery or Storage Requirements

Point of delivery if other than site

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 10 (formerly USF955) SERVICING WORK Procedures or instructions for undertaking the contract servicing works shall be developed for the following activities. (Note: procedures/instructions and their associated documents shall provide the necessary evidence that the servicing work meets the contract requirements):

Servicing Activity

Doc No: USF960 (formerly USF945 - 956)

Edition No: 6

06 August 2007

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS TABLE 11 (formerly USF956) QUALITY RECORDS Type of Record

No. of Copies

Doc No: USF960 (formerly USF945 - 956)

Submit To Whom

Date Required

Edition No: 6

Retention Retain By Minimum Whom Period (Years)

06 August 2007

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FORM USF957 PROJECT: __________________________________________________________ CLIENT: ___________________________________PROJECT No: ___________ SUPERINTENDENT: _________________________________________________ CONTRACTOR: _____________________________________________________ SCOPE OF WORKS SUBMITTED FOR ACCEPTANCE: _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ This section to be completed by Contractor's Representative: I hereby claim that the above listed works have been duly completed in accordance with the specification requirements, except for the concessions granted in writing by the Superintendent which are detailed in the attached listing of nonconformances and their status. I have verified that: (a)

outstanding minor nonconformances as per the attached listing are applicable to the works.

(b)

all Inspection and Test Plan(s) (ITP s) applicable to the above works, as indicated in the attached register of ITP's, any associated test record sheets and other quality records as required by the specification, have been satisfactorily completed and signed.

(c)

any identified nonconformances have been satisfactorily disposed of and their documentation closed out, excepting any minor nonconformances.

(d)

all positive recalls have been completed and verified.

(e)

concessions have been granted for the nonconforming items on the attached listing.

(f)

WAE Drawings and Asset Lists relevant to the attached claim are being progressively prepared.

NAME (PRINT): _________________ SIGNATURE: __________________ DATE: (Contractor's Representative)

/

/

This section to be completed by the Superintendent's Representative: Contractor's above completed works claim is noted and has been verified. Payment to be reduced for outstanding minor nonconformances

YES NO (Tick As Appropriate)

NAME (PRINT):_________________ SIGNATURE: ___________________ DATE: (Superintendent's Representative)

Doc No: USF957

Edition No: 6

30 July 2007

/

/