scan 2005/

26 July 2005

Neil Byron
Presiding Member
Heritage Inquiry
Productivity Commission
PO Box 80
BELCONNEN  ACT  2616

Dear Sir,

RE:  PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION ISSUES PAPER (MAY 2005) - CONSERVATION OF AUSTRALIA'S HISTORIC HERITAGE PLACES

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Productivity Commission Issues Paper (May 2005) - Conservation of Australia’s Historic Heritage Places.

Adelaide’s general community places considerable value on its built heritage.  The Adelaide City Council, likewise places significant money and resources into its protection, making it a local government leader in the promotion and facilitation of heritage conservation in Australia. At the present time, over 1,200 local heritage places are protected within the City of Adelaide and a further 457 are protected by State heritage listing.

Current Council Initiatives

Council aims to conserve Adelaide’s historic heritage places in three ways:
•	Financial – Heritage Incentive Scheme (HIS)
•	Education and promotion – walking trails, plaques and technical notes
•	Legislation and regulation – Development Plan provisions.

In addition, Council invests directly in servicing and managing significant heritage buildings such as the Town Hall and the Victoria Park Grand Stand.

1.	Financial:  Since 1988 the Council has provided the most substantial local government heritage incentive scheme (HIS) in Australia, reimbursing owners of heritage places with part funding for conservation works. The scheme provides Council with the appropriate mechanisms to ensure that the correct techniques and materials are employed during the conservation process. The HIS gives higher priority to projects that impact on the public realm, therefore providing significant improvements to the City’s streetscapes. The scheme has contributed significantly to the conservation of heritage places within the City of Adelaide.  Please find the HIS policy and operating guidelines attached.

2.	Education and Promotion: The Council promotes conservation of historic heritage places through publications, installation of heritage plaques at significant heritage properties and technical notes on conservation practices.  Examples include:

•	Multicultural walking trails
•	Historical walking trails
•	Heritage listing technical note
•	Development applications for heritage places technical note
•	Salt damp treatment and mortar mixes technical note
•	Verandah conservation for heritage listed places technical note
•	Security and other modern requirements technical note
•	Heritage fencing technical note
•	Re-roofing of a heritage place technical note
•	Painting of a heritage place technical note
•	A number of joint publications on specific conservation issues with the State Heritage Branch

Opportunities are currently being explored for joint publications and initiatives with:
•	Property Council of Australia/State Heritage Branch
•	R.A.I.A.
•	National Trust SA Division

3.	Legislation and regulation: A comprehensive review has been completed to further expand protection of historic heritage places within North Adelaide. The review resulted in proposed additional local heritage places being protected and the introduction of a historic conservation zone to conserve large areas of historic value throughout the area. The use of area-based controls to protect the heritage values of groups of buildings or suburbs of heritage value is a successful mechanism for managing heritage in a comprehensive manner. Funding has been allocated by Council this financial year to continue the review of heritage places within Southern Adelaide.

In 1985 the Adelaide Park Lands were placed on the Register of the National Estate.  Later, in 2002 Adelaide City Council in consultation with the then Australian Heritage Commission nominated the City of Adelaide Historic Layout to be placed on the Register of the National Estate.  Council recently nominated the City of Adelaide Historic Layout and Adelaide Park Lands to the National Heritage List.  Council believes that the City of Adelaide Historic Layout and Park Lands is of such significance to the nation and indeed the world, that it would warrant World Heritage Listing.  

The current range of Council initiatives are lengthy and expensive to undertake and many local government bodies would be financially or resource constrained in dealing with heritage matters on such a comprehensive basis. Increasing demands on local government support for heritage, particularly for financial contributions for conservation works, will require increasing financial commitment from the State and Federal Governments.   

Issues for consideration

1.	Limited incentives provided to owners of heritage properties by State and Federal government 
It is important to acknowledge that the necessity to conserve the built environment should be borne by the overall community.  While the introduction of local heritage powers to Local Government authorities has been a positive step for built heritage management, it has placed increased pressure on local government to provide incentives, including financial assistance for these properties. The Adelaide City Council greatly assists in providing owners of heritage listed buildings with financial assistance.  However, the responsibility of providing heritage assistance in the form of taxes, rates, incentives and promotion should be fairly shared by all levels of government.

Similarly, other than those provided through the Heritage Incentives Scheme, currently there are no incentives for historic commercial buildings to be upgraded and re-used.  Adaptation of old buildings to accommodate modern building requirements is difficult and costly.  Suitable State and Federal financial incentives and legislation should be introduced to assist in the refurbishment of these historic commercial buildings. 

2.	Imbalance of financial contribution towards conservation of heritage places
Capital cities play a vital role in the development and settlement of a state.  For this reason any financial assistance or incentives from the State or Federal Government should have a high focus on capital cities.  In reality, the State Heritage Branch financial contribution to heritage management is significantly less than Adelaide City Council’s contribution. For the past 2 years, the State Heritage Branch budget for heritage grants has been $250,000 for buildings and $50,000 for cemeteries.  In previous years it has been significantly less.  This funds conservation projects for State listed properties throughout the entire state.  When compared to the Adelaide City Council $1million budget for the Adelaide city area the imbalance of funding becomes obvious.  

About 30% of applications funded through Council’s heritage incentives scheme are for State listed properties.  There are very few examples where the State Heritage Branch has contributed to these projects.  The parity of funding availability needs to be addressed at State and Federal level to ensure each government sector is contributing in accordance with the number of heritage properties under its jurisdiction. This issue is also apparent with respect to the new National heritage legislation. While the impacts of the new legislation on local government are unknown, expansion of the National list may raise community expectations for financial assistance. 

3.	Perception that heritage listing results in reduction of property value
There is a perception that new heritage listing of places in commercial precincts results in significant devaluation. This is inequitable, and some mechanism for balancing values is needed. Council has used the TFA [transferable floor area] system, but found it of limited use, particularly in a slow property market. It is also fundamentally at odds with the “merit assessment” approach to development approval upon which the SA planning system is based.

It is often thought that heritage listing means that owners will not be able to alter a heritage place in any way and development on the site will be very restricted.  It is also thought that maintenance costs are higher for heritage properties.  This results in many owners objecting to the listing of their property.  This in turn increases the chance of future demolition of some of Adelaide’s significant buildings.  

Suggested methods of addressing issues

For the effective conservation of historic heritage places it is vital that all levels of government accept a significant part of the responsibility required.  Currently, the responsibility is felt primarily by local government.  While regulations imposed by government in the form of heritage listing and development control helps prevent inappropriate development and demolition, the most effective way of conserving historic heritage places is through incentives.  Incentive and policy tools aid in ensuring owners of heritage buildings are not unduly disadvantaged by development constraints or conservation costs and help generate conservation activity through out the community.   

It is felt that incentives for heritage owners needs to start from the highest level of government before any benefits can be felt by local government and inturn heritage owners.  Therefore, federal government needs to explore broader heritage incentives in order to ensure greater protection of its built heritage.

A range of incentives have been investigated in detail in the EPHC National Incentives Taskforce Making Heritage Happen paper (April 2004).  These should be given further consideration by Federal Government. Particular incentives could include: 

1.	Tax incentives: The Tax Incentive Scheme previously offered by the Commonwealth Government, gave owners of State heritage properties a tax rebate for conservation works. This was an effective incentive for owners of heritage places, albeit overly complicated in its administration. Other tax schemes could be investigated to benefit heritage buildings.  However, any review of negative gearing investment tax policies by the Federal government should not result in negative financial impacts on heritage buildings.  

2.	Valuation: Council will give consideration to making a submission to State Government that the Valuation of Land Act Regulations 2005 be amended to include a qualification to the definition of annual value. Where land forms part of a heritage place, the annual value of the land must (where the annual value is computed on the basis of gross annual rental, but not otherwise) be reduced by an amount representing the additional expenditure necessary to maintain the value of the property. 

3.	Depreciation: Tax treatment of depreciation, particularly for conservation maintenance and adaptive reuse of commercial heritage buildings, should encourage continued investment in such buildings. 

4.	Provision of funding for the National Heritage Listed properties: The abolition of the National Estate Grants Program (NEGP) and emphasis on other natural and indigenous heritage programs and biodiversity has resulted in a smaller pool of funds being available for the preservation of built heritage places. The introduction of the Distinctly Australian Program to support places on the National Heritage List is applauded, however, it is still considered necessary to expand the incentives available to broader sections of the community through grants, tax incentives and other mechanisms.

5.	Joint conservation projects: Significant conservation projects should consider the opportunity for the three spheres of government, together with the owner, to work cooperatively (not only in terms of financial contribution) to achieve a well balanced heritage result. Council was involved in such a joint approach with the stabilisation of the Adelaide Mosque minarets in 1998.  This model could be used as an example for many state listed properties.

6.	National Heritage Advisory Scheme:  Consideration should be given to a National Heritage Advisory Scheme providing quality heritage advice to owners and local government. Providing funding for a scheme that supplies consistent and quality advice would benefit heritage on all levels.  The Scheme should also make provision for funding heritage promotion and education.  Greater emphasis should be placed on heritage education and skills at universities and TAFEs to ensure the availability of suitably trained tradepersons and heritage architects and advisors.

There is also an opportunity for the Federal Government to take a greater leadership role in the promotion of the Community benefits of heritage, including cost/benefit analysis of such matters as:

-	Community ‘return’ on grants and funding schemes
-	Financial implications on heritage listings
-	Increased maintenance costs to the owners of heritage places.

The three tiers of government should accept their fair level of responsibility for heritage promotion, education and conservation. The State and Federal Governments should play a more active role in the funding of promotion, education and heritage conservation the current burden carried by Local Government reduced.  

The Council would be pleased to provide further advise on details should the Inquiry find it of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Michael Harbison
LORD MAYOR

OPERATING GUIDELINES

HERITAGE INCENTIVES SCHEME

Approved by: 	Strategy & Policy Committee on 28 June 2004

Document Owner
Position:	Don Donaldson, Development Policy Manager
Phone: 	8203 7596

ACC1999/01856-6

CONTENTS PAGE
No	Item	Page No	
1	INTRODUCTION	3	
1.1	Scope	3	
1.2	Legislative and Corporate Requirements	3	
2	ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY	3	
2.1	Principles	3	
2.2	Categories	3	
2.3	Priorities	4	
2.4	Scheme Eligibility	4	
2.5	Funding Limits	5	
3	SCOPE OF INCENTIVES	6	
3.1	Documentation	6	
3.2	Conservation Works	6	
3.3	Special Projects	8	
3.4	Emergency Works	8	
4	PROCESS	9	
4.1	Call and Preliminary Discussions	9	
4.2	Applications	9	
4.2	Assessment of Applications	10	
4.3	Allocation of Funding	10	
4.4	Implementation	11	
4.5	Claim, Verification and Payment	11	
4.6	Emergency Works	11	
5	ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES	12	
6	MONITORING AND REVIEW	12	
4.1	Indicators of Effectiveness	12	
4.2	Procedures/Timelines for Review	12	

1	INTRODUCTION

1.1	Scope

The Heritage Incentives Scheme (HIS) is the principal means by which Council implements its Built Heritage Management Policy.  The Scheme assists owners of Heritage Places in the City of Adelaide, as identified in the Adelaide (City) Development Plan or the State Heritage Register.
The Scheme promotes conservation of Heritage Places by reimbursing owners for a proportion of the costs involved in retaining, reinforcing or reinstating heritage significance of these places with particular emphasis on preserving the local Adelaide character.
The Heritage Incentives Scheme acknowledges community interest in conserving privately-owned Heritage Places by recognising the cost to owners of conservation works.

1.2	Legislative and Corporate requirements
	
	The most directly relevant corporate documents are:

•	Built Heritage Management Policy – which sets out Council’s overall approach to managing and enhancing the heritage assets of the City; and

•	Adelaide (City) Development Plan – which sets out Council’s requirements for development affecting Heritage Places.

2.	ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY

2.1	Principles

The core principles of the Heritage Incentive Scheme are:

•	develop an understanding of the importance of heritage conservation, engender pride in and support of heritage buildings, and encourage a partnership approach between owners and Council;

•	encourage building owners to undertake conservation works when they may not otherwise do so by offering reimbursement for a proportion of the costs involved;

•	provide maximum visible enhancement to the public realm surrounding Heritage Places as a means of building Adelaide’s unique character and maximising the community and economic benefit of heritage buildings and areas;

•	ensure conservation work is of acceptable quality and reinforces the local Adelaide character; and

•	encourage owners to support the designation/retention of buildings as Local or State Heritage Places.

2.2	Categories

Funding will be provided for projects in the following categories (section 3 refers):

•	documentation (see section 3.1 - generally accounting for 10% of funding available for allocation in any particular funding round);

•	conservation works (see section 3.2 - generally around 75% of available funding);

•	special projects (see section 3.3 - generally around 10% of available funding); and

•	emergency works (see section 3.4 - a contingency amount set aside in each funding round, generally equivalent to around 5% of available funding).

2.3	Priorities

In allocating funding available at any particular funding round, applications will be ranked based on the following criteria:

•	properties that have been recently designated as Heritage Places;

•	buildings that are considered to make a prominent contribution to the streetscape character of the local area;

•	properties that have not previously received funding under the HIS;

•	buildings that are owned by institutions or incorporated associations with a predominantly community, religious or community service purpose; 

•	buildings that are held in multiple ownership and where each owner has agreed to cooperate in undertaking conservation works; 

•	buildings which have not been recently unsympathetically modified (ie in a manner that detracts from their heritage value) by the current building owner; and

•	projects that more directly support the buildings’ elements of heritage value, as listed in either the Adelaide (City) Development Plan or the State Heritage Register.

Priority will be assessed according to an “on balance” ranking.  No one criteria will be, in itself, determinative.  The assessment will be based on the merit of the building, not the particular circumstances of the owner.

2.4	Scheme Eligibility

To be eligible for funding allocations and/or payments under the Scheme:

•	the subject building/site must be designated as either:
(i)	a Local Heritage Place (excluding interim listing) in  the Adelaide (City) Development Plan; or
(ii)	a State Heritage Place (excluding provisional entry) on the State Heritage Register.  Evidence must be provided to demonstrate that financial assistance has been sought – and declined – by the State Government;

•	the project must meet relevant category-specific eligibility requirements (as set out in section 3 below);

•	the building must be privately owned and occupied (buildings that are either owned or occupied by Council or by any agency, authority or statutory entity of State or Commonwealth government are ineligible);

•	there must be no form of debt or charge outstanding in favour of Council on the part of either the building or the owner; 

•	the works for which funding is sought must not have already been substantially commenced or completed (ie retrospective funding is not available); 

•	the same or similar works or project can only be funded once (ie funding will not be provided twice in relation to the same or similar project); 

•	the total project value must be greater than $1,000; 

•	assistance can only be provided within funding limits (see 2.5 below); and

•	the application must be on the prescribed application form and be accompanied by all required information.

	2.5	Funding Limits

Funding assistance provided in relation to each of the categories outlined in Section 3 below cannot exceed any of the following limits:

Documentation (see 3.1 below)

Funding limits for the category of documentation are $5000 or a fixed 50% of the cost of documentation, whichever is the lesser amount.

Conservation Works (see 3.2 below)

in relation to individual allocations: no individual building can be allocated in excess of either:
-	a fixed 50% of the total project value; or
-	$10,000;
whichever is the lesser, except in relation to single buildings in the nature of row or terrace buildings that are held in more than one independent Torrens-titled ownership, in which case each ownership shall be eligible for funding up to these limits;

Cumulatively:
No individual building can be allocated or paid in excess of $15,000 for documentation and/or conservation works in any five year period, except in relation to single buildings that are held in more than one independent Torrens-titled ownership, in which case each ownership shall be eligible for funding up to these limits.

Special Projects (see 3.3 below)

	Funding limits for the category of special projects are double those set out above.  Council, at its absolute discretion, may approve an additional allocation in the special projects category if an application can demonstrate exceptional merit based on the principles set out in 2.3 above and 3.3 below.

	Emergency Works (see 3.4 below)

	Funding limits for the category of emergency works are $5,000 or a fixed 50% of the project value, whichever is the lesser.  There is no cumulative limit.  Any funding provided in this category will not be taken into account when determining eligibility for funding available in any other category.

3.0	SCOPE OF INCENTIVES

3.1	Documentation

This category of funding seeks to provide owners with advice, plans and/or specifications that will:

•	assist the owner in making decisions about future investment in, and/or management of, heritage places; and/or

•	provide a basis for tendering, implementing and supervising subsequent conservation works.

Grants in this category will defray the cost of construction documentation, which is an essential pre-requisite for non-routine conservation works (see 3.2 below).

Other specific items eligible for funding in the documentation category include:

•	conservation plans;

•	reuse options studies;

•	photographic surveys;

•	dilapidation surveys;

•	fire safety and disabled access upgrade plans; and

•	archaeological surveys.

3.2	Conservation Works

	This category of funding seeks to reimburse owners for part of the costs associated with conservation works.  

	Conservation works are building works that directly contribute to the long term strengthening of the heritage values of a Heritage Place by restoring, conserving, enhancing or reinstating historic fabric.

	In addition to the criteria set out in 2.4 above, projects applying for funding under this category must be accompanied by documentation that meets the following requirements:

•	for routine conservation works as defined (see below):
-	standard specifications or technical notes (as provided on Council’s heritage 	website)

•	for non-routine conservation works as defined (see below):
-	construction documentation suitable and appropriate for tendering and 	construction supervision (which may have been subject to a previous 	funding allocation under the HIS)

	Routine conservation works are conservation works which occur commonly across all or most heritage buildings and involve well-established conservation construction techniques.  These works will generally be similar in their scope notwithstanding the type of building involved.  They can usually be adequately documented for tendering purposes by reference to standard construction practices or by using standard specifications and technical notes provided by Council.  Examples include:

•	repointing and relining;

•	undersetting;

•	fencing repairs and/or reconstruction;

•	paint removal;

•	salt damp treatment;

•	re-roofing and guttering for roofs and verandahs;

•	chimney repairs.

	Non-routine conservation works are those that involve construction techniques that vary considerably across heritage buildings, are more complex in nature and/or are unique to a particular building.  They will usually require customised construction documentation in order to enable tendering and supervision of works.  Examples include:

•	verandah repairs and/or reconstruction;

•	reinstatement of facades;

•	removal of render;

•	joinery repairs and/or reconstruction.

In addition to the costs of the works themselves, the following associated costs are eligible for inclusion in the total project value for the purposes of calculating funding allocations:

•	an allowance for any inspection reports prepared by qualified heritage architects and required by Council staff (see 4.3 below);

•	an allowance for any fees payable in relation to the project under the Development Act 1993.

	Works that will not be funded as conservation works include:

•	normal ongoing maintenance tasks that are not dependent on the heritage status of the building, including:
-	repainting
-	termite treatment
-	treatment and remediation of internal walls 
-	landscaping and paving (including installation of root barriers) 

•	additions or enhancements that are not directly related to heritage values, including:
-	construction of additions and outbuildings
-	re-wiring
-	re-plumbing
-	installation of security devices
-	installation of disabled access provisions
-	installation of new vertical transportation devices

3.3	Special Projects

	This category of funding seeks to provide customised assistance packages to owners of buildings that pose particularly large, complex or significant conservation challenges.

Generally, a special project will have one or more of the following characteristics:

•	buildings with multiple heritage elements of high conservation value;

•	visually prominent, with strong contribution to streetscape character;

•	multiple and/or complex ownership arrangements;

•	a history of underutilisation emphasising the importance of viable re-use;

•	requirement for continuity of funding support over more than one year;

•	estimated value of documentation and conservation works exceeding $50,000.

	The following activities are eligible for funding under this category:

•	documentation (as per 3.1 above);

•	conservation works (as per 3.2 above); and

•	conservation-related activities (see below).

	Conservation-related activities are plans, analyses and/or works that help to prolong the life of heritage buildings by assisting them to accommodate viable economic uses into the future.  Examples include:

•	preparing analyses or plans to guide a number of building owners in making management decisions about groups of heritage buildings;

•	installing fire protection systems; 

•	providing vertical transportation to upper floors of buildings;

•	installing disabled access provisions; and

•	other works that materially contribute to the future use and viability of the Place.

	Projects in this category may be allocated funding over more than one year, up to a maximum of three years.

	In addition to direct funding support, consideration will also be given to providing projects in this category with subsidised loans.  Any funding provided in the form of a subsidised loan will be in addition to the funding limits set out in 2.5 above and will be at no net cost to Council.  Subsidised loans will only be approved at the discretion of Council. 

	Associated fees (as outlined in 3.3 above) are eligible for inclusion in the total project value for the purposes of calculating funding allocations.

	3.4	Emergency Works

This category of funding supports building owners in undertaking stabilisation works that are required urgently in order to prevent structural failure of part or all of a heritage place, or to protect the public from hazards generated by heritage properties.  

The purpose of funding is to ensure short-term safety and stabilisation only – subsequent remediation or repair can then be considered for funding under other categories (if eligible).   

Examples of works eligible for funding in this category include:

•	works necessary to avoid threatened collapse of heritage fabric;

•	temporary covering of leaking roofs or walls to prevent ingress of water;

•	installation of scaffolding or safety screening to prevent masonry falling onto footpaths or roads; and 

•	making heritage fabric safe and stable following fire, flood or other adverse events.

	Associated fees (as outlined in 3.3 above) are eligible for inclusion in the total project value for the purposes of calculating funding allocations.

4.	PROCESS

The process outlined in sections 4.1 to 4.5 below applies to each of the categories of documentation, conservation works and special projects.

The process for the category of emergency works is different by virtue of the urgent and unprogrammable requirements of works in this category, and is set out in section 4.7 below.

4.1	Call and Preliminary Discussions

Subject to availability of funds, there will be two calls for applications per annum.

At each call, the funding available for allocation will generally consist of:

•	half of any annual funding allocated by Council;

•	any  funding that becomes available for reallocation as a result of failure to comply with the conditions of funding (including a failure to complete the funded works within the specified time period – see 4.4 below); and

•	funding held in reserve for emergency works that has not been allocated for that purpose.

Owners of heritage buildings must hold preliminary discussions with Council heritage staff prior to lodging an application.  The purpose of this discussion is to ensure there is clarity about the eligibility of the project and the documentation requirements, and to enable staff to assist owners in compiling an application.  Preliminary discussions can occur at any stage and are not contingent upon a call for applications.

4.2	Applications

Applications can only be submitted following preliminary discussions with Council heritage staff.

Applications in relation to State Heritage Places can only be submitted when financial assistance has been sought from – and declined by – the State Government.

Applications must be on the prescribed form and must be endorsed by all owners of the building.  Applicants must acknowledge that the application and all supporting documentation may be made available for public viewing.

Applications for conservation works must be accompanied by plans and drawings that clearly depict the proposed works:

•	for routine conservation works: a site plan, building plan and building elevations showing the nature and scope of the works, together with detail of construction techniques to be employed consisting of standard specifications and technical notes made available by Council on its website

•	for non-routine conservation works: a site plan, building plan and building elevations showing the nature and scope of the works, together construction documentation prepared by a suitably qualified and/or experienced heritage expert (construction documentation previously funded under the documentation category of the Scheme will satisfy this requirement).

In addition, applications must be accompanied by at least two written quotes.  While the lower of the two quotes will be used for the purpose of calculating the amount of funding to be allocated, the owner is not bound to commission any particular tender.

4.3	Assessment of Applications

Applications will then be assessed and prioritised by Council staff or their agents.

Where an application is incomplete or inaccurate, the applicant will be contacted and asked to rectify the deficiencies in the application within two (2) weeks.  Where rectification is not achieved within this timeframe, the application will be deemed ineligible for funding.

Applications that do not meet the eligibility criteria set out in sections 2.4, 2.5 and 3.1-3.3 above will not be considered for funding.

Applications will be ranked according to the criteria set out in section 2.3 above as a basis for making recommendations for allocating funding.

The assessment process will also determine those situations in which non-routine conservation works or special projects may require inspection (either during construction or following completion) by a suitably qualified and/or experienced heritage expert to confirm that the works are undertaken in accordance with the plans and specifications.  This will be based on the complexity of the works involved and their impact on heritage fabric.

	The applicant is required to obtain any requisite approvals before works can commence.  For example, most construction projects will require a development authorisation under the Development Act 1993, and some construction projects may require agreement from other affected parties (eg lessees, lessors, owners, encumbrances).  It is recommended that the applicant commence the process of seeking these approvals at the assessment stage.  Council heritage staff is able to assist and advise on this process.

4.4	Allocation of Funding

Council’s Business and Operations Committee will be provided with recommendations on allocations of project funding. The Committee will allocate funds at its absolute discretion.

Unsuccessful applicants must reapply at the next funding round - unsuccessful applications will not be “queued”.

Once approved by the Committee, funds will be allocated to the project and will be set aside for a period not exceeding 12 months (except where funded under the special projects category), after which funding will automatically expire.

Any funding allocations that expire will be reallocated at the next available funding round.

The amount of funding allocated to a particular project will not be increased.  Any applicants wishing to apply for an increased allocation must surrender their initial allocation and apply for the varied amount in the next funding round.

4.5	Implementation

Following allocation, the owner (or their agent) can proceed to secure relevant approvals (including under the Development Act 1993) and commission the project.

In relation to construction projects, a temporary sign acknowledging Council’s contribution under the Scheme must be affixed to a part of the premises that is visible from the street for the duration of construction.

The project must be substantially completed within 12 months (except where funded under the special projects category), otherwise funding will be forfeited.

Where inspection during construction is a condition of funding, inspection reports must be provided to Council staff in accordance with the funding agreement.  Failure to provide inspection reports as required will result in forfeiture of funding allocation.

4.6	Claim, Verification and Payment 

Upon completion of the works, the owner must notify Council staff and claim payment using the prescribed form and attaching evidence of paid accounts.

Where a post-completion inspection report has been required, this report must be provided with the completion notice/claim payment.

Where no post-completion inspection report has been required, Council staff will inspect or review the project for the purposes of ensuring that the work has been completed according to the original application.

When satisfied that the work has been satisfactorily completed Council staff will arrange payment of the allocated amount.

4.7	Emergency Works

	The process for allocation and payment of funding towards emergency work is:

•	hazard identified (either by owner, Council staff or third party);

•	scope of works, costs and Scheme funding allocation identified and agreed in discussion between owner and Council staff (including obtaining any specialised technical advice that may be required) and confirmed in writing;

•	owner commissions works in accordance with written agreement;

•	Council staff inspect and confirm adequacy; and

•	Council staff arrange payment of funding allocation upon presentation by owner of paid accounts.

	Given the need for urgent response, decisions on allocation of funds for emergency works will be taken by staff under delegation from Council.

	Full details of funds allocated by staff for emergency works will be reported to Council’s Business and Operational Committee twice a year, at the time of each funding round.

5.	ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Development Policy team has overall responsibility for implementation of these Operating Guidelines.

The Development Assessment team is responsible for dealing with applications for development authorisation under the Development Act 1993.

6.	MONITORING AND REVIEW
6.1	Indicators of Effectiveness

	The following indicators will be reported to Council’s Business and Operations Committee twice yearly at the time the Committee is asked to determine funding allocations:

•	number and average value of funding allocations made;

•	value of HIS allocations as a proportion of total project value;

•	distribution of allocations across the City;

•	number of applications ineligible for funding;

•	number of allocations forfeited due to failure to complete within specified time or failure to provide inspection reports; and

•	number of completed projects.

6.2	Procedures/Timelines for Review

The Scheme will be reviewed every two years in consultation with Council.