Create Value Tree for following Case study

CASE STUDY: THE COUNCIL SWIMMING POOL ISCINE MOTOR The public swimming pool in Metroville was very well known. Originally a beautiful art-deco building from the 1930s, it was a local landmark and was well used and loved by the local residents. Local schools also used it for school swimming events, packing the poolside grandstand with school children during races and carnivals. Over the years the pool had been progressively modernised, with a smaller indoor pool complex added on the side and some other minor changes. The pool was owned by the municipal council of Metroville. Council's Engineering & Facilities (E&F) Manager had responsibility for all of Council's buildings and public facilities, including the pool. The department's 70 people, including 5 engineers, had budgetary responsibility for the operations, maintenance and long-term planning of the buildings and facilities. As a result, the E&F manager, although quite new in the job, was one of the most important people in the council's administration, reporting directly to the elected councillors and the mayor The council had aspirations to completely replace the pool with a brand new pool complex, but they didn't have the budget for this. It would take them 1-2 years of lobbying for state funding, or perhaps even increasing local taxes, before they could afford to build a new complex But now the council of Metroville faced a dilemma. The main swimming pool was becoming more and more expensive to maintain due to its age. Tiles were coming loose, the concrete around the pool was deteriorating, and the pool was starting to slowly leak into the groundwater below it. The councillors wondered whether it would be better to do minor repairs in the hope of keeping the pool going for another year or so, or to briefly close the pool to do some more major work, or to completely rebuild the entire complex The mayor delegated the E&F manager to propose what council should do. The E&F manager first asked for a structural report. The findings were not positive. In addition to the known problems, the large concrete grandstand at one side of the pool, also from the 1930s, was found to have major structural deterioration and would very soon be unsafe. The E&F manager called a meeting of her engineering team to discuss the news. Using data from the inspections and probability modelling to inform their decisions, the engineering team decided that it is was no longer safe for large numbers of people to use the grandstand. Because the grandstand was integrated in the concrete of the pool, and was right next to the pool, they decided the prudent approach would be to close the pool completely. However when the E&F manager reported this recommendation to the mayor, the mayor was not happy: "That's a very narrow engineering view and I think you need to broaden your outlook" the mayor said. "You can't even tell me how long the pool will be closed for. Thousands of people swim at that pool, and most of them are voters. You need to sort this out." Somehow, the initial E&F recommendation found its way into the local press. The public outcry was immediate and loud. Some of the social media comments included: "If this pool can't be used, why don't we have a new one yet?" "Can't you people plan ahead? Why didn't you start the new pool earlier?" "You don't have to close the whole pool. This is an over-reaction." "Another case of over-cautious engineers with no clue about the real world!" "Why can't you council idiots run things properly so they don't fall apart?" I'm not paying for a new pool. Just look after what we've got." "Our pool is a heritage item. Don't you dare replace it with something modern." The councillors were concerned. The mayor called the E&F manager into the mayor's office for an emergency discussion: "Next week we have a council meeting. I'm going to ask your team to tell the meeting your recommendation. You'll have five minutes. The general public will be at the meeting, and probably some journalists too. Don't let us down