PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
Memorandum
TO: Infrastructure
Committee
MEETING DATE: 5
August 2020
TITLE: Whakarongo
Residential Subdivision 6-Monthly Update
Presented By: Bryce
Hosking, Manager - Property
APPROVED BY: Tom
Williams, Chief Infrastructure Officer
|
RECOMMENDATION(S)
TO Infrastructure Committee
1. That the
memorandum entitled ‘Whakarongo Residential Subdivision 6-Monthly
Update’ presented to the Infrastructure Committee on 5 August 2020, be
received for information.
|
1. ISSUE
1.1 This
report is providing the 6-Monthly update on the Whakarongo Residential
Subdivision project being undertaken by Council.
1.2 Please
Note:
· There is currently
a parallel discussion around Council potentially retaining some sections for
the construction Council-owned public rental housing within the subdivision.
· The first report
on this matter titled ‘Public Rental Housing within Council’s
Whakarongo Subdivision’ was presented to the Finance and Audit
Committee on 17 June 2020, with a follow-up report being presented to the
Finance and Audit Committee Meeting in August 2020.
· However, the
project continues to an proceed in developing the site to a serviced section
level with all sections being sold to the marketplace.
· If a resolution is
passed by Council to build housing within the development, this would be a
change in scope of the project and reflected in the next 6-monthly update.
· Until
a competitive tender process has been undertaken for the construction works,
the final costs are unable to be confirmed.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 Palmerston
North City Council owns an area of 9.63ha within the upper terrace of the
Whakarongo residential growth area off James Line.
2.2 The
land was acquired by Council for cemetery purposes but was no longer required.
As obliged under the public works process the land was offered back to the
previous owners to purchase, but no offer was received.
2.3 Given
no offer was received, the parcel of land was subsequently rezoned for
residential use.
2.4 The
Long-Term Plan anticipated that Council will develop this land and funding was
allocated beginning in the 2018/19 financial year through Programme 1485.
2.5 Once
developed the site will create 114 new residential sections. Sections will be
of a variety of sizes to appeal to a wide variety of purchasers by giving
options regarding design, build type and purchase price.
2.6 Council
has engaged Veros Property Services as the lead development consultant to
manage delivery the programme on its behalf. 4Sight Consulting and Land
Development Engineering (LDE) have been engaged for the overall design and
civil and geotechnical design respectively.
3. Development
Update from 1 july 2020
Development Layout
3.1 Below
is the proposed layout submitted with the resource consent approval:
Note, while this is the proposed layout of the site and is
being considered the final layout, it may be subject to some minor changes as
part of the consent process with PNCC and Horizons.
3.2 As
the detailed designs have been refined it is now confirmed that there will be
114 sections within the development, not 115.
3.3 Section
sizes range from 275m2 (a couple) through to 810m2, with
the average section size being 463m2.
Design
3.4 LDE
are progressing with detailed engineering designs as planned. These are on
track to be completed in mid-July.
3.5 4Sight
Consulting are preparing to commence detailed landscape design upon receipt of
LDE’s design information in July.
3.6 LDE
have submitted conceptual utilities designs to suppliers, i.e. electrical,
street lighting and telecommunications design and construct services, to
determine pricing for these services. These are over and above the civil
construction tender.
Regulatory
3.7 Veros
continue to work through the consenting process and field requests for
information and detail from both Horizons Regional Council (HRC) and Palmerston
North City Council’s (PNCC) respective planners.
3.8 HRC
are seeking more information in relation to the existing farm drain that
traverses the site and the potential for loss of habitat.
3.9 This
is despite the ecological report stating: “The ecological values of
the proposed development site are currently low as a result of the long-term
rural land use. Residential development of the site will therefore not result
in the loss of significant ecological features or values. Indeed, the
development offers an opportunity to increase the biodiversity values of the
site while creating an attractive amenity feature for future residents.”
3.10 To address
this, Veros are preparing a further response to address how ecological values
will be enhanced as a result of the development.
3.11 Council
are also yet to receive an updated date from HRC for the determination of
notification of consent.
3.12 There are
also some remaining concerns from planners regarding stormwater attenuation on
the site and this continues to be worked through.
3.13 For
clarity, as part of our stormwater requirements of the development, Council is
proposing to install a culvert from our stormwater dry pond area, under the
rail corridor, and into the oxbow in the below property on the other side of
the rail tracks. Whilst provision will be made for this in stage 1 of the
development, this will not actually be constructed until stage 2. KiwiRail require
a specific formal approval process for this undertaking over and above the
resource consent. There have been ongoing discussions with KiwiRail regarding
this, but formal approval is still required in due course.
Development Programme
3.14 The
development of the site will be split into two stages. The current consents
that have been submitted are for Stage 1 (circa 79 sections), with the balance
of sections to be delivered in Stage 2.
3.15 Stage 2 is
subject to the approval of the comprehensive discharge consent (CDC) for the
entire Whakarongo Growth Area from Horizons Regional Council and is anticipated
to closely follow, but remain distinct from, Stage 1.
3.16 Ideally,
the timing of the CDC ties in with the completion of Stage 1 construction works
to enable us to seamlessly roll from Stage 1 to 2 without further mobilisation
and establishment of a contractor. This is subject to the performance and
throughput of Stage 1 and approval of KiwiRail as indicated in Clause 3.13.
3.17 Below
is a summary of the Stage 1 Development Programme:
· June/July 2020
– consent
· June/July 2020
– detailed design
· July/ August 2020
– presales and procurement
· September 2020
– contract negotiations and mobilisation of contractors
· October 2020
– earthworks commencement
· February 2021
– civil works commencement
· August
2021 – titles issued.
Legal
3.18 Simpson
Grierson have been engaged as the project solicitor. They were briefed in
early July and are conducting reviews of existing documents and historic
property files. They will also be providing general advice on legal
matters in respect to delivering a development on behalf of local
government.
3.19 In
addition, Simpson Grierson will be the custodian of all sale and purchase,
transaction and contractual matters associated with the development.
Marketing for Sales
3.20 We have
recently engaged and briefed Black Sheep Design to come on board as specialist
marketing, brand and design consultants to assist with the sale of
sections.
3.21 Black
Sheep Design have started their research and are preparing to present initial ideas
to the project team later in July.
3.22 A
programme for marketing of the development is to be formed along with a
programme and strategy for the presale of sections.
3.23 Rangitāne
o Manawatu have been working with the project team through all areas of the
project and will have input and involvement in the marketing design process.
4. NEXT
STEPS
4.1 Begin
the marketing and presales phase of the project.
4.2 Begin
the procurement phase of the project.
5. Compliance
and administration
|
Does the Committee have
delegated authority to decide?
|
Yes
|
|
Are the decisions significant?
|
No
|
|
If they are significant do they
affect land or a body of water?
|
No
|
|
Can this decision only be made
through a 10 Year Plan?
|
No
|
|
Does this decision require consultation
through the Special Consultative procedure?
|
No
|
|
Is there funding in the current
Annual Plan for these actions?
|
Yes
|
|
Are the recommendations
inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?
|
No
|
|
|
|
The recommendations contribute
to Goal 1: An Innovative and Growing City
|
|
The recommendations contribute
to the outcomes of the City Development Strategy
|
|
The recommendations contribute
to the achievement of action/actions in the Housing and Future Development
Plan
The action is: Housing
development is initiated at Whakarongo
|
|
Contribution
to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural
well-being
|
Progressing a Council-led
housing development at Whakarongo (2018/19 onwards).
|
|
|
|
Attachments
NIL
PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL
Memorandum
TO: Infrastructure
Committee
MEETING DATE: 5
August 2020
TITLE: Facilities
Management Improvements Update
Presented By: Bryce
Hosking, Manager - Property and Sarah Hall, Facilities Management Team Leader
APPROVED BY: Tom
Williams, Chief Infrastructure Officer
|
RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Infrastructure Committee
1. That the
memorandum entitled ‘Facilities Management Improvements Update’
presented to the Infrastructure Committee on 5 August 2020, be received for
information.
|
1. ISSUE
1.1 The
facilities management (FM) provision within the Property Division is an
important function of Council. It ensures Council facilities are fit for
purpose, well maintained, and generally meet the needs of the people that use
them.
1.2 Within
Council the FM service provision is responsible for:
· Attending to
unplanned and unscheduled repairs and maintenance;
· Undertaking
planned and scheduled maintenance;
· Facility condition
grade assessment and monitoring;
· Maintenance and
works planning;
· Compliance
planning; and
· Delivery
of in-house operational functions – minor work, painting and cleaning.
1.3 The
Infrastructure Unit identified that the FM service provision was under resourced
and the team was not structured to best deliver the service
required.
1.4 As
a result, the Facilities Management Team within the Property Division has been
undertaking a significant review of how this service has been delivered in the
past and is in the process of transitioning to a facilities management service
delivery model that is better aligned with accepted industry practice.
1.5 This
report provides an update on the changes and improvements in this area.
2. background
– the need for change
Overview – A Predominantly Run-to-Failure Approach
to Maintenance
2.1 Historically
Council’s facility maintenance has predominately focused on
run-to-failure maintenance strategy.
2.2 In
this strategy, assets are deliberately allowed to operate until they are about
to fail at which point reactive maintenance or replacement of the asset is
undertaken.
2.3 Limited
planned preventive maintenance is performed within facilities other than to
critical assets which if failed may pose a risk to health and safety or affect
the facility’s ability to operate.
2.4 The
disadvantages of this strategy are:
· Unpredictable
– Because most asset failures are unpredictable, it is difficult to
anticipate when manpower and parts will be needed for repairs.
· Inconsistent
– The intermittent nature of failures means efficient planning of staff
and resources can be difficult.
· Costly
– All costs associated with this strategy need to be considered when it
is implemented.
2.5 For
clarity, this maintenance approach was not in the absence of planning. A lot of
maintenance is planned, it is just planned to respond to the anticipated
failure of assets. However, it would be fair to surmise that a significant
amount of the reactive maintenance was unplanned for.
2.6 This
is a common maintenance strategy when there is a lack of condition data driven
decision making and an operating environment of insufficient or very
constrained budgets.
Annual Maintenance Spend
2.7 The
annual total facilities maintenance budget is approx. $3,600,000.
2.8 Whilst
this is split over all of Council’s buildings and facilities, the top 5
maintenance spend areas are consistently:
1.
Social Housing - $950,000
2.
CAB - $540,000
3.
Cultural Facilities - $280,000
4.
Public Toilets - $235,000
5. Community Centres -
$160,000
2.9 Note:
figures above have been rounded for simplicity of reading and to provide an
indicative split. Actual figures may vary from year to year.
2.10 To provide
some context to paragraphs 2.1 – 2.6 the reactive vs preventative
maintenance splits for the 2018/19 financial year, and 2019/20 are presented
below:
2.11 The
movement in the reactive vs. preventative maintenance split between the two
years reflects a transition to the enhanced FM approach discussed in Section 3
of this report. Ideally a mature FM model would see the percentage splits
reversed.
KPMG Report
2.12 In
May 2019 KPMG were commissioned to provide an independent review of
Council’s facilities management operations and activities.
2.13 The KPMG
report focused on Council’s current operating environment as well as
providing recommendations for aligning this to the commercial industry
operating environment standards.
2.14 There were
several options that could achieve this including fully outsourcing the service
to an external provider. It was agreed by all parties however moving to a
single service external operating model would create distance between the
in-house FM team and the users of the facilities, and thus would not be the
best vehicle for delivering the overall outcomes Council is trying to achieve.
2.15 The report
found whilst the then current approach was addressing many of the basic
requirements of its facilities such as scheduled and unscheduled maintenance,
the Property Division’s overall FM approach was limited and was not
deemed best practice.
2.16 Broadly
the KPMG report recommended that changes be made to:
· Skillsets;
· Processes;
· System; and
· Contractors.
2.17 The first
of these issues was addressed through the Infrastructure Unit restructure in
May 2019.
2.18 It was
identified that the Property Division structure did not allow for the key
deliverable areas to be resourced and focused on, it was not aligned to best
practice, and had resulted in double ups, no clear line of sight to strategic
direction, and Council Officers practicing a wide variety of tasks rather than
focusing on key deliverables.
2.19 This
restructure saw the creation of dedicated FM and compliance functions within
the Property Division to enable a “narrow and deep” structure,
rather than the generalist “wide and shallow” role scopes.
WT Partnership (WTP) Engagement
2.20 WTP were
engaged to assist with the implementation of the recommendations.
2.21 After
understanding and context of the KMPG report, WTP adopted a relatively deep
dive into the internal processes within Council’s FM team.
2.22 From
that deep dive WTP identified several issues which created an environment which
was highly labour intensive as well as one which lacked meaningful data
collection. The main areas of deficiency could be summarised as:
· A relatively basic
maintenance management system which required significant input from staff to
perform basic functions such as getting FM jobs out to contractors. The system
also does not talk to the financial system or the K-Base job logging system
meaning that the FM team perform significant administration tasks duplicating
information from one program to another;
· Considerable
double up and multiple different areas of Council arranging maintenance rather
than through the FM provision;
· An inconsistent
approach to the maintenance of facilities, focusing too heavily on individual
requests, rather than basing maintenance on portfolio types;
· A reasonable lack
of meaningful contracts with FM related clauses like priority classifications
and requirements to document changes to assets;
· Limited asset
data, job data and planned preventative maintenance (mainly compliance) data
meaning limited ability to make accurate decisions both costs, compliance and
asset longevity;
· A significantly
“reactive” overall FM function mainly due to the FM team spending
large amount of time duplicating data etc.;
· A lack of job
oversight in terms of knowing which work orders were complete, in progress,
delayed, cancelled etc. (the FM function would have to phone/email the
contractor to find out progress); and
· A
Health and Safety system in this area which lacked some oversight in terms of
PNCC being the main PCBU and assumed most of the responsibility fell on the
sub-contractors.
2.23 As a
result, there is an increased risk of Council paying substantially more than
required for FM services through a combination of lack of contracts, comfort
levels of the incumbent suppliers and a lack of a transparent procurement
process for services.
3. Enhanced Facilities Management Approach
3.1 Given
the findings from the deep dive, WTP began to develop an enhanced approach to
FM which:
a) dealt
with the main efficiencies identified in Paragraph 2.11; and
b) gave effect to the
remaining 3 broad recommendations from the KPMG report.
Transformation to the Enhanced FM Model
3.2 The
transformation to the enhanced approach is aligned to the All of Government
Facilities Management Service Panel Maturity Model.
3.3 Appendix
1: ‘All of Government Facilities Management Service Panel Maturity
Model’ contains a larger version of this diagram.
3.4 Broadly
this sees the FM function reduce costs through increasing planned preventative
maintenance (PPM) to reduce reactive and unplanned maintenance, whilst at the
same time increasing the function’s maturity through better knowledge,
processes and systems.
3.5 It
is important to note, as the FM function continues to mature, Council will
continue to see benefits, however, the reality is that the implementation of
the enhanced approach may take a couple of planning cycles before the full
benefits are realised.
3.6 For
clarity, Council’s FM provision is currently sitting in the
‘Strategy Implementation’ phase.
3.7 Equally
so, it is important to note that as the FM function continues to mature and
understand assets better, this will highlight the gap between the current and
desired state of Council’s assets.
3.8 It
is expected that by doing this, several unknown maintenance issues will be
discovered that will need to be addressed. This may result in the need for
increased budgets in the short term to resolve these issues.
3.9 Ideally
these works will be addressed through planned operational and capital renewal
programmes in the 2021-31 LTP, however some issues may need to be attended to
in the current financial year.
Improvement Actions
3.10 To give
effect to the enhanced FM approach several actions were proposed by WTP.
3.11 These
actions were accepted by Council Officers and are in various stages of
completion. For alignment back to the KPMG report findings, these actions have
been placed under the recommendation headings that they are addressing:
Skillsets
· As per paragraphs
2.17 – 2.19 this was addressed through the Infrastructure Unit
restructure that took place in May 2019.
Processes
· Improve internal
FM processes through the creation of operating procedures which are included in
the sub-contract’s for trades.
o An example would be defined
workflows providing an understanding of how certain events take place under the
new contractual operating model.
System
· Undertake a
procurement exercise for an MMS (maintenance management system). Systems in
themselves do not drive improved performance, however there are considerable
barriers in the current system that will considerably limit the improvements
that can be made. Essentially the intent is to speed up the processes with
which the FM function currently administer FM.
· The system needs
to provide the following:
o Automated workflow and links to both
K-Base and the financial software package to significantly reduce internal
labour and opportunity costs;
o Automated planned property
maintenance scheduling which “pushes” jobs to contractors directly
based on frequency;
o Field/ phone app system to enable
the FM team to communicate with the relevant tradesperson in the field in real
time, rather than having to come back to the office to then methodically send
out all the jobs;
o A function within the phone app
which allows contractors to report on the status of jobs i.e. ‘in
progress’, ‘complete’ etc.;
o Better reporting functions to allow
better decision making for the FM team; and
o Better
asset reporting through integration with the Asset Management System (SPM) to
maintain up-to-date information to better understand the condition of the PNCC
assets.
Contractors
· Undertake
procurement of trade services on an individual trade level with an emphasis on
moving contractors onto a new more robust contractual framework which will
allow the FM to more easily manage sub-contractors.
· Reduce costs
through procurement which will provide cheaper rates for trade services and an
environment where costs are more known and easily managed by the FM team.
· Improve
the overall H&S environment for FM through both the adoption of new
internal H&S processes but also through contractual requirement placed on
the sub-contractors.
Improvement Actions Progress
3.12 The
improvement actions are currently underway and in various stages of completion.
Processes
3.13 Firstly,
the FM team identified how both planned and unplanned reactive maintenance had
been undertaken in the past. This included from when a call came in from a
user, tasking a contractor, through to work closeout.
3.14 With the
help of WTP, and based on best practice, the FM team has now identified and is
currently process-mapping several optimal and streamlined processes to better
address the programme of works. Essentially determining “what good looks
like”.
3.15 Many of
these processes are unable to come into full effect until a new system has been
implemented as this is causing considerable functionality limitations.
3.16 In the
meantime, the revised processes are being modified around the existing FM
system to deliver as many efficiencies as possible until a new system is in
place.
3.17 In
addition, there has been an effort to determine a clear responsibility line/
maintenance approach for works to be completed – Essentially what is
user’s responsibility, what is Council’s?
3.18 There is a
focus on consistency, so all parties have a clear understanding of their
maintenance responsibilities for planning and budgeting purposes.
3.19 It has
been determined that there are five broad maintenance approach categories based
on the use type of facility and the users. The responsibility line for
maintenance varies between these categories but is consistent for all
facilities within them.
3.20 The five
maintenance approach categories are:
1. Operational
Facilities – facilities Council operates out of.
o Essentially all maintenance within
these facilities is the responsibility of the FM function/ Council.
2. Investment
Properties – tenanted and has a commercial lease agreement
o Nearly all maintenance other than
compliance matters related to the building fabric is the responsibility of the
tenant.
3. Housing
4. Cultural
Facilities
5. Community Centres and
Agency Facilities
3.21 For
clarity, the maintenance responsibility line within the Housing, Cultural
Facilities, and Community Centre and Agency Facilities approaches sit at
different levels between other two approaches.
3.22 The
Housing and Community Centre and Agency Facilities approaches are still being
finalised in conjunction with the user groups.
System
3.23 Working
with WTP Council have competed a thorough analysis of its system. These are
detailed in paragraph 3.9 of this report.
3.24 Council
Officers met with other organisations including Citycare, Programmed Property
Services & Wellington City Council to understand what systems they use,
what their user requirements were, and the advantages and disadvantages of
their respective systems.
3.25 This was
then followed by a Request for Information from suppliers in the marketplace to
understand what options are available. These systems were then assessed against
Council’s requirements, and further investigation was then undertaken on
the top 3 systems.
3.26 This is
currently being evaluated as part of the Information Management Strategic
Planning Process.
3.27 It is
currently unbudgeted, and as such will be considered as part of the 2021-31 LTP
process.
Contractors
3.28 Significant
work has been undertaken to create new contract documentation for our
Contractors as well as an FM Operational Requirements document which will be
the foundation for contractual expectations.
3.29 The new
contract model will reflect a preferred supplier for each trade sector i.e.
lift maintenance, air-conditioning, fencing, BWOF, asbestos removal etc.
3.30 For some
of the bigger trade sectors such as electrical and plumbing; two suppliers may
be selected to ensure contractor availability.
3.31 The
contracts have been written to include several performance-based and
service-based KPIs to meet the enhanced requirements of the FM provision
including:
· Expectations
around response times;
· Agreed financial
rates where applicable;
· Health and safety
and risk analysis and reporting;
· Asset condition
data reporting; and
· Job
progress update expectations.
3.32 Council
Officers will be engaging the contractor marketplace in the first quarter of
the 2020/21 financial year either through open tender or direct sourcing in
line with Council’s procurement policy.
4. influencing asset management planning
4.1 Ultimately
the enhanced FM approach will have a direct influence on the content of AMPs,
decision making, and will help to ensure the programme of works planned is well
scoped and deliverable.
4.2 The
Property Division is working closely with the Asset Planning Division to:
· Develop a budgeted
programme of works informed by Asset Management Plans and the Infrastructure
Strategy; and
· Provide
asset information intelligence that better informs asset management planning
and developing priorities for the programme of works.
4.3 The
improved asset management planning will become evident through the updating of
the AMPs in the 2020/21 Year, resulting in a well scoped, deliverable, end of
life replacement and renewal programme.
4.4 Four
key pieces of work that are being undertaken to support the asset management
planning discussed in paragraph.6 are:
· Condition Grade
Assessments;
· Asset Component
Levels of Service;
· Portfolio-wide
Facility Hierarchy; and
· Asset
Component Hierarchy within these Facilities.
4.5 These
four elements are interlinked and form the starting point for the compilation
of the renewal and maintenance programmes.
Condition Grade Assessments
4.6 It
is essential the Property Division understands the current condition of
facilities and importantly the individual components within them. Asset
components are graded on a 1-5 scale whereby:
· Grade 1 –
Very good/ new condition
· Grade 2 –
Good condition
· Grade 3 –
Fair condition
· Grade 4 –
Poor condition
· Grade
5 – Very Poor condition/ failure
4.7 The
previous strategy for condition grade assessments relied on 3-yearly
portfolio-wide assessments and focused on replacement upon failure. If this
assessment process was delayed the condition data would become more and more
out of date.
4.8 The
revised strategy is for condition assessments to be integrated into the FM
service provision. For example, when a contractor is conducting service work in
facilities they are also reporting on the condition of the asset at the same
time.
4.9 In
addition to this the Property Division is currently undertaking an initial
portfolio-wide assessment to bring all the condition data up to date. Not only
will this help to inform the next LTP but will also form a strong basis to
begin working from under the superior approach of continued assessments.
Asset Component Levels of Service
4.10 Coupled
with understanding the condition of assets, there is also a need to determine
at what point during the individual asset’s life within the facility
needs to be replaced or renewed.
4.11 This is
informed by a balance of Council’s overall level of service expectations
for its facilities and the expectations of the users and tenants of the
facilities.
4.12 In the
past the approach has been maintain the level of service required at a facility
level, rather than at an asset component level. Essentially maintaining all
components within a facility at the same condition grade.
4.13 The
revised approach is to maintain facilities at a component level. This approach
reflects that some areas within a facility may need to be kept at a higher
standard than others. An example of this could be maintaining the carpet in a
reception or public-fronting area in a good condition (grade 2), whereas carpet
in a back office of a building may not be replaced until it is in a poor
condition (grade 4).
4.14 In
addition to this, some assets within a facility may be renewed or replaced at a
higher level than others depending on their criticality and performance. For
example, it may be appropriate to let carpet deteriorate to a poor condition
(grade 4), but windows and sills may always be renewed at a fair condition
(grade 3) to ensure water-tightness.
Portfolio-wide Facility Hierarchy
4.15 Given
Council does not have unlimited resources; works need to be prioritised to
ensure the most important works are completed first within budgets.
4.16 While all
of Council’s facilities are important, and each facility enables a
service to be delivered (either internally or externally), some facilities are
more critical than others, and need to be prioritised.
4.17 A key
piece of work towards this is determining a portfolio-wide facility hierarchy.
This allows for a clear prioritisation of facilities which will help inform
which works should be prioritised when determining a programme of works in the
10-year plan.
4.18 This
exercise considers factors such as:
· Utilisation and
demand for the facility;
· Average condition
of the facility and the assets within it;
· Criticality of the
facility; and
· Value
of the facility.
4.19 For
clarity, the hierarchy order can, and probably will, change in the future as
Council’s direction, services provided, and physical assets change. It is
a “snap-shot in time”, which will assist with informed decision
making.
4.20 In
addition to establishing a hierarchy at a facilities level, it is also
important that the various asset component types within a facility are also
provided with a hierarchy. This will add a further level of informed decision
making.
Asset Component Hierarchy within these Facilities
4.21 The level
at which assets are to be replaced or renewed, and what assets should be
prioritised over others is determined by the asset component hierarchy.
4.22 The
hierarchy of assets components within the Council’s facilities is:
Essential Works
1. Works
that affect water-tightness or cause damage if not resolved
· Roof work,
windows, cladding, toilets etc.
2. Essential
works to meet tenancy standards
· Bathrooms,
kitchens, lighting etc.
3. Compliance
related matters
· Fire detection and
protection, asbestos, electrical and wiring etc.
Non-Essential
Works
4. Functional
works
· Layout changes,
user requested functionality changes etc.
5. Cosmetic
and other works
· Painting,
carpet etc.
4.23 Note this
is not an exhaustive list of assets and works. It is simply intended to provide
an overview of this workstream.
4.24 This means
the essential works (items 1-3) in paragraph 4.22 will be prioritised over the
non-essential works.
Hierarchical Prioritisation
Example
4.25 An
example of how the hierarchical prioritisation can influence decision making:
· Works were
identified to be completed in the Crematorium, Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP) and Community Centre.
o Crematorium – Internal
painting
o WWTP – Bathroom refurbishment
o Community
Centre – Carpet replacement
If funds were only available
to do works in one of the facilities, staff had to choose where to focus
on…
· The Crematorium
and the WWTP were assessed as equal highest importance within Council’s
portfolio and given an equal priority ranking of 1 due to the critical services
provided within the facilities, whereas the Community Centre was less critical
and ranked a 2.
· This means the
works required in the Crematorium and the WWTP take priority over the works in
the Community Centre.
However, if funds were further
limited and had to choose between the WWTP and the Crematorium in this
situation…
· Based on the asset
component works hierarchy, the bathroom refurbishment in the WWTP would be
prioritised over the painting within the Crematorium.
· The
other works would be deferred until funds were available.
4.26 Appendix
2: ‘Hierarchical Prioritisation of Works Flowchart’ supports
this example.
5. NEXT
STEPS
5.1 Continued
improvement and development of the facilities management provision within
Council.
5.2 A
programme will be forwarded to the 2021-31 LTP for the purchase and on-going
support of the preferred option.
6. Compliance
and administration
|
Does
the Committee have delegated authority to decide?
|
Yes
|
|
Are
the decisions significant?
|
No
|
|
If
they are significant do, they affect land or a body of water?
|
No
|
|
Can
this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?
|
No
|
|
Does
this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative
procedure?
|
No
|
|
Is
there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?
|
No
|
|
Are
the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or
plans?
|
No
|
|
The
recommendations contribute to Goal 5: A Driven and Enabling Council
|
|
The
recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Driven and Enabling Council
Strategy
|
|
The
recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in Not
Applicable
The
action is: Not Applicable
|
|
Contribution
to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural
well-being
|
Improved
facilities management practices will ensure Council’s building are
maintained appropriately and will directly influence Council’s Asset
Management Planning.
|
|
|
|
Attachments
|
1.
|
AoG FM Service Panel Maturity Model ⇩ 
|
|
|
2.
|
Hierarchical Prioritisation of Works Flowchart ⇩
|
|
