HomeMy WebLinkAboutINS-11-076 - Consolidated Maintenance Facility1
Staff Re ort
p
Krr~.~-~~,i~iER ~nfrastru~ture Servrces Department www.kitthenerta
REPORT T0: Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: November 28, 2011
SUBMITTED BY: Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO Infrastructure Services
Department (ext. 2646}
PREPARED BY: Cynthia Fletcher, Director of Facilities Management (ext.
2424)
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: November 21 , 2011
REPORT NO.: INS-11-076
SUBJECT: CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE FACILITY (CMF) (now
named Kitchener Operations Facility) FINAL PROJECT
REPORT- November 2011
RECOMMENDATION:
N/A. For information.
BACKGROUND:
The business case for a consolidated maintenance facility model was approved by Council in
November 2004, followed by an Environmental Assessment and site selection process which
was approved in November 2007. Application for grant funding under the Infrastructure
Stimulus Program provided additional funding of $9.33 million which allowed for additional
facility enhancements and energy management features. Approval to proceed with these
enhancements was approved by Council in June 2009. The overall final project budget
recommendation was endorsed by Council in September 2009. The key elements of the
Consolidated Maintenance Facility Site are detailed in AppendixA.
On June 20, 2011, Council received staff report INS-11-022 which provided a status update on
the consolidated maintenance facility (CMF) project to that point in time.
REPORT:
This report provides a status update on the CMF project from July 1, 2011 to November, 2011,
representing the final report for this project.
1. Project Status
Overall Status: The project is complete in terms of construction and all the related staff
(approximately 450) from other facilities, including Bramm, Chandler, Strasburg, Elmsdale and
City Hall have been relocated to the new facility.
LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) application: Official application
for LEED designation will be made in October. Based on the information collected to date, we
6-1
expect to achieve a Silver designation. The final outcome of the LEED application will not be
known for several months.
2. Budget
From a cost management viewpoint, project spending has been strictly controlled and within the
allocated budget. Council has approved project funding of $48.2 million for the base budget
plus $14 million for infrastructure funded enhancements and LEED components. A final project
financial report is attached Appendix B, with a projected surplus of $210,599. The cost side of
the project has now been finalized, including provision for a few items to be completed by the
end of 2011. The only significant outstanding component for this project budget is the revenue
to be generated by land sales. The sale of two properties: Elmsdale and a portion of Battler
remain outstanding and are expected to be sold within 6 to 12 months. Staff recommend that
the projected surplus be retained in this account until all land sales are finalized.
3. Efficiencies and Process Improvements
Efficiencies of the consolidated facility approach include:
Energy efficiencies through LEED construction standards:
o geothermal,
o high efficiency heating and lighting systems,
o water reclamation,
o cistern
o Solar roof will have a positive impact on net operating budget after project
payback period
Streamlined operations:
o indoor storage of first response vehicles to ensure prompt response to
emergencies and snow events;
o dedicated fuel, wash and inspect process to increase productivity of operators
and reduce downtime of vehicles;
o improved fleet utilization through single facility access
o improved fleet monitoring systems-fleet booking,
o On line real time vehicle service status information to assist with work planning
functions
o Fleet bays and amenities sized for modern equipment, reducing time required to
service vehicles (e.g. don't have to take off plow blades, etc.}
o Consolidated central administration functions to resulting in productivity
improvement, opportunity to cross train to ensure work coverage, which created
workload capacity to create dedicated staff for records management. Ensuring
quick and easy access to records is important for the City to be able to fulfill our
legislative requirements and to defend legal claims related to maintenance
issues.
o Implementation of shifts in Fleet and Stores to improve internal customer service
levels and improved operator productivity
o Salt dome -efficient loading of vehicles, maximize storage capacity to ensure
good pricing and goods available when needed; environmental approach to
handling
o Combined use of equipment and shops (e.g. carpentry shop, welding shop)
6-2
o Improvements to waste management and increased recycling generating more
revenue
Governance and Culture:
o single plant manager; all major asset stewards in one department, consolidated
in two locations (City Hall and KOF) -common purpose; co-ordinated direction
o Joint Operations Committee to resolve site operational concerns and streamline
operations
o Health and Safety Committee forthe entire facility rather than union group based
reduced overlap of inspections and common focus on risk mitigation
o New opportunities for on site training (computer, Human Resource, driver, etc)
reduces downtime to travel to other sites, such as City Hall
o Space allows for easier opportunity to share corporate/departmental and
divisional information with front line staff (e.g. corporate road shows,
departmental or divisional staff meetings, etc). reduces downtime for staff
travelling to other locations (e.g. City Hall and Aud)
o Divisions previously in more than one location, now consolidated, which
improves communication and co-ordination-applied to almost all work areas
(Operations - originally in 3 locations; Utilities originally in 2 locations; Stores -
originally in 4 locations; Fleet-originally in 2 locations- FM -originally in 2 core
locations}
o Focus on building a positive workplace culture, resulting in improved teamwork.
Initiatives include:
^ Social committee
^ Positive workplace workshops
^ Employee feedback -KOF survey
Future Planning:
o Energy efficiencies and environmental sustainable features
o Space planning for 30 year needs
o Extra land (7 acres) set aside to be evaluated in 5 years
o Facility located geographically closer to new areas of development (southwest
end) while still being easily accessible to core areas of the City (close to
expressway and future River Road extension)
o Continued evaluation and re-evaluation of processes now that staff have a frame
of reference as a result of moving to the KOF.
Efficiency Tracking Annual Savingsl
Cost Avoidance
Efficiencies realized and built into Budget: $162,000
3 positions eliminated in 2010 budget in anticipation of CMF (2 Operations
temps and 1 carpet layer in Facilities Management)
Interest savings on Green Municipal Fund Loan (2012 budget) $35,000
Sub-total $197,000
Efficiencies to be built into future budgets: $353,000
Energy savings -solar roof (applied to payback capital investment first)
Sub-Total $353,000
6-3
Cost Avoidance realized:
Consolidation administrative functions allowed for one full time equivalent $62,000
resource to be redeployed to Records Management function, which will
ensure information available to support City's position in legal claims, etc.
Consolidation of stores and tool crib functions allowed for 2 full time $132,000
equivalent resources to be redeployed -one to introduce shifts, reduce
overtime and as a result improve internal customer service and response
times and one redeployed to service increased legislative requirements in
Utilities division
Fleet -introduction of shifts to improve internal customer service allowed 1 $78,000
full time equivalent staff position to be redeployed to improve asset
management, service planning and co-ordination
Sub-Total $272,000
Future Cost Avoidance (estimated impact):
Improved field staff deployment through streamlining processes (e.g. $500,000 to $900,000
dedicated fuel, wash and inspect process, inside storage of first response
vehicles, etc.). The benefit of improved staff deployment and productivity
gains is starting to accrue but will continue to develop over the long term in
the form of cost avoidance (i.e. delay in timing of adding staff resources).
Savings estimate based on 15 to 20 minutes per day per employee
Energy savings -other (business case estimate used until actual experience $80,000
available over the next year or two)
Sub-Total $580,000 to $980,000
Total $1,402,000-1,802,000
Note: total compares favourably to total efficiency savings identified in original business case
totalled $1, 067, 000
There are other competing pressures for resources that have and will continue to more than
offset the productivity and efficiencies achieved. Two major examples are:
4. Operating and Maintenance Funding Gaps
Facility and Site Maintenance Costs: The budget allocation for the existinglformerfscilities is
not adequate to operate the KOF. The existinglformer facilities total 140,000 sq ft and 26.6
acres.
The KOF has a 315,000 sq ft main building and 45 acre site. Additionally, there is almost 7
acres of unallocated land at the rear of the property that will require maintenance.
Operating expenses cover: Snow removal, grass cutting, scheduled building maintenance
repairs, emergency repairs, inspections, custodial services, security services, IT services,
utilities (gas, water, electricity, storm water charges) taxes, insurance.
While the facility space has increased by 119%, it is estimated that the budget increase is only
66% (not taking into account any energy efficiencies that expected to accrue). This facility is
planned for up to 30 years, which means more operating costs are incurred now forthat growth
space. It should be noted that the business case for the CMF Project was based on a facility of
161,000 square feet. The increased facility operating costs will be phased in over the next two
to four budget cycles, as budget funding capacity allows.
6-4
Expense Type 2012 Current
Budget Required KOF
Budget Funding
Gap
Inspections, maintenance,
Custodial, supplies $518,719 $779,755 $261,036
Landscaping/Snow removal 70,000 110,000 40,000
Utilities (Gas, Water, Hydro) 280,265 560,531 280,266
Total $868,984 $1,450,286 $581,302
Impact of City Growth on Operational Resources: The business case for the CMF was
prepared in 2004. Since 2004, City growth has far exceeded additional budget allocations to
service that growth. The number of kilometres of roads has increased by approximately 14%
and the number of hectares of parks has increase by 82%. An estimate of the net impact of
these factors is outlined in the chart below:
Average budget impact to service growth 18%
Budget impact of legislative change 2%
Sub-Total 20%
Less: resources applied:
Increases to operating budgets (excluding inflation} 5%
Improved staff deployment (from previous chart) 3%
2012 proposed operating budget funding Adjustment 2%
Sub-Total 10%
Net Funding Gap 10%
Net Funding Gap -tax based $ $1,841,000
In addition to the above, there has been a 40% growth in the square footage of major city
facilities over the past 10 years.
The increased operating budget requirement to service growth will be phased in over the next
two to four budget cycles, as budget funding capacity allows.
Process improvement review work will continue in 2012 and beyond to identify further
opportunities for improvement and efficiency. This work will be led by the Manager of Service
Co-ordination and Improvement for the Infrastructure Services department. In addition, a
comprehensive Operations division review is planned to define and measure service levels and
benchmark performance.
5. Measuring Project Success
- success measures
o project budget, - on budget-final proceeds from land sales pending
o employee survey -the survey has been completed and staff are in the process of
analyzing results. These results will be brought forward to Council early to mid
6-5
2012 as in conjunction with the overall Corporate Employee Culture survey
results.
o process improvement recommendations implemented, - 286 recommendations
(76%} already implemented plus 51 recommendations (14%} pending
implementation
o efficiencies achieved -estimated efficiencies exceeded business case estimate
o cost avoidance -facility size is 119% larger than the combined space of the 4
previous facilities, whereas operating budget has only increased 66%
o environmental sustainability features (see LEED features)
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Theme: Efficient and Effective Government
Goal: To position the municipality as a leader in public sector policy, processes and systems
Strategic Direction: Ensure accountability and transparency in all public processes.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications related to this report. It should be noted, however, that
KPMG has completed an audit of the project and determined that the financial information
relating to the Green Municipal Fund loan and grant agreement, in all material respects are
presented fairly.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
A full and detailed communications strategy for the CMF project has been in place that targeted
all of the audiences and stakeholders who will be affected either directly or indirectly by the new
facility, including city staff, city council, the general public and the residents of nearby Hidden
Valley. The strategy also included tools and methods for reaching all of these audiences with
information as the project progresses, and especially at significant project milestones.
CONCLUSION:
The CMF project has been a major and high priority project for the organization, for over three
years. Construction is now complete. The relocation of staff is complete. The original project
budget commitment has been achieved. The project success measures have been achieved.
This report is submitted on behalf of the CMF Project Steering Committee comprised of
Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO, Infrastructure Services Department (project sponsor)
Cynthia Fletcher, Director of Facilities Management (project director)
Larry Gordon, Director of Supply Services
Wally Malcolm, Director of Utilities
Don Miller, Director of Fleet
Jim Witmer, Director of Operations
Grant Murphy, Director of Engineering
Hans Gross, Director of Asset Management
John McBride, Director of Transportation Planning
Jeannie Murphy, Manager of Corporate Contact Centre
~ ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO, Infrastructure Services Department ~
6-6
Elements of the Consolidated Maintenance Facility Site
131 Goodrich Drive, Kitchener
General Features
• 45 acres of land
• Approximately 315,000 SF of main building
Environmental Features
Appendix A
• Reuse of a cleaned-up brownfield property
• Reuse of an existing building refurbished to at least LEED Silver designation
• Solar rooftop plant generating 500 Kw (largest rooftop plant in Ontario}
• Underground water cisterns for roof water reuse
• Geothermal heating & cooling system
• Stormwater quality management
• Energy efficient lighting throughout
FntrannP~
• Two entrances off Goodrich Drive for staff, visitor and general delivery
• Main operations entrance off Wabanaki Drive for fleet vehicles, equipment and
bulk materials
Parking
• Parking for approximately 475 staff and visitor vehicles at the front of the building
• Additional fleet vehicle parking at the sides and rear of the building
• Limited indoor parking for first-response vehicles
Main BuildincL~minimum LEED Silver
The main building will house the following functions:
• Office supportforalloperations
• Corporate Contact Centre
• Central stores
• Parks desig n & development
• Facilities management
• Operations for water, gas, roads, sewers, and parks
• Fleet & vehicle maintenance; welding & body repair
• Carpentry shop
• Sign shop
• Paint booths
• Vehicle wash
• Facilities to support a projected 2040 occupancy of 615 persons
• Designated and hard surfaced snow pile storage areas for site snow only
6-7
Garden Centre
• Approximately 12,000 SF
• Includes a greenhouse, plant staging area and compost area
• Produces and processes many of the plants used within the City
Fuel Depot
• Three above-ground fuel storageldispensing tanks with spill containment features
Salt Storage
• Approximate 24,000 SF salt storage building with containment features
Screened Outdoor Storage
• Waste and recycling bins
• Equipment
• Canopy-covered storage
• Material storage bunkers
• Propane & flammable materials
• Containment area for temporarily stored contaminated materials
Vehicle wei h scale
Fi iti irP
• Potential fire training area
• Future development area
6-8