DATE: June 16, 2014 REPORT NO. PW Chair and Members Committee of the Whole Operations and Administration

Transcription

1 PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION DATE: June 16, 2014 REPORT NO. PW TO: FROM: Chair and Members Committee of the Whole Operations and Administration Geoff Rae, MBA, P.Eng. General Manager, Public Works Commission 1.0 TYPE OF REPORT CONSENT ITEM [ ] ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION [ X ] 2.0 TOPIC Update on the Status of the Development of the Services Works Yard Facilities Rationalization Study 3.0 RECOMMENDATION THAT Report No. PW , Update on the Status of the Development of the Services Works Yard Facilities Rationalization Study, BE RECEIVED for information. 4.0 PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to provide City Council with an update on the status of the development of the Services Works Yard Facilities Rationalization Study. This report presents the process used, the current accommodation and operational issues, and examines potential alternatives to creating efficiencies within the City s works yard operations. The Services Works Yard Facilities Rationalization Study focuses on possible amalgamation of facilities that house administrative staff, as well as the consolidation of operational facilities, stores and yards to support an efficient and cost-effective delivery of services through fewer and more centralized points of contact. Along with the recently commissioned Corporate Facilities Accommodation Strategy, the Services Works Yard Facilities Rationalization Study is intended to formulate information required to complete a broader Real Estate Optimization Implementation Plan.

2 Date: June 16, 2014 Page BACKGROUND In 2013, City Council approved Capital Project CP1304 for the Operational Service Yards Facilities Rationalization Study (the study). The purpose of the study was to analyze the current Public Works and Community Services works yard locations and adjacencies, review the functionality and usage of the existing sites, and investigate staff accommodation and space need requirements for the City s operational works yards, laboratory services and associated facilities. The following 5 sites and services were part of this study: 10 Earl Avenue - Works Yard (Roads, Stormwater, Traffic Services) 1 Sherwood Drive and 12 Catharine Avenue - Parks and Recreation 400 Grand River Avenue Fleet and Transit Service and tenant Brantford Power 324 Grand River Avenue - Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection Yard 180 Greenwich Street Compliance Pollution Control Lab, Wastewater Laboratory, Facilities Management, Engineering Inspection Staff issued a Request for Proposal (RFP Consulting Services Required for the Completion of a Service Works Yard Facilities Master Plan) for this project. Nine (9) proposal submissions were received. Based on the evaluation of the pre-defined criteria and total points received, the project was awarded to AECOM Canada. AECOM s submission scored the lowest cost-per-point and the work plan presented addressed all facets of the project scope. The goal of this study was to develop an overall site utilization strategy for the best possible arrangement, functionality, accommodation and usage of the five sites. The study included a series of recommendations for the most efficient accommodation and site utilization to respond to the immediate needs of the City and establish the long-term accommodation needs to support growth into the future. The rationalization of the yards can provide an opportunity to reduce overhead and operational costs, lower capital and maintenance costs, increase efficiencies and possibly divest surplus properties. A companion study, the Corporate Facilities Accommodations Strategy (Report No. PW ), is intended to forecast the City s requirements for the short and long-term, and will act as a blueprint for the administrative and operational office space utilization, staffing space needs, and the ability to provide services in an effective and efficient manner, while maintaining or improving current service levels. As well, it will explore numerous issues, trends and options within the industry and establish priorities relating to the creation, consolidation or expansion of the City s services and the impact on future space needs. Both projects include the review of the 1 Sherwood Drive and 180 Greenwich Street properties, as these properties house both Corporate Administrative staff and Operational Service Yards, and therefore, both projects were mindful of the

3 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 3 process and discussions that were developed in its counterpart to ensure consistency. 6.0 CORPORATE POLICY CONTEXT The review of the Operational Services Yards Facilities supports the City s Strategic Plan s vision element of Managed Growth and Environmental Leadership and Excellent in Governance and Municipal Management. The following Strategic Actions are followed: Brantford Community Strategic Plan Goal # 4 - Excellence in Governance and Municipal Management - Brantford will be recognized as a fiscally responsible and well-managed city that provides efficient and effective government services. This initiative also fulfills the Strategic Financial Plan objective To focus on cost efficient and effective service and program delivery. 7.0 INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES Staff from Finance, Parks Design & Development, Parks Services, Parks & Recreation Administration, Engineering Services, Environmental Services, Facilities & Asset Management, Fleet & Transit Services and Operational Services was consulted in the development of the Services Works Yard Facilities Rationalization Study including various interviews with departmental managers and supervisors which operate from the properties involved. 8.0 ANALYSIS To complete this study, AECOM began by reviewing background information including, but not limited to the 2013 building condition assessments (BCA) completed by Insyght Engineering, all available site plans and building drawings. Site tours were conducted at each facility, as well as a high level inventory of existing buildings and site uses. Interviews with the works department managers were conducted to review current department amenities, size, location and adjacencies. Two master planning workshops with key operating staff were conducted to review existing site function, deficiencies and provide ideas for future needs and growth, as well as to develop concept options to address long-term growth needs of the works yards(s) with preliminary cost estimates and phasing plans. Overview of the Works Yards and Feedback from Departmental Interviews Through the evaluation of the existing Building Condition Assessment (BCA) reports, annual operating budgets and the departmental interviews conducted by

4 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 4 AECOM, the following conclusions have been made of the City s Services Works Yard Facilities. A summary of projected capital needs and operational costs at each facility is shown below in Table 1 10 Earl Avenue The works yard at Earl Avenue was constructed in 1965 and has seen significant interior renovations, the most recent completed in The site is located close to Highway 403 and houses Operational Services, Fleet Maintenance and Traffic. The primary components of the site include two separate main buildings, two salt storage domes, several materials storage areas, parking, the City s snow dump, and a fueling station. The administration building includes the maintenance garage, stockroom and the Operational Services staff offices. The other main building houses the fleet vehicle storage area and the Traffic Department offices and work areas. The Building Condition Assessments that the facility has some code compliance and building code issues and various aspects of the facility were noted to be in poor condition. The main issues identified by the departmental interviews for the 10 Earl Avenue site, are the lack of indoor and operational space within the maintenance garage building, the vehicle storage building, the Traffic offices, Traffic workshop, Traffic garage and indoor storage room. There is, however, adequate room on the overall Earl Avenue site for expanded facilities. 400 Grand River Avenue The Transit Building is located at 400 Grand River Avenue and was constructed in two phases between the mid-1960s and early 1970s. The site is located on an extensive parcel of City-owned land adjacent to trails, sports fields, the nearby Grand River and is close to the Water Treatment Plant located at 324 Grand River Avenue. There is one building on the site which includes a mix of administrative offices, stock room and shop space for the repair and storage of buses. The primary occupant is Brantford Transit, although Branford Power currently leases space within the building, as well as a portion of the exterior yard. The facility is in generally good condition. Through staff interviews, it was revealed that functionality of the transit facility is hampered by insufficient indoor vehicle storage room, insufficient space for vehicle maintenance, not enough yard space for vehicle circulation and a limited outdoor parking area for fleet vehicles. It was revealed that if the Transit group was able to make use of the additional indoor and outdoor spaces, which are currently leased by Brantford Power, this will provide Transit with sufficient space for the long term. 324 Grand River Avenue (old WTP) The original Water Treatment Plant (WTP) building located at 324 Grand River Avenue was constructed in Several building additions followed including

5 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 5 the separate storage building (circa 1890), the original residential house (circa early 1900s), the filter gallery (circa 1965), and the high lift building (circa 1975). Other expansion areas were constructed adjacent to the original WTP building in 1950 and Many sections of the old WTP became redundant and were abandoned after the new WTP was built nearby on the same property. Portions of the old WTP have been re-purposed to house the combined staff of the Water Distribution (WD) group and the Waste Water Collection (WWC) group. The BCA noted that several of the buildings in the old WTP are in generally poor condition with various code compliance and building code issues. Some of the buildings also have structural issues requiring significant work over the next 10 years. The departmental interviews identified that the main issues with the old WTP facility are the age, poor condition, structural issues, dysfunctional layout and lack of space for indoor vehicle storage, outdoor materials storage and outdoor parking. The current overall layout is disjointed, and the buildings and site don t suitably support the intended functions as the site use has changed from a water plant to an operational yard. 180 Greenwich Street The building located at 180 Greenwich Street is close to the downtown and currently houses the Facilities Department, Compliance, and the Engineering Services Construction Inspectors. The building was originally constructed as a Police Station in 1953, with an expansion in 1964, and a renovation in 1994 to convert it to its present use as mixed office space with a laboratory. The Building Condition Assessment noted that several aspects of the facility at 180 Greenwich Street are in poor condition and there are various code compliance issues. Structural issues including the settlement of the old firing range floor slab have also been identified. The main issues identified by the departmental interviews for the 180 Greenwich Street facility are that the site is not secure, the indoor vehicle storage garage is not large enough, there are no proper clean/dirty change rooms for the lab, and the lab is not accessible for deliveries. The four different floor levels and numerous stairs pose issues with accessibility. The building and lot are generally under-utilized with the office space and lab being twice as large as currently needed. The three departments at 180 Greenwich Street could easily be relocated into a more suitable facility. 1 Sherwood Drive The Sherwood Drive facility houses the Parks and Recreation Department. The site is located in a residential neighborhood and is hemmed in by adjacent sports fields, the Grand River and a parking lot. The Sherwood Drive site has a main building for offices with a small maintenance garage at the rear, an old residential house, five green houses, a carpentry shop/wood storage building, an office portable, storage sheds, and a small works yard.

6 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 6 The BCA noted that the facility is in generally poor condition with various code compliance issues and potential building violations. There is no room at the Sherwood Drive site for outdoor materials storage, and so the nearby 24 Catharine Avenue yard is used to house the outdoor materials storage piles used by Parks and Recreation. The main issues identified by the departmental interviews for the Sherwood Drive site are the severely congested yard area, insufficient size of the maintenance garage, inadequate and undersized field staff portable, poor layout of the office area, insufficient office storage space, and poor yard drainage. There is no available space on the Sherwood Drive site or on adjacent properties to expand the existing facilities without impacting established recreational areas. The Sherwood Drive site does not adequately support the functions of the Parks and Recreation Department. The following table (Table 1 Projected Services Works Yard Facility Expenses) depicts the forecasted capital and operating re-investment required to sustain the facilities. This table demonstrates that current and future Operating and Capital costs for 1 & 3 Sherwood and 180 Greenwich are high in relation to other facilities. This is mainly a by-product of the age, accessibility improvements and the general condition of these facilities. Table 1 Projected Services Works Yard Facility Expenses: Facility 0-2 yr Capital Needs * Overall Capital Needs (0-10 years) Capital Cost / ft²/ year Accessibility Annual Operating Costs ** Operating Cost /ft²/year 10 Earl Minor $218,000 $848,500 $1.79 Ave. Obstacles $175,000 $ Grand River Ave. TBD* TBD* TBD* Accessible $346,000 $ Grand Major $1,203,000 $2,095,500 $4.65 River Ave Obstacles Unknown*** Unknown*** 1 & 3 Major $542,850 $780,750 $10.41 Sherwood Obstacles $80,000 $ Minor Greenwich $107,900 $573,850 $2.06 Obstacles St. $123,700 $4.45 * Projected capital needs identified from the BCA s also include Accessibility improvements but does not include the cost of asbestos abatement or inflation. BCA has not been completed at 400 Grand River. ** Annual Operating costs generally include the repair and maintenance to the building and to equipment, energy costs, utility costs, snow removal, waste removal, janitorial services, security services as well as property taxes (where applicable) *** Annual Operating costs for the Water/Wastewater Treatment Plant site could not be determined or normalized due to the complexity of its operating budget and the various buildings and their ages.

7 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 7 Feedback from Master Planning Workshops Through the initial staff workshop, it was generally agreed that further development should be focused on one or both of the 10 Earl Avenue site and the 400 Grand River Avenue site. It was established that it will not be effective to put additional development resources into the remaining three older facilities including the Old Water Treatment Plant at 324 Grand River Avenue, the 180 Greenwich Street facility and the 1 Sherwood Drive/24 Catharine Avenue sites. At the second workshop, AECOM presented two concept plans for the development of the Earl Avenue and 400 Grand River Avenue works yards. In assessing the plans, staff advised that more space was required for indoor vehicle storage, vehicle maintenance, and unheated indoor equipment storage. City representatives also noted that it was preferred to locate the Parks and Recreation Department together with the Environmental Services Department at 400 Grand River Avenue, while housing the other departments at Earl Avenue including Transit, Operational Services, Traffic, Facilities and Construction Inspectors. It is also beneficial to locate the Environmental Services group at 400 Grand River Avenue as this allows them to remain close to the WTP at 324 Grand River Ave. It was discussed that relocating the Transit group from 400 Grand River Avenue could be beneficial in eliminating bus traffic through the adjacent residential area. The feedback from the workshops was then incorporated into the revised concept options. At the second workshop, it was also noted that for each of the options, the sites of the abandoned yards and buildings at 180 Greenwich Street, 324 Grand River Avenue, and 1 Sherwood Drive could be demolished, re-purposed, rented out, or sold at the option of the City. It was further identified that it will be useful to convert the Sherwood Drive property into additional public parking which is needed for the many visitors to the adjacent sports fields. It was also suggested that the remaining heritage portion of the administration building at Sherwood Drive could potentially be re-purposed or converted into a community hall, and that the Catharine Avenue yard could be re-developed. Further review for future uses of the surplus sites is outside the scope of this report. Recommendations Concept 1 One Consolidated Works Yard Concept 1 consists of having one combined works yard located at 10 Earl Avenue. All departments included in this study will be consolidated there. This will include Environmental Services, Parks and Recreation, Facilities, Construction Inspectors, Transit, Fleet, Operational Services, and some management staff from City Hall. The existing outdoor materials storage will remain at the Catharine Avenue yard. The existing greenhouses and the heritage portion of the administration building could remain at Sherwood Drive. However, there is an opportunity to relocate the Green Houses to other City sites

8 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 8 such as the landfill site adjacent to the co-generation facility to take advantage of potential heat recovery and energy savings. To make space for any new facilities at Earl Avenue the site layout will be revised, the existing City snow dump will be relocated off-site, and the currently unused front portion of the property which abuts Henry Street will be developed. The reorganized site will incorporate a new two-storey administration building with parking located towards the front of the site. The administration building will include the Compliance lab, offices and support spaces for the management and administrative staff of each of the works departments, some management staff from City Hall, the Facilities department and the Construction Inspectors. The site will also include a large new maintenance garage building with stockrooms, indoor storage areas, lead hand offices and field staff support spaces. There will also be improvements and a new indoor vehicle storage building with two wash bays, and an unheated indoor storage building. The site will also include exterior parking areas, outdoor materials storage piles, the fueling station and bulk water station. The redevelopment of Earl Avenue into a consolidated works yard will also have to account for the proposed future road extension of Charing Cross Street, as well as for the increased vehicle traffic on the surrounding roads. Traffic impact studies will be required to establish the impacts on surrounding roadways. The total area needed for the consolidation of all the buildings, parking, outdoor materials storage areas, and circulation spaces is approximately 780,000 square feet. The existing property at 10 Earl Avenue has a total site area of approximately 940,000 square feet incorporating the deductions of the applicable set-backs and the area of the Charing Cross Street road extension. This shows that approximately 83% of the site area at Earl Avenue will be required for the consolidation of all works yards at this one site. However, due to the irregular shape of the property, and the sloped portions of the site, full utilization of the site area will not likely be possible. It is, therefore, not advisable to attempt to fit all of the works yards onto the Earl Avenue site. Concept 2 Two Primary Works Yards Concept 2 consists of utilizing two primary works yards. The first will be located at 400 Grand River Avenue, and the other will be located at 10 Earl Avenue. To ensure this could happen, the 400 Grand River Avenue site will need to be vacated by Transit and Brantford Power, and will then be re-purposed and expanded to accommodate the Environmental Services group and the Parks and Recreation group, including the Compliance lab, and a three bay vehicle maintenance area. The outdoor materials storage areas from the Catharine Avenue yard, as well as the greenhouses from the Sherwood Drive site could be relocated to this site. The heritage portion of the existing administration building will remain at the Sherwood Drive site.

9 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 9 Similar to Concept 1, the Earl Avenue site will also be re-developed with a new administration building with offices and support spaces for the management and administrative staff of Operational Services and Transit, some management staff from City Hall, the Facilities department and the Construction Inspectors. The Earl Avenue site will also include a new maintenance garage building with stockrooms, indoor storage areas, lead hand offices and field staff support spaces. There will also be a new indoor vehicle storage building with two wash bays, and an unheated indoor storage building. The Earl Avenue site will also include exterior parking areas, outdoor materials storage piles, the fueling station and the water depot. However, in Concept 2, each of the new buildings at Earl Avenue will be smaller area, as compared to Concept 1. In Concept 2, there is more room for future expansion at both sites. A phased approach is proposed for the re-development of the works yards to minimize the impact to the operations of the facilities and to allow the flexibility to carry out certain phases when the expansion needs arise. Next Steps The consultant has concluded that there is a clear case for reducing and rationalizing the existing Works Yards (facilities, yards and stores), coupled with a need to invest resources to improve and make better use of the remaining facilities, to establish more efficient, effective and sustainable workplaces. The recently commissioned Services Works Yard Rationalization Study (PW ) and the Corporate Accommodation Strategy (PW ) have outlined a strategy to delivery this. A more strategic approach to planning and a coordinated Corporate-Wide approach to implementation have the potential to unlock opportunities identified in both studies to minimize costs and to deliver significant savings. Therefore, both reports need to be assessed collectively to establish the framework for a Real Estate Optimization Implementation Plan. Through the development of this Plan, the proposed options presented in both reports will be evaluated together and in greater depth, including completing further financial analysis, determine the constructability of potential site developments, refine conceptual designs and align key milestones. The Plan will look at existing studies and identify further studies required for a broadened analysis; look for opportunities for efficiencies through real estate optimization, including divesting properties and/or look at available land acquisitions, as well as develop a financial strategy to support the Plan. The Plan will review the regulatory requirements and approvals needed for the implementation of a Master Plan and future construction. The Master Plan will also identify construction phasing options, refine budgetary estimates and develop conceptual site layouts. This is especially useful in establishing the timing of capital projects and to help ensure services are maintained, with minimal impact to the public, and certainly enhanced to support an efficient and cost-effective delivery of services through fewer and more centralized points of contact.

10 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 10 The following is a sample timeline and budgetary estimate by phase based on Concept 2. This demonstrates how the Real Estate Optimization Implementation Plan could identify phasing options whereby investments can be phased to be more financially feasible to works can be aligned with the Accommodation Strategy. 9.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The preliminary cost estimate for the Concept 1 development of a consolidated works yard at Earl Avenue is approximately $77.0 million phased in over the next 10 years. The breakdown of this total includes an allowance of $4 million for demolition and site work, a value of $41.9 million for new industrial use buildings with a total area of approximately 209,900 square feet, and an amount of $16.7 million for the new office building with an area of approximately 47,650 square feet. The preliminary cost estimates include an overall contingency of 8%, as well as 15% for contractor s overhead and profit. The preliminary cost estimates do not

11 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 11 include taxes, consulting fees, development charges, permits, approvals, escalation costs, furnishings, relocation costs, soil testing or abnormal soil conditions, or the cost of any work at the surplus works yard sites. The overall total preliminary cost estimate for the Concept 2 development of primary works yards at 10 Earl Avenue and at 400 Grand River Avenue is approximately $65.2 million phased in over the next 10 years. The breakdown of this total includes an allowance of $3.5 million for demolition and site work at both sites, a value of $31.5 million for new industrial use buildings with a total area of approximately 157,500 square feet, an amount of $9.2 million for the new office building with an area of approximately 26,400 square feet, and a value of $8.73 million for the renovation of existing buildings which are to remain. Under both concepts, some of the proposed capital costs could be offset by the sale of buildings and properties being vacated, along with the reduced capital and operating re-investment associated with the buildings and properties being eliminated. The elimination of these three works yard facilities will gain the benefit of an estimated cost avoidance of ongoing repairs, facility maintenance and operations in the amount of $3.91 million dollars over the next ten years. Staff will be recommending through the 2015 capital budget process that funding in the amount of $100,000 be approved for the development of a Real Estate Optimization Implementation Plan CONCLUSION Growth within the City of Brantford is inevitable and will have a direct impact on where and how services within the City are delivered to the public. The Works Yard Rationalization Study provides an overall site utilization strategy for the best possible arrangement, functionality, accommodation and usage of the five sites, to ensure the long-term sustainability of the sites and ensure that services are delivered in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible. The development of a Real Estate Optimization Implementation Plan, will rationalize both the Service Works Yard Rationalization Study and the Corporate Facilities Accommodation Strategy. This will further allow the City to identify an optimized capital investment forecast based on priority and timing, and provide conceptual design and financial plans on how the City will address future accommodation needs and ultimately the implementation of the amalgamation of facilities that house administrative staff, as well as the consolidation of operational facilities, common properties or areas that can be assessed in conjunction with each other. Staff will be recommending through the 2015 Capital Budget process that funding in the amount of $100,000 be approved for the development of a Real Estate Optimization Implementation Plan.

12 Date: June 16, 2014 Page 12 Geoff Linschoten Geoff Rae, MBA, P.Eng., Director, Facilities & Asset Management General Manager, Public Works Commission. Lise Sordo, A.Sc.T Facilities Management Specialist. In adopting this report, is a by-law or agreement required? If so, it should be referenced in the recommendation section. By-law required [ ] yes [ x ] no Agreement(s) or other documents to be signed by Mayor and/or City Clerk [ ] yes [ x ] no Is the necessary by-law or agreement being sent concurrently to Council? [ ] yes [ x ] no