Facility Condition Assessments

Transcription

1 Facility Condition Assessments City Council Work Session: July 1, 2014 Department of Public Works

2 Introduction Andrew Clough, Director, Public Works Phil Harrington, Deputy Director, Public Works Lorin Jensen, Supervising Civil Engineer, Public Works Gordon Rogers, Kitchell 2

3 Objectives Determine the physical condition of each facility inspected Recommend corrective actions Provide a budget-level cost estimate for corrective actions Review previous conditions assessments (1997 & 2000) maintenance records Develop budget-level cost estimates for all City Facilities Identify Maintenance Management Options for City Facilities 3

4 Facility Capital Improvement Program 2 Main Parts: Parks Recreation & Waterfront Facilities 39 Buildings Public Works Facilities 56 Buildings The 95 Buildings maintained by Parks Recreation & Waterfront Program and Public Works do not include Library Facilities and buildings leased to other entities 4

5 2013 Assessment Process Parks Recreation & Waterfront Facilities 5 Frances Albrier Community Center MLK Jr. Youth Services Center Live Oak Community Center Marina Corporation Yard Cragmont Restroom Cedar Rose Park Building Berkeley Yacht Club Berkeley Art Center

6 2013 Assessment Process (cont.) Public Works Facilities Center Street Building Health Clinic University Avenue North Berkeley Senior Center South Berkeley Senior Center West Berkeley Senior Center Corporation Yard Equipment Maintenance Building Transfer Station Tipping Building Transfer Station Vehicle Maintenance

7 Key Building Systems Evaluated Life Safety Accessibility Exteriors Roofing Interiors Structural Mechanical Plumbing Fire Protective Systems Electrical 7

8 Facility Condition Grades A Good Facility will Look Clean and Functional B Fair Facility will Begin to Show Signs of Wear C Average Facility will Look Worn with Apparent/Increasing Deterioration D Critical Facility will Look Worn with Obvious Deterioration F Unusable Facility is Unusable 8

9 Kitchell Analysis Procedure: Assessment Team: Architect, Mechanical Engineer, Electrical Engineer Checklists Based on Experience and Best Practices Costs Based on Recent Local Bid-Day Results 9

10 Analysis Definitions: Deficiency: An observed condition that requires immediate maintenance/repair. Priority: A system of grading the criticality of observed deficiencies. 10

11 11 Francis Albrier Center

12 12 Francis Albrier Center

13 13 Francis Albrier Center

14 14 James Kenney Recreation Center

15 15 James Kenney Recreation Center

16 16 James Kenney Recreation Center

17 17 North Berkeley Senior Center

18 18 North Berkeley Senior Center

19 19 North Berkeley Senior Center

20 20 North Berkeley Senior Center

21 21 North Berkeley Senior Center

22 Maintenance Study LONG-TERM IMPACT OF STATUS QUO: Higher Capital Costs Higher Maintenance Costs Increased Consumption of Natural Resources Poor Example of Sustainability Contrary to the City s Climate Action Plan 22

23 Maintenance Study IMPACT OF CHANGING COURSE: Sustainability Less capital replacement; more regular maintenance Less use of non-renewables Lower carbon footprint Better Stewardship of City Assets Assets will last longer Lower costs to the City over time Pleasant & Functional Building Spaces 23

24 Maintenance Management Options All maintenance, repair and renovation/improvement activities are classified into 5 categories: 1. Scheduled Maintenance 2. Minor Repair 3. Recurring Maintenance 4. Capital Repair 5. Renovation/Improvement Note: Deferred Maintenance Repair Backlog 24

25 Facility Programs Funding Needs Maintenance Management (Backlog Repairs) Unfunded Capital Renovation or Improvements (Excluding Seismic Retrofits) Seismic Retrofits (Rough Estimates Only - needs additional evaluation to determine construction costs) FY 2013 $DOLLARS PRW PW Total $ 4,920,651 $ 16,394,078 $ 21,314,729 $ 9,900,356 Included in Maintenance Management & Seismic Retrofits $9,900,356 $ 15,000,000 $ 103,000,000 $118,000,000 Program Total $ 29,821,007 $ 119,394,078 $ 149,215,085 25

26 Comparison of Three Maintenance Management Options Parks, Recreation & Waterfront Facilities Options FY 1 FY 2 FY 3 FY 4 FY 5 # of Yrs. To Address Repair Annual Maintenance Budget Existing $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 5 $ D-F 1 $ 750,000 (+$750K) $ 750,000 (+$750K) $ 750,000 (+$750K) $ 750,000 (+$750K) $ 750,000 (+$750K) Target Facility Criteria Level 7 $ 750,000 B-C 2 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 400, $ 400,000 C-D 3 $ 984,130 (backlog) $ 1,013,654 (backlog) $ 1,044,064 (backlog) $ 1,075,385 (backlog) $ 1,107,647 (backlog) 5 $ 1,044,976 (Avg.) A-B 26

27 Comparison of Three Maintenance Management Options Public Works Facilities Options FY 1 FY 2 FY 3 FY 4 FY 5 # of Yrs. To Address Repair Annual Maintenance Budget Existing $ 900,000 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 $ 900, $ 900,000 C-D Target Facility Criteria Level 1 $2,000,000 (+$ 1.1M) $ 2,000,000 (+$1.1M) $ 2,000,000 (+$1.1M) $ 2,000,000 (+$1.1M) $ 2,000,000 (+$1.1M) 9 $ 2,000,000 B-C 2 $ 3,278,816 (backlog) $ 3,377,180 (backlog) $ 3,478,496 (backlog) $ 3,582,851 (backlog) $3,690,336 (backlog) 5 $ 3,481,535 (Avg.) A-B 27

28 Conclusion Suggested Maintenance Management Options $1.85M Additional Per Year Yield B-C Quality Facilities 28

29 29 Thank You for Your Time