1
2
Capital Program • Overview – Previous FCS data • Overview – Previous FCS data • Upcoming Facility Condition Survey • Capital Tools Refresher • DAHP support Steve Lewandowski October, 2018 Chief Architect
Previous Facility Condition Survey Overview • Building condition trend – How do they change over time? • System building condition summary – What is our goal? • Maintenance expenditures comparison – How do you compare to others? 4
Average Building Condition Trend Adequate = 275 64% 5
System Building Condition Summary Facility Condition 2013 2015 2017 State Board goal: Immediate Replacement 4.9% 2.8% 2.6% Needs Major Renovation 10.5% 12.9% 11.6% All buildings in Needs Improvement 21.1% 20.0% 22.3% adequate Adequate 33.5% 36.9% 33.8% condition or Superior 30.0% 27.4% 29.7% better by 2020. 63.5% 64.3% 63.5% Adequate or better What has affected the progress in reaching this goal? • Repair funding level has increased by 10% per biennium • Major project funding reduced over the last 3 biennia • Upward trend towards achieving this goal has become flat 6
Average Building Condition Trend Budget Requests tell a story: Trend: 64% flat 7
System Building Condition Summary Facility Condition 2013 2015 2017 State Board goal: Immediate Replacement 4.9% 2.8% 2.6% Needs Major Renovation 10.5% 12.9% 11.6% All buildings in Needs Improvement 21.1% 20.0% 22.3% adequate Adequate 33.5% 36.9% 33.8% condition or Superior 30.0% 27.4% 29.7% better by 2020. 63.5% 64.3% 63.5% Adequate or better Counteracting changes in condition: • A few buildings receive significant improvement every biennium • All other buildings slowly degrade • System has reached equilibrium under current funding level 8
System Building Condition Summary What does it cost to achieve the goal: • 1 out of 5 buildings need minor improvements ($230k average x 219 buildings x 2 systems = $100.6 Million) • 1 out of 10 buildings need major renovations ($30M average x 98 buildings = $2.94 Billion) • 1 out of 40 should be replaced ($35M average x 25 buildings = $875 Million) Total cost = $3.92 Billion Target duration to reach goal = 10 biennia Cost per biennium = $392 Million 9
System Building Condition Summary Biennial budget request required to reach goal: Maintain current conditions $300 Million Additional improvements to conditions $392 Million Total budget required (for 10 biennia) $692 Million Actual request: 2019-21 Budget request $600 Million 2021-23 Estimated budget request $850 Million (if 2019-21 is successful) 10
$0.00 $0.50 $1.00 $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 Bates Bellevue Bellingham 2013 Staff Big Bend Maintenance Expenditures Comparison Cascadia Centralia Clark Clover Park 2013 Contracted Columbia Basin Edmonds Everett Grays Harbor Green River Highline 2015 Staff Lake Washington Lower Columbia materials and outside contracts) Annual maintenance expenditures (staff, North Seattle Olympic 2015 Contracted Peninsula Pierce Fort Steilacoom Pierce Puyallup Renton Seattle Central Shoreline 2017 Staff Skagit Valley South Puget Sound South Seattle Spokane Spokane Falls 2017 Contracted Tacoma Walla Walla Wenatchee Valley Whatcom Yakima Valley 11
Upcoming Facility Condition Survey
Facility Condition Survey • Surveys occur Feb – Nov, 2019 (Scheduled in January) • Support documents provided with Outlook invite and email • Facility Condition Survey Tool is available • Results will be used to ask for roughly $48M in the 2021-23 budget for repairs (10% increase) • Average repair funding request = $1.4M per college 13
Process • The survey is completed roughly every two years at each college. • All owned buildings are evaluated and scored based on their condition. • Building and site deficiencies are evaluated and scored. • A report is generated for each college and published at the end of the calendar year. These reports are used to help the State Board build part of the capital budget proposal. • All college deficiencies are ranked by score. The highest ranking deficiencies are included in the next capital budget proposal. • The building condition scores will be used by colleges that request a major capital project (worth 15% of total points). • Funding is requested in the next biennium capital budget. • Funding becomes available 2 years after survey (on average). 14
Preparing for the survey • Review Pre-survey questions (your use only) • Review State Board guide to identify deficiencies (email) • Use the Facility Condition Survey tool to enter data http://www.sbctc.edu/colleges-staff/programs-services/capital-budget/facility-assessment.aspx • Evaluate and obtain supporting documentation for deficiencies that are not observable. Examples: underground utilities, electrical systems, obsolete safety equipment with verification that it is no longer supported, extent of moisture damage, etc 15
Site visit • Initial interview with facility director and business officer Update facility condition and planning data Discuss currently funded and previously identified minor works projects Review and update deficiency and maintenance management data provided by college • Survey building and site conditions Score buildings and review deficiencies • Exit interview Go over survey highlights Overview of building and site score changes Overview of deficiencies that will be included in the survey report 16
Other Focus Areas • Continued focus on spending Minor works funds in two years. Projects should start immediately after budget bill is signed. Coordinate with DES prior to the release of funds. • A new focus on infrastructure. Many campuses have utilities that are more than 50 years old. System failures could be extremely disruptive to programs. Campus-wide solutions could be considered as a major project request. 17
Infrastructure Survey • A system-wide infrastructure condition survey will be completed in addition to the facility condition survey. This survey will be independent of the FCS. This new survey will be used to build a database and identify projects that will reduce the risk of major system failures. • This is a new type of minor work project since much of the work may be preventative. Projects may be ranked based on system age and component materials rather than observable degradation. The State Board plans to hire a contract employee to complete the survey. The effort may take 8 to 10 months to complete. • Colleges will be asked to provide resources to help identify system composition and age. The data will be used to identify high priority infrastructure repair or replacement projects that will be included in the 2021-23 biennium request. 18
Infrastructure Survey • The system will request $34M for these infrastructure minor works projects. This is in addition to the request for site, roof and facility repairs. The site repair category will no longer include infrastructure. Equipment that is not located in close proximity to a building (roughly 5 feet) will be considered infrastructure during the facility and infrastructure condition surveys. • Infrastructure project examples: Utility loops, electrical feeder lines, transformers, cooling towers or remote mechanical equipment. 19
Capital Tools Refresher • Facility Condition Survey Tool • Allocation and Monitoring tables (SBCTC website) • Minor Works Project Change Tool • ADA standards Tool 20
Capital Tools Refresher • Facility Condition Survey Tool • Allocation and Monitoring tables (SBCTC website) • Minor Works Project Change Tool • ADA standards Tool 21
22 sbctc-fcs
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Capital Tools Refresher • Facility Condition Survey Tool • Allocation and Monitoring tables (SBCTC website) • Minor Works Project Change Tool • ADA standards Tool 34
Allocation and Monitoring SBCTC.EDU SEARCH “ALLOCATION AND MONITORING” 35
Allocation and Monitoring 36
Allocation and Monitoring 37
Allocation and Monitoring 38
Allocation and Monitoring 39
Capital Tools Refresher • Facility Condition Survey Tool • Allocation and Monitoring tables (SBCTC website) • Minor Works Project Change Tool • ADA standards Tool 40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Capital Tools Refresher • Facility Condition Survey Tool • Allocation and Monitoring tables (SBCTC website) • Minor Works Project Change Tool • ADA standards Tool 51
ADA Review Tool 52
ADA Review Tool 53
ADA Review Tool 54
ADA Review Tool 55
ADA Review Tool 56
ADA Review Tool 57
ADA Review Tool 58
ADA Review Tool 59
DAHP support (Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation) • What is the law? • Support provided by State Board • Requirement flow chart 60
Recommend
More recommend
