6 capital project prioritization - fefpa capital project prioritization.pdf · capital project...
TRANSCRIPT
Capital Project Prioritization
Ken Marsh, AICP
Director of Long Range Planning for Sarasota
County Schools
David Wildes
Director of Physical Plant, Facilities Planning and
Construction, TCC
SESSION GOALS
• For participants to
– Learn specific tools to prioritize large K-12 capital
projects
– Learn options for prioritizing college and
university small projects
– Share other best practices
TOPICS COVERED
• Major topic = Prioritization Schemes
• Brief Mention
– Capital Revenue Streams
– Necessary Data
– Decision-Making Scenarios
– Other Influences
– Capital Budget Elements
WHAT OTHER TOPICS SHOULD WE
COVER?
WHAT SPECIFICALLY WOULD YOU
LIKE TO LEARN FROM THIS
SESSION?
CAPITAL REVENUE STREAMS
• K-12
– Millage
– Capital Outlay & Debt
Service
– PECO
– Sales Tax
– Impact Fees
– Concurrency Mitigation
– Borrowing
• College/University
– PECO Rem/Ren
– PECO Sum of the Digits
– PECO – New Projects
– Capital Outlay & Debt
Service
– SBOE bonds (until 2011)
– Local Capital
Improvement Fees
– Foundation
– Major Donors
NECESSARY DATA, K-12
• Plant Survey, Five-Year Work Plan, Project
Prioritization List
• COFTE projections and Revenue Trends
• Facility Data
• Educational Initiatives
• Legislative Mandates
NECESSARY DATA, College/University
• Educational Plant Survey
• Facility Condition Matrix
• Capital Improvement Plan
• Educational Initiatives
– Use of portal for dean & director input
• Annual SREF safety inspection
• Energy initiatives
DECISION-MAKING SCENARIOS
• K-12
– Board-driven
– Superintendent-driven
– Staff-driven
• Florida College System
– Board of Trustees
– President and VP’s
– Deans and Executive
Directors
– College staff
Sarasota County Schools
• Capital Projects Team
– Membership
• Instructional Executive Directors & Chief Operating
Officer
• Department Heads for Facilities, Construction,
Telecom, Instructional Technology, Safety & Security
• Chief Building Official/Staff Architect, Planning Analyst,
Archibus Facilitator
• Led by Director of Long Range Planning
Sarasota County Schools
• Capital Projects Team
– Responsibilities
• Operations sub-group meets bi-monthly to coordinate
on-going projects to prevent “public works syndrome”
• Full CPT meets 3-4 times per year
– September to review completed and on-going projects
– January to prioritize Large Projects [new schools; classroom
wings; major infrastructure initiatives]
– February to prioritize Small Projects to be completed in the
summer
– As needed
OTHER INFLUENCES
• Financial Advisory Committees
• Historic Preservation
• Joint-Use / Co-location opportunities
• other
•
CAPITAL BUDGET ELEMENTS
• Sarasota
– Recurring
– Growth-related
– Competing Projects
– New Initiatives
• TCC
– College landscape is very
different:
• Uncertain funding for major
projects
• Growth at main campus has
stopped
– Focus has changed to
PECO R&R
• Safety corrections
• ADA survey by FCS
• New programs/initiatives
• Infrastructure and facilities
renewal
PRIORITIZATION SCHEMES
• Sarasota District
– Matrix
– Building-level FCI [Facility Condition
Index]
• Palm Beach District
– Pair-wise
Comparisons
• TCC
– Major projects:
– CIP
– General Rem/Ren
– Matrix based
on project
type
Significant Capacity Needs 1 Average Age of Relocatables 3 Cost of Maintenance Projects Pending 5 Past Five Yrs' Capital Investments 7
>50% in reloc. 5
>50% over 20
yrs 5 > $20 million 5 <$1.0 million 5
40-49 % 4 40-49 % 4 $10.00 - 19.99 million 4 $1.0 - 2.9 million 4
30-39% 3 30-39% 3 $5.00 -9.9 9million 3 $3.0 - 5.9 million 3
16-29% 2 16-29% 2 $1.00 - 4.99 million 2 $6.0 - 7.9 million 2
1-15% 1 1-15% 1 $0.50 - 0.99 million 1 $8.0 - 9.9 million 1
perm. space avail. 0
zero relocatabl
es 0 <$0.49 million 0 >10 million 0
Duration of Over-Capacity 2 Projected 5-Year Core Status 4 Utility Costs per Square Foot 6 Facility Condition Index 8
>10% in Relocatables > than 20 yrs 5 >160% 5 >$2.00 5 >30% 5
11 -19 yrs 4 140-159% 4 $1.75-1.99 4 24-29% 4
7-10 yrs 3 125-139% 3 $1.50-1.74 3 18-23% 3
3-6 yrs 2 111-124% 2 $1.25-1.49 2 12-17% 2
1-2 yrs 1 100-110% 1 $1.00-1.24 1 6-11% 1
< 10% in relocatables now 0 0 - .99 0 <$1.00 0 <6% 0
LEGEND WEIGHTING RATIONALE
#1 - computations are based on (relocatable student stations) ÷ (permanent student stations) In general, each issue is weighted according to the School Board's capital budget priorities:
#2 - the length of time the school has had greater than 10% of its student stations in relocatables
Weight of 5 = assigned to "safety and security" and to the cost of pending projects
#3 - the percentage of relocatables that are greater than 20 years oldWeight of 4 = updated Facility Index score
#4 - computed as (2017-18 projection) ÷ (permanent program capacity) Weight of 3 = future capacity-related issues
#5 - maintenance and capital improvements identified as beyond their expected useful life cycle or current deficiencies
Weight of 2 = utility costs and recent capital expenditures [an inverse relationship]
#6 - the cost of electricity for this site
Weight of 1 = three issues related to current capacity of the school or building#7 - all capital funds invested at each site during the past five years
#8 - the latest index score
#9 - based upon analysis by the Office of Safety and Security
Duration of Over-Capacity 2Projected 5-Year Core
Status 4
>10% in Relocatables > than 20 yrs 5 >160% 5
11 -19 yrs 4 140-159% 4
7-10 yrs 3 125-139% 3
3-6 yrs 2 111-124% 2
1-2 yrs 1 100-110% 1
< 10% in relocatables now 0 0 - .99 0
#2 - the length of time the school has had greater than 10% of its student stations in
relocatables
#4 - computed as (2017-18 projection) ÷ (permanent program capacity)
Cost of Maintenance Projects Pending 5
Past Five Yrs' Capital Investments 7
> $20 million 5 <$1.0 million 5
$10.00 - 19.99 m 4 $1.0 - 2.9 m 4
$5.00 - 9.99 m 3 $3.0 - 5.9 m 3
$1.00 - 4.99 m 2 $6.0 - 7.9 m 2
$0.50 - 0.99 m 1 $8.0 - 9.9 m 1
<$0.49 m 0 >10 million 0
#5 - maintenance and capital improvements identified as beyond their expected useful
life cycle or current deficiencies
#7 - all capital funds invested at each site during the past five years
SchoolDuration of Over-Capacity
Projected 5-Year Core
Status
Cost of Maint.
Projects Pending
Utility Costs
Past Five Years' Capital Invest
Facility Condition
Index
Security CPTED
Analysis
2013
Total
2012 Total
2012-2013 Capital Plan, etc.
weight 1 3 5 2 2 4 5
Bay Haven 3 3 20 8 8 8 25 75 73
Sarasota HS 0 0 25 2 4 8 25 64 83 classrooms, gym, media, food service, site, etc.
Pine View 3 9 20 2 8 4 10 56 82
Gocio 5 12 0 4 8 4 20 53 66
Venice MS 0 0 20 2 8 8 15 53 36
SCTI-South 0 12 0 0 n/a 20 20 52 29
Brentwood 0 0 20 2 8 8 10 48 26
Fruitville 5 6 0 8 8 4 10 41 46 ice storage funded 2011-13
Ashton 5 9 0 6 10 0 10 40 31
Garden 5 9 0 4 8 4 10 40 47
Englewood 0 3 10 4 8 8 5 38 29
Southside 0 9 0 2 8 4 15 38 5
Alta Vista 0 0 5 4 8 12 5 34 33
Cranberry 3 6 0 4 10 0 10 33 21
SCTI-Fire Academy 3 0 0 0 10 0 20 33 33
Taylor Ranch 4 0 0 4 8 0 15 31 38
E E Booker 0 0 0 2 8 4 15 29 35
Oak Park 0 0 0 6 8 0 15 29 35
Phillippi Shores 1 3 0 2 10 0 10 26 15
Toledo Blade 0 0 0 0 4 0 20 24 23
McIntosh 0 0 0 0 8 0 15 23 26
Sarasota MS 0 0 0 4 4 0 15 23 60 HVAC 2012-14
Tatum Ridge 0 3 0 2 8 0 10 23 14
SchoolDuration of Over-Capacity
Projected 5-Year Core
Status
Cost of Maint.
Projects Pending
Utility Costs
Past Five Years' Capital Invest
Facility Condition
Index
Security CPTED
Analysis
2013
Total
2012 Total
2012-2013 Capital Plan, etc.
Lakeview 5 6 0 4 2 0 5 22 38
Laurel Nokomis 0 0 0 2 4 0 15 21 54 HVAC renovation 2010-13
Booker MS 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 20 63 HVAC renovation 2012-2016
Brookside 0 0 0 2 8 0 10 20 22
North Port HS 0 0 0 4 6 0 10 20 22
Phoenix 0 3 0 4 10 0 0 17 14
Riverview HS 0 3 0 4 0 0 10 17 4
Tuttle 0 0 5 4 8 0 0 17 15
Gulf Gate 0 0 0 2 8 0 5 15 15
Heron Creek 0 0 0 2 8 0 5 15 19
TRIAD 0 0 0 0 10 0 5 15 21
Venice ES 0 3 0 2 10 0 0 15 18
Wilkinson 0 0 0 4 10 0 0 14 14
Lamarque 0 0 0 4 8 0 0 12 15
Suncoast Poly HS 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 5
Glenallen 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 7 12
Venice HS 0 3 0 4 0 0 0 7 31 rebuild 2010-15
Atwater 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0
SCTI-Main 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 15 rebuild 2007-14
Booker HS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 rebuild 2010-14
Woodland MS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Building-Level Analyses,
Using ASTM CSI Uniformat II Coding
Row Labels
BUILDING SYSTEM ASSESSMENT
ADA & SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
EQUIPMENT & FURNISHINGS
INTERIORS
SERVICES
SHELL
SUBSTRUCTURE
EQUIPMENT LEVEL ASSESSMENT:
EQUIPMENT & FURNISHINGS
ROOFING COVERING ASSESSMENT:
SHELL
SITE LEVEL ASSESSMENT:
SITEWORK
Grand Total
Facility Condition Index data
Campus Building USE Year
Gross Area
(Sq.Ft.)Deferred
Maintenance FCI CapitalDeferred + Renewal Replacement
BAY HAVEN SCHOOL OF BASIC
008-04 Art/Music 1966 1,770 $172,469 62.25% $32,835 $205,304 $277,076
ENGLEWOOD ELEMENTARY
015-04 Classrooms 1958 5,156 $435,728 56.19% $213,593 $649,321 $775,425
ALTA VISTA ELEMENTARY
001-02 Butterfly 1957 19,196 $1,429,560 49.90% $322,128 $1,751,688 $2,864,738
Sarasota HS - West Campus
007-42 Classrooms 1958 18,799 $1,188,968 44.94% $619,672 $1,808,640 $2,645,867
Sarasota HS - West Campus
007-04 Vacant Classrooms
1958 46,824 $2,965,395 43.23% $2,691,345 $5,656,740 $6,859,416
Sarasota County Public Schools
Palm Beach Scheme
• Pair-wise comparisons by 25 staff and 6 Board
Members for 40 projects
– Additions and expansions
– Modernizations
– Rebuilds
– Athletic fields, pools
– Maintenance compounds
• Comparisons are of issues, not projects
Palm Beach Scheme Results
• Funding Integrity @ 48%
– Construction investment
– On Referendum list (highest weighting @ 17.65%)
– Socioeconomic status (up to 10.55%)
– COPs (11.2%)
• Educational Environment @ 38%
– Needed for CSR (2nd highest @ 16.35%)
– Reduce overcrowding (11.8%)
– New programs (9.6%)
Palm Beach Scheme [cont.]
• Operational Efficiency @ 14%
– Outdated instructional buildings
– Reduction of operating expenses
– Removal of >20-year old relocatables (<6%)
– Required by other projects
– Ancillary facilities service delivery
Combined
FY2009
Ranking
Order
Project Description
Original
Funding
Year
(per
Referendum)
Constructio
n
Investment
*On
Referendu
m List
SES
Tier 1
(50-
59.49%)
SES
Tier 2
(59.5-
74.49)
SES
Tier 3
(74.5-
89.49)
SES
Tier 4
(89.5-100)
COPs
Promise
d
If CSR
is Recv'd
Needed
for CSR
Reduce
Overcrowdin
g
New
Programs
Replace
or
Renovat
e
Old/Poor
Academi
c
Buildings
Reduces
Operating
Expenses
Removal
+20 Yr Old
Portable
Classrooms
Required
Due to
Impact
of Other
Projects
Ancillary
Facilities-
Service
Efficienc
y
Total
Percentag
e
Score
Combine
d
FY2009
Ranking
Order
FY2008
Previous
Rank
FY2008
Previous
Rank
Adjusted
4.90% 17.65% 2.64% 5.28% 7.91% 10.55% 11.20% 3.75% 16.35% 11.80% 9.60% 4.70% 2.90%
**
(see legend
below) 1.60% 1.10%
1 West Central Elem 03-W FY07 4.90% 20.65% 0.00% 5.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.35% 11.80% 9.60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 68.58% 1 43 14
2 Seminole Trails Elem Addition FY08 4.90% 19.65% 0.00% 5.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.35% 11.80% 0.00% 0.00% 2.90% 5.95% 0.00% 0.00% 66.83% 2 26 6
3 Pahokee Elem Addition ( part of 03-MM) FY05 4.90% 22.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.60% 0.00% 2.90% 2.95% 1.60% 0.00% 55.15% 3 none 16
4 Plumosa K-5 Modernization FY08 4.90% 19.65% 0.00% 0.00% 7.91% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.60% 4.70% 2.90% 1.95% 0.00% 0.00% 51.61% 4 32 8
5 Relocatables and Modulars Purchase Varies 0.00% 22.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 16.35% 11.80% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50.80% 5 8 1
6 Belle Glade Elem Addition Pre-K FY08 4.90% 19.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.60% 0.00% 0.00% 3.95% 0.00% 0.00% 48.65% 6 39 12
7 Pahokee High Remodeling (part of 03-MM) FY05 4.90% 22.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 47.70% 7 none 16
7 Pahokee Middle (03-MM) FY05 4.90% 22.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 47.70% 7 47 16
9
West Area Educational Complex (West Tech)
Modern. FY05 4.90% 22.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.70% 2.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 45.70% 9 20 4
10 Riviera Beach High 02-MMM FY05 0.00% 22.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 9.60% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 42.80% 10 52 22
11 Manatee Elem Addition FY08 4.90% 19.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.80% 0.00% 0.00% 2.90% 2.95% 0.00% 0.00% 42.20% 11 23 5
12 Galaxy Elem Modernization FY10 0.00% 17.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.70% 2.90% 1.95% 0.00% 0.00% 37.75% 12 32 8
13 Village Academy Buildout FY06 4.90% 21.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 37.10% 13 51 21
14 Lake Worth Middle Core Addition FY07 0.00% 20.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 35.90% 14 10 2
14 Gove Elem Modernization 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 10.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.80% 0.00% 4.70% 2.90% 5.95% 0.00% 0.00% 35.90% 14 32 8
16 JF Kennedy Middle Athletic Fields FY05 4.90% 22.65% 0.00% 0.00% 7.91% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 35.46% 16 none none
17 North Palm Beach Elem Modernization FY09 0.00% 18.65% 0.00% 5.28% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.70% 2.90% 1.95% 0.00% 0.00% 33.48% 17 36 11
Prioritization Schemes
• TCC
– Major projects:
• Projects listed in Capital Improvement Plan
• Priorities selected by President and Executive Team
based on staff input and College Strategic Plan
– Renovation/remodeling projects
• Matrix based on project type and funding source
• Matrix developed by Facilities Department and
approved by President and Executive Team
Tallahassee Community College
Building No.Landscap
e Roof WindowsExt.
PaintExt.
BrickEave
sExt.
DoorsHVA
CLightin
gElecSys Flooring EMS
Int. Paint
Restrooms
Fire Sys Remarks
MAIN CAMPUS
English 1 G G F G G F G * G G1st-p 2nd-g G
1st-p 2nd-g G G
HVAC, 1ST FL. FAIR, 2ND FL. GOOD, ALL BLDGS.
NEED WASHED
Science Math Annex 2 G G F G F F F G G P G F G
Academic Support 3 G G F G F G G * G G G G G G G HVAC, 1ST FL. FAIR, 2ND FL. GOOD
Moore Lecture Hall 4 G G F G F F F G G P G n/a G
Communications and Humanities 5 G G F G F F F G G F G F G G
Dental Hygiene 6 G G F G F G G * G1st-p 2nd-g G
1st-p 2nd-g G G HVAC, 1ST FL. FAIR, 2ND FL. GOOD
Arcade (CoveredWalkway) 7
Academic Computing Center 8 G G F G G G G G G F G F G G
Centre 9 G G n/a G G G G G G G G G G G
Bridge (CoveredWalkway) 10
Tech. & Prof. Prog. 11 G G F G G G G G G F G G G G
Fine and PerformingArts Center 12 G G F G G G G * G G G G G G G HVAC, SOME GOOD, SOME FAIR
Ancillary (Deleted) 13
Ancillary (Deleted) 14
Lifetime Sports Ctr. 15 G G F G G G F G G G G G G G
Electrical 16 N n/a P G F F n/a G G n/a G n/a n/a F
Support ServicesBuilding 17 F G F G G G G G G G G G G G
Science and MathBuilding 18 G G F G G F F G G F G F G G
University Center 19 F G n/a G G G F G G G G G G G
Baseball Field House 20 P F n/a n/a G G G G G n/a G F G G
Richardson 21 F F n/a G G G R F G n/a G F G F
Andrews 22 F F F G G G G G G n/a G F G G
Baseball Concessions 23 G n/a n/a n/a G G G G G n/a G G G G
Vehicle Extrication(Covered Walkway) 24
Covered Area (Covered Walkway) 25
Not Assigned 26
Hinson Administration 27 G G F G G G F G G F G F G G
Central Energy Plant 28 G G n/a n/a n/a G N G G n/a G n/a G G
Bruce (Deleted) 29
Library 30 G G n/a G G G G G G F G F G G
Eagle's Nest/RyderBuilding 31 F G n/a G G G G G G G G F G G
Building Conditions Matrix
Tallahassee Community CollegeProjects Summary Report
FUNDING SOURCE
10/11, 11/12 PECO R/R 10/11 CO/DS
TCC Foundation
SBOE Bond Fund LCIF
11/12 PECO Maint.
12/13 PECO Maint.(Tent.)
$98,410.66 $268,609.50 Carry over from prior year.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION $1,094,214.00 $252,305.00 1,000,000.00 $1,383,485.00 $1,500,000.00 $235,836.00 $156,801.00Fund Balance 07/01/2011
Projects committed and completed to date $807,982.66 $31,289.50 0.00 $1,560,222.50 $270,269.65 $189,761.00 $0.00
Allowance for ERP $400,000.00
Projects committed per ET 3/28/12
- FPSI Range Testing and Remediation $90,000.00
- Centennial Interior Remodel $200,000.00
- Gadsden Center New Project Allowance $200,000.00
- Renovate Finishes & Plumbing Dental Hygiene $170,000.00
- Furniture Replacement Allowance $75,000.00
- Science Lab Expansion and Remodel 900,000.00
Proposed "Mandatory" Projects
- ADA Revisions to Complete First Tranche $20,000.00
- EN Structure Remediation $20,000.00
- HSS, CT, WD, AD Floor Revision (Slip Issues) $32,000.00
- Lighting Enhancement, West Parking Lot $15,000.00
- Carpet/Flooring Replacement Allowance $50,000.00
GRAND TOTALS $944,982.66 $31,289.50 900,000.00 $1,650,222.50 $1,315,269.65 $189,761.00 $0.00
BALANCE AVAILABLE $247,642.00 $221,015.50 100,000.00 $1,872.00 $184,730.35 $46,075.00 $156,801.00
(Committed to (Committed to (Committed to
Infrastructure) Maintenance) Maintenance)
[other schemes from audience]