INTEGRATED FACILITY PLANNING

Project prioritisation working group

 

Minutes of Meeting

Date: Wednesday 29 October 2014

 

Time: 1.30 – 4.00pm

 

Venue: City of Yarra, Meeting Room 3, Richmond Town Hall, 333 Bridge Road, Richmond 3121

 

 

 

Attending organisations:

Cities of Brimbank, Casey, Greater Geelong, Knox, Maroondah, Melbourne, Melton, Monash, Moonee Valley, Moreland, Mornington Peninsula, Port Phillip, Whitehorse, Whittlesea, Yarra. Metropolitan Planning Authority.

 

Apologies:

Cities of Hume and Stonnington. Shire of Mitchell.

 

Item

 

1

Presentation by Jimmy Yung, Building Asset Management Coordinator, City of Casey

 

“City of Casey - Integrated Facility Planning Prioritisation Approach”

 

Jimmy presented Casey’s approach to prioritising infrastructure projects, structured around two parts:

1.   New facilities - Priority List and Implementation Strategy

2.    Existing facilities – multi-component assessment including weighted scoring of building criticality, utilisation, fitness for purpose, structural and physical condition and compliance.

(Presentation available online at http://www.lgam.info/infrastructure-prioritisation-working-group)

Casey’s assessment exemplifies a comprehensive and data-rich systems approach to prioritising capital works. It is based on a thorough understanding of existing infrastructure, community need for new and/or improved facilities, cash flow from contributions, and triggers and thresholds for provision. It embodies principles such as minimising council debt and timely delivery of infrastructure in step with population growth.

Subsequent discussion focused on the need for a different approach to planning for new vs existing facilities, the use of benchmarks (provision ratios) and triggers, and how the various data required by such an assessment could be acquired and used across council.

2

Presentation by Wayne Eddy, Strategic Asset Planning Coordinator, City of Whittlesea

 

“Capital Works Evaluation Framework”

 

Wayne summarised the common components of two capital works prioritisation approaches from Indigo Shire and Townsville City Council.

 

(Presentation available online at http://www.lgam.info/capital-works-evaluation-framework)

 

The majority of evaluation questions asked by both examples were similar to each other and indeed were typical of examples from many other councils. Scoring and weighting of questions were also typical. These were accompanied by guidelines about how to assign scores, and evaluation teams were assigned to assess each project.

 

Group discussion highlighted that such assessments do not distinguish between the different stages of identifying and justifying projects. These stages were common to many councils but were clouded by the use of different terminology.

 

Four distinct stages were proposed, by which projects could be identified, evaluated and ultimately prioritised:

 

  1. Strategic assessment

·         Legislation and major policy drivers

·         Strategic alignment with Council vision, priorities and aspirations

·         Major spatial drivers

 

  1. Needs analysis

·         Service-based / facility-based / planning-based

·         Community needs assessment

·         Asset condition, fitness for purpose, criticality

·         Supply & demand (current and future), gap analysis

 

  1. Needs alignment

·         Strategic overview of needs and opportunities

·         Common or conflicting priorities across council

·         Projects that meet multiple needs

·         Key decisions not made in isolation

 

  1. Prioritisation

·         Prioritising needs as well as prioritising projects

·         Ranking systems as well as qualitative professional judgement

 

The stages apply to many types of project, not just community infrastructure.

 

 

3

Next steps

 

It was agreed that the four stages provide a useful structure for further examination of the common challenges faced by councils in developing and prioritising the ‘right’ projects. The same structure may also be appropriate for developing solutions to these challenges.

 

ACTION: Raeph Cumming will arrange a second meeting of the working group to develop this further.

 

 

 

End.