capital infrastructure committee - brock university...board of trustees capital infrastructure...

Board of Trustees

Capital Infrastructure Committee Cycle 2 – Wednesday, December 2, 2015

10:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. Cairns 207

Agenda

# Item By Start Time

Length Action

1. Call to Order KF 10:30 1

2. Declaration of Conflict of Interest KF 10:31 1

3. Approval of Agenda (including consent items) KF 10:32 1 Approval

4. Minutes of Previous Meeting – Meeting #1(2015-16)held on September 30, 2015

KF 10:33 1 Approval

5. KF 10:34 1 Business Arising from the Minutes

KEY ITEMS

6. Campus Plan Update (including Appendices 1-2)

TSI 10:35 45 Information

7. Fiscal Framework – A Closer Look at Capital &Related Projects (including Appendix 1)

BB 11:20 10 Information

8. Five Year Long Term Capital Plan(including Appendices 1-3)

DC/TSI 11:30 5 Information

9. 2016-17 Capital and Related Project Budget(including Appendices 1-2)

DC/TSI 11:35 20 Decision

10. Q2 Financial Update on Capital and RelatedProjects Plan (including Appendix 1)

TSI 11:55 5 Decision

11. Goodman School of Business Rendering(including Appendices 1-2)

TSI 12:00 10 Decision

… COMMITTEE BREAK … 12:10 5

12. Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium ProjectArchitect Procurement & Pre-Design Phase(including Appendix 1)

TA/TSI 12:15 5 Information

13. Residence Facility Condition Index(including Appendices 1-3)

TA/TSI 12:20 10 Information

14. Hamilton Campus (including Appendices 1-2) BH 12:30 10 Information

15. New Accounting System – Project Phoenix(including Appendix 1)

BB 12:40 5 Information

of 2

# Item By Start Time

Length Action

16. BH 12:45 5 Information Capital Infrastructure Goal Progress Scorecard

CONSENT ITEMS 12:50 5 (if

needed) 17. Major Projects Update – ITS

(including Appendices 1-6)DC Information

18. IT Governance DC Information

19. Major Projects Update – FM(including Appendices 1-5)

TSI Information

20. Cairns Family Health & Bioscience ResearchComplex (CFHBRC) Post-Occupancy EvaluationFollow-up (including Appendices 1-2)

TSI Information

21. Computerized Facility Management System(CFMS)

TSI Information

22. Residence and Parking Master Plans – UPDATE TA Information

23. Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act(AODA) Update (including Appendix 1)

GA Information

CONSENT ITEMS (IN CAMERA) 12:55 5 (if

needed) 24. Record of IN CAMERA session of Previous

Meeting – Meeting #1 (2015-16) held onSeptember 30, 2015 –(IN CAMERA)

KF Approval

25. Other Business KF 1:00

26. ADJOURNMENT KF

DEBRIEFING SESSION: Committee members and guests are invited by the Chair to attend debriefing sessions in the meeting room as follows;

a) Committee members, including the Presidentand Vice Presidents

b) Committee members, including the Presidentc) Committee members, excluding the President

Agenda Legend BB - Bryan Boles KF - Kristine Freudenthaler BH - Brian Hutchings TA - Tom Arkell DC - David Cullum TSI - Tom Saint-Ivany GA - Grant Armstrong

Brock University Niagara Region 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way St. Catharines, ON L2S 3A1 Canada

(Circulated Prior to Approval)

MINUTES OF MEETING #1 (2015-2016)

CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2015, 10:30 AM

CAIRNS FAMILY HEALTH AND BIOSCIENCE RESEARCH COMPLEX, ROOM 207 PRESENT: Ms. Kristine Freudenthaler (Chair), Mr. Jeffrey Cairns (Vice-Chair), Mr. Mark Arthur, Ms. Michele-Elise Burnett, Mr. Trevor Cooper, Ms. Gloria Gallagher, Dr. Scott Henderson, Mr. Marco Marrone, Mr. Joe Robertson, Mr. Peter Stoyanov, Mr. John Suk RESOURCE PERSONNEL: Mr. Bryan Boles, Mr. David Cullum, Mr. Brian Hutchings, Dr. Gary Libben, Dr. Neil McCartney, Mr. Roland Mech, Mr. Tom Saint-Ivany, Ms. Margaret Thompson, Ms. Angela Magro (Recorder) By invitation:

Ms. Donna Moody and Mr. Rick Fraser (Item 8), Ms. Karen Epp (Items 9 and 10) Mr. Tom Arkell (Items 11 and 23) Ms. Wendy Laslo and Mr. James Fleming (Item 11) Ms. Janis Barlow, Mr. Peter Partridge and Mr. Stuart Reid (Item 22)

ALSO PRESENT: Faculty Deans: Dr. S. Ejaz Ahmed REGRETS: Mr. Nick DiPietro, Dr. Jack Lightstone 1. Call to Order

Ms. Freudenthaler welcomed members, staff and guests and called the meeting to order. The Chair extended an additional welcome to new Trustees serving on the Committee and recognized Management for the successful opening of the Marilyn I. Walker School of Fine and Performing Arts.

2. Declaration of Conflict of Interest

There were no conflicts of interest declared to any matter on the Agenda.

3. Approval of Agenda The Chair confirmed that there were no items to be lifted from the consent agenda portion of the meeting Agenda.

Board of Trustees

Minutes of the Capital Infrastructure Committee Meeting – September 30, 2015 2.

On a motion by Mr. Marrone, seconded by Ms. Gallagher and carried, it was RESOLVED that the Agenda, including consent items be approved.

4. Minutes of the Previous Meeting

[The Minutes of Meeting #5 (2014-15) of the Capital Infrastructure Committee held on June 24, 2015 had been posted with the meeting materials.] On a motion by Mr. Marrone, seconded by Mr. Suk and carried, it was

RESOLVED that the Minutes of Meeting #5 (2014-15) of the Capital Infrastructure

Committee held on June 24, 2015 be approved. 5. Business Arising from the Minutes – None

6. Capital Infrastructure Committee Goal Progress Scorecard [An Information Item TOPIC: 2015-16 Capital Infrastructure Committee Goals and

Objectives Progress Scorecard, dated September 30, 2015 had been posted with the meeting materials.] The Committee received the 2015-16 Capital Infrastructure Committee Goals and Objectives Progress Scorecard for information. Mr. Hutchings provided an overview of the Scorecard and noted that metrics will be incorporated into the next draft of the Scorecard.

7. Accounting System Scorecard [An Information Item TOPIC: Accounting System Scorecard dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: Accounting System Scorecard, had been posted with the meeting materials.] The Committee received the template of the Accounting System Scorecard for information.

8. Brock University Campus Security Services Annual Report

[An Information Item TOPIC: Brock University Campus Security Services Annual Report dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: Brock University 2014 Annual Report Campus Security Services, had been posted with the meeting materials.] Ms. Moody provided an overview of the Campus Security Services Annual Report. She highlighted certain areas of the Report, noting the recent infrastructure developments in the department relating to the incident management software and a new social media communications initiative. During discussion, Ms. Moody and Mr. Fraser responded to all questions from members.

9. Long Term Capital Plan (LTCP) Update [An Information Item TOPIC: Long Term Capital Plan Update dated September 30, 2015

together with Appendix 1: Fiscal Year 2016/2017 Long Term Capital Planning Targets; Appendix 2: Fiscal Year 2016/2017 LTCP Budget Development; Appendix 3: Fiscal Year 2016/2017 LTCP Forecast; and Appendix 4: LTCP Funding Summary and Future Year Targets, had been posted with the meeting materials.]


Mr. Saint-Ivany provided an overview of the Report and corresponding appendices that

contained detailed information regarding the Long Term Capital Plan. Management responded to all questions from the Committee and received feedback

regarding potentially including classroom modernization in the Long Term Capital Plan. The Chair suggested that Management provide a one-page summary to enable further

discussion by the Committee at the December 2015 meeting. 10. Q1 Financial Update on Capital and Related Projects

[A Decision Item TOPIC: Q1 Financial Update on Capital and Related Projects dated September 30, 2015, together with Appendix 1: 2014/15 and 2015/16 LTCP Q1 Status Report as at August 5, 2015 had been posted with the meeting materials.] The Committee reviewed the Report which contained the background information for the proposed motion. During discussion, Management responded to questions related to the capital requirements as outlined in the Report. On a motion by Ms. Freudenthaler, seconded by Ms. Gallagher, and carried, it was RESOLVED that the Capital Infrastructure Committee approve the inclusion of

the additional capital and related requirements, identified in Management’s Fiscal Year 2014/15 and Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Long Term Capital Plans: “Q1 Financial Update on Capital and Related Projects,” into the Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Long Term Capital Plan.

11. Residence and Parking Master Plans

[An Information Item TOPIC: Residence and Parking Master Plans dated September 30, 2015, had been posted with the meeting materials.] Management provided an overview of the residence master plan followed by an overview of the parking master plan. A discussion ensued regarding the University’s current and potential residence and parking facilities during which Members provided feedback to Management. The Chair suggested it may be beneficial for comparative information on residence and parking facilities to be documented in a “fact sheet” for future presentation to the Committee.

12. Draft Delegation of Authority Policy [An Information Item TOPIC: Draft Delegation of Authority Policy, dated September 30, 2015, together with Appendix 1: Report to the Financial Planning and

Investment Committee on Draft Delegation of Authority Policy, had been posted with the meeting materials.]


Management provided an overview of the draft Delegation of Authority Policy, noting its

importance in ensuring appropriate levels of control and accountability in transactions that bind the University while enabling projects to be undertaken in a timely fashion. Members were encouraged to continue to provide feedback to Management. Following a

consultative process, the Policy will be considered during a future Board cycle. Consent Items: The following Items had been received by consent:

13. Major Projects Update – Information Technology Services (ITS) [An Information Item TOPIC: Major Projects Update – ITS dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: Cloud Initiatives – Office 365 for students; Appendix 2: PaperCut – Centralized Print Accounting; Appendix 3: Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards Compliance; Appendix 4: SharePoint Document Management; Appendix 5: Wireless Expansion Phase; and Appendix 6: Evergreening Program, had been posted with the meeting materials.]

14. Information Technology Services (ITS) Policy Update [An Information Item TOPIC: ITS Policy Update dated September 30, 2015 had been posted with the meeting materials.]

15. Major Projects Update – Facilities Management (FM) [An Information Item TOPIC: Major Projects Update - FM dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: Marilyn I. Walker School of Fine and Performing Arts (MIWSFPA); Appendix 2: Artificial Turf Field; Appendix 3: Goodman School of Business Building; Appendix 4: Mackenzie Chown Complex Fire Alarm Replacement; and Appendix 5: Post- MIWSFPA Moves/Renovations, had been posted with the meeting materials.]

16. Deferred Maintenance Update [An Information Item TOPIC: Deferred Maintenance Update dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: Fiscal Year 2014/2015 and Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Q1 Deferred Maintenance Project Status Report and Appendix 2: Facility Condition Audit Cycle / VFA Database Update, had been posted with the meeting materials.]

17. Department of Facilities Management – Introductory Information [An Information Item TOPIC: Department of Facilities Management – Introductory

Information dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: Organization Chart; Appendix 2: Co-generation Plant; Appendix 3: Main Campus District Distribution of Electrical

Services; Appendix 4: Facilities Management Metrics; and Appendix 5: Brock University Buildings, had been posted with the meeting materials.]

18. Department of Information Technology Services (ITS) – Introductory Information [An Information Item TOPIC: Department of Information Technology Services dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: ITS Organizational Structure and Appendix 2: Evolution of ITS, had been posted with the meeting materials.]


19. Department of University Services – Introductory Information [An Information Item TOPIC: Department of University Services – Introductory Information dated September 30, 2015 together with Appendix 1: University Services Organizational Chart; Appendix 2: Departmental Descriptions; Appendix 3: Budgets with further detail; and Appendix 4: CBC News related article, had been posted with the meeting materials.]

20. St. David’s Road West Name Change [An Information Item TOPIC: St. David’s Road West Name Change dated September 30, 2015 had been posted with the meeting materials.]

The Chair noted that a motion was required to move in camera for consideration of the

following Agenda Items: 21. Record of the In Camera Session of Meeting #5 (2014-15) held on June 24, 2015 – In camera 22. Rodman Hall – In camera 23. Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium Project and Architect Procurement - In camera 24. Goodman School of Business - In camera

On a motion by Mr. Suk, seconded by Mr. Cairns and carried, the Committee moved in camera at 12:04 p.m. Only members of the Committee and those invited staff remained for the closed session.

*****

[During closed session, confidential Reports were reviewed and confidential motions were passed related to Agenda Items 22 and 23] The Committee resumed open session at 1:06 p.m.

25. Other Business – None 26. Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 1:06 p.m.

1/2

Board of Trustees

Report to the Capital Infrastructure Committee

Information Item

TOPIC: Campus Plan Update

December 2, 2015

Tom Saint-Ivany, Associate Vice-President, Facilities Management Roland Mech, Interim Director, Campus Planning, Design & Construction Services

BACKGROUND The update of the 2003 Campus Plan, which is a goal of the Capital Infrastructure Committee, is underway and will be finalized January 2016. It is supportive of the University’s Integrated Strategic Plan and the Strategic Mandate Agreement with the Province of Ontario and is providing for the appropriate stakeholder input and oversight during its development. The Campus Plan Update will be aligned with current strategic directions and guidance, reflecting future development potential and opportunities. Urban Strategies Inc., the company that prepared the 2003 Campus Plan and the 2006 Facility Needs & Priorities Study (i.e. the space plan), is undertaking the Campus Plan Update. CAMPUS PLAN KEY DIRECTIONS The following are the key directions for the Campus Plan:

• Expand and Renew the Core

• Improve and Integrate the East Campus

• Renew Facilities

• Renew the Campus Setting

• Improve Movement and Connections

• Integrate with the Surrounding City

• Create Partnership Opportunities

CAMPUS PLAN UPDATE ACTIVITIES – COMPLETED AND UP-COMING Subsequent to Management’s report and presentation, with Urban Strategies, to the June 24, 2015 Capital Infrastructure Committee (CIC), representatives from Urban Strategies conducted a Visioning Workshop on July 29, 2015 with internal and external stakeholders and held a Campus Open House on September 16th, 2015 with the University community. The Open House presented the project’s background, campus planning principals, key physical directions and the preliminary planning framework. Approximately 75 attendees participated from the University

2/2

and surrounding community. The following points reflect the Open House participant’s feedback and key themes:

• The future of East Campus

• Pedestrian crossing at Glenridge

• Services and amenities in the Campus Core

• Relationship to natural setting

• Pedestrian and bicycle connectivity

• Student residence experience

• Transit Mall

• Continued need for parking

University representatives participated in a meeting October 27th with Regional Municipality of Niagara staff to discuss exchange understandings regarding the alignment and opportunities afforded by the preparation of the Region’s Brock District Plan and its convergence in time with the University’s Campus Plan Update. Discussion included streetscape, opportunities for district energy production and delivery, and ensuring coordinated boundaries on mapping.

At the time of writing this report, University representatives have been invited to participate in a presentation November 25th to the Region’s Planning and Development Committee on the Region’s Brock District Plan and the University’s Campus Plan Update.

The University community will be able to view and provide feedback on Draft Campus Plan Update through a second Open House to be held on December 7, 2015. Remaining Campus Plan Update milestone dates are outlined at Appendix 1.

DRAFT CAMPUS PLAN UPDATE PRESENTATION

At the Cycle 2 CIC December 2, 2015 Committee meeting, representatives from Urban Strategies will be presenting the Draft Campus Plan Update. Time has been allowed for substantive discussion afterwards. Their presentation will be provided as Appendix 2 on November 27th.

NEXT STEPS

Acceptance of the Campus Plan Update. Management will receive the Campus Plan Update by January 8th and will seek endorsement of it from Senior Administrative Council at its January 11th meeting. As coordinated with the CIC Chair, a special meeting of the CIC and the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees is anticipated to be called for the latter half of January 2016 to receive and accept the Campus Plan Update.

Post-Campus Plan Update. The Campus Plan Update will guide and inform the undertaking of the Facility Needs & Priorities Study Update in 2016 with the principal purpose of producing a much needed multi-year space plan for the University; whereby those space needs can, in turn, be progressively planned for and delivered on by the Long Term Capital Plan (LTCP).

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - Campus Plan Update - Remaining Milestone Dates (1 page)Appendix 2 – Draft Campus Plan Open House Presentation (20 pages)

Campu

s Plan Upd

ate

Remaining M

ileston

e Da

tes

Nove

mber

- 20

15

• W

edne

sday

, Nov

embe

r 25th

- Pr

esen

tation

on th

e Pre

limina

ry Ca

mpus

Plan

Upd

ate at

the R

egion

al Mu

nicipa

lity of

Niag

ara’s

Plan

ning &

Dev

elopm

ent C

ommi

ttee

• Th

ursd

ay, N

ovem

ber 2

6th –

Camp

us P

lan U

pdate

Stee

ring C

ommi

ttee M

eetin

g #6…

Rece

ive D

raft

Camp

us P

lan U

pdate

De

cemb

er -

2015

• 

Wed

nesd

ay, D

ecem

ber 2

nd –

Pres

entat

ion &

Disc

ussio

n of th

e Dra

ft Cam

pus P

lan U

pdate

at th

e Cyc

le #2

Cap

ital In

frastr

uctur

e Com

mitte

e Mee

ting (

Boar

d of T

ruste

es)

• Mo

nday

, Dec

embe

r 7th

– Pr

esen

tation

& D

iscus

sion o

f the D

raft C

ampu

s Plan

Upd

ate at

the S

enior

Ad

minis

trativ

e Cou

ncil M

eetin

g • 

Mond

ay, D

ecem

ber 7

th –

Open

Hou

se #2

on th

e Dra

ft Cam

pus P

lan U

pdate

• 

Wed

nesd

ay, D

ecem

ber 9

th –

Pres

entat

ion &

Disc

ussio

n of th

e Dra

ft Cam

pus P

lan U

pdate

at th

e Se

nate

Infor

matio

n Tec

hnolo

gy an

d Infr

astru

cture

Com

mitte

e Mee

ting

• W

eek o

f Dec

embe

r 14th

– Ca

mpus

Plan

Upd

ate S

teerin

g Com

mitte

e Mee

ting #

7…Di

scus

s Rev

iew of

an

d Fee

dbac

k on t

he D

raft C

ampu

s Plan

Upd

ate

Janu

ary -

2016

• 

Frid

ay, J

anua

ry 8th

– Re

ceive

Fina

lized

Cam

pus P

lan U

pdate

Rep

ort

• Mo

nday

, Jan

uary

11th

– Su

bmit t

he C

ampu

s Plan

Upd

ate to

the S

enior

Adm

inistr

ative

Cou

ncil M

eetin

g • 

Janu

ary –

Sub

mit th

e Cam

pus P

lan U

pdate

to th

e Cap

ital In

frastr

uctur

e Com

mitte

e and

the E

xecu

tive

Comm

ittee o

f the B

oard

of Tr

ustee

s at a

Spe

cial M

eetin

g(s)

rmech

Text Box

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: Campus Plan Update December 2, 2015 Appendix 1

Welcome to the

Brock University Campus Plan

Open House

DDDDDDDDDeeeeeeeecccccccccceeeeeeeeeemmmmmmmmmmmbbbbbbbbbeeeeeeerrrrrrrrr 7777777777,,,,,,,,,, 2222222222200000000011111111111555555555

The objective for today’s open house is to share our directions and hear your feedback regarding the Draft Campus Plan. Members of the consultant team are on hand to listen to your thoughts and answer any questions.

We want your input!

Capital Infrastructure CommitteeTOPIC: Campus Plan Update

December 2, 2015Appendix 2

St. David’s Rd

406

Mer

rittv

ille

Hw

yG

lenr

idge

Ave

Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Phase 1 Phase 2

Steering Committee Coordination

Key Stakeholder Interviews Visioning Workshop

Open House #1

Open House #2

Analysis Visioning Draft Plan Final PlanPhase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5

Project Scoping

We are here500 m

JOHN MACDONELL

ST

GLEN

RIDG

E AVE

MER

RITV

ILLE

HIG

HWAY

SIR ISAAC BROCK WAY

MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY

EAST CAMPUS

NIAGARA ESCARPMENT

SOUTHCAMPUS

EASTLAND RESERVE

LOCKHART DRIVELAND RESERVE

MAIN CAMPUS

1

Open HouseBrock University Campus Plan

DRAFT

Project OverviewWelcome to the second Open House for Brock University’s Campus Plan Update. This Open House will give you an opportunity to learn more about the planning process, review the vision and comprehensive framework for the future of the campus and provide feedback.

evolution. The planning process allows for a re-examination of the framework and directions for physical

experience for students, staff, faculty and the Niagara community.

Campus Project TeamThe campus planning process is guided by the Campus Plan Steering Committee, consisting of

The consultant team appointed to the project provided a variety of expertise, as well as past experience

• Urban Strategies (Project lead) - Planning, urban design and landscape design• MMM Group - Transportation planning• Amec Foster Wheeler

Project Timeline

period, ending in early 2016.

How to Read These Panels

draft Campus Plan vision and framework.

Panels 1 - 3 Introduce and provide the context of the study.

Panels 4-6: Outline the planning principles, key directions and place-making moves that guide the Campus Plan.

Panels 7 - 14: Describe the campus systems, including land use, movement, open space and utilities.

Panel 15 - 18: Illustrate the Near-Term and Long-Term Demonstration Plans and provide an overview of the Precinct Plans.

Campus Plan - Study Area

City Building Opportunities

University Strategic

Priorities & Needs

2


DRAFT

The Planning ProcessIt has been more than a decade since the completion of the 2003 Campus Plan. As the University continues to evolve, this update to the Campus Plan is needed to guide the next phase of campus change and respond to emerging needs and opportunities. Accordingly, the Campus Plan:

• Reviews major strategies and initiatives of the 2003 Campus Plan to ensure they align with the future

•

• Responds to the evolving demographic, economic and pedagogical climates and context that the

•

•

•

• Will inform future initiatives, including the Parking Study and Residential Master Plan.

Brock University’s Strategic Mandate AgreementBrock University’s Strategic Mandate Agreement with the Province of Ontario envisions the University as a dynamic postsecondary educational institution and sets out three priority objectives:

1.

2. Establishing transdisciplinary research hubs and developing new graduate and undergraduate

3. creativity.

From a physical planning perspective, this means that the Campus Plan must:

• group learning spaces, and shared amenities

• Provide the setting to support your evolving academic community

• Identify development opportunities and related infrastructure to support emerging partnership initiatives

Stakeholder Interviews, Visioning Workshop & Open Houses

Plan, which are presented on the following panels. The emerging directions were also shared with the

engaged with participants and received feedback on the emerging directions.

University’s strategic priorities with external opportunities in order to achieve Brock’s Strategic Mandate Agreement while addressing the emerging needs and opportunities.

3


DRAFT

The Campus TodayBrock University will encounter many opportunities and challenges over the coming decades. Guided by this Plan, the University will be positioned to positively respond to these challenges and opportunities in a way that supports the academic mission and promotes the evolution and growth of campus.

The poor physical conditions of a number of buildings on campus provides opportunities for transformative facility renewal projects.

The emergence of East Campus as academic cluster and centre of a growing student residential area presents an excellent opportunity to leverage the high-

The campus’s unique natural setting sets the campus apart from other institutions.

connections to and around campus require further investment.

cultural hub in the Niagara Region. As the owner of

has an opportunity to shape and inform the long-term evolution of this important regional mixed-use node.

partnerships provides an opportunity to support community engagement and deliver new campus infrastructure by working with municipalities, neighbours and other stakeholders.

Key Opportunities and Challenges

4


DRAFT

Campus Planning PrinciplesThe campus planning principles are broad-based and mutually supportive to provide comprehensive direction for Campus Plan and offer a means for evaluating future projects and amendments to the Campus Plan. The principles build on those of the 2003 Campus

Administrative Council.

1. Support Brock University’s academic mission• Align campus planning decisions with academic and strategic planning

•

• Create a supportive environment for transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary learning

•

2. Enhance the campus experience• Create an environment for student-centred teaching, learning, working, playing and living

• Expand and enhance social and cultural infrastructure to ensure vibrant campus life and support learning

• Pursue design excellence in new development, renovation and place-making initiatives

• areas

• Extend the high-quality campus experience to campus areas

• Ensure a safe and welcoming campus environment for all users

• Preserve and enhance legacy buildings and settings

3. Engage and integrate with the community•

• Engage in integrated, cooperative and transformative planning for campus lands with provincial, municipal and community partners

• Create a supportive environment for partnership opportunities and development

• Support the provision of services, facilities and amenities for the campus and surrounding community

4. Support connectivity and accessibility• Support the continued reduction in single-occupant vehicle trips and increase pedestrian,

bicycle and transit trips

• Develop a complete network of pedestrian and bicycle connections on and off campus, and support all-season pedestrian connectivity

• Eliminate physical barriers and pursue universal accessibility

• environment

• Pursue the realization of ‘complete streets’ within the campus and surroundings

• Enhance connectivity to surrounding lands and region and the Greater Golden Horseshoe

5. Foster sustainability• Support the development of a compact, mixed-use campus

• Prioritize the maintenance, renewal and transformation of existing building assets before new construction

• Pursue reductions in energy use and emissions through operations, campus renewal and new development

• making

• Align campus development with robust and resilient utilities and infrastructure to provide continuous service and access

• Provide long-term clarity and certainty for campus lands and physical resources

5


DRAFT

Key Directions for the Campus PlanBuilding on the campus planning principles, the seven key directions provide the foundations of the Campus Plan by

University’s strategic priorities and needs with broader city building opportunities in order to realize Brock’s strategic mandate and engage the surrounding communities.

1. Expand and renew the coreAs the campus evolves, the university will focus on renewing the campus core to ensure that it continues to be a focal point for learning, amenity space and student services

2. Improve and integrate East CampusThe redevelopment of East Campus will create a well-connected mixed-use node that supports activities and amenities for both the university and the community.

3. Renew facilitiesContinued improvements to instructional and study space are required to respond to institutional needs, declining building conditions and the changing nature of university campuses.

4. Renew the campus settingThe campus’s structuring landscapes will set the framework for evolution of the campus setting, and and will be the focus of facility renewal, infrastructure investment and new construction.

5. Improve movement and connectionsThe campus’ circulation and arrival experience will continue to be enhanced through the addition of new pedestrian and cycling connections, the creation of an integrated cycling network, two new campus entrances and a more robust street network.

6. Integrate with the surrounding cityDevelopment, landscape and movement improvements at the edges of campus could support community oriented uses, programs and amenities that encourage integration with the surrounding community and make the campus more welcoming.

7. Create partnership opportunities

and Merrittville Highway has the greatest potential to accommodate partnership development and new growth.

Major ring roads

East-west spine Multi-use trail

Mixed-use node

Open spaces to be improved

Campus Core

High development potential

Campus structure based on the natural setting and major open spaces Campus structure based on the natural setting and major open spaces, and the centres and walks

Campus structure based on the natural setting and major open spaces, centres and walks, and connections to the surrounding city

6


DRAFT

Key Place-Making MovesGuided by the planning principles and key directions, three place-making moves establish the primary physical intentions of the Campus Plan. Overlaying the place-making moves

1. Strengthen the relationship with to the natural setting

assets. At the north and west edge of campus, open space improvements and trail connections will integrate the Niagara Escarpment into the campus fabric. To the south, open space improvement will enhance views of Lake Moodie while contrasting the campus’s formal and natural landscapes. The major streetscapes will extend into campus and provide a network of greenways that link the major natural features.

2. Reinforce and connect the campus centres The campus centres represent three important activity nodes

Each centre will be provide an iconic place in their respective parts of campus. The emerging centres on East and South Campus will be linked to the campus core by two prominent pedestrian walks that extend the campus setting.

3. Engage with the surrounding city

serve as important through streets that extend the city into campus. The land surrounding this important intersection

and engage with the city. A complete street network around

potential of these lands.

7


DRAFT

Campus Systems and University ProjectsCampus Systems The campus systems support the long-term framework for the growth and evolution of campus. The following panels provide detailed direction related to land use and development, landscape and open space, movement and utilities systems. Implementation of these systems will ensure that the vision, principles and key directions of the Plan are upheld as the campus grows and evolves.

University Projects

Projects are large-scale projects that should be centrally implemented and managed by the university administration due to their scale and complexity.

investment beyond the walls of new or existing buildings. They also include improvements to the movement network, including pedestrian, cycling and vehicular circulation, and transit and parking. Three additional projects relate to renewal and new development opportunities.

List of University ProjectsDevelopment

Landscape and Open Space

L1. Escarpment Edge

L2. Memorial Wood

L4. East Walk

L5. Jubilee Court

L6. West Common

L7. East Common

L8. South Walk

L10. Campus Gateways

8


DRAFT

Land Use Strategystructure for the organization and location of uses and activities on campus. The land use distribution supports an integrated campus and builds on the existing structure and pattern of uses.Academic activities will continue to be concentrated near the heart of campus with other supportive functions and services intermixed to reinforce learning and campus life. Existing residential uses and athletics

will be established along Glenridge Avenue, including a major mixed-use

Academic services, administration and amenities.

Residential areas will continue to support existing student residences and provide opportunities for ongoing renewal.

Athletics and recreation uses are priority uses in the northwest area of campus.

Mixed Use areas will accommodate a wide range of uses, including potential partnerships, that complement the academic zone.

The Mixed Use Node

services and amenities for the campus community.

The development based on the future needs of the university.

The will accommodate the facilities to maintain the day-to-day operations of

The Land Reserve designation recognizes the unknown future of these lands due to their physical constraints and isolation.

9


DRAFT

Opportunities for Renewal and New DevelopmentFuture campus growth will see the evolution of facilities over time through a combination of renewal, redevelopment and new development. Investment in existing campus buildings to improve their quality and condition is a major priority. Strategic redevelopment of some buildings should be considered in some areas of campus to remove buildings that

cycle and are located on sites that offer strategic opportunities for new development and more intensive uses.

of future development opportunities provides structure and clarity for future campus growth. The Precinct Plans provide greater detail for implementation of projects in these areas based on their relationship to the overall Campus Plan framework.

University Projects

Potential redevelopment

mid-term redevelopment 10-20 years

near-term redevelopment 1-10 years

Potential renewal

Areas that can accommodate new development

developmentD1

10


DRAFT

Movement NetworkThe movement network illustrates the long-term network of transportation infrastructure that will support campus access, circulation and new development opportunities. While continuing to accommodate all modes of travel to and within the campus, the movement network will expand to better support active and sustainable modes of transportation, including walking, cycling and transit use. A connected, walkable and accessible campus supports academic

and new infrastructure, supports mobility options and contributes to

to accommodate cars and the demand for parking with the desire for a pedestrian-friendly campus that supports the growing number of students living close to campus.

University Projects

Primary campus road

Secondary campus road

Long term primary road connection

Long term secondary road connectionService road

Regional road

Local road

Pickup & drop-off

Transit

Primary campus cycling route

Secondary cycling route

Existing city cycling route

Proposed cycling route

Pedestrian spine

Major paths

Sidewalks

Internal pedestrian connection

Key activity nodes

M1

Typical Street Section of Campus Drive

11


DRAFT

University Projects - Movement NetworkUniversity Project M1:Brock Mall North

University Project M2:University Road

University Project M3:Campus Drive

Enhancing the existing transit

increase capacity and streamline transit operations.

up drop-off location on campus and will include dedicated bicycle infrastructure in the long-term.

Campus Drive will connect each of the campus entries, improve access to campus and parking area, and unlock new development sites.

12


DRAFT

Landscape and Open Space NetworkThe landscape and open space strategy plays an important role in establishing the campus setting, shaping development patterns and reinforcing the movement network. The Niagara Escarpment, in

enhance the campus experience, by reconnecting the existing open spaces and buildings with this unique natural asset.

and approach to the open space network. The environmental, town and

function of the different types of places found on campus. Recognizing the role of these zones will provide clear direction on the maintenance and renewal of existing places and provide a clear context for the design and

University ProjectsL1. Escarpment Edge

L2. Memorial Wood

L4. East Walk

L5. Jubilee Court

L6. West Common

L7. East Common

L8. South Walk

L10. Campus Gateways

The Environmental Zonesurrounding the campus.

The Town and Country provides a buffer to the Environmental Zone, allowing for the sensitive integration of development and recreational uses.

The Modern Zone extends a formal landscape throughout the interior part of campus, It supports intensive use and pedestrian activity while providing and immediate setting for buildings.

Gateways are places that mark the entrance or arrival to campus.

Landmarks elements L1

1

2

3

consolidated & screened servicing and parking area

naturalization area

continuous multi-use trail

continuous multi-use trail

The Escarpment Edge today

Illustration of the Escarpment Edge with continuous pedestrian / cycling route

Section of Escarpment Edge Cutting Thrugh Servicing and Parking Area looking west

13


DRAFT

University Projects - Landscape and Open Space

University Project L3: Brock Mall and Circle

University Project L1: Escarpment EdgeThe Escarpment Edge will integrate and restore the natural character to north edge of campus while providing a continuous bicycle and pedestrian connection.

The ongoing management of

reinforce it as the focal open space of campus through the formal design of its landscape and buildings.

14


DRAFT

Infrastructure, Utilities and SustainabilityThe University’s infrastructure and utilities provide the means to achieve sustainability objectives

buildings. Campus utilities include steam and chilled water, water and wastewater systems, stormwater, electricity and telecommunications networks, and other minor utilities.

effective means of heating and cooling campus buildings. This network and

and minimizing contributions to climate change. The university will continue to expand and improve the district energy network and other utility systems to support new campus development and users. Continued attention to energy conservation, carbon emission reductions, water conservation and on-site stormwater management will minimize downstream impacts.

Heating/Cooling Zones

Solar Opportunity Zone

Stormwater Management

UNIVERSITY ROAD

MER

RIT

TVIL

LE H

IGH

WAY

SIR ISAAC BROCK WAY

15


DRAFT

Long-Term Demonstration PlanThe Long-Term Demonstration Plan is an illustration of how the campus of the future could look if the vision and framework of campus systems were fully implemented over the coming decades years.

and broader Niagara community to live, work, teach, learn and play. The campus will build on its compact, connected and intimate character by

experience. The campus core will be the focal point of campus life and will be reinforced through the renewal and development of high quality academic facilities that are supported by various amenities.

routes and transit amenities will ensure that people can access and move around campus safely and easily. The campus open spaces will strengthen

existing and new development.

centre that welcomes members of the broader Niagara community. The

partnerships that will enrich the academic program and enhance the

GLE

NR

IDG

E A

VE

NIAGARA ESCARPMENT

West Campus (looking northwest)

East Precinct (looking north)

CAMPUS D

RIVE

CAMPUS DRIVEFLO

RA EG

ERTER

WAY

UNIVERSITY ROADUNIVERSITY ROAD

RING ROAD

RING ROAD

UNIVERSITY ROAD

UNIVERSITY ROADCAM

PUS DRIVE

GLENRIDGE AVENUE

GLEN

RID

GE AVEN

UE

SCHMON PARKW

AY

MERRITTVILLE HIGHW

AY

SIR ISAAC BROCK WAY

SIR ISAAC BROCK WAY

JOHN MACDONELL STREET

16


DRAFT

Long-Term Demonstration Plan

17


DRAFT

Near-Term Demonstration PlanThe Near-Term Demonstration Plan highlights a series of development opportunities and priority projects that may be considered to meet the University’s needs over the next 20 years while setting the stage for future development.

ensure the evolving campus environment supports and protects for new development opportunities and reinforces the long-term vision for the campus.

Campus Renewal and Development

• Renew and/or redevelop buildings with the pressing maintenance needs.

• Establish a campus focal point and expand the campus core through Schmon Tower Atrium project.

• Develop a mixed use node on East Campus Renovate of Taro Hall and

• Accommodate future academic expansion in parking lot A.

• Pursue partnership opportunities in South Campus.

• Construct a new works yard in South Campus.

Campus Movement

•

• Construct two new campus entrances to relieve congestion.

• Invest in a complete and interconnected street network.

• Relocate surface parking to South Campus as required.

• Improve cycling network on- and off-campus.

Campus Open Space

• Extend the East and South Walk from the Main Campus

UNIVERSITY ROAD

MER

RIT

TVIL

LE H

IGH

WAY

SIR ISAAC BROCK WAY

GLE

NR

IDG

E AV

E

NIAGARA ESCARPMENT

18


DRAFT

Precinct Plans

L3

A3 Development parcel

Renewal sites

Open space projects

Movement projects

Streetscape projects

Gateway

Primary pedestrian connection

Internal pedestrian connection

Landmarks

Key building frontage

Primary entrance

Pickup & drop-off zone

Service access

Pickup & drop-off zone

Potential parkingstructure location

M3

L9

L10

P

The Precinct Plans will be an important tool for implementing the Campus Plan by consolidating the opportunities and requirements for campus evolution on a place-by-place basis. The Precinct Plans establish guidelines for development and identify the enabling and coordinated projects that must be considered in new building and renewal projects.

to plan and evaluate campus projects within the comprehensive framework

implementation, the campus has been divided into four precincts.

19


DRAFT

Feedback and Next StepsThank You! Next Steps

Draft Campus Plan into a consolidated Campus Plan report which will be Thank you for participating in today’s open house to learn about the planning process and review the Draft Campus Plan. We want you to tell us what you think. There are a number of ways to provide

• Speak to a member of the consultant team here today

•

• Yiwen Zhu, Project Manager

[email protected]

• Roland Mech, Associate Director, Space Management and Planning [email protected]

Board of Trustees


Information Item

TOPIC: Fiscal Framework – A Closer Look at Capital and Related Projects

December 2, 2015 Bryan Boles, Associate Vice-President, Finance

REPORT

A fiscal framework is being developed for the purpose of financial planning. The fiscal framework is being reviewed for comment by the Financial Planning and Investment Committee this Board of Trustees cycle. A presentation providing a closer look at the impact on capital and related projects is attached as Appendix 1. APPENDIX Appendix 1 – DRAFT Fiscal Framework – A Closer Look at Capital and Related Projects (22 pages)

1

Fiscal Framework

A Closer Look at Capital and

Related Projects

- December 2015 -

Capital Infrastructure Committee

TOPIC: Fiscal Framework – A Closer Look at Capital and Related Projects

December 2, 2015

Appendix 1

Forward looking information

This presentation contains forward looking information.

It is the accumulation of financial information obtained

from Unit budget developers across the University. In

preparing the following forecasts and budgets, certain

assumptions and estimates were necessary. These

assumptions and estimates are based on information

available to Unit budget developers at the time of

preparing the following forecasts and budgets. Users of

this information are cautioned that actual results may

vary. All figures are in (‘000s) unless otherwise noted.

2

3

Agenda

• Fiscal Framework – Goal

• Key aspects of the model with respect

to capital and related projects

• Debt repayment

• Maintaining our Infrastructure

• Frequently Asked Questions

Fiscal Framework

The goal of the model is to recognize our

history and budget environment and using

key metrics help us address the looking

forward observations and resource

allocation questions to ensure a fiscally

sustainable Brock University.

4

Key aspects of the model

5

The model can best be described as a pay-as-you-go.

The model concentrates on reducing debt.

The model forecasts no new debt.

The model concentrates funding on deferred maintenance

and core applications associated with information

technology.

New capital requirements are highly depend on donations

and/or other incremental sources of funding not already

worked into the fiscal framework.


6

Why no new debt …

Fiscal structure

Majority of revenue

is regulated.

Majority of costs are

salary, wages and

benefits tied to

union agreements.

Limited Flexibility

Political Environment

Province’s fiscal

flexibility is limited.

Increasing tuition is

politically

complicated for the

Province.

No Flexibility

Demographics

Demographics

indicate a declining

cohort of 18-20 year

olds in the coming

years. This has

already been worked

into our future

enrolment

estimates.

Negative Flexibility

Financing Structure

We cannot raise

equity.

We can only raise

debt.

No Flexibility


The model is funded as follows …

The 2015-16 base funding for debt, capital and related projects is maintained.

The base funding grows by the construction price index (currently estimated at 2.5%).

New ministry funding through the Facilities Renewal Program (FRP) are added into the program as received.

A one-time increase to the base will occur as a result of an increase to parking fees to support the capital infrastructure of parking, road and transit.

7

8


Interesting fact: On a discounted basis this model will require no more tuition and grant funding in 30 years then it does today.

Combining debt and deferred maintenance

The aggregate funding model looks like this:The funding envelopes of

deferred maintenance and

debt are to be combined and

increased at the construction

index (currently 2.5%).

The rational is simple…

both envelopes relate to

infrastructure. It makes

sense that the debt originally

allowed for new

infrastructure to be built.

As the debt is paid off, that

infrastructure that was once

new now requires deferred

maintenance work. It makes

sense to repurpose those

debt payments to main

infrastructure.

This model forecasts no new facilities renewal program funding after

2019-20 or divestitures or repurposing of infrastructure.


By the numbers…

Capital and Related Project Budget going out to April 2021

9


By the numbers…

Debt Servicing Costs going out to April 2021

10


11

By the numbers…

Capital and Related Project Budget going out to April 2021


12

By the numbers…

Facilities management funding out to April 2021

Information technology funding out to April 2021

* One-time temporary reduction in deferred maintenance funding to complete Post-Cairns MIWSFPA renovations.

13


By the numbers…

Total Debt Outstanding going out to April 2021

14

Debt repayment

15

Debt and DM intersect

MIWSFPA 2019-20

Cairns

2024-25

Deferred maintenance and sinking

fund

Residence 2028-29

Sinking fund

16

Maintaining our infrastructure

Caution:

This is for illustrative purposes only. The expectation

that investment would persist to bring FCI significantly

below 0.10 may be unrealistic. Reinvestment decisions

should be made once FCI approaches 0.10.

17

Frequently asked questions

If funding is budgeted to complete a project …

Q: Is the funding held for that specific project until completion of that project?

A: Yes, unless it becomes apparent that the project can be completed for less then

budget. At this point a budget transfer would occur as per the Delegation of Authority.

Q: And the project is not completed in the year it was budgeted, are the costs incurred

in the following or following years covered by the funding originally budgeted?

A: Yes

Q: And the project is completed in either a surplus / deficit position what happens?

A: The Capital and Related Project program maintains a Facilitates Management and

Information Technology over/short reserve. All surpluses and deficits are closed out to

this reserve as per the Delegation of Authority.

18


The fiscal framework outlines a certain amount of available funding per year …

Q: What happens if a project is expected to take multiple years? Will the funding be

budgeted all in the initial year or over the years the project is expected to be

completed?

A: For smaller projects, generally defined as less than $1 million, it is expected that

the complete project funding requirement be included in the budget of an individual

year.

For larger projects, generally defined as greater then or equal to $1 million, the

funding could be budgeted over the years the project is expected to be completed.

The intent is to match the years with cash flow and specifically identify these projects

in the budget. An example of a larger project is the new accounting system – it is

financed $3.8 million up front and $1 million in the second year. Another example

could be the post-MIWSFPA construction.

19



Q: Will any of that funding be going into reserves to accumulate funds to do larger

capital projects?

A: The fiscal framework certainly allows for funds to be set aside in reserves but it was

designed to put funding to work immediately given the significant backlog in deferred

maintenance and insufficient core information technology applications.

Q: If limited reserves are to be maintained how would a large capital project get

completed if the cost was larger then the funding allocation of any one year and the

cash flows would occur primarily in one year?

A: The fundamental requirement of the fiscal framework is that it requires a visible

and knowing funding plan for investments. In this situation a capital project could be

approved provided a funding plan was put in place. That funding plan may include

reducing the follow year or years spending.

20



Q: If upon approval there is spending on larger capital projects in advance of the

cash being budgeted, how will this impact the University cash flow?

A: Recognizing the size of the capital program compared to the size of the operating

budget it is anticipated that such projects could be temporarily funded through

working capital and/or the temporarily unspent funding of previously approved

capital projects. The concept here is to ensure unspent cash is producing value. It is

anticipated that these types of projects will be limited and their impact on cash flow

would need to be reviewed as part of the project approval on a case by case basis.

Available information

21

http://www.brocku.ca/finance/university-financial-information/budget-reports

Annual reports, budget reports, quarterly reporting can be found at:

http://www.brocku.ca/finance/faculty-and-staff/revenue-expense-allocation-pro

http://www.brocku.ca/finance/faculty-and-staff/financeconnect

Revenue and expense allocation information can be found at:

Finance connect newsletter can be found at:

http://www.brocku.ca/finance/university-financial-information/budget-reports

http://www.brocku.ca/finance/faculty-and-staff/revenue-expense-allocation-pro

http://www.brocku.ca/finance/faculty-and-staff/financeconnect

Questions/comments?

22

1/3

Board of Trustees


Information Item

TOPIC: Five-Year Long Term Capital Plan Outlook

December 2, 2015

Tom Saint-Ivany, Associate Vice-President, Facilities Management David Cullum, Associate Vice-President, Information Technology Services

Bryan Boles, Associate Vice-President, Finance

KNOWN MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECT REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTI-YEAR DEVELOPMENT The following five projects, considered to be Major Capital Projects as they are expected to have Total Project Budgets that exceed $1,000,000, have been identified in the FY 16/17 Long Term Capital Plan (see Cycle #2 Topic Report “2016-17 Capital and Related Project Budget”) for further limited development:

Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium

International Centre Building Phase 21

Heritage Plaza - Brock-Niagara Centre for Health & Well-being

Schmon Tower Renewal

3rd Campus Entrance and Grounds Yard Relocation The first four projects were submitted to MTCU on August 31, 2015 as part of the Ministry’s update of their inventory of postsecondary education capital priority projects. Management intends on undertaking the further development of those four Major Capital Projects, consisting of either additional planning and/or design, so that MTCU’s inventory of Brock University’s projects is closer to being tender-ready. Further development of these projects using consultant resources will enable future decision-making on approvals to proceed with the allocation of resources for further development including design and/or construction. The fifth project, the 3rd Campus Entrance & Grounds Yard Relocation, is the only one, following FY 16/17 design, intended to be recommended in the FY 17/18 Long Term Capital Plan for substantive funding, tender and construction in FY 17/18. An overview of the current status of these five projects along with a one-page synopsis of each of these projects is provided at Appendix 1.

1 This project was formerly titled as the “Norman Road Phase 2” and then the “John Macdonell Street Phase 2” project. On the advice of the Executive Committee it was renamed to more clearly reflect the purpose of the project.

2/3

LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT The Five-Year Long Term Capital Plan outlook has been updated (Appendices 2 and 3) since last reported to the Committee at Cycle 1 (September 30, 2015) and is based on the planned Fiscal Framework for Capital and Related Projects. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DELIVERED CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS FY 17/18 TO FY 20/21 Balanced with the multi-year Fiscal Framework for Capital and Related Projects, the capital requirements content for the four future LTCP FYs beyond FY 16/17 will be shaped by the analysis, integration and prioritization of outcomes arising from: • The Campus Plan Update • The Residences Facility Condition Audit • Housing Master Plan • Parking Master Plan • Facility Needs & Priorities Study Update (the University’s Space Plan) • Energy Conservation and Demand Management Plan Update • Capital Asset Management Plans – Reserve Fund Studies: CFHBRC, Schmon Tower, MIWSFPA In addition to planning on and recommending the full funding of the 3rd Campus Entrance & Grounds Yard Relocation in FY 17/18 there will be an emphasis on the renewal and improvement of the University’s Main Campus roads (Residence Road, Sir Isaac Brock Boulevards North/South/East/West, Village Residence access road & courtyard lanes, and parking lots) over the next two years. Capital requirements arising from the Energy Conservation and Demand Management Plan include the development of solar and wind generated electricity and the phased replacement of the natural gas powered reciprocating engines in the Co-generation Plant used for heating, cooling, and powering much of the Main Campus in order to achieve operating cost savings related to natural gas consumption and to reduce the University’s green-house gas emissions. The phased replacement of sub-surface waterlines used for potable water and the district distribution of water used for heating and cooling will be undertaken, as the waterlines to and from the Co-generation plant are getting thinner. Classroom modernization and renewal, Accessible Built Environment improvements (FY 17/18 will see the recommendation the installation of an elevator in the two-floor Central Utilities Building following design in FY 16/17), and Residences and non-Residences deferred maintenance along with the undertaking of capital requirements coming due as identified in the capital asset management plans and reserve fund studies will be included. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DELIVERED CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS FY 17/18 TO FY 20/21 Information Technology Services (ITS) capital spend over the next five years is emphasized towards the replacement of Brock core applications. Other core applications identified to be replaced within this time frame are:

Human Resource Information System

Facilities Management Computerized Facility Management System

Student Information System

Learning Management System

3/3

An application road map has been developed by ITS to ensure those core systems and other mid-tier systems have been flagged for review and possible replacement. Also included in the ITS capital spend for FY 17/18 – FY 20/21 is a review and replacement of Brock’s Telecom system which is now 15 years old and nearing its support life. The review will help steer as to what direction would be the best in terms of Brock requirements and technology. Door access systems is another major system identified to be addressed over the next 4-5 years. We currently have multiple door access systems and many administrators of these systems resulting in poor administration and security overall. As an interim, ITS is leading a project to bridge these multiple systems to improve the administration and security vulnerabilities identified. As part of the ITS evergreening (Deferred Maintenance) program, network infrastructure such as Core and edge switches are in line to be replaced as they are near end of life and support. This is in line with ITS’ evergreening strategy. APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Status of Known Major Capital Project Requirements for Development (8 pages) Appendix 2 – Five-Year Long Term Capital Plan Outlook - Graphical (1 page) Appendix 3 – Five-Year Long Term Capital Plan Outlook - Tabular (1 page)

Brock UniversityFive-Year Long Term Capital Plan Outlook - Graphical

Year Total Actuals FM Actuals IT Actuals Total LTCP Budget FM LTCP Budget IT LTCP Budget11-‐12 2,738 2,574 164 12-‐13 5,445 4,657 788 13-‐14 3,952 3,087 865 14-‐15* 3,905 3,053 852 10,325 8,780 1,545 15-‐16 13,800 8,500 5,300

16-‐17 (Draft) 12,264 8,088 4,176 17-‐18 13,127 9,719 4,408 18-‐19 15,508 10,370 5,138 19-‐20 17,514 11,026 6,488 20-‐21 17,899 11,249 6,650

* 14/15 FM Budget includes $2 million reserve

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

11-‐12 12-‐13 13-‐14 14-‐15* 15-‐16 16-‐17 (DraF)

17-‐18 18-‐19 19-‐20 20-‐21

Capital Budget & Actuals ($000s)

Total Actuals FM Actuals IT Actuals

Total LTCP Budget FM LTCP Budget IT LTCP Budget

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: 2016-17 Capital and Related Project Budget

December 2, 2015 Appendix 2

Brock UniversityFive-‐Year Long Term Capital Plan Outlook -‐ Tabular

Unspent** 11-‐12 12-‐13 13-‐14 14-‐15 15-‐16 Q2 15-‐16 Q2 16-‐17 17-‐18 18-‐19 19-‐20 20-‐21 Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Unspent Draft Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast

Specific Major Projects 35,773,193 17,588,845 23,400,070 14,846,241 2,972,210 * 24,701,698 ***

Core FM ProjectsFM Major Projects 150,319 5,020 6,558 528,312 2,311,688 New Construction and Replacements (less than $1M) 250,000 Buildings 721,071 1,001,906 1,532,692 1,872,693 1,765,891 3,221,305 1,352,500 1,250,000 2,550,000 2,250,000 4,000,000 Roads, Parking lots, -‐ 87,186 38,456 347,432 1,468 113,611 820,000 1,188,312 2,000,000 2,000,000 250,000 Above surface, sub-‐surface utilities 106,937 28,035 155,989 9,252 1,460 422,842 404,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 Adaptations, renovations 2,769,706 707,684 4,010 518,466 1,754,836 4,060,000 300,000 666,700 672,000 893,500 AODA 257,035 11,509 124,135 19,800 92,345 257,855 177,000 700,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 Energy Conservation & Demand Management 39,280 341,950 107,236 50,843 51,514 239,649 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 Audits and Studies 109,214 181,797 203,161 282,713 143,216 453,991 495,500 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Residence 1,258,270 111,751 103,500 242,624 1,367,408 1,578,095 324,188 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 Vehicles & Wheeled Equipment 82,511 123,234 114,264 72,949 128,557 77,994 330,000 315,000 303,300 254,000 255,500 Reserve 2,050,000

Total Core FM Projects 2,574,318 4,657,073 3,087,117 3,052,635 4,075,345 10,426,736 8,087,500 9,719,000 10,370,000 11,026,000 11,249,000

Total FM Projects 38,347,511 22,245,918 26,487,187 17,898,876 7,047,555 35,128,434 8,087,500 9,719,000 10,370,000 11,026,000 11,249,000

IT ProjectsCore Applications 70,799 3,729,201 1,639,000 2,832,000 3,523,000 4,832,000 4,953,000 IT-‐Non Residences Evergreening & Growth 164,173 717,590 853,399 680,877 336,533 1,125,082 1,622,800 1,202,000 1,235,000 1,256,000 1,277,000 IT-‐Residences -‐ 70,456 12,007 170,947 328,923 501,569 914,700 374,000 380,000 400,000 420,000

Total IT Projects 164,173 788,046 865,406 851,824 736,255 5,355,852 4,176,500 4,408,000 5,138,000 6,488,000 6,650,000

Forecasted (to be allocated to FM & IT) 13,127,000 15,508,000 17,514,000 17,899,000

Total FM and IT Projects 38,511,684 23,033,964 27,352,593 18,750,700 7,783,810 40,484,286 12,264,000 14,127,000 15,508,000 17,514,000 17,899,000

Notes:* Includes MIWSFPA actuals, which aren't reflected in the Q2 Capital Update** Includes all projects previously approved by the Board*** Does not include the MIWSFPA overspendMajor projects in 15/16 -‐ $2.8M additional funding added to IT Core Application for Finance SystemMajor projects in 17/18 -‐ $1M additional funding added to IT Core Applications for FMIn FY 17/18, the $1,000,000 difference between the Plan's "Total" and the Framework's "Forecasted (to be allocated to FM & IT" is intended to be funded from Reserves

Actual Spend ForecastCapital Infrastructure Com

mittee

TOPIC: Five-Year Long Term

Capital Plan Outlook

Decem

ber 2, 2015 A

ppendix 3

1/2

Board of Trustees


Decision Item

TOPIC: 2016-17 Capital and Related Project Budget

December 2, 2015 Tom Saint-Ivany, Associate Vice-President, Facilities Management

David Cullum, Associate Vice-President, Information Technology Services

MOTION That the Capital Infrastructure Committee approve the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 long term capital and related planning activities presented in Appendix 1 of the report to the Committee dated December 2, 2015 subject to funding approval from the Board of Trustees. DISCUSSION Following consultation and coordination, including with the Senate Information Technology and Infrastructure Committee and the Senior Administrative Council, the recommended FY 2016-2017 Long Term Capital Plan (LTCP) at Appendix 1 provides a proposed ‘best-fit’ alignment of known FY 16/17 capital requirements within the University’s overall fiscal framework target of $12,264,000 for FY 16/17. Recommended allocations are graphically presented at Appendix 2. Approval will enable staff sufficient time to undertake preparatory work to prepare for the design and/or procurement of these capital requirements, including further progressive development of four of the seven multi-year major capital projects that were submitted by the University into MTCU’s inventory of projects. Please refer to the current Cycle #2 Topic Report: “Five-Year Long Term Capital Plan Outlook” for specific information on those four major capital projects and their contemplated further development. The status of the three other projects is:

a. Twin-pad Municipal Arena. This project, conceptually a municipally funded arena on University south campus lands in Thorold, was submitted to MTCU for information purposes only, with no expectation for provincial (or University) funding consideration. It has been recently confirmed with municipal authorities that there is no current need for it.

b. Cool Climate Oenology and Viticulture Institute (CCOVI) Grape & Wine Innovation

Platform. This project proposed the construction of a three floor, 7,289 gross square foot, addition onto the existing Main Campus Inniskillen Hall that is where CCOVI is accommodated. This project is being withdrawn for the purposes of undertaking a further look at program requirements including as it relates to industry benefits, needs and linkages.

2/2

c. Environmental Sustainability Research Centre (in the Alumni Greenhouse). The

Alumni Greenhouse building, vacant since the occupancy of the greenhouses in the CFHBRC and with a Facility Condition Index of 0.82 (indicative of prohibitive-to-repair), is planned to be removed and the site restored. Alternative uses for the building were considered (a café, Applied Health Sciences dry labs, and the Environmental Sustainability Research Centre); however, it was concluded that those requirements could be more cost-effectively accommodated in existing or new space that is aligned with the Campus Plan Update (January 2016) and arising from the Facility Needs & Priorities Study Update (to be completed in 2016).

Management intends on undertaking the design of the Third Campus Entrance & Grounds Yard Relocation (a major capital project) in 2016 and, at the December 2016 Board and Committee meetings, recommending the allocation of FY 17/18 LTCP funds (estimated at $2.3 million) for tender and construction in 2017 subject to having sought Board of Trustees approval. The Campus Plan Update will inform the design-brief that will be used to procure the Consulting Engineer services in respect of the routing of the new road and adjacent University land uses. The allocation of $3,305,000 to deferred maintenance falls short of the intended deferred maintenance annual spending target of $6,000,000. The allocation for Fiscal Year 2014/2015 was $4,980,730 and the allocation for the current Fiscal Year 2015/2016 is $6,017,500. The benefit achieved in funding short of the deferred maintenance target is that it enables the full scope of the $3.2 million Phase 2 Post-MIWSFPA bundle of projects to be achieved in FY 16/17 (versus further splitting them into a FY 17/18 Phase 3). This includes for the full conversion of the Sean O’Sullivan Theatre into a lecture facility. In consideration of the “Student Residence Needs Analysis & Housing Master Plan,” that is now underway, and the results of the recently completed Residence facility condition audit, spending on Residence facilities will be less this year pending the inter-departmental analysis and determination of capital needs and priorities to be funded in future fiscal years (see Topic Report: Residence Facility Condition Index, dated December 2, 2015) Funding for the Finance System Core Application is included, along with funding to further develop the next group of Core Applications to be replaced. APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Fiscal Year 2016/2017 Long Term Capital Plan (3 pages) Appendix 2 – Fiscal Year 2016/2017 Long Term Capital Plan Allocations (2 pages)

November 19, 2015 1/3

DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017 LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN (LTCP)

Financial Planning Target – FM $8,087,500 DM: $6,000,000

Non-DM: $2,087,500 Financial Planning Target – IT $4,176,500 IT Core Applications: $1,639,000

IT: $2,537,500 TOTAL FY 16/17 Planned $ Allocation $12,264,000

Project Category Budget

Needs Remarks

MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECTS (greater than $1 million)

Schmon Tower Student Services Centre Atrium $50,000 Pre-design. Total Project Budget $12.1M est.

International Centre Building Phase 2 $20,000 FN&P & Design Update. Total Project Budget $26.6M est.

Heritage Plaza - Brock-Niagara Centre for Health & Well-being

$50,000 SMA. Prepare Design-Build SOR. Total Project Budget $14M est.

Schmon Tower Renewal DM $80,000 Feasibility Study. Total Project Total Project Budget $25M-$42M est

3rd Campus Entrance & Grounds Yard Relocation $188,312 Design. FY17/18 Construct $2.3M. Total Project Budget $2.5M

Sub-Total $388,312

NEW CONSTRUCTION AND REPLACEMENTS – MINOR CAPITAL (less than $1 million)

BUILDINGS

Annual Controls Conversion DM $42,500 CUB Cooling Tower Renewal DM $100,000 High Voltage Equipment Renewal DM $75,000 600 V Sub-Station Deficiencies DM $85,000 Podium Roof DM $450,000 MC “D” Block Roof DM $325,000 Central Utilities – Training Classroom Portable DM $100,000 Replace existing Flooring Renewal Program DM $50,000 Interior & Exterior Door Renewal DM $50,000 Alumni Greenhouse Demolition & Site Restoration DM $75,000 FCI 0.82

Sub-Total $1,352,500

ABOVE SURFACE/SUB-SURFACE UTILITIES, DRAINAGE, ROADS & PARKING LOTS, SIDEWALKS

University Rd. East from Lot P to Alphie’s DM $650,000 Reconstruction University Rd. East – CFHBRC Kiss & Ride $100,000 Joint Health & Safety Cmtee #086 Aboriginal Students’ Garden $35,000 CFHBRC Site - North-West Corner Capital Contribution – Merrittville Hwy Upgrades $35,000 Sidewalks & Lighting

Sub-Total $820,000

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: 2016-17 Capital and Related Project Budget December 2, 2015 Appendix 1

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

November 19, 2015 2/3

ADAPTATIONS/RENOVATIONS AND MAJOR RENEWAL

Phase 2 Post-MIWSFPA Bundle of Projects $2,240,000 Phase 2 Total: $3,200,000

(Using Residence Res: $2,050,000) DM estimated $960,000 Centre for Digital Humanities $270,000 Re: FY 15/16 LTCP Project Classroom Modernization & Renewal $367,500 CRTTC Priorities - 7 x Seminar

Rooms DM estimated $157,500 CFHBRC 400-Level Alterations - Kinesiology Grad $25,000 Functional Prog via FM op budget One Stop – Student Services $160,000 ST 3rd Floor 13th Floor Board Room Chair Replacement $20,000


AUDITS & STUDIES

Facility Needs & Priorities (FN&P) Study $250,000 University “Space Plan” Facility Condition Audits DM $75,000 Recurring Annual VFA Asset Database Maintenance Services $20,500 Recurring Annual Thistle Classrms - Renewal & Accessibility Study $75,000 CRTTC Priority Pond Inlet Renovation Some DM $25,000 SOR Study Capital Asset Management Planning DM $30,000 CUB Building Reserve Fund Study Space Audits $20,000

Sub-Total $495,500

RESIDENCES

Residences (Non-Deferred Maintenance) Village Furniture Replacement – Phase 2 $100,000 DeCew Furniture replacement – Phase 2 $100,000

Proximity Card Access System $124,188 Sub-Total $324,188

AODA ACCESSIBLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT (ABE Committee)

Single-Use Accessible Washroom Call Stations AODA $72,000 Academic Service Counters AODA $28,000 CUB Elevator AODA $50,000 Design. FY17/18 Construct $600K Admin Service Counters AODA $27,000

Sub-Total $177,000

VEHICLES & WHEELED EQUIPMENT

Replace FM 002 (RTV) $22,000 Replace FM 023 (CAT IT Loader) $135,000 Replace FM 028 (Kubota 3680 Mower) $36,000 Replace FM 057 (Full-size Van) $33,500 Replace FM 060 (Full-size Van) $33,500 Trailer-mounted Emergency Generator $70,000 For ‘building plug-in’ e.g. Kenmore

Sub-Total $330,000

November 19, 2015 3/3

IT – CORE APPLICATIONS

Core Applications Development $639,000 IT Infrastructure Finance System $1,000,000 IT Infrastructure


IT – NON-RESIDENCES

Physical Security & Paging System Improvements $172,300 Hardware EG & Growth Payment Card Industry Audit $60,000 IT Infrastructure Sharepoint Forms Engine $35,000 Enterprise Software Wireless Expansion – WH, SBH & TH $90,000 Hardware EG & Growth Replace switches in PLZ $252,000 Hardware EG & Growth Upgrade TH 300, Gaming Program area & Print Shop. Central logging server

$155,000 IT Infrastructure

Replace Edge Firewalls (HA) $200,000 Hardware EG & Growth Infrastructure Growth & VPN $214,000 Hardware EG & Growth Data Centre & Campus UPS $80,000 Hardware EG & Growth Hamilton WAN Network Improvements $15,000 IT Infrastructure Replace 228 PC’s & 140 Monitors $258,000 Hardware EG & Growth Replace projectors in WH 324, GLN 162, 164, 212 & MC A241

$15,000 Hardware EG & Growth

Replace video conferencing equipment in CRN 217 & Sankey and install ST 1215 for H.R.


Upgrade audio & install control unit WH 147 $35,000 Hardware EG & Growth Backup server for Video Centre $10,000 IT Infrastructure


IT – RESIDENCES Wireless Expansion – LOW, GBV & EARP $480,000 Hardware EG & Growth Replace switches in LOW, GBV & EARP $110,700 Hardware EG & Growth Remove phones in rooms, deploy 380 phones in common rooms


Replace Edge Firewalls (HA) $235,000 Hardware EG & Growth Replace UPS $10,000 Hardware EG & Growth

Sub-Total $914,700

TOTAL FY 16/17 Capital Requirements (Vis-à-Vis Planned $ Allocation)

$12,264,000

FM DM: $3,305,000 FM Non-DM: $4,782,500 IT – Core Applications: $1,639,000 IT – Non-Res: $1,622,800 IT – Res: $914,700

Grey Shaded Area – Capital projects submitted into the MTCU Refresh of Capital Inventory for Postsecondary Education FM DM – Deferred Maintenance (rose shaded) FM Non-DM -- Facilities Management-delivered Non-Deferred Maintenance (blue shaded) CRTTC – Classroom Renewal, Teaching and Technologies Committee SOR – Statement of Requirements (Functional Program) Est – Estimated CUB – Central Utilities Building (including Co-generation Plant) EG – Ever-greening

FY 16/17 Long Term Capital Plan Alloca9ons Planned Alloca9on of $12,264,000

Major Capital Project Development

Buildings

Above/Sub-‐Surface U?li?es, Drainage, Roads & Parking Lots, Sidewalks Adapta?ons/Renova?ons and Major Renewal

Audits & Studies

Residences

AODA Accessible Built Environment

Vehicles & Wheeled Equipment

IT -‐ Core Applica?ons

IT -‐ Non-‐Residences

IT -‐ Residences 1/2

Capital Infrastructure Comm

ittee TO

PIC: 2016-17 Capital and Related Project Budget D

ecember 2, 2015 A

ppendix 2

FY 16/17 Long Term Capital Plan Alloca9ons Planned Alloca9on of $12,264,000 FM Deferred Maintenance

$3,305,000

FM Non-‐Deferred Maintenance $4,782,500

IT -‐ Core Applica?ons $1,639,000

IT -‐ Non-‐Residences $1,622,800

IT -‐ Residences $914,700

2/2

1/2

Board of Trustees


Decision Item

TOPIC: Q2 Financial Update on Capital and Related Projects

December 2, 2015 Tom Saint-Ivany, Associate Vice-President, Facilities Management

David Cullum, Associate Vice-President, Information Technology Services

MOTION

That the Capital Infrastructure Committee approve the inclusion of the additional capital and related requirements, identified in Management’s Fiscal Year 2014/15 and Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Long Term Capital Plans “Q2 Financial Update on Capital and Related Projects,” into the Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Long Term Capital Plan.

BACKGROUND

As identified on September 30th, at Q1, the Capital Infrastructure Committee approved the additional LTCP capital requirements of $119,092 Non IT and $99,000 IT, increasing the previously approved 2014/15 and 2015/16 LTCP budgets to a revised total of $41,084,535 (Non-IT) and $6,943,932 (IT) respectively.

DISCUSSION

General. Nine (9) Non-IT projects and four (4) IT projects have been completed and closed since the Q1 update. Since the Q1 report, $2,397,366 has been spent on approved LTCP projects being delivered by Facilities Management. The Residence Reserve remains at $2,050,000.

15/16 LTCP. As at the end of Q2, two (2) Non-IT capital requirements have arisen totaling $88,500 (Table 1). With funding available from surpluses within the approved FY 15/16 LTCP, Management recommends that these requirements be added to the FY 15/16 LTCP.

Capital Requirement (“DM” – Deferred Maintenance) Amount

“2000 Years” Sculpture Move $43,500 Washroom Upgrades – Mackenzie Chown (DM) $45,000

Total $88,500

Table 1

2/2

In summary, as at the end of Q1, Management recommends:

That the Non-IT capital requirements identified at Table 1, with funds available from surpluses within the Q2-approved FY 15/16 LTCP, be included in the FY 15/16 LTCP (highlighted in green on Appendix 1)

APPENDIX

Appendix 1 – 2014/15 & 2015/16 LTCP Q2 Status Report as at October 26, 2015 (6 pages)

APPENDIX 1

2014/15 2015/16 LTCP Q2 Status Report as at October 26, 2015

Capital Infrastructure CommitteeTOPIC: Q2 Financial Update on Capital and Related Projects


Page 1 of 6

COMPLETED PROJECTS

Project NameBudget

Year

Q1 Sept/15 Approved Funding

Q1 Funding Adjustments

Approved Funding (A)

14/15 Actual Costs (B)

15/16 Actual Costs to October 26, 2015

(C)

Project Variance (A-B-C)

Cost at Completion

Podium Roof - Phase 1 14/15 110,000$ 110,000$ 109,226$ -$ 774$ 109,226$

Facility Condition Audits (VFA) 14/15 75,000$ 75,000$ 75,541$ -$ (541)$ 75,541$

B Block Level 300 Network Upgrades 14/15 70,000$ 70,000$ 56,152$ (191)$ 14,039$ 55,961$

South Block Wireless Upgrading 14/15 50,000$ 50,000$ 49,282$ -$ 718$ 49,282$

Campus Wireless Upgrading 14/15 28,100$ 28,100$ 27,999$ -$ 101$ 27,999$

Faculty of Math & Science Paint Booth Code Compliance 14/15 70,000$ 70,000$ 68,680$ -$ 1,320$ 68,680$

Thistle Make-up Air Upgrade 14/15 27,000$ 27,000$ 19,304$ -$ 7,696$ 19,304$

Faculty of Math & Science Nitrogen Room Upgrades 14/15 30,000$ 30,000$ 61,542$ -$ (31,542)$ 61,542$

Facility Improv. To Support ITS Classroom Improv. 14/15 40,000$ 40,000$ 25,427$ -$ 14,573$ 25,427$

Thistle Door Replacements 14/15 33,030$ 33,030$ 41,081$ -$ (8,051)$ 41,081$

East Academic Seminar Room A/V Renewal 14/15 117,000$ 117,000$ 108,279$ -$ 8,721$ 108,279$

Lowenberger Kitchen AHU Replacememt 14/15 325,000$ 325,000$ 299,122$ -$ 25,878$ 299,122$

Village Courts 10, 11, 12 Roof Replacement 14/15 125,000$ 125,000$ 142,490$ -$ (17,490)$ 142,490$

WH 311 14/15 8,000$ 8,000$ 8,138$ -$ (138)$ 8,138$

WH 327 14/15 85,000$ 85,000$ 86,612$ -$ (1,612)$ 86,612$

Campus Entrance Sign Renewal 14/15 30,000$ 30,000$ 6,730$ -$ 23,270$ 6,730$

Sculpture Relocation 14/15 40,000$ 40,000$ 32,471$ -$ 7,529$ 32,471$

Water Conservation - low flow toilets 14/15 19,000$ 19,000$ 18,943$ -$ 57$ 18,943$

Vehicles - Ancillary Utility Vehicles 14/15 17,000$ 17,000$ 17,062$ -$ (62)$ 17,062$

Vehicles - FM Small Equipment 14/15 10,000$ 10,000$ 9,493$ -$ 507$ 9,493$

Vehicles - Security 14/15 55,000$ 55,000$ 46,394$ -$ 8,606$ 46,394$

Isaac Brock Blvd Transit Waiting Area Improvements (Reduced Scope) 14/15 64,700$ 64,700$ 58,404$ -$ 6,296$ 58,404$

BRIC Watermain Replacement - Additional Expenses 14/15 -$ -$ 8,554$ -$ (8,554)$ 8,554$

BUSU Roof Replacement 14/15 280,460$ 280,460$ 280,460$ -$ -$ 280,460$

Plaza - 513 14/15 8,415$ 8,415$ 8,415$ -$ -$ 8,415$

Aquatic Centre - Final Costs 14/15 8,190$ 8,190$ 10,796$ -$ (2,606)$ 10,796$

CFHBRC Asset Management Plan/Reserve Fund Study 14/15 42,900$ 42,900$ 20,992$ 2,896$ 19,012$ 23,888$

Schmon Tower Lobby Millwork 14/15 -$ -$ 19,911$ -$ (19,911)$ 19,911$

High Voltage Equipment Renewal 14/15 75,000$ 75,000$ 64,372$ 9,917$ 711$ 74,289$

WH 324 (tiered classroom) - Ph1 Design 14/15 20,000$ 20,000$ 15,720$ (5,169)$ 9,449$ 10,551$

Add Twin Exchanger at HX-2 14/15 100,000$ 100,000$ 5,361$ 5,687$ 88,952$ 11,048$

Campus Metering 14/15 50,000$ 50,000$ 18,148$ 28,046$ 3,806$ 46,194$

Emergency Exit Light Replacements (LED) 14/15 10,000$ 10,000$ 836$ -$ 9,164$ 836$

Project Management Expenses 14/15 152,040$ 152,040$ 148,767$ -$ 3,273$ 148,767$

Cogen Energy Audit and Mass Balance Study 14/15 20,000$ 20,000$ 12,849$ 5,506$ 1,645$ 18,355$

Walker Complex Humidification Boiler Replacement 14/15 45,000$ 45,000$ 7,219$ 13,770$ 24,011$ 20,989$

Cairns East Entrance Door Replacement 14/15 46,370$ 46,370$ 69,814$ 25,042$ (48,486)$ 94,856$

Schmon Tower Elevators 14/15 26,400$ 26,400$ 27,278$ (878)$ 27,278$

Exam Desks & Chairs 14/15 40,000$ 40,000$ 34,100$ 5,900$ 34,100$

General 14/15 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Swimming Pool Hydraulic Cylinder Renewal 15/16 75,000$ 75,000$ 3,476$ 71,524$ 3,476$

MC "A" Roofs 57,58 15/16 425,000$ 425,000$ 323,542$ 101,458$ 323,542$

FM Staff Vehicle Replacement - Used 15/16 18,000$ 18,000$ 23,955$ (5,955)$ 23,955$

MIWSFPA vehicle 15/16 35,000$ 35,000$ 24,335$ 10,665$ 24,335$

Community & Ancillary Services (Conf Serv RTV's) 15/16 21,000$ 21,000$ 19,165$ 1,835$ 19,165$

MCC F314 Modifications 2-2016 15/16 -$ 12,107$ 12,107$ 12,107$ -$ 12,107$

Campus Security New and Replacement Vehicle 15/16 35,000$ 35,000$ 25,943$ 9,057$ 25,943$

Total Completed Non IT Projects 2,962,605$ 12,107$ 2,974,712$ 2,060,586$ 579,407$ 334,720$ 2,639,993$

2014/15 & 2015/16 LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN (NON IT)

APPENDIX 1




Page 2 of 6

REMAINING PROJECTS

15/16 Actual Costs to Date

Total Project Variance

Total Projected Cost at

Completion

(October 26, 2015) (A-B-C-D-E-F) (B+C+D+E+F)

MAJOR CAPITAL

Goodman School of Business - Alternative Planning 14/15 125,000$ 125,000$ 119,901$ 5,020$ 5,099$ -$ 125,000$

Artificial Turf Sports Field- Design Fees 14/15 60,325$ -$ 60,325$ 30,418$ 5,275$ 29,907$ -$ 60,325$

Artificial Turf Sports Field (Construction) 14/15 1,500,000$ 135$ 1,500,135$ 810,563$ 1,500,135$ -$ 1,500,135$

Schmon Tower Atrium 14/15 5,337$ 1,142$ 6,479$ -$ 6,479$ -$

Goodman School of Business 15/16 22,000,000$ -$ 22,000,000$ 12,506$ 1,200,000$ 7,400,000$ 13,250,000$ 150,000$ -$ 22,000,000$

Goodman School of Business 15/16 2,000,000$ -$ 2,000,000$ -$ 2,000,000$ -$ 2,000,000$

Total Major Capital 25,690,662$ 1,277$ 25,691,939$ 150,319$ 833,364$ 2,735,141$ 7,400,000$ 15,250,000$ 150,000$ 6,479$ 25,685,460$

NEW CONSTRUCTION & REPLACEMENT (UNDER $1 MILLION)

Data Centre Generator 15/16 250,000$ 250,000$ -$ 100,000$ 150,000$ -$ 250,000$

Total New Construction & Replacement 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ -$ 100,000$ 150,000$ -$ -$ -$ 250,000$

BUILDINGS

Annual Controls Conversion 14/15 75,000$ 75,000$ 67,386$ (1,071)$ 7,614$ -$ 75,000$

Mackenzie Chown Fire Alarm Replacement 14/15 1,402,000$ 1,402,000$ 362,839$ 371,988$ 1,039,161$ -$ 1,402,000$

Aquatic Centre Structural Repair - Ph 1 Design 14/15 150,000$ 150,000$ 51,971$ 10,556$ 98,029$ -$ 150,000$

POST MIWSFPA- Schmon Tower Upgrades - Design Fees 14/15 62,046$ 62,046$ 21,964$ 6,408$ 40,082$ -$ 62,046$

Walker Complex - Faculty of AHS Air Quality Upgrades - Ph 1 Design 14/15 60,000$ 60,000$ 30$ 2,830$ 59,970$ -$ 60,000$

East Academic Site Work 14/15 50,000$ 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$ 50,000$

POST MIWSFPA- SOS THEATRE Upgrades -Design Fees 14/15 87,381$ 87,381$ -$ 3,404$ 87,381$ -$ 87,381$

POST MIWSFPA- Thistle Upgrades - Design Fees 14/15 85,313$ 85,313$ 23,477$ 37,747$ 61,836$ -$ 85,313$

POST MIWSFPA- Glenridge/East Academic Upgrades - Design Fees 14/15 40,260$ 40,260$ 7,033$ 10,241$ 33,227$ -$ 40,260$

Print Shop Lift (G Block Elevator) 14/15 60,600$ 60,600$ 7,658$ 29,658$ 92,342$ (39,400)$ 100,000$

Aquatic Centre Structural Repair 15/16 1,200,000$ 1,200,000$ 318,206$ 1,200,000$ -$ 1,200,000$

High Voltage Equipment Renewal 15/16 75,000$ 75,000$ 9,917$ 16,391$ 65,083$ -$ 75,000$

Annual Controls Conversion 15/16 32,500$ 32,500$ 27,497$ 32,500$ -$ 32,500$

600 V Sub-Station Deficiencies 15/16 85,000$ 85,000$ 2,877$ 85,000$ -$ 85,000$

Walker Complex-FAHS Air Quality Upgrades 15/16 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ -$ -$ 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$

Podium Roof 15/16 435,000$ 435,000$ 481,777$ 532,000$ (97,000)$ 532,000$

Install Dehumidifiers- Cairns 15/16 -$ 52,757$ 52,757$ -$ 52,757$ -$ -$ 52,757$

BUSU Bus Shelters 15/16 -$ -$ 3,505$ 40,000$ (40,000)$ 40,000$

Schmon Tower 3rd Flr Carpet Repl. 15/16 -$ -$ -$ 40,000$ (40,000)$ 40,000$

Schmon Tower Lobby Floor 15/16 -$ -$ -$ 20,000$ 130,000$ (150,000)$ 150,000$

Total Buildings 4,900,100$ 52,757$ 4,952,857$ 552,275$ 1,322,016$ 3,636,982$ 1,130,000$ -$ -$ (366,400)$ 5,319,257$

ROADS, PARKING LOTS, WALKWAYS, STRUCTURES, SURFACE DRAINAGE

BRIC Parking Lot Rebuilding 14/15 253,000$ 253,000$ 239,390$ (0)$ -$ 13,610$ 239,390$

Third Campus Entrance Design 14/15 45,000$ 45,000$ 9,543$ 0$ 35,457$ -$ 45,000$

Asphalt Repairs to Various Roads 14/15 45,000$ 45,000$ 1,468$ 49,601$ (4,601)$ 49,601$

Total Roads, Parking Lots, Walkways, Structures 343,000$ -$ 343,000$ 248,933$ 1,468$ 85,058$ -$ -$ -$ 9,009$ 333,991$

SURFACE/ABOVE, SUB-SURFACE UTILITIES, DISTRIBUTION

Back-flow Prevention - St. Catharines 14/15 50,000$ 50,000$ 698$ 1,243$ 49,302$ -$ -$ 50,000$

Potable Water Piping Master Plan/Design (for tunnel and buried piping) 14/15 110,000$ 110,000$ -$ 110,000$ -$ 110,000$

Stormwater Management Facility 14/15 215,000$ 215,000$ 217$ 215,000$ -$ 215,000$

Back-Flow Prevention - St. Catharines 15/16 50,000$ 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$ -$ 50,000$

Total Surface/Above, Sub-Surface Utilities 425,000$ -$ 425,000$ 698$ 1,460$ 374,302$ 50,000$ -$ -$ -$ 425,000$

Total 16/17 Projected Cost (D)

Total 17/18 Projected Cost

(E)

Total 18/19 Projected Cost (F)

Project Name


Budget Year

Approved Funding


Revised Funding (A)

Actual Costs 14/15 (B)


(C)

APPENDIX 1




Page 3 of 6

REMAINING PROJECTS




Completion


ADAPTATIONS, RENOVATIONS AND MAJOR RENEWAL

MC C308 Classroom Renovation 14/15 24,016$ 24,016$ 12,201$ 24,016$ -$ 24,016$

CDH Facility Plan- Design 14/15 25,000$ 25,000$ 4,010$ 7,217$ 21,325$ -$ (335)$ 25,335$

Library 6th Floor Group Learning Space 15/16 105,000$ 105,000$ 3,359$ 72,001$ 101,641$ -$ -$ 105,000$

A207,A242,E208 Marketing/Comm. Renovations 15/16 -$ 22,673$ 22,673$ 15,995$ 22,673$ -$ 22,673$

MC C405 and C407 Classroom Renovation 15/16 -$ 30,278$ 30,278$ 16,145$ 30,278$ -$ 30,278$

MIWSFPA- Thistle Upgrades 15/16 776,299$ 776,299$ 112,157$ 776,299$ -$ 776,299$

MIWSFPA- Glenridge/East Academic Upgrades 15/16 372,036$ 372,036$ 13,204$ 537,321$ (165,285)$ 537,321$

MIWSFPA- Schmon Tower Upgrades 15/16 269,318$ 269,318$ 2,766$ 269,318$ -$ 269,318$

MIWSFPA- SOS Theatre Upgrades 15/16 107,347$ 107,347$ 103,482$ 107,347$ -$ 107,347$

EA Seminar Room and Flat Classroom Renewal 15/16 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ 100,000$ -$ 100,000$

EA Learning Space ITS/AV Modernization 15/16 190,000$ 190,000$ 14,124$ 159,493$ 175,876$ -$ 190,000$

CDH Facilities Plan-Construction 15/16 179,000$ 179,000$ 517$ 0$ -$ 178,483$ -$ 179,000$

Washroom Upgrades - MC Chown 15/16 -$ -$ -$ 45,000$ (45,000)$ 45,000$

Total Adaptations, Renovations and Major Renewal 2,148,016$ 52,951$ 2,200,967$ 22,010$ 514,661$ 2,211,094$ 178,483$ -$ -$ (210,620)$ 2,411,587$

AODA (ACCESSIBLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT)

Jubilee Court & Decew Ramps 14/15 125,000$ 125,000$ 5,042$ 81,846$ 119,958$ -$ 125,000$

Single Use Accessible Washroom Call Stations 14/15 25,000$ 25,000$ 3,309$ 25,000$ -$ 25,000$

Exterior Paths of Travel (Design of Public Spaces) 14/15 95,000$ 95,000$ 14,758$ 7,189$ 15,242$ 65,000$ -$ 95,000$

Exterior Routes of Travel 15/16 25,000$ 25,000$ -$ 10,000$ 15,000$ -$ 25,000$

Life Safety-Visual Alarms (WC,TA,BRIC,WH) 15/16 25,000$ 25,000$ -$ 7,000$ 18,000$ -$ 25,000$

Parking Curb Cuts/Accessible Spaces 15/16 15,000$ 15,000$ -$ 5,000$ 10,000$ -$ 15,000$

Traditional Residences Auto Door Operators 15/16 60,000$ 60,000$ -$ 10,000$ 50,000$ -$ 60,000$

Total AODA 370,000$ -$ 370,000$ 19,800$ 92,345$ 192,200$ 158,000$ -$ -$ -$ 370,000$

ENERGY CONSERVATION & DEMAND MANAGEMENT

CBF Supply and Exhaust Air Improvements (CFHBRC) 14/15 100,000$ 100,000$ 1,158$ 50,000$ 50,000$ -$ 100,000$

Energy Audits for Key Buildings and Areas 14/15 20,000$ 20,000$ 11,363$ 5,979$ 13,637$ (5,000)$ 25,000$

Lighting Conversion Main Campus 14/15 30,000$ 30,000$ 336$ 5,138$ 96,899$ (67,235)$ 97,235$

Water Treatment Review (CFHBRC) 14/15 10,000$ 10,000$ -$ 7,500$ 2,500$ -$ 10,000$

Total Energy Conservation & Demand Management 160,000$ -$ 160,000$ 11,699$ 12,275$ 168,036$ 52,500$ -$ -$ (72,235)$ 232,235$

AUDITS & STUDIES

Athletics & Rec.Services Facility Needs Study 14/15 35,000$ 35,000$ -$ 35,000$ -$ 35,000$

Residence Reserve Fund Study 14/15 200,000$ 200,000$ 69,173$ 200,000$ -$ 200,000$

Campus Plan Update 14/15 200,000$ 200,000$ 13,201$ 55,107$ 186,799$ -$ 200,000$

Reserve Fund Studies (Schmon Tower et al) 14/15 25,000$ 25,000$ 5,894$ 25,000$ -$ 25,000$

Facility Condition Audits (VFA) 15/16 75,000$ 75,000$ 10,146$ 75,000$ -$ 75,000$

Parking Lot Audit/Master Plan 15/16 53,500$ 53,500$ -$ 53,500$ -$ 53,500$

Total Audits & Studies 588,500$ -$ 588,500$ 13,201$ 140,321$ 575,299$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 588,500$

OTHER

Move 3 Corten Sculptures to MIWSFPA 14/15 25,000$ 25,000$ 894$ 2,513$ 31,106$ (7,000)$ 32,000$

Gateway - LED Messaging Sign 14/15 95,000$ 95,000$ -$ 95,000$ -$ 95,000$

Gateway Furniture 14/15 300,000$ 300,000$ 265,051$ 291,000$ 9,000$ 291,000$

Replace Sankey Chairs and Tables 14/15 36,560$ 36,560$ -$ 36,560$ -$ 36,560$

Restoration of Path of Possibilities Sculpture 14/15 10,000$ 10,000$ -$ -$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$

"2000 Years" Relocation 15/16 -$ -$ 1,292$ 43,500$ (43,500)$ 43,500$

Total Other 466,560$ -$ 466,560$ 894$ 268,856$ 497,166$ 10,000$ -$ -$ (41,500)$ 508,060$


Project NameBudget

Year Approved Funding


Revised Funding (A)



(C)



(E)


APPENDIX 1




Page 4 of 6

REMAINING PROJECTS




Completion


RESIDENCE

Furniture repl-residence 14/15 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,910$ 109,692$ (9,692)$ 109,692$

Prox. Card access system - residence 14/15 150,000$ 150,000$ 134$ 976$ 149,866$ -$ 150,000$

Lowenberger Carpeting Replacement 15/16 150,000$ 150,000$ 4,648$ 110,497$ 113,899$ 31,453$ -$ 150,000$

Village Fire Alarm/Emergency Notification 15/16 1,140,000$ 1,140,000$ 15,717$ 786,250$ 888,201$ 236,082$ 903,918$

Village Residence Underground Conduit for Wireless System 15/16 115,000$ 115,000$ -$ -$ -$ 115,000$ -$

DeCew Lighting Retrofit 15/16 200,000$ 200,000$ 1,498$ 4,575$ 18,502$ 180,000$ -$ 200,000$

Village Furniture Replacement 15/16 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ 99,149$ 99,149$ -$ 851$ 99,149$

Lowenberger Cladding Replacement 15/16 200,000$ 200,000$ -$ -$ 20,000$ 180,000$ -$ 200,000$

Village Exterior Court Lighting (Final Phase) 15/16 50,000$ 50,000$ -$ -$ 27,626$ 22,374$ 27,626$

Miscellaneous Bedroom Painting (Res) 15/16 150,000$ 150,000$ -$ -$ -$ 150,000$ -$ 150,000$

Miscellaneous Public Area Painting (Res) 15/16 50,000$ 50,000$ -$ -$ -$ 50,000$ -$ 50,000$

Village Interior Renewal (Painting,Furniture,Carpeting,Blinds) 15/16 67,500$ 67,500$ -$ -$ -$ 67,500$ -$ 67,500$

Decew Painting Renewal 15/16 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ -$ -$ 100,000$ -$ 100,000$

Total Residence 2,572,500$ -$ 2,572,500$ 21,997$ 1,102,357$ 1,426,935$ 758,953$ -$ -$ 364,615$ 2,207,885$

VEHICLES

Small Equipment 15/16 32,000$ 32,000$ 19,493$ 32,000$ -$ 32,000$

Maintenance & Utilities Replacement Vehicles 15/16 28,500$ 28,500$ -$ 35,063$ (6,563)$ 35,063$

Main Campus Restricted New & Replacement Vehicles 15/16 28,000$ 28,000$ 15,667$ 21,000$ 7,000$ 21,000$

Total Vehicles 88,500$ -$ 88,500$ -$ 35,159$ 88,063$ -$ -$ -$ 437$ 88,063$

Total Remaining 2014/15 & 2015/16 Projects 38,002,838$ 106,985$ 38,109,823$ 1,041,826$ 4,324,283$ 12,090,276$ 9,887,936$ 15,250,000$ 150,000$ (310,215)$ 38,420,038$

2014/15 & 2015/16 LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN (NON IT) 40,965,443$ 119,092$ 41,084,535$ 3,102,412$ 4,903,690$ 12,669,683$ 9,887,936$ 15,250,000$ 150,000$ 24,504$ 41,060,031$


(C)



(E)


Project NameBudget



Revised Funding (A)



APPENDIX 1




Page 5 of 6

COMPLETED PROJECTS

Project NameBudget

Year

Q1 Sept/15 Approved Funding


Approved Funding (A)


15/16 Actual Costs to October 26, 2015

(C)

Project Variance (A-B-C)

Cost at Completion

Bookstore move to Chase PaymenTech 14/15 20,000$ -$ $ 20,000 37,034$ -$ (17,034)$ 37,034$

Security (Door Security) 14/15 30,000$ -$ $ 30,000 29,155$ -$ 845$ 29,155$

UPS Replacement - Batteries 14/15 35,000$ -$ $ 35,000 34,578$ -$ 422$ 34,578$

CCTV Evergreening 14/15 25,000$ -$ $ 25,000 27,044$ -$ (2,044)$ 27,044$

CATV 14/15 10,000$ -$ $ 10,000 9,799$ -$ 201$ 9,799$

Computer Redeployment 14/15 186,000$ -$ $ 186,000 185,832$ -$ 168$ 185,832$

Audio Visual BAU 2014 14/15 50,000$ -$ $ 50,000 48,842$ 118$ 1,040$ 48,960$

Space Planning - Archibus 14/15 34,331$ -$ $ 34,331 1,705$ 35,502$ (2,876)$ 37,207$

Incident Management Software 14/15 32,600$ -$ $ 32,600 31,873$ 544$ 183$ 32,417$

Disk Storage Replacement 14/15 21,009$ -$ $ 21,009 111$ 3,776$ 17,122$ 3,887$

Contract Management 14/15 55,000$ (55,000)$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Wireless Administrative - EG 15/16 102,000$ -$ $ 102,000 -$ 101,838$ 162$ 101,838$

Telephone System - Administrative 15/16 1,800$ -$ 1,800$ -$ 1,118$ 682$ 1,800$

Total Completed IT Projects 602,740$ (55,000)$ 547,740$ 405,973$ 142,896$ (1,129)$ 549,551$

REMAINING PROJECTS



Total Projected

Cost at Completion

(October 26, 2015) (A-B-C-D) (B+C+D)

IT INFRASTRUCTURE

Sharepoint Infrastructure 14/15 71,000$ 55,000$ 126,000$ 24,437$ 26,067$ 101,563$ -$ -$ 126,000$

Cloud Readiness 14/15 29,000$ -$ 29,000$ -$ -$ 29,000$ -$ -$ 29,000$

Cloud Student Email 14/15 25,000$ -$ 25,000$ 15,331$ -$ 7,669$ -$ 2,000$ 23,000$

Microsoft Dynamics/CRM 14/15 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$

PCI Compliance 15/16 45,000$ 45,000$ -$ -$ 45,000$ -$ -$ 45,000$

Office & Lab Renovations 15/16 60,000$ 60,000$ -$ 2,278$ 40,000$ 20,000$ -$ 60,000$

Total IT Infrastructure 280,000$ 55,000$ 335,000$ 39,768$ 28,345$ 273,232$ 20,000$ 2,000$ 333,000$

IT EVERGREENING

Network Switches 14/15 325,000$ -$ 325,000$ 173,703$ 17,581$ 151,297$ -$ -$ 325,000$

BAU - Evergreening - Residence 14/15 373,992$ -$ 373,992$ 170,947$ 67,192$ 203,045$ -$ -$ 373,992$

Network Switches - Administrative - EG 15/16 42,800$ 42,800$ -$ 61$ 42,800$ -$ -$ 42,800$

Network Switches - Residences - EG 15/16 53,950$ 53,950$ -$ -$ 53,950$ -$ -$ 53,950$

Network Switches - Residences - Growth 15/16 13,000$ 13,000$ -$ -$ 13,000$ -$ -$ 13,000$

Network Applicances - Administrative - Growth 15/16 45,000$ 25,000$ 70,000$ -$ 60,024$ 70,000$ -$ -$ 70,000$

A.V. (Including Video Conferencing) - Growth 15/16 20,250$ 20,250$ -$ 13,517$ 20,250$ -$ -$ 20,250$

A.V. (Including Video Conferencing) - EG 15/16 48,400$ 48,400$ -$ 35,989$ 48,400$ -$ -$ 48,400$

Wireless Administrative - Growth 15/16 42,500$ 42,500$ -$ 33,444$ 42,500$ -$ -$ 42,500$

Wireless Residence - EG 15/16 55,250$ 55,250$ -$ 39,907$ 55,250$ -$ -$ 55,250$

Gateway Residence 15/16 -$ 64,000$ 64,000$ -$ 9,098$ 64,000$ -$ -$ 64,000$

Wireless Residence - Growth 15/16 264,000$ 264,000$ -$ 212,665$ 264,000$ -$ -$ 264,000$

Cable Television System - Residence 15/16 4,500$ 4,500$ -$ -$ 4,500$ -$ -$ 4,500$

Telephone System - Residence 15/16 1,800$ 1,800$ -$ -$ 1,800$ -$ -$ 1,800$

Disk Storage Growth 15/16 237,750$ 237,750$ -$ -$ 237,750$ -$ -$ 237,750$

Data Back-Up - EG 15/16 45,000$ 45,000$ -$ -$ 45,000$ -$ -$ 45,000$

Security Door Consolidation 15/16 45,000$ 45,000$ -$ -$ 45,000$ -$ -$ 45,000$

Cameras & Alarm Systems - EG 15/16 22,500$ 22,500$ -$ -$ 22,500$ -$ -$ 22,500$

Computer Purchase & Redeployment Program 15/16 255,000$ 10,000$ 265,000$ -$ -$ 265,000$ -$ -$ 265,000$

Total IT Evergreening 1,895,692$ 99,000$ 1,994,692$ 344,650$ 489,477$ 1,650,042$ -$ -$ 1,994,692$

Budget Year



2014/15 & 2015/16 LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN (IT)

Project Name Approved Funding


Revised Funding (A)


(C)


APPENDIX 1




Page 6 of 6

REMAINING PROJECTS



Total Projected

Cost at Completion

(October 26, 2015) (A-B-C-D) (B+C+D)

IT SOFTWARE

Microsoft Project Server 14/15 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ -$ -$ 10,000$ -$ -$ 10,000$

Education Desktop/365 14/15 90,000$ -$ 90,000$ -$ 758$ 90,000$ -$ -$ 90,000$

Conversion Of Analog Cameras 14/15 72,000$ -$ 72,000$ 61,434$ 3,980$ 10,566$ -$ -$ 72,000$

Campus Security Incident/Dispatch Reporting Software 15/16 40,500$ 40,500$ -$ -$ 40,500$ -$ -$ 40,500$

Software Development Tools For AODA 15/16 22,500$ 22,500$ -$ -$ 22,500$ -$ -$ 22,500$

Configuration Management Software 15/16 18,000$ 18,000$ -$ -$ 18,000$ -$ -$ 18,000$

Architecture Planning Tool 15/16 13,500$ 13,500$ -$ -$ 13,500$ -$ -$ 13,500$

Finance System Replacement 15/16 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ -$ 70,799$ 3,130,923$ 669,077$ -$ 3,800,000$

Total IT Software 4,066,500$ -$ 4,066,500$ 61,434$ 75,537$ 3,335,989$ 669,077$ -$ 4,066,500$

Total Remaining IT Projects 6,242,192$ 154,000$ 6,396,192$ 445,852$ 593,359$ 5,259,263$ 689,077$ 2,000$ 6,394,192$

TOTAL 2014/15 & 2015/16 LONG TERM CAPITAL PLAN (IT) 6,844,932$ 99,000$ 6,943,932$ 851,825$ 736,255$ 5,402,159$ 689,077$ 871$ 6,943,743$

RESERVE

Residence13/14 & 14/15 2,050,000$ -$ 2,050,000$ -$ -$ -$ 1,000,000$ 1,050,000$ 1,000,000$

Total Reserve 2,050,000$ -$ 2,050,000$ -$ -$ -$ 1,000,000$ 1,050,000$ 1,000,000$



(C)



Project NameBudget



Revised Funding (A)

1/2

15 Board of Trustees


Decision Item

TOPIC: Goodman School of Business Rendering

December 2, 2015

Tom Saint-Ivany, Associate Vice-President, Facilities Management Roland Mech, Interim Director, Campus Planning, Design & Construction Services

Carlos Midence, Project Manager, Campus Planning, Design & Construction Services MOTION That the Capital Infrastructure Committee direct Staff to continue with the design of the Goodman School of Business in accordance to the University’s design guidelines and objectives as outlined in the “Adhering to Brock University’s Built Form Guidelines” report and illustrated in the accompanying rendering prepared by +VG Architects. BACKGROUND The Goodman School of Business project has an over-riding goal to deliver a renewed and expanded facility for the start of the academic year in September 2018. +VG Architects started detailed design work for this project in June 2015. An integrated Design Process (IDP) began this summer, coordinated by the Campus Planning, Design and Construction Services’ Project Manager, with the participation of representatives of the Goodman School of Business and the Architects. Holding weekly meetings, the main purpose of the IDP is to ensure that, as project design progresses, the University’s design guidelines are met as well as the Faculty’s program requirements. Schematic design documents and a Class C estimate have been prepared and are currently under review. We have received Faculty sign off on the floor plan layouts. The schematic design and costing package will be presented at the December 10th Project Steering Committee meeting for comment and approval. DISCUSSION The IDP has allowed the early formation of an interdisciplinary team, ensuring that necessary expertise is present at times when is most required. From the beginning of their assignment, +VG Architects, continued to reference Brock’s specific design requirements and particularly by those included in “Brock University Campus Plan”, which also includes the “Built Form Guidelines” section. This section outlines design requirements for new buildings and how open spaces are to have a harmonious relationship with surrounding areas. Appendix 1 summarizes how the design is aligned with these guidelines and how they have been applied in this project. Reference has also been made to the University’s “Shaping our Future” document that includes a guide to the planning, design and architecture of the natural and built environments.

2/2

An updated rendering of the new project has been prepared which illustrates the overall design intent, corrected number of floors and the building’s overall relationship with surrounding areas. (Appendix 2). Management does not have a specific record of what opportunities, either internal to or external to the Goodman School of Business, were used to present this rendering and that, directly or indirectly, would have enabled feedback on it. In addition to providing renderings to the Project Steering Committee, an earlier, but not dissimilar, design concept rendering was included in the May 6, 2015 (In Camera) Topic Report “Goodman Building Alternative Plan.” APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Adhering to Brock University’s Built Form Guidelines (3 pages) Appendix 2 – Goodman School of Business Rendering (1 pages)

GOODMAN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

RENOVATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO TARO HALL

ADHERING TO BROCK UNIVERSITY’S BUILT FORM GUIDELINES

15-11-02 1

During the preliminary planning and design stage of the Goodman School of Business

project at Taro Hall, +VG have been reviewing design decisions against the university’s

design guidelines and objectives as described in the Campus Plan (February 2003) and the

goals of the Shaping Our Future (April 2007) document.

The following summarizes the University’s objectives as described in section 2.8 Built Form

Guidelines of the Campus Plan and how the GSB design addresses these objectives where

they are applicable:

Guideline Design Response

1. New buildings will be 3 to 6 storeys Existing and new additions are three

storeys. The west addition is planned

for a future vertical expansion to 4

storeys.

2. Buildings facing Brock Mall and Brock

Circle will be a minimum of 5 storeys.

Current development along Brock Mall

has not achieved this objective as yet.

The addition facing the Mall is

designed to accommodate a 4 storey

structure.

3. Consider future build-out of the

development parcel.

The project is within development

parcel 6 which has already seen the

addition of Plaza Building. The

additions to Taro Hall provide further

capacity on the development parcel.

4. Material and colour palette facing Brock

Mall is to use a consistent material and

colour palette including stone.

The design of additions to Taro Hall

anticipate the use of stone panels.

5. Residential buildings in the Village are to

be red brick

Not applicable

6. Bold and modern expression in keeping

with the existing academic buildings

The additions to Taro Hall will be

modern and sympathetic to the

neighbouring academic buildings.

7. Windows and glazed walls will be

transparent, not mirrored

The new additions will utilize

transparent glass providing

connections between interior and

exterior.

8. New blank walls are not to face important

exterior spaces.

New walls facing west and south will

not be blank walls.

9. Building entrances will be clearly

identified.

The new main entrance is highly

visible and aligns with the existing

exterior east west pedestrian walkway.

10. Floor levels at entrance ways will align

with adjacent ground levels.

New entrance ways align with

adjacent ground levels.

11. Develop building additions that repair

poorly defined existing exterior spaces.

The west side addition provides an

improved edge along the Mall with

improved definition of the street edge.

12. Development Parcels 3, 11, 18, 19 & 20

are to have ‘pavilion buildings’

Not applicable

rmech

Text Box

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: GSB Rendering December 2, 2015 Appendix 1




15-11-02

2

Guideline Design Response

13. On many development parcels, landmark

building elements are called for.

Given the proximity to Schmon Tower,

the west side addition will utilize a

simple and clean expression to

maintain legibility of the Brock mall

and the university main entrance.

Shaping Our Future is a document that focuses on directions for planning, design,

sustainability and continued integration with the natural environment for the Brock Campus.

The following are key points applicable to the design:

Goals Design Response

2.2.1 Urban Design and Architecture 5.2.

5.2.1 Pursue the development of a highly

compact campus;

The additions and intensification of the

Taro Hall site maintains furthers this

goal.

5.2.3

Pursue contemporary design that is

harmonious and respectful of existing

buildings.

The new additions respect the height

and massing of the adjacent Taro Hall.

5.2.4 Develop buildings that respond to the

context of the site.

The new additions respond to the

adjacent open spaces of the site.

5.2.6 Encourage the interplay between the

inside and outside of buildings to

enhance facility users’ contact with

natural surroundings and encourage the

use of natural light.

The west addition and south facing

link are highly transparent, glassy

elements that reveal the buildings’

activity to the campus and participate

in the adjacent landscape spaces.

5.2.7 Design building spaces that are functional

and flexible with the opportunity for

expansion and revision as the university

grows and changes.

The west side addition is designed for

future vertical expansion and the east

side addition is designed with column

free spaces to anticipate future

classroom uses.

5.2.8 Ensure that instructional and non-office

space are designed to support formal

and informal gathering.

All the new teaching spaces utilize flat

floors and flexible layouts to ensure a

variety of arrangements.

5.2.9 Pursue the integration of innovative

building technology.

The new teaching spaces will

incorporate the latest technologies

based upon faculty and facility

stakeholder input.

5.2.10 Promote the use of building materials that

minimize health risks

Materials will be selected that are

durable and will minimize VOC’s.

5.2.11 Encourage the creation of landmark The atrium of the west addition is




15-11-02

3

Goals Design Response

buildings in key and appropriate

locations.

intended to provide the new ‘face’ of

the Goodman School of Business

within the Brock Mall.

5.2.12 Encourage the creation of new open

spaces by placing new buildings

appropriately.

The west side addition intends to take

advantage of the existing underused

courtyard on the north side of Taro

Hall as an outdoor amenity for staff,

students and visitors.

5.2.13 Consider Value Engineering and Life

Cycle analysis for new facilities

All design decisions consider these

factors.

5.2.14 Integrate universal design to ensure that

all buildings are accessible to all people

Including those with disabilities

The project will ensure all new spaces

and most existing spaces will meet

current standards.

5.2.15 Integrate the principles of Crime

Prevention through Environmental Design

(CPTED)

All design features consider CPTED.

2.2.2 Open Space and Public Realm 5.3

5.3.4 When designing new facilities, consider

the creation of open spaces and

courtyards with unique identity that

encourage gathering.

As mentioned above, the design

anticipates greater use of the existing

north side courtyard as a gathering

space.

5.3.5 Promote connections between exterior

and interior space on campus.

The additions are located directly off of

existing exterior pedestrian routes

enabling better connections.

rmech

Text Box

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: GSB Rendering December 2, 2015 Appendix 2

1/2

15 Board of Trustees


Information Item

TOPIC: Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium Project Architect Procurement & Pre-Design Phase

December 2, 2015

Tom Arkell, Associate Vice-President, University Services Tom Saint-Ivany, Associate Vice-President, Facilities Management

BACKGROUND The proposed Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium presents a significant opportunity to create an inviting front door to campus. This initiative will add a large central indoor space that complements and engages with the existing Tower building. The transparent enclosure would continue the University’s practice of open walls and serves as an extension to the Brock Mall landscape. The space is intended to accommodate ‘at-hand’ student services and amenities at the heart of the campus and, in so doing, providing a renewed and re-vitalized hub for students, faculty, staff, visitors and transit users. At the October 1, 2015 Board of Trustees Meeting it was resolved “that preliminary project approval be given for the Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium Project for the purposes of enabling Management to undertake a Request for Proposal process for a Prime Consultant to provide professional architectural, engineering and related services for those future phases of project development that the Board of Trustees may approve at a later date.” DISCUSSION Request for Pre-Qualification Submittals. The Request for Pre-Qualification for Architectural Consulting Services (Architectural Services including: structural, mechanical and electrical engineering, as well as cost consulting services) for the Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium project RFPQ No EG15-23 was issued on October 16, 2015 via MERX (a national on-line procurement tool). A total of 25 proposals were received on the November 2, 2015 submission due date. Of the 25 proposals, one was received late and returned unopened resulting in 24 eligible and compliant proposals to be evaluated. Evaluation and Top-ranked Proponents. The evaluation team, comprised of Facilities Management and University Services Staff, evaluated the 24 proposals based upon the evaluation criteria set out in the RFPQ. Evaluation scoring results were compiled and tabulated in an Evaluation Summary spreadsheet and the evaluation process included reference checks for all of the top-ranked proponents. As stipulated in the RFPQ, a maximum of six proponents will be pre-qualified and invited to participate in the RFP process. The successful top-ranked proponents, in alphabetical order, are as follows:

2/2

• Diamond Schmitt Architects • Hariri Pontarini Architects • IBI Group Architects • Moriyama & Teshima Architects • Perkins + Will Inc. • RDH Architects Inc.

NEXT STEPS An RFP will be issued to the pre-qualified proponents for full consulting services for all stages of the $8.6 million dollar (construction budget) project. Selection of the Architectural team will be based on evaluation criteria (outlined in the RFP), the fee proposal and an interview process. The RFP process will be in compliance with the Broader Public Sector Procurement Directive. It will be clearly identified that the University only intends to enter into contract with the successful proponent for Preliminary-design services at this time. Preliminary-design services will include developing a functional program for the proposed use of the new space, a preliminary design concept, a Class D order of magnitude cost estimate and a photorealistic rendering. The 2016-17 Capital and Related Project Budget report, presented today, includes $50,000 for the purposes of undertaking the Preliminary-design Services (Stage 1), to be performed by the selected Prime Consultant, using LTCP FY 16/17 funding upon Board approval to award to the recommended Prime Consultant and to proceed with Stage 1 – Preliminary-design Services. The remaining phases of service would be quoted as a percentage fee to be calculated against the agreed upon construction budget once approval to proceed with the next phase or phases of the project has been obtained (Appendix 1, Table 1). APPENDIX Appendix 1 – Key Milestones and Schedule Estimate (1 page)

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium Project

Architect Procurement & Pre-Design Phase December 2, 2015

Appendix 1

KEY MILESTONES AND SCHEDULE ESTIMATE

The key Tasks, their grouping, and time estimates for approvals and undertaking the sequenced stages, upon approval(s) for each stage(s), involved in delivering the Schmon Tower Student Services Atrium project are shown in Table 1.

Task Date Duration Cumulative Time

1. Board Approval to retain Prime Consultant Team

• Architect, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical and Cost Consultant

October 1, 2015

0.5 months

2. RFPQ period for Prime Consultant Team October 16, 2015

1.5 month

3. RFP period for Prime Consultant Team (full Architectural Services with phased approvals)

December 7, 2015

2.5 months

4. LTCP Funding Approval for Stage 1 Cycle #2 Dec 3, 2015

5. Stage 1 - Board Approval for Pre-design

• Board Approval to proceed with Preliminary Design Services Phase and Prime Consultant Award

Cycle #3 Mar 9, 2016 or Executive Committee

6. Stage 1 - Preliminary Design Services Phase

• Functional Program • Preliminary Design • Class D Estimate

Spring 2016 3.5 months

8 months

7. LTCP Funding Approval for Stage 2 TBD

8. Stage 2 – Board Approval for Design TBD

• Board Approval to proceed with Design Services Phase

• Schematic Design Phase • Design Development Phase • Construction Document Phase

2.5 months 2.5 months 4.5 months

17.5 months

9. LTCP Funding Approval for Stage 3 TBD

10. Stage 3- Project Approval for Tender and Construction

• Tender period

TBD

2 months

19.5 months

11. Recommendation to Board for Award

• General Contractor

TBD

12. Construction Start TBD 0.5 month 20 months

13. Construction Period (phased) TBD 15 months 35 months

14. Occupancy TBD 1 month 36 months

Table 1

1/3

Board of Trustees


Information Item

TOPIC: Residence Facility Condition Index

December 2, 2015 Tom Arkell, Associate Vice-President, University Services

Tom Saint-Ivany, Associate Vice-President, Facilities Management

BACKGROUND

Beginning in May 2015, and over the past several months, the Department of Residences and Facilities Management have worked to complete a comprehensive facility condition audit of all residence facilities. The audit was recently completed, a detailed report prepared, and the University’s data in Accruent LLC’s VFA capital asset management software database (used by Ontario universities) was updated. Definitions used in facility condition audits and assessments, standardized to the extent possible with Council of Ontario Universities (COU) Facility Condition Assessment Program (FCAP) reporting, are provided at Appendix 1.

FACILITY CONDITION AUDIT RESULTS

The results are in line with expectations in that the oldest residence, DeCew, had the poorest ratings (FCI 0.33, RI 0.39), while newer construction, such as Earp and Lowenberger Residences, had good ratings. An overview of the results is provided in Table 1, below. The VFA summary report can be found at Appendix 2.

Residence 2015 VFA Update CRV DM FCI R RI

Alan Earp $22,775,676 $1,461,515 0.06 $2,221,721 0.10

Arnie Lowenberger $26,410,160 $2,041,109 0.08 $2,886,028 0.11

DeCew & Dining Hall $46,575,483 $15,525,092 0.33 $18,261,786 0.39

Gordon & Betty Vallee $18,011,291 $1,668,304 0.09 $2,598,150 0.14

Village (avg. all units) $41,483,372 $5,111,431 0.12 $5,525,937 0.11

Quarry View (avg. all units) $17,134,522 $1,861,729 0.11 $1,905,981 0.11

TOTAL $172,390,504 $27,669,180 0.16 $33,399,603 0.19

DM: Deferred Maintenance FCI: Facility Condition Index (DM ÷ CRV) R: DM & Non-Deferred Maintenance Requirements RI: Requirements Index (R ÷ CRV) CRV: Current Replacement Value

Table 1

2/3

As the COU FCAP reporting excludes residences, comparator system indices (with those shown in Table 1) for residences are not readily available. The 2014 COU FCAP (excluding residences and facilities rented/leased) system FCI is 0.11 and the system RI is 0.13 and for Brock University, the FCI is 0.18 and the RI is 0.25. If the results for the DeCew Residence and Dining Hall are considered an anomaly (taking into account age and maintainability); overall, the FCI and RI results for the residence portfolio is indicative of good stewardship and good levels of re-capitalization that, together, have kept deferred maintenance in check over the years. STUDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY RESULTS SUMMARY – RESIDENCES From the data in the 2014 Student Satisfaction Survey Results Summary (Appendix 3), one can see that students living in Earp and Vallee had the highest satistfaction with the facilities and overall experience, while students living in Quarry View and Village had the lowest satisfaction with both the facilities and overall. Aesthetically, Quarry View and Village are not pleasing and are in need of upgrades such as paint and carpeting. The nature of the contruction of these two buildings (drywall) do not make them as “durable” as the block and concrete construction in the traditional style buildings. This makes it difficult to keep them looking as good as the other buildings. The marked difference between satisfaction in terms of facilities and overall for the students in Lowenberger can be attributed to overall community issues encountered in the building for that year, that the Residence Life Team were managing. Overall, students living in DeCew were marginally more satisfied with the facilities of the building but did have a higher overall satisfaction rate than most of the other buildings. This may be attributed to the community that develops in DeCew Residence. Anecdotally, Residence staff know from students that, while DeCew is in need of upgrading, they love the design of the building and how it contributes to developing strong friendships and connections with other students. While the FCI for DeCew is higher than for the other Residence facilities; given the satisfaction with DeCew, there is some time before significant recapitalization decisions need to be made and resources allocated. CONCLUSION This latest facility condition data will provide valuable information and guidance on the capital renewal requirements in the residences portfolio and provide content into the rolling five-year Long Term Capital Plan (LTCP). Deferred maintenance and capital renewal are expected to be major points of discussion in the review and analysis of the content in the 1500-page VFA report. Both the facility condition data and the Student Satisfaction Survey results will be key pieces of information to be taken into consideration in the “Student Residence Needs Analysis & Housing Master Plan”. The outcomes of the recently awarded “Student Residence Needs Analysis & Housing Master Plan” will provide significant guidance and direction regarding residence facilities renewal for long-term capital planning purposes. Management recognizes that it is reasonable to expect that investments in residence facilities would increase levels of student satisfaction.

3/3

In making recommendations on the allocation of funds to capital requirements within the University’s FY 16/17 LTCP, Management has taken into consideration: 1) the current state of Residence infrastructure, 2) the need to now assess the results of the facility condition audits, 3) indicative findings from the Student Satisfaction Survey, 4) the Housing Master Plan effort that is now underway, and 5) the finalization of the Campus Plan Update in January 2016. With 2016 being a year to synthesize these considerations and determine what, when, and how much to fund in future years; LTCP funding for Residences renewal is planned to be less in FY 16/17. APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Facility Condition Audit Definitions (1 page) Appendix 2 – VFA Residence Summary Report, Asset List (8 pages) Appendix 3 – Student Satisfaction Survey Results Summary (2 pages)

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: Residence Facility Condition Index


FACILITY CONDITION AUDIT DEFINITIONS

Deferred Maintenance (DM)

Deferred maintenance is work that has been deferred on a planned or unplanned basis to a future budget cycle or postponed until funds become available. It includes the total dollar amount of existing major maintenance repairs and replacements, identified by a comprehensive facilities condition audit of buildings, grounds, fixed equipment and infrastructure needs.

Facility Condition Index (FCI)

The Facility Condition Index (FCI) is a standard facility management benchmark that provides an overall indicator of infrastructure condition. Condition is categorized, on the basis of the FCI, by the Council of Ontario uUiversities (COU) as follows:

Excellent Condition – FCI is less than 0.05

Fair Condition – FCI is between 0.05 and 0.10

Poor Condition – FCI is greater than 0.10

The Province’s Ministry of Education (for K-12) further categorizes a FCI greater than 0.65 as being Prohibitive to Repair, indicative that the infrastructure should be completely replaced or disposed of.

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.65 1.00

Excellent Fair Poor Prohibitive to Repair

Calculating FCI

FCI = Deferred Maintenance $ (DM) Current Replacement Value $ (CRV)

Requrements Index (RI) The Requirements Index (RI) is similar to FCI but includes more than priority deferred maintenance (DM) items. In addition to DM items, the RI includes short-term and long-term capital improvements and grandfathered code items in its calculations, such as replacement of equipment that has not yet reached their end of service life.

Calculating RI

RI = Sum of ALL Requirments in a Given Time $ (R) Current Replacement Value $ (CRV)

Asset List ReportBy Name

Reporting Currency: CADAdjustment Factor: 0%

Region Name: Brock University - Residence

Campus Name: Brock University-Residences-East Campus

Asset Number Age Use SizeReplacement

ValueCost/

Unit FCI Cost FCI RI Cost RIAsset Primary Photo

Asset Type: Building

Quarryview Block 1 QV-1 12 Residence 1,319 2,295,182 1,740 288,806 0.13 296,181 0.13





Copyright 2015 VFA, Inc. All rights reserved. Nov 2, 2015 9:19:01 AM Page 1 of 8

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: Residence Facility Condition Index December 2, 2015 Appendix 2

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text

tsaintivany

Typewritten Text



ValueCost/



Subtotal for Building 10,773 17,134,522 1,591 1,861,729 0.11 1,905,981 0.11

Campus Name: Brock University-Residences-East Campus 17,134,522 1,861,729 0.11 1,905,981 0.11



Reporting Currency: CADAdjustment Factor: 0%

Region Name: Brock University - Residence

Campus Name: Brock University-Residences-Main Campus


ValueCost/


Asset Type: Building

Alan Earp Residence

ERP 14 Residence 9,224 22,775,676 2,469 1,461,515 0.06 2,221,721 0.10

Arnie Lowenberger Residence

LOW 12 Residence 10,219 26,410,160 2,584 2,041,109 0.08 2,886,028 0.11

DeCew Residence and Dining Hall

DEC-1 46 Residence 14,289 46,575,483 3,260 15,525,092 0.33 18,261,786 0.39

Gordon & Betty Vallee Residence

VAL 20 Residence 7,421 18,011,291 2,427 1,668,304 0.09 2,598,150 0.14

Village Residence - Building 10A

VIL-10A 18 Residence 312 698,012 2,237 28,822 0.04 30,730 0.04




ValueCost/


Village Residence - Building 10B

VIL-10B 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 35,044 0.04 37,588 0.04

Village Residence - Building 10C

VIL-10C 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 35,044 0.04 37,588 0.04

Village Residence - Building 10D

VIL-10D 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 38,254 0.04 40,798 0.04


VIL-11A 18 Residence 312 698,012 2,237 28,822 0.04 30,730 0.04


VIL-11B 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 28,625 0.03 31,169 0.03


VIL-11C 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 38,254 0.04 40,798 0.04




ValueCost/


Village Residence - Building 11D

VIL-11D 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 38,254 0.04 40,798 0.04


VIL-12A 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 38,254 0.04 40,798 0.04


VIL-12B 18 Residence 417 930,560 2,232 38,254 0.04 40,798 0.04


VIL-12C 18 Residence 763 1,644,794 2,156 66,945 0.04 71,396 0.04


VIL-1A 28 Residence 833 1,884,668 2,263 378,748 0.20 408,860 0.22


VIL-1B 28 Residence 763 1,668,138 2,186 336,611 0.20 366,165 0.22




ValueCost/



VIL-2A 28 Residence 833 1,856,461 2,229 362,542 0.20 392,654 0.21


VIL-2B 28 Residence 763 1,668,138 2,186 336,611 0.20 366,165 0.22


VIL-3A 28 Residence 833 1,884,668 2,263 372,266 0.20 402,378 0.21


VIL-3B 28 Residence 763 1,668,138 2,186 333,613 0.20 363,167 0.22


VIL-4A 28 Residence 833 1,884,668 2,263 375,491 0.20 405,603 0.22


VIL-4B 28 Residence 763 1,668,138 2,186 336,611 0.20 366,165 0.22




ValueCost/



VIL-5A 28 Residence 833 1,882,960 2,260 372,266 0.20 402,378 0.21


VIL-5B 28 Residence 763 1,668,138 2,186 330,387 0.20 359,941 0.22


VIL-6A 28 Residence 833 1,884,668 2,263 372,266 0.20 402,378 0.21


VIL-6B 28 Residence 763 1,668,138 2,186 333,613 0.20 363,167 0.22


VIL-7A 23 Residence 833 1,884,132 2,262 88,922 0.05 95,601 0.05


VIL-7B 23 Residence 763 1,667,026 2,185 76,768 0.05 81,296 0.05




ValueCost/



VIL-8A 23 Residence 833 1,884,132 2,262 88,922 0.05 94,009 0.05


VIL-8B 23 Residence 763 1,667,026 2,185 79,993 0.05 84,522 0.05


VIL-9A 23 Residence 763 1,667,026 2,185 76,768 0.05 81,296 0.05


VIL-9B 23 Residence 417 941,809 2,259 44,461 0.05 47,005 0.05

Subtotal for Building 59,824 155,255,982 2,595 25,807,451 0.17 31,493,622 0.20

Campus Name: Brock University-Residences-Main Campus

155,255,982 25,807,451 0.17 31,493,622 0.20

Region Name: Brock University - Residence 172,390,503 27,669,180 0.16 33,399,603 0.19

Summary 172,390,503 27,669,180 0.16 33,399,603 0.19


1/2



STUDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY RESULTS SUMMARY The Skyfactor (formely EBI) Benchmarking assessment tool, used in the Student Satisfaction Survey, has 152 questions or “factors” measured including institution specific questions. These factors can be filtered down to various levels in order to ‘drill-down’ in the data for a rich assessment. The charts below are the “Facilities” satisfaction level (Figure 1) and the “Overall” satisfaction level (Figure 2), by building, from the 2014 assessment.

Figure 1

2/2



Figure 2

Board of Trustees


Information Item

TOPIC: Hamilton Campus

December 2, 2015

Brian Hutchings, Vice-President, Administration

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Brock University operates a campus in Hamilton, Ontario. The campus is located at 1842 King Street East which is in the Rosedale neighbourhood of East Hamilton (Appendix 1). The school houses the Faculty of Education and is an essential part of that program with approximately 362 of the total 602 students in the Teacher Education program. The Department of Teacher Education offers the following programs: Primary/Junior, Junior/Intermediate, Intermediate/Senior and Technological Education. The campus sits on approximately 6.98 acres of land, which was appraised in 2013 for $4.9 million. The building has a deferred maintenance of $3.03 million and an FCI of 0.22, which is considered poor. The Faculty of Education has a very strong enrolment in Hamilton. The location allows many consecutive education students the convenience of attending school close to their respective home communities which for many is along the 401 stretch from Kitchener to Mississauga while being close to their placement schools. At this point, staff are reviewing the functional requirements of the Hamilton Campus to determine space requirements and further to make a decision on renovating existing space, acquiring or leasing space in the Hamilton or Burlington area. The timeline for this review will occur over the next 4-5 months. This decision and reasoning will be brought to the Board of Trustees for their information and/or decision in June 2016. APPENDIX Appendix 1 – Map of Hamilton Campus (2 pages) Appendix 2 – History of Hamilton Campus (1 page)

1

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: Hamilton Campus


1

Capital Infrastructure Committee TOPIC: Hamilton Campus

December 2, 2015 Appendix 2 History of Hamilton Campus

The presence of Brock’s Teacher Education program in the Hamilton area dates from the mid-1960s. At that time, the previously independent teachers’ colleges were being folded into universities. McMaster declined to enter this field, so Brock stepped in to fill the vacuum in this area. In 1996, Brock purchased its existing building, located at 1842 King St. East, which is a former high school. This building has met Brock’s needs fairly well. There is an adequate number of classrooms, computer labs, and faculty and staff offices. There is a well-equipped instructional resource centre. There is a gym with a stage and fairly spartan change rooms. The location is fairly easily accessible by car; less so by public transit. However, there are a number of problems with the existing facility. With the switch from the one-year to the two-year program, the building will be filled to capacity or possibly beyond. The existing parking lot is inadequate for peak loads which results in spillover parking in the neighbourhood which results in complaints from residents. With the advent of the two-year program, parking will move from an intermittent nuisance to a serious irritant for students and neighbourhood residents. The major issue is that the building requires significant repairs such as replacement of the roof and the original single-pane windows. A continued presence in the Hamilton area is important for the Teacher Education program. Currently 362 of our total 602 Teacher Education students take their courses at the Hamilton campus. These students are drawn from Hamilton/Burlington, the western and northern areas of the GTA, and west and north of Hamilton (Guelph, Waterloo). This will be an increasingly important source of students as the GTA remains a growth area while the population of Niagara grows more slowly. Brock’s presence in this area is also important for our relationship with school boards that provide teaching placements for our students. Brock has relationships with both the public and Catholic school boards in Hamilton, Halton, Peel, and Grand Erie regions.

Board of Trustees


Information Item

TOPIC: New Accounting System – Project Phoenix

December 2, 2015 Bryan Boles, Associate Vice President, Finance

Josh Sekel, Senior Project Manager

BACKGROUND

The University is implementing a cloud based accounting system and its related processes. The project is intended to improve the timelines, relevance and accuracy of information to support decision, streamline processes by implementing leading practices to improve the experience of those participating in financial transactions, and support a strong environment of internal control. When implementing, system customization will be limited.

The project was formally approved by a joint meeting of the Executive Committee and the Capital Infrastructure Committee on September 3, 2015. The system is scheduled to go live May 1, 2016.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Since the last reporting on the project on September 30, 2015 and the time of writing this report the project team has been concentrating on achieving appropriate contracts with Workday, Deloitte and KPMG, the account structure, and planning for the introduction and training of the new accounting system. Some additional information on these topics are provided below and our standard project status update is presented in Appendix 1.

Workday Contract

Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP was utilized in the negotiations with Workday. The contract negotiations took longer than anticipated. The project team was able to adjust plans accordingly and while we are currently slightly behind schedule there is a plan to catch up. Presently the project is still considered to be delivered on time and on budget. The negotiated contract price for the new financial system was the quoted price received in the request for proposal. The contract negotiated is consistent with the direction provided by the joint committee and includes pricing for all the human resource and student information modules. The pricing has not been provided here for confidential reasons. Management can discuss the pricing should the committee desire to go in-camera. The costs of these systems along with a Facilitates Management System have been incorporated into the fiscal framework and long-term capital plan.

We remind the committee that the Workday finance and human resources modules are fully developed and implemented but the majority of the student information modules remain in development until spring 2017. The only Workday student information modules currently deployed at Universities today are those associated with recruitment and admissions.

Workday has provided the University an option to get involved in the development at a small cost should there be an appetite.

The following link is to a short video demonstrating the workday system with the Finance, human resource and student information modules all working together. https://youtu.be/atWdtdnOuUo

Account Structure

Financial Services, along with a number of other individuals from units across the University, have been working on reviewing the account structure of the University for well over a year in preparation of a move to a new accounting system. In Workday, the account structure is called a Financial Data Model (FDM). It works much like a normal linear account structure like our current account structure (Function-Cost Centre-Account) except the number of dimensions is greatly increased thanks to a system Workday calls “tagging” that essentially can jump linear lines as the account structure is built more like a 3-dimensional cube than a linear line. This will allow for enhanced reporting across expense types, projects, and functions. Key elements of the account structure have already been presented at the Council of Academic Deans Finance Committee where interest and support for the account structure was high.

The project team has identified that the Workday community of other Universities is very willing to communicate and share experiences as hoped. This has been helpful as the team has been able to not only utilize the experience of Deloitte but other Universities that have already or are currently implementing.

Introduction and training for the new system

Given the project sets out a path that we will adopt the process of the technology with limited customization, we recognize there will be significant changes to the way people interact with the accounting system and do their job. As a result, the University has contracted an individual with an extensive background in change management and who has been significantly involved in three other successful system implementations in the past. The project team has been educated in the components of change management. See some of the standard change management type educational tools/charts below.

https://youtu.be/atWdtdnOuUo

At the time of writing this report the change management plan is being finalized. While constant communication has been occurring at a number of committees across the University, broader level communication, information and training sessions are anticipated to begin as early as the end of November.

APPENDIX

Appendix 1 – Project Status Update (1 page)

Project Phoenix Brock University

Project Status UpdateOctober 30, 2015

Project Status Completed 18% Change Orders 0

Project Goal Project Plan

Budget (000's)Budget Committed Actual

Phase 1 3,833 2,773 99 Phase 1.5 476 72 - Phase 2 420 - - Subtotal 4,729 2,846 99 Contingency 71 - - Total 4,800 2,846 99

Top 5 outstanding issuesDescription Date Priority Impact1. HR data integration 28-Oct-15 High High

2. Independent contractor T4As 28-Oct-15 High ModerateFinance/ITIT to build a solution outside of Workday until

HCM implementation

The University is implementing a cloud based accounting system and its related processes. The project is intended to improve the timeliness, relevance and accuracy of information to support decision, streamline processes by implementing leading practices to improve the experience of those participating in financial transactions, and support a strong environment of internal control. When implementing, system customization will be limited.

Owner Progress/ResolutionHR/IT Build staging table/ cleanse HR data

% complete Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

PlanProject Charter 75% X X

Project Plan 90% X

Engagement Tools & Resources 75% X

Tenant Strategy 85% X

Project Kickoff 0% X

ArchitectFDM Workshops 80% X

Discovery Workshops (P0) 75% X

Business Requirements Fit/Gap 0% X

Functional Configuration Documentation 0% X

Configure & PrototypeConfigure P1 Prototype Tenant 0% X

P1 Tenant Prototype Review & Validation 0% X

Develop Integration Specifications 0% X

Develop Conversions 0% X X

Configure P2 Prototype Tenant 0% X

P2 Tenant Prototype Review & Validation 0% X X

Develop Reports and Interfaces 0% X X X

TestConfigure P3 Prototype Tenant 0% X

System Integration Testing 0% X

Prepare UAT Tenant 0% X

Conduct UAT Testing 0% X

Conduct End User Training 0% X

Conduct Cutover Dress Rehearsals 0% X

DeployPrepare Gold Production Tenant 0% X

Execute Cutover 0% X

SupportStabilize Solution 0% X

Transition Support 0% X X

Close Project 0% X

2014 2015

Capital Infrastructure CommitteeTOPIC: New Accounting System - Project Phoenix


2015 – 16 Capital Infrastructure Committee Goals and Objectives Progress Scorecard

as at December 2, 2015

November 20, 2015 Page 1 of 10 !CIC_Progress Scorecard_2015-16_Cycle 2v1.docx

LEGEND: GREEN = COMMITMENTS COMPLETE YELLOW = COMMITMENTS IN PROGRESS AND ON TRACK

RED = COMMITMENTS ARE NOT ON TRACK

Item #

Source Action Goal Measurement Target Date Progress / Status

C1 Committee Charter

Review 5 Year Accessible Built Environment progress against plan

June 2016 Cycle 1: This process will commence in the Fall of 2015 with the ABE Committee.

Cycle 2: Scheduled for discussion at the November 20, 2015 ABE Committee meeting.


Review Emergency Management Plan and Emergency Preparedness changes or updates

Receive and review in Cycle 5

June 2016 Cycle 1: Report presented in June 2015, work has begun on the redrafting of the Emergency Management plan to reflect the I.M.S. model. Draft to be presented in Fall 2015 to V.P. Finance and Administration.

Cycle 2: Draft is near completion of the combination to make up the new EMT (Emergency Management Team) revising the EMP (Emergency Management Plan) model.


Review Annual Campus Security Services Report Receive and review in Cycle 1

October 2015 Cycle 1: Report completed on agenda to be spoken to at Cycle 1 Wednesday Sept 30th at CIC of the Board.

Cycle 2: Report delivered at the Cycle 1 meeting. Discussions with the City of St. Catharines for security at PAC (Performing Arts Centre) underway. Metrics being refined in communication and statistics. Campus Security is now a part of the Sub-Committee Data Management.


Review annual facilities condition audit and annual deferred maintenance report. Review multi-year funding plan to allow for appropriate levels of funding to reduce the University’s deferred maintenance backlog including that for residences

January 2016 Cycle 1: Ongoing as reported in the Cycle 1 “Deferred Maintenance Update” Topic Report.

Cycle 2: Review of Residence facility condition audit report underway by Residences and Facilities Management for LTCP planning. Cross-reference to Item # C21.


Review and approve the Five-Year Long Term Capital Plan

Approve FY 16-17 LTCP

December 2015

Cycle 1: IT and non-IT capital requirements for the 2016/17 LTCP will be presented at Cycle 2.

Cycle 2: Draft FY 16/17 Plan has been coordinated with stakeholders and will be recommended for approval of capital requirements content and funding.

C6 Review COU and MTCU reports April 2016 Cycle 1: Ongoing.






Item #


Committee Charter

Cycle 2: Ongoing.


Review annual report on sustainability-related plans and activities

February 2016 Cycle 1: COU’s draft 2014 “Going Greener” Report is being reviewed and it is anticipated to be issued this Fall.

Cycle 2: COU’s 2014 “Going Greener” Report was issued October 22, 2015 for discussion at the Sustainability Coordinating Committee November 26, 2015.


Review annual non-hazardous waste audit report

April 2016 Cycle 1: A mini audit was conducted in August with the full annual audit to be done in December.

Cycle 2: The annual Waste Audit was conducted October 19-30, 2015. Results are being reviewed for Cycle 3 reporting.


Review annual energy conservation and demand management plan

April 2016 Cycle 1: The update of the ECDMP is underway for reporting at Cycle 3 with an emphasis on alternative energies and GHG reduction.

Cycle 2: Action at Cycle 1 is continuing.


Receive advice from Senate as to what building and other facilities are required to meet the needs of the University

May 2016 Cycle 1: No update.

Cycle 2: No update.


Receive reports and review individual; major capital projects (total budget exceeding $1,000,000) and ensure that on-going operating costs have been included

Ongoing Cycle 1: Ongoing.

Cycle 2: Ongoing.


Receive results of an recommendations for post-occupancy evaluation surveys

Cycle 1: The Associate Director, Space Management and Planning will be undertaking a follow-on POE for the CFHBRC for reporting at Cycle 2 and a POE for the MIWSFPA for reporting at Cycle 4.

Cycle 2: A topic report on the CFHBRC POE follow-up has been prepared for the Cycle 2 CIC meeting.


Receive and review those performance metrics that are indicative of the successful

October 2015 Cycle 1: These metrics are included in the Cycle 1 “Department of Facilities Management – Introduction Information” Topic Report.






Item #


stewardship of the University’s real property assets and the sustainment of an effective, accessible, safe and secure environment

Cycle 2: Completed.

C14 President’s Goals

Review of governance model for administrative and academic “service” functions

Models for ITS function reviewed with recommendations for change, as appropriate

December 2015

Cycle 1: No update.

Cycle 2: Administration’s proposal for IT Governance to address the President’s goal will be presented shortly to SAC; see IT Governance report update to CIC.

C15 Committee Goals

Implement on time and on budget a new accounting system

System Selection September 2015

Cycle 1: Confidential report to Joint Executive Committee and Capital Infrastructure Committee was approved.

Cycle 2: Contracts with provider (Workday) and implementer (Deloitte) signed; details can be found in the New Accounting System – Project Phoenix update presented to CIC this cycle.

Phase 1 Tentative May 2016

Cycle 1: Budgeted timeline on track.

Cycle 2: No change from Cycle 1.

Phase 2 Tentative May 2017

Cycle 1: Budgeted timeline on track.

Cycle 2: No change from Cycle 1.

C16 Committee Goals

Campus Plan is completed Plan complete by December 2015

December 2015

Cycle 1: This is on track for completion in December and reporting at the Cycle 2 meeting. An Open House for the University community is planned for January 2016 to inform of the outcomes.

Cycle 2: The Draft Campus Plan update will be received by the University at the end of November and presented to the Cycle 2 CIC meeting with the finalized Campus Plan Update to be submitted to a special meeting(s) of CIC and Executive Committee in January.

C17 Committee Goals

Develop a plan and approach for an updated Facility Needs and Priorities Review

March 2016 Cycle 1: A request for a $300,000 allocation within the 2016/17 LTCP will be brought forward at Cycle 2. This will serve as the University’s “Space Plan”.






Item #


Cycle 2: A reduced amount of $250,000 has been identified in the recommended FY 16/17 LTCP being brought forward at the Cycle CIC meeting. The draft RFP document has been prepared.

April 2017

C18 Committee Goals

Ensure progress on the Goodman School of Business is on-time, on-budget and risks are identified and mitigation plans are in place

Substantial Performance of Work

June 2018 Cycle 1: A Construction Manager is in place and efforts are now focused on design development. Risks (academic and construction) and their management are being assessed with mitigation measures being undertaken. The next milestone is completion of the schematic design and a Class C cost estimate by December 2015.

Cycle 2: Schematic design documents are complete and Class “C” estimate is under review. On schedule.

C19 Committee Goals

Repurpose and renovate the Alumni Greenhouse into the new home for the ESRC and a future Sustainability Coordinator

Plan in place March 2016 Cycle 1: This deferred maintenance project has been submitted into MTCU’s Refresh of Capital Inventory Program. Further developmental work will be undertaken as part of the 2016/17 LTCP.

Cycle 2: As part of the FY 16/17 LTCP planning and in consideration of the Facility Condition Index of 0.82 (prohibitive to repair), Management recommends that the building be removed and the site restored. EXRC space needs will be identified in the Facility Needs & Priorities Update study.

C20 Committee Goals

Residence master plan

Develop a long-term plan that includes market measurement and student desire.

March 2015

Cycle 1: RFP issued on September 1, 2015. Final report and presentation: Early February

Cycle 2: Consultant selected. Scoping meeting being scheduled. Topic sheet provides key milestones.

C21 Committee Goals

Residence facility condition index Develop a FCI for all buildings, and a long term plan

December 2015

Cycle 1: FCI draft just received. This is to be reviewed for errors and omissions by Residences and FM. Once finalized, the top deferred maintenance issues will be identified according to risk and priority, and in conjunction with the outcomes residence






Item #


for refurbishment or renovation.

master plan, will be prioritized and identified on the 16/17 long-term capital plan.

Cycle 2: See Item C4. FCI report has been reviewed and turned over to the residence master plan consultant for further review.

C22 Committee Goals

Parking & Transportation Develop a parking master plan and long term strategy

Completion of a long term plan for use, redevelopment and refurbishment

April 2016 Cycle 1: RFP to be issued September 9, 2015. Final report and presentation: January

Cycle 2: RFP was refined and issued in October. Final presentation is expected in February. Topic sheet provides key milestones.

C23 Committee Goals

Development – East Lands Development of a plan to remediate the lands and unlock the access.

February 2016 Cycle 1: Planning for the East Lands development will follow the development of the Campus Master Plan and Region of Niagara University precinct plan.

Cycle 2: A project team is being assembled to assist in land planning, environmental concerns and roadway access.

C24 Committee Goals

Development – Heritage Plaza Redevelopment of the Heritage Plaza to increase density and revenue or space.

February 2016 Cycle 1: Planning for the Heritage Plaza redevelopment is progressing concurrently with the Campus Master Plan. A draft marketing package is currently being prepared.

Cycle 2: The project is being further defined and consultations are underway to understand the potential mix of tenants. A proposal to seek assistance with the massing, scale and layout of the development is currently being reviewed.

C25 Committee Goals

Development – Tower Atrium Re-engineer the facility and explore other financing, construction and operation models.

December 2016

Cycle 1: The Tower Atrium project is currently being reviewed to ensure that the ultimate mix of uses are included. A process is being developed to procure an architect to further identify needs and redesign. A report will be submitted to this committee on September 30, 2015

Cycle 2: RFP to select a principle architect has closed and submissions are being evaluated. Architects have responded to the Request for Pre-Qualification and the submissions are being evaluated. A list of the pre-






Item #


qualified Architects to receive the Request for Proposal will be provided at the Cycle 2 CIC meeting. Management intends on requesting approval to proceed with issuing the RFP and authority to spend $50,000 on project pre-design (funding identified in the FY 16/17 LTCP).

C26 Committee Goals

Provide technology, information resources and support services for our faculty, staff and 21st century learners that enrich learning, encourage collaboration, facilitate communication, expand access and promote Brock as the preferred place to work and study.

Senate Committee direction to the Board

June 2016

Cycle 1: The IT Strategic Planning process is underway. A draft vision, mission and related principles have been developed (see CIC_IT Strategic Plan Update Report). Key related initiatives include:

SharePoint (see CIC_IT Major Projects Update Report)

Roadmap for core applications to address urgent and high risk applications – current state assessment underway

Application architecture plan – to be completed by Feb 2016

Roadmap for internet bandwidth – to be completed by Dec 2015

Wireless capacity improvements across campus and the residences to be completed via a phased approach by Dec 2016

Formation of a Student IT Advisory Committee to better understand student needs and gain input on projects and initiatives affecting students – Committee to be in place by Dec 2015

Annual IT client satisfaction survey – next survey planned for Mar 2016

Cycle 2: The IT Strategic Planning process is underway. Follow-up meetings have been scheduled with key University stakeholders to present accomplishments to date and collaborate on a shared IT strategic vision for the medium term. Key related initiatives include:

SharePoint (see CIC_IT Major Projects Update Report)

Roadmap for core applications to address urgent and high risk applications – road map proposal presented to Core Application






Item #


Committee (Sep 2015), presentation to SAC scheduled for Nov 2015 for approval

Application architecture plan – draft data warehouse architecture plan completed; will feed into the application architecture plan – to be completed by Feb 2016

Roadmap for internet bandwidth – completed; awaiting approval from the budget committee for the operating expenses budget

Wireless capacity improvements across campus and the residences – no change

Formation of a Student IT Advisory Committee - no change Annual IT client satisfaction survey – no change

C27 Committee Goals

Provide the Capital Infrastructure Committee with direction on the role of the Hamilton Campus

March 2016 Cycle 1: No report.

Cycle 2: Report presented to the Committee at this Cycle.






METRICS

Item to be measured Metric History Benchmark Target

CAMPUS SECURITY SERVICES

2014 Criminal Offence Rate 2014 decline - 6.5% 2013 increase + 4.4% 2012 decline -20.5% (overall 3 yr average: - 7.5%)

Not available -3% in 2015


2014 Provincial Offence Rate 2014 decline – 18.8% 2013 increase + .8% 2012 decline – 22.7% (overall 3 yr average: - 13.6%)

Not available -3%in 2015


2014 Service Calls 2014 increase + 5.6% 2013 decline – 6.1% (overall 3 yr average: - 1.3%) 2012 decline – 3.4%

Not available +20-25% with addition of MIWSFPA in 2015

FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Overall indicator of infrastructure condition

Facility Condition Index 2013-2014 FCI: 0.18 2014-2015 FCI: 0.16

May 2014 COU FCAP FCI: 0.11

To be determined

FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Annual diversion rate of non-hazardous waste

Annual Waste Diversion Rate 2013-2014: 65.3% 2014-2015: 65.8%

Province of Ontario: 60%

67.5%

FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Ratio (as a %) of Space inventory to Space Generated per COU Standards

% I/G 2013-14: 66.7% COU System: 78.8 To be determined







INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Business impact of system failure

Severity (# users

impacted)

Mar 2015

Apr 2015

May 2015

Jun 2015

Jul 2015

Aug 2015

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

1 (>500 users)

2 4 1 4

2 (50 to 500 users)

2 2 1 3

3 (<50 users)

3 1

4 (0 users) 1 1

TBD TBD

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES ITS project portfolio (as at Nove-4, 2015)

Current projects underway

Completed projects: FY2013/14 to current

TBD TBD

18

42

9

Operations

New Work

Mandated

0 20 40 60

2013/2014

2014/2015

2015/2016

12

5

11

18

15

8

14

10

9

Operations

New Work

Mandated







INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Availability of core systems

Service Target (avg > ) Aug

2015 Sep 2015 Oct 2015 AUG-OCT

2015

ADFS 99.000% 99.984% 100.000% 100.000% 99.995%

Portal (my.brocku.ca) 99.000% 99.536% 99.557% 99.469% 99.521%

c ard.brocku.ca 99.000% 99.957% 99.968% 99.945% 99.957%

careerzone.brocku.ca 99.000% 99.924% 99.986% 99.883% 99.931%

your.brocku.ca/Footprints 99.000% 99.973% 99.801% 100.000% 99.925%

Sakai 99.000% 99.986% 99.951% 99.814% 99.917%

mailbox.brocku.ca (OWA) 99.000% 99.984% 99.997% 99.991% 99.991%

TBD Included with metrics

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Performance of core systems

Service Target (avg < ) sec

Aug 2015 Sep 2015 Oct 2015

AUG-OCT 2015

ADFS 10.0000 0.0722 0.0704 0.0713 0.0713

Portal (my.brocku.ca) 10.0000 0.0384 0.0401 0.0440 0.0409

c ard.brocku.ca 10.0000 0.0320 0.0325 0.0464 0.0369

careerzone.brocku.ca 10.0000 0.0666 0.0563 0.0994 0.0741

your.brocku.ca/Footprints 10.0000 0.0233 0.0307 0.0353 0.0298

Sakai 10.0000 0.1075 0.1951 0.2113 0.1713

mailbox.brocku.ca (OWA) 10.0000 0.0322 0.0366 0.0394 0.0361 TBD

TBD Included with metrics

capital infrastructure committee - brock university...board of trustees capital infrastructure...

Documents