Liveblog: Committee on Grounds and Buildings!


So  I think the big part of this committee is really Item GB6&7, which is the Annual Report on Sustainability Practices, which I reviewed here: https://ucregentlive.wordpress.com/about/tk-2-thank-you-annual-report-on-sustainability/

Item GB1: Monitoring the Progress and Performance of the Capital Program (buildings)

Some of the new things that the UC wants to adopt is more accountability for the starting of capital projects.  They need designated individuals for capital projects and building processes on both the systemwide and campus level to take accountability for how the projects are going.  Overall, the recommendations develop more “clearly defined decisionmaking authority”.

—————————————————-

In the report, they have these following reasons for budget additions for the capital projects…

• Reasons cited for budget augmentations approved in FY 2008-09
􀂾 Scope or program change due to unanticipated gifts or grants – 52%
􀂾 Unforeseen conditions – 43%
􀂾 Schedule extensions – largely due to State suspension, litigation – 29%
􀂾 Market conditions – 29%
􀂾 Other ( errors & omissions, document coordination) – 24%

Notice that these don’t add up to 100%…a lot of these reasons are overlapping, and multiple will apply to one project.

——————————————————————–

The five recommendations proposed in this item

1. A single individual that is accountable to capital projects, both on the campus and on the systemwide level.

2. Formal business analysis of all the following projects.

3. A clearer chain of authority is meant to shorten the planning phase and stop the revisiting of decisions.

4. The move to the ‘best value’ building model – sharing best practices, etc.etc.

5. Establishing construction benchmarks and metrics, with roll-up reporting to track projects.

Item GB2: 10 year Financial Plan and Physical Plan for UC Merced

UC Merced is applying for confirmation of it’s 10 Year Financial Plan and Physical Plan of construction…this is important because it predicts how UCM will plan to build into the future with buildings – especially in UCM, which is a small, high growth campus. The presentation will be about context and the current state of UCM and its future plans, as an argument for how they’d like to grow into the future.

Physical Challenges definitely include that there is no infrastructure for miles and miles near UC Merced.  None.  They are built into nowhere.  Which means they definitely need to build all their own water lines, energy lines, roads, to expand.

State has invested 311 million dollars into  UCM’s building.  Most of it was startup funds.  Meanwhile, 600-700 student growth/year into the future for UCM is suggested.  Most of the funding source needs to come from State and Debt   Financing.  Half of it is for instruction and research facilities.

UCM’s sustainability is unparalleled, especailly going into the future.  They are already saving over a millino dollars in energy savings a year.  This benefit is offset by the extensive amount of infrastructure that will need to be built – two rivers run through the campus, this will need 15-30 different bridges to be built on the campus.  Also two large road leading out of the campus will need to be built to keep access to the campus (literally), sustainable.

Item GB3: 10 Year Physical and Financial Plan for UCSC

So while this is important, it’s  a very very long report on the Board of Regents – we’ll be pointing out the parts of the report that Regents are going to point concerns too, but we don’t currently have the capacity to adequately report on this item.  If you’d like to see more of this item: http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/mar10/gb3.pdf

Item GB4: Improving the Glen Mor 2 Student Apartments on the UCR Campus

Same thing…http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/mar10/gb4.pdf

Question: Have you explored a public/privatepartnership on this thing?  Response: The higher probably of success is with projects which are farther away from the close campus.  Our experience shows us that those knids of things are better for things that aren’t so much linked to residence life programs.

Item GB5: Capital Improvements on the UCSD Medical Center East Campus Bed Tower

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/mar10/gb5.pdf

Here’s the shock with this project: They actually have a donor that wants to give 5million dollars.  WHO WANTS TO BE UNNAMED.  WHO ISN’T ASKING FOR MATCHING FUNDS.  This is incredible.  Like people were incredibly generous and good people and loved to University.  I love them.

Item GB6: Annual Report on Sustainability & Report from the Sustainability Task Force

https://ucregentlive.wordpress.com/about/tk-2-thank-you-annual-report-on-sustainability/

So proud.  So proud.

So this is one of the most successful projects the UC has ever done.  It covers 8 different areas – we’ve gotten so many accolades for this.  You can tell, people are really proud of this.

One of the things is that the foodservice auxilaries and medical centers need to be applying a feasiability study by May 2010…haha so if you’re a student in a medical center or eating at a auxiliary, don’t forget to pressure those people to figure out their feasiability studies by the end of the deadline!

It’ll also be important for the UC’s to go carbon-neutral “as soon as possible’, as desiginated in the UC sustainability policy.  The direct costs of this will be around 17m-60m/yr…that’s if we bought carbon offsets to the point where we would be completely carbon-neutral.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s