This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
28. 5. 97
STRATEGY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
23 MAY 1997
A meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee
was held on Friday 23 May 1997 at 12 noon
PART A - MATTERS REQUIRING A COUNCIL DECISION
1. REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SHIRLEY LIBRARY
AND SERVICE CENTRE RR 5291
| Officer responsible |
Authors |
| Director of Operations |
Stephen Phillips, Peter Francis, Sue Sutherland and Barbara Clarke |
| Corporate Plan Output: Corporate Advice 4.1 text 2 |
The purpose of this report is to update the Council on the redevelopment of the Shirley Service Centre and Library, and raise some possible changes which could be realised during that process.
BACKGROUND
On the evening of 20 April 1997 a fire originating in the area of the staff room at the Shirley Library and Service Centre resulted in considerable damage to the roof and internal contents of the building. Whilst flame damage was restricted to approximately 15% of the building the resultant smoke and water damage destroyed the entire contents. The Council's insurers have provided indemnity on the building and contents where restoration to original condition is impossible or uneconomic. It is anticipated that the reinstatement of the building and contents will take a period of between six to nine months.
In order to maintain a service delivery to the community the Service Centre has opened temporary premises at 3 New Brighton Road with full counter services and ancillary staff located in adjacent premises in Marshland Road. The Library has not been able to locate suitable premises in the area from which temporary services could be satisfactorily operated but has initiated a free bus service from the Palms complex to adjacent Community Libraries on a twice weekly basis. Community Board meetings and meetings with the public will be conducted from various locations within Burwood/Pegasus as well as from the facilities available at the Linwood Service Centre.
All Service Centre staff have been housed in the Palms complex and library staff have been assigned to various positions within the library network.
REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES
The fire which devastated the Shirley Library and Service Centre on 20 April has created an opportunity to review the internal layout of the premises.
Redesign of the layout now would enable:
Councillors will recall that a report proposing a new strategic direction for the delivery of Council functions at suburban level was presented to the February meeting of the Strategy and Resources Committee.
That report, whilst acknowledging the success of co-located libraries and service centres, highlighted the opportunity to improve the model through the integration of selected services within the libraries network.
This new integrated service delivery model was perceived to have the following advantages and disadvantages:
| Perceived Advantages |
Perceived Disadvantages |
| * Seamless Service ... `one stop shop' |
* Staff resistance |
| * Heightened focus of Council activity in the
community |
* Risk of loss of specialisation |
| * Opportunity for expansion of service delivery
points |
* Mix of activities not always compatible |
| * Breaks down Unit barriers |
|
| * No duplication of facilities |
|
| * Enhanced customer satisfaction |
|
| * Cost savings likely |
|
| * Uniform hours of operation |
The conclusions of the report (which recommended the adoption of a Suburban Service Delivery Strategy,) as presented to the Committee in February, are attached as Appendix I.
The intention was to implement Library and Service Centre developments over time in a way that is compatible with the plan.
The Committee at that time resolved that the strategy be supported for further investigation of operational and capital costs and savings.
This further study is in hand and it is anticipated that a report dealing with cost implications of the strategy will be submitted to the August meeting of the Committee.
The fire has also created an opportunity to review the service delivery model in so far as this location is concerned.
The matter is brought to the Committee as one of urgency as the Insurance Assessors are tendering the reconstruction contract on 3 June with tenders let by 4 July 1997.
The tender documents assume reinstatement of the building as it was before the fire. If changes are to be made tenders for an alternative internal design would also need to be sought. Costs above re-instatement of the original building (if any) would be the responsibility of the Council, rather than the insurer.
This report therefore looks at options available to the Council in terms of redevelopment opportunities.
OPTIONS
The following four options for redevelopment of the Library and Service Centre have been identified:
1. Status Quo (i.e. rebuild as it was prior to the fire).
2. Redesign to improve existing layout and enable future integration of Library and Service Centre Customer Service Functions (i.e. all existing functions and staff remain at the site but the internal design is such that at a later stage the service delivery functions could readily be integrated by the removal of partitions/walls).
3. Maximise redesign opportunities and include integration of Library and Service Centre Customer Service Functions (i.e. existing front of house service centre staff (say 4) are integrated into the Library customer service space and other Service Centre staff are relocated to the Linwood Service Centre).
4. Full Integration of Library and Service Centre Customer Service Functions (i.e. cash receipting, handling of action requests for Council and general Council/Community information through access to a networked data base).
Each of these options were assessed equally from the Library and Service Centre perspectives and the perceived advantages and disadvantages of each option are considered to be as follows:
| OPTION 1 STATUS QUO |
| Perceived Advantages |
Perceived Disadvantages |
| * No additional costs to Council (i.e. reinstatement by insurance) |
* Doesn't address opportunities identified through
the Suburban Service Delivery Review |
| * No long term disruption to staff |
* Retains costly administrative structure |
| * Outcome is known to the Council and the Community |
* Retains duplication of resources |
| * Retains different hours of operation |
A plan of the existing design is tabled.
| OPTION 2 REDESIGN TO IMPROVE
EXISTING LAYOUT AND ENABLE FUTURE INTEGRATION |
| Perceived Advantages |
Perceived Disadvantages |
|
| * No additional disruption to the staff (in the short
term) |
* Possible immediate additional costs (i.e. costs (if
any) over replacement costs for original design) |
|
| * Outcome is known to the Council and the Community |
* Retain costly administrative structure |
|
| * Opportunity to address internal alterations needed
to improve layout and space allocations |
* Retain duplication of resources |
|
| * Establishes an opportunity for future change in
line with the Suburban Service Delivery Strategy |
* Doesn't address, in the short term, opportunities
identified in the Suburban Service Delivery Review |
|
| * Improved public circulation and workspace |
* Future additional costs (and disruption) to
implement integration in terms of the Suburban Service
Delivery strategy |
|
| * Improved meeting room facilities |
* Retain different hours of operation |
|
| * Dedicated space for Community Constable |
* Compromises in building design would be necessary
and to the detriment of final integration |
| OPTION 3 MAXIMISE REDESIGN
OPPORTUNITIES AND INCLUDE INTEGRATION OF FUNCTIONS |
| Perceived Advantages |
Perceived Disadvantages |
|
| * Moves towards implementation of the Suburban
Service Delivery Strategy |
* Possible immediate additional costs (i.e. costs (if
any) over replacement costs for original design) |
|
| * Allows the Suburban Service Delivery Strategy to be
piloted and evaluated |
* Possible staff resistance to multi-skilling |
|
| * Enhances service delivery levels through better
access to Council services (e.g. extended hours) |
||
| * Possible reduction in operating costs (staffing and
administrative) |
||
| * Some staff development opportunities |
||
| * Library better fulfils its role as supplier of
information |
||
| * Minimises duplication of services |
||
| * Maximises use of staff resources through further
multi-skilling |
||
| * Improved public circulation and workspace |
||
| * Improved meeting room facilities |
||
| * Dedicated space for Community Constable |
||
| * Enhances Council's service delivery image |
| OPTION 4 FULL INTEGRATION OF
LIBRARY AND SERVICE CENTRE CUSTOMER SERVICE FUNCTIONS
|
| Perceived Advantages |
Perceived Disadvantages |
|
| As Option 3 excluding "Enhances Council's
Service Delivery Image" |
As Option 3 plus |
|
| * Technical support (i.e. networked data base) not
yet available |
||
| * Unable to meet expected service delivery
requirements |
||
| * Unrealistic expectations of staff |
Having assessed the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the four options we do not believe that in terms of service delivery the status quo or immediate full integration are appropriate courses of action to follow for redevelopment of this high profile suburban Council facility.
Further work, by way of concept plans has been undertaken on options 2 and 3.
ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS
Option 2 (Redesign to Improve Existing Layout and enable Future Integration)
As outlined this option retains all existing service centre functions and staff on the present site but the internal layout is redesigned to improve public circulation and work areas in the library, provides a space for a Community Constable and easily allows for later integration of customer service functions as proposed in the Suburban Service Delivery Strategy.
A plan, depicting how this could be achieved is tabled.
Attention is drawn to the new location of the Boardroom. Currently the Boardroom is located between the Library and Service Centre activities which inhibits integration of service delivery functions.
Option 3 (Maximise Redesign Opportunities and include Integration of Library and Service Centre Customer Service Functions)
The option envisages a maximum of four service centre staff (front of house) being integrated into the Library.
The tabled plan indicates a possible layout.
This redesign provides for:
| * Improved public access/circulation areas |
||
| * Accommodation for a community constable |
||
| * Integration of library and counter service centre
functions |
||
| * Utilisation of "released" service centre
space by the library |
||
| * Retention of public toilet facilities |
||
| * Relocated and improved boardroom facilities for
public use both during and outside of normal operating
hours |
IMPACT OF ALTERNATIVES
The impact of the alternatives (i.e. options 2 and 3) have been assessed as follows:
OPTION 2
This option is not seen as having any different impact on customers, elected members or staff. In essence it is the status quo from a service delivery point of view, the only changes being to internal layout.
Increased costs over the reinstatement of the existing design are estimated to be in the order of $75,000.
OPTION 3
The impact of this option is seen as follows:
Customers
The level of service delivery for walk-in and telephone customers is enhanced to the extent that hours of operation per week for the library and Service Centre will increase from 43.5 and 45 respectively to 48.
Elected members and the Burwood-Pegasus Community Board will continue to receive the same high level of service.
Service delivery standards in the community (i.e. site visits) will be maintained, if not improved by strengthened service delivery teams.
Staffing
Integration of functions present opportunities to improve efficiencies. Greater multi-skilling of staff will be necessary to achieve these gains. Some staff will see this as an opportunity whilst some may resist it because of a perceived loss of specialisation. Overall, however "multi-skilling and integration in service delivery" are an aspect of the organisation's culture statement.
Staged integration will lead to changes in work places in the short term and possibly roles in the longer term. Again some staff will see this as a challenge whilst others will view it with concern. Change needs to be managed with sensitivity.
Technology
The draft 1997/98 budget makes provision for development of an integrated data base and customer inquiry handling system.
Technology that was available at the Service Centre before the fire would be reinstated. This would ensure that the same level of service for (Service Centre) walk-in and telephone customers would be retained (e.g. receipting, rating/property enquiries) until a new integrated database was installed.
Hours of Operation
Pre-fire hours of operation were as follows:
Service Centre: 8.00am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday
Library: 10.00am to 5.30pm Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday.
10.00am to 8.30pm Thursday
10.00am to 1.00pm Saturday
Clearly under the integrated model hours of operation need to be rationalised.
The majority of the premises in The Palms (excluding the supermarket) open at 9.00am, which is seen as appropriate for the new premises. The Library closing time of 5.30pm is also seen as more appropriate than 5.00pm.
Proposed hours of operation for the new premises are:
9.00am to 5.30pm Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday
9.00am to 8.00pm Thursday
10.00am to 1.00pm Saturday
This equates to 48 hours per week and can be compared with previous hours 45 per week for the Service Centre and 43.5 per week for the Library.
This represents a significant increase in the level of service available. Later opening hours for Service Centre functions are offset by later closing hours, a late night and part Saturday opening.
Up to an additional 20 person hours per week will be required to operate extended library hours.
We believe that through staff rostering and bettering utilisation of staff through multi-skilling the extended hours of operation can be achieved at no additional cost.
Financing
As indicated above operational costs at this stage remain unchanged. Relocation of staff to the Linwood Service Centre can be accommodated within existing budgets.
Building costs beyond replacement insurance cover are estimated to be in the vicinity of $90,000 but this is very much dependent on the outcome of the tender process.
As the budget for 1997/98 will not be completed until 30 July 1997 any additional costs could be accommodated within the final annual plan as approved by the Council.
The draft annual plan forecasts a rate increase of 2.7% for 1997/98 and 2.72% for 1998/99.
The Financial Planning Manager has advised that additional expenditure of $90,000 is not significant and the rate increase would remain at 2.70% for 1997/98. In the second year the full loan servicing costs would come to charge and would result in the addition of 0.01% being added to the projected rate increase.
Opportunities for Improvement
The unfortunate circumstances created by the fire have presented an opportunity to enhance service delivery, in terms of design, hours of operation and integration of functions, from the Shirley site, i.e. pilot a model advocated through the Suburban Service Review. Improvements to the existing service delivery model will lead to better use of staff resources and avoid duplication of other resources. Better service delivery will enhance the Council's image in the community.
CONCLUSIONS
The status quo ignores the opportunity to improve customer service. To implement options 2 or 3 at a later date would more than double the estimated cost of doing this now.
Later integration will incur additional costs (both now and later), lead to compromises in design and further disruption.
Immediate full integration, in terms of the Suburban Service Delivery Strategy, would result in a significant reduction in present service delivery standards.
We conclude that option 3 (maximise re-design opportunities and include immediate implementation of integration of Library and Service Centre Customer Service Functions) is the best option.
Officers'
Recommendation: 1. That in addition to tenders being called for reinstatement of the Shirley Service Centre and Library tenders also be called for redevelopment of the facility as a Library and Information Centre in terms of Option 3 as outlined in this report.
2. That provided the additional cost to redevelop the facility as a Library and Information Centre is not greater than $100,000 the Chairman of the Strategy and Resources Committee and the Director of Operations be authorised to accept a tender on the understanding that the additional costs will be accommodated within the Annual Plan for 1997/98.
The Chairman commented:
"The unfortunate fire has provided us with an unexpected opportunity to implement an innovative model of service delivery earlier than expected.
This project could be the first step in providing Christchurch people with much better access to Council information and services."
Recommendation: Because of the timing of the Committee meeting it was not possible to include the Committee's recommendation on the above proposal in this report. The recommendation will be tabled at the Council meeting.
CONSIDERED THIS 28TH DAY OF MAY 1997
MAYOR