5 minute read
4.4 Park System Maintenance Assessment
Parks and amenities that are properly maintained (i.e. clean and functioning effi ciently) are a critical element to delivering high quality programs and services. This is no small task. The City of Fresno maintains 1023 acres of park land, not including miscellaneous public grounds, right of way, or median landscaping, greenways or trails.
The landscape and custodial “core lines of service,” or functions performed by Fresno’s PARCS Department, are numerous and include custodial maintenance (restrooms cleaning and trash removal), contract management, equipment maintenance, furniture, fi xture and amenity maintenance, Integrated Pest Management (IPM), irrigation maintenance, landscape maintenance, open space maintenance, playground maintenance, response to citizen inquiries, special event facilitation, special projects, streetscape maintenance, turf maintenance, and urban forestry.
DIVISION OF WORK
Maintenance of the parks system is the responsibility of both the Public Works Department and the PARCS Department. This has resulted in a number of ineffi ciencies, including but not limited to: overlapping of crews, duplication of travel time to and from parks, and lack of consistent maintenance standards.
Through the review of limited data and workshops with staff, the PROS Consulting team determined that the PARCS and Public Works Maintenance Divisions do have “institutional” routine maintenance practices in place. However, the maintenance practices have limited written standards and accompanying standard operating procedures, are based on “one-size-fi tsall” approach to parks maintenance, are inconsistently applied in the fi eld and minimal maintenance is completed in natural areas, primarily due to lack of staffi ng capacity.
WORK ORDER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
The City of Fresno does utilize a Work Order Management System for the maintenance that it performs, however the Public Works Department and PARCS Department do not effectively utilize this system to allow for maximum benefi t. In addition to a system that tracks equipment that is being used, and parks that are being maintained, there would be signifi cant benefi ts to utilizing a City wide Work Order Management System that makes better use of City wide data so that maintenance decisions can be made that can improve effi ciency and reduce costs across departments. This relates to better tracking data about items that routinely need maintenance and replacement and time that is spent on specifi c tasks in order to make informed decisions about how future costs can be reduced. In addition, a management system for tracking lifecycle replacement cost, needs and longevity would also provide signifi cant benefi t.
RESOURCES
Staff does not lack the necessary equipment or resources to perform tasks at a high level, however, lack of staff create hardships when managing turf, trees and landscaping.
THIRD PARTY CONTRACTING OF SERVICES
Given the varying cycles of the economy, it is imperative that PARCS continually evaluates the capacity and cost of service in the private sector. Currently, PARCS does not track unit activity costs and therefore cannot analyze the unit cost to perform work internally against the unit cost to perform work by a third party vendor. Without this level of analysis the division is unable to determine if it is more effective and effi cient to perform work in-house or to contract it out.
MAINTENANCE YARD LOCATIONS
The lack of equitable distribution of maintenance yards is likely a major contributor to the ineffi cient use of park maintenance dollars due to the likelihood of the high amount of travel time required between park locations, also known as windshield time. See Appendix for “Park Maintenance Zone” concept diagram.
ANNUAL PARK OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING
Based on analysis conducted by PROS Consulting, unit costs are not in alignment with best practice cost per acre.
The following chart illustrates:
• Acreage by park type maintained by the
City of Fresno
• Annual funding allocated for park maintenance by park typology
• Annual funding allocated for utility costs by park typology
• Annual funding allocated for facility maintenance by park typology
• Annual funding allocated for administration and overhead by park typology
• Total annual funding expended on park and facility maintenance for each park typology
• Fresno direct cost per acre expended on park maintenance by park typology
Table 4.7
OPERATIONAL FUNDING ANALYSIS
Park Type Acreage Facility Square Footage
Pocket Parks 20.24
Neighborhood Parks 235.93 63,616 Community Parks 37.82 50,387 Regional Parks 445.02 Greenways 43.41 Special Use Parks 6.50 Sports Complex Parks 114.30 Basin Parks 74.50
Facility Parks 15.06 97,832 Conservation Parks 35.76
Miscellaneous Facilities and Grounds
TOTAL 1,028.54 211,835.00
Park & Landscape Maintenance Utilities Facility Maintenance Administration & Overhead Expenditures Total Funding: Park & Facility Maintenance Direct Cost Per Acre Best Practice Cost Per Acre Additional Funding Needed To Meet Best Practice
$158,167 $26,123 $16,736 $227,725 $428,751 $9,932 $10,000 $1,374 $515,603 $738,450 $676,246 $1,118,142 $3,048,441 $12,424 $13,000 $135,824 $64,090 $99,458 $242,081 $203,021 $608,650 $12,376 $15,000 $99,221 $859,640 $242,364 $322,629 $1,033,887 $2,458,520 $3,201 $10,000 $3,025,567 $22,066 $6,202 $449 $31,132 $59,849 $662 $5,000 $188,325 $1,248 $25,869 $5,276 $13,142 $45,535 $4,983 $7,500 $16,357 $174,670 $232,617 $68,919 $160,434 $636,640 $4,166 $10,000 $666,794 $12,089 $52,408 $14,392 $34,161 $113,050 $1,059 $7,500 $479,861 $68,086 $261,392 $220,651 $274,790 $824,919 $4,520 $4,500 $298 $15,000 $0 $5,173 $1,907 $22,080 $564 $600 $1,283 $224,562 $161,171 $198,118 $397,924 $981,775 NA NA NA
$2,115,221 $1,846,055 $1,770,670 $3,496,265 $9,228,211 $4,614,307
• Best practice cost per acre expended on park maintenance by park typology
• Additional annual funding needed to meet best practice cost per acre by park typology
• As noted in the table, the parks maintenance in the City of Fresno is underfunded annually by nearly $5 million
The PARCS and Public Works Parks Maintenance Divisions are comprised of 38.38 FTEs. Best practice ratio of staff per park acres at a “Level 2” maintenance standard is 1:20 acres. With the responsibility of actively managing 1028.54 acres (does not include right of way and median landscaping), the staff does not have the capacity to manage the parks system consistently at a Level 2 maintenance standard as the current ratio of FTEs to park acres is 1:26.8 and is currently understaffed by at least 13 FTEs.
