Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 An annual publication that demonstrates the Western Cape Government’s commitment to managing and improving the efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of its property holdings. Issue No. 9. Contents
About the report ...... 2 Foreword ...... 6 Introduction ...... 8 Executive summary ...... 10 Chapter 1 – Environmental performance ...... 12 Case Study – Rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) systems ...... 24 Chapter 2 – Space utilisation ...... 26 Chapter 3 – Performance measurement cost...... 30 Case Study – Operating cost analysis ...... 34 Chapter 4 – Portfolio overview ...... 38 Chapter 5 – The way forward ...... 40 Acknowledgements ...... 44 Glossary ...... 46
About the report
The first Property Efficiency Report (PER) was published in 2013 and covered the 2011/2012 reporting period. The baseline established then continues to be used for performance reporting. This, the 9th edition of the PER, highlights the continuing dedication of the Western Cape Government (WCG), through the Department of Transport and Public Works (DTPW) as the custodian of WCG immovable assets, to transparency in its day-to-day activities and the collecting of data that enables evidence-based stewardship of the resources. The information produced here is based on data received from the DTPW, users of the various properties, and other stakeholders.
The property portfolio covered in the report represents a mixture of old and new buildings located inside the Cape Town Central Business District (CBD) and elsewhere in the Western Cape. DTPW takes its mandate from various legislated prescripts, particularly the Government Immovable Asset Management Act, 2007 (Act 19 of 2007) (GIAMA). To ensure that DTPW complies with this mandate, the custodian again developed a Custodian Asset Management Plan (C-AMP) which drew on all the User Immovable Asset Management Plans (U-AMPs) for the 2019/2020 reporting period submitted by the user department and entities.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 2 The strategic intent of The longer-term strategic ABOUT the DTPW in regard to approach includes: its existing immovable assets is to: The development and implementation of a Master Accommodation Plan to achieve efficiencies and resilience Manage the property portfolio and in the office accommodation portfolio; improve its efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability A shared office building approach aimed at diminishing the demand for additional office space, promoting integration Reduce costs of space, and further improving efficiencies in the use of space; and Optimize space utilization An ongoing search for and employment of viable solutions Reduce full-time employee costs to provide more resilient infrastructure that can effectively adapt to climate change and give effect to greater environmental sustainability.
The report continues to build on work done in prior years, including information gathered from remote meters installed at various facilities in the WCG property portfolio. Off-grid solar photovoltaic (PV) remains a crucial focus, as do the various water efficiency projects introduced during the 2015 – 2018 drought. DTPW is starting to see the many benefits of the improved guardianship of natural resources and reduced dependency on municipal resources.
The performance matrix consists of nine consecutive years’ data, thus enabling DTPW to provide a context-appropriate picture, per individual facility, of resource utilisation efficiency, office suitability and space utilisation efficiency.
The consumption of natural resources in the portfolio, mainly electricity and water, remains an area of interest. Data from remote meters has made it possible to generate automated performance reports, develop service alerts for urgent attention, pinpoint faults, and highlight areas where efficiency gains can be made.
Reporting period and scope This report examines the performance of 37 office buildings, totalling 205 388m², from the WCG’s real estate portfolio for the 2019/2020 period. All owned and leased office accommodation of over 1 000 m2 has been included in the portfolio. The data is all in respect of the 12-month period from April 2019 to March 2020.
Changes from the previous report include:
3 Dorp Street The Western 68 Orange Street has been Cape Education has not been included again Department included as the in the portfolio, (WCED) Central entire building as the office Office has been was vacant and modernisation excluded due undergoing office project to a lack of 12 modernisation undertaken there months’ reliable during the was completed. data. reporting period.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 3 39 = 208 658 m2
ABOUT buildings
Owned Leased 28 buildings 11 buildings
Non- CBD EXCLUDED Non- CBD 15 CBD 11 02 03 CBD 08
54 828 m2 81 092 m2 3 270 m2 7 357 m2 62 111 m2
Data management Portfolio percentage split based on m² and access Portfolio percentage split based on m²
A reliable and informative report can only be produced if the data it is based upon is accurate and relevant. The principal sources of baseline data are the DTPW’s Public Works Immovable Asset 27% Register, remote meters at the various buildings, 30% Public Works Operational Property Management, the Public Works Property Support Office, the provincial Department of Social Development, 4% Public Works General Infrastructure and the Department of Community Safety.
Great care has been taken to ensure that the 39% meter readings are accurate. Meter readings were compared to the consumption reflected on the various municipal accounts. Anomalies CBD leased were investigated and corrected. The information CBD owned Non-CBD leased was analysed using sound and responsible Non-CBD owned methodologies to ensure the data was correctly interpreted.
The WCG’s portfolio was benchmarked against the Green Building Council of South Africa (GBCSA) database of office building data. Various landlords use GBCSA’s energy and water benchmarking tool (private and public sector) to determine the performance of their buildings against similar buildings in the same geographic area, as well as other buildings in the owner’s portfolio. The private sector cost benchmark was derived from data from private landlords, MSCI, the South African Property Owners’ Association (SAPOA) and various other published reports.
In this edition, we also have the pleasure of benchmarking our energy efficiency performance against a portfolio of City of Cape Town (CoCT) office buildings. DTPW is extremely excited and looks forward to working more closely with the CoCT to build a public sector office benchmark in the future.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 4 ABOUT 5 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property Foreword BONGINKOSI MADIKIZELA FOREWORD Minister of Transport and Public Works
The preparation of this 9th edition of the Property Efficiency Report (PER) is being undertaken against the backdrop of unprecedented fiscal uncertainty, the aftermath of the peak and continued presence of COVID-19, a recent history of severe disruptions in business activity, and increased pressure on government to meet growing societal needs. These situational factors further emphasise our rationale for a report of this nature, the need for greater efficiency across our property portfolio and the increasing need for this in forthcoming reporting periods.
The property performance results reflected for the current reporting I am confident of period again demonstrate continued improvement across most this team’s focus measures reported on as well as against the applicable benchmarks. I am exceedingly proud of both the team directly responsible for and determination preparing it, and also the greater departmental and Western Cape to continue along Government (WCG) effort reflected in these exceptional results. our sustainability path and to accept We have recently seen Western Cape Water Supply System dams our fair share of overflowing and experienced flashbacks to a recent time when we were planning and preparing for a potential “Day Zero” when some of responsibility to our taps could have run dry. With load shedding very much a part of future generations. our everyday lives, we look forward to a time when this too is a thing of the past. The environmental results in this report are testament to our sustainability commitment and I am confident of this team’s focus and determination to continue along our sustainability path and to accept our fair share of responsibility to future generations. Further recognition of this is the recent appointment of the head of the Public Works Branch, Gavin Kode, to the board of the Green Building Council of South Africa as a volunteer non-executive director. This appointment recognises our historic work on sustainable infrastructure and accommodation in the Western Cape and also highlights what is possible within the public sector.
For the first time, this publication now also includes the City of Cape Town’s own office portfolio efficiency measures, in addition to the private sector benchmarks and the National Department of Public Works and Infrastructure Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) against which we are now also able to compare our performance. The City of Cape Town has been utilising the WCG’s PER publication as a performance gauge over the last three years and is busy with an extensive efficiency study of its own. We look forward to examining the City of Cape Town’s property efficiency report as soon as this is published. This is a simple but significant example of collaboration and transparency within and between spheres of government.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 6 FOREWORD
Our focus will therefore have to be on protecting those core aspects that speak directly to our occupational health and safety obligations. The approach will be to prioritise maintenance as far as is practically possible to that end.
In the run-up to the 2020/2021 financial year, as well as now due to the impact of COVID-19, the Department of Transport and Public Works (DTPW) was requested to effect significant budgetary cuts. The largest portion of the cut was absorbed within the infrastructure units of the DTPW, leading to a delay in giving effect to a number of infrastructure and accommodation projects, each with various degrees of economic, social or development impact. Our Provincial Public Works budget has been reduced. This has a negative impact on the ability of DTPW as the custodian to provide services to departments, and has delayed some of the office modernisation projects that are aimed at providing a more efficient work environment in line with the outcomes of this Property Efficiency Report. Our focus will therefore have to be on protecting those core aspects that speak directly to our occupational health and safety obligations. The approach will be to prioritise maintenance as far as is practically possible to that end.
The DTPW is acutely aware of the enormous pressure that is being The DTPW is brought to bear on government to actively contribute towards acutely aware of the measures aimed at protecting the most vulnerable against the enormous pressure devastating impact of the pandemic, to stimulate economic that is being growth, and to adapt to a new normal – a new normal in which brought to bear COVID-19 and its related implications will be with us for the next on government to 12–18 months. Although the Red Dot and Red Dot Light transport actively contribute initiatives in response to COVID-19 are significant innovations and towards measures performance achievements from the transport side of the DTPW, aimed at protecting the procurement, contract management and construction of the the most vulnerable Cape Town International Convention Centre Hospital of Hope, as against the well as other infrastructure and accommodation projects, are due devastating impact to the direct efforts and determination of the Public Works teams. of the pandemic, to stimulate economic These efforts aimed at fighting the scourge of COVID-19 have growth, and to adapt demonstrated the value of our historic investment in systems, to a new normal – a technology and people. Building off these investments will be a new normal in which cornerstone of our approach going forward. Leveraging the goodwill COVID-19 and its and trust generated through our existing initiatives and collaboration related implications does, however, happen in a context of trade-offs and difficult choices, will be with us where the consequence of our decisions has a direct impact on the for the next 12–18 lives of our citizens. Nowhere is this trade-off starker than in the months. infrastructure space.
I am confident that the DTPW stands ready to actively contribute towards this effort and has shown, through innovation, determination and cross-collaboration, that such a contribution can fundamentally shift existing paradigms.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 7 Introduction JACQUELINE GOOCH Head of Department, Transport and Public Works INTRODUCTION
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf said that “The size of your dreams must always exceed your current capacity to achieve them. If your dreams do not scare you, they are not big enough”. Some years ago already, we started to dream – not daydream or wander aimlessly, but to dream of a future that was not only possible, but which we truly desired. A future that was worth creating – because they say that the best way to predict the future is to create it.
We looked at the sustainability of what we were doing, and asked ourselves the key question of what the cost is, was or would be, to current and future generations of the decisions we would either make, or not make, today. We looked at the citizen and how becoming citizen-centric in a complexity system was essential. We went “back to the future”, so to speak. We looked at the considerations necessary for shaping our future and designing our future vision. We saw that infrastructure was our societal backbone – that the infrastructure ecosystem was the invisible socio-economic backbone that touches every citizen all the time. We saw that we needed to create a fundamentally different set of initial conditions that would give rise to an alternative future that was vested in human dignity, sustainability and resilience.
We developed our Massive Transformative Purpose (MTP). In its simplest sense, an MTP is a “highly aspirational tagline” for an individual or group or organisation. It is a huge and audacious purpose statement, it is unique to the individual or group or organisation, and it is aimed at fundamental transformation. We developed our MTP as:
Enabled communities leading dignified lives. And the hashtag by-line that was developed to support this was: JUSTdignity
Our MTP is therefore an embodiment of the ethos of ethical behaviour, citizen-centricity, and the construction of a compact between the state and citizens that will guide the actions of the Department through the next strategic planning period 2020 to 2025. In crafting our 20-year vision, the Department is placing the citizen at the centre of its service delivery mandate. Within this context, it is deeply committed to realise both the goals and objectives that have been set at a national level as enshrined in, for example, the National Development Plan (NDP) and the Medium-Term Strategic Framework, as well as those set at a provincial level in the Provincial Strategic Plan. It strives to give concrete effect to the spirit and the letter of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
As a department, we have set the protection of the provincial infrastructure asset base, the leveraging of technology, and the well-being of our staff as core components of our overall strategic drive towards maximising the impact of our services. These are all substantial aspects of property efficiency – which is the essence of this report. In an increasingly volatile, uncertain, complex and
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 8 INTRODUCTION 9 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property In reflecting on the dreams from many years ago when we first set out on this Property EfficiencyProperty set out on this we first when years ago many from on the dreams In reflecting The these dreams. from has emerged that see the significant fruit I am pleased to journey, Report and report process, this into resources time and to invest Works Public of Provincial efforts continued efficient public its position as the most it maintains that will ensure performance, which drive the levers commitment same dedication, the that And I am confident in South Africa. manager property sector will have we look back in time, when we that, will ensure and vision of the people in the Department lead dignified lives. to enabled communities We continue to make progress towards spatial integration and have provided land for affordable affordable land for provided have and integration spatial towards progress make to continue We Living Model Better as the Hospital site Conradie of the former development The human settlements. approvals planning site relevant bidder, the successful to has been awarded (BLMEP) Project Exemplar of this approximately underway is well and construction of Cape Town, the City obtained from were in respond called to undoubtedly times and are living in unprecedented are We R5.5bn development. ways. unprecedented ambiguous (VUCA) environment, we have endeavoured to improve our agility, create unity around unity around create our agility, improve to endeavoured have we environment, (VUCA) ambiguous and innovative. be creative and purpose, Executive summary This is the 9th edition of the Property Efficiency Report. The report examines the performance of 37 selected office buildings from the Western Cape Government’s real estate portfolio.
2018/2019 2019/2020
All All Non- Non- All leased CBD Private All WCG All leased All owned CBD Public
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WCG owned CBD CBD buildings offices sector offices buildings buildings offices sector offices buildings offices offices
WC portfolio 214 506 69 580 144 926 148 118 66 388 - 208 658 69 468 139 190 144 571 64 087 - net area
WC portfolio performance 211 037 69 580 141 457 144 649 66 388 - 205 388 69 468 135 920 143 203 62 185 - data
Accommodated 11 168 3 633 7 535 7 902 3 266 - 9 139 3 070 6 069 6 633 2 506 - office staff
Cost/m² 3 037 2 842 3 222 3 205 2 861 2 907 2 319 2 692 2 129 2 653 1 550 2 127
Cost/FTE 59 716 55 187 61 921 58 669 62 437 - 52 119 60 915 47 669 57 283 38 451
m²/FTE 19 19 19 18 22 - 22 23 22 21 25 -
m²/Desk 17 17 17 16 20 15 19 20 19 18 22 16
Energy kWh consumed per 2 893 3 619 2 520 3 237 1 647 - 2 749 3 988 2 940 3 809 1 923 - FTE/pa
Water kL consumed per 11 14 9 10 14 - 12 13 11 11 12 - FTE/pa
Energy kWh/ 150 186 131 177 90 231 146 176 131 176 77 222 m²/pa
Water kL/m²/pa 0.63 0.73 0.47 0.54 0.76 0.94 0.54 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.56 0.84
Total electricity consumption per kWh/m2/pa decreased by 2.6% from 150 to 146 kWh/m²/pa over the 2019/2020 reporting period.
Despite a decrease in electricity consumption, the final portfolio target of 139.7 kWh/m²/ pa was not met. We remain committed to reducing our energy consumption.
The portfolio currently out-performs the industry benchmark for electricity consumption by more than 34%. The private sector benchmark stands at 222 kWh/m2/pa.
For the first time we are also able to benchmark the WCG’s energy efficiency performance against 32 selected buildings of the City of Cape Town’s (CoCT) office building portfolio. The CoCT’s office portfolio consumption stands at 110 kWh/m²/pa. This trumps our performance by approximately 24%.
Solar PV-generated electricity accounts for 3% of the total energy consumption in the portfolio of 37 buildings.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
11 Cape Town CBD buildings cost 28% more than SAPOA’s R66/m² benchmark R66/m² SAPOA’s than more 28% cost buildings CBD Town Cape from R2 907 to R2 127/m² over the same over R2 127/m² to R2 907 26% from by dropped benchmark sector private The period. and electricity accounts cost of occupancy 72% for leased buildings accounts for Rental 13%. for , which is 6% higher than the is R70/m² under review the portfolio for cost operating The benchmark of R66/m². SAPOA R85/m², At Extensive analysis has been done on the portfolio’s on the portfolio’s has been done analysis Extensive are and we metre, per square cost occupancy total has decreased cost the total that report to delighted period reporting the 2019/2020 nearly 25% over by R2 319/m². to R3 097 from the MSCI benchmark of R77/m². 10% above and are buildingsthe For group. costs operating the in category largest the are charges Municipal 21% below is This costs. operating of total 41% for account they in this report, covered benchmark. the SAPOA The portfolio achieved an average desk space of of desk space an average achieved portfolio The the same to 17 m² compared from 19 m², an increase year. period last levels. 2017/2018 to taking us back efficiency, an 11% decline in desk space represents This the timing and analyse verify to with an investigation busy Department is currently The efficiency. to this decline in led that of staff movement the wide-ranging for and reasons per FTE [full-time metre in square an increase showed All buildings portfolio The non-CBD buildings density of combined 22 m²/FTE. The 19 m²/FTE to from equivalent] period. the reporting than 13% over more by decreased water consumption benchmark consumption water sector private the outperform to continues portfolio The the same period. for kL/m²/pa of 0.84 groundwater its utilising actively portfolio in the only building the is Dorp Street 9 water this alternative from comes consumed water of the and 47% in the basement in its use of municipal 41% of approximately a reduction building showed The source. kL/m²/pa 0.20 to kL/m²/pa 0.34 from moved period, having a three-year over water period. this over Water consumption decreased from 0.63 to to 0.63 from decreased consumption Water the during decrease, a 14% kL/m²/pa, 0.54 period. reporting 2019/2020 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property Executive summary Executive ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTAL
Chapter 1: Environmental performance
Environmental sustainability remains a critical concern for 64% of the water all government departments, and the efficient use of natural resources remains high on the WCG’s priority list. In striving consumption for this, the WCG has implemented targets to reduce the analysis is from portfolio’s carbon footprint and to increase the utilisation of renewable energy sources. the portfolio’s remote meters, As part of the WCG’s environmental performance, we continue to monitor and report on energy and water consumption 28% is from across the portfolio. This is a team effort with various the monthly departments involved in the process. This 9th edition of the Property Efficiency Report highlights our continued transition bills received from relying solely on municipal bills to collecting this data from the local from our own remote meters. municipalities, and
Our analysis of the energy consumption is based on data 8% of the portfolio received from meter readings, which accounts for 77% of was excluded due the data, 18% is based on monthly bills received from various municipalities, while only 5% of the portfolio data had to be to inaccurate or excluded from this exercise due to it being fundamentally unavailable data. inaccurate or unavailable.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 12 The changeover to meter readings remains a Energy consumption data compilation ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE Energy consumption data compilation technical process and individual building audits remain part of the process as some buildings present site-specific challenges. We continue to identify buildings with variances where bills 5% received from the local municipality or the 18% landlord differ from our meter readings. These discrepancies are investigated, rectified and the Metered findings reported. Accounts Analysing the data has once again highlighted Excluded the crucial role that remote metering plays in obtaining accurate and timeous information 77% used to monitor usage. In line with our reporting rationale, we need these meters to measure the consumption, so that we can monitor Water consumption data compilation the performance, manage the performance Water consumption data compilation outcomes, and improve outcomes over time. The value of this approach has been proven in the non-CBD leased buildings where water consumption has been reduced by more than 8% 67% over the reporting period. Spikes in the data prompted investigations which led to fixing various slow leaks that would not otherwise 28% Metered have been noticed. Accounts Excluded In the year under review, total electricity 64% consumption (kWh/m2/pa) decreased by 2.6% from 150 to 146 kWh/m2/pa. The consumption of 3 Dorp Street has been included again in the analysis after the modernisation project Environmental at the building had been completed. As noted previously, the Western Cape Education Department Central Office has been excluded because of a performance lack of 12 months’ reliable data. Some of the initiatives implemented and installations done by the WCG to reduce the consumption of water during the drought resulted in a less significant reduction in electricity consumption. As a result, the energy performance is slightly above the 5-year target of 139.7 kWh/m2/pa, albeit below the Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) benchmark.
Electricity performance per kWh/m2 per annum
Electricity performance per kWh/m2 per annum 300 EPC benchmmark 185 250
200
150 273 249 247 237 231 139 100 222 191 168 158 150 145 146 50 154 182 171 191 191
0 2014/2015 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020 Targeted 191 191 182 171 154 139 Actual 191 168 158 145 150 146 Private sector 273 249 247 237 231 222
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 13 Although the final portfolio target of 139.7 kWh/m²/pa was not met, we remain committed to reducing our energy consumption.
A substantial achievement is a reduction of approximately 14% in water consumption from the previous period to the current period, which now stands at 0.54 kL/m2/pa.
Strict water restrictions imposed by local authorities due to the drought, various water-saving initiatives throughout the portfolio, and improved user behaviour all contributed to this outstanding result. No water target was set for the 2019/2020 period.
Water performance per kL/m2 per annum
Water performance per kL/m2 per annum 1.20 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTAL 1.00
0. 80
0. 60 1.14 1.14 1.10 1.08 1.03 0.94 0.91 0.89
0. 40 0.86 0.84 0.80 0.69 0.63 0. 20 0.54
0. 00 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020 Targeted 1.14 1.14 1.08 1.03 Actual 1.10 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.54 Private sector 0.80 0.89 0.86 0.94 0.84
2019/2020 Electricity benchmarks Water benchmarks Types of buildings kWh/m2/pa kL/m2/pa WCG portfolio Private sector WCG portfolio Private sector CBD owned 167 224 0.46 0.81 CBD leased 189 214 0.65 0.74 CBD all buildings 176 220 0.53 0.78 Non-CBD owned 79 225 0.56 0.90 Non-CBD leased 68 218 0.59 0.97 Non-CBD all buildings 77 224 0.56 0.91 All owned 131 224 0.50 0.86 All leased 176 216 0.64 0.81 All buildings 146 222 0.54 0.84
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 14 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE 15 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property Electricity
Electricity consumption decreased by 8% over the last four years from 158 kWh/m²/pa in 2016/2017 to 146 kWh/m²/pa in 2019/2020.
The owned WCG portfolio outperformed the EPC benchmark of 185 kWh/m²/pa. Due the weak economic conditions in South Africa, For the fourth the majority of private landlords remain under pressure, leading them successive year, to focus on retaining tenants and limiting operational expenses and the WCG portfolio capital expenditure. The drought forced them to incur additional capital outperformed expenses to ensure they complied with strict water restrictions. the private sector’s electricity For the first time, we will also be able to benchmark the WCG’s consumption energy efficiency performance against 32 buildings of the City of benchmark of Cape Town’s (CoCT) office building portfolio. DTPW looks forward 222 kWh/m2/pa, to working more closely with the CoCT to build a public sector office and this year by benchmark in the future. approximately 34%.
Electricity consumed (kWh) per m2 per annum
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTAL Electricity consumed (kWh) per m2 per annum ElectricityElectricityElectricity consumedElectricity consumed consumed (kWh) consumed (kWh) per (kWh) perm (kWh)2 per mper2 perannum mper2 annumper m2 annum per annum 146 185 150 146 146 146 146 EPC 185 185 185 185 All buildin gsAll benchmark 145 150 150 150 150 EPC EPC EPC EPC buildingsAll buildinAll buildinAll gs buildinAll gs buildin gs gs benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 158145 145 145 145 158 158 158 158 222 131 222 222 222 222 131 131 131 131 Private sector All owned 131 benchmarkPrivatePrivate sectorPrivate sector Private sector sector All owned buildings 131 131 131 131 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark All ownedAll ownedAll buildings ownedAll buildings owned buildings buildings 118 110 CoCT all buildings buildings 118 118 118 118 benchmark110 CoCT110 CoCT 110all buildings CoCTall110 buildings allCoCT buildings all buildings 130 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 130 130 130 130 176 176 176 176 176 All leased 186 All leased buildin gs 186 186 186 186 All leasedAllbuildings leasedAll buildin leasedAll buildin leased gs buildin gs buildin gs gs 194 205 194 194 194 194 205 205 205 205 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 0 0 0 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 200 200 200 200 250 250 250 250 2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017 2019/20202019/20202019/20202018/20192019/20202018/20192018/20192017/20182018/20192017/20182017/20182016/20172017/20182016/20172016/20172016/2017
The graph indicates that WCG-owned buildings outperformed leased buildings in the portfolio. Consumption in all the owned buildings remained steady over the reporting period, while all leased buildings reduced their consumption from 186 kWh/m²/pa to 176 kWh/m²/pa, a reduction of 5% compared to the previous reporting period.
The owned buildings’ consumption of 131 kWh/m2/pa is 25% better than the leased buildings’ consumption of 176 kWh/m2/pa.
The CoCT’s office portfolio consumption stands at 110 kWh/m²/pa. This trumps our performance by approximately 24%. Significant contributing factors to the CoCT’s remarkable performance are the inclusion of one five and one four Green Star SA-rated buildings in the portfolio of 32 buildings and various efficiency projects, including but not limited to T5 lighting retrofits, behaviour change training, solar water heaters, and power factor corrections.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 16 CBD electricity consumption ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
CBD buildings - electricity consumed (kWh) per m2 per annum CBD buildings - electricity consumed (kWh) per m2 per annum
ElectricityElectricityElectricity176 consumedElectricity consumed consumed (kWh) consumed (kWh) per (kWh) perm (kWh)2 per mper2 perannum mper2 annumper m2 annum per annum CombinedCombined 177 CBDCBD 169 146 146 146 146 185 185 185 185 183 150 150 150 150 EPC EPC EPC EPC All buildinAll buildinAll gs buildinAll gs buildin gs gs 145 145 145 145 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 167 158 158 158 158 185 220 159 CBD EPC benchmark 222 222 222 222 CBD owned 131 131 131 131 Private Sector owned 135 144 CoCT CBD benchmark PrivatePrivate sectorPrivate sector Private sector sector 131 131 131 131 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark All ownedAll ownedAll buildings ownedAll buildings owned buildings buildings 152 benchmark 118 118 118 118 110 CoCT110 CoCT 110all buildings CoCTall110 buildings allCoCT buildings all buildings benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 130189 130 130 130 CBD 200 CBD le ased 176 176 176 176 leased 214 186 186 186 186 All leasedAll leasedAll buildin leasedAll buildin leased gs buildin gs buildin gs gs 227 194 194 194 194 0 50 100 205 205 205150205 200 250 0 0 0 0 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 200 200 200 200 250 250 250 250 2019 /2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017 2019/20202019/20202019/20202018/20192019/20202018/20192018/20192017/20182018/20192017/20182017/20182016/20172017/20182016/20172016/20172016/2017
The combined CoCT benchmark is approximately 13% more efficient than the WCG portfolio at 144 kWh/m2/pa, with CBD owned buildings being 18% more efficient. The WCG’s CBD owned buildings outperformed the EPC benchmark by 10%.
Leased buildings in the CBD continued to improve energy efficiency – the efficiency gain has been over 5% in 2019/2020 compared to the previous period. Over the last four years, the CBD leased buildings reduced consumption by more than 16%.
CBD owned buildings had a 5% reduction in efficiency resulting from an increase in consumption from 159 kWh/m2/pa in 2018/2019 to 167 kWh/m2/pa in 2019/2020. The main reason for this consumption increase is the implementation of initiatives to ensure that the portfolio meets the strict water restrictions imposed by local municipalities. Some of the initiatives include increasing the number of dry coolers, replacing diesel boilers with heat pumps, installing circulation pumps for grey and potable water systems, and installing more efficient chiller plants. This was an unavoidable consequence of steps taken to reduce water consumption over the period.
The CBD portfolio (176 kWh/m2/pa) outperformed the private sector benchmark (220 kWh/m2/pa) by more than 20%.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 17 Non-CBD electricity
WCG-leased buildings (68 kWh/m2/pa) are outperforming non-CBD owned buildings (79 kWh/m2/pa). The CoCT non- CBD buildings benchmark is 68 kWh/m²/pa, which means that this portfolio is approximately 11% more efficient over the same reporting period. On average, Global Green Star rated On average, the non- buildings demonstrate energy savings of 40 – 50% and water CBD buildings are savings of 20 – 30% when compared to unrated conventional outperforming both the buildings. private sector benchmark of 224 kWh/m2/pa and the In respect of year-on-year performance, non-CBD owned EPC benchmark of buildings improved efficiency over the reporting period by 15%. 185 kWh/m2/pa.
Non-CBD buildings - electricity consumed (kWh) per m2 per annum
2 2 2 2 224 ElectricityElectricityElectricity consumed77Electricity consumed consumed (kWh) consumed (kWh) per (kWh) perm (kWh)per mper perannum mper annumper m annumperPrivate annumsector 90 benchmark
ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTAL Combined Non-CBD 146 14696 146 146 185 185 185 185 15085 150 150 150 EPC EPC EPC EPC All buildinAll buildinAll gs buildinAll gs buildin gs gs benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 145 145 145 145 185 79 158 158 158 158 EPC benchmark 93 222 222 222 222 Non-CBD owned 131 131 131 131 101 PrivatePrivate sectorPrivate sector Private sector sector 131 131 131 131 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark All ownedAll ownedAll buildings ownedAll buildings owned buildings buildings 118 118 11892 118 110 CoCT110 CoCT 110all buildings CoCTall110 buildings allCoCT buildings all buildings benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 68130 130 130 130 72 176 176 176 176 Non-CBD leased 65 186 186 186 186 All leasedAll leasedAll buildin leasedAll buildin leased gs buildin gs buildin gs gs 61 194 194 194 194CoCT Non-CBD benchmark 205 205 205 68205 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 0 0 0 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 200 200 200 200 250 250 250 250 20192019/2020 /20202019/20202019/20202018/20192019/20202018/20192018/20192018/20192017/20182018/20192017/20182017/20182017/20182016/20172017/20182016/20172016/20172016/20172016/2017
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 18 Energy consumption – ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE solar photovoltaic and
municipal electricity Solar PV consumption consumption accounts for 3% of the total consumption in the Please note that 9 Dorp Street includes only six months portfolio of 37 buildings. of PV data due to on-site construction work. The Green Building (next to Karl Bremer Hospital) is the best performer with 50% of its electricity consumption coming from solar PV, followed by Elsenburg (Admin Building) with 41%, and Goulburn Centre with 26%.
Municipal vs Solar PV kWh/m² per annum Municipal vs Solar PV kWh/m² per annum 600
500 62
400
300 2
200 2 0.5 13 38 7 26 100 18 172 229 185 55 114 77 473 98 0 18 27 Wa le 4 Dorp 9 Dorp Elsenburg At hl on e Goul burn York Park The Green Khay eli tsha Stree t Stree t Stree t (Admin. (SSC) Centre Building SSC Offices) Remote meter reading Solar
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 19 Water
The Western Cape suffered its worse water crisis in a century and Cape Town nearly became the world’s first major city to run out of water in 2018. Though rainfall increased in September 2018, the region continued to endure moderate drought conditions, and urban water restrictions remained in place, although less strict than before. During this period, the WCG continued to install remote water meters throughout its vast property portfolio to ensure that whenever consumption in specific Water buildings exceeded the applicable parameters, the problem could consumption receive prompt attention. decreased The performance of the portfolio over the 2019/2020 period indicates from 0.63 to the WCG’s continued commitment to reducing the consumption of 0.54 kL/m²/pa water as a very scarce natural resource. Water consumption in the during the portfolio has steadily decreased by 41% over the last four years. 2019/2020
The portfolio continues to outperform the private sector benchmark reporting period, of 0.84 kL/m2/pa for the same period. a 14% decrease. ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTAL
Water consumed (kL) per m2 per annum Water consumed (kL) per m2 per annum
Electricity0.54ElectricityElectricity consumedElectricity consumed consumed (kWh) consumed (kWh) per (kWh) perm (kWh)2 per mper2 perannum mper2 annumper m2 annum per annum 0.63 0.84 All buildin gs Private sector benchmark 0.69 146 146 146 146 185 185 185 185 1500.91150 150 150 EPC EPC EPC EPC All buildinAll buildinAll gs buildinAll gs buildin gs gs 145 145 145 145 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 0.50 158 158 158 158 0.47 222 222 222 222 All owned buildings 131 131 131 131 0.50 PrivatePrivate sectorPrivate sector Private sector sector 131 131 131 131 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark All ownedAll ownedAll buildings ownedAll buildings owned buildings buildings 0.695350122118 118 118 118 110 CoCT110 CoCT 110all buildings CoCTall110 buildings allCoCT buildings all buildings benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 0.64 130 130 130 130 0.73 176 176 176 176 All leased buildin gs 186 186 186 186 All leasedAll leasedAll buildin leasedAll buildin leased gs buildin gs buildin gs gs 1.03 194 194 194 194 1.179799382 205 205 205 205 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0 0 0 0 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 200 200 200 200 250 250 250 250 2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017 2019/20202019/20202019/20202018/20192019/20202018/20192018/20192017/20182018/20192017/20182017/20182016/20172017/20182016/20172016/20172016/2017
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 20 CBD water ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
CBD buildings - water consumed (kL) per m2 per annum CBD buildings - water consumed (kL) per m2 per annum
0.53
0.54 0.78 2 2 2 2 Combined CBD ElectricityElectricityElectricity consumedElectricity consumed consumed (kWh) consumed (kWh) per (kWh) perm (kWh)per mper perannum mper annumper m annumper annum 0.72 Private sector benchmark 0.99146 146 146 146 185 185 185 185 150 150 150 150 EPC EPC EPC EPC All buildinAll buildinAll gs buildinAll gs buildin gs gs 0.46 145 145 145 145 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 0.45 158 158 158 158 CB D o wned 222 222 222 222 0.53 131 131 131 131 PrivatePrivate sectorPrivate sector Private sector sector 131 131 131 131 benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark All ownedAll ownedAll buildings ownedAll buildings owned buildings buildings 0.73 118 118 118 118 110 CoCT110 CoCT 110all buildings CoCTall110 buildings allCoCT buildings all buildings benchmarkbenchmarkbenchmarkbenchmark 0.65 130 130 130 130 0.67 176 176 176 176 CBD leased 186 186 186 186 All leasedAll leasedAll buildin leasedAll buildin leased gs buildin gs buildin gs gs 1.00 194 194 194 194 1.46 205 205 205 205
0 0 0 0.20 0 0.450 50 500.650 100 1000.8 100 1001 150 150 1501.2 150 2001.4200 200 1.6200 250 250 250 250 2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017 2019/20202019/20202019/20202018/20192019/20202018/20192018/20192017/20182018/20192017/20182017/20182016/20172017/20182016/20172016/20172016/2017
Leased buildings showed a reduction of 55% over the last four years from 1.46 kL/m2/pa to 0.65 kL/m²/pa. This is a remarkable achievement. The CBD buildings showed a combined reduction of 2% to 0.53 kL/m2/pa over the reporting period. Water consumption in CBD owned buildings remained stable at 0.45 kL/m2/pa. The combined CBD buildings are currently outperforming the private sector benchmark of 0.78 kL/m2/pa.
The 9 Dorp Street building is the only one in the portfolio actively utilising its groundwater source in the basement, and 47% of the water it consumes comes from this alternative water source. The basement water is used effectively to reduce the buildings’ dependency on potable municipal water.
9 Dorp Street municipal vs. basement water (kL/m2/pa)
9 Dorp Street municipal vs. basement water (kL/m2/pa) 0.60
0.50 The building 0.20 showed a reduction 0.40 0.20 of approximately 0.30 41% in its use of 0.17 0.20 municipal water 0.34 0.26 over the three-year 0.10 0.20 period 2017/2018 0.00 to 2019/2020, from 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020 0.34 kL/m²/pa to 0.20 kL/m²/pa. Municipal water Basement water
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 21 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Non-CBD water More useofthesealternative water sources are plannedinthefuture. Elsenburg make useofgroundwater whichistreated onsite to reduce potablemunicipaldemand. CBD buildingsare performing well below theindustry benchmarkat 0.59 kL/m²/pa. York Park and Oudtshoorn. They were ableto eliminate various slow leaks that were extremely difficult tofind.Non- champion whocontinued to investigate thehighconsumption at individualbuildingsinGeorge and The decrease was due to the hard work of the portfolio managers and the Department’s resource All owned buildings Combined Non-CBD Combined l esdbidngs buildin leased All Non-CBD buildings-water consumed (kL)perm2 reporting period. benchmark of 0.90 kL/m2/pa withconsumption of 0.56 kL/m 2/pa over the The non-CBD owned buildingsare currently outperforming theindustry Non -CBD owned -CBD Non Non-CBD leased All owned buildings l esdbidngs buildin leased All l uli gs buildin All All owned buildings l esdbidngs buildin leased All l uli gs buildin All of more than67% over theperiod2016/2017 to 2019/2020. portfolio under review with a water consumption reduction Non-CBD leasedbuildingsare thestar performer ofthe All owned buildings l esdbidngs buildin leased All l uli gs buildin All 0.00 0 l uli gs buildin All 2019/2020 2019/2020 0 2019/2020 0 0.56 0.56 2019/2020 0.59 0.62 Electricity consumedElectricity (kWh)per m Non 0.70 0.73 0 0.76 2018/2019 2019/2020 Electricity consumedElectricity (kWh)per m - 2018/2019 CBD buildings 0.95 50 0.50 2018/2019 1.08 Electricity consumedElectricity (kWh)per m 118 50 130 2018/2019 131 131 118 Electricity consumedElectricity (kWh)per m 1.35 145 146 50 150 130 2017/2018 131 131 2018/2019 158 118 145 146 150 50 2017/2018 176 130 2017/2018 1.84 131 131 158 - 186 205 water consumed annum m²per (kL) perannum 145 118 146 194 150 176 2017/2018 100 130 158 131 131 186 0.91 205 Private sectorbenchmark 1.00 194 145 146 2016/2017 100 150 176 2017/2018 158 186 205 1.97 194 2016/2017 100 176 110 2016/2017 186 205 194 2016/2017 100 benchmark CoCT allbuildings 2 110 per annum 2016/2017 benchmark CoCT allbuildings 2 110 150 per annum benchmark CoCT allbuildings 2 150 1.50 110 per annum benchmark CoCT allbuildings 150 2 per annum 150 185 benchmark EPC 200 185 benchmark EPC 200 185 benchmark EPC 2.00 200 22 222 benchmark Private sector 185 benchmark EPC 200 222 benchmark Private sector 222 benchmark Private sector 250
250 222 benchmark Private sector . 0 2.5 250 250 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE 23 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property CASE STUDY Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 The current cumulative energy saving for thefinancial year 2019/2020 isapproximately 3201 MWh. considered for thecontinued implementation ofsolarPV withanapproximate value ofR17million. at 16government-owned properties. At thedate ofpublication, anadditionaleightsites were being committed expenditure ofapproximately R54.8 millionto theinstallation ofrooftop solarPV systems Term Service Agreement hassubsequentlybeenextended by 12monthsto 1July2020. The DTPW Energy Ltd Management(Pty) was awarded athree-year contract to theendofJune2019, andthe Metro Rooftop SolarPV Installation, Operation andMaintenance Term Service Agreement. Shared In 2016, atender was issued to procure theservices ofasolarPV contractor for theCapeTown with theobjectives oftheprogramme. abundant sunshineacross SouthAfrica meansthat theutilisation ofsolarenergy isperfectly aligned asset portfolio, actively promotes theuseofrenewable energy inpublicbuildings.The availability of The DTPW, initscapacityascustodian andmanageroftheprovincial government’s immovable solutions, solarwater heaters, androoftop solarPV. low carbonsupplyandenergy efficiency measures that includethe investment inenergy efficiency dependency onEskom. Households,businesses andthegovernment canbecontributors through contribute aneffective 10% to the Western Cape’s electricityneeds by 2020 by reducing ourprovince’s The Western CapeGovernment, through itsEnergy Changerprogramme, Security Game aimsto systems photovoltaic (PV) Rooftop solar Khayelitsha KSSO Karl Bremer Admin Building Alfred Street -Library &CMD Artscape Building York Park Building, George 4 DorpStreet Dassen Island Elsenburg Gene Louw Kromme Rhee CTLI Goulburn New GMTBuilding 27 Wale Street Athlone VSSC Project/ building Rooftop SolarPV -capacityandenergy produced 9 DorpStreet Capacity (kWp) 2 164 425 285 367 372 109 120 131 54 29 22 52 75 72 16 15 21 (MWh) 2016/ 2017 26 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 (MWh) 2017/ 2018 740 164 195 197 45 24 24 74 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (MWh) 2018/ 2019 2 131 449 465 376 108 185 125 177 69 36 23 25 61 15 15 0 3 (MWh) 2019/ 3 201 2020 440 444 222 154 719 615 122 172 94 84 34 23 25 37 9 7 (MWh) Grand 6 098 total 1 168 1 101 406 444 992 528 247 441 169 153 153 83 78 72 10 51 24 CASE STUDY 25 626 252 total Grand Grand R99 671 R111 783 R172 412 R172 R331 213 R86 492 R571 421 R571 R135 441 R135 R123 220 R668 188 R416 025 R416 R239 664 R239 R230 830 R558 500 R1 349 121 R1 349 R1 267 561 R1 267 2019/2020 R1 062 032 R7 423 574 R4 153 344 2018/2019 R2 2020 2019/ R72 221 R72 R15 265 R63 775 R63 R47 895 R47 R159 717R159 R44 528 R64 052 R250 141 R255 145 R939 481 R939 R104 282 R707 743 R707 R201 500 R201 R203 755 R203 R564 626 R558 500 R4 252 626 R4 252 376 R794 2017/2018 R0 2019 420 2018/ R22 717 R68 129 R39 268 R39 R38 854 R50 785 R27 450 R27 R29 330 R511 790 R160 881 R221 276 R125 543 R103 855 R103 R180 346 R354 289 R354 R409 640 R2 344 153 R32 2016/2017 Energy savings Energy per financial year R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 000 000 000 2018 2017/ R13 103 R191 145 R32 535 R35 935 R45 953 R179 888 R179 R187 320 R187 R108 497 R794 376 R794 500 000 500 000 500 500 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 R500 R1 R1 Energy savings per financial year financial per savings Energy R2 R3 R4 R2 R3 R4 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 R0 2017 R3 488 2016/ R12 047 R16 884 R32 420 201 21 15 16 72 75 22 52 29 54 131 120 109 3 372 367 285 425 2 164 (kWp) 2019/2020 Capacity 131 2 2018/2019 The solar energy yield has increased from 26 MWh in 26 MWh from yield has increased solar energy The and the cost in 2019/2020, MWh 3 201 to 2016/2017 period from the corresponding over increased savings 626 pa. R4 252 R32 000 per annum to 740 2017/2018 26 2016/2017 Rooftop SolarRooftop PV energy produced (MWh) 0 500 500 500 500 000 000 000 1 1 2 3 2 3 Rooftop Solar PV energy produced (MWh) produced energy PV Solar Rooftop York Park Building, George Park York Artscape Building Dassen Island Dassen 4 Dorp Street Elsenburg Karl Bremer Admin Building Admin Bremer Karl KSSO Khayelitsha GMT Building New Goulburn Rhee Kromme Gene Louw 9 Dorp Street Rooftop Solar PV - capacity and cost savings per financial year per financial savings - capacity and cost Solar PV Rooftop building Project/ Street Wale 27 CTLI Alfred Street - Library & CMD - Library Street Alfred Athlone VSSC Athlone During the reporting period, Cape Teaching and Learning Institution’s (CTLI) capacity had to be cut had to capacity (CTLI) Institution’s Learning and Teaching Cape period, the reporting During restricted due to was This completed. was the project design of the detailed once 425 kWp to down Artscape at capacity installation The energy. the amount of exported limit and to space suitable roof not was roof foyer the Opera that highlighted engineer’s report the structural after also adjusted was kWp. 372 to be downsized had to load and the system envisaged carry the able to Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property SPACE UTILISATION SPACE
Chapter 2: Space utilisation
Square metre per desk - The continued development of and improvement in technology is transforming workplaces around the world, allowing business and public sector leaders to formulate corporate real estate strategies that provide environments that better suit their organisations’ culture and nature of business. When strategising about their space utilisation, they take the nature and age of the buildings they occupy into account. Globally, more and more organisations are querying whether the square metre per desk method is the most effective way of measuring space efficiency, as various industries have differing space requirements, including for example, the size and number of meeting rooms, storage requirements, shared offices, and the various extents of executive offices.
According to research published by JLL during 2019 it pointed out that the average density in most countries ranges from 14 m² to 23 m² per desk/person. High-density offices achieve an average of 14m², while moderate density offices achieve 23 m². Public sectors globally come in at an average 16.3 m² per desk/person. It is our opinion that the WCG can be classified as a moderate to high-density user and we have accordingly adjusted our benchmarking figure to 16 m² to compare our performance against global public sector occupiers.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 26 SPACE UTILISATION Portfolio - m2 per desk CBD buildings - m2 per desk Portfolio - m2 per desk
18 19 16 16 Global public sector benchmark Combined CBD 17 All buildings 19 18 27 24 22 18 20 15 Combined non-CBDCBD owned 21 19 31 22
18 19 utilisation 2: Space Chapter 16 17 16 Global public sector benchmark CombinedCBD CBD le ased 18 17 24 20
0 0 5 5 10 15 10 20 15 25 3020 35 25 2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017 2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017
The portfolio achieved an average desk space of 19 m2, an increase from 17 m2 in the same period last year. This represents an 11% decline in desk space efficiency, taking us back to 2017/2018 levels. This is mainly due to the relocation of various departments to other buildings for a variety of reasons, including the consolidation of departments, space utilisation projects, and refurbishments of several floors within buildings. The Department is currently busy with an investigation to verify and analyse the timing and reasons for the wide-ranging movement of staff. CBD buildings
Though the CBD buildings are back to 2017/2018 levels of 18 m²/desk, they remain the most space- efficient section of the overall WCG portfolio, outperforming non-CBD buildings by 18%. CBD owned buildings showed a decline in space efficiency from 15 m2/desk in 2018/2019 to 18 m2/desk in 2019/2020, while CBD leased buildings are at 19 m2/desk. Space CBD buildings - m2 per desk utilisation CBD buildingsCBD -buildingsm2 per desk - m2 per desk 18 18 16 16 16 Global public16 Global sector public benchmark sector benchmark Combined CBDCombined CBD 18 18 24 24 18 18 15 15 CBD ownedCBD owned 19 19 22 22 19 19 17 17 CBD le asedCBD le ased 17 17 20 20
0 0 5 5 10 10 15 15 20 20 25 25
2019/20202019/20202018/2019 2018/20192017/2018 2017/20182016/2017 2016/2017
Space efficiency of the CBD buildings is 12% less efficient than the public sector benchmark of 16 m²/desk.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 27 Non-CBD buildings
Non-CBD buildings - m2 per desk
Non-CBD buildings - m2 per desk Non-CBD buildings - m2 per desk 22 20 Combined non-CBD 22 20 21 Combined non-CBD 2131 31 22 2220 SPACE UTILISATION SPACE Non-CBD owned 20 21 Non-CBD owned 21 29 29 30 17 Global public sector benchmark Non-CBD le ased 30 16 17 19 Global public sector benchmark Non-CBD le ased 16 19 42 0 5 10 15 4220 25 30 35 40 45 0 2019/20205 10 2018/201915 202017/201825 302016/201735 40 45 2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017
Both the non-CBD buildings combined portfolio and the non-CBD owned buildings portfolio achieved a space per desk of 22 m2. The most significant drop in space utilisation efficiency was in non-CBD leased properties where square metrage per desk increased from 17 m2 to 30 m2, 87% above the public sector benchmark of 16 m²/desk. This reduction of more than 180 desks in the non-CBD leased buildings is mainly due to a relocation of staff to other WCG-owned buildings in the portfolio. An exercise to verify and analyse the timing and reasons for the wide-ranging movement of staff is underway. Square metre per FTE
FTE stands for full-time equivalent and in this Portfolio - m² per FTE report represents the PortfolioPortfolio - -m²m² per per FTE FTE number of desks minus the
vacant desks. Measuring 22 22 density per employee per All buildings 19 All buildings 19 square metre provides an 21 21 opportunity to evaluate 25 the levels of workstation 25 Combined non-CBD 22 occupation by comparing Combined non-CBD 22 22 FTE staff numbers with the 22 number of workstations in 21 21 the workplace. Combined CBD 18 Combined CBD 18 21 21 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018 2019/2020 2018/2019 2017/2018
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 28 SPACE UTILISATION 25 25 40
25 29 20 20 20 30 15 15 15 /FTE density by 14%. by /FTE density m² per FTE m² per FTE 23 23 - - 20 22 22 21 21 21 21 21 21 2017/2018 2017/2018 2017/2018 10 10 19 19 19 19 m² per FTE 34 18 18 23 - 18 18 22 m² per FTE 21 21 21 2017/2018 - 10 19 19 18 CBD buildings CBD buildings CBD buildings CBD buildings 18 25 24 23 22 22 2018/2019 2018/2019 22 21 5 5 10 2018/2019 19 CBD buildings CBD buildings CBD buildings CBD buildings 2018/2019 - 5 Non 2019 /2020 2019 /2020 0 0 2019 /2020 0 2019 /2020 0 CBD leased CBD leased CBD owned CBD owned Combined CBD Combined CBD CBD leased Non-CBD leased CBD owned Non-CBD owned Combined CBD Combined non-CBD Non-CBD buildings - m² per FTE CBD buildings - m² per FTE CBD buildings Non-CBD leased premises increased their space per person from 19 m²/FTE to 34 m²/FTE. This is an 34 m²/FTE. This 19 m²/FTE to per person from their space increased Non-CBD leased premises required and movements decanting operations to related which is directly 78% than of more increase of these changes is underway. An analysis modernisation. office facilitate to The density of all CBD building types decreased in density from 2018/2019 to 2019/2020. Combined Combined 2019/2020. to 2018/2019 in density from density of all CBD building types decreased The 21 m²/FTE. CBD leased 18 m²/FTE to per FTE from metrage in square CBD buildings had an increase a similar displayed properties 22 m²/FTE. CBD owned 19 m²/FTE to in density from reduced space 21 m²/FTE. 18 m²/FTE to – from trend The All buildings portfolio showed an increase in square metrage per FTE from 19 m²/FTE to to m²/FTE 19 from FTE per metrage square in an increase showed portfolio All buildings The 22 m²/FTE. The density of combined non-CBD buildings decreased by more than 13% over the the over 13% than more by decreased buildings non-CBD combined of density The m²/FTE. 22 their m2 decreased CBD buildings combined period, while reporting Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property PERFORMANCE MEAUSREMENT COST MEAUSREMENT PERFORMANCE
Chapter 3: Performance measurement cost
Extensive analysis has been done on the portfolio’s total The total cost occupancy cost per square metre, and we are delighted to report that the total cost has decreased by nearly 25% over has decreased by the reporting period from R3 097 to R2 319/m². Research nearly 25% over the done by Serendipityremix shows that the private sector reporting period from benchmark also dropped by 26% from R2 907 to R2 127/m² over the same period. R3 097 to R2 319/m²
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 30 PERFORMANCE MEAUSREMENT COST 000 5 500 4 31 000 000
4 4 000 4 000
500 500 5
3 3 500 3 000 000
2016/2017 3 3 000 3 000
4 Private sector benchmark 500 500
500 2 2 2 2 127 cost per m² per cost 2016/2017 - 000 2017/2018
3 000 000 000
Benc hmark Benc hmark 2 807 807 2 807 2 291 3 606 3 Private sector benchmark 3 4 3 222 097 195 195 3 vs private sector benchmark sector private vs vs private sector benchmark sector private vs 953 097 097 500 2 127 3 3 3 2 2 842 1 798 500 All buildings 500 2 3 3
907
691 907 cost per m² per cost 692 1 2 1 2 2017/2018 - 2 2 2 691 691 2 000
Total cost 807 Total cost 319 2 2 2 492 492 3 606 2018/2019 2 129 291 319 2 319 3 2 4 2 2 2 222 127 000 127 1 097 3 2 2 953 000 3 000
842
2 1 1 692 691 2 2 2 All buildings 319 Total cost per m per cost Total Total cost per m per cost Total 2 129 2018/2019 500 2 000
1 500 500 2019/2020 vs private sector benchmark sector private vs 0 0 0 #N/A 2019/2020 0 All buildings All 2017/2018 2016/2017 2018/2019 2017/2018 2016/2017 2018/2019 2019 /2020 2019 /2020 All buildings - cost per m² All buildings - cost Total cost per m2 cost Total All buildings All All leased buildings leased All During the 2019/2020 reporting period, the highest total cost was in respect of all-leased buildings in respect was cost total the highest period, reporting During the 2019/2020 R2 129/m². was buildings portfolio in the all-owned while the cost (R2 692/m²), The WCG continues to make investments in its assets to ensure more sustainable operation of these of these operation sustainable more ensure to assets in its investments make to continues WCG The infrastructure for the budget conditions, economic weak the current with Still, future. in the assets has sector private The projects. urgent to be given priority will as a result, and, is limited investment outlook. a similar All owned All owned buildings Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property All leased buildings leased All All owned All owned buildings Performance Performance cost measurement 0.55% 0.66% 0.75% 11% 0.19% 4% 4% PERFORMANCE MEAUSREMENT COST 6% 4% 3% 4% Occupancy cost breakdown owned all buildings 0.66% 0.48% 10% 13% Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 0.55% accounts for 13%. and electricity occupancy cost for 72% of accounts leased buildings Rental for manager. Provincial Works Public asasset departments andfrom DTPW within the various occupying The data was sourced from and electricityare alsoincluded. waste disposal,water, sewerage improvements, security, cleaning, maintenance, aswell asminor and structural repairs and mechanical, electrical,external hardware installations. Internal, equipment, ITinfrastructure and include theadaptation of Annualised capitalexpenses as well asmanagementfees. services, repairs andmaintenance, include rates andtaxes, support Annual operating expenses comparison withleasedspace. rental rate to facilitate adirect included anapproximate market costs for owned buildings,we To calculate the total occupancy levies charged by thelandlord. rental, allrates andtaxes andCID component comprises of net reflect capital costs. The rental infrastructure andhardware information technology (IT) as adaptation andequipment, Annualised capitalexpenses, such as well asmanagementfees. charges and support services, repairs andmaintenance, service as rent andlocalreal estate taxes, annual operating expenses, such leased buildings are made up of The total occupancy costs for Occupancy cost breakdown leased buildings all 0.66% 0.25% 6% 0.75% 25% 3% 4% 0.66% 0.48% 11% 0.19% 13% 4% 4% Occupancy cost breakdown leased buildings all 0.25% 6% 4% 6% 72% 34% 3% 3% 4% 4% 0.66% 0.66% 0.48% 0.48% Occupancy cost breakdown owned all buildings 13% 13% 10% Occupancy cost breakdown leased buildings all Occupancy cost breakdown leased buildings all 0.25% 0.25% 6% 6% 72% 3% 4% 0.66% Occupancy cost breakdown allleasedbuildings 0.48% 0.55% Cleaning Security Rental removal Waste/Refuse Sewerage Water Electricity Occupancy cost breakdown allowned buildings 25% 13% aneace Maintenanc cost Op Other removal Waste/Refuse Levies CID Sewerage Rates Water Electricity Cleaning Security Capex Indicative net rental 0.66% Occupancy cost breakdown leased buildings all 0.25% 0.75% 0.19% 11% 3% 4% 0.66% 0.48% 4% 4% 6% 13% 72% 72% Water Electricity Cleaning Security Rental removal Waste/Refuse Sewerage 6% 4% 34% Occupancy cost breakdown leased buildings all 0.25% Occupancy cost breakdown owned all buildings 10% 6% 72% removal removal Waste/Refuse Waste/Refuse SewerageSewerage Water Water ElectricityElectricity Cleaning Cleaning Security Security Rental Rental 25% aneace Maintenanc cost Op Other removal Waste/Refuse Levies CID Sewerage Rates Water Electricity Cleaning Security Capex Indicative net rental 72% removal Waste/Refuse Sewerage Water Electricity Cleaning Security Rental 34% removal Waste/Refuse Sewerage Water Electricity Cleaning Security Rental 32 aneace Maintenanc cost Op Other removal Waste/Refuse Levies CID Sewerage Rates Water Electricity Cleaning Security Capex Indicative net rental PERFORMANCE MEAUSREMENT COST 500
3 000
6 33 000
3 000
000 5
000
5 5 500 2016/2017
Private sector benchmark 2 2016/2017 000 2 127 2016/2017
2016/2017 4 000 R
000
4 4 000
2 Spending on all CBD from dropped properties in R2 653/m² R3 205 to 2019/2020 2017/2018 000
3 2017/2018 019 Non-CBD combined properties properties Non-CBD combined R2 861 from their costs reduced in 2019/2020. R1 550/m² to 000 500 2017/2018 914
302
000 3 861 Private sector benchmark Private sector 1 2017/2018
3 2 5 3 2 336 636 609 4 Private sector benchmark 2 2 2 127 Private sector benchmark 415 322 2 2 000
2018/2019 2 127 CBD buildings cost per m² per CBD buildings cost 2 2 127 - 000
cost per m² per cost 897 1 368 cost per m² per cost - 1 198 205 000 - 3
052 000 807 046 3 2018/2019 989 Non
3 2 946 807 606 571 847 3 606 2 3 3 550 2 2018/2019 3 1 1 2 606 291 653 3 1 2 2018/2019 291 505 386 3 4 2 222 4 1 2 222 097 3 097 953 3 3 842 953 3 000 2
842 692 691 2 2 1 500 692 691 2 2 2 2 2 All buildings 319 All buildings 319 2 129 2 2019/2020 129 2 000
2 000 1
1 2019 /2020 2019/2020 0 0 2019/2020 #N/A #N/A 0 0 CBD leased CBD owned CBD combined Non-CBD le ased Non-CBD owned Non-CBD Non-CBD buildings cost per m² Non-CBD buildings cost CBD buildings cost per m² per cost CBD buildings Non-CBD combined Non-CBD All buildings All Non-CBD leased premises showed a decrease a decrease showed Non-CBD leased premises while non-CBD owned of 13% in costs, of 47% reduction had a substantial properties being projects modernisation various due to period. in the 2018/2019 concluded Spending on all CBD properties dropped from R3 205 to R3 205 to from dropped Spending on all CBD properties of 17%. CBD a decrease which is in 2019/2020, R2 653/m² since reduction 52% a collective show buildings owned because the space is largely in costs drop The 2017/2018. 3 Dorp Street at projects and refurbishment utilisation Spending on CBD leased properties been completed. have period. the reporting nearly 4% over by decreased All buildings All Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property All leased buildings leased All All owned All owned buildings All leased buildings leased All All owned All owned buildings CASE STUDY Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 classifications: municipalcharges, repairs andmaintenance, softservices, andotheroperating costs. performance against that of the private sector. We broke down the operational costs into thefollowing and MSCI’s operating cost benchmarks. This isanopportunityto compare thechosenportfolios’ can compare theoperating costs ofthe37 selected buildingsinthisreport to thoseofSAPOA’s For thisreport, we have madeadetailedanalysis oftheportfolio’s expenses. For thefirst time, we take realistic actionsaimedat minimisingsuchcosts. consideration whencompleting theirbudgetsandplanningfor future years. Italsoallows themto Being inpossession ofthis information allows companies to pinpointtheareas that demandspecial occupying aspace. tenants andlandlords to identifythosecomponents that have themost influence onthe cost of throughout theworld. Analysing thevarious components that make upoperating costs assists both Operating costs have become acrucialconcern for commercial property owners andtenants Operating cost analysis • • • • Municipal charges • • • Soft services (CID) levies where applicable City Improvement District Rates andtaxes charges Municipal Electricity Security Gardens /landscaping Cleaning Operating costs • • • • Other operating costs maintenance Repairs and • • • • Insurance, baddebtsandother Leasing fees andcommissions Facilities managementfees Property managementfees Tenant installtion costs Elevators /escalators Building fabric Air conditioning 34 CASE STUDY 35 19 19 19 13 13 13 22 22 22 Other costs Op Other costs Op Other costs Op 10 10 10 66 SAPOA 11 11 11 SAPOA SAPOA SAPOA 24 24 24 26 26 26 So ft ser vices So ft ser vices So ft ser vices 70 25 25 25 All buildin gs All buildin gs All buildin gs All buildin gs 8 8 8 62 17 17 17 All leased All All leased All leased All Operating cost R/m² cost Operating All leased All 1 1 1 Operating cost by cost category (%) category cost by cost Operating 25 25 25 Operating cost by cost category (%) category cost by cost Operating (%) category cost by cost Operating Repairs & maintenance Repairs & maintenance Repairs & maintenance All owned All owned All owned 72 All owned 62 62 62 45 45 45 72 58 62 56 74 68 66 70 64 60 51 51 51 41 41 Municipal charges Municipal charges 41 Municipal charges 0 Operating cost R/m² cost Operating Operating cost by cost category (%) category cost by cost Operating 10 0% 0% 70 20 50 30 60 40 10% 10% 70% 70% 20% 20% 50% 50% 30% 30% 60 % 60 % 40% 40% The operating cost for the portfolio under review is R70/m², which is 6% higher than the SAPOA higher than the SAPOA which is 6% is R70/m², under review the portfolio for cost operating The 6% for benchmark by the SAPOA outperform buildings in the portfolio Leased benchmark of R66/m². the same period. Municipal charges are indeed the largest category in the operating costs group, accounting for 41% 41% for accounting group, costs in the operating category indeed the largest are Municipal charges the SAPOA is 21% below This in this report. to the buildings referred of costs operating of the total SAPOA. by reported is 11% higher than that account soft services portfolio’s WCG benchmark. The Municipal charges make up the largest percentage of overall operating costs. From 2010 to 2019, 2019, to 2010 From costs. operating of overall percentage largest up the make charges Municipal below. graph the from is visible This cost. operating other than any faster grew charges municipal Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property A more detailed analysis of the Cape Town CBD buildings indicated that the CBD owned buildings are 28% above SAPOA and 10% above the MSCI benchmark of R77/m².
Cape Town CBD operating cost R/m² Cape Town CBD operating cost R/m² 90
CASE STUDY CASE 80
70
60
50
85 40 77 65 66 30
20
10
0 CB D o wned CBD leased SAPOA MSCI
Non-CBD owned buildings outperformed both private sector benchmarks by 18% and non-CBD leased buildings by approximately 50%.
Non-CBD operating cost R/m² Non-CBD operating cost R/m² 70
60
50
40
66 66 30 54
20 32 10
0 Non -CBD owned Non-CBD leased SAPOA MSCI
This analysis highlighted that WCG’s portfolio under review is performing well when compared to the private sector. The life cycle of a building is similar to that of the human life cycle. Buildings are affected by age and suffer physical deterioration, which leads to functional and external obsolescence which then jeopardises buildings’ usability. Therefore, long-term planning and maintenance management, including managing operating costs, are essential.
When taking the operational stage of the life cycle of the buildings in the selected portfolio into account, we believe the portfolio is performing well in respect of the management of operating costs.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 36 CASE STUDY 37 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property Chapter 4: Portfolio overview
Portfolio by location 2019/2020 Location of building Ownership Size m² Number of buildings m²/FTE CBD Leased 62 111 8 22 PORFTOLIO OVERVIEW PORFTOLIO CBD Owned 81 092 11 21 Non-CBD Leased 7 357 3 34 Non-CBD Owned 54 828 15 24 Total 205 388 37 22 Exclusions 2019/2020 3 270 2 Total All buildings 208 658 39
Portfolio by ownership 2019/2020 Ownership Size m² Count CBD Non-CBD All leased 69 468 11 8 3 All owned 135 920 26 11 15 Total 205 388 37 19 18 Exclusions 2019/2020 3 270 2 1 1 Total All buildings 208 658 39 20 19
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 38 PORFTOLIO OVERVIEW Building name Useable Total cost Total cost Total cost Energy Water Number of FTE area m2 per FTE per m² 2019/2020 2019/2020 desks per m² 2019/2020 2019/2020 kWh/m²/ kl/m²/ annum annum
All buildings 205 388 R476 314 416 R52 119 R2 319 146 0.54 19 9 139
All leased 69 468 R187 008 333 R60 915 R2 953 176 0.64 20 3 070 buildings
All owned 135 920 R289 306 083 R47 669 R4 291 131 0.50 19 6 069 buildings
All CBD buildings 143 203 R379 956 630 R57 283 R2 653 176 0.53 18 6 633
CBD leased 62 111 R176 808 356 R61 951 R2 847 189 0.65 19 2 854
11 Leeuwen Street 1 726 R4 204 683 R37 880 R2 436 99 0.55 13 111
35 Wale Street 5 309 R14 061 156 R55 578 R2 649 128 0.00 18 253
Atterbury House 6 160 R17 748 494 R48 230 R2 881 162 0.71 15 368
Golden Acre 8 987 R19 456 380 R40 366 R2 165 201 0.56 18 482
Grand Central 18 722 R60 416 943 R85 335 R3 227 215 0.34 25 708
Norton Rose 4 978 R12 794 465 R74 821 R2 570 130 0.67 25 171
Protea Assurance 6 608 R19 501 083 R64 148 R2 951 91 1.29 22 304
Waldorf 9 621 R28 625 152 R62 637 R2 975 292 0.87 16 457
CBD owned 81 092 R203 148 274 R53 757 R2 505 167 0.46 18 3 779
1 Dorp Street 3 362 R6 940 060 R56 886 R2 064 172 0.42 22 122
27 Wale Street 10 844 R22 997 238 R42 985 R2 121 172 0.40 17 535
3 Dorp Street 1 800 R5 393 236 R94 618 R2 996 72 1.84 25 57
4 Dorp Street 18 365 R38 033 613 R36 257 R2 071 229 0.54 16 1 049
4 Leeuwen Street 1 791 R2 388 856 R24 884 R1 334 72 0.23 16 96
7 & 15 Wale Street 19 790 R28 776 192 R38 317 R1 454 127 0.28 24 751
9 Dorp Street 14 964 R61 015 146 R78 831 R4 077 185 0.20 15 774
Government 1 140 R4 473 148 R3 924 188 0.38 Garage (Hope Street)
Government 1 192 R4 299 510 R3 607 190 1.08 Garage (Roeland Street)
Hugenot 2 123 R18 491 581 R377 379 R8 710 29 0.24 29 49
Union House 5 721 R10 339 693 R29 884 R1 807 148 1.17 13 346
All Non-CBD 62 185 R96 357 785 R38 451 R1 550 77 0.56 22 2 506 buildings
Non-CBD leased 7 357 R10 199 977 R47 222 R1 386 68 0.59 30 216
Eersterivier (Soc. 1 157 R1 408 549 R26 084 R1 217 132 0.68 21 54 Serv)
George (Soc. Serv 4 500 R8 017 225 R69 715 R1 782 69 0.42 35 115 & WCED)
Oudtshoorn (SSC) 1 700 R774 203 R16 472 R455 23 0.99 28 47
Non-CBD owned 54 828 R86 157 808 R37 623 1 571 79 0.56 22 2 290
Athlone (SSC) 6 557 R13 288 972 R52 319 R2 027 114 0.52 22 254
Bredasdorp (SSC) 2 894 R3 554 390 R107 709 R1 228 71 0.44 88 33
Elsenburg (Admin. 10 804 R6 830 106 R18 973 R632 55 0.40 29 360 Offices)
Goulburn Centre 2 213 R5 292 899 R26 333 R2 392 77 0.43 11 201
Khayelitsha (SSC) 2 635 R3 217 145 R18 814 R1 221 98 0.65 12 171
Mossel Bay (SSC) 1 141 R967 809 R32 260 R848 27 0.34 37 30
Oudtshoorn 1 995 R3 818 521 R97 911 R1 914 30 2.04 51 39 (WCED & DTPW)
Paarl (WCED) 2 632 R5 614 858 R47 990 R2 133 67 0.44 21 117
Swellendam (SSC) 1 621 R1 219 351 R50 806 R752 21 0.26 58 24
The Green 6 615 R6 113 279 R18 927 R924 18 0.08 18 323 Building
WCED North 3 726 R3 696 563 R18 120 R992 75 0.25 18 204 Office
Worcester (Soc. 1 150 R1 175 995 R13 674 R1 023 83 0.60 13 86 Serv)
Worcester 4 324 R5 245 786 R31 601 R1 213 39 0.45 24 166 (WCED)
Wynberg (Soc. 4 024 R5 908 161 R51 826 R1 468 50 0.81 31 114 Serv)
York Park 2 497 R20 213 974 R120 321 R8 095 473 2.28 12 168
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 39 THE WAY FORWARD Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 normal” andwillcontinue to dosoaswe adapt shown incredible resilience by adapting to our“new us too Works inthePublic Branch, we have already after theendofcurrent reporting period,for main impactofCOVID-19 was onlyexperienced change hasbecome animperative.” Althoughthe but theabilityto adaptto complexity andcontinual central competency …Efficiency remainsimportant, that “Adaptability, not efficiency, must become our the USTask Force General Stanley McChrystal said normal” ofAl Qaeda inIraq in2003, the leaderof turned upsidedown. Inconfronting thethen“new what is“normal”,“expected” and “usual”have been perceptions and understanding of the concepts of With therecent onsetofCOVID-19 onourworld, our sought-after efficiency gains. report are outstanding andclearlydemonstrate the The portfolio performance results reflected in the the least investment oftime, energy andmoney. performance – that is, of getting the most out with of various worthy andsignificant indicators of in managingthem.Itisapursuitofefficiency our properties andisameasure ofourefficiency been, areport ontheperformance ofaportfolio of This Property Efficiency Report is,andalways has compliant withalloccupational healthandsafety andapplicablebuildingregulations. health andproductivity of occupants, inclusivity and universal accessibility, aswell asto befully adaptable to change, withanemphasis onindoorenvironmental quality, levels ofcomfort for the Programme inwhichwe have reconfigured ouroffice accommodation tobe more flexibleand Historically, oneofthekey levers ofefficiency atourdisposalhasbeenthe WCG Office Modernisation in thisfundamentallychangedenvironment. further anddemonstrate efficiency gainsinourmanagementoftheimmovable assets underourcare Provincial Works Public Deputy Director-General, GAVIN KODE forward The way Chapter 5: changed environment. care inthisfundamentally immovable assets underour in ourmanagementofthe demonstrate efficiency gains as we adaptfurtherand will continue to doso to our“new normal”and resilience by adapting already shown incredible Works Branch, we have for ustoo inthePublic the current reporting period, experienced after theendof of COVID-19 was only Although themainimpact 40 THE WAY FORWARD 41 . We are are We agile. /Full Time Equivalent Equivalent /Full Time /desk in 2018/2019 and 2018/2019 in /desk and creative unitary, visionary, /FTE as our target. Notwithstanding our shift from per FTE to per FTE to shift from our Notwithstanding target. /FTE as our COVID-19 has had a fundamental has COVID-19 – impact on mobility requirements on our which in turn, has impacted as office plans as far infrastructure is concerned. accommodation /desk have even been realised. While this is phenomenally efficient, when it comes it when efficient, phenomenally is this While realised. been even have /desk /desk in 2019/2020. The explanations for this upward shift are understood at this at understood shift are upward this for explanations The in 2019/2020. /desk I reported last year that the enterprise-wide property asset information management system, now now management system, information asset property the enterprise-wide that year last I reported to ensure has been designed This platform launched. had finally been platform, as the eMerge known management and management reporting with property base, information of a robust the creation to approach a holistic provide support management decision making and therefore that systems was approach three-step A multi-disciplinary management teams. management through asset and disrupt. transform namely stabilise, with eMerge, adopted trusting that these attributes will make us more adaptable to the evident complexity in our world and in our world complexity the evident adaptable to us more will make these attributes that trusting of us. change required the continual We know we live in what has become known as a VUCA world – one which is volatile, uncertain, uncertain, is volatile, – one which world as a VUCA known has become in what live we know We on focus and embrace to ourselves repurposed we Department, a As ambiguous. and complex is, that worldview; VUCA DTPW antidotal an creating We are already preparing to undertake the main occupancy audit in February of 2021 so that we we so that of 2021 audit in February the main occupancy undertake to preparing already are We the essence but which also captures years, previous analogous to more indicator an occupancy have and data access such as turnstile other information will also use norm. We occupancy of the new during the higher lockdown generally more levels occupancy determine plans to continuity business adapt further in will need to we of how and understanding will supplement our reporting This levels. this journey. The portfolio in our first PER for the 2011/2012 financial year revealed a 28m2 revealed year financial for the 2011/2012 PER first in our portfolio The life office of usual devoid buildings of office most rendered of 2020 in March lockdown national The and more more 2020, through progressed strategy of the risk-adjusted levels and, as the lockdown associated levels and occupancy normality and work-from-office form of to some returned staff our adapt to us require to going therefore necessarily is PER 2020/2021 The increased. costs variable emerge. will undoubtedly anomalies norm, and various reporting time and unpacked to some extent on page 27. In some of our recently modernised offices, space space modernised offices, of our recently In some on page 27. some extent to time and unpacked 11m2 of efficiencies not that are workspaces occupied densely turns out that it environments, working safe COVID-19 to dynamics, to new require plans workplace and COVID-19 regulations COVID-19 New anymore. safe remains important efficiency McChrystal, General by noted adapt. As was all had to have which we required we will be but performance, to improve in our efforts this lever work to continue will and we normality. space office this new to respond adaptable as we much more become to (FTE) occupancy whereas we set 14m2 we whereas (FTE) occupancy 2 17m at was portfolio the vacancy, of effect the remove to metric desk per a 19m2 up at is now Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property The way way The forward THE WAY FORWARD Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 right things.We continue therefore onourjourney to adapt andcontinually adaptto theever-changing environment to ensure that we are alsodoingthe to besure that we are alsodoingtherightthingsefficiently. Inthis complex world, wewillneed to effectiveness isdoingtherightthings”. We obviously need to beefficientin what wedobut weneed World renowned managementguru Peter Drucker saidthat “Efficiency isdoingthingsright; all ofthedata required for thenext PERwillbedrawn outofeMerge. phenomenal progress being made with eMerge and these proofs-of-concept, we are confident that is using the EU government-funded Smart Cities platform developed in OpenSource. Dueto the have two PERdata anddata-visualisation andanalyticsproofs-of-concept underway, oneofwhich productivity andefficiency. Through collaborative workwith stakeholders andservice providers, we accessibility, reporting andcapturing, whichisfundamentallychangingtheway we work andour Directorate isfullyutilisingtheAcquisitions module. Allmodulesincludeanappfor mobile of theProject Management and theMaintenance Managementmodules,andtheentire Acquisitions The Education Infrastructure component Works ofPublic was thefirst unit to commence operation assessment information andconsumption metering data, isnow housedinthedata lake. hand. Allpreviously disparate information anddata, includinghistorical andcurrent facility condition parcels andvalues ontheonehand,andfacilities andbuildingstheirusersontheother financial asset hierarchy required for a comprehensive understanding ofthe construct ofland (including leasedassets) was deconstructed andreconstructed withtherequisite layers ofthe Significant and exciting progress hasbeenmadeinallthree ofthese steps. The asset register managers. for-purpose aspublicsector immovable asset way we work and to make ourselves truly fit- (fourth industrial revolution), to disrupt the intelligence andblockchain, andallthings4IR information. The final step istheuseofartificial and theuseofsinglethreads ofaudited numerous business systems to ensure efficiency The second step involves atransformation ofthe business units, systems and processes can draw. data sources onto a“data lake” from whichall The first step involves the centralisation ofall do the right things right. things right the do right things”. effectiveness isdoingthe is doingthingsright; Drucker saidthat “Efficiency management guruPeter World renowned 42 THE WAY FORWARD 43 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property Acknowledgements
This 9th edition of the Property Efficiency Report highlights the dedication and hard work of all stakeholders involved, most notably those in the Immovable Asset Management and General Infrastructure components of Provincial Public Works in the DTPW.
The efficiency results achieved underlines the positive impact of the innovations introduced by the DTPW during the reporting period. The metering programme is proving successful and the confidence in the data collected is growing. Data collection was expanded to include a more in-depth analysis of the portfolio’s cost. This year we were able Serendipityremix offers ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS to benchmark the WCG’s energy efficiency performance against a advisory, consultancy and selected sample of the CoCT’s office portfolio. support services to all sectors in the built environment. Personally, we would like to thank all who contributed to the good story With more than 20 years’ which the report highlights. The WCG truly does work “Better Together”, experience in the property as this was made clear once again through the continuation of the good market and around it’s story told through the entire Property Efficiency Report series. fringes, we have, considerable knowledge and a widespread Shiehaam Noordien network, and can offer Deputy Director: Property Planning and Information Immovable Asset Management our clients assistance and Department of Transport and Public Works advice based on sound facts, Western Cape Government data, and robust analytical Tel: 021 483 6639 methods. Data and analysis are critical components to ensure that companies base business decisions on Data Sources relevant market intelligence.
Department of Transport and Public Works: Our understanding of the • Internal Communications property management, • Chief Directorate: Immovable Asset Management (Property broking, valuations, research, Support Office, Operational Property Management, and and marketing disciplines Property Planning and Information) allows us to offer our clients • Chief Directorate: General Infrastructure (Technical Support, a bird’s eye view of their Programme / Projects Infrastructure Delivery) built assets as we bring support and advice from a Department of Community Safety different angle. Resource Champion Indawo Our services include; building Green Building Council of South Africa condition assessments, due City of Cape Town diligence, focus groups, lease South African Property Owners’ Association audits, nodal reports, research, MSCI social media support, and valuations. Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated trading as JLL Eris Property Group: Property Valuations
Disclaimer The Western Cape Government has taken every reasonable step in the preparation of this report to present accurate and reliable information. While the sources of information used to prepare the report are believed to be accurate and reliable, no guarantee of accuracy or completeness can be given. Should any errors be identified post-publication, the Department of Transport and Public Works undertakes to issue an erratum to effect any necessary corrections.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 44 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 45 Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 Report Efficiency Property Glossary GLOSSARY
Benchmark In this report, the portfolio is benchmarked against a comprehensive database of office buildings in the same geographical area compiled by the Green Building Council of South Africa (GBCSA), a selected sample from the City of Cape Town’s (CoCT) portfolio, and data received from MSCI, South Africa Property Owners Association (SAPOA) and Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (JLL). Capital expenses Includes capital and maintenance expenditure such as adaptation of equipment, IT infrastructure and hardware installations. For owned buildings it also includes internal, mechanical, electrical, external and structural repair and maintenance, as well as minor improvements, security, cleaning, waste disposal, water, sewerage and electricity. CBD offices The 2019/2020 report includes the 19 WCG offices located in the Cape Town Central Business District. The portfolio comprises around 143 203m² of occupied office space. Cost / total costs References in this report to cost and total costs represent the following: • Total occupancy costs for leased buildings are made up of annual operating expenses, such as rent and local real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance, service charges and support services, as well as management fees. • Annualised capital expenses include adaptation, equipment, information technology infrastructure and hardware installations as well as internal, mechanical, electrical, external and structural repair and maintenance, minor improvements, security, cleaning, waste disposal, water, sewerage and electricity. • The total occupancy costs for owned buildings include an approximate market rental rate to facilitate direct comparison with leased space. • Annual operating expenses include rates and taxes, support services, repairs and maintenance, as well as management fees. CoCT City of Cape Town DTPW Department of Transport and Public Works Energy EPCs benchmark the energy efficiency of a building against industry benchmarks performance or national norms. EPCs carry ratings on energy use and carbon dioxide emissions certificates (EPC) and applied through the application of a standard method defined in South African National Standard 1544.
For EPC purposes, properties are classified into: Type of occupation, Climatic zone and Energy consumption in kWh/m². The properties in the PER 2019/2020 are classified in group G1, climatic zone 4 (Coastal) – 185 kWh/m². GBCSA Green Building Council of South Africa JLL Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated, a US commercial real estate services company which provides investment management services worldwide. kL Kilolitre – 1 000 litres, a cubic metre kWp kWp is the peak power of a PV system or panel. Solar panel systems are given a rating in kilowatts peak (kWp) which is the rate at which they generate energy at peak performance, such as on a sunny day in the afternoon. kWh Kilowatt hour – a unit of energy equal to 1 000-watt hours. Average annual power consumption can be expressed in kilowatt hours per year, per square metre or per FTE user. MSCI MSCI Inc. is a US finance company which provides worldwide equity, fixed income, hedge fund stock market indexes, and multi-asset portfolio analysis tools. This report uses data extracted from the MSCI database for 2019/2020. MWh Megawatt hour – 1 000 kilowatts of electricity used continuously for one hour.
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 46 GLOSSARY
Non-CBD offices In this report, this term refers to 18 WCG offices located outside the Cape Town Central Business District comprising 62 185m² of occupied office space. Occupancy costs Costs related to occupying a space, including rent, real estate taxes, property taxes, insurance on building and contents, depreciation, and amortisation expenses. Occupied space The net internal area measured in square metres, using the SAPOA definition. (usable area) Operating costs In this report operating costs refers to the expenses related to the operation and continued maintenance of office buildings. These are municipal charges, repairs and maintenance, soft services, and other operating costs. Performance Performance of the Western Cape Government office portfolio has been assessed using three standard metrics of property efficiency (cost per square metre, space per FTE, and cost per FTE) to report internal efficiencies and in comparison to a benchmark average of South African corporate occupiers. Additionally, sustainability performances have been assessed using data to develop energy and water consumption metrics. Reporting period The reporting period for the Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 is from 1 April 2019 to 31 March 2020. SAPOA South African Property Owners’ Association. SAPOA’s Operating Cost Report: results for the 12 months ended December 2019 was used in this report. Soc. Serv Social Services Solar PV Rooftop solar photovoltaic systems SSC Shared Service Centre – an office building occupied by various WCG departments and often with shared facilities and a public interface. WCG Western Cape Government WCED Western Cape Education Department
Property Efficiency Report 2019/2020 47 Department of Transport and Public Works Head Office, 9 Dorp Street, Cape Town, 8001. Tel: 021 483 6639 www.westerncape.gov.za