Master Planning
Approach
The most common approach to Master Planning is to initially evaluate and assess existing status. Review of facilities, processes, equipment, utility and support systems, material handling and staff operations is undertaken and evaluated for: capacity, reliability, efficiency, regulatory compliance and best practices, and obsolescence. Once complete, the existing conditions assessment forms a clear background of capabilities upon which to develop program alternatives. Additionally, areas of remediation may be identified during current condition assessments that become integrated in the schedule of capital projects.
Secondly, the Master Planning team, made up of client and consultant teams develops a program for the Master Plan. Desired goals are defined as outcomes. These include capacity targets and improvements to regulatory issues and efficiencies as enumerated above, as well as schedule and capital imperatives. Time horizons, or planning phases are often defined at this stage, and often expressed as near term, medium term and long term (e.g. 2, 5, 10 years). These phases serve to categorize multiple capital projects into time period snapshots of anticipated evolution.
Once defined, the Master Plan program drives the development of multiple conceptual planning options each made up of a series of capital projects designed to achieve program goals. Often opportunities are identified in the process of alternative development that serve to inform and refine the program itself.
Through an iterative process, options are evaluated and refined until clear, well understood alternatives result. Evaluation bases include: desirability of intermediate and end states, order of magnitude costs, efficiency of resulting and intermediate operations, risk to ongoing operations during and following execution, flexibility for change, etc. Additionally, alternatives are described in terms of; logical steps that may be achieved within the practical confines of existing operations and facility layout. For example, how are construction forces and materials afforded clear access to a proposed capital project area without undue risk and interference to ongoing operations or risk to product quality.
Finally the Master Plan team selects the final strategy from among the developed alternatives. Upon refinement, development of schedule and capital cost summaries, and presentation narratives and illustrations, this becomes the basis of a published Master, or Strategic Plan. It forms the coordinated planning armature around which subsequent capital projects may be commissioned and executed. The finished plan describes stages of development, projected costs and expected operating efficiencies and utility requirements at each stage.
Deliverables for the Master Plan are summarized as follows:
• Existing Status Summary
• Master Plan Program Description
• Plan Drawings and Narrative Descriptions of Master Plan Evolution by Phase
• Summary of Capacities, Efficiencies, Operating and Capital Costs by Phase
The most common approach to Master Planning is to initially evaluate and assess existing status. Review of facilities, processes, equipment, utility and support systems, material handling and staff operations is undertaken and evaluated for: capacity, reliability, efficiency, regulatory compliance and best practices, and obsolescence. Once complete, the existing conditions assessment forms a clear background of capabilities upon which to develop program alternatives. Additionally, areas of remediation may be identified during current condition assessments that become integrated in the schedule of capital projects.
Secondly, the Master Planning team, made up of client and consultant teams develops a program for the Master Plan. Desired goals are defined as outcomes. These include capacity targets and improvements to regulatory issues and efficiencies as enumerated above, as well as schedule and capital imperatives. Time horizons, or planning phases are often defined at this stage, and often expressed as near term, medium term and long term (e.g. 2, 5, 10 years). These phases serve to categorize multiple capital projects into time period snapshots of anticipated evolution.
Once defined, the Master Plan program drives the development of multiple conceptual planning options each made up of a series of capital projects designed to achieve program goals. Often opportunities are identified in the process of alternative development that serve to inform and refine the program itself.
Through an iterative process, options are evaluated and refined until clear, well understood alternatives result. Evaluation bases include: desirability of intermediate and end states, order of magnitude costs, efficiency of resulting and intermediate operations, risk to ongoing operations during and following execution, flexibility for change, etc. Additionally, alternatives are described in terms of; logical steps that may be achieved within the practical confines of existing operations and facility layout. For example, how are construction forces and materials afforded clear access to a proposed capital project area without undue risk and interference to ongoing operations or risk to product quality.
Finally the Master Plan team selects the final strategy from among the developed alternatives. Upon refinement, development of schedule and capital cost summaries, and presentation narratives and illustrations, this becomes the basis of a published Master, or Strategic Plan. It forms the coordinated planning armature around which subsequent capital projects may be commissioned and executed. The finished plan describes stages of development, projected costs and expected operating efficiencies and utility requirements at each stage.
Deliverables for the Master Plan are summarized as follows:
• Existing Status Summary
• Master Plan Program Description
• Plan Drawings and Narrative Descriptions of Master Plan Evolution by Phase
• Summary of Capacities, Efficiencies, Operating and Capital Costs by Phase