Executive Summary

The objective of this report is to determine the current and future maintenance requirements of the valet department of The Four Seasons Sydney hotel. Under the authorisation of Four Seasons’ General Manager, Mr. Vincent Hoogewijs, this report was carried out on the 2nd of July 2012.

The process of conducting the report involved designing a FCA form using academic and industry literature as guidance to match the functions of the chosen area of the property. The FCA form found the valet department is in ‘1-excellent condition’ although some aspects of valet housekeeping (mechanical and structural) were ranked lower at ‘2- minor damage/cosmetic’.

Recommendations have been provided for both facility/engineering and general management to assist respectively in taking corrective measure to minimise and where possible eliminate the present issues that require maintenance. Table of Contents

Letter of Transmittal............................................................................................................ 2
Executive Summary............................................................................................................ 3
Table of Contents................................................................................................................ 4
1.0. Introduction of Facilities Case..................................................................................
1.1. Facilities Overview
1.2. Current Operations & Equipment
1.3. Past & Present Maintenance........................................................................ 5

6
2.0. Methodology & Justification of Facilities Condition Assessment Form Design........ 7
3.0. Facilities Condition Assessment..............................................................................
3.1. Blank Form (3 pages)
3.2. Completed Form, for The Four Seasons Sydney (5 pages)......................... 9

13
4.0. Facilities Condition Assessment Discussion of Findings.........................................
4.1. Areas with Minor Damage
4.2. Areas with Preventative Maintenance Required...........................................
4.3. Areas with Immediate Maintenance Action Required 17

18
Conclusion...................................................................................................................
19
List of References........................................................................................................ 20
Appendix......................................................................................................................
20

1.0. Introduction of Facilities Case

1.1. Facilities Overview
The chosen venue is the valet laundry sub-department, which operates under the Housekeeping department within the Rooms Division of the Four Seasons Sydney (FSS) luxury-brand hotel. The property is located on 199 George Street in Sydney’s Central Business District (CBD), and venue is 119.5m2 total area, sharing the staff-only accessible fifth floor with the Housekeeping department (refer to Appendices 0.0. and 0.0., pp. X-X). Currently, refurbishment is underway whilst the hotel remains open to guests, with forecasted completion in 2014. However renovations are for front-of-house areas only.

1.2. Current Operations & Equipment
The Valet department is the only 24-hour operating laundry service in the CBD, available not only to the 531 guest rooms within the hotel, but also external guest orders, mostly from other hotels including the InterContinental and Hilton. Job tasks include use of equipment and guest interaction; one usually handles requests, priority order, pickups and deliveries, whilst the other constantly operates the machinery, with assistance from the former when present.

This department is highly reliant upon using machinery to complete all service tasks, thus equipment must be regularly maintained and in efficient working condition. The facilities are predominantly machinery including those required for washing, drying, pressing, ironing and stain removal (refer to Appendix 0.0., p. X) which are consistently operational yet at significant stages of life expectancy, showing many years of wear and tear (refer to Appendix 0.0., p. X). Other equipment includes wheeled clothing bins, wheeled clothing racks, non-slip floor mats, a computer, pagers and telephone all of which are in relatively good condition (refer to appendix 0.0. p XX).

1.3. Past & Present Maintenance
Scheduled preventative maintenance for Valet is not conducted regularly due to the long life expectancy of the machinery used. Rather, maintenance is corrective, with on-site engineers fixing problems as they arise. Recent maintenance conducted was for the industrial washing machine (#19, refer to Appendix 0.0. p XX), which experienced a severe leak mid-cycle, causing a pool of water to run outside of the Valet area into the Housekeeping Department. As a result, it has been deemed necessary that this machine be monitored during operation from now on. Current maintenance include washing machine (#23, refer to Appendix 0.0. p XX) which is “Out of Order” and a ceiling leak.
2.0. Methodology & Justification of Designed Facilities Condition Assessment

To overcome identified risks in maintenance projects, Chandrashekaran and Gopalakrishnan (2008) identify Facilities Condition Assessments (FCA) as good approaches to use as a decision making tool that prioritises projects based on its physical condition to reduce the overall risk impact for the organisation. Also known as a Venue Condition Assessment, the choice to design an FCA instead was to focus on mechanical systems (Chandrashekaran & Gopalakrishnan, 2008), as these were the most predominant within the chosen department. Chandrashekaran and Gopalakrishnan (2008) cite particular focus of FCAs on HVAC, which was relevant due to Valet being a closed environment with machinery continuously operated, causing considerable heat, humidity and steam.

The FCA applied in this report was based on a variety of recognised models. From the sample FCAs obtained, analysis indicated that assessment criteria was derived from job-related tasks, for example the risk assessment report by HSE (2008) noted physical and chemical-based injuries were among a list of criterion that were used to judge the condition of the property. However, in terms of the report design, it was more clear to categorise aspects of the facilities assessed, as per the FSS “Work Inspection Checklist” (refer to Appendix 0.0., pp X-X). As such, aspects of the facilities were categorised into five areas:
• Furniture, fixtures and equipment
• Information technology (IT) and information systems (IS)
• Mechanical aspects
• Electrical aspects
• Structural aspects
• Hazards, safety & security
• Heating, ventilation & air conditioning (HVAC)

Research has shown that the use of a FCA can do more than analyse the physical aspects of a property (Lai & Yik, 2011; Shanka & Taylor, 2003) found that analysis of hotel facilities is significant in increasing the standard of service and continuing customers loyalty. Moreover, regular analysis is required as changes in society have led to increases in: social time, income and changes in working culture, which have impacted on an increase in service consumption (Strinati 1995, cited in Shanka and Taylor, 2003). Further research has shown the significance of the value of facilities management, which involves the use of FCA, to hotels. Jones and Jowett (1998) state that facilities management has great applicability to the management of hotels, which forms a significant aspect of the final product sold to the guest. As the Valet department provides its service in the intangible form, the use of FCA in its facilities management will influence the final product sold. Therefore, it can be said that the use of FCA can assist an establishment with its financial performances. As such, Langston and Kristensen (2002) state that tools utilised in facilities management, the FCA, can provide management with information such as capital assets to assist financial performance. Furthermore, the FCA can assist this process as Shanka and Taylor (2003) found that by maintaining the quality of facilities, management could propose more feasible options.
LOR
Jones, C & Jowett, V 1998, ‘The concept and scope of facilities management’, Managing Facilities, Oxford, pp. 1-21
Langston, C & Kristensen, RL 2002, ‘Strategic facility management’, Strategic Management of Built Facilities, Oxford, pp. 15-21

A notable difference was the absence of an adequate rating system which assesses criteria on numerous levels. The closest model was the FSS “Job Safety Environmental Analysis” report (refer to Appendix 0.0., p X ) which is accompanied by a charted scale describing the controlled variables to avoid subjectivity of an individuals’ assessment. Franceschini and Rupil (1999) identify that the interpretation of the numerical system in the VCA form can vary amongst different audiences. As such the designed FCA purposefully included condition ratings were presented as a Likert Scale (refer to Figure 3.1., pp. 9-11) which better measured the extent of the assor’s agreement to the level of condition each facility is (McLeod, 2008).

Furthermore, this FCA criteria rates are coupled with damage indications whereby ratings ‘3- some damage’ to ‘5- major damage’, were matched with the relevant action required; ‘3-preventative maintenance’ to ‘5- removal from circulation’ (refer to Figure 3.1., pp. 9-11). According to Trochim (2006), the method of scaling can be used to ensure that the results obtained can determine a hypothesis. This ensures that the level of wear and tear is directly linked with predictive maintenance, to enable planned solutions to any issues raised, current to the time that the FCA is conducted.