Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIR 7317 INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7317 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council September 1, 1988 V1jVMR i?�' A,0 UW Subject: IN-HOUSE ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN POLICIES 1673 Informal Report No. 7310 was presented to the City Council August 16, 1988 in- an effort to answer questions previously raised concerning the Transpor- tation and Public Works in-house engineering design section. The presenta- tion led to further questions which will take some time to research ade- quately and answer thoroughly. This report outlines the operational criteria currently employed in making decisions regarding in-house versus consultant design assignments and recommends a procedure for addressing this issue in a comprehensive fashion. Current Practices In-house design activities, i .e. , engineering or architectural design work performed by City employees , are undertaken in three City departments : Transportation and Public Works; Water and Sewer; and, Park and Recreation. These activities are not new; they have been performed for many years . In Transportation and Public Works more projects are designed in-house than by consultants , but approximately 81% of the dollar value of all projects currently assigned is associated with consultant-designed projects. In Water and Sewer the situation is similar to that in T/PW. Approximately 95% of the dollar value of currently assigned projects is associated with consultant-designed projects. In Park and Recreation, the vast majority of design projects are handled by in-house forces , but consultant-designed projects represent 41% of the total dollar value of all projects. It has long been the working assumption of all three departments that it is cost-effective from the City 's standpoint to divide design work between in-house forces and private consultants . Performing all design work in-house would require the addition of many more employees at certain periods of heavy demand and their subsequent termination when the workload slackened. Should consultants perform absolutely all design functions , the City would be unable to respond quickly to emergencies requiring design expertise. Economies of scale also must be considered. Department heads believe that many smaller scale projects can be accomplished less expensive- ly when done by City forces. Unfortunately, while these assumptions are plausible, it is difficult to test their validity. Furthermore, even if it is agreed that a division of design work is preferable, how do we know if the current division is optimal? Procedures for establishing an optimal balance in the design work- load have not been developed and formal policies for determining how to divide design work between in-house forces and consultants have not been enacted. All three departments now operate under internal procedures reflecting the rationales stated above. ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS - INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7317 - P9. 2 �j44+��fo�-+�ayr;" To the Mayor and Members of the City Council September 1, 1988 Subject: IN-HOUSE ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN POLICIES tj 11 The Park and Recreation Department since 1978 has had a sizable capital improvement program, with design work shared by employees and consultants. The decision to employ a consultant is usually based on the need for exper- tise or specialization not found in-house. Park and Recreation in-house forces are best suited for landscape architectural type projects, so those projects involving building design (recreation centers ) or complex charac- teristics (zoo improvements , swimming pool renovations) are assigned to consultants. Park and Recreation also employs consultants for landscape architectural services on a selective basis depending upon the nature of the project. The Water and Sewer Department is heavily reliant on engineering design consultants but does have an active in-house qesign component. Consultants are normally engaged in any of the following cases: a) for highly complex projects; b) for very large projects ; c) for comprehensive engineering studies ; and , d) for specialized work on water and wastewater treatment plants. Some of the duties performed by in-house engineers include studies and cost estimates for small extensions , studies and analytical work on distribution and collection systems , mapping, minor plant modifications , emergency replacement design , and assistance to consultants for both City and developer work. The in-house unit is also involved in plat reviews for community facility agreements and in performing preliminary studies for highway department projects. The criteria used by Transportation and Public Works in making the in-house or outside consultant decision are similar to those of the Water and Sewer Department. The first criterion is complexity. Relatively simple projects such as street repair and maintenance or small -scale drainage projects are frequently assigned in-house. The second criterion is available expertise. It is an automatic decision to go to outside consultants if in-house forces lack the needed expertise for a particular type of project. As an example, all design work for bridges is contracted to consultants . The third criterion is time of response. Projects requiring a very quick turnaround are often assigned in-house. The fourth criterion is size. Most of the very large projects are assigned to consultants. Finally, the workload of the in-house design group is considered. If the in-house group has no available time for a project, it is directed outside. It was noted in I.R. No. 7310 that from January, 1987 through June, 1988 the T/PW in-house design group completed projects with a subsequent construction cost of $17,831,199. Private consultants completed projects costing $28,623,884. The average cost of a staff designed project was $218,942; for the private consultants the average was $2,862,388. LISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 7317 Pg. 3 LNFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. September 1, 1988 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council lu_% -1 x Su bject: Analysis Required It is appropriate to analyze and reconsider the informal policies upon which the division of City design work has been made up to this time. As a beginning point, a thorough cost analysis of in-house design activities and a cost comparison with consultant design efforts must be made to establish if it is indeed more economical for in-house forces to design certain types of projects. It should be determined, for each of the three departments , which projects are most cost-effectively performed in-house. Also, a detailed survey of other comparable cities should be undertaken to estab- engineering/architectural design work and the rationales for these prac- tices in other cities should be explored. To lend objectivity and exper- tise to these suggested efforts, it is recommended that the Internal Audit Department and the Office of Management Services be assigned this s tudy. Once the results are obtained, they can be presented to the Council along with draft policies to govern the in-house design function in each of the three departments. The Council , after review and modification if required , can then adopt specific policies that will determine how future decisions to assign design work to in-house force-s or outside consultants should be made. It is anticipated that a study of the type suggested above could be ready for presentation to the Council at the November workshop. If this approach meets with the Council 's approval , the staff will endeavor to present the resulting information as objectively as possible. Should the results indicate that substantial changes in current practices are warranted, such changes will be recommended for implementation . The staff's guiding considerations will be cost-effectiveness and concern for the overall best interests of the City. Please let me know if you have any questions and provide guidance as to whether the suggested study procedure is acceptable. Douglas Harman City Manager ISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS