|7-A – 7-F
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: OVERHAUL THE DEPARTMENT’S DEMOLITION STRATEGY
– The City does not have a demolition strategy tied to an overall redevelopment plan or individual neighborhood plans. In 1995, there were 228 demolitions; in 1996, 552; in 1997, 1087; in 1998, 1754; and in 1999, 996. (There is currently a moratorium on demolitions due to a lack of funding and the need to reevaluate the decision making process for demolitions.) The current backlog of demolitions is unknown, but the estimated number of vacant buildings citywide is in excess of 12,000.- The current demolition contracting process creates a lengthy bid process, and results in cost overruns and inconsistent workmanship. City contracts for both demolition and site preparation services for redevelopment are combined at a substantially higher cost than if these two services were bid separately. The City takes months to award a contract after the bid is submitted.
– The current practice of requiring minority participation statements a week after bids are submitted leads to price comparison among contractors. The lowest bidders then disqualify themselves, leading to unnecessarily high costs to the City.
– The City does not place a high priority on recycling building materials. DPW routinely disposes of building materials from demolished buildings at expensive and irreplaceable landfills rather than recycling the materials.
– The City should develop and adopt a formal demolition strategy that is based on:
– The City should develop an emergency demolition standard. If individual neighborhood plans do not include a demolition component or if there is no redevelopment plan, buildings should not be demolished unless their continued presence poses a health and safety danger to the community.
– The City should establish an annual demolition target. In order to increase the cost effectiveness of demolition, buildings should be demolished in groups, such as whole blocks (or ‘assemblages’) at one time.
– The City should award separate contracts for demolition and site preparation for redevelopment.
– In FY 2001, HCD should consider implementing a Job Order Contracting (JOC) program similar to that successfully used by HABC ($91 million), based on recommendations of the Gordian Group, a consulting group hired by HABC (and approved by HCD) to develop and implement its JOC program. The JOC process expands the number of competitive bidders and reduces the amount of time (and money) spent administering the bidding process.
– Contracts for demolitions should be awarded within 30 days of bid submittal.
– Institute recycling for all City demolition work, including emergency work.
Estimated Annual Impact:
Estimated Implementation Costs:
Barriers to Implementation:
$10,000 per demolition X .13= $ 1,300 per demolition
To demolish 1,000 units, the savings would be:
1,000 X $1,300 $1,300,000
3) To implement Job Order Contracting (JOC), the city would decrease the number of Notices of Letting (NOLs) it would have to issue. Under the current system, the city must issue a NOL incrementally, or every time it wishes to do a small block of demolitions. Thus, if the city wanted to demolish a block of 50 units at a time, it would have to issue an NOL every time it wanted to demolish a group of units. Over an annual period, the City might have to issue 30 NOLs for 1,500 demolitions. Under JOC, the City could issue one NOL for all of its future work in one particular area. For instance, the City could issue one NOL for all of its demolition work, one for all of the debris removal, and one for repairs or stabilization of neighboring structures.
Cost of issuing an NOL: $5,000
Cost of issuing NOLs (one each for demolition, debris removal, and repairs/stabilization) under JOC system for 1,000 demolitions:
3 X $5,000 = $15,000
Potential savings: $100,000 – $15,000 $85,000
Average price for disposing of waste in sanitary landfill
– Savings per demolition =