Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout118-91 RESOLUTION5 • RESOLUTION NO. 118-91 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A NEEDS STUDY CONTRACT WITH ROTH & SHEPPARD ARCHITECTS TO RESEARCH THE FUTURE NEEDS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, MUNICIPAL COURT, AND PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract in the amount of $18,000.00 with Roth & Sheppard Architects to research the future needs of the police department, municipal court, and city prosecutor's office. A copy of the contract authorized for execution hereby is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof. PASSED AND APPROVED this 18th day of June , 1991. APPROVED• By /�(-7 /v j -<— Mayor ATTEA,,a31"S-� rf' ST: 10/I yf City Caerk F _ N S• ,```'L �-�fRa1Yla o----- • ROTH C: SHEPPARD ARCHITECTS FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: //�'�/�/ TO: ec/(/J COS �^ / / e Aerie: 50/ 52/ 6376 2185 Broadway Denver Colorado 80205 303 296 8850 NUMBER OF PAGES (Including cover sheet): REFERENCE: FROM: aer A//7 Atn.5/4NS 45 R6oaEsM-D• f•ydfizi ,,l S o Cireedara0 Gird qtril i� ` �: A VG!/w /7 'site /-3 /6-/7 ationien Afen.✓y at/ text /6 T II E AMERICAN INSTITUTE O F A R c. SII I Tr E C T S AIA Document 13727 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect ,for Special Services 1988 EDITION THIS DOCUMENT HAS IMPOR7>1NT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES; CONSULTATION WITH AN AT7ORNIiY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT 70 /7S COMPLETION 01? MODIFICATION. AGREEMENT made as of the Nineteen Hundred and BETWEEN the Owner: (Name and address) and the Architect: (Name and address) day of The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West,Mountain ,,.I., a• Fayetteville`;Arkansas 72701'z 20- .' aA . Roth + Sheppard Architects& 2185 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80205 For the following Project: (Include detailed description of Project location, address and senile) in the year of p_— NEEDS STUDY for the Fayetteville Police:DepartmeE,Prosecutor's-Office;''and lie-Municipal-Courtx - aincluding FUTURE POLICE OPERATIONS; PERSONNEL; PROJECTIONS,' SPACE' NEEDS; xt a ADJACENCY DIAGRAM OF OPERATIONS AND ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECTCOMPLETION.. a a The Owner and the Architect agree as set forth below. Copyright 1972. 1979, ©19R8 by Tho American Institute of Architects. 1735 Nov AFork Avenue, NAV.. Washington, D.C. 20006. Reproduction of the material herein or substantial quotation of its provisions without written permission of the AIA violates ❑1c copyright laws of the .11ni!cd States and will be slbjCCI to legal prosecution. AIA DOCUMENT 8727 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • WAR FDI'I'ION • AIC • ©1988 • 111E AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCIIITECT:S, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE. NW, WAST IINGTON. D.C. 201106 B727-1988 1 ARTICLE 1 ARCHITECT'S SERVICES (fiery list those services to be provided by the Architect under the ?limns and Conditions of this Agreement. Note under each service listed the method and means of compensation to be used, if applicable as provided in Article 8.) 1.1 PROGRAMMING SERVICES Programming Services shall include programming work sessions, including key City Staff members in order to identify the needs and goals of the Project. The initial programming session will review general goals and organization and will target key individuals for detailed interviews and questionnaire response. Subsequent work sessions with City Staff will address FUTURE POLICE OPERATIONS, PERSONNEL PROJECTIONS, SPACE NEEDS and ADJACENCY DIAGRAM OF OPERATIONS. Additional features of the PROGRAM will include; A u • MISSION STATEMENT for the -Department and other facilities and functions that .may impacted by. this project. t . -. ..• r. GENERAL GOALS:,d�e))fining objectives for the building, its operations and* construction. i,. t+{ °^Sa " , , , S °S ECIFIC GOAI *' •• `t•' y operations, staffing projections specific' organizational iSsl „ ' •• •• ate. It'y�+=' y , y • DIVISIONAL gni ds, goals; assumptions and details J of each drvisic 1 I •I 1 L' - .�a ?e4; ,t' 1 4. - . I' a., SUMMARY{SPACE NEEDS,. Air At \('1 .It i,I,IIREMENTS:and.SPACE >. STANDA}t 1% _ '. - t• . :•.;•;•.,. fp! ;3 ...• ," ; ••.. 4.s. • .. /t BUDGET ..1.1; • d,1 i :,,j, t;ueral level Of quality desired. r %,•1„ {;4'i'li f. j'7'.b f,e,,r e;t i?:. ICONSTRUCTION ISSUES 'defining building construction type, life safety and ;{ titiilding code issues in 1.2 CONCEPT DESIGN: Concept Design services shall include alternative concept diagrams of how the Police Department, Municipal Court and Prosecutor's Office may occupy the proposed new building. Concept diagrams are provided to allow the City of Fayetteville the opportunity to evaluate and prioritize different approaches in satisfying the present and future needs of the various City Departments impacted by the Project AIA DOCUMENT 8727 1, OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • 19RH EDITION • AIN^ • ©19H8 • TI AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCIIITEQS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENI IE. N.W., WASIIINGTON, D.C. 200116 B727-1988 .2 • • TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ARCHITECT OWNER'S RESPONSIBILIITIES 2.1 The Owner shall provide full information regarding requirements for the Projeet. The Owner shall furnish required information as expeditiously as necessary for the orderly progress of the Work, and the Architect shall be enti- tled to rely on the accuracy and completeness thereof 2.2 The Owner shall designate a representative authorized to act on the Owner's behalf with respect to the Project. The Owner or such authorized representative shall render deci- sions in a timely manner pertainingtodocuments submitted by the•Architect in order to -avoid -unreasonable delay in the orderly and sequential progress of the Architect's -services. ARTICLE 3 USE OF ARCHITECT'S DOCUMENTS 3.1 The documents prepared. by the Architect for this Proj- ect are instruments of the Architect's service for use solely with respect to this Project and, unless otherwise provided, the Architect shall be deemed the author of these documents and shall retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including the copyright. The Owner shall be permit- ted to retain copies, including reproducible copies, of the Architect's documents for the Owner's information, reference and use in connection with the Project. The Architect'a docs mentsshell-ne• ^^d,. the Owser or others on other peal- - •eetsrfoF-additionc to thic Project or-fer-eetnpletion of the Project by othercrueletc the Architect is adjudged se-bc in default under thisagruomentreateept-by agreement -in .siting and with appropriate compensation to the Architust.r ARTICLE 4 ARBITRATION _} may: by bothparties consenting l 4.1 Claims, disputes or er matters In •question between the parties to this Agreement ising out of or relating to this Agreement or breach thereohl aW be subject to and decided by arbitration in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association cur- rently in effect unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. 4.2 A demand for arbitration shall be made within a reason- able time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no eventshall thedemand for arbitration be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable pro- ceedings based on such claim, dispute or other matter in ques- • MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS - tion would be barred 6S7 -the applicable -statutes of limitations. x..„61 Unless otherwise provided, this Agreement shall be gov- 4.3 -.No arbitration arising out of or relating to this Agreement - errted .by the law. of the principal place of business of the shall include, by consolidation, joinder or in any other.man- •„Architectr • ,ua, '- -" '' - _. ner, an additional person or entity not a party to this Agree - matter in question not described in the written consent or with a person or entity not named or described therein. The foregoing agreement to arbitrate and other agreements to arbi- trate with an additional person or entity duly consented to by the parties to this Agreement shall be specifically enforce- able in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 4.4 The award rendered by the arbitrator or arbitrators shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. ARTICLE 5 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION 5.1 This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon not less than seven days' written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination. 5.2 If the Owner fails to make payment when due the Archi- tect for services and expenses, the Architect may, upon seven days' written notice to the Owner, suspend performance of services under this Agreement. Unless payment • in full is • received by the Architect within seven days of the date of the notice, the suspension shall take effect without further notice. In the event of a suspension of services, the Architect shall have no liability to the Owner for delay or damage caused the Owner because of such .suspension of services. 5.3 In the event of termination not the fault of the Architect, the Architect shall be compensated for services performed prior to termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due and all Termination Expenses as defined in Paragraph 5.4. 5.4 Termination Expenses shall be computed as a percentage of the compensation earned to the time of termination, as follows: .1 For services provided on the basis of a multiple of Direct Personnel Expense, 20 percent of the total Direct Personnel Expense incurred to the time of ter- mination; and For services provided on the basis of a stipulated sum, 10 percent of the stipulated sum earned to the time of termination. ARTICLE 6 • mens; except by wriiten'ebnsent containing a specific refer ` 6.2 Causesof aaionbetween the .parties .to this Agreement - ®pence to this•Agreement•signed-by the Owner, Architect and pertaining to sets or failures to act shall be deemed to have i any otherPersonor entity -sought. to -be -joined Consent to '_ i':acerued'and [happlicable licable statute of limitations shall com- . arbitration involving an additional person or entity shall not mence`to run not later than the date payment is due the Archi- • constitute consent to arbitration of any claim, dispute or other tett pursuant to Paragraph 8.4. • AIA DOCUMENT 0727 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • 1988 EDITION • AIA® • ©1988 • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE. OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W, WASHINGTON, DC. 20006 B727-1988 3 6.3 The Owner and Architect, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, suc- cessors, assigns and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement. Neither Owner nor Architect shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other. 6.4 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agree- ment between the Owner and Architect and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either writ- ten or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by writ- ten instrument signed by both Owner and Architect. 6.5 Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a con- tractual relationship with or cause of action. in favor of a third party against either the Owner or Architect. 6.6 Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Archi- tect and Architect's consultants shall have no responsibility for the discovery, presence, handling, removal or disposal of or exposure of persons to hazardous materials in any form at the Project site, including but not limited to asbestos, asbestos products, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) or other toxic substances. ARTICLE 7 PAYMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT 7.1 DIRECT PERSONNEL. EXPENSE 7.1.1 Direct Personnel Expense Is defined as the direct salaries of the Architect's personnel engaged on the Project and the portion of the cost of their mandatory and customary con- tributions and benefits related thereto, such as employment taxes and other statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays, vacations, pensions, and similar contributions and benefits. 7.2 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 7.2.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to the Architect's compensation and include expenses incurred by the Archi- IP tect and Architect's employees and consultants in the interest of the Project for: .1 expense of transportation and living expenses in con- nection wiih out-of-town travel authorized by the Owner; . 2 long-distance communications; 3 fees paid for securing approval of authorities hay ing jttrisdietion over the Peoject, . 4 reproductions; .5 postage and handling of documents; . 6 expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates, if authorized by the Owner; . 7 renderings and models requested by the Owner; .8 expense of additional coverage or limits, including professional liability insurance, requested by the Owner in excess of that normally carried by the Architect and the Architect's consultants; and A Expense of computer aided design and drafting equipment time when used in connection with tho 7.3 PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF THE ARCHITECT'S SERVICES 7.3.1 Payments on account of the Architect's services and for Reimbursable Expenses shall be made monthly upon presen- tation of the Architect's statement of services rendered or as otherwise provided in this Agreement. 7.3.2 An initial payment as set forth in Paragraph 8.1 is the minimum payment under this Agreement. 7.4 ARCHITECT'S ACCOUNTING RECORDS 7.4.1 Records of Reimbursable Expenses and expenses per- taining to services performed on the basis of a multiple of Direct Personnel Expense shall be available to the Owner or the Owner's authorized representative at mutually convenient times. ARTICLE 8 BASIS OF COMPENSATION The Owner shall compensate the Architect as follows: 8.1 AN INITIAL PAYMENT OF Zero Dollars (5 be made upon execution of this Agreement and credited to the Owner's account at final payment. 8.2 COMPENSATION FOR THE ARCHITECT'S SERVICES, as described in Article 1, Architect's Services, shall be computed as follows: (Insert basis of compensation, Including stipulated sums multiples or percentages, and identify the services to which particular methods of compensation apply, q necessary) 0 ) shall 1.1 Programming Services; Stipulated sum not to exceed Ten Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($10,000.00) 1.2 Concept Design; Stipulated sum not to exceed Five Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($5,000.00) • 7.2 Reimbursable Expenses as defined in Article 72 of this Agreement shall not exceed Three Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($3.000.00) Arm, 4 9727-1988 AIA DOCUMENT 8727 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • 198H EDITION • AIA° • ©1988 • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS. 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE. NW., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 8.3 FOR REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, as described in Article 7, and any other items included in Article 9 as Reimbursable Ex- penses, a multiple of One ( 1 .0 ) times the expenses incurred by the Architect, the Architect's employees and consultants in the interest of the Project. 8.4 Payments are due and payable .th }' ty ( 3Q. ) days from the date of the Architect's invoice. Amounts unpaid forty five ( 45 ) days after the invoice date shall bear interest at the rate entered below, or in the absence thereof, at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the principal place of business of the Architect. (insert, rate of interest agreed upon.) 11% /.month on unpaid balance • (Usury laws and requirements under tbe Federal Truth in Lending Act, similar state and local consumer credit laws and otber regulations at tbe Owner's and Architect's principal places of business, the location of tbe Project and elsewhere may affect tbe validity of this provision. Specific legal advice should be obtained with respect to deletions or modifications, and also regarding other requirements sucb as written disclosures or waivers.) 8.5 IF THE SCOPE of the Project or of the Architect's services is changed materially, the amounts of compensation shall be equitably adjusted. ARTICLE 9 . OTHER CONDITIONS 9.1 Initial programming work session will occur within one week of the notice to proceed and will last a minimum of three days. A second programming work session will occur within ten days of the first + session and will be followed by the conceptual design work sessions. Project completion and submittal of the final draft of the programming and conceptual design report will occur withinone monthof the rlit notice to proceed. r ark- • k - , ~ w f .• ..r 9.2 Basic services do not include mechanical, electrical or structural design services which, may be required • '• to evaluate the existing building: If such services are required they will bebilled tothe`City at one •ti;;,•l times (1.0) the amount billed. the -Architect?- "' $ + 9+ tiro ' rte . z •,. i'° 9.3 Inasmuch as the remodeling and/or • 'rehabilitation of an'existing • building requires !that certain assumptions be made regarding existing conditions; and because'some of these assumptionsmay not; • i.. be verifiable without expending additional sums of money:. or destroying otherwise• adequate or s. serviceable portions of the building, the Owner agrees that, except for -negligence on the part of the Architect, the Owner will hold harmless, indemnify and defend the Architect from and against any and :, all claims arising -out -of the professional services provided under this agreement. • . ; • .- 4• ,. 9.4 When expenses are required and authorized by the Owner, the Architect will be compensated for such ' expenses at the Architect's standard hourly rates as follows: -t • w „'Principal () ` ° 4.•- - '0- • Project Architect Technician Clerical Yr - $80.00/ Hour $50.00/ Hour $40.00/ Hour $25.00/ Hour This Agreement entered into as of the day and year first written above. OWNER ARCHITEC (Signature) 1 • my.p. Wrneeer A flan'', / , ilio -R (Printed name and title) /f1/9/0,-? (Printed name and title) AIA DOCUMENT B727 • OWNER -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT • 1988 EDITION • AIAe • ©1988 • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, NW, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 13727-1988 5 1 1 1 1 1 1*. 1 1 1 1 1 i• 1 ROTH .: SHEPPARD ARCHITECTS PRE -ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS put w/ Seo , 01,; ;- MICROFILMED 2185 Brn,dwav Denver Colorado 81) 303 296 8850 POLICE DEPARTMENT, MUNICIPAL COURT AND PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE JULY 1991 75 ROTH :: SHEPPARD ARCHITECTS July 31, 1991 Harold Dahlinger Facilities Superintendent City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Dear Harold: 2185 Broadway Denver Colorado 80205 303 296 8850 We are pleased to submit the final draft of the Pre Architectural Program for the City of Fayetteville Police Department, Municipal Court and Prosecutor's Office. The Program projects the building needs for the City to the year 2012. The Program is intended to be a working document and we will update with new program information as it becomes available. This document along with the Conceptual Design floor plans and Conceptual Design cost estimate satisfies the services required per our agreement and purchase order dated lune 26, 1991. The programming effort defined the operational goals of the Department, the Municipal Court and the Prosecutor's Office. Space needs were derived from the understanding of these goals in an appropriate and conservative manner and were revised to address the constraints of the existing Systematics building wherever it was most appropriate. The Program defines optimum space needs for the Department and identifies that the total area required including factors for circulation, structure, mechanical and electrical exceeds the available space within Systematics. With that in mind the design must utilize the Program as a guide only with the understanding that perhaps an optimum facility is unattainable but an acceptable facility is. The study does show that space within Systematics will meet the needs of the Police and the Municipal Court for possibly ten years if the compromises defined in the concept design drawings are accepted and implemented. The Program is subdivided by Department and Division with important descriptive staffing information, building factor information and space standards located at the beginning. Please feel free to call us if additional explanations and clarifications are required. HaroldDahlinger 2 July 31, 1991 The information and assistance provided by the City staff has been most helpful. We particularly want to acknowledge the efforts of Assistant Chief Gerald Bradley, Lts. Tim Helder and Rick Hoyt and Fiscal Officer Judy Cohea of the City of Fayetteville Police Department. We are available for any questions you may have about the Program and look forward to our continued working relationship in the design phases of the project. • Je rey L. Sheppard AIA CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PRE ARCHITECTURAL PROGRAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, MUNICIPAL COURT AND PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE JULY 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1.0 PART 2.0 PART 3.0 PART 4.0 PART 5.0 PART 6.0 PART 7.0 PART 8.0 PART 9.0 PART 10.0 PART 11.0 AREA FACTORS SUMMARY SPACE NEEDS STAFFING PROJECTIONS SPACE STANDARDS PRELIMINARY CODE ANALYSIS CHIEF OF POLICE COMMUNICATIONS ADMINISTRATION DIVISION PATROL DIVISION DETECTIVE DIVISION COMMON FACILITIES MUNICIPAL COURT PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE CONCEPT DESIGN CONCEPT DESIGN COST ESTIMATE AREA FACTORS and STAFF / SUPPORT DEFINITIONS The PROGRAM AREA REQUIREMENTS identified in each of the Divisions and in the summary sheets define area in three relative terms as follows: NET AREA, GROSS DIVISION AREA or GROSS AREA and GROSS BUILDING NET AREA refers to the total assigned area of the space GROSS DIVISION AREA or GROSS AREA refers to the NET AREA plus a factor of 25% to cover circulation GROSS BUILDING AREA refers to GROSS DIVISION AREA plus a BUILDING FACTOR of 25% The 25% BUILDING FACTOR consists of the following: Lobby and Reception 30/0 Design Contingency 5 Major Circulation 5 % Stairs and Elevators 3% Rest rooms, Jan. & Mech. 6.5% Structure 2.5% These 25% factors are conservative and are generally acceptable for a spacious and functional facility. They are used as•a guide only and historically the actual efficiency after design may range within ± 20% depending on the thoroughnessand attentiveness on the part of the user and the designer. The PROGRAM AREA REQUIREMENTS contain columns for STAFF and SUPPORT. These columns define whether the specific space is assigned a staffing allocation or if it is a support space only. An example of this is the Chief of Police Office which is assigned a staff of one, the Chief, and the Chief's Conference Room which is a support space for 14 guests or conferees. • • CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE PROGRAM AREA REQUIREMENTS ON en CO 0 Q Q N ulN NO VI 1. V fol N< N tel in O CO OQI M O i0 ON 0 n 011 O O W N NII. O vi vi ilei N n1 m Q 1f1 em+f N‹ 0 0 W W Z 0 W U O of 01 0 0 0 VI VI W W m^ ^ h W F n ce 0. N 0 O N u1 Q Q Q CO VI 10 in O^ N N< N en N.— en V1 m CO V1 Q VI Q O W Si N O V1 Q eh en OI e1 -Q VI 1 1 N <Cg NN - V1 0 W W z 0 W VuD Vf V1 eh N O V1 W_ W L '-' NON N O< 0_ N 10 OI N 10 Q V1 Lfl Q h N n ON < eh M O en N OI cc r r N Q O U VI VI l0 Q Lel mi.— m H W m N < X H W N Nt. O Q NN N Vel QN1 eh P1 Q V1 O• NMM WON m V1 T N n Q s V� <6 < y<j imp Z W wet w oe O z Z ~ z< tg z< W o o U U S < >_ " W% O o U O 0 W aW Z •N C> Z y 0 m d 0 m 1 on x 1- vl vu«ou i-uu De .o n 0 a+b TOTAL GROSS BUILDING August 9, 1991 STAFFING PROJECTIONS Over the past 20 years, methods for providing police department staffing projections have changed significantly. In the 1970's and 80's generally accepted national ratios of police officer/ citizen per -capita were utilized to generate appropriate staffing levels. Projections for increases in staff were directly proportional to population growth. The police officer/ citizen -per capita ratio has many disadvantages. Among them are generalizations relative to demographics, economic condition, age, and family status and the impact these factors can have on crime and calls for service. In many cities, although population may have declined, calls for service and crime have increased. In view of these circumstances it is an unsound management practice to determine staffing levels within police agencies by merely establishing a police officer/ citizen -per capita ratio. A more appropriate method, as recommended by the F.B.I., is to determine staffing based on the demand on the agency. Demand for police service is based on the following 'work generating' variables. 1. Calls for service 2. Investigative case load practices 3. The service delivery policy and procedures established by local government and community expectation ( tradition ). The first variable, based on calls for service, is used to describe the number of uniformed officers needed to answer citizen calls for police service. The second variable is based on follow -up practices related to the type of offence, and the investigative services required. The third variable identifies the number of officers needed to deliver those services placed upon the agency by community tradition, its elected officials, and administrative concerns for threats to public safety. variables 2 and 3 were derived from interviews with agency personnel and statistical data gathered from information provided by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, U.S. Department of Justice Uniform Crime Reports and police departments of a size similar to Fayetteville's. Analysis of this documentation leads to the following guidelines for allocatingtime to a patrol units activities: Responding to calls for service; 35% Patrol administrative activity; 35% Non - directed patrol activity; 30% Man power and hours required to respond to calls for service were tabulated by documenting calls for service and the average response time ( variables such as type of call, severity of call, shift, and personnel availability are all factored into the average response time ). Documentation from 12 months of calls for service including response time and t me for report writing, based on data generated by the Fayetteville Communication Center's computer aided dispatch system were analyzed for the City of Fayetteville Police Department. Using this information calculations were performed to determine the number of patrol units needed to respond based on the 35% ratio of time allocation explained above. The calculation to determine patrol units is performed in the following manner: 1990 calls for service --------------------- = Patrol units required # of hours a patrol unit ( if 100% of time is spent responding to calls ) works annually August 9, 1991 22,721 hours 8 hrs. times 365 days 7.78 patrol units divided by 35% = 7.78'patrol units = 22.23 ( # of patrol units required to respond to calls for service based on a patrol unit utilizing 35% of his/her time to respond to calls for service) Research indicates that it takes an average of 1.78 police officers to staff a one- officer patrol (unit ) car 8 hours per day 365 days per year. We confirmed this research by deducting the Department's training and comp. time from the available time and then dividing the remainder into the available time 2920 - (Training, Comp Time) = 1629 2920 = 1.78 (Availability Factor) 1629 Thus: 22 ( patrol units) times 1 78 = 39 ( police officers ) Utilizing available 1991 calls for service and response time data, ( a 7% increase over the similar period in 1990), projecting the available data to the end of 1991 and utilizing the same formula results in a patrol staffing of 42 patrolmen. In order to retain the level of service identified by tradition in the City of Fayetteville and address the increased calls for service workload and the increased number of reported crimes, ( The City's number of reported crimes increased at the rate of 9.4% per year over the last two years) it is recommended that the staff be increased by a minimum of 5 patrolmen in 1992. We can forecast, optimistically, that while the 7% increase in calls for service can be documented for the past year, modifications in policing methodology and efficiency in the Department's ability to increase the time spent on non - directed Patrol activity will contributed to a lowered increase in reported crimes and calls for service. The fol owing table projects the 7% increase to the end of 1991 and a lower increase (t 2%) thereafte to the year 2012: CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PATROL STAFF PROJECTION based on 7% yearly increase in Calls For Service Time to 1992 and a 2% increase thereafter YEAR TOTAL HOURS TOTAL PATROL 1990 22721 40 1991 24311 42 1992 24798 43 1993 25294 44 1994 25800 45 1995 26316 46 1996 26842 47 1997 27379 48 1998 27926 49 1999 28485 50 2000 29054 51 2001 29636 52 August 9, 1991 2002 30228 53 2003 30833 54 2004 31449 55 2005 32078 56 2006 32720 57 2007 33374 58 2008 34042 59 2009 34723 60 2010 35417 62 2011 36126 63 2012 36848 64 • The table depicts a straight line increase of approximately one patrolmen per year through the year 2012 bases on a continuous increase in calls for service of 2% per year. It is recommended that the City project this need if calls for service continue to increase and the desire remains to maintain the level of service historically provided to the people of Fayetteville. Evaluation of current Detective staffing and interviews of key personnel determined that growth of the Division based on increased caseloads is inevitable. Further evaluation of task responsibilities revealed, as in the case of Property and Evidence management, that personnel tasks where complicated by other facets of Departmental requirements. Recommendations were made to increase staff to cover the requirements of the other facets allowing Detectives, in this case, to concentrate on their caseloads, thus potentially alleviating the need to increase Detective positions dramatically. Evaluation of caseload increases between 1988 and 1990 revealed an increase of 31%. Current caseload activity through the first 5 months of 1991 and projected over the next seven month reveals that caseload activity will continue to increase at the alarming rate of 87.5% over 1990. It is not prudent to react to this projection and increase staffing dramatically but rather to maintain or increase moderately for the next year in anticipation that revised operational methodology suggested in this report will be able to mediate the impact of the projected caseloads. Statistical evaluation of Police Department staffing has yielded guidelines for the ratio of civilian to sworn employees Common sense evaluation of civilian staff based on task workload and increase in sworn personnel are initially utilized to understand how civilian employee counts will increase based on projections determined by the previously identified methods. Final figures are evaluated based on the statistic that one civilian employee is necessary to support 4 - 6 sworn personnel. Current Fayetteville PD statistics including Communications personnel reveals a ratio of one civilian employee to 2.59 sworn, which may be indicative of inefficiencies in operations or task requirements of the civilian employees outside of normal and customary police service. It is our contention that a number of factors must be considered when determining the personnel requirements of a police agency. For the purposes of this staffing projection synopsis we have concentrated on the more important variables which effect demand for police service. Thus, we have based our projection methodology on calls for service, investigative caseload, and agency policy procedure. Only after these variables were identified and the agencies assignment availability determined were the actual number of police officers required to staff the organization identified. August 9, 1991 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE AND MUNICIPAL COURT SPACE STANDARDS a a 350 SF 180 SF D c) o 150 SF A Chief of Police B Assistant Chief Captain C Lieutenant OPS/IA Office Communications Mgr. Crime Prev. Sgt Training Sgt. Detective Supervisor Det Fiscal Officer 0 0 0 120 SF a 80 SF 36 SF Iminmr 4 D Property Services Mgr. E Patrol Sergeants Detectives . F Records Clerks Warrant Clerk G D Data Entry / Dictation Detective Secretary 50 SF Ja D 100 SF H Interview Room Break Room 80 SF 000'00 00000 400 SF 0 100 SF a 64 SF 1 Admin. Secretary 1 Training Room Classroom (Similar) Briefing Room K Chiefs Reception Detective Reception (Sim) L Prosecutor's Reception Hot Check Clerk Prosecutor Warrant Officer • prm 00 180 SF 0 C D C D C D C D 200 SF 1 CI D C D 4 D 150 SF • M Judges Chamber's N Municipal Court Conference Room Prosecutor's Conference Room Patrol Conference Room 0 Communications Break / Conference Juvenile /Crime Preven. Conference