December 17, 2009

Tendering process increasingly bypassing architects

JEAN SORENSEN

correspondent

VANCOUVER

Metro Vancouver architects, who have designed municipal buildings or structures, are increasingly being cut out of the municipal tendering process.

The reason, said some municipalities, isn’t to save a few dollars, but litigation fears in what is becoming a highly competitive arena with accountability and transparency as key issues.

Municipalities want more direct control over the tender distribution and flow of information regarding posted tenders.

“I would say that the trend is more and more to manage ourselves,” said Wolfgang Beier, purchasing manager for the City of North Vancouver. “It is happening in a lot of municipalities.”

North Vancouver has controlled the process for the past two years.

However, some dispute the reasons behind the trend.

Maura Gatensby, the Architectural Institute of B.C.’s (AIBC) director of professional services, said the suggestion that municipal staff can better manage the tender process than the architects, whom have traditionally done this, is a disservice to the profession.

Architects follow strict guidelines in how they issue the tender packages, answer questions and deal with bidders, as required by AIBC bylaws and code of ethics.

“They (the municipalities) may have their reasons for doing this, but it should not be to protect the process,” she said.

It was more reasonable to suggest the measure came as a cost-cutting means rather than gaining advantages in transparency and fairness, she said.

That tendering process, though, is not a large part of the architect’s contract fee and may represent only five percent of the job.

However, if a municipality is going to take over that role, but still rely upon the architect to answer questions from municipal staff that come in regarding the tender package, then the architect should be fairly compensated for the time spent, she said.

Traditionally, architects have designed a municipal structure (swimming pool or public facility) and then sent out the tender packages to the construction industry for bidding.

Architects were also responsible for answering questions related to the package and ensuring that information was then circulated fairly to all bidding parties.

Gatensby, however, pointed out that architects handling the tendering is not a universal concept.

It’s different in the private-sector multi-family residential construction, where the architects have turned it over to the developer (who is often the builder) to search for contractors to do the work.

The shift away from architects has increased within the past five years.

The cities of North Vancouver, Vancouver, Burnaby and New Westminster all indicated that they now control the tender process through their purchasing and supply departments.

Surrey uses both a traditional and in-house system.

Beier said legal concerns are an issue today.

“If there are bad purchasing practices or when something goes wrong, we want to be able to step in and take control — that’s important,” he said.

As well, Beier added that his municipality is a participant of various trade agreements and therefore posts tenders on its website, as well as on BC Bid.

“Why would I need to deal with a third party?” he asked.

Questions requiring answers are posted as addendums on BC Bid and contractors can subscribe to an automatic update.

Beier said it is a blind system, where city departments don’t know which companies are preparing to bid.

“It is totally impartial. We can’t play favourites and can’t give information to just one party,” he said.

Architects, in their contracts, are asked to answer questions upon request and are compensated for their time, if municipal staff need to contact them.

Print | Email | Comment