June 18, 2006
June 18, 2006
June 21, 2006
11.402.1 - 11.402.8
Design-Build Approach to Project Delivery: The Checks and Balances in the Overall Construction Process
In the late 1990s, the author conducted a Survey1 of some of the top Owners listed in the Engineering News Record (ENR) to ascertain the prevalent construction contracting practices in the United States. Among the several questions asked of the Owners, one of the Survey questions dealt with the topic of ‘Project Delivery Systems.’ In response to the question, “Which of the following project delivery systems do you use most?” Owners overwhelmingly said, “Design- Bid-Build,” but some did say that they used Design-Build on occasions when fast-tracking was needed. However, the number of responses in favor of Design-Build was significantly small. But over time, Design-Build as a project delivery system, has significantly matured and more and more owners are opting to utilize this system either to shorten the project cycle, or to develop a smooth flow between the design and construction phases of the project. Today, Design-Build is no longer limited to complex industrial projects such as oil refineries and power plants but is also being used to build public projects such as prisons, office buildings, industrial facilities, etc. Based on data gathered from the owners, architects, engineers, and the contractors, this paper describes the advantages and disadvantages of Design-Build approach to project delivery and cites actual cases where Design-Build did prove to be a successful approach. Case histories are an important learning tool for students of construction, and should be used in the delivery of construction curriculums with caution and sound professional judgment.
In 2000, one of the civil engineering alumni of the University of Florida assumed the role of the Project Manager for the $700 million design-build contract for the Cooper River Bridge Replacement Project on behalf of the South Carolina DOT. The $540 million design-build contract for the construction of the new Cooper River Bridge has delivered the longest cable stay bridge in North America. The new bridge is the replacement for the two old bridges, one being the 1929 Grace Bridge, and the other 1966 Pearman Bridge. The $60 million contract for demolition and dismantling of the existing bridges was also a part of the overall $700 million design-build contract for the replacement project. The application of design-build project delivery system to this new and old construction for the Cooper River Project is a success story and a huge positive step for the acceptance of Design-Build as a highly viable project delivery system. It is also a success story that needs to be told to construction engineering and technology students that as ‘constructors’, they have the same opportunities for building such mega structures as do graduates from the discipline of civil engineering.
In the late 1990s, the author conducted a Survey of some of the top Owners listed in the Engineering News Record (ENR) to ascertain the prevalent construction contracting practices in the United States. Among the several questions asked of the Owners, one of the Survey questions dealt with the topic of ‘Project Delivery Systems.’ In response to the question, “Which of the following project delivery systems do you use most?” Owners overwhelmingly said, “Design-
Varma, V. (2006, June), Design Build Approach To Project Delivery: The Checks And Balances In The Overall Construction Process Paper presented at 2006 Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, Illinois. 10.18260/1-2--19
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2006 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015