No single delivery method is suitable for every project. Design-build is best suited for a project where basic performance and technical requirements can largely be agreed upon prior to design and construction of the project. The owner must be willing to set such requirements and allow the service provider to fulfill them in the best possible way. If a project is not clearly defined at the outset or may need constant owner input at different steps in the process, then design-build may not be appropriate. However, when speed of completion is a priority, then design-build may be the most attractive option.

Subscribe to WDBC Blog
Posts by Topic and Firm
- Acceptance Standards
- AECOM
- Allowances
- Aqua-Aerobic Systems
- Arcadis
- Best Practices
- Best Value
- Black & Veatch
- Brown and Caldwell
- Burns & McDonnell
- Carollo
- CDM Smith
- Clark Construction
- CMAR
- Collaborative Delivery
- Construction Law
- Contingency
- Contracts
- Core and Main
- Craft Labor
- Crist Engineers
- Crossland Heavy Contractors
- CWSRF
- Design-Build
- Design-Build-Operate
- Dispute Board
- Earned Performance Fees
- Education
- Enerfab
- Equipment/Technology Suppliers
- ESG (Energy Systems Group)
- Evoqua
- Fixed-Price Design-Build
- Flatiron
- Garney
- Garver
- Goodwin Brothers
- Guaranteed Maximum Price
- Haskell
- HDR
- Integrated Design Manager (IDM)
- Jacobs
- Kiewit
- Kokosing
- McCarthy
- MWH
- O&M
- OBG
- Off-Ramp
- Open-Book Pricing
- Owner Advisor
- Owners
- P3
- Parsons
- PC Construction
- PCL
- Performance Standards
- PLW Waterworks
- Procurement
- Progressive Design-Build
- Ramboll
- Research
- Reynolds Construction
- RFP
- Rice Lake
- Risk Allocation
- Risk Register
- Safety
- Spearin Doctrine
- Stantec
- TBL
- Technology
- The Walsh Group
- Ulliman Schutte
- Uncategorized
- Value Engineering
- Value of Water Coalition
- Victaulic
- Virtual Design & Construction (VDC)
- Wastewater Infrastructure/Treatment
- Water Design-Build Project
- Water Infrastructure/Treatment
- Water Week
- WDBC Admin
- Xylem