Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFernandez, Eduardo H.
dc.description.abstractDesign Build (DB) is a system in which the contractor is solely responsible for the design and construction of the project. The DB system differs from the Design, Bid, Build, (DBB) system in which the owner contracts with a design professional for design services, and once plans and specifications are complete, would allow contractors to competitively bid on the construction services. However, the DB approach does not come without disadvantages. This paper will highlight these disadvantages as they directly relate to the USACE-KC District. Disadvantages ranging from legality issues, to higher costs or “cost growth” as shown by data collected for USACE-KC District military specific construction projects.

This paper addresses from the viewpoint of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Kansas City District (USACE-KC), the viability of DB in regards to whether it should continue to be a project delivery method of the District. According to data taken over a seven year time period, DB projects were completed sooner than DBB projects, however on average, DB projects tended to have a higher cost growth ( 3.99%) than DBB projects.

DB is clearly a form of delivery system that will continue to be a mainstay in the public and private sectors for many years to come, however, in light of the many legal issues and significant higher cost to USACE-KC, it most certainly should not be the preferred delivery system for USACE-KC District to implement on a consistent basis; but rather one only reserved for limited specialized projects where the traditional form would not be suitable.
dc.titleDesign Build: Should the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Kansas City District Continue to Use this Form of Project Delivery Method?
kusw.oapolicyThis item does not meet KU Open Access policy criteria.

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record