California Slow to Embrace Design-Build

Over the next six years, an estimated 700 public K-12 schools will be built in California. The state’s increasing population, mandated class-size reduction, and inadequate facilities have made the need for additional classroom capacity imperative, but many of the state’s school officials have proved hesitant to adopt the design-build delivery method.

In order to accommodate for this growth in construction, Assembly Bill 1402, enacted on Jan. 1, 2002, allowed school projects costing $10 million or more to take advantage of design-build, a project delivery method that allows for architecture/engineering and construction services to be combined under a single contract.

California public schools were previously excluded from the design-build delivery process as an alternative to the conventional project delivery method of first designing a project, then requesting bids and selecting the low bidder before proceeding with construction. With the option of design-build, school districts are now allowed the flexibility to search for the best team to design and build its project.

While many California architects, contractors, and school officials agree that AB 1402 provides a safe, timely and cost-effective option for school districts, many districts are hesitant to be the first to participate in design-build and have adopted a "wait and see" attitude, despite the fact that the process is already widely accepted by districts in most other states.

California school districts that are early adopters of the design-build method tend to have superintendents and facilities staff in place with previous construction experience. These individuals understand the value of having the designer and builder working together as a team from the onset of the project. They are familiar with the model’s additional advantages, including cost containment and the closing of gaps early in the design process.

Part of the districts’ hesitancy may also be because design-build is not meant for every project. It is better suited for new school construction as opposed to renovation and modernization. In addition to the limitation of use on projects costing $10 million or more, AB 1402 requires that a design-build project may only be used when it will reduce costs, accelerate competition, or provide features not achievable through traditional delivery methods.

As additional districts begin to utilize design-build, others will, in turn, begin to realize the benefits of the delivery system. It seems inevitable that the method will continue to grow in use as more districts see first hand the schedule, cost, and quality benefits this delivery model brings to education projects. Over time, districts will gain a better understanding of the selection process, and the requirements involved within it.

When selecting a design-build team, districts should use criteria such as the number of schools built, safety record, quality of proposed personnel, value of the design and budgeting process, track record of meeting deadlines, and the firm’s ability to gain approval from the California Division of the State Architect.

AB 1402 is not the cure-all in school construction. However, it does provide school districts an additional option and gives them the opportunity to improve upon previous experiences with other delivery methods. For those suitable projects, the collaborative teamwork resulting from design-build can result in a superior project.

Frances Choun serves as vice president of business development for McCarthy Building Companies Inc.’s Northern Pacific Division/San Francisco office. She can be reached at fchoun@mccarthy.com.

Lynn Halfhide is a business development manager, educational services at McCarthy Building Companies Inc.’s Northern Pacific Division. She can be reached at lhalfhide@mccarthy.com.