Commercial Construction
Built to Perform

For most commercial projects, yes, and the reason is accountability. Under design-build, the architect, the engineers, and the construction team work under one contract with one firm responsible for the result. When a design decision turns out to be expensive to build, the same team that drew it is the team that has to build it, so the conversation happens early instead of as a change order. Cost feedback arrives while the design is still on paper. The alternative, hiring a designer and then bidding the construction separately, gives the owner more control over each piece and makes the owner the referee between them. Design-build is worth it when you want one team accountable for the whole outcome. Woolsey has delivered Camp Fimfo, the Albert Hotel, and Buda Mill & Grain under that model.

Usually the opposite, once the whole project is counted. A design-build price includes design, engineering, permitting coordination, and construction under one number. A general contractor's bid covers construction only, and the design fees, the coordination between designer and builder, and the cost of anything the drawings missed sit outside it. Where design-build saves money is in the design phase: the builder prices decisions as they are made, so the design that goes out for construction is one that fits the budget instead of one that has to be cut back after bids come in. The honest caveat is that design-build asks the owner to choose the firm before the design exists, so the choice has to rest on the firm's record rather than on a bid for a finished set of plans.

The owner gives up a check that the separate-contract model provides. When the architect and the builder work for different firms, each one reviews the other's work, and the owner can compare several construction bids for the same set of drawings. Under design-build, the owner is trusting one firm with both the design and the price, so that firm's track record matters more than it would in a bid. The other honest disadvantage is that the owner has less direct control over design details, since the design is developed with buildability and budget in the room from the start. For owners who want to select their own architect and shop the construction, the separate model is the better fit. For owners who want one accountable team and a price that holds, design-build is.

The usual breakdown is by role. A general contractor holds the main construction contract, hires and manages the trades, and is accountable for delivering the finished project. Specialty contractors, sometimes called subcontractors, perform one trade: electrical, plumbing, mechanical, concrete, framing, roofing, and so on, under contract to the general contractor. A design-build contractor is a general contractor that also carries the design, so the owner has one contract for both. And a construction manager advises the owner and coordinates the work without holding the trade contracts, acting as the owner's agent rather than the builder. Woolsey works as a commercial general contractor and as a design-build firm, and offers owner's representation for clients who want an advocate on a project someone else is building.