IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 4)

legIslAtIve upDAte// The Tools Necessary to Move Design-Build Forward By richard thomas thIrty yeArs Ago, use of alternative project delivery methods such as design-build was rare. Today we live in a different world; design-build accounts for 40 percent of market share and less than half of all construction projects in the United States are delivered using the traditional designbid-build method. While alternative project delivery is fairly common, a lack of standardized project delivery laws at the state level often creates confusion for owners and design-build professionals alike and leads to a culture in which best practices are set aside in favor of compliance. In states with new or limited alternative project delivery authority, the lack of standardized laws often leaves owners who wish to expand their authority without guidance to move forward. In 1995, the Building Futures Council (BFC) performed a two-year study of alternative contracting methods and procurement in the public sector, with the American College of Construction Lawyers (ACCL) providing technical research and drafting of the model act. The Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA) also participated in the project, assuming the principal responsibility for advocating enactment of the Model Design-Build Act upon completion of BFC’s developmental effort. The model act and the accompanying legislative guide applied to entities such as state governments, agencies of state governments, counties, municipalities, independent authorities and school boards and have helped lawmakers craft design-build legislation over the last 25 years. Today some degree of design-build is authorized in every state. Still, approximately one-third of the states have serious limitations on designbuild and other project delivery methods, while other states are looking to expand existing authority, particularly at the local level. For the most part, design-build has worked remarkably well. However, lack of training and poorly drafted design-build laws sometimes mean that the industry’s recognized best practices are ignored. To meet this challenge, DBIA began reworking the original model act to take a comprehensive approach that authorized not only design-build but other alternative project delivery methods as well. Based on Arizona’s Alternative Project Delivery Methods legislation, DBIA’s new Innovative Project Delivery (IPD) Act does that, providing a model for states that want the choices of design-build (best value and qualifications-based selection), job-order contracting and constructionmanager-at-risk delivery models. The latest model legislation is part of a new Legislative Tool Kit DBIA is developing for 2013. The tool kit includes all of the elements owners and industry professionals need to expand alternative project delivery authority, providing empirical data and time-tested best-practices that lawmakers need to support their legislative efforts. In addition to the IPD Act, the Tool Kit will include DBIA educational materials, best practices white papers, project and legislative case studies, legislative and public relations strategies and DBIA’s State Statute and Pending Legislation Reports. Interest among owners and lawmakers in alternative project delivery has never been greater. Yet the biggest obstacle to its expansion is the lack of education and information. DBIA’s IPD Act and Legislative Tool Kit offer owners and industry professionals alike the information they need to break down the barriers to high-performance projects. rIcharD thoMaS IS VIcE prESIDEnt of aDVocacY anD EXtErnaL affaIrS at DBIa, WhErE hE ManaGES thE orGanIzatIon’S LoBBYInG anD aDVocacY EffortS. hE IS aLSo thE author of chaptErS for DBIa’S ManuaL of practIcE anD an upcoMInG BooK on DESIGnBuILD In thE WatEr anD WaStEWatEr SEctor. 4 winter//2012 the quarterly publication of the design-build institute of america

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IQ Winter 2012

IQ Winter 2012

IQ Winter 2012 - (Page Cover1)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page Cover2)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 1)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 2)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 3)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 4)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 5)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 6)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 7)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 8)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 9)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 10)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 11)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 12)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 13)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 14)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 15)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 16)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 17)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 18)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 19)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 20)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 21)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 22)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 23)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page 24)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page Cover3)
IQ Winter 2012 - (Page Cover4)