Current Design-Build Practices for Transportation Projects

4. Development of Procurement Package

The following is an overview of each agency's procurement package based on responses to the questions in Section 4 of Appendix 3.

The appropriate level of design for a design-build procurement will depend on numerous factors, including the procurement process to be used, risk sharing decisions and project goals. Projects that are competitively bid are more likely to have a level of design in the higher ranges. A higher level of preliminary design is also more likely where prescriptive specifications are used. The original survey indicated that the designs included in the procurement packages were taken to the following levels:

• AC/BC: 20%
• ACTA: 5-15%
• AZ DOT: 10-20%
• FDOT: 10%
• LADOTD: 0 - 20 %
• Michigan DOT: 5% to 30% (depending on project complexities, and what risks are associated with the individual project)
• Montana DOT 5 - 35 %
• NAVFAC: Initially 35%, now ranges from 15% to 35% depending on complexity of project
• NC DOT (Jan 2003): Initially 25-75%, aiming for 25% on future projects.
• TCA Eastern: 35%
• TCA FTC-S: 5%
• TCA Glenwood: 35%
• TCA San Joaquin: 35%
• UT DOT I-15: Overall 15%, but with wide variations among specific project components (for example; bridges, 0%; alignment and grade 30%, and geotechnical investigations, 95%)
• UT DOT Legacy Parkway: 15%
• UTA: 30%
• VDOT: Overall 30%, but with variations among specific project components (for example; bridges, 0%; alignment and grade 30%, and geotechnical investigations, 95%)
• WSDOT:30-40% (less in future).

A number of agencies indicated a preference for performance specifications where possible (NC DOT uses both performance and prescriptive specifications), but almost all of the agencies relied on prescriptive specifications for significant portions of the project.