To evaluate the pragmatism of extending project delivery authority to all agencies in the public construction sector, this report will present; a synopsis and history of the legislation regarding bid procurement in the public construction industry, the advantages and disadvantages associated with both delivery methods, the policy issues at the center of the debate for the implementation of alternative project delivery methods, a case study to document an actual project awarded and constructed under the new legislation, and field research from construction firms currently engaged in public construction. .
During the 19th century, design-build was the primary project delivery method used in the United States. In this method, the general contractor served as a 'master builder', participating in both the design and construction phases of a project. However, fraud started to become prevalent as the construction industry expanded. The traditional design-build method, which placed the responsibilities of designing and building on a single enterprise, had no system in place to conduct quality control on building materials and standards. With the rising potential for a conflict of interest between the general contractors and owners, the construction industry began to adopt ethical principles that required the owner's interest to be the primary concentration during all phases of a project life-cycle. By the early 20th century, general contractors were forbidden to act as both the designer and the builder. .
Traditionally, construction contract procurement in Texas has been guided by Government Code Chapter 2155: Purchasing: General Rules and Procedures and Local Government Code Chapter 271: Purchasing and Contracting Authority of Municipalities, Counties, and Certain Other Local Governments. Under this legislation, public construction purchases over $25,000 are required to be procured through competitive bidding (GOV CODE 2155, 2003).
