How does the final contract differ in design-build versus traditional delivery methods?

In design-build delivery methods, the final contract distinctly combines both design and construction responsibilities into a single agreement. This is a fundamental shift from traditional delivery methods, where typically separate contracts exist for design and construction, leading to more fragmented responsibility.

In a design-build approach, one entity—the design-builder—takes on the entirety of the project, managing both the design aspects and the actual construction. This integration helps streamline communication, reduce the potential for disputes over scope and responsibility, and facilitate a more collaborative project environment. It allows for increased efficiency as the design-builder can optimize construction techniques while the design is being finalized, potentially leading to cost savings and faster completion times.

The other options focus on limited or irrelevant aspects of the contract. For instance, a focus solely on design responsibilities does not reflect the comprehensive nature of design-build, while suggesting the elimination of a contractor disregards the role of the design-builder. Finally, the relationship of the contract to project timelines is not exclusive to the design-build method, as all contract types are usually aligned with project schedules. Thus, the combination of responsibilities is what sets the design-build contract apart from more traditional methods.