The traditional way is design first, then bid. It works, and it fails in one specific expensive way: the drawings come back and the bids come in twenty percent over budget, so months of design get reworked or the project dies.
Design build puts the builder in the room while decisions are still on paper. When someone asks what a taller ceiling or a different roof line does to the number, they get the answer that week rather than after the design is finished. Fewer surprises, one contract, one party accountable for both halves.
The same project, arranged so the builder and the drawings are never strangers.
What the building has to do, how much space that really takes and what it costs per square foot here, before anything is drawn in detail.
Drawings developed against a live budget, so a design decision and its cost arrive in the same conversation.
Catching the details that draw well and build badly, at the stage where changing them costs nothing.
Plan review and permit filing handled in house as part of the same contract rather than a separate scramble.
The build executed by the people who priced it, which removes the handoff where responsibility usually gets lost.
One company answering for design and construction, so a problem never turns into two parties pointing at each other.
What you need the building to do and what you can spend. Both, at the start, honestly. This is the entire foundation of the method.
Drawings developed with costs attached as they go, so the design that gets finished is one that can actually be built for the money.
Permits filed, trades bought out and long lead items ordered while the last details are being finalized.
Construction by the same company that designed and priced it, on the number that was agreed before drawings were finished.
Design build earns its keep when the budget is the hard constraint: shops, metal buildings, barndominiums and commercial spaces where the money is set and the design has to fit it rather than the other way around.
See the project gallery →One contract covering both design and construction, with the builder involved while the drawings are still being developed. The alternative is designing first and bidding after, which is where budget surprises come from.
Not automatically, but it is far more predictable, and it avoids the most expensive failure in construction: finishing a design nobody can afford and paying to redo it.
We work with designers and architects as part of the team rather than employing them. What matters is that they are in the room with the builder while the decisions are being made.
Yes. We will work alongside a designer you already trust. The value of the method is the builder being involved early, not who holds the pencil.
Tell us what the building has to do and what you can spend. We will tell you honestly whether those two things fit together before anyone starts drawing.