Wilmington's commercial construction landscape is booming. From new mixed-use developments along the riverfront to expanding healthcare facilities and retail centers, our coastal city is experiencing unprecedented growth. Yet many projects still rely on the traditional Design-Bid-Build method—a procurement approach that's increasingly out of step with modern construction realities. It's time Wilmington's developers and property owners seriously consider Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) and Design-Build delivery methods as the new norm. 

The Design-Bid-Build Problem 

Design-Bid-Build follows a linear process: hire an architect, complete designs, then competitively bid to contractors. It seems straightforward, but this rigid sequence creates fundamental problems. The architect and contractor work in silos, communicating only through the owner. When constructability issues arise—and in Wilmington's unique environment of coastal regulations, flood zones, and hurricane-resistant requirements, they always do—change orders pile up, schedules slip, and unfortunately, the finger-pointing begins. 

Early Collaboration Makes the Difference 

CMAR and Design-Build offer something Design-Bid-Build cannot: early collaboration. With CMAR, the construction manager joins the team as soon as possible during design, providing real-time cost estimates and constructability reviews. They're not yet building, but they're ensuring designs can be built efficiently, that the details are thoroughly thought through, that alternate materials are explored, that all long-lead items are identified and secured, and that data drives decisions early. When the design is complete, they Guarantee a Maximum Price (GMP) and deliver the project, putting their fee at risk if costs exceed that cap and any stated assumptions, clarifications, and allowances. 

Design-build takes integration a step further by combining design and construction under a single contract. The owner hires a single entity responsible for both. This unified approach eliminates the adversarial relationships that plague traditional projects and still offers the same early-stage collaboration as CMAR. "One throat to choke," as we say. 

Both methods address Wilmington's unique challenges: limited subcontractor pools, volatile material supply chain constraints, global financial market impacts that still hit close to home, strict coastal building codes, and an increasingly compressed construction season due to seasonal weather windows. Traditional Design-Bid-Build can't adapt quickly to these realities, leaving the Owner with an increasing amount of unnecessary risk. 

A Real-World Scenario 

Consider a hypothetical office building. Under Design-Bid-Build, the architect completes drawings without contractor input. Six months into construction, the team discovers the specified HVAC system won't meet new ventilation standards or the refrigerant changes mandated by the (then-upcoming) code changes that were just being finalized during design. Change orders now add $500,000 and four months to the schedule. 

Under CMAR or Design-Build, the construction team would have caught this during design, when adjustments cost nothing and delay nothing. They would also have secured long-lead items such as structural steel, HVAC equipment, generators, and switchgear earlier—critical details in today's supply chain-driven environment. The only change orders would be due to programmatic changes (additional bathrooms, revised parking requirements) rather than avoidable design oversights. 

As our community continues growing, we need delivery methods that embrace collaboration over confrontation, flexibility over rigidity, and speed over unnecessary delays. Our commercial construction projects—and the businesses and operations they house—deserve nothing less.