Dive Brief:

• If federal agencies had fewer firms competing in the detailed second rounds of competitions for design-build contracts, they would get the best designs and save themselves work and expense, the American Institute of Architects is arguing to Congress.
• AIA representative Charles Dalluge of the Leo A Daly firm told a committee hearing that under the current system, detailed drawings, models and documentation drive up competitors' costs while the number of firms brought to the second stage of competition cuts each of their odds of winning.
• A pending bill would limit the competition after initial cuts, so more firms might want to take a shot at design-build contracts, and agency officials would have less material to review and evaluate unless they got an exemption for a specific project.

Dive Insight:

There is irony in the AIA's stance. It makes sense economically, yet it was government contracts that helped some firms get through the slump in the private sector during the recession. The architects are not ungrateful for government opportunities, but the company said a survey it did of efforts to get both government and private-sector projects found the cost of a detailed submission averaged $260,000.