I think this advice isn't just throwing money at the problem, your suggestion sinks time into creating a mini-bureaucracy to ensure quality decision making. That mini-bureaucracy may in itself may make it hard to source/retain the various contractors you're suggesting.
For example I imagine it would be quite hard to source a small dental clinic builder who does high quality work and is also willing to sign a 200-page city level government procurement contracts without significant negotiation or persuasion.
>your suggestion sinks time into creating a mini-bureaucracy to ensure quality decision making
My main suggestion is to hire an engineer/architect, they will manage all of this crap. They will work FOR you and not for the contractor and money doesn't come out of their pocket when they reject something.
>For example I imagine it would be quite hard to source a small dental clinic builder who does high quality work
It's not, they don't need to know how to design it, they just need to have done commercial work before and be used to work on a project that has architects/engineers watching them. Dental clinic was just a random example. Government buildings might have been a better one.
>and is also willing to sign a 200-page city level government procurement contracts without significant negotiation or persuasion.
In every region, there should be one contract that everyone is used to work with and that is fairly balanced. You should not write a new one or try to negotiate clauses. They are long because they have a clause for almost every possible type of conflict that could happen. No one actually reads them cover-to-cover because it's mostly just common sense or things that don't apply but someone has to put it in writing to make it official. If the project goes well, you will never open it.
It provides instructions on things like how to approve an extra and payment schedules, how to fire them, how to reject work, how to contest a decisions from the expert, maximum delays for important things, etc. If you want a hands-off approach, it will protect you. The more involved you want to be, the less you need it.
I think this advice isn't just throwing money at the problem, your suggestion sinks time into creating a mini-bureaucracy to ensure quality decision making. That mini-bureaucracy may in itself may make it hard to source/retain the various contractors you're suggesting.
For example I imagine it would be quite hard to source a small dental clinic builder who does high quality work and is also willing to sign a 200-page city level government procurement contracts without significant negotiation or persuasion.