Municipal permitting is often cited as the primary source of commercial construction delays, but Mike Marden, a registered architect and licensed general contractor at WDS Architecture in Phoenix, argues that the most damaging delays originate before a single document is filed. Clients who rely on generic city counter conversations, follow sequential project models, and overlook pre-construction gaps unknowingly extend their timelines.
Marden points out that clients frequently treat a conversation with a city employee as authoritative guidance. Such conversations are not documented, and the provided checklists may not apply to the specific project. “They often say, ‘We already spoke with someone at the city. They said we just turn in this form and this is roughly the time,’” says Marden. “First of all, that’s not a documented conversation. There is no log number or record. None of that’s official. And everything on the checklist might not even apply.” This generic information often leads to unrealistic expectations, which are only discovered after the review process begins, costing months.
The conventional sequential model—complete design, submit for permits, wait for approval, then build—also introduces built-in delays. During the permit review, no construction progresses, while lease clocks tick and contractors stand by. Marden notes that the gap between design completion and construction start is often extended by contractor selection and mobilization. “Did you think about the gap where you’re bidding and trying to find a contractor, meanwhile, permits are ready and you’ve signed the lease?” he asks.
Firms that consistently hit their permit timelines compress the process rather than speed through it. They engage the city early, understand specific jurisdictional requirements, and begin non-permit construction activities during review. Marden explains that at WDS Commercial, “We can start building the project as we’re turning in for a permit. We’re the contractor, already contracted with the Owner, and have spent months participating in the design. If we are questioned or told to turn in drawings, well, we have already done that because we are also the Architect! We can go right up to first inspection with our work, gaining a month versus waiting on bid results, contracts, permits, and mobilization, losing a month or two.” This parallel approach is possible only when architect and contractor are integrated from the start.
WDS Architecture applies this integrated model by leveraging its dual credentials as both architect and contractor. The firm begins mobilization activities—staging, layout, scoping, testing, demo, subcontracting, scheduling crews, and ordering materials—while permit review is underway, compressing the overall timeline without compromising compliance. Marden also emphasizes the importance of engaging clients on permitting strategy during site selection, before a lease is signed. He describes a common scenario: a location that appears attractive on price may carry permitting complexity that adds months to the schedule, while a more expensive clean site may deliver a faster opening. “It’s like building a project twice, when dealing with existing conditions, removing what is there so that new material can be installed to meet code,” Marden says.
For business owners planning a commercial build-out in Phoenix, the practical implication is clear: the permitting timeline they’ve been told to expect likely understates reality. The gap between estimate and actual timeline often originates in decisions made before filing—decisions that can be avoided with an integrated approach like the one WDS offers.
