Commercial Permitting Delays Often Stem from Pre-Filing Decisions, Says Phoenix Architect

Municipal permitting is often blamed for commercial construction delays, but the most damaging setbacks frequently occur before a single document is filed, according to Mike Marden, a registered architect and licensed general contractor at WDS Architecture in Phoenix.

Marden identifies a common client mistake: treating a conversation with a city counter employee as authoritative guidance. Clients often call the city, describe a project in general terms, and receive a scripted response about typical timelines and requirements. This informal advice rarely reflects the specific project's needs. “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,'” Marden says. “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.” A generic checklist may include inapplicable items or omit crucial ones, and clients discover this only after entering the review process. This gap between generic information and project-specific requirements can cost months.

Beyond information gaps, Marden points to structural issues in project sequencing. The conventional approach—complete design, submit for permit, wait for approval, then build—treats permitting as a gate, wasting time. While permit review proceeds, no construction happens; lease clocks run, contractors stand by, and trade partners remain unavailable. Additionally, clients who finish drawings and then search for a contractor add weeks or months. “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?” Marden says.

Firms that consistently meet timelines do so by compressing the process. They engage the city early with preliminary questions, understand specific jurisdictional requirements, and begin non-permitted construction activities during review. At WDS Commercial, Marden notes, “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 by leveraging its dual credentials as both architecture firm and general contractor. Since the same team produces drawings and builds, they can mobilize for activities outside permit scope—staging, layout, testing, demo, subcontracting, scheduling, and ordering materials—while review is underway. They also use ongoing relationships with local jurisdictions to gauge realistic timelines. “Over here, where we do this every day, we know what really needs to go in, how long it’s really going to take,” Marden says. The firm advises clients on permitting strategy during site selection, before lease signing, to avoid locations with hidden code compliance issues. A former restaurant space may appear ready but require extensive updates, erasing apparent savings. “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 explains.

For business owners planning commercial build-outs in Phoenix, the implication is clear: expected permitting timelines often understate reality, and the gap frequently originates in pre-filing decisions. Mike Marden is the founder of WDS Architecture and WDS Commercial, a Phoenix-based integrated design-build firm. Learn more at wds.build.