Should pre-submittal meetings be required for all major building permits?

EmilyPage

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2024
Total posts
14
Likes received
5
We currently have pre-submittal meetings required for expedited permits, but optional for all other building permits. During the 1-hour meeting, a plans reviewer and zoning officer look over the proposed plans, answer any questions the applicant has and informs them of our submittal standards. When pre-submittal meetings are requested, they are usually scheduled within 2 weeks of requesting and have improved the submittal quality significantly leading to faster intake times. Additionally, we have many contractors who have been submitting permits for years that incorrectly submit applications, resulting in a few back-and-forths to get it the way we need.
If we were to request these meetings for every major building permit, it would slow it down at the front end but would result in time saved during the entire review process. Do any other jurisdictions require a pre-submittal meeting for every major building permit? What is your experience? If you don't, why not?
 
Location
Aspen, Colorado, United States
Major projects must go through a design review /entitlement process through Planning prior to submitting to Building & Safety. Building & Safety provides input during this process and highlights any issues that need to be resolved prior or during plan check.
It is a required process that does take time. Unfortunately by the time the applicant is ready to submit full plans for review, they can be very frustrated with the process.
 
If I were an applicant, I would feel more confident if I had meetings like that. If going through all the hassle means less chance of rejection or faster approval time, then why not? The officers can 'punish' those who still fail to meet the requirements after going through the meetings by rejecting or delaying the proposal. That sounds like a good motivation to make people cooperate.
 
We do that for land use proposals, the applicant pays a fee and applies and then staff reviews and will meet with the applicant to talk feasibility and let them know what will be needed to continue.
For bldg permits, I think it would be nice, but if it's a "major" project it's likely gone through the land use/design review process already, which would include this type of meeting.
 
In Somerton, AZ, we do encourage pre-development meetings free of charge for any project proposals.
 
In Corps Regulatory, we now have regulations on the books that require the applicant request a "pre-filing" (aka "pre-application") meeting before applying for their 401 Water Quality Certification. There's a reasonable period of time (RPOT) attached to 401 applications, after which the 401 requirement can potentially be waived. The pre-filing meeting helps ensure the proper level of coordination has occurred before the application is submitted and the RPOT gets set.
 
Yes, I have always done a post legislative approval meeting on big projects to lay out the permitting requirements, and I also do a pre-construction meeting to set expectations, understand the needs and make sure that all of the teams understand the project. Lots of communication is the hallmark of a good Development Department.
 
We currently have pre-submittal meetings required for expedited permits, but optional for all other building permits. During the 1-hour meeting, a plans reviewer and zoning officer look over the proposed plans, answer any questions the applicant has and informs them of our submittal standards. When pre-submittal meetings are requested, they are usually scheduled within 2 weeks of requesting and have improved the submittal quality significantly leading to faster intake times. Additionally, we have many contractors who have been submitting permits for years that incorrectly submit applications, resulting in a few back-and-forths to get it the way we need.
If we were to request these meetings for every major building permit, it would slow it down at the front end but would result in time saved during the entire review process. Do any other jurisdictions require a pre-submittal meeting for every major building permit? What is your experience? If you don't, why not?
Pre approvals are required for all new construction and additions. These include, County Soil Approval, Engineering, Zoning, Tree and Board of Health. For major developments (ie, affordable housing/complexes, shopping centers, etc) a meeting is held to discuss processing and timeslines for the developer to follow but no pre approvals are given. Developers are required to obtain preapprovals before construction permits may be reviewed. We definately do not expedite because our process is streamlined and the expediting owness is on the design professionals to obtain preapprovals.
 
Yes, Our jurisdiction does require what we call a PDM (Pre-Development Meeting), to ensure that any questions that the applicant has can by answered by every dept and all of their comments are logged and provided at the end. It gives our Directors a chance to get to know that applicant and to know exactly what they are wanting to do, and also letting them know if what they want to do is possible and whether or not they can actually do it along with everything that would be required to do so as well. It does not tie up much time on our front end because we only schedule them for Friday's, and they have to have their application submitted the Friday prior in order to be put on the schedule and it is on a FCFS basis.
 
Large projects have to go through Planning, but other than that, we actually discourage predevelopment meetings as we have found that they are a waste of time. We were doing meetings for projects that never got off of the ground. By requiring them to apply, we at least have a permit fee collected and actual plans to review.
 
Large projects have to go through Planning, but other than that, we actually discourage predevelopment meetings as we have found that they are a waste of time. We were doing meetings for projects that never got off of the ground. By requiring them to apply, we at least have a permit fee collected and actual plans to review.

Good call. In addition to wasting government resources, I think blanket requirements for process steps that aren't meaningful/worthwhile can be demoralizing for staff, e.g., meetings that staff know probably aren't going to go anywhere. The whole enterprise of government works best when you have leaders who are focused just as much on removing unproductive processes as they are adding new ones.
 
Back
Top