The City of Dallas’ Development Services Department (DSD) held a Lunch-N-Learn training session Friday where officials with the City’s engineering division discussed common construction management mistakes that prolong permit approvals.
During the training session, City inspectors Eric D’Llaggio and Cecil Oliver discussed the roles of third-party inspectors, developers, and contractors during the pre-development and construction process and how a lack of communication between them can lead to lengthy permit cycles.
While Dallas can be considered an attractive market to some investors, developers with new construction projects are often burdened by the City’s complicated and slow permitting process, particularly for residential and commercial construction.
With permit times far beyond the acceptable metric established by DSD’s 2022-2023 performance goals and metrics report, local officials criticized Dallas City Manager T.C. Broadnax, who nearly lost his job over his handling of the problem.
A developer is generally responsible for buying the land, arranging necessary land use permissions, and coordinating development plans.
General contractors are typically responsible for managing the project, including hiring subcontractors, meeting with clients, getting building permits, and scheduling inspections.
A third-party inspector is responsible for conducting inspections, certifying development plans, and ensuring new construction projects meet all applicable ordinances and City codes.
According to D’Llaggio, professional third-party inspectors must thoroughly know the approved design plans, the construction schedule, safety standards, and more.
During the pre-development phase, each party must sign a memorandum of understanding, a binding contract that meticulously details the roles and responsibilities each party will play during the development process.
If either party deviates from the signed agreement, someone fails to perform their respective duties or a component of the project changes. Each party must denote a mutual agreement to terminate the contract.
In an example of a scenario that delays approval, D’Llaggio claimed that if a third-party inspector identifies discrepancies between the design plan and the development site, then it is the duty of the design engineer who sealed and stamped the plans to provide a corrective action plan. It is not the responsibility of the City or the third-party inspector to find a solution.
To avoid such scenarios and ensure a smooth inspection process, D’Llaggio said that ” communication ” was the key to success.”
If a project continues to hit snags in pre-development, it is likely that one of the parties is not communicating or that their duties were not properly conveyed in the memorandum, he alleged.
Some of the more common design mistakes highlighted during the training session included the incorrect installation of concrete piping, improper placement of above-ground utility structures like street lights, tree wells, and parking meters, and using construction materials that are not in accordance with City codes.
While City Inspectors have some wiggle room to amend simple design mistakes, D’Llaggio noted that in almost all cases, the engineering firm that designed and created the plans would need to be the one to make the changes.
Ultimately, the longer it takes for a third-party inspector to certify development plans, the longer it takes to obtain a construction permit, and the longer it takes to get the project off the ground.