As plan-review changes move toward permanency, some worry of uncertainty

Listen to this article

To speed up commercial-plan approvals, state regulators are planning to make permanent a policy change that no longer allows contractors and architects to schedule specific dates for plan reviews.

The proposal, part of various procedural modifications scheduled to take effect Jan. 15, is already drawing criticism from contractors concerned they will lose the ability to gauge when their work might get underway.

As has been the case with similar recent policies, the Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Service’s goal is to expedite their procedures and whittle away at the state’s backlog of unreviewed plans, which have been a cause of complaint among contractors for years. But some in the industry worry that state officials will only be adding further uncertainty to an already uncertain situation.

“Now we won’t be able to know if we can expect to start work in two weeks or two months,” said Steve Klessig, vice president of the Kaukauna-based general contractor and design firm Keller Inc. “How can we plan for anything, when we won’t even be able to know construction is going to start?”

Others aren’t so concerned. Lisa Kennedy, executive director of the American Institute of Architects Wisconsin, said she has yet to hear any of her members express anxiety about the coming change.

“Of course, the hope is that this will improve review times,” she said.

The new submissions policy comes as the culmination of the DSPS’s attempts this year to speed up its reviews of commercial plans. Among the various modifications state officials have been experimenting with, one requires contractors to make sure their plans are complete before submitting them to the state. In a memo sent out this week to contractors and other companies, DSPS Secretary-designee Dawn Crim said the changes appear to be having the desired effect.

“I am happy to report that plumbing plans are now reviewed and returned within three weeks,” Crim wrote in her memo. “Commercial building plans are back to customers within five weeks.”

Before the change doing away with set review dates, the DSPS had experimented with allowing contractors to schedule reviews two weeks out from the date their plans were submitted. Even that, Klessig said, was an imposition, since it essentially meant an automatic two-week project delay.

But it at least provided some certainty. Contractors won’t even have that come Jan. 15, he said.

“I don’t care if you’re in architecture, or if you’re making widgets, or if you’re a baker,” Klessig said. “Nobody in business likes uncertainty.”

In her memo, Crim said the DSPS should be able to make review decisions within six weeks of receiving submitted plans.

“This is largely how we have been operating our plan review process for most of 2020, so it should be familiar to those of you who have submitted plans this year,” she wrote.

The policy change scheduled for Jan. 15 will also prevent contractors from selecting which state officials will review their plans. DSPS officials worry certain regulators are getting overwhelmed with review requests while others are being given relatively little work.

Rather than make changes to the state’s submission rules, groups like the Associated Builders and Contractors of Wisconsin have been pushing to exempt certain projects from review requirements. John Schulze, ABC of Wisconsin director of legal and government affairs, said one proposal he and his colleagues have put forward would lift review requirements for most one-story buildings. This, he said, would eliminate a redundant step in the approval of routine projects. Review requirements would still apply to schools, hospitals, theaters and other places of assembly.

Klessig, who is slated to become chairman of the ABC’s national organization next year, said there is very little need for government to provide an additional safeguard to make sure contractors and designers are doing good work. The threat of lawsuits and loss of professional standing are usually enough in themselves to keep people in line.

“We take total responsibility, we take total liability,” Klessig said. “That’s why the cost of errors and omissions insurance is so high.” Follow @TDR_WLJDan