How does the process of getting permits work in the Fast Track delivery method? Mike gives an example of how in the Fast Track delivery method a foundation can be designed and build before the framing, and I was wondering how it would work in terms of pulling appropriate permits for each phase of the project.
Take a look at this snip from the AHPP. This may of may not be helpful.
Consider this CD pkg 1 you core and shell CD package which can also be used for permit. I might be wrong on this but that’s how I understand the concept.
Hi @sarhad.design ,
Let me see if I can help!
In fast track the architect produces multiple, separate packages for permit. Like you mentioned, a lot of times the foundations might be one package and then the shell might be another.
The building should be roughly designed before any packages are submitted for permit. By roughly, I mean that the general shape, area, and elevations of the building should be known. You might not know exactly what the finishes are or have detailed material transitions drawn before you issue out your foundations package, but you should have decent grasp on the building footprint and weight.
That said, it’s very likely that there will be portions of the building which aren’t fully coordinated and will require modifications as the building progresses. I believe what the AHPP says is something along the lines of, “The risks of fast-track are often well understood” and I think that is absolutely true!
In practice, I recently permitted a fast-track project. This project was a retail building and our scope of work was to only do the shell. Because timeline was very important for the owner, we fast-tracked the project. This was a pretty easy one to fast-track as there were only two phases. A lot of other fast-track projects have many separate packages!
We completed the SD & DD phases. Then, when we got to CD, we split the drawings into two packages - one early steel and foundation package, and one shell package. Major structural steel as well as foundations were shown on the first and we issued this prior to the shell drawings being completed. This absolutely causes additional coordination and clarifications to the first package as we finished the shell. For example, additional steel needed to be added that was not anticipated to support an overhead door and additional frost slabs needed to be added for entries. In addition, we had to move unground plumbing over from the shell drawing set to the foundations drawing set before the permit office would approve the foundation package.
To complicate things further, a separate architect did the tenant drawings. They did not complete the tenant drawings by the time we permitted both the foundations and shell.
We attempted to coordinate with the original tenant drawings as best as possible. After the tenant drawings were complete, the owner requested us to perform a coordination study with them against our drawings which were at this point nearly completely constructed in the field. We performed this study as an add-service and noted differences.
One of the big changes was an additional entrance that needed to be added in the tenant drawings due to further occupancy calculations & study which weren’t present when we did the shell drawings. The shell is built at this point, so they are going to have to punch a hole in the brand new building to put in the entrance.
Fast-track is messy and difficult, that’s why Mike talks about it so disdainfully! My example above had multiple coordination issues, and it was a very simple fast-track project. They can be much more complex.
Hope this helps!
Here’s some other blogs about fast-track: