HomePlan

Phase 3 · Permits · Step 3.3

Plan review (multiple disciplines)

PP&D reviewers across 5-8 disciplines mark up your plans. You respond with revisions until everyone clears. This is the longest part of the permit phase and the part you have the most control over.

Who
Designer, PP&D
How long
8-16 weeks for first round; 4-8 weeks per revision
Cost
Included in plan check fee
You end up with
Plans cleared by all reviewing disciplines

How review works

Each discipline (planning, residential, structural, plumbing, electrical, mechanical, BES, sometimes Urban Forestry and PBOT) reviews the plans in parallel and produces a list of corrections. You — through your designer — answer every comment in writing and resubmit revised plans.

Most Portland DADUs clear in 2 rounds. A clean submittal (especially a pre-approved set) can clear in 1.

Typical timeline

  • First round: 8-16 weeks. The slowest discipline sets the clock.
  • Your response: 2-6 weeks. This is the part you control.
  • Second round: 4-8 weeks.
  • Total: 12-24 weeks is normal.

How to keep it moving

  • Respond to comments in batches — one consolidated response is faster than drip-feeding.
  • For each comment, quote the comment, state your response, and point to the sheet or detail that resolves it. Reviewers like this and clear comments faster.
  • If a comment looks wrong, call the reviewer. Phone numbers are right on the comment sheet. A 10-minute call resolves what would otherwise take a full revision cycle.

When something stalls

If a single discipline has been silent for 4+ weeks, escalate through DevHub or call the assigned reviewer. PP&D isn't adversarial — most stalls are queue depth, not opposition.

Go deeper

Optional reading. Skip if you only need the headline.

›How to structure a correction response so the next cycle is shorterThe response-letter format experienced Portland designers use to close PP&D corrections in one round instead of three.

The response letter format

When a PP&D reviewer re-opens the project, they read the correction comments and then look for your response. If your response is scattered across email threads or buried in sheet notes, they re-issue the comment. Your resubmittal needs a single correction response letter that mirrors the PP&D comment list exactly.

For each numbered comment, give them three things in order:

  1. The original comment, verbatim. Don't paraphrase — reviewers look for their own wording first.
  2. The response. One of four stock framings:
    • "Revised — see sheet A2.1, detail 4, revision cloud 3." (Most comments.)
    • "Acknowledged — the condition does not apply because [narrow, specific reason]." (Use sparingly; every one of these is a fight you're choosing.)
    • "Clarification added — see general note on A0.0." (For anything a reviewer flagged as "ambiguous.")
    • "See attached calc / memo from [engineer], dated [date]." (For structural or BES comments that need a discipline response.)
  3. A direct pointer to where the change lives: sheet number, detail number, revision cloud number. Never "see revised drawings" — always the exact spot.

Revision clouds and deltas

Every drawing change goes inside a revision cloud, with a delta triangle pointing to the revision number in the title block. The title-block revision log has to match the response letter's revision number. Reviewers scan for that match first; if the delta doesn't match the response, the comment reopens.

What experienced Portland designers do differently

  • They close corrections in one round, not two. Common-cause comments (missing energy path on the mechanical sheet, missing BES BMP sizing on small infiltration designs, missing fire-rated assembly detail at a shared wall) are predictable. An experienced designer pre-empts them in the first submittal so there's nothing to correct.
  • They front-load structural coordination. Structural corrections are the single biggest source of a second round — the engineer answers a comment, the architect redraws the assembly, and that's a 3-week internal loop before PP&D ever sees it. Getting structural drawings into the first submittal at 95% resolution (not 70%) cuts a full cycle off the project.
  • They call the reviewer when a comment looks wrong. Phone numbers are right on the comment sheet. A 10-minute call resolves what would otherwise take a written-revision cycle. Pick this fight on the call, not on paper.
  • They pick their fights. One or two pushback comments in the letter is normal. Five is adversarial and usually costs you a cycle. If a reviewer misread a condition, call it out narrowly and move on — don't bundle it with a general objection.

What to hand the reviewer on resubmittal

  • Revised drawings (full set), with revision clouds and the revision log updated.
  • The correction response letter (PDF), uploaded through DevHub against the original review.
  • Any new supporting calcs, memos, or product data as separate PDFs, referenced from the response letter by filename.
  • A cover note confirming no scope changes outside the correction comments — reviewers re-scope if they find changes they didn't ask for.

Where this information came from

← Back to project map