From the Eyes of the Reviewer: A DOB Insider's Guide to Successful Permit Applications
As told by an anonymous Plan Examiner at the Department of Buildings
After twelve years reviewing permit applications at DOB, I've seen it all—from meticulously prepared professional submissions that sail through approval to hastily thrown-together applications that bounce back faster than a rubber ball. Today, I want to pull back the curtain on what really happens when your application lands on my desk, and more importantly, how you can set yourself up for success from day one.
The Reality of My Daily Workload
Let me start with some context that might surprise you. On any given day, I review between 15-25 applications, ranging from simple residential additions to complex commercial developments. Each application gets my full attention, but the time I can spend depends largely on how well-prepared your submission is. A complete, professional application might take me 45 minutes to review thoroughly. An incomplete or poorly organized submission? That could eat up half my morning just trying to figure out what you're actually proposing.
The math is simple: when I spend three hours deciphering a confusing application, that's three fewer applications I can review that day. This creates a ripple effect that impacts everyone in the queue. So when I emphasize the importance of complete, clear submissions, it's not just about your project—it's about respecting the entire system and your fellow applicants.
What Catches My Eye First (And Why It Matters)
The moment I open your file, I'm conducting what we call a "completeness check." This isn't about approving or denying your project yet—it's about determining whether I have everything I need to conduct a meaningful review. Here's my mental checklist:
Cover Sheet Clarity: Your cover sheet is like a movie trailer—it tells me what to expect from the full feature. I need to see your property correctly identified (lot and square numbers matter!), the scope of work clearly described, and all required professional seals present. If I can't quickly understand what you're proposing and where, we're already off to a rocky start.
Drawing Organization: Professional plan sets follow a logical sequence that makes review efficient. I expect to see architectural plans first, followed by structural, then MEP (mechanical, electrical, plumbing) if applicable. When drawings are out of order or missing sheet numbers, it's like trying to read a book with scrambled pages.
Code Compliance Documentation: This is where I see the biggest divide between professional and amateur submissions. Experienced architects and engineers don't just design to code—they document their compliance clearly. They show me egress calculations, accessibility compliance matrices, and energy code documentation. Amateur submissions often assume I'll figure out compliance on my own, which isn't how this works.
The Stories Behind Common Rejections
Let me share a few real examples (with identifying details changed, of course) that illustrate common pitfalls:
The "Simple" Kitchen Renovation: Last month, I received an application for what the homeowner described as a "simple kitchen update." The plans showed removing a wall, but there was no structural engineer's seal confirming it wasn't load-bearing. The electrical plan showed new appliance circuits but didn't demonstrate adequate panel capacity. What seemed "simple" to the homeowner required structural analysis and electrical load calculations. Result: rejection with a request for additional documentation, adding six weeks to their timeline.
The Historic District Surprise: A contractor submitted plans for a rear addition in Georgetown, complete with beautiful architectural drawings and proper engineering. Everything looked great until I noticed they hadn't included Historic Preservation Review Board (HPRB) approval. In historic districts, you need HPRB approval before we can issue a building permit—not after. This sequencing mistake cost them three months while they went through the historic review process.
The Zoning Assumption: An architect submitted plans for a two-story addition that would have been perfectly legal in most D.C. neighborhoods. Unfortunately, this particular property was in a zone with specific height restrictions due to its proximity to a park. The plans exceeded the allowable height by eight feet. A simple zoning verification before design would have prevented this costly redesign.
What Makes My Job Easier (And Your Approval Faster)
When I receive a well-prepared application, the difference is immediately apparent. Here's what sets the good submissions apart:
Proactive Problem-Solving: The best applications anticipate my questions. If there's something unusual about the project, they include a cover letter explaining the situation and referencing relevant code sections. If they're requesting a variance or exception, they clearly explain why it's justified and include supporting documentation.
Clear Communication: Professional drawings use standard symbols and notation that I can read quickly. Dimensions are clear and consistent. Notes are specific rather than vague. When I see "provide per code" on a drawing, I know I'm dealing with someone who doesn't understand that my job is to verify code compliance, not determine it.
Complete Coordination: The architectural plans match the structural plans, which match the MEP plans. Sounds basic, but you'd be amazed how often I see conflicts between disciplines. When the architect shows a beam in one location and the structural engineer shows it somewhere else, I have to reject the application until they sort it out.
The Human Element You Might Not Consider
Here's something most applicants don't realize: I want your project to succeed. Rejecting applications creates more work for everyone—you have to revise and resubmit, and I have to review the same project multiple times. Every approval is a small victory for both of us.
That said, I can't approve applications that don't meet code requirements, no matter how much I might want to help. The codes exist for good reasons—public safety, structural integrity, accessibility, and environmental protection. My job is to ensure every approved project meets these standards, protecting both you and future occupants.
When I do have to reject an application, I try to provide clear, specific comments that help you understand exactly what needs to be addressed. Generic comments like "provide code compliance" aren't helpful to anyone. I aim for specificity: "Provide structural calculations for beam B-3 showing adequate capacity for proposed loading" or "Demonstrate compliance with Section 1109.2 for accessible route to second floor."
Insider Tips for Success
Based on my years of experience, here are the strategies that consistently lead to smooth approvals:
Do Your Homework First: Before you even start designing, research your property's zoning, historic district status, and any special requirements. The DOB website has most of this information, and a quick call to our office can clarify anything unclear.
Invest in Professional Help: I can usually tell within minutes whether plans were prepared by a licensed professional familiar with D.C. requirements. The cost of hiring qualified professionals is almost always less than the delays and revisions that result from amateur submissions.
Submit Complete Applications: It's tempting to submit partial applications to "get in the queue," but incomplete submissions just get rejected, putting you back at the end of the line. Take the time to prepare everything properly the first time.
Follow Up Appropriately: If you haven't heard back within the posted review timeframes, a polite inquiry is appropriate. However, calling daily for status updates doesn't speed up the process—it just takes time away from reviewing applications.
The Bigger Picture
Remember that the permitting process exists for important reasons. Every requirement has a purpose, whether it's ensuring structural safety, protecting historic character, or maintaining neighborhood compatibility. When I review your application, I'm not just checking boxes—I'm helping ensure that your project contributes positively to our city's built environment.
The most successful applicants understand this bigger picture. They see the review process not as an obstacle to overcome, but as a quality assurance system that protects their investment and their community. They prepare thoroughly, communicate clearly, and work collaboratively with our office to achieve their goals.
Final Thoughts
From my desk at DOB, I see the full spectrum of human ambition and creativity. I review plans for dream homes, innovative businesses, and community spaces that will serve residents for decades to come. It's genuinely rewarding work, and I take pride in helping good projects move forward efficiently.
The key to success is preparation, professionalism, and patience. Understand the requirements, prepare complete applications, and work with qualified professionals when needed. When you do, you'll find that the review process, while thorough, is fair and predictable.
Your project matters—to you, to your community, and to those of us who review it. By taking the time to do things right, you're not just improving your chances of approval; you're contributing to a system that makes Washington, D.C. a better place to live, work, and visit.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a stack of applications waiting for review, and hopefully, some of them will be the kind of well-prepared submissions that make my job a pleasure rather than a puzzle.
