- Most lost time is preventable: incomplete intake packages and vague scopes of work.
- Trade permits usually follow the building permit, but several reviews can run in parallel.
- Correction comments are normal. How fast and how completely you answer them decides the cycle count.
- One coordinator across building, fire, health and utilities keeps the record straight.
The sequence in plain terms
Zoning clearance or planning sign-off comes first where required. The building permit application follows, with the architectural, structural and MEP set plus supporting documents. Once the building permit is in review, trade permits (mechanical, electrical, plumbing), fire alarm and sprinkler, and health review where food service is involved can often be prepared or submitted in parallel depending on local practice. Permit issuance follows fee payment. Inspections run through construction, then temporary or final certificate of occupancy closes the project.
What a complete commercial submittal usually includes
- Signed and sealed architectural plans for the scope of work
- Structural drawings and calculations where the scope touches structure
- MEP drawings coordinated with the architectural set
- Energy compliance documentation (IECC / ASHRAE, or the state equivalent)
- Occupant load, egress and plumbing fixture count calculations
- Site plan where site work, parking or accessibility routes are affected
- Contractor licensing and registration for the jurisdiction
- Owner authorization, valuation and a specific written scope of work
Where commercial projects lose time
Almost none of it is the reviewer's fault. The recurring causes are structural to the submission itself.
- A scope of work written too generally for intake to route the application
- Missing energy compliance forms on conditioned-space work
- Egress or occupant load calculations that don't match the floor plan
- Accessibility route and restroom clearances not shown dimensionally
- Fire alarm and sprinkler modifications deferred and then forgotten
- Health review triggered late on food-service tenant improvements
- Corrections answered sheet-by-sheet instead of comment-by-comment
Handling correction comments without a third cycle
A correction letter is a checklist, and it should be answered like one: a written response for every numbered comment, each pointing to the specific sheet and detail that resolves it, with the revised set clouded and delta-marked. Where a comment reflects an actual code issue, the fix belongs on the drawings — not in an argument with the examiner. Where a comment appears to be based on a misread, the response cites the sheet and the code section without conceding a violation. Complete, traceable responses are what keep the second review from becoming a third.
Tenant improvements have their own traps
TI work inherits assumptions from the shell. Verify the existing occupancy classification and any prior certificate of occupancy, whether demising and rated assemblies are documented, how egress from within the suite works with the base building, where MEP tie-ins land, and whether the new use changes occupancy load or fixture counts. A change of occupancy triggers a broader review than owners expect — egress reanalysis, fire separation, accessibility upgrades and a re-issued certificate of occupancy.
Where LPG fits
LPG runs the permitting process around your design and construction team: pre-application strategy, package QC before submittal, portal submission, review tracking, agency follow-up, correction coordination with the design team, fee payment, permit pickup and status reporting to your stakeholders. Jurisdictions control official review durations. Our job is to remove the preventable delays around them.
Frequently asked questions
- How many review cycles should we expect?
- Plan for a first review with comments. A clean, complete package answered thoroughly often closes on the first resubmittal; that is the target we manage to, though the jurisdiction decides.
- Can trade permits be submitted before the building permit is issued?
- It varies by jurisdiction. Some accept parallel submittals, others require the building permit first. We confirm local practice before building the schedule.
- Who talks to the plans examiner — you or our architect?
- LPG owns the agency communication and the record. Technical design responses stay with the licensed design professional; we coordinate, package and transmit them.
Code references reflect widely adopted model codes (IBC, IFC, IECC, IPC/IMC, NEC, ADA / ICC A117.1). Jurisdictions amend heavily — always verify with the local building department.
Have a commercial project in review — or about to be?
Send the scope and the jurisdiction. We'll tell you what the submittal set needs to contain and what the path to issuance typically looks like. FREE quote.