Pre-Submittal Plan Review Checklist to Cut First-Round Comments

This checklist follows submittal order: what the examiner opens first, what they compare it against, and what gets the set bounced at intake. For code-section depth by code, use the construction drawing code compliance checklist, which goes through IBC, ADA, NFPA, NEC, plumbing, mechanical, and energy items one by one. For why the permit review and the IFC review look for different things, see permit set vs IFC set.

Why do first-round comments land on the same items?

First-round comments repeat because the same sheets carry the numbers every reviewer checks. In Seattle's 2025 proof of value, intake staff logged 90 rejection reasons across 29 residential applications before plan review even began, according to the city's CivCheck evaluation report. The same report puts each review cycle at about a month of calendar time.

Honolulu's Department of Planning and Permitting reported an average of 23.5 corrections per residential permit across 17 comparison permits that did not use its AI pre-screen. Most of those corrections trace to a short list of sheets: the code analysis, the life-safety plan, the wall types, the enlarged accessibility plans, and the site plan. Check those first and check them against each other.

The pre-submittal plan review checklist, step by step

Run the steps in order. Several of them depend on numbers set in an earlier step, so a change to the occupant load in step 2 means rechecking steps 3 and 5.

1. 1. Check the sheet index against the set

   Every sheet in the index is in the set, every sheet in the set is in the index, and sheet numbers, titles, and revision dates match the title blocks. Every detail and section callout points to a sheet that exists.

   • Cover sheet lists the address, parcel, scope of work, and the code editions the design follows.
   • Stamps and signatures appear on every sheet the jurisdiction requires.
   • Deferred submittals are listed by name, such as fire sprinkler, fire alarm, or trusses.

   Related: Sheet index validation

2. 2. Make the code analysis sheet agree with the plans

   The code analysis is the first sheet an examiner checks the plans against, so every number on it has to match the floor plans and the life-safety plan.

   • Occupancy classification for each area, and the separation or nonseparation approach for mixed use.
   • Construction type, sprinklered status, and allowable height and area with any increase shown.
   • Occupant load for every floor and room, which IBC Section 107.2.3 requires outside Groups R-2, R-3, and I-1.
   • Plumbing fixture count calculated from that same occupant load.

3. 3. Trace egress on the life-safety plan

   Walk every room to the public way on paper. IBC Section 107.2.3 asks for the location, construction, size, and character of every part of the means of egress, including exit discharge.

   • Number of exits and exit width sized from the occupant load on the code sheet.
   • Travel distance, common path of egress travel, and dead-end corridors dimensioned.
   • Door swing, hardware, and any delayed or controlled egress locks shown and scheduled.

   Related: Egress compliance checking

4. 4. Tie fire-resistance ratings to listed assemblies

   Each rated wall, floor, and roof needs a listed design behind it, and the rating has to read the same on the plans, the wall types, and the door schedule.

   • Wall-type legend gives a tested assembly number for every rated type.
   • Rated lines are continuous on every floor plan and match the life-safety plan.
   • Door and window ratings in the schedules match the wall they sit in.
   • Penetrations through rated assemblies have a firestop detail.
   • Fire separation distance is dimensioned for exterior walls and openings.

   Related: Fire and life safety review

5. 5. Dimension the accessible route

   Examiners check accessibility on enlarged plans, so the clearances have to be dimensioned there, not implied by scale.

   • Accessible route from parking and the public way to each entrance.
   • Enlarged toilet rooms with turning space, fixture clearances, and grab bars dimensioned.
   • Door maneuvering clearances and hardware heights on accessible doors.
   • Counter, reach, and fixture heights tied to ICC A117.1 or the ADA Standards the jurisdiction adopted.

   Related: Accessibility checking

6. 6. Coordinate structure and MEP with the architecture

   Structural and MEP sheets go to separate reviewers, and the comments that cost a cycle are often the places where those sheets disagree with the architecture.

   • Structural general notes state the design criteria: loads, wind, seismic, and soil values.
   • A statement of special inspections is included where the code requires one.
   • Column grids and levels match across architectural, structural, and MEP sheets.
   • Duct and pipe routes clear the framing, and rooftop equipment has structure under it.

   Related: 2D clash detection

7. 7. Match the energy compliance forms to the drawings

   Energy reviewers compare the compliance forms to the schedules line by line, so the forms and the drawings have to carry the same values.

   • The compliance path is stated: IECC prescriptive, IECC performance, or ASHRAE 90.1.
   • Signed forms are attached, such as COMcheck, REScheck, or Title 24 forms in California.
   • Insulation and fenestration values on the forms match the wall types and window schedule.
   • Lighting power and mechanical efficiencies match the fixture and equipment schedules.

   Related: Energy code compliance guide

8. 8. Check the site plan and zoning numbers

   IBC Section 107.2.6 requires a site plan drawn to scale from an accurate boundary survey, and zoning reviewers read the same sheet for coverage, height, and setbacks.

   • New and existing structures, distances from lot lines, street grades, and finished grades.
   • Flood hazard areas and design flood elevations where they apply.
   • Lot coverage, building height, and yard setbacks calculated and shown, not left to the reviewer.

9. 9. For residential work, show smoke and carbon monoxide alarms

   Alarm locations are a short item that comes back often on residential permits. Show every smoke and carbon monoxide alarm on the floor plans with a legend.

   • Smoke alarms in each sleeping room, outside sleeping areas, and on every level.
   • Carbon monoxide alarms where the code requires them for fuel-burning appliances or attached garages.

10. 10. Package the submittal the way the city asks

    A complete, correctly formatted package keeps the set from being bounced at intake before anyone reviews the design.

    • Calculations, geotechnical report, specifications, and required forms are attached.
    • PDFs follow the city's format rules for orientation, sheet size, scale, and file naming.
    • The full set is uploaded together, since many cities will not review loose sheets.

Which items does Seattle's data say applicants miss most?

Seattle's report lists the checks that most often failed in its sample of middle housing applications. The sample is residential and small, so treat it as a pattern. Zoning and life-safety basics lead the list, and every item on it could have been caught on the applicant's side.

Source: Appendix B of Seattle's CivCheck AI pre-screening pilot report. Commercial sets fail on a different list, led in our experience by code analysis numbers that no longer match the plans.

How do you run this checklist on a 400-page set?

By hand, a QA reviewer samples. Nobody overlays every wall type against every floor plan on a 400-page set in the last week before submittal. The cross-sheet steps are the ones that get skipped, and they are the ones that produce comments.

Helonic reads every sheet of the 2D PDF set and runs those comparisons for you: the code analysis against the plans, the door schedule against the floor plans, rated lines across levels, and MEP routes against the framing. It checks against IBC, IRC, CBC, ADA, NEC, NFPA, and ASHRAE 90.1, and gives each finding a severity and a page location. See Helonic's code compliance checking for the code side.

On a 188-page Wisconsin senior living set, Helonic compared the code analysis with the door hardware and fire alarm drawings. The memory care wing used controlled egress, but the hardware schedule listed locks that did not meet it and the fire alarm drawings showed no release. The architect resolved it with the consultants before the permit set was issued.

What comes after the checklist?

Submit, and if your city runs an AI pre-screen, run it on the cleaned set. The difference between those city tools and the review above is covered in city AI plan review vs applicant AI plan check, and the published results are in what the Honolulu and Seattle AI permit pilots measured.

When comments come back, the guide on how to respond to plan check comments covers the response letter and the clouding that keep round two from turning into round three. For background on the category, read what AI plan review is, the AI plan review guide, and AI plan check on the building department side.