Permit Reform: One File. One Answer. One Clock.

Krishna Raisinghani

Sep 18

3 min read

Updated: Oct 2

A permit shouldn't feel like a scavenger hunt through City Hall.

I've heard enough examples from residents and businesses to think we can make the process clearer and more predictable.

My approach is pretty simple: One file. One answer. One clock.

One File

For a complex application, there should be one accountable City contact helping coordinate the file.

That doesn't mean one person does every technical review.

Building, planning, engineering, fire and other departments still need to do their jobs.

But an applicant shouldn't have to understand the City's organizational chart just to figure out what's happening.

Someone should own the coordination:

Where's the file?
What is outstanding?
Who has the next step?
And what needs to happen to move it forward?

One Answer

Wherever possible, City departments should review an application at the same time, rather than one after another.

Then comments should come back in one coordinated response.

The City already uses coordinated feedback in parts of its development process. I'd push to make that discipline more consistent and measurable across the system.

The goal is to reduce situations where an applicant responds to one set of comments, only to receive another round from somewhere else weeks later.

That creates delay for everybody.

One Clock

Every major permit stream should have a clear service standard.

The City currently publishes average processing times of four to five months for home improvements, six months for a business-space renovation, and 11 to 12 months for new construction. Land-use approvals can take longer depending on their complexity.

I'd move from averages toward clearer service targets.

For qualifying simple, low-risk applications, my starting point would be:

Five business days: confirm whether the application is complete.
30 days: target a decision.

More complex applications need different timelines.

But every stream should have a clock.

And the clock needs to be fair.

Once a complete application is submitted, the City clock starts.

If City staff are reviewing it, the City's time is running. If staff need substantive revisions from the applicant, show that separately.

Once a complete response comes back, the City clock resumes, so everyone can see where the time is actually going.

Show Where the File Is

I'd connect those service standards to a much better public application tracker.

For a major application, you should be able to see something like:

RECEIVED → COMPLETE → UNDER REVIEW → REVISIONS → FINAL REVIEW → DECISION

And underneath:

current stage
last meaningful action
who has the next action
next expected milestone
City review time
applicant response time

The City already provides some permit-status information through CityServe and publishes active development applications. I'd build on that foundation.