ChatGPT SearchOct 8, 2026
Loading…
Data as of Oct 13, 2026A topic in Government Permitting & Code Enforcement Software.
Reviewed by Dimitry Apollonsky
Mentioned in · Jul 7 – Oct 13, 2026
ChatGPT SearchOct 8, 2026
Yes. What you’re describing is concurrent electronic plan review: Fire, Planning, Building, etc. all receive the same digital plan set and can review/mark it up in parallel instead of waiting for one department to finish before the next starts.
| Platform | Concurrent departmental review | Shared markups | Permit workflow | Best fit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| e-PlanREVIEW (e-PlanSoft) | Yes | Yes | Integrates with permitting systems | Dedicated electronic plan review |
| Accela | Yes | Yes | Excellent | Full municipal permitting platform |
| OpenGov Permitting & Licensing | Yes | Yes | Excellent | Modern end-to-end permitting |
| CityView + Bluebeam | Yes | Yes | Excellent | Permitting + sophisticated PDF review |
| Bluebeam Studio | Yes | Excellent | Moderate | Best if you primarily need collaborative plan markup |
1. e-PlanREVIEW is probably the closest match to your exact requirement. Its documentation explicitly says multiple reviewers can mark up plans simultaneously, with concurrent reviews across departments/disciplines, document versioning, comment management, and aggregated correction reports.
ePlanSoft ePlanSoft Web Address: 111 Pacifica #100, Irvine, CA 92618, United States Phone: +1 949-430-6075
2. Accela is particularly compelling if you want the permitting system itself—not just plan-review software—to manage the process. Accela specifically supports Fire, Planning, Public Works and Utilities reviewing in the same shared system at the same time, with annotations and approvals tracked.
3. OpenGov has a very similar model. Its permitting platform can route complex applications to Planning, Fire, Public Works and Building concurrently, with reviewers working from shared documents and a unified comment record.
4. CityView + Bluebeam is another strong architecture. CityView handles the permit/development workflow while Bluebeam handles the actual drawing review and markup. CityView explicitly supports concurrent departmental plan reviews.
5. Bluebeam Studio alone is excellent for the collaboration/markup portion. Its Studio Sessions allow multiple departments to work on the same plans simultaneously. The City of Las Vegas, for example, used Bluebeam to connect planning, building and licensing departments for concurrent electronic review.
If your main problem is “our departments are waiting on each other”, I'd shortlist:
If this is for Honolulu/DPP, there's an especially relevant wrinkle: Honolulu already uses an ePlans electronic plan-review system, so the question may be whether your existing system can be configured/integrated for true parallel Fire/Planning/Building review rather than replacing it entirely.
Department of Planning & Permitting Department of Planning & Permitting Web Address: 650 S King St, Honolulu, HI 96813, United States Phone: +1 808-768-8000
I can also compare Accela vs. OpenGov vs. e-PlanSoft vs. Bluebeam specifically for a municipal building department—including cost, implementation time, simultaneous review, integrations, audit trails, and examples of cities using each.
Google AI ModeSep 21, 2026
Several specialized government software and collaboration platforms are designed specifically to eliminate sequential "hand-off" delays by allowing fire, planning, building, and public works departments to mark up and review the same plan set simultaneously.
The primary software options used by municipalities and agencies for concurrent, multi-department electronic plan review include:
Google AI ModeOct 13, 2026
Yes, there are specialized electronic plan review (EPR) platforms built specifically for local governments that allow fire, planning, building, public works, and engineering departments to log in and mark up the exact same document at the same time.
Moving from sequential routing (where one department waits for another to finish a paper or siloed PDF review) to parallel, concurrent reviews typically cuts permit approval times drastically.
Top digital plan review solutions that support simultaneous, multi-department collaboration include:
If you're looking to choose one, let me know:
I can help narrow down which option fits your agency's infrastructure best.
ChatGPT SearchOct 13, 2026
What tools are available for electronic plan review that enable simultaneous collaboration for our fire, planning, and building departments to help reduce our permit processing times?
If you'd like to narrow this down, tell me:
Yes. There are digital plan review platforms designed specifically for local government permitting that let fire, planning, and building reviewers work from the same set of electronic plans, add markups and comments, and coordinate reviews without passing separate PDF copies back and forth.
The key feature to look for is concurrent, multi-department plan review: reviewers can access the same plan set, add their own annotations, see other departments’ comments, and track outstanding corrections in one place. This can help reduce the delays caused by sequential reviews, duplicate comments, and applicants submitting revised plans without a clear record of what changed.
These are four strong candidates based on their documented multi-department collaboration capabilities.
1. GovWell Plan Review
(Strong fit)
Built for government permitting, with parallel routing to building, fire, planning and zoning; shared markups; code-linked comments; and version tracking. Applicants can also see review status and consolidated feedback.
Best for: A jurisdiction seeking an integrated, government-focused review workflow.
2. e-PlanSoft Collaborative Plan Review
Provides a shared workspace where building, fire, zoning and engineering reviewers can work on the same plans simultaneously, view one another's comments and reuse standard review comments.
Best for: Teams that want specialized electronic plan checking and coordinated technical reviews.
3. Accela Building
Combines concurrent departmental review with broader permitting workflows, including application intake, routing, approvals and inspections. Accela reports a Manatee County example in which single-family plan reviews dropped from seven days to three when multiple reviewers worked on the same record simultaneously.
Best for: Municipalities that want plan review connected to their wider permitting system.
4. Bluebeam Revu with Studio Sessions
Lets multiple reviewers annotate the same PDF in real time, with changes visible to everyone and a record of markup activity. It can be used as a collaborative review layer, although permitting intake, departmental routing and applicant tracking may require separate software or workflow configuration.
Best for: Departments that already use PDF-based reviews and want to improve collaboration without immediately replacing their permitting system.
Explore Bluebeam for public sector
If your goal is to shorten permit turnaround times, I would start with GovWell and e-PlanSoft, then compare Accela if you also want to modernize the broader permitting process. Bluebeam is worth evaluating if your existing process is already built around PDF markups. These are initial candidates, not a verified ranking of overall product quality.
During demonstrations, require vendors to show the following workflow live:
What permitting software does your municipality currently use, if any?
For example, Accela, CityView, Tyler Technologies, or a mostly manual process with PDFs and email. That will help determine whether you should add a collaborative review tool to your existing system or consider a more integrated replacement.
