I hear you on the file size headaches. I once had to break a set into four separate uploads, and by the end, I was half-convinced the reviewer would just give up after the first two. I’ve tried the digital highlighter trick too—neon yellow arrows everywhere. It’s like, “Hey, look here, please!” But honestly, sometimes I wonder if it just makes them more determined to skip that page.
One time, I even added a little note in the margin (not sure if that’s technically allowed) just to point out a weird ceiling detail. No idea if it helped, but at least I felt like I’d done everything short of sending cookies with my submission. The digital process is supposed to be more efficient, but sometimes it feels like we’re just inventing new ways to make things complicated. At least with paper sets, you could stick a post-it on the page and hope for the best...
I totally get what you mean about the digital highlighters—sometimes I feel like the more I try to draw attention to something, the more it gets ignored. I’ve had reviewers miss entire sheets, even with bright arrows and notes. At least with paper, you could physically flip to the page and point right at it... Digital’s supposed to be easier, but half the time I’m just troubleshooting PDFs instead of actually working on the project. Hang in there—it’s a weird learning curve for everyone.
I hear you on the digital markup struggles. I’ve had city staff miss stuff even when I used every color in the palette and stuck virtual sticky notes everywhere. One thing that’s helped a bit: I started making a separate “read me first” sheet at the front of my PDFs, summarizing all the changes and where to find them. It’s not foolproof, but it seems to cut down on confusion. Has anyone tried embedding short video walkthroughs or screen recordings in their digital submissions? Curious if that actually helps reviewers or just adds another layer of tech headaches.
Title: Getting city approval: digital applications vs. old-school paperwork
I get the idea behind adding videos or screen recordings, but honestly, I think it just complicates things. Most of the city reviewers I’ve dealt with barely seem comfortable opening PDFs, let alone clicking through embedded videos. I tried attaching a short walkthrough once (just a basic screen capture, nothing fancy), and the response I got was basically, “We don’t open external links or video files for security reasons.” That was a waste of time and effort on my end.
The “read me first” sheet is a decent workaround, but even then, I’ve had staff miss it or ignore it. Sometimes I wonder if the old-school way—just printing everything out and highlighting changes with an actual marker—was more effective. At least then you knew they’d see it, because it was right in front of them, no clicking or scrolling required.
I get that digital is supposed to be more efficient, but in practice, it feels like it just shifts the confusion around. Plus, not everyone has the same software or knows how to use all the features. I’ve had markups disappear or not show up right depending on what program they’re using. That’s a headache I never had with paper.
Honestly, I’d rather keep things as simple as possible. The more bells and whistles you add, the more chances there are for something to get missed or not work. Maybe that’s just me being old-fashioned, but I’d rather deal with a stack of papers than a bunch of tech issues any day.
Man, you nailed it. I once sent in a digital set with all the markups and notes, only to have the reviewer print it out... in black and white. All my color-coded changes? Gone. Sometimes I think the only thing more confusing than city paperwork is city software. Give me a highlighter and a stack of paper any day—at least I know what they’re looking at.
