Dining outdoor air is designed for 33 people where the code density gives 100.
The architectural, demolition and MEP sheets of a restaurant fit-out leave kitchen exhaust, ventilation and several connections undefined before construction.
Restaurant fit-out ventilation
A restaurant tenant fit-out set: architectural, demolition, electrical, mechanical and plumbing sheets with equipment schedules, life safety notes and accessibility details.
What the review compared
The review read the architectural, demolition, electrical, mechanical and plumbing sheets for a restaurant fit-out with their equipment schedules, life safety notes and accessibility details. Its instructions asked for constructability and preconstruction risks: trade coordination, missing dimensions or details, and sequencing.
Where the set is incomplete
The dishwasher hood and the unhooded cooking appliances have no exhaust, and dining outdoor air is designed for far fewer people than the code density gives. Exit lighting sits on switched circuits, the accessible bar lacks toe space, and a wall to be demolished carries services with no reroute shown.
What to verify next
The engineers should complete the exhaust and outdoor air design, and the architect the bar detail, before trades are bought. Code checking was enabled; examples that cite a requirement follow the codes the review cited, and every example is a question for the responsible designers.
7 selected examples from the review
Seven distinct findings, summarized for professional verification.
Exit and emergency lights on timer circuits
The plan puts exit signs and emergency lights on timer-controlled circuits the panel lists as spaces.
Why it matters: Life safety notes require a dedicated locked-on circuit.
What to check: Add that circuit and breaker.
ElectricalOutdoor air sized for a third of the diners
The air table designs dining outdoor air for 33 people where the code density gives 100.
Why it matters: The existing unit may be too small.
What to check: Recalculate and resize or add outdoor air.
MechanicalDishwasher hood has no exhaust
A dishwasher hood is scheduled, but the mechanical sheets give it no airflow, duct or fan.
Why it matters: Expect an RFI and a change order.
What to check: Add airflow, duct route and fan.
Mechanical · ElectricalUnhooded cooking appliances have no exhaust
Kitchen and bar appliances sit outside any hood, and neither room has designed exhaust.
Why it matters: Fans and ducts would be added above finished ceilings.
What to check: Add exhaust sized to the mechanical code.
Mechanical · ElectricalAccessible bar seats lack toe space
The accessible bar detail leaves less toe clearance than the accessibility standard requires.
Why it matters: That part of the bar would be rebuilt.
What to check: Revise the detail at the accessible seats.
ArchitecturalHot water run to the bar sinks is too long
The bar sinks are fed from a distant heater, beyond the energy code’s pipe volume limit.
Why it matters: Inspection may reject the piping.
What to check: Add a local heater or recirculation.
Plumbing · ElectricalDemolished wall carries live services
Demolition removes a wall a field note says holds fire alarm, power and water lines.
Why it matters: Rerouting is unpriced and sequencing waits.
What to check: Show which lines are capped or rerouted.
Architectural · Electrical · PlumbingReview scope and priorities
The review organized the questions by severity, discipline, and source context so the responsible designers could investigate them.
Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, Architectural, and Fire protection
Check the findings with the responsible discipline designers.
High, Medium, and Low priorities
Selected examples retain their assigned priority.
Drawing coordination and code checking
Code checking was enabled alongside the review of plans, schedules, details, and notes.
Findings connected to their source context
Groundbook links each finding to the sheets it came from so the responsible designer can confirm or dismiss it.
Potential impacts describe the issue type. They are not verified outcomes from this project.
Follow the information across the complete set
Groundbook reads the documents you upload and reports where they disagree, where a reference does not resolve, and where a required value is absent.
See how a full set is reviewed or how interfaces are coordinated.
- 1Map the complete set
Identify sheets, disciplines, details, schedules, and notes.
- 2Connect repeated information
Follow tags, references, and requirements wherever they reappear.
- 3Check drawings and code references
Read the detected code references alongside the drawing evidence.
- 4Return findings for verification
Organize potential issues by severity, discipline, and supporting context.
Questions for professional verification
The output supports the responsible designers as they review the source documents and decide what needs to change.
What this result means
- Groundbook surfaced potential issues for professional review.
- Severity helps prioritize which questions to investigate.
- The findings describe coordination, completeness, and code-reference questions in the uploaded set.
- Each finding includes source context for verification.
What it does not mean
- Every potential finding is a confirmed error or violation.
- The project was unsafe, unbuildable, or ultimately noncompliant.
- Groundbook replaced the responsible professionals or authority.
- A correction was made, or any cost or delay was avoided.
About this review
Is this a real review?
Based on a Groundbook review completed in November 2026. Findings are summarized.
Are these findings confirmed defects?
No. Each one is a potential issue for the responsible designer to verify against the source documents. Groundbook reports what the documents say and where they disagree. It does not make design decisions, certify compliance, or replace the authority having jurisdiction.
How long did the review take?
Turnaround runs from 20 minutes to 24 hours depending on project size.
Which codes were checked?
Code checking was enabled for this review. Groundbook detects the codes a set references, reads the codes and amendments that governments publish online, and uses licensed codes only where a license allows it.
Can I see a full report?
Yes. The sample plan review report shows all 79 findings from one review of a drawing set and its specifications, with the cited excerpts.
Continue from the case study
Explore the source-linked examples in the sample plan review report, or browse every published case study.
Give the next drawing set a connected first pass
Upload the project, choose the checks that matter, and receive structured potential findings with source context.