AI building code review

Trace the requirement to the drawing

Find potential mismatches between the design documents and the code references included in your review. See the affected drawing and supporting requirements together, then verify the application with the responsible reviewer.

Where to focus

What to bring into the review

Opening protection

Compare the door schedule with the location, wall separation, and referenced opening requirements. Check the actual condition and applicable exceptions before deciding a rating is missing.

Design criteria

Follow requirements such as guard and handrail design loads from notes to the details that rely on them. Ask the responsible engineer to confirm the governing criteria.

Mechanical installation conditions

Review the relationship between equipment locations, support details, exhaust classification, and the requirements supplied for the project.

Incomplete reference chains

Investigate details that point to general notes without carrying the needed requirement through the set. Keep the source edition and local amendments visible in the review record.

Inside Groundbook

Read the finding with its sources

This hotel example places a door-rating finding beside the affected plan and linked drawing and code references. The reviewer can examine the location and the cited requirement before deciding what needs to change.

A hotel door-rating finding beside its highlighted plan and linked drawing and code references in Groundbook.
A door-rating finding from the hotel review, shown beside its drawing and supporting references.Start for free

A practical workflow

From the first pass to a decision

  1. Confirm the governing references

    Identify the jurisdiction, adopted editions, local amendments, occupancy, and relevant project conditions. Include the reference PDFs needed for the review.

  2. Check the document relationship

    Open the schedule, plan, detail, and cited requirement. Confirm that they describe the same condition and that the cited section applies.

  3. Document the design decision

    Have the responsible professional accept, reject, or refine the finding. Coordinate any correction across every affected drawing and specification.

From a published project review

Door schedule and separation requirements disagree

Sleeping-unit entry doors opening into an interior lobby were marked unrated, while the surrounding separation called for protected openings.

Read the finding

Define the scope with your team

Groundbook flags potential issues; it does not certify compliance or issue permits. Model codes, adopted editions, and local amendments can differ. The project’s qualified reviewers must verify applicability, exceptions, and the final design decision.

ICC code adoption resources

Questions, answered

FAQs

Can Groundbook check my local building codes and amendments?

Yes. Groundbook detects the codes the drawings cite and has many in its library. For a local code or amendment it does not have, upload the code PDF or add a link to the public code page. Save the PDF once to reuse it on future projects; it stays private to your account.

Does Groundbook certify that a design complies with code?

No. It provides potential findings with supporting document references for a reviewer to investigate. Compliance determinations and required approvals remain with the responsible professionals and authorities.

Which code edition should we use?

Use the edition and amendments applicable to the project and jurisdiction, confirmed by the project team or relevant authority. A model code’s publication date alone does not establish which requirements govern a project.

Can a cited code section still be wrong for the project?

Yes. A reference may be real but inapplicable because of occupancy, construction type, scope, an exception, or a local amendment. Review the complete context before accepting a code-related finding.

Bring your next set into focus

Set up a review or talk through your project with our team.

Product screenshot