Loading...
Loading...
BuildCompass gives architecture teams an evidence-backed pre-permit review of plan sets — surfacing code, accessibility, and life-safety issues with page references, excerpts, and explicit clarification when drawings do not show enough.
Sample Output (Illustrative) — Results vary based on drawing completeness.
Project
Medical Office Tenant Improvement
Code Basis
IBC 2021 + ADA
Exit signs are shown with illumination and emergency power/backup notes along the required egress path.
Why flagged: Evidence on the electrical and life-safety sheets indicates illuminated exit signage with backup power at the required egress points.
Door hardware is specified at 42" AFF, within the compliant range of 34" to 48" above finished floor per ADA requirements.
Why flagged: Door schedule explicitly states lever hardware mounting height within accessible range.
Building is fully sprinklered per NFPA 13 with coverage throughout tenant space including the new exam rooms and waiting area.
Why flagged: Fire protection plan shows complete sprinkler coverage with head spacing within NFPA 13 requirements.
Main corridor width appears to be 44" clear based on dimension callout, but occupant load calculation suggests minimum 48" may be required for this occupancy.
Why flagged: Corridor width dimension found, but calculated egress width requirement based on occupant load may exceed what is shown.
The building is identified as sprinklered, but the life-safety plan and wall legend do not clearly coordinate whether the corridor is intended to be rated or non-rated under the sprinklered Group B code path.
Why flagged: The corridor wall tags and life-safety notes should clearly state the intended corridor rating strategy. Review whether the sprinklered corridor exception/code path is being relied on and make the code summary, life-safety plan, and wall-type documentation consistent.
Reception counter transaction surface appears to be at 42" AFF based on millwork detail. ADA maximum for forward reach is 48", but accessible counter portion should be at 36" max.
Why flagged: Accessible transaction counter height not clearly identified. Standard counter height may exceed accessible requirements.
Unable to verify 60" turning radius in accessible restroom. Fixture layout shown but overall room dimensions are not dimensioned on this sheet.
Why flagged: Clear floor space verification requires geometry measurement that cannot be determined from available drawing information.
Stair section shows general configuration but individual riser heights are not dimensioned. IBC limits risers to 7" maximum.
Why flagged: Riser dimension not found on stair detail. Verify riser heights comply with 4" min, 7" max requirement.
This sample demonstrates review output structure. Actual results depend on drawing content and quality.
Three steps to catch review comments earlier — before you submit.
Upload architectural PDFs. BuildCompass ingests the set, identifies relevant sheets, and pulls the labeled information reviewers look for.
We evaluate rules using what's explicitly documented in the drawings. Results are grouped as Likely Compliant, Issues to Review, or Needs Clarification when details aren't shown.
Share results internally, address gaps, and re-run checks in minutes—so you submit with fewer surprises and fewer resubmittals.
BuildCompass analyzes architectural plan sets at high fidelity and ties each finding back to what is actually shown in the drawings — with page references, excerpts, and explicit clarification when documentation is incomplete.
Every flagged item is tied back to drawing content so teams can review what was found instead of relying on black-box output.
BuildCompass separates likely issues from missing or unclear documentation, helping teams avoid false confidence and focus follow-up where it matters.
Designed for code, accessibility, and life-safety review workflows — not generic document OCR.
Illustrative view of high-fidelity plan analysis
Standard on all Professional plans to support high-fidelity compliance review at scale.
Uploaded plan sets are never used to train AI. They are processed only to generate your requested review output and are deleted after processing.
Practical outcomes for architecture teams reviewing plan sets as they evolve — and before submission.
Surface likely code issues and missing information during documentation, before they turn into permit comments, RFIs, or redesign.
Give project leads and technical reviewers a shared view of findings so issues are resolved once, not passed around piecemeal.
BuildCompass flags uncertainty explicitly, helping teams separate likely issues from documentation gaps instead of reviewing from assumptions.
Enter permit review with a clearer picture of what's documented, what's unresolved, and what still needs follow-up.
BuildCompass doesn't replace professional judgment — it helps teams apply it earlier.