UpCodes says its AI Plan Review flagged 180,000 potential code issues across 1,300 plan sets

UpCodes, an Austin company that sells building code research software, said on October 13, 2026, that its AI Plan Review feature has checked more than 1,300 construction plan sets since it launched in June and flagged more than 180,000 potential issues. Plan Review reads an uploaded drawing set and compares it with the codes and amendments adopted where the project will be built. UpCodes named Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, BDG Architects and Hereford Dooley Architects among the organizations now using it.

The workflow it touches is the code check on a drawing set before it goes to the building department for permit. On a contractor's side, that is the design manager on a design-build job or the preconstruction team reviewing a set before bid.

The October release says Plan Review runs on multimodal AI, meaning a model that reads the drawing images along with the text on them. That lets it read a dimension string or a door location on a floor plan together with the notes. UpCodes says each run checks against 11 million sections of locally adopted codes and amendments, with amendments from more than 6,000 jurisdictions.

Code sections checked per run

11 million

Jurisdictions with amendments

6,000+

Each issue carries

Severity, category, sheet, code section

Each issue in the output carries a severity, a category, the sheet where it appears and the code section behind it. The tool also flags places where the plans and the specifications disagree, the kind of conflict a project engineer would otherwise write up as an RFI once the job is in the field.

UpCodes calls Plan Review a first-pass analysis and says the tool does not replace review by a licensed design professional or approval by the authority having jurisdiction. Someone with code knowledge still has to read each flag and decide whether it is real. A similar tool from Buildcheck, which raised $12 million in September, has its own staff check each flag before a customer sees it.

The plan sets ranged from single-family homes to commercial and medical buildings. Missing exit signage was the most common critical finding. The life-safety group covers means of egress, fire protection and fire-resistance-rated construction. The coordination conflicts are clashes between the architectural, structural and MEP sheets.

The release gives totals and averages, and two more figures follow from them.

1. Dividing 180,000 flagged issues by 1,300 plan sets gives about 138 issues per set. With 21 of those rated critical, about 15% of what the tool flags is critical. Both inputs are "more than" figures, so treat the ratio as approximate.
2. Applying the 46% life-safety share to 21 critical issues gives about 10 critical life-safety findings per set. About two per set were coordination conflicts between disciplines, and the two groups can overlap.

The $1 million figure is an estimate. UpCodes built it from the average issue counts and its estimated cost to resolve comparable issues during design, permitting and construction. The share of flags that a reviewer confirmed as real code issues, and the time a reviewer spent working the list, are not yet public.

Capture the baseline from projects you have already permitted:

1. Pull the plan review comment letters for three to five recent projects in the same jurisdiction and of a similar building type.
2. Count the comments in each letter by category, and record the number of review rounds and the calendar days from first submission to permit issue.
3. Note which comments turned into RFIs or change orders after construction started.

During a pilot, log each flag the tool raises and whether your reviewer accepts it. The share accepted is the tool's precision, the portion of its flags that are real code issues. A low share means your reviewer spends more of the pilot clearing flags that turn out to be fine. Then, when the building department's letter arrives, count how many of its comments the tool had already flagged. That share is the tool's recall, the portion of real issues it caught.

A first step on one job is a backtest. Take a set that has already been through permit, with the comment letter in hand, ask the vendor to run it, and count how many of the building department's comments show up in the tool's list.

The Professional plan adds UpCodes' Copilot assistant, which answers code questions limited to a chosen jurisdiction and cites the code sections it used. Essentials and Professional come with a two-week free trial. The pricing page does not list a trial for Plan Review.