InspectMind AI logo InspectMind
ArchitecturalElectricalGeneralMechanical

Ontario Commercial Plan Review: 305 Issues Found

An anonymized Ontario commercial plan review uncovered coordination and code issues across disciplines—before permit.

305
Potential findings
5
Disciplines
2
Codes referenced
Start with $100 creditSee the findings

Enterprise & volume pricing

Key findings

Conflicting Fume Hood Quantities in Chemistry Lab 450

Architectural

Critical

Architectural plan A-706 depicts a single large fume hood (FH-1) in Chemistry Lab 450. However, the Mechanical P&ID (M-013.11) diagrams three fume hoods connected to the exhaust system for this room, which aligns with the Mechanical Controls schedule (M-801) that explicitly lists three fume hoods (Fume Hood 1, 2, and 3) for the same space.

Fire Alarm System Type Discrepancy (Single-Stage vs. Two-Stage / Horns vs. Speakers)

Electrical

Critical

Drawing E-721 explicitly details the system in its sequence of operations as a '(SINGLE STAGE F/A SYSTEM)' and the schedule symbols only list 'FIRE ALARM HORN' and 'FIRE ALARM HORN/STROBE'. However, Drawing E-720 directly contradicts this by requiring 'ONE SPEAKER ZONE PER LEVEL AND ONE SPEAKER ZONE FOR EACH STAIRWELL' (General Note 4) and...

Miele Washer Phase and Circuit Poles Mismatch

Electrical

Critical

Keynote 3 specifies a '3-PHASE 30A' connection for the Miele Washers, which requires a 3-pole circuit breaker and 3 circuit slots (e.g., 4N1-41,43,45). However, the plan tags the connections as 2-pole circuits (4N1-43,45 and 4N1-40,42), and Panel Schedule RP-CE-4N1 confirms these circuits have only 2 poles.

Physical and Code Coordination Conflicts Between Plumbing Vents (VTR) and HVAC Equipment

Plumbing

Critical

The Plumbing Plan (M-250) designates multiple Vent Thru Roof (VTR) and Acid Relief Vents (VTR (AR)) at locations that physically clash with HVAC equipment shown on the HVAC Plan (M-351). Specifically, M-250 shows VTRs directly adjacent to AHU-5 and at grid intersections B-7 and C-7. However, M-351 locates Exhaust Fans (EF-41A, EF-46A, EF-38,...

Motorized Latch Retraction (MLR) incorrectly specifies 120V direct power

Electrical

Critical

The electrical legend indicates to 'PROVIDE 120 V.' for the Motorized Latch Retraction (MLR). However, the Finish Hardware specification explicitly requires electrified hardware to operate via power supplies that provide a 'low voltage DC output' (12/24VDC). Providing 120V is only applicable to the hardware power supply unit itself, not...

Improper Sealant Specified Around Floor Sleeves in Fire Separations

Electrical

Critical

Detail 5 requires packing the inside of the steel sleeve with 'FIRE STOP MATERIAL', which indicates the floor slab is treated as a fire separation. However, it specifies 'SILICON CAULKING AROUND STEEL SLEEVE' for the exterior annular space between the concrete slab and the steel sleeve. Section 07 84 10 requires listed firestop and smoke seal...

Firestop F-Rating Conflict for Penetrations in Fire-Protected Structures

General

Critical

The drawing note in the FIRE SEPARATIONS LEGEND states that walls with a 'FIRE PROTECTED STRUCTURE RATING' shall be constructed as 0 HR fire separations with respect to penetrations. This directly contradicts the specification, which mandates that the F-Rating for firestopping must not be less than the fire-resistance rating of the construction...

Fire-Rated Exit Stairwell Doors Missing Closer Designation

Architectural

Critical

The Code Plan assigns a '45 | - | CR' tag to the doors leading into the exit stairwells. According to the 'FIRE PROTECTED CLOSURES LEGEND', the second position in this tag designates the 'CLOSURE OPERATION CONTROL DEVICE', and a '-' explicitly indicates that no closure device is specified. However, Specification Section 08 11 13 requires all...

Conflicting nomenclature for 'PT-#' paint designation

Architectural

Critical

Specification Section 09 91 23 designates 'PT#' for architectural interior finishes, specifically defining 'PT-1' as a High-Performance Epoxy and 'PT-2' as a Standard Performance Latex. However, the Code Plan Legend on drawing A-021 explicitly defines the 'PT-#' tag as '1HR INTUMESCENT PAINT'.

Casework Schedule Specifies 'Steel' Instead of 'Stainless Steel'

Architectural

Critical

The casework schedule explicitly lists multiple base cabinetry items (e.g., CW-002-3-L-A, CW-009-3-x-A) as standard 'STEEL BASE CABINETS' or 'STEEL_BASE_CABINETS'. However, Specification Section 12 35 71 mandates that all steel furniture under this section must be constructed of stainless steel.

Issue categories

Architectural
Egress, accessibility, room layouts, building code compliance, and finish specifications
Electrical
Electrical systems, panelboards, circuits, and electrical code compliance
Mechanical
HVAC systems, ventilation, exhaust, and mechanical code compliance
Plumbing
Plumbing fixtures, drainage, venting, water supply, and plumbing code compliance
General
Drawing index, coordination, and general plan review findings

Review details and suggested questions

Conflicting Fume Hood Quantities in Chemistry Lab 450
Architectural
Critical

Summary: Architectural plan A-706 depicts a single large fume hood (FH-1) in Chemistry Lab 450. However, the Mechanical P&ID (M-013.11) diagrams three fume hoods connected to the exhaust system for this room, which aligns with the Mechanical Controls schedule (M-801) that explicitly lists three fume hoods (Fume Hood 1, 2, and 3) for the same space.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Fire Alarm System Type Discrepancy (Single-Stage vs. Two-Stage / Horns vs. Speakers)
Electrical
Critical

Summary: Drawing E-721 explicitly details the system in its sequence of operations as a '(SINGLE STAGE F/A SYSTEM)' and the schedule symbols only list 'FIRE ALARM HORN' and 'FIRE ALARM HORN/STROBE'. However, Drawing E-720 directly contradicts this by requiring 'ONE SPEAKER ZONE PER LEVEL AND ONE SPEAKER ZONE FOR EACH STAIRWELL' (General Note 4) and...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Miele Washer Phase and Circuit Poles Mismatch
Electrical
Critical

Summary: Keynote 3 specifies a '3-PHASE 30A' connection for the Miele Washers, which requires a 3-pole circuit breaker and 3 circuit slots (e.g., 4N1-41,43,45). However, the plan tags the connections as 2-pole circuits (4N1-43,45 and 4N1-40,42), and Panel Schedule RP-CE-4N1 confirms these circuits have only 2 poles.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Physical and Code Coordination Conflicts Between Plumbing Vents (VTR) and HVAC Equipment
Plumbing
Critical

Summary: The Plumbing Plan (M-250) designates multiple Vent Thru Roof (VTR) and Acid Relief Vents (VTR (AR)) at locations that physically clash with HVAC equipment shown on the HVAC Plan (M-351). Specifically, M-250 shows VTRs directly adjacent to AHU-5 and at grid intersections B-7 and C-7. However, M-351 locates Exhaust Fans (EF-41A, EF-46A, EF-38,...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Motorized Latch Retraction (MLR) incorrectly specifies 120V direct power
Electrical
Critical

Summary: The electrical legend indicates to 'PROVIDE 120 V.' for the Motorized Latch Retraction (MLR). However, the Finish Hardware specification explicitly requires electrified hardware to operate via power supplies that provide a 'low voltage DC output' (12/24VDC). Providing 120V is only applicable to the hardware power supply unit itself, not...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Improper Sealant Specified Around Floor Sleeves in Fire Separations
Electrical
Critical

Summary: Detail 5 requires packing the inside of the steel sleeve with 'FIRE STOP MATERIAL', which indicates the floor slab is treated as a fire separation. However, it specifies 'SILICON CAULKING AROUND STEEL SLEEVE' for the exterior annular space between the concrete slab and the steel sleeve. Section 07 84 10 requires listed firestop and smoke seal...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Firestop F-Rating Conflict for Penetrations in Fire-Protected Structures
General
Critical

Summary: The drawing note in the FIRE SEPARATIONS LEGEND states that walls with a 'FIRE PROTECTED STRUCTURE RATING' shall be constructed as 0 HR fire separations with respect to penetrations. This directly contradicts the specification, which mandates that the F-Rating for firestopping must not be less than the fire-resistance rating of the construction...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Fire-Rated Exit Stairwell Doors Missing Closer Designation
Architectural
Critical

Summary: The Code Plan assigns a '45 | - | CR' tag to the doors leading into the exit stairwells. According to the 'FIRE PROTECTED CLOSURES LEGEND', the second position in this tag designates the 'CLOSURE OPERATION CONTROL DEVICE', and a '-' explicitly indicates that no closure device is specified. However, Specification Section 08 11 13 requires all...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Conflicting nomenclature for 'PT-#' paint designation
Architectural
Critical

Summary: Specification Section 09 91 23 designates 'PT#' for architectural interior finishes, specifically defining 'PT-1' as a High-Performance Epoxy and 'PT-2' as a Standard Performance Latex. However, the Code Plan Legend on drawing A-021 explicitly defines the 'PT-#' tag as '1HR INTUMESCENT PAINT'.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Casework Schedule Specifies 'Steel' Instead of 'Stainless Steel'
Architectural
Critical

Summary: The casework schedule explicitly lists multiple base cabinetry items (e.g., CW-002-3-L-A, CW-009-3-x-A) as standard 'STEEL BASE CABINETS' or 'STEEL_BASE_CABINETS'. However, Specification Section 12 35 71 mandates that all steel furniture under this section must be constructed of stainless steel.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Dimensional Conflict in M. WASH 416 Top Wall Layout
Architectural
Critical

Summary: The overall interior width of the top wall in M. WASH 416 is dimensioned as 4736 mm. However, the continuous run of individual dimensions along this wall (urinal area 771 mm + urinal area 942 mm + standard WC stall 925 mm + barrier-free WC stall 2165 mm, which are dimensioned to the centerlines of the partitions) sums to 4803 mm. This sum...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Hardware Groups omitted from Door Schedule and Specification
Architectural
Critical

Summary: The Door Schedule includes a column for 'HARDWARE GROUP', but it is completely blank for all doors. Furthermore, Specification Section 08 71 00 (Section 3.6 Hardware Groups) contains no hardware sets, leaving the project without any defined hardware configurations.

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Reheat Coils (RHC) Power Design Conflicts with Hydronic Specification
Electrical
Critical

Summary: The electrical drawings specify dedicated line-voltage and 3-phase power circuits (e.g., 3-pole breakers 4NB-35,37,39 and 4NB-13,15,17) connected directly to Reheat Coils (tagged RHC), which designates a design for high-amperage Electric Reheat Coils. However, the mechanical specifications explicitly require 'hot water reheat coils' and outline...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

New Air Handling Units Excluded from Systems Scope via Keynote 1
Electrical
Critical

Summary: Drawing E-450 places Keynote 1 ('AREA NOT IN SCOPE') directly onto the footprints of the newly scheduled air handling units (AHU-16A, 16B, 16C, 16D). However, Specification 23 74 14 Section 3.1.1 mandates to 'Provide outdoor modular air handling units on roof'. Furthermore, Specification 23 74 14 Section 2.2.11.4 requires the Systems...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

Packaged AHUs incorrectly shown fed through external VFDs on main power circuits
Electrical
Critical

Summary: The electrical single-line diagrams (Details 1 and 3 on E-702) show the main 125A and 150A branch power circuits for the Air Handling Units (e.g., AHU-1A, AHU-16B) feeding through external Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs). However, per mechanical specification 23 74 14, these modular AHUs are fully packaged units that require a standard main...

Why it matters:

Suggested next step:

RFI draft:

This is an anonymized example. Findings shown are excerpts for illustration. Actual project details have been modified to protect client confidentiality.

Related case studies

Similar AI plan review results by project type and discipline. Browse all case studies

First $100 covered

Want this on your next set?

Start with the first $100 covered. See cited issues in hours, no call required.

  • Evidence-linked findings
  • 5+ issues or full refund
  • Results in hours

5+ issues or full refund · No demo required

View all case studies|See pricing