Find slope violations, reach range problems, turning radius issues, and path of travel conflicts. Results in days, not weeks.
Free check, no card needed · Watch the 2-minute demo
Best for: Architects, Plan reviewers, Owners, Accessibility consultants.
ADA accessibility requirements ensure buildings are accessible to people with disabilities. One violation can cause significant rework costs and legal liability.
ADA violations are especially problematic because they can result in lawsuits and require complete redesign of affected areas.
Common issues that lead to costly rework:
AI reviews drawings for ADA compliance to identify issues that manual review might miss.
606
issue-title matches
1.5% of 40,401 structured public records
This disclosed pattern covers explicit ADA, accessibility, wheelchair, maneuvering-clearance, grab-bar, reach-range, and curb-ramp terms.
Counts use disclosed, case-insensitive matching on published issue titles. Topic groups overlap and describe this sample; they are not industry-wide error rates.
Review the full dataset and methodologyIn-depth guide
Most accessibility problems are not missing knowledge. Designers know the 60 in. turning circle and the 1:12 ramp. The errors come from coordination: a turning space drawn on the enlarged plan that a door swing or casework later eats into, a corridor that meets clear width on the floor plan but not after a drinking fountain is added, or a counter height that differs between the elevation and the millwork detail. Once built, these are demolition, not redlines.
The references below are to the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Many jurisdictions enforce ICC A117.1 through the building code instead, with similar but not identical dimensions. If yours does, upload that standard and it is included in the review.
Section 304 allows either a 60 in. diameter circle or a T-shaped space within a 60 in. square. On drawings, the common failures are:
Section 403.5.1 sets a 36 in. minimum clear width for walking surfaces on an accessible route, which may narrow to 32 in. for a length of 24 in. or less. Clear width is measured to the face of obstructions, not to the wall centerline. Things that typically reduce it:
Running slope over 1:20 makes a walking surface a ramp, and cross slope over 1:48 is not allowed. The checker compares slopes and spot elevations on site and civil sheets against those limits and the ramp requirements in Section 405.
Unobstructed forward and side reach both fall between 15 in. minimum and 48 in. maximum above the floor. Obstructed reaches over counters or cabinets lower the high limit. Reach problems are easy to miss because the controls are often specified on different sheets from the elevations:
The accessible route has to connect parking, passenger loading, and public sidewalks to the entrance. The checker looks for accessible parking with no access aisle shown, aisles on slopes steeper than allowed, and routes that cross curbs without a curb ramp. Site work is cross-checked with the civil checker.
Each finding names the sheets, the dimension, and the requirement. An illustrative example:
Enlarged plan A-401 shows a 60 in. turning circle in Toilet 114. Interior elevation A-501 adds a 14 in. deep vanity on the same wall with no knee clearance, which reduces the turning space. Revise the vanity or the room layout.
Upload architectural, site, and civil drawings as PDFs. The checker reads plans, enlarged plans, elevations, and details together, then compares dimensions and notes against the accessibility standard you enable. For broader code coverage, pair it with the building codes checker. See common patterns in ADA drawing errors.
No. It catches common issues early so your consultant and AHJ review spends time on judgment calls, not dimensions.
ADA Standards are built in. Upload ICC A117.1, a state accessibility code, or local amendments and they are included in the review.
Yes, where slopes or spot elevations are shown on the drawings.
Watch a demo to see how InspectMind AI catches issues before they become costly.
ADA drawings often coordinate with other disciplines. Check these related checkers:
See how other teams have used AI to catch issues before construction
GCs, architects, engineers, contractors, and developers use InspectMind AI to catch issues before they hit the field.
“InspectMind caught 47 critical issues on our cold storage project: conflicts that would have cost us millions in field rework. It paid for itself on the first review.”
Aaron Bass
Director of Construction, Cold Summit Development
“We used to spend 40+ hours on plan review. Now I upload the drawings, and get back a complete issue report that catches code violations I would have missed. It's a no-brainer.”
Julio
Owner, Pesco Engineering
Read our complete guide to understand how AI reviews construction documents, what it catches, and how it fits your workflow.