The Most Common Plan Check Issues (by Discipline)
Run one real project first
Upload drawings, specs, codes, checklists, or city comments. Eligible work-email signups get a $100 first-check credit and evidence-backed issues in hours.
The most common plan check issues are cross-discipline coordination conflicts, spec-vs-drawing contradictions, missing or inconsistent details, and code-compliance gaps. Most are introduced during design revisions and copy-paste, and almost all are catchable before permit submission. Below are the recurring categories by discipline, with the review that targets each. For how many issues a typical project surfaces, see the AI plan check benchmarks.
Structural
- Load-path discontinuities and connection details that don't carry through
- Beam, column, and foundation callouts that conflict between plans and schedules
- Missing or contradictory details referenced from structural sheets
- Lateral system and code (IBC / ASCE 7) gaps
Targeted review: Structural plan check.
Architectural
- Finish, door, and window schedules that don't match the plans
- Dimension and room-area mismatches across sheets
- ADA / accessibility clearances and egress path gaps
- Wall types and ratings inconsistent between plan and details
Targeted review: Architectural drawing review.
MEP coordination
- Duct-vs-pipe and conduit-vs-structure clashes
- Electrical panel working-clearance (NEC) violations
- Equipment specs that don't match schedule callouts (tonnage, CFM, voltage)
- Plumbing risers that conflict with fixture counts or sizing
Targeted review: MEP plan review.
Civil
- Grading and drainage conflicts; invert and datum inconsistencies
- Utility coordination gaps and clashes
- SWPPP / erosion control and site-plan QA gaps
- Mismatches between civil and architectural site assumptions
Targeted review: Civil plan check.
Spec vs. drawing & code
- Materials or products specified one way on drawings, another in the spec book
- Code-compliance gaps (occupancy, egress, fire separation, accessibility)
- References to details, sections, or sheets that don't exist
- Copy-paste errors carried across revisions
Targeted review: Spec vs drawing checker.
The most expensive issues are between disciplines
Single-discipline mistakes are common, but the costliest findings usually sit between disciplines — a duct routed through a beam, a fixture that lands where the architecture says a wall is, a panel with no code clearance. They only appear when the full set is reviewed against itself, which is why a cross-discipline review beats checking each trade in isolation.
See real examples
Every InspectMind finding comes with evidence — the exact sheet and code or spec reference. Browse the case study library to see the actual issues found on real projects (from a handful on small sets to thousands on large multi-discipline submissions), or read how the review works.
Ready to run this check?
Upload PDF drawings and specs. Get flagged issues with evidence and code citations in hours.
First free check for eligible work-email signups
Run one real project first. Future checks are pay-per-run, with volume pricing available for teams.
See sample report (282 issues found)
Not sure yet? Upload a completed project you already know. See what we catch, then recheck a revised set or run the next project.
Upload all project PDFs: drawings, specs, codes, checklists, shop drawings, submittals, contracts, zoning codes, city comments. AI checks everything against everything.
187,000+ issues caught across 500+ engineering and construction firms
One issue found pays for the whole check