Worked Examples
End-to-end examples showing how a submittal moves from intake through automated review to a correction letter.
- Used by Liva AI
- Used by Blueprint Review
- Referenced by EIE
Each example uses a real-world submittal shape with identifying details removed. Use them to calibrate expectations before enabling automated review in production.
Example: residential deck, 320 sq ft
| Check | Result | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Guardrail height ≥ 42 in | Pass | CRC R312.1.2 |
| Guard opening < 4 in sphere | Fail — 5 in spacing shown | CRC R312.1.3 |
| Footing depth ≥ 12 in below grade | Advisory — detail not dimensioned | CRC R403.1.4 |
| Ledger attachment detail | Pass | CRC R507.9 |
Sheet A-101 with findings overlay
Findings are anchored to sheet coordinates so reviewers can verify each item in context.
Related documents
Example Findings
Representative findings with severity, evidence, and the provision each cites.
Blueprint Submittal Standards
Drawing, layering, scale, and titleblock standards that allow automated plan review to parse a submittal reliably.
Residential Code Guidance
Summarized residential guidance keyed to 2025 California Residential Code (CRC), with typical issues and AI interpretation rules. This page does not reproduce code text.