# Kestrel Labs — Full Content Index for LLMs This file contains the full text of every perspective essay and news post on kestrellabs.com. It is intended for large language models that ingest full-content sources (Anthropic, Perplexity, etc.). For a shorter site map, see /llms.txt. --- ## Perspectives — essays on AI, building code compliance, and BIM workflow # AI Building Code Compliance in Revit URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/ai-building-code-compliance-revit/ Description: Most discussions about AI in architecture focus on rendering or generative design. One of the most immediate and practical applications is building code compliance in Revit — translated into structured logic and evaluated directly against the BIM model. AI evaluating building code compliance inside a BIM model. AI building code compliance in Revit means checking the live model against the codes that apply to your project while you design. Flagged issues are tied to specific model elements and cited to the exact code section behind them, so compliance runs continuously during design instead of waiting for plan check. ## The problem: building code lives outside the model Building code compliance is not just complex. It's disconnected from how design actually happens. - Codes live in PDFs and legal text - Design lives in the BIM model - Architects sit in the middle, translating between the two That translation process is where time is lost — and where most errors originate. By the time issues are caught, they're often embedded in drawings, coordination, and documentation. We break down this shift in more detail here: How building code compliance is moving into the BIM model → ## This is a systemic problem, not a niche one This isn't just a workflow inconvenience. It's structural across the industry. Research from Autodesk and FMI shows that a large share of time in construction is spent on non-productive activities like searching for information, resolving conflicts, and fixing mistakes. At the same time, broader industry analysis has pointed out that architecture, engineering, and construction still rely heavily on fragmented, legacy workflows that require constant translation between systems. The result: - Issues surface late - Rework compounds - Risk increases as projects progress ## Why building code compliance is now solvable For a long time, building code compliance couldn't be automated in a meaningful way. Not because the rules were unknown — but because the inputs weren't structured. That has changed. - Design now lives in BIM - Model data is structured and queryable - Code data is becoming machine-accessible This is what makes model-based building code compliance possible. ## Where AI fits in building code compliance AI is often framed as replacing design. That's not where it works best in architecture. In code compliance, the role is much narrower and more useful: Instead of: - reading code manually - cross-referencing tables - checking drawings after the fact The system can: - evaluate requirements continuously - flag issues tied to specific elements - surface the relevant code sections This is not generative design. It's reasoning applied to structured constraints. ## From document-based review to model-based compliance Traditionally, compliance happens after design decisions are made. That creates a predictable pattern: - late discovery - expensive fixes - coordination overhead Model-based compliance changes when that check runs. Instead of reviewing compliance at the end, teams evaluate it during design. The difference is not incremental. It changes how risk is managed. ## What changes when compliance happens during design When compliance runs during design: - issues surface earlier - rework is reduced - teams don't rely on plan check to catch problems The impact is not just speed. It's that compliance becomes part of the design process itself. ## Where Kestrel fits Kestrel is built around this approach. It translates licensed building code data into structured logic that runs directly inside the Revit model, with every issue tied to a specific element and cited to a code section. If you're evaluating tools in this space, we break down the current landscape here: What tools exist for building code compliance in Revit → For the broader industry argument behind this — why structured, machine-readable code is the missing data layer in AEC — see: The compliance data layer for the built environment → If you want to see how this works in your own model: Schedule a demo → --- # AI Building Code Compliance Tools, Compared URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/ai-building-code-compliance-tools-compared/ Description: How AI building code compliance tools differ — code research and lookup, drawing-set and plan review, and model-native compliance during design. Where each fits in the workflow, and where Kestrel sits. Generation 01 [ earlier gen ] ### Code research Ask a code question, get a cited answer. Genuinely useful — for research. It tells you what the code says; it doesn’t check whether your design meets it. **Kestrel Compliance Chat** does this too, grounded in your actual project, model, and jurisdiction. Find and interpret the rule. --- # Catch Building Code Compliance Issues During Design URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/catch-building-code-compliance-issues-during-design/ Description: Most building code compliance issues are discovered at plan check — when they are expensive to fix and delay permitting. How model-based compliance catches them during design instead, inside the Revit model. ## What building code compliance looks like during design Most building code compliance issues are discovered at plan check — when they are expensive to fix and delay permitting. By that point, the design is already set. Fixing one issue means reworking multiple systems, redrawing sheets, and going back through coordination. A different approach is emerging. This approach — known as model-based building code compliance — evaluates code requirements directly inside the BIM model during design. ## How building code compliance works inside the model Instead of reviewing drawings after the fact, teams run building code compliance checks directly inside Revit. Kestrel translates building code, local amendments, and regulatory requirements into structured logic that runs against the model. This is made possible by building code compliance software for Revit that operates inside the design environment. Each check: - evaluates the model against applicable code requirements - flags issues tied to specific elements - cites the exact code section behind each violation Checks run in seconds and can be repeated continuously throughout design. Code compliance issues flagged inside the Revit model during design. ## What changes when compliance moves into the model A compliance check that used to take hours of manual review now takes seconds. More importantly, it happens earlier. Instead of discovering issues at plan check, teams surface them during design development — when they are still easy to fix. This shift — from checking after drawings are complete to evaluating compliance continuously — is part of a broader move toward model-based building code compliance in BIM. ## How this compares to traditional workflows Most compliance workflows still rely on: - manual interpretation of code - PDF-based plan review - late-stage QA/QC These approaches catch issues — but only after design decisions are locked. Today, teams are starting to move toward tools that check compliance directly in the model. ## Why this matters When compliance runs during design: - issues surface earlier - rework is reduced - permitting timelines become more predictable Instead of reacting to plan check comments, teams design with compliance in mind from the start. That changes how risk is managed across the project. ## Where this is going BIM became the system of record for design over the last two decades. Compliance is the last major workflow that hasn't fully followed it into the model. The tools — and the underlying code data, built on licensed sources including International Code Council (ICC) data — now exist to make that shift possible. Kestrel is part of a new category of model-side tools reshaping how compliance gets handled, and has already been recognized in programs like the Trimble 0–60 Challenge. Kestrel is building that compliance layer — translating building code into structured logic that runs directly inside the Revit model. If you want to see how this works in your own model: Schedule a demo → --- # Citations, Not Summaries: What AI for Code Has to Get Right URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/citations-not-summaries-ai-for-code/ Description: Building code compliance is not a chatbot problem. Every flagged issue has to point back to the exact section, paragraph, and adopted amendment — not a summary. Why that constraint is what makes the system useful. The easy version of AI for building code is a chatbot that reads the codebook and answers questions in plain language. It is fluent. It is fast. It is almost always wrong in the ways that matter. The harder version is a system that surfaces issues with a citation a reviewer can verify. That is the system architects need. ## Why the chatbot shape is wrong for the problem Building code is not advisory. It is the legal basis a project is permitted against. An answer that paraphrases the code shifts the work of verification onto the person reading the answer — at a moment when they are designing, not auditing. Summaries also hide their failure modes. A summary that is wrong by one occupancy class, one threshold, or one exception reads exactly the same as a summary that is right. The architect has no signal. ## What a real citation looks like For a flagged issue to be useful, the citation has to be specific enough that a reviewer can open the codebook and verify it without help. That means, at minimum: - The adopted code edition (IBC 2021, CBC 2022, etc.) - The chapter, section, and paragraph or table - The specific element in the model the issue is tied to - The values the system used to reach the conclusion "Egress capacity is insufficient" is not a citation. "IBC 2021 Table 1004.5, applied to a Group B occupancy at 150 sf/occupant for the 2,400 sf assembly area shown on Level 02, requires 16 occupant capacity at this exit" is a citation. ## The local amendment layer Every jurisdiction adopts the model code with modifications. Sometimes a single section is struck. Sometimes a whole chapter is replaced. Sometimes a state amendment is overridden by a city amendment. A useful citation has to surface both layers. The model code section that applies, and the local amendment — if any — that modifies it. Without that layering, the architect cannot tell whether they are looking at the rule that actually governs the project. ## What this constraint rules out Once "every issue has to cite a verifiable source" is a hard requirement, a lot of tempting shortcuts stop being acceptable — anything that paraphrases the code, blends it into a summary, or otherwise can't show its work against the source text. The bar is simple to state and hard to meet: the adopted code is the source of truth, and every result has to trace back to it. ## Auditability is the product Architects do not want to be told they are out of compliance. They want to be able to confirm that a flagged issue is real, decide how to resolve it, and stand behind that decision with a stamped set. That means every issue the system surfaces has to be defensible — to a colleague, to a client, to a plan reviewer. The citation is what makes that possible. "The system told me" is not a defense. "Here is the section, here is the value, here is the element" is. ## What a trustworthy result requires For a flagged issue to be worth acting on, it has to: - Point to the exact code section it came from, in the adopted edition - Reflect the local amendments that actually apply to your project - Show the values behind the conclusion, not just a pass or fail - Stand on its own, without asking you to take our word for it None of that comes for free from a model that answers questions in plain language. It's a high bar — and it's the one we hold every result to. ## Where we landed Kestrel is built to clear that bar. Every flagged issue comes back tied to the element that triggered it and cited to the code section that governs it — checked against the licensed code itself, not a summary of it. The result is something you can verify, not just trust. We wrote about the underlying approach here: AI building code compliance in Revit → If you want to see what cited issues look like on your own model: Schedule a demo → --- # The Compliance Data Layer for the Built Environment URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/compliance-data-layer-built-environment/ Description: Structured, machine-readable building code is infrastructure the AEC industry has been missing. What unlocks once it exists — and why the first application is compliance, not the only one. Every industry that runs on rules eventually turns those rules into data. Finance did it with GAAP and IFRS. Aviation did it with the FARs. Healthcare did it with ICD and CPT. Tax code is published as machine-readable regulation in dozens of countries. Building code has not done this. Not because anyone decided against it — because nothing forced it. ## What other industries have that AEC doesn't The pattern in other regulated industries is consistent: - The rules exist as legal text - The rules *also* exist as a structured, queryable representation - Software is built on top of the structured layer, not the legal text - Audit trails point back to the legal text when needed In construction and design, only the first one is true. Every tool that interprets the code has to do its own interpretation, every time. ## Why building code never got structured Three reasons it stayed text: - Code is published by hundreds of jurisdictions, each on their own cycle - Code is written for human interpretation, not for machine evaluation - The buyer for a structured version was never large enough to fund building it The first two are still true. The third one is changing. Architecture firms and AHJs both want what the structured layer enables, and the data and tooling are finally there to build it. ## What the absence costs the industry Without a structured code layer: - Every firm does the same code interpretation, in parallel, on every project - Plan check is a backstop instead of a verification - AHJs operate without the tooling other regulators take for granted - Each cycle of code adoption requires the same hand-translation across thousands of practices The cost shows up as schedule slip, rework, and risk priced into fees. It does not show up as a line item, which is part of why it has taken so long to address. ## What changes when the layer exists Once code is available as structured data, several things start working differently: - Compliance evaluation runs against the model in real time - Local amendments can be layered cleanly on top of the model code - Updates propagate without re-translation by every consumer - Issues carry citations that any reviewer can verify None of this is novel. It is what regulated industries with a data layer have looked like for decades. ## Compliance is the first application, not the only one Compliance is the most acute version of the problem, which is why it is the first thing the layer gets used for. It is not the only one. Once a structured code layer exists, it becomes the substrate for: - Feasibility studies that can evaluate envelope and program options against code from the start - Plan review tooling for AHJs that doesn't require interpreting the same code twice - Estimating systems that understand which assemblies are admissible in a jurisdiction - Lifecycle and renovation work that can reason about what a building was permitted to be Each of those uses the same underlying layer. ## What this is, what it isn't A compliance data layer is not a single product. It is infrastructure — the kind of thing that is most useful when it is boring and dependable. It is not a replacement for code officials, code consultants, or the architect's judgment. The same way that GAAP did not replace accountants. The structured layer is what makes their work scale. ## Where Kestrel sits Kestrel is building this layer for the built environment and using it first for the place the gap is most painful: compliance during design. Every essay in this series is one angle on the same shift. Related reading: - Why building code compliance is still manual - AI building code compliance in Revit - Citations, not summaries: what AI for code has to get right If you want to see how this looks on a real project: Schedule a demo → --- # Why Compliance During Design Beats Plan Check Rework URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/compliance-during-design-beats-plan-check-rework/ Description: Catching a code issue at plan check is technically catching it. But the cost of fixing it once design decisions are set and documentation is in flight is an order of magnitude higher than catching it during design. Most firms still treat building code compliance as something that happens at the end of design. Plan check finds the issues. The team responds. The project moves on. The cost of that pattern is hidden — until you measure it. ## Two places to catch issues On any given project, a code issue can be caught in one of two places: - During design, while the model is still moving - At plan check, after the set is sealed and submitted Either path identifies the issue. They are not equivalent. ## What plan check actually catches Plan check is good at catching issues that survive the team's own review. It is not designed to catch them early. By the time a set arrives at the AHJ: - Layouts are fixed - Consultant drawings are coordinated against them - Specifications reference specific assemblies - The project schedule is anchored to a submission date A single comment on egress, occupancy, or accessibility at this stage rarely changes one drawing. It changes a layout, then a structural grid, then a stair, then the documents that reference them. ## The hidden cost of late issues Industry research on AEC rework is consistent: the cost of fixing an issue grows roughly an order of magnitude with each phase it survives. A clearance question caught at SD is a comment. The same question caught in CDs is a coordination pass across multiple disciplines. Caught at plan check, it can hold a permit. The cost is not only in hours. It is in: - Carry costs on land or construction loans waiting for permit - Schedule slip that cascades into other trades - Fee erosion from unbudgeted revision cycles - Trust with the client when a date slides ## What 'during design' actually looks like Moving compliance into the design phase does not mean reading more code earlier. It means letting the model itself surface the issues as it is being built. In practice: - Egress paths are evaluated against occupant loads as the plan changes - Accessibility clearances are checked at every fixture, not just at the end - Wall, floor, and roof assemblies are checked against the energy code as they are selected - Each flagged issue is tied to the specific element that caused it The team is still designing. The model is doing the cross-reference. ## What changes for the team The shift is less about new work and more about where existing work happens. Senior staff spend less time interpreting code on issues a junior could resolve with the right reference. Junior staff stop guessing. Principals review fewer corrections sets. PMs hold fewer emergency standups two weeks before permit. The hardest calls — the ones that require judgment about intent, precedent, and AHJ relationships — still need a person. The mechanical ones stop reaching that person. ## What changes for the project Submission becomes the place where compliance gets confirmed, not the place where it gets discovered. The corrections set that used to define the weeks after submission shrinks. In several of the projects we have watched run this way, the first-pass corrections list moved from the typical dozens to the single digits — and in a few cases to zero. The submission date and the construction-start date move closer together. That is the line that matters to the client. ## Where this fits None of this requires architects to stop being architects. It requires a system that can evaluate building code against the model continuously, in the background, without becoming another tool the team has to babysit. We wrote about what that looks like here: AI building code compliance in Revit → And the broader argument for why this has stayed manual for so long: Why building code compliance is still manual → If you want to see how it changes a real project: Schedule a demo → --- # How Building Code Compliance Is Moving Into the BIM Model URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/how-building-code-compliance-is-moving-into-the-bim-model/ Description: For most of architectural practice, building code compliance has lived outside the model. That is changing. Why model-based compliance is now possible — and what it means for the whole team. Compliance checks running inside the BIM model during design development. Building code compliance is moving into the BIM model through a new category of model-based checking tools. Instead of reviewing exported PDF drawing sets at plan check, these tools evaluate the live model against applicable code requirements during design, so issues surface while they are still inexpensive to change. ## The shift that's already happening In a 2026 survey of the AEC QA/QC landscape, Slantis identified a new class of tools changing how compliance gets handled. That's the shift. Compliance moving from a downstream check to a continuous part of the design process — what we describe as model-based building code compliance — running inside the Revit model, not alongside it. It's possible now because BIM made it possible. When design lives in a structured model, compliance can be evaluated against that structure directly. Building code stops being a document to interpret and becomes structured logic that can be evaluated directly against the BIM model. This is now being enabled by building code compliance software for Revit that runs directly in the design environment. ## What this means in practice A building code compliance check that used to take hours of manual cross-referencing now takes about 30 seconds with a Revit code compliance tool. Every flagged issue is tied to the exact element in the model and cited to a specific code section. Teams run checks continuously — after a design review, before a client meeting, while testing options — instead of saving it for the end. The result isn't just faster compliance. It's a different relationship with risk. Issues that would have surfaced at plan check surface during design development, when fixing them is still cheap. ## Why it matters for the whole team The conversation about compliance tooling usually centers on the architect doing the work. But the shift to in-model compliance changes things for the whole team. Project managers can track compliance status across projects without opening a BIM file. Principals can see where a set stands before it goes out. Everyone works from the same picture instead of waiting on a redline. That visibility has always been missing. A compliance problem discovered at plan check is visible to everyone immediately. A compliance problem that could have been caught in design development is invisible until it isn't. ## Where this is going BIM became the system of record for design over the last two decades. Compliance is the last major workflow that hasn't followed it into the model. The tools and the underlying code data — built on licensed sources, including International Code Council (ICC) data — now exist to change that. If you're exploring how different approaches compare, we break down the current landscape of tools for building code compliance in Revit. Kestrel is building that compliance layer — translating building code into structured logic that runs directly inside the Revit model. Related reading: how this changes the work in practice in catch building code compliance issues during design, and the case for moving the check earlier in why compliance during design beats plan check rework. If you want to see this on your own project: Schedule a demo → --- # Building Compliance Knowledge Base URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/knowledge-base/ Description: An entity graph of building compliance: fundamentals, digital compliance concepts, technology, and permitting. Definitions, relationships, common questions, and primary sources for every concept. ### Building code [01.01] Also called: construction code · adopted code Narrower: IBC (International Building Code) · Local amendments · Egress (means of egress) · Fire-resistance rating Full entry → Architects Owners & developers Definition The body of legal requirements governing how buildings must be designed and constructed, covering life safety, egress, fire protection, accessibility, structure, and energy. In the United States, most jurisdictions adopt model codes such as the IBC and then modify them with local amendments. Why it matters In practice there is no single "the code." Every project answers to a specific stack: a model code, an edition year, and the local changes layered on top. Establishing that stack is the first step of any code analysis, manual or automated. Often confused with - Zoning code. Zoning governs what may be built where (use, density, setbacks); the building code governs how the building itself must perform. A project must satisfy both, usually through different review processes. Common question Is the building code the same everywhere? No. Model codes like the IBC provide the common base, but each jurisdiction adopts its own edition on its own schedule and amends it locally. Compliance is always relative to one specific jurisdiction’s stack. Enables: Machine-readable building codes Related: IBC (International Building Code) Local amendments Jurisdiction Sources & reading: ICC — International Codes --- # The 80/20 of Building Code Compliance URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/the-80-20-of-building-code-compliance/ Description: 80% of building code compliance is black and white. The other 20% requires interpretation, and that is where design lives. Kestrel Chief Industry Officer Marissa Ritchen, a licensed architect, on why constraints understood early are tools, not roadblocks. No one gets into architecture with a passion for code compliance. If you did, no offense, we want your warm and inclusive perspective. But for the rest of us, the code arrived in our lives as a threat. ## The scare I was in architecture school through the Great Recession, and our professional practice classes had a particular flavor: alumni coming back to warn us. You are going to have a bad time. You are going to do ADA diagrams and stair details. You will never design. It will crush your soul. We were all quite a ways down the line by then, so it was slightly too late to turn back, but the message landed. Code compliance was the looming spectre waiting on the other side of graduation, the thing that ruins your vision after you have drawn it. I think that is an antiquated view, and I say that as someone who spent fifteen years in practice doing the diagrams and the stair details, and who comes to AI with a decent amount of skepticism and a healthy defensiveness of this profession. The spectre is real, but it is not the code. It is the way we encounter the code: late, manually, and after the design decisions are already made. ## Is compliance a negotiation? On a podcast recently, the host told me about a New York real estate attorney whose entire philosophy of code compliance came down to one line: everything is a negotiation. I understand where he got it. One of my first firms did several buildings for a client in the jewelry district, and we developed an interpretation of the zoning code where pulling the floor plate back about two feet turned the vertical face of the building into something you could sell as a billboard: not signage, so not controlled as signage, and not leasable interior space either. A whole new tenancy on the face of a building, resting entirely on an interpretation. Nowhere does the code say you can do that. Nowhere does it say you cannot. That is negotiation, and honestly, it is some of the most creative work I have ever been part of. But nobody negotiates a turning radius. Nobody negotiates knee clearance, stair widths, or the fire rating between occupancies. A huge share of the code exists to guarantee quality of life, equity, and safety, and it is written to be binary on purpose. The model either meets the requirement or it does not. You do not want to negotiate on that, and neither does anyone who will ever use your building. ## The 80/20 So both camps are right. The lawyer is right that interpretation is real, and the engineers are right that most checking is mechanical. The proportions are what matter: if 80% of compliance is black and white, then you provide those things, and the 20% that remains leaves you a wonderful array of levers to push and pull. The black and white 80% is exactly the work that software should check continuously, because there is nothing interpretive about it and everything repetitive about it. The 20% is where your judgment, your reading of the jurisdiction, and your billboard-that-is-not-signage ideas live. There is an old Eames line that constraints are opportunities. It only works if you actually know the constraints, and know them early enough to wield them. If you know enough about the code constrictions early, it does not rob you of your design. It is not a roadblock. It is a tool. ## Envelope first The New York City planning guide hands you diagrams: the base, the setback, the sky exposure plane you need to clear. The lowest common denominator of compliance with those diagrams yields boring buildings, and the city is full of proof. But read them differently and they describe an envelope, an invisible fencing. Understand that fencing first and you can build anything you want inside it. The constraint stops being the thing that trims your design down and becomes the thing you sculpt against. The same logic scales down to a single detail. I spent years in boutique hospitality, and the bar is always where design intent and accessibility meet. The ADA drop, the knee and toe clearance, the turning radius: all binary, all non-negotiable. The design question is whether you get to iterate. If checking your grab bars, fire separations, and door maneuvering clearances consumes four days of the team's week, you do one version of the sculpted stone bar and hope. If the checking is running against the model as you work, you do twenty sketches of it, every one of them compliant, and pick the most beautiful. ## Completed thoughts, not popups Real time does not mean naggy. Nobody wants to move a door and get a violation popup. The rhythm that actually fits how designers work is: I have completed this thought, let me make sure it works the way I think it does. You are shifting walls, playing with spatial layouts, weighing option A against option B, and you want data at the moment of comparison. This option gets us a few more bar seats but loses two banquettes. This one gets us two more floors, 30% smaller. Compliance is one more input in that trade, delivered while the trade is still live. And there is a second effect that I care about even more. When a PM says give me four options for this classroom layout, a young designer can now show four options that already work, before the senior review, instead of learning by demoralizing redline. Because every finding traces to a model element and a code section, the code stops being someone senior being petty about your dreams. It has a source. You learn where it comes from. It does not take the 10,000 hours of studying door and wall ratings for compliance to become second nature; it becomes a reward cycle instead. That is not replacing junior architects. That is how we bring people up through a profession that is about to lose a generation of tacit code knowledge to retirement. ## What do you want back? The time you get back only matters if you are intentional about what it becomes. Productivity and creativity can be delineated from one another, and they should be: the point of getting faster at the checkable work is not to cram in more checking, it is to protect the part of the week where the thorny questions live. When I ask myself what I want back, the answers are embarrassingly analog. I loved hand drawing in school and stopped having time for it. I said on a Dezeen panel this summer that an architect will always be a storyteller, and stories have to come from somewhere other than a screen. Some of that somewhere cannot be outsourced even in principle. Early in my career I learned to tell plumbing from gas from electrical conduit on a site walk, because they are three different metals and we draw them all the same. No tool teaches you that, and no tool needs to. Walking the site, looking at open walls, talking to the cabinet maker: that is the kind of time worth buying back with software, and it feeds directly back into the work. ## Wield it Architects are allowed to keep our identity of being somewhat frustrated. I certainly have. The trick is directing the frustration at more productive aims than checking sink clearances by hand. Handle the 80% that is black and white the moment it can be handled, and the 20% that requires a human reading stops feeling like a threat and starts feeling like the job: interpretation, judgment, and the occasional billboard where a wall used to be. No one gets into architecture with a passion for code compliance. You do not need one. You need the black and white handled, and the good part of the job back. --- # What Is Model-Based Building Code Compliance? URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/what-is-model-based-building-code-compliance/ Description: Model-based building code compliance evaluates a design directly within the BIM model, rather than checking compliance after drawings are complete. What that shift means, in practice and in principle. ## How building code compliance works today Building code compliance has traditionally lived outside the model. Building code exists as text. Architects interpret requirements manually, cross-reference documents, and verify compliance during plan review or internal QA/QC. That process happens late, when issues are expensive to fix. We break down why this process is still largely manual in why building code compliance is still manual. Compliance violations flagged inside the BIM model with code references. ## What "model-based" building code compliance means Model-based building code compliance means evaluating a design directly within the BIM model, rather than checking compliance after drawings are complete. Model-based compliance changes when that check runs. This shift is part of a broader move toward building code compliance during design. Instead of reading code and applying it manually, the code is translated into structured logic that evaluates directly against the model. Every flagged issue is tied to a specific element and cited to a code section so teams can see what's wrong, why it matters, and how to resolve it. ## How compliance runs inside the model Kestrel is built around this approach. It translates licensed building code data, including the International Code Council (ICC), into machine-executable logic that runs inside the design environment. Checks take about 30 seconds and can be run continuously throughout design. ## What changes when compliance happens during design This shift changes how teams work. Instead of discovering issues at plan review, compliance becomes part of the design process itself. This makes it possible to catch building code compliance issues during design rather than after submission. The shift this represents: - From documents to data - From manual interpretation to structured evaluation - From end-of-process checks to continuous feedback ## What this looks like in practice Building code becomes something the model can understand. Kestrel flags code compliance issues directly in the model, with explanations and cited code references. Compliance is no longer a separate workflow. It becomes part of the design environment itself. ## Where this is going Building code compliance is moving into the model. We break down this shift in more detail here: How building code compliance is moving into the BIM model → For a broader view of the current landscape: What tools exist for building code compliance in Revit → The role of AI in this shift is explored further in: AI building code compliance in Revit → If you want to see this in your own model: Schedule a demo → --- # What Tools Exist for Building Code Compliance in Revit? URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/what-tools-exist-for-building-code-compliance-in-revit/ Description: Architects have been asking a version of the same question for years: is there software that checks building code directly inside Revit? A landscape view — model-side analysis, PDF plan review tools, and custom scripts — and the key difference between them. Categories of tools used for building code compliance in BIM workflows. Three categories of tools handle building code compliance in Revit today: model-side analysis platforms that evaluate the BIM model directly during design, PDF plan review tools that check exported drawing sets after documentation, and custom scripts or general AI workflows built in-house. Model-side analysis is the newest category and the one developing fastest. ## Model-side analysis (inside Revit) These tools evaluate the BIM model directly, flagging issues related to geometry, parameters, and code requirements. This is the category seeing the most active development. As described in recent QA/QC research by Slantis, model-side tools are shifting compliance earlier into the design process — surfacing issues while the model is still being built rather than at submission. This shift toward checking code during design is what's driving the move to building code compliance software for Revit that runs directly inside the model. Kestrel is an example of this approach. It runs compliance checks inside Revit, mapping every flagged issue to the exact element in the model and citing the specific code section behind it. Checks take about 30 seconds and can be run continuously throughout design. ## PDF plan review tools These tools analyze exported drawing sets, catching inconsistencies across sheets and coordination issues. Useful — but they operate after design decisions are already locked. This is the traditional plan check workflow, where compliance is verified at the end instead of during design. ## Custom scripts and general AI workflows Some firms build internal tools to check specific standards or use general AI systems to interpret code. Often powerful, but require ongoing setup, maintenance, and manual validation. Most are not directly integrated into the BIM model itself. ## The key difference The key difference between these categories is timing. PDF tools check after design. Model-side tools check during design. That difference determines whether a compliance issue costs five minutes or five weeks. This shift — from checking after drawings are complete to evaluating compliance continuously — is what defines the move toward model-based building code compliance in BIM. ## Where to explore further Kestrel is listed on AEC+Tech with a full overview of what it checks, how pricing works, and how to get started. For a category-level view of how the different kinds of tool differ — code research, plan review, and model-native during design — see AI building code compliance tools, compared. You can also see how compliance is moving into the model in practice in our breakdown of how building code compliance is shifting into the BIM model. The category is still early — but the direction is clear. If you want to see what a model-side check looks like on your own project: Schedule a demo → --- # Where AI Doesn't Belong URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/where-ai-does-not-belong/ Description: The barrier to building software has never been lower, which means the bar for taste and accuracy has to be much higher. The most important product question isn't how much AI you can add — it's whether AI belongs in that part of the product at all. You can build something that looks functional in a weekend now. Sometimes it actually is functional. The barrier to building software has never been lower — and that changes what is scarce. When anyone can build, the value moves to judgment: knowing what is worth building, and where it should not be built at all. Whether or not you are delivering real value to people is now completely detached from your ability to build something. AEC software is a sharp example of this. So the question we spend the most time on at Kestrel Labs isn't "Where should we use AI?" It's "Where shouldn't we?" ## The barrier collapsed I am not exaggerating the speed. I built our entire website myself in about ten days using Claude Code — an incredibly fun creative exercise that also saved us a meaningful amount of money. The marginal cost of producing software is heading toward zero, and that is genuinely good news for small teams. But "I can build it" and "this should exist" are different sentences. When the cost of building collapses, the things that used to be implied by the effort — care, discernment, the decision to do it at all — stop being implied. They have to be chosen on purpose. ## Building is not the same as value A working demo proves you can ship. It says nothing about whether the thing should be trusted. In a low-trust, low-stakes domain, that gap is forgivable — you iterate in public and the worst case is a bad afternoon. Building codes are not that domain. The code is the legal basis a project is permitted against. A tool that is fluent and fast and confidently wrong is worse than no tool, because it spends the one thing the industry runs on: trust. The bar for taste and accuracy has to rise exactly as fast as the barrier to building falls. ## The question we ask most For those who don't know what we do: Kestrel digitizes building codes and puts them inside the BIM model, so you can check compliance continuously while you're still designing. The obvious instinct is to ask where else we can add AI. We deliberately invert it. AI is incredibly good at processing and standardizing large amounts of information. That does not mean it belongs everywhere. The harder, more useful conversation our leadership team has — driven by our CTO and kept honest by the two licensed architects on staff, who describe themselves as AI skeptics or Luddites depending on the day — is the opposite one: Where do we *not* put AI? ## Probabilistic where it fits, deterministic where it counts There are places where a probabilistic system is exactly the right tool, and places where you still want a trusted, auditable, deterministic one. The skill is telling them apart. In a high-trust, high-risk industry, there are places where a probabilistic system cannot and should not be trusted — at least today. The answer that comes out at the end has to be one an architect can stand behind with a stamped set, not one that merely sounds right. ## The four design parameters Over time we have compressed that judgment into four parameters. Each one is testable: you can sit in a demo and check it. They apply to any system whose output a professional has to stand behind, in any high-liability domain, not just ours. A product that fails one of them can still be useful. It just cannot be load-bearing. 01 ### Repeatability Identical inputs return identical outputs. Run the same check a thousand times, get the same finding a thousand times, and let people watch you do it. 02 ### Traceability to authority Every finding cites the specific source text it rests on, at the clause level. A paraphrase of the code is not the code. 03 ### Row-level auditability The full reasoning behind every result is open for inspection. Someone who wants to open a 10,000-line report and verify each finding by hand can do exactly that. 04 ### Differentiated confidence Interpretive output looks visibly different from determinate output, so a reasonable inference is never dressed up as a settled requirement. These four parameters are what let us draw the line inside the product, and the line falls in the same place every time. AI does the reading: converting enormous volumes of unstructured legal text into a structured store the checks can run against, work that is high-volume and verifiable. Rule logic does the determining: the moment the system asserts that something is or is not true. And AI does the explaining: what a violation means, why it matters, and how to fix it without creating three new problems elsewhere in the building. Ingestion, determination, explanation. The middle one is where trust lives, and it is the one we keep AI out of. The point of all four is the person who signs the drawings. Every parameter exists so that when an architect stands behind a set, they are standing on something they can see. (I went deeper on these, and on where they came from, on the What’s Left? podcast.) ## That discernment doesn't come from knowing the most about AI Here is the part that gets missed. For AEC, you cannot make these calls from knowing the most about AI. Knowing where a probabilistic system belongs in a building-code workflow is a question about buildings, liability, and practice — not about model architectures. That level of discernment, risk assessment, and taste comes from decades of practice — from licensure, from painful permit comments, from long conversations with clients and contractors, and from making unbelievably stupid mistakes late in a project. ("We don't have a water fountain here" is a silly reason to delay a permit, and it is also exactly the kind of thing that delays permits.) That collective, hard-won judgment is more valuable now than ever, not less. It is why the architects on our team aren't just the voice of the customer — they are the level of discernment that decides what we build, what we refuse to automate, and what "right" even means for a given check. Please don't all leave architecture for tech. We still very much need architects. ## Be subtractive, not additive The honest answer, in 2026, is that you can put AI into nearly anything. And you may not be happy if you do. When everybody can build everything, the result is a sea of noise — and the same is true inside a single product that bolts AI onto every surface. So we try to be subtractive rather than additive. The discipline is removing AI from the places it doesn't earn its keep, and reserving it for the places where it genuinely changes what's possible. Be intentional about what you make — and about what you choose not to. ## The future is very long None of this is a prediction that AI won't get there. The future is very long. I don't know where these models will be in five years, and our line between probabilistic and deterministic will move as they improve. Drawing it carefully today is not pessimism — it's how you stay trustworthy long enough to still be here when the line moves. One of the most important product questions isn't how much AI you can add to a product. It's whether AI belongs in that part of the product in the first place. We ask it constantly — and we think any serious team building in a high-trust industry should too. We've written about what this looks like in practice — why every flagged issue has to carry a verifiable citation: Citations, not summaries → If you want to see where we drew the line on your own model: Schedule a demo → --- # Why Building Code Compliance Is Still Manual URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/why-building-code-compliance-is-manual/ Description: Building code compliance is still largely manual in architecture — PDFs, cross-referenced tables, and hand checks. Why no widely adopted system evaluates code directly inside the BIM model during design, and what's starting to change. Building code compliance is still manual because code exists as legal text while design exists as spatial geometry in a BIM model, and no widely adopted system has bridged the two. So most firms review code by reading PDFs, cross-referencing tables, and checking designs by hand, with every design change triggering a recheck. Manual vs. model-based building code compliance. ## How building code compliance works today In most projects, code compliance is handled outside the model: - Architects interpret building code manually - Teams cross-reference drawings against written requirements - Code consultants review assumptions late in the process - Small design changes trigger hours of rechecking By the time issues are identified, they are often embedded in layouts, coordination, and documentation. ## Why building code compliance software hasn't solved this This isn't just a lack of tools. It's a structural problem. Building code exists as legal text. Design exists as spatial geometry inside a BIM model. Bridging those two requires: - interpreting written requirements - mapping them to geometry - evaluating relationships between elements That translation has historically been too complex to automate in a meaningful way. ## Why plan review tools don't fix the problem Some tools do exist today for building code compliance. Most of them operate on exported drawing sets, reviewing PDFs to identify coordination issues and inconsistencies across sheets. These tools can catch problems. But they operate after design decisions are already made. By that point: - layouts are set - systems are coordinated - documentation is underway A compliance issue at this stage is no longer a small fix. It's rework. The problem isn't just whether issues are caught. It's when they're caught. ## What's changing now That timing is starting to shift. Instead of checking compliance after design, teams can begin evaluating it directly against the model. This is what's referred to as model-based building code compliance. ## From downstream review to in-model evaluation Traditionally, compliance is something that happens at the end of the process. Now, it's beginning to move earlier — into the design phase itself. Instead of reviewing drawings after the fact, teams can evaluate compliance continuously as the model evolves. We break down this shift in more detail here: How building code compliance is moving into the model → ## Where the market is now There are tools emerging that attempt to address this problem, but the category is still developing. Most solutions either: - operate on drawings after export - or require heavy customization to check specific conditions We outline the current landscape here: What tools exist for building code compliance in Revit → ## What this means The core issue hasn't been a lack of awareness or effort. It's been the absence of a system that can interpret building code and evaluate it directly against the model during design. That is what is now becoming possible. For more on how that shift plays out in practice, see catch building code compliance issues during design and why compliance during design beats plan check rework. If you want to see how this works in practice: Schedule a demo → --- ## News & Updates # AEC Tech Journeys: How Kestrel Labs Is Automating Building Code Compliance URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/aec-tech-journeys-interview/ Description: Marian Pulford joined AEC Tech Journeys with Mayur Mistry for a video interview on the path from art and real estate to founding Kestrel, and how AI-driven compliance is changing architecture. **AEC Tech Journeys**, the interview series from Mayur Mistry on the people building technology for architecture, engineering, and construction, sat down with Kestrel Co-Founder & CEO Marian Pulford for a 14-minute conversation: “How Kestrel Labs Is Automating Building Code Compliance.” AEC Tech Journeys with Mayur Mistry, Aug 8, 2026. The conversation traces an unconventional route into building technology: from art and real estate to founding an AI company for building code compliance. The through-line is the problem itself. Building regulations shape every project, but the knowledge of how they apply lives in dense books and long careers, and checking a design against them has stayed stubbornly manual while the rest of the design process moved into the model. That is the gap Kestrel was founded to close: making building regulations accessible and efficient by putting the check where the design decisions happen. Kestrel Compliance Analysis runs a review against the codes for a project and jurisdiction in about 30 seconds, inside Revit, with every violation tied to a model element and cited to the exact code section. Watch the full interview: AEC Tech Journeys → Or see the product side of the story on one of your projects: Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel Is Sponsoring AECTechCon 2026 in St. Louis URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/aectechcon-2026-sponsorship/ Description: Kestrel Labs is sponsoring AECTechCon 2026 in St. Louis this May. We'll have a booth and the team on the floor. Come find us if you're working on AI, BIM, or building code compliance. Kestrel Labs is sponsoring AECTechCon 2026, held in St. Louis this May. The conference brings together AEC firms, technology vendors, and the people moving design, construction, and operations into more capable tooling. It's a natural place for us to be. Building code compliance, and the broader shift from document-based to model-based design QA, sits exactly at the intersection the event covers. We'll have a booth, members of the team on the floor, and live demos of Kestrel running checks inside Revit. We're co-sponsoring alongside KAI, with AGC Missouri and AI St. Louis hosting the event. AECTechCon comes between two other Kestrel stops this season: the Autodesk AECO Technology Partner Summit in April, and live demos at the AIA '26 Innovation Zone in June. If you'll be there and want to talk about Kestrel, the future of code compliance, model-based QA, or any of the work in this category, come find us. And if you'd rather see what Kestrel does without waiting for an in-person meeting, schedule a demo → --- # Marissa Ritchen in Dezeen: AI, Storytelling, and the Future of Architecture URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/an-architect-will-always-be-a-storyteller/ Description: Dezeen covered The Productive Architect, its AIA26 panel with Trimble SketchUp, where Kestrel Chief Industry Officer Marissa Ritchen argued that AI should automate repetitive work like code compliance so architects can spend more time on design and storytelling. Dezeen has published its coverage, and film, of *The Productive Architect: How AI is Changing Our Approach to Design*: the talk it hosted with Trimble SketchUp at the Skybox at DiamondView Tower during the AIA Conference on Architecture and Design 2026 in San Diego. Moderated by Dezeen co-CEO Ben Hobson, the panel brought together Marissa Ritchen, Kestrel's Chief Industry Officer, with Christopher Cronin, senior vice president of architecture and design at SketchUp, and Omar Calderon Santiago, design principal at Perkins Eastman. The panel's throughline, in Calderon Santiago's words: “fundamentally, architecture is a human endeavour.” As AI becomes embedded in the design process, that makes human judgement, ingenuity, and storytelling more central to the profession, not less. ## What should AI actually do in an architecture practice? Marissa's answer draws a clean line. AI belongs on the repetitive, time-consuming work, and she pointed to Kestrel's code compliance platform as the example: automate the checking so architects spend that time on design. The technology should create more room for storytelling and creative exploration, not replace them. > “I think an architect will always be a storyteller.” Marissa Ritchen, AIA, RA, NCARB, Chief Industry Officer, Kestrel Labs, speaking on the Dezeen panel “That idea of lived experience will always inform the architect,” she continued. “You're bringing all of your lived experiences and you are distilling them, and bringing folks in and inviting them into a space that they're collaborating on.” No model generates that. What software can do is clear the repetitive work out of its way. ## Why compliance is the work AI should take Code compliance is some of the most repetitive, highest-stakes work in a project, which makes it exactly the wrong place for human hours and exactly the right place for automation. When the checking runs inside the model, continuously and with citations, the hours it used to consume go back to the part of the job only an architect can do. Marissa goes deeper on that argument in her hour-long Startup Conversations interview with Chaos's CGconnect. Watch the full talk above, or read Dezeen's coverage: Architecture fundamentally a human endeavour, says panel at Trimble SketchUp talk in San Diego → Want to see what the panel was talking about? Schedule a demo → --- # ArchiCheck AI is Now Kestrel Labs URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/archicheck-ai-is-now-kestrel-labs/ Description: ArchiCheck AI is now Kestrel Labs. The product, team, and direction remain the same. Only the name has changed to better reflect what we're building. ArchiCheck AI is Kestrel Labs. We've updated our name to better reflect what we're building: software that brings building code compliance directly into the design process. ## What we do Kestrel runs building code compliance checks directly inside the Revit model, helping architects identify issues during design instead of at plan check. Instead of manually interpreting code and reviewing drawings after the fact, teams can evaluate compliance continuously against the BIM model itself. Kestrel translates licensed building code data into structured logic that runs directly inside the model, with every issue tied to a specific element and cited to a code section. ## What changed (and what didn't) The product, team, and direction remain the same. If you're looking for ArchiCheck AI, here's where to start: - What is model-based building code compliance? - How building code compliance is moving into the BIM model - What tools exist for building code compliance in Revit ## Where this is going As the platform has evolved, it became clear that the original name no longer captured the scope of what we're building. Kestrel Labs reflects a broader shift: from manual code interpretation toward real-time, model-based compliance embedded directly in the design workflow. ## How building code compliance is moving into the model Building code has historically lived outside the model. That's starting to change. New systems are making it possible to evaluate compliance directly against the BIM model during design, reducing rework and making permitting more predictable. Kestrel is part of that shift. --- # AI Building Code Checks in 30 Seconds: Kestrel Labs in BusinessDen URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/architects-spend-20-percent-of-their-week-on-code-compliance/ Description: BusinessDen profiled Kestrel Labs: architects spend up to 20% of their week on code compliance, Kestrel checks an entire building against municipal codes in about 30 seconds, and the Denver team raised a pre-seed led by New Stack Ventures to give that time back. BusinessDen, the outlet covering Denver's business and real estate scene, profiled Kestrel Labs. The piece opens where the company started: Co-Founder & CEO Marian Pulford's own permitting frustration developing in the RiNo Art District, the experience that convinced her the slowest part of getting a building approved was a software problem nobody had solved. > “Architects are spending up to 20% of their time a week doing these activities.” Marian Pulford, Co-Founder & CEO, Kestrel Labs, speaking to BusinessDen ## The whole building, checked in about 30 seconds The article walks through how Kestrel gives that time back. The platform plugs into the 3D design tools architects already use and checks the entire building in about 30 seconds, surfacing every error, with the code section behind it, against the roughly 80% of municipal codes that are clearly defined. The remaining 20% is interpretation, and that stays where it belongs: with the architect. BusinessDen also captures where the company is today: several dozen customers running Kestrel across hundreds of projects, concentrated in Colorado and reaching design teams in Florida, California, New York, and Illinois, backed by a pre-seed round led by New Stack Ventures with participation from Denver Ventures and FirstMile Ventures. On pricing, Marian was candid with the reporter: “We are not out here charging more than the software that architects use to design, but it costs more than a ChatGPT subscription.” Annual contracts, unlimited use, tiered by firm size and project types. ## Built in Denver, on purpose Kestrel is a nine-person team at 18th and California downtown, building for an industry that Denver knows well from both sides: the firms designing the city and the permitting offices approving it. Hometown coverage like this means a lot. Read the full piece on BusinessDen: AI-for-architects startup raises $2M to trim permitting times → Want your 20% back? Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel on the Cover of Architectural Products, July/August 2026 URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/architectural-products-cover-july-august-2026/ Description: Architectural Products put Kestrel on the cover of its July/August 2026 issue: a live compliance check inside the BIM model, leading the magazine's Must-See Products from AIA 2026. **Architectural Products**, the product publication of the U.S. architectural market, put Kestrel on the cover of its July/August 2026 issue (Vol 24 No 4). The cover image is a working view of the product: a BIM model inside its compliance bounding box, with the Kestrel checker panel showing a real run: 1,107 checks, 11 violations, each tied to its code section. Architectural Products, July/August 2026. Cover image: a Kestrel compliance check inside the BIM model. The issue is the magazine’s annual AIA roundup, headlined “Must-See Products from AIA 2026.” The cover copy singles out the idea the image illustrates: AI-powered platforms that finally conduct jurisdiction-specific code checks inside the BIM model. Inside, the feature describes Kestrel as “the first AI-powered compliance platform built natively inside the Building Information Modeling (BIM) workflow,” and walks through the three parts of the platform: Kestrel Compliance Analysis, Kestrel Compliance Chat, and the Kestrel Portal. One click inside Revit runs a full compliance review in roughly 30 seconds and cites exact code sections when issues are found. The editor’s letter goes further. Surveying an AIA expo floor where AI “seemed to live in every direction,” the editor writes: > “One of the most exciting AI launches was from Kestrel Labs.” Editor’s letter, Architectural Products, July/August 2026 What makes this one different for us is the audience. Architectural Products is read by the people who decide what actually goes into buildings: architects, specifiers, and design teams evaluating products against performance and code requirements. That a product publication chose a code compliance check, running inside the model, as the image for its AIA issue says something about where the industry conversation is heading: compliance is moving into the BIM model, and it is becoming the mainstream story, not the niche one. Read the full issue on Issuu: Architectural Products, July/August 2026 → Want to see the check that made the cover? Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel Labs Wins Architosh Best of Show for Innovation at AIA26 URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/architosh-best-of-show-innovation-aia26/ Description: Architosh named Kestrel Labs the Best of Show winner in the Innovation category at its 12th Best of Show Honors for digital technologies at AIA San Diego, calling Kestrel an 'Omaha Beach moment' for the profession. Architosh has named Kestrel Labs the **Best of Show winner in the Innovation category** at its 12th annual Best of Show Honors, recognizing the digital technologies that stood out at the AIA Conference on Architecture and Design 2026 in San Diego. The honors are selected by Architosh founder and editor-in-chief Anthony Frausto-Robledo, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, himself a licensed architect. “Kestrel Labs’ new compliance platform focused on building codes was one of AIA26 San Diego’s biggest highlights with respect to digital tools,” Frausto-Robledo wrote. “While other AI code tools exist, Kestrel’s solution puts their compliance engine directly inside the design and documentation environment, whilst also having an intelligent web-based code analysis space for its users.” He singled out an idea at the core of how we think about the product: that a project’s *code work* should move with the project across tools and phases: from Revit today, to Trimble Connect and SketchUp and other BIM environments as we grow. The part we’ll be thinking about for a long time is how he framed the moment: > “Every few years, maybe around every five, a brand-new tool comes out that really has the ability to capture a critical beachhead — that Omaha Beach moment — where we just know a tool and its strategy is super strong and will have rapid success. We believe Kestrel is that.” Anthony Frausto-Robledo, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, Founder & Editor-in-Chief, Architosh On the build itself, he added that Kestrel’s “implementation is also particularly strong for a new application, with a visually appealing GUI and brand identity that speaks to architects,” comparing the experience to award-winning practice software. In the judging notes, Architosh observed that Innovation winners “often herald new directions in digital technologies, often solving age-old pain points,” calling Kestrel’s AI-powered compliance platform “a rather textbook example,” with “the quality of attack on addressing code review in practice” particularly impressive at version 1.0. We’re grateful for the recognition, and for a read of the product that matches exactly why we built it: keep decades of hard-won code expertise inside the model, visible to the whole team, at every phase of design. Read the full Best of Show feature on Architosh: AIA26: Architosh’s 12th Best of Show Honors → Want to see what won? Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel at the Autodesk AECO Technology Partner Summit 2026 URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/autodesk-aeco-technology-partner-summit-2026/ Description: Notes from the Autodesk AECO Technology Partner Summit in San Francisco: what we heard from the AECO ecosystem about AI, BIM-native workflows, and where the partner landscape is heading. Austin and I spent the end of April at the Autodesk AECO Technology Partner Summit in San Francisco. It was a useful read on where the AECO ecosystem is heading, and where AI, BIM, and the platforms underneath them are converging. A few things stood out: - The conversation has shifted from "will AI matter in AEC" to "where in the workflow does it land first." - BIM-native is becoming the default expectation for new tooling, not the exception. - The partner-ecosystem view of Autodesk's roadmap aligns closely with what we're hearing from design firms directly. - Compliance, QA/QC, and code reasoning kept coming up as the categories closest to ready. We left with sharper conviction about where Kestrel sits in this picture, and a lot of conversations to continue. We've written more about that picture in AI building code compliance in Revit and the compliance data layer for the built environment. More to come from the work this summit kicked off, including live demos at the AIA '26 Innovation Zone in June. If you want to see how this lands in practice on a real project: Schedule a demo → --- # Brian Farber Joins Kestrel Labs: Former Autodesk AEC Global PR Lead URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/brian-farber-joins-as-strategic-communications-consultant/ Description: Brian Farber, formerly head of global PR for Autodesk's AEC business and a White House appointee at the US DOT, joins Kestrel Labs as a strategic communications consultant. We're pleased to welcome Brian Farber as a strategic communications consultant at Kestrel Labs. Brian spent nearly seven years leading global PR for Autodesk's AEC business, shaping how one of the most important platforms in our industry shows up to customers and the market. Before that, he was a White House appointee at the U.S. Department of Transportation, leading communications and public affairs across a 55,000-person agency. He brings a clear understanding of both the AEC ecosystem and how to position complex technology in the real world. That shows up immediately: Brian was already in the room with us at the Autodesk AECO Technology Partner Summit and will be on the floor with the team at the AIA '26 Innovation Zone in June. Welcome, Brian. --- # Kestrel in CNR Magazine: Fixing Permit Errors Before the Submittal URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/cnr-magazine-before-the-submittal/ Description: CNR Magazine's guest column on the permitting backlog features Kestrel Labs: real-time occupancy, egress, and ADA checks inside Revit, ICC-licensed code data with jurisdictional amendments, and why a documented compliance record matters as California opens the door to third-party plan review. CNR Magazine (Construction News and Review) has published *Before the Submittal: How Tech is Helping the Permitting Backlog*, a guest column by Tiffanie Reynolds, founder and principal at MarCom Consultants. The piece looks at how construction technology is attacking the permitting bottleneck: not by speeding up the review queue, but by eliminating the errors that send projects back into it before review even begins. The column opens with a frustration every contractor and developer knows: an incomplete plan check, a revision cycle that takes weeks, and a project clock that keeps running while the paperwork stacks up. Kestrel features as the company working earliest in that sequence. The column describes how the platform embeds code compliance checking directly into Revit, flagging occupancy, egress, ADA, and other code requirements in real time, rather than surfacing them after a plan is printed and submitted. It also walks through where the code data comes from: officially licensed building code data through Kestrel's partnership with the International Code Council, with jurisdictional amendments layered on top based on project address, construction type, and whether the building is sprinklered. > “It's like having another set of eyes working alongside you in the model. The earlier you catch a compliance issue, the less it costs to fix it.” Marissa Ritchen, AIA, RA, NCARB, Chief Industry Officer, Kestrel Labs, in CNR Magazine ## Why the earliest phase of the bottleneck matters The column puts numbers on the backlog: 77 percent of developers report permit delays, and cities like San Francisco average 33 months to secure approval. It also maps the landscape, contrasting Kestrel with permit automation platforms like PermitFlow, which streamline submissions and track applications once a plan set exists. As the piece frames it, the two target different phases of the same bottleneck, and Kestrel's phase comes first: the errors caught during design never become rejection letters at all. The accountability angle gives the argument legislative weight. The column points to California's AB 253, signed in October 2025, which allows homebuilders to hire a licensed third-party reviewer when a local building department exceeds a 30-day review window. In that environment, a documented record of which requirements were reviewed, which were addressed, and which remain open stops being a nice-to-have. The column calls the Kestrel report “a practical fit” for exactly that. > “It becomes a tool of accountability. Not a replacement for plan reviewers, but something that establishes a data path they can trust.” Marissa Ritchen, in CNR Magazine ## Honest about the limits The part of the column we appreciate most is the part about what automation should not do. Kestrel compares Revit model data against applicable building code parameters, which works well for requirements with clear, objective thresholds. Where code language is ambiguous, or a project requires modifications, the platform flags the issue and defers to licensed professionals. That line is a design choice, not a limitation we are waiting to engineer away, and we have written about it at length in Where AI Doesn't Belong. As the column concludes, the tools that earn a permanent role in the permitting process will be the ones that make project teams more capable, not the ones that try to cut them out. Read the full column in CNR Magazine: Before the Submittal: How Tech is Helping the Permitting Backlog → Want that second set of eyes on your next project? Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel Ranks No. 1 on Colorado's Startup Leaderboard URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/colorado-startups-leaderboard-q3-2026/ Description: The Q3 2026 Colorado Startups Leaderboard ranks Kestrel No. 1 among Colorado startups founded in the past five years, and No. 14 overall among companies founded in the past decade. The Leaderboard, published semiannually by Colorado Startups, ranks the state’s fastest-growing companies using Crunchbase’s CB Rank, a measure built from employee count, funding raised, and social data. In the Q3 2026 edition, Kestrel ranked No. 1 among Colorado startups founded within the past five years and with less than $20 million in funding. We also ranked No. 14 overall among Colorado companies founded in the past decade. Less than 18 months after we incorporated Kestrel, our name now sits beside companies that have spent years building and raised hundreds of millions of dollars. I am astonished by what this team has accomplished in that time. Kestrel is building the first structured compliance data layer for the built environment. We transform building regulations into machine-readable intelligence that continuously reviews BIM models during design. See the full ranking: Colorado Startups Leaderboard → Or see what the fastest-growing startup in Colorado is building: Schedule a demo → --- # Marian Pulford in aec+tech: Code Compliance Inside the BIM Model URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/find-out-while-changes-are-still-cheap/ Description: aec+tech sat down with Kestrel Co-Founder & CEO Marian Pulford on why compliance issues should surface while changes are still cheap: building codes turned into machine-readable logic, evaluated against the actual project in Revit. Every code issue in a building gets found eventually. The only question is when, and the when decides what it costs. Caught during design, a violation is a wall nudged on screen. Caught at permit submission, it is redesign, resubmittal, and weeks on the schedule. That is the argument at the center of aec+tech's interview with our Co-Founder & CEO, Marian Pulford: > “The architect finds out while changes are still cheap, not after submission.” Marian Pulford, Co-Founder & CEO, Kestrel Labs, speaking to aec+tech ## How does a building code become something software can check? The conversation covers the core of what we build: turning building codes into machine-readable logic that can be evaluated against the actual geometry and conditions of a project. Kestrel runs one-click checks directly in Revit, with SketchUp support on the way, pairing AI-generated logic with precise, deterministic evaluation so every result cites the specific code section behind it and traces back to the exact elements in the model. The feature also touches on scope transparency. Kestrel documents what was checked and is clear about coverage limits, so the tool supports the architect's professional judgment rather than standing in for it. You can read more about that approach in AI building code compliance in Revit. Read the full feature on aec+tech: How Kestrel Labs Is Bringing Code Compliance Inside the BIM Model → Want to see it for yourself? Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel at AIA 2026: Live Demos in the Innovation Zone URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/kestrel-at-aia-2026-innovation-zone/ Description: Kestrel Labs is heading to AIA '26 in San Diego. Marissa Ritchen, Austin Pulford, Brian Farber, and Marian Pulford will be demoing Kestrel live throughout the conference in the Innovation Zone. Kestrel Labs is heading to The American Institute of Architects (AIA) '26 next month. We can't wait to show over 15,000 architects what building code compliance looks like when it runs live inside BIM during design, instead of after the fact. Kestrel runs one-click compliance checks directly in Revit, using officially licensed International Code Council content, delivering real-time feedback based on the actual geometry and conditions of the project. We've written more about that approach in AI building code compliance in Revit. Marissa Ritchen, Austin Pulford (AIA, NCARB), Brian Farber, and I will be demoing Kestrel live throughout the conference, along with a few exciting things we've been working on with some incredible partners. We're also sponsoring the archi+tech Social Night at Carrier Johnson + Culture on Friday, June 12. Come find us there too. See you in the Innovation Zone. Want to set up time before AIA? Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel Named a Finalist in the Trimble 0-60 Challenge URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/kestrel-finalist-trimble-0-60-challenge-2025/ Description: Kestrel Labs has been named a finalist in the Trimble 0-60 Challenge, a signal that model-based building code compliance is moving from a manual process into the design environment itself. The selection reflects a broader shift across the industry: building code compliance is moving from a manual process into the design environment itself. Kestrel running inside Trimble Connect, showing how building code compliance is moving into connected design workflows. ## Recognition from the AEC ecosystem The Trimble 0-60 Challenge highlights companies working at the intersection of design, construction, and data. Kestrel was selected within the Connected Design category, reflecting a growing focus on systems that bridge the gap between design intent and downstream review processes. As part of this work, Kestrel is engaging with the broader Trimble ecosystem, including integrations with platforms like Trimble Connect. ## This shift is showing up across the industry The movement toward in-model compliance is showing up across multiple parts of the industry. Recent analysis of the AEC QA/QC landscape has identified a new class of tools moving compliance earlier into the design process, surfacing issues while the model is still being developed. At a broader level, firms like a16z have pointed out that much of the built environment is still designed using fragmented workflows that require constant translation between systems. ## Building code is becoming machine-readable One of the core challenges in building code compliance has been access to reliable, structured code content. Building code has historically lived in PDFs and static documents, requiring manual interpretation and cross-referencing. Through programs like the ICC Code Connect API, building code can now be accessed directly inside software workflows, with up-to-date code content available programmatically. Kestrel is part of this ecosystem as an approved technology provider, reflecting a broader shift toward integrating code directly into the tools where design decisions are made. ## Design platforms are opening up This shift is also being supported by broader platform ecosystems. Kestrel is part of programs including Autodesk's AECO technology partner network, alongside integrations with connected data environments like Trimble Connect. Together, these systems are making it possible to move compliance closer to the design process itself. ## What this means for design teams Across code publishers, design platforms, and industry research, multiple independent signals are pointing in the same direction: Building code compliance is becoming part of the design system, not a separate review step. - We break down this shift in more detail here: How building code compliance is moving into the model → - For a definition of how this works: What is model-based building code compliance → - And for an overview of the current landscape: What tools exist for building code compliance in architecture → ## Kestrel's role in this shift Kestrel Labs, a Techstars portfolio company, is building a structured compliance data layer for the built environment, translating building code into logic that can be evaluated directly against design models. If you want to see how this works in practice: See what Kestrel finds in your model → --- # Kestrel Labs Unveils the First AI-Powered Compliance Platform Built Natively Inside BIM URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/kestrel-labs-launches-bim-native-compliance-platform/ Description: Backed by $2.15 million in pre-seed financing and an ICC data agreement, the Denver startup puts building code compliance inside Autodesk Revit at the design stage. SAN DIEGO, June 10, 2026 — At the American Institute of Architects Conference on Architecture and Design 2026, Kestrel Labs launched the first compliance platform built natively inside the Building Information Modeling (BIM) workflow, putting jurisdiction-specific code requirements inside Autodesk® Revit®, before drawings reach plan review. Revit is a BIM software that allows architects, engineers, and construction professionals to design in 3D. Kestrel raised $2.15 million in pre-seed financing from New Stack Ventures, FirstMile Ventures, Denver Ventures, and Avesta Fund. The Kestrel Platform includes three features: - Kestrel Compliance Analysis – One click inside Revit runs a full compliance check in about 30 seconds, with every result tied to the specific model element and cited to the exact code section. - Kestrel Compliance Chat – An AI building code assistant and thought partner that answers project-specific compliance questions in plain language, cited to the exact code section. Available inside Revit and in the browser. - Kestrel Portal – A web-based compliance dashboard for project managers and firm leadership with no BIM file required. Senior architects carrying decades of code knowledge are approaching retirement. Junior architects are billable from day one with limited time for knowledge transfer. Austin Pulford, AIA, NCARB, Co-Founder, brought 20 years of licensed practice to this problem. Marian Pulford, Co-Founder and CEO, built the company around solving it. Kestrel’s compliance checks draw from a data agreement with the International Code Council (ICC), the global authority on model building codes adopted across the United States and in more than 100 countries. > “No permit delay, no redesign, no late-stage surprise is random. They most often start in the design phase, when the right information wasn’t there at the right moment. Austin and I studied this for years, then moved to tackle the problem ourselves, from the ground up, for how architects actually work. Kestrel puts the code right inside the BIM workflow, at the moment it can still make a difference. Every architect we talked to had lived this story. Kestrel is for them.” Marian Pulford, Co-Founder and CEO, Kestrel Labs > “New hires are billable from week one now. There is little runway to sit with a senior architect and transfer twenty years of code knowledge. Kestrel changes that equation. The code is in the model, visible to everyone, and it does not depend on who is in the room. That is not a small thing for a firm trying to grow.” Micah Gray, AIA, Director of Technology and Innovation, KAI Enterprises ## Pricing Annual firm-wide license, no per-seat fees: - No limits on users, projects, or compliance checks - Pricing reflects firm size, project complexity, and jurisdictional scope - Charter customers receive preferred pricing and input on jurisdiction roadmap ## Find Kestrel - Autodesk Design & Make Marketplace - Trimble Connect Marketplace - SketchUp integration (coming soon) ## Investors > “Construction is one of those industries where everyone knows the problem and nobody has built the infrastructure to fix it. Kestrel came to us with deep domain knowledge, a product already running inside the tools architects use every day, and a data foundation that would take most companies years to assemble. That combination – inside the workflow, grounded in authoritative data, solving a problem the profession has accepted as unsolvable – is exactly what we look for.” Nick Moran, General Partner, New Stack Ventures > “We invested in Kestrel because they understand what most AEC companies miss: compliance is not a feature. It is the foundation. Every permit delay, every round of rework, traces to building code issues in the design process. Kestrel fixes that from inside the BIM model. This is not a workflow improvement but a structural shift for the industry, and this team is built to lead that shift.” Aaron Stachel, Founding Partner, FirstMile Ventures ## About Kestrel Labs Kestrel Labs, located in Denver, Colorado, is the first AI-powered building code compliance platform built natively inside BIM and the first structured compliance data layer for the built environment. kestrellabs.com | kestrellabs.com/aia for AIA 2026 updates Autodesk and Revit are registered trademarks or trademarks of Autodesk, Inc., and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates in the USA and/or other countries. All other brand names, product names, or trademarks belong to their respective holders. --- # Kestrel Live in the Autodesk Design & Make Marketplace URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/kestrel-live-in-autodesk-design-and-make-marketplace/ Description: Kestrel is an Autodesk AECO Technology Partner, and the Kestrel add-in for Revit is live in the Autodesk Design & Make Marketplace with support for Revit 2024-2027. Two milestones, one announcement. Kestrel has joined Autodesk’s AECO Technology Partner Ecosystem, and the Kestrel add-in for Revit is live in the Autodesk Design & Make Marketplace, with support for Revit 2024 through 2027. The marketplace is where Autodesk users find and install add-ins for Revit and the rest of the Design & Make portfolio. For architects, that shortens the distance between hearing about Kestrel and running it: find the listing, install the add-in, open a model, run a check. From there, Kestrel Compliance Analysis works the way it always does: one click inside Revit runs a compliance review against the codes for your project and jurisdiction in about 30 seconds, maps each violation to the exact model element involved, and cites the applicable code section using official code data licensed directly from ICC. Move a wall, run it again. The AECO Technology Partner Ecosystem is Autodesk’s program for companies building on its architecture, engineering, construction, and operations platform. For Kestrel, it means a listed, supported presence in the ecosystem where most of our customers already work, and a direct working relationship with Autodesk’s partner organization. We wrote about our first AECO Technology Partner Summit back in April; this makes the relationship official on both counts. It also reflects how we think compliance should be delivered: inside the tools where design decisions actually happen, distributed through the platforms design teams already use. Kestrel is available in the Trimble Connect Marketplace as well, so firms can meet us in whichever ecosystem they build in. The direction of travel is the same everywhere: building code compliance is moving into the BIM model. Find Kestrel in the Autodesk Design & Make Marketplace → Or let us run it on one of your active projects: Schedule a demo → --- # Kestrel Is Sponsoring the archi+tech Social Night at AIA 2026 URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/kestrel-sponsoring-archi-tech-social-night-aia-2026/ Description: Kestrel Labs is sponsoring the archi+tech Social Night at Carrier Johnson + Culture in San Diego on Friday, June 12, alongside the AIA 2026 conference. Excited for AIA '26 and proud for Kestrel Labs to sponsor the archi+tech Social Night at Carrier Johnson + Culture in San Diego on Friday, June 12. The AEC industry is entering a new era where AI is moving from isolated tools into core design and delivery workflows. Looking forward to conversations with architects, CIOs, BIM leaders, founders, investors, and technology teams about where the industry is heading next, especially around real-time code intelligence, BIM-native workflows, and the future of permitting and compliance infrastructure. Huge credit to Nirva Fereshetian, CBT Architects, Niknaz Aftahi, and aec+tech for putting together such a strong group, and thank you to our friends at Slantis for inviting us to join them in supporting the event alongside an incredible group of companies across the AEC ecosystem. Excited to connect with everyone attending the American Institute of Architects (AIA) Conference on Architecture & Design 2026. We'll also be doing live demos in the AIA '26 Innovation Zone throughout the conference. Come by either or both. RSVP for archi+tech Social Night → --- # Marissa Ritchen Joins Kestrel Labs as Chief Industry Officer URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/marissa-ritchen-joins-the-team/ Description: Marissa Ritchen, AIA, RA, NCARB, a licensed architect with 15+ years of experience across residential, commercial, and landmark work, joins Kestrel Labs as Chief Industry Officer to lead industry engagement. I could not be more excited to share that **Marissa Ritchen, AIA, RA, NCARB** is joining Kestrel Labs as Chief Industry Officer. Marissa is a licensed architect with 15+ years of experience delivering complex projects across residential, commercial, and landmark work. She has held leadership roles at Electric Bowery, Ltd., Shawmut Design and Construction, and most recently at Rowland+Broughton Architecture and Interior Design, where she led high-profile residential projects. She has deep experience working with planning agencies, landmarks commissions, and permitting authorities, and understands firsthand how regulatory constraints shape design decisions and timelines. Marissa will lead industry engagement at Kestrel and help ensure our product reflects how architecture is practiced today. You'll see her on the floor at our spring conference stops, including AECTechCon 2026 in St. Louis and AIA '26 in San Diego. We are very fortunate to have her on our executive leadership team. Welcome, Marissa. We're hiring carefully for a few more roles in the months ahead. If you're working in AI, AEC tech, or anywhere those two meet and want to be on our radar, say hello on the careers page. --- # Marissa Ritchen on AI, BIM, and the Future of Code Compliance URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/no-one-gets-into-architecture-with-a-passion-for-code-compliance/ Description: Kestrel Chief Industry Officer Marissa Ritchen joined Chaos's Startup Conversations for an hour on why most code compliance is black and white, how model-based compliance analysis differs from 2D plan review, and what real-time code checking gives back to design teams. Roderick Bates, who leads product operations at Chaos (the company behind V-Ray and Enscape), hosts Startup Conversations on CGconnect, Chaos's community platform for design and visualization professionals. For the latest episode he sat down with Marissa Ritchen, Kestrel's Chief Industry Officer and a licensed architect (AIA, RA, NCARB), for an hour-long conversation about the technology reshaping BIM and the state of the AEC industry. He booked the interview after asking Architosh's editor-in-chief which technology stood out most at AIA26. The answer was Kestrel. The conversation opens where Kestrel's story starts: “No one gets into architecture with a passion for code compliance,” Marissa says. Yet compliance consumes an enormous share of design time, and the profession has largely accepted that as the cost of practicing. Kestrel was founded on the opposite premise: the most frustrating part of designing a building should not be proving it follows the rules. ## Is code compliance a negotiation? Bates opened with a challenge. A New York real estate lawyer once told him that in code compliance, “everything is a negotiation.” So how can software automate a negotiation? Marissa's answer draws the line that runs through Kestrel's whole approach: most of a building code is not interpretive at all. Egress widths, turning radii, ADA clearances, fire separations: the model either meets the requirement or it does not. > “If 80% of compliance is black and white, then you provide those things, and that 20% leaves you this wonderful array of levers to push and pull.” Marissa Ritchen, AIA, RA, NCARB, Chief Industry Officer, Kestrel Labs Automate the black and white, and the interpretive 20% stops being a threat to the design and becomes design leverage. “If you know enough about the code constrictions early, it doesn't rob you of your design,” she says. “It's not a roadblock. It's a tool to be wielded.” ## The third generation of code compliance tools Marissa frames the industry's tooling in three generations. First came digitized code books: searchable text, but the checking stayed manual. Then 2D plan review: software reading static drawings after the design is done. The third generation reads the BIM model itself, evaluating the data architects already put into Revit against the code while the design is still moving. That is what Kestrel builds, and why checking can happen inside the model instead of at a review milestone. Trust runs through that answer, because architecture is a liability profession. “If you run it a thousand times, you are going to get the exact same result a thousand times,” Marissa says, and the results are grounded in licensed code text through Kestrel's collaboration with the ICC. Just as important, the platform reports what it did not check. It never says “you passed.” It says which requirements were evaluated, and against which code sections. ## Real-time feedback is a learning tool The old workflow is static: print a PDF set at a milestone, hand it to a reviewer, wait. Kestrel's is conversational. “It's not move a door, get a violation popup,” Marissa says. “It's: I've completed this thought. Let me make sure it works the way I think it does.” Because every finding is tied to both a model element and a specific code section, younger architects learn the code as they design instead of discovering it in redlines. The point is not replacing junior staff. It is giving every option a designer sketches a chance to already work. The full hour covers much more: why "you built a spreadsheet" is the sharpest insult in architecture, what a 3D plan check could mean for permit review, and how compliance knowledge compounds across a firm's projects. Watch it above, or on CGconnect's YouTube channel → Want to see the third generation in practice? Schedule a demo → --- # Techstars Boston 2025 Wrap: Demand From 60+ Firms and Jurisdictions URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/techstars-boston-2025-wrap/ Description: Kestrel Labs completes Techstars Boston Accelerator 2025 with paid design partners, demand from 60+ firms and jurisdictions, and ecosystem partnerships with Autodesk and Trimble. That's a wrap on Techstars Boston Accelerator 2025. Kestrel Labs came into the program with a clear thesis and a differentiated technical foundation. Over the past three months, that foundation translated into unmistakable market traction. We now have paid design partners, strong demand from more than sixty firms and jurisdictions, and ecosystem partnerships with Autodesk and Trimble that position us inside the workflows of the entire industry. This experience compressed years of progress into a single quarter. It strengthened the product, expanded our reach, and sharpened the path to scale. It also deepened our conviction in the size of the opportunity and in our ability to lead it. Thank you to the Techstars Boston team: Jennifer Davis, Aidan Kittredge, Jacqueline Kwan, Steve Bernard (still counts, that's where your chair is), Ben Greene, Anuj Adhiya, Steve Walsh. And to our mentors Jay Batson, Michael Papish, Brad Harkavy, Dan Sirk, Ian Roughley, Javier Segovia, and Brian Farber (who later joined as our strategic communications consultant). Thank you to the exceptional founders in our cohort, and most of all to my team, Brian Krzeminski and Austin Pulford (AIA, NCARB), for the guidance, pressure, and candor that made this possible. We're leaving Boston aligned, energized, grateful, and ready for what comes next. What came next: new senior hires, including a Chief Industry Officer and a strategic communications consultant, and the spring conference season that follows. Earlier in the year, we had also renamed from ArchiCheck AI to Kestrel Labs. --- # Marian and Austin Pulford Speaking at Texas A&M's AI Symposium URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/texas-am-ai-symposium-2026/ Description: Kestrel Labs co-founders Marian and Austin Pulford will speak at AI Across the AEC Industry: Data to Design, the Texas A&M College of Architecture AI symposium, October 5-6 in College Station. Kestrel Labs co-founders Marian Pulford and Austin Pulford will speak at the Texas A&M University College of Architecture AI symposium, AI Across the AEC Industry: Data to Design, held October 5-6 at the Annenberg Presidential Conference Center in College Station, Texas. The symposium deliberately pairs academic researchers with industry practitioners to examine how AI is changing research, design, and building practice across architecture, engineering, and construction. Keynotes come from Phillip Bernstein, Deputy Dean of the Yale School of Architecture and former Autodesk vice president, and Burçin Becerik-Gerber, Director of the Center for Intelligent Environments at USC. Their session, "AI, Automation, and Agency: What Must Be Left to the Architect?", takes on the question underneath every AI conversation in this industry: which tasks belong to machines, and which decisions demand human expertise. Using Kestrel's work in building code compliance as the case study, Marian and Austin will examine the distinct roles that AI, deterministic computation, and professional judgment each play in the design process, and why responsibility, interpretation, and judgment must remain with the architect. It's the question Kestrel comes back to more than any other, explored in Where AI doesn't belong and in Marian's recent conversation on the What's Left? podcast. Working through it with the next generation of architects, and the researchers studying these systems, is exactly the kind of conversation Kestrel wants to be having. The symposium is open to faculty, researchers, students, and industry professionals, with registration on the event site. If you'll be in College Station, come say hello to the team. And if you'd rather see what Kestrel does before October, schedule a demo → --- # Architosh on Kestrel: Democratizing Code Compliance Knowledge URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/when-senior-architects-retire-code-knowledge-leaves/ Description: Architosh founder Anthony Frausto-Robledo covered Kestrel's AIA26 launch with a bigger argument: as a generation of architects retires, decades of tacit code compliance knowledge goes with them. BIM-native compliance analysis is how that knowledge stays. Architosh published a feature on Kestrel Labs' launch at the AIA Conference on Architecture and Design 2026, written by founder and editor-in-chief Anthony Frausto-Robledo, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, himself a licensed architect. It walks through the product, but the reason to read it is the closing argument. ## Where does code expertise go when a generation retires? In most firms, the deepest code compliance knowledge is not in a database. It is in the heads of the most senior people: which requirements bite on which building types, how a jurisdiction actually reads a section, what a reviewer will flag. Frausto-Robledo's point is that the profession is about to lose an enormous amount of that knowledge at once: > “What Kestrel is doing is democratizing code compliance knowledge, which is especially meaningful as we enter the crest of the Baby Boomers wave as they retire over the next decade. When they leave, so does decades of hard-earned tacit knowledge about how code compliance works in architecture. Kestrel Labs has arrived just in time for the world of architecture.” Anthony Frausto-Robledo, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP, Founder & Editor-in-Chief, Architosh That knowledge cliff is exactly the problem Kestrel was built to meet. When compliance checking runs inside the model and every finding is tied to a model element and cited to the exact code section, code expertise stops living only in senior architects' heads. It becomes visible to the whole team, at every phase, on every project, and younger staff learn the code as they design instead of absorbing it over decades of redlines. ## What Architosh saw at the launch The feature walks through what we built: a compliance platform that runs natively inside BIM, starting in Autodesk Revit, with Trimble Connect live and SketchUp on the way. One click runs a full compliance check in about 30 seconds, every result tied to a model element and cited to the exact code section, alongside Kestrel Compliance Chat and the Kestrel Portal. Eleven days later, Architosh followed up by naming Kestrel Best of Show for Innovation at AIA26. Read the full feature on Architosh: AIA26: Kestrel Labs, Native BIM Compliance Platform → Want to see it for yourself? Schedule a demo → --- # Where We Don't Put AI: Marian Pulford on the What's Left? Podcast URL: https://kestrellabs.com/resources/news/where-we-dont-put-ai-whats-left-podcast/ Description: Marian Pulford joined What's Left?, Alex Lee's podcast on leaders in the age of AI, to talk about where Kestrel deliberately keeps AI out of building code compliance, and the four tests an AI answer must pass when someone has to stand behind it. During Kestrel’s design-partner year, before the product was released, architects kept asking a version of the same question. In Marian Pulford’s telling: “I know that this error is correct, because I’m an architect who’s been in the field for 30 years. How would my youngest member of staff, who got out of grad school a year ago, know to verify this?” That question sits at the center of “Where We Don’t Put AI,” Marian’s conversation with Alex Lee on the third episode of **What’s Left?**, Lee’s podcast on leaders thriving in an age of AI. A senior architect can spot a wrong answer on sight. The people who can’t are the ones a compliance tool actually has to be built for, and taking that seriously changes where AI belongs in the product. What’s Left? with Alex Lee, Ep. 03, Aug 18, 2026. The answer Kestrel landed on is the part of the episode worth hearing in full. The detection of errors is deterministic. “We can run that same check a thousand times and get the exact same answer,” Marian says. “People can open up a log, audit the response that they’ve gotten from us, and say: I can really believe what this software is telling me.” The standard behind that is concrete. An architect who wants to open a 10,000-line error report and verify every finding by hand can do exactly that. AI is in the product where it earns its place. In Marian’s words, “it’s 2026, and no competent technologist would build software without AI in it.” It does the reading, processing the enormous volume of legal text the checks run against, and it does the explaining, unpacking what a violation means, why it matters for safety or accessibility, and how to fix it without breaking something else in the building. And for the roughly 20 percent of code that is genuinely interpretive rather than black and white, the software never presents an interpretation with the same confidence as a determinate finding. The conversation ranges wider than the product. There is the industry’s missing middle: a generation that left architecture in the Great Recession, senior specialists now retiring, and firms asking, in Marian’s words, “Bob’s going to retire. He’s the guy who always knows these answers. What are we going to do?” (Architosh made the same argument about Kestrel’s launch.) There is the permitting saga at Denver’s RiNo Art District that started the company, where, as her architect co-founder put it, “everyone loses money and sleep and hair.” And it closes on taste: “You can slopify the entire world if you’re not careful.” The written version of the argument is Marian’s essay “Where AI doesn’t belong.” The episode is the version with the stories in it. Listen to the full episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. Or open up the log yourself, on one of your own projects: Schedule a demo → ---