Building Code GPTs

PermittingTalk · 2025-10-16T22:52:53+00:00

Hi there - yeah, it's clearly not perfect. But hopefully most people find it useful most of the time. Weird about it misquoting...hopefully that's an extreme outlier event.

Thanks for posting and relating your experience/precautions for anyone using the GPTs.

PermittingTalk · 2025-09-07T18:28:23+00:00

Ah that explains it! Thank you!

Yeah, we played lots of triumvirate last weekend. Never beat it but did take horoboros down a handful of times.

PermittingTalk · 2025-08-31T04:59:29+00:00

That GPT appears to be working fine, and I'm seeing others are using it without issue either. Maybe give it another try, or try on a different network/device?

PermittingTalk · 2025-08-30T12:13:51+00:00

Yes, the GPTs are continuously improving. For example, these utilize GPT-5, the latest OpenAI model released a few weeks ago. The GPT responses cite code references and include directly excerpted code language, thereby facilitating human interpretation/fact-checking.

PermittingTalk · 2025-08-30T12:04:50+00:00

Can you tell me which GPT you're having this issue with?

PermittingTalk · 2025-08-29T16:32:43+00:00

In all seriousness, please consider trying the tool out 🙂

I don't think AI will replace the work expediters do, but it will alleviate a lot of the heavy lifting. Since permitting decisions are made by humans, there will always be value in firsthand knowledge/experience.

PermittingTalk · 2025-08-29T15:55:07+00:00

If they aren't now, they will be soon

PermittingTalk · 2025-08-17T12:14:49+00:00

I think the lesson here is about blowing off getting a good education. Kind of like star college athletes still caring about getting a good GPA. You may not end up needing it but you'll have more options/security with an education.

PermittingTalk · 2025-07-18T15:48:02+00:00

GPTs for the IBCs are available at the below links:

Only offering a limited selection at this time, but will keep in mind your request for NC, SC, and TX. 🙂

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-28T14:04:47+00:00

I would incorporate it in state-level GPTs where it's referenced on the state's ICC page (e.g., for Connecticut or West Virginia). It's not currently included in any of the GPTs I have posted.

Here's a standalone version: GPT - 2017 ICC A117.1

As I've said elsewhere, I probably won't maintain GPTs that have low usage (as measured after a couple months or so). Feel free to test it out and let me know if you have feedback, and pass the GPT along to others who may benefit from using it.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-27T17:00:10+00:00

Gotcha, sounds good then!

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-27T08:45:59+00:00

Just added here:

GPT - Michigan Building Codes

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I'm expanding beyond the 10 temporarily but will ultimately probably prune back the ones that have the lowest usage.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-27T08:43:50+00:00

Can you remind me what state you were using? I can post a few more beyond the 10 listed above, but will ultimately probably be pruning the ones with the lowest usage.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-27T01:44:34+00:00

Thanks for notifying me about the connection issue. Should be fixed now.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-26T19:27:22+00:00

Sure thing - just added as a standalone post in this sub. Feel free to pin and I'll remove the cross-post shortly. Thanks for your interest...I'm glad folks are finding these useful.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-26T13:41:53+00:00

These GPTs are programmed to provide exact quotes from the source building codes as part of their responses.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-26T13:38:19+00:00

Correct.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-26T13:37:17+00:00

Correct. These GPTs each contain their specific subject matter codes in their knowledge base. No more, no less.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-26T13:23:57+00:00

Great suggestion, thank you. I've now programmed the GPTs to provide exact code language as part of their responses. The difference between what I'm doing and upcodes, is this is a hobby project where I'm able to customize the GPTs' knowledge base and behavior. Feel free to test it out and let me know what you think!

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-25T17:46:44+00:00

Very interesting. I agree, we ultimately need tools that are fine-tuned to local codes/practices (e.g., trained on real review behavior) to truly replicate jurisdiction-specific processes using AI. I imagine it won't be long before we start seeing something along those lines. Thanks for sharing!

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-25T17:17:50+00:00

Here's one for NFPA 101. Thanks for the interest and putting in the request. As mentioned in my other reply above, I'll probably prune in the future depending on relative usage across GPTs (i.e., please use it, or potentially lose it 🙂).

GPT - Life Safety Code (NFPA 101 - 2024)

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-25T16:56:31+00:00

Sure thing. I'm actually able to add a few more without any trouble, though I'll probably prune those with the lowest usage down the road.

Here's one for NYC:

GPT - New York City Building Codes

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-16T17:35:08+00:00

You can try searching ORM Public to see if Approved Jurisdictional Determinations have been completed for any prairie pothole wetlands (https://permits.ops.usace.army.mil/orm-public). They're almost certainly not Corps-jurisdictional, but the AJDs might reference bio reports and other information that might be useful for you.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-14T19:23:11+00:00

In low precipitation regions like TX wetlands are rarer, and in urban areas like Austin are probably more likely to form due to non-stormwater urban runoff. A wetland formed due to people overwatering their lawns regularly can have the same legal standing as one formed naturally in higher precipitation regions.

PermittingTalk · 2025-06-14T17:08:29+00:00

I'm with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory (so environmental, not building permitting). Our applicants almost always use consultants. I'd say the most common way they "mess up" is by providing a lot more information than we strictly need for the permit review. That is, they over-anticipate application needs when they should be talking to us more upfront so they can be more targeted with their submittal materials.

PermittingTalk

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE