Starting Here: Your Deal Snapshot

• What is the parcel or deal name/address we should use for this study?
• Where are you in the purchase lifecycle right now? Options: Under contract — active due diligence, Under contract — inspections only, Option agreement (not yet under contract), Contingent contract (financing/entitlement contingencies), Contract contingencies removed / closing scheduled
• How many calendar days remain on your due-diligence or contingency deadline? Options: Less than 7 days, 7–14 days, 15–30 days, 31–60 days, 61–90 days, More than 90 days, No formal deadline yet
• What is your current target unit yield for this parcel (range is fine)? Options: Less than 20 units, 20–49 units, 50–99 units, 100–199 units, 200+ units
• Please enter the exact target unit count your pro forma assumes.
• Who are the stakeholders we need to satisfy in this decision (select all that apply)? Options: Development VP / Sponsor, Construction Manager / GC, Equity Partner / Investor, Lender, Landowner / Seller, Local partner / co-developer, Other
• Who holds final go/no-go authority on the purchase (name or role)?

If This Deal Falls Short — What Then?

• If the architect’s unit count can’t survive planning review, what is the single real consequence for this deal? Options: Project fails to meet pro forma and we walk, We renegotiate price, We accept reduced # of units and proceed, We seek rezoning/variance and accept a longer timeline, We pivot to a different product type
• What is the minimum unit count below which the equity partner will withdraw or require major restructuring? Options: Within 5% of target, Within 10% of target, Within 20% of target, Any reduction triggers review, No specific minimum defined
• How would missing the target unit count make you feel about the land purchase—frustrated, nervous, resigned, or something else? Options: Very anxious / would pause deal, Concerned but solvable, Frustrating but tolerable, Neutral / plan B in place
• If the unit count drops, what short-term actions would you consider (select up to three)? Options: Renegotiate purchase price, Cut amenity or unit size, Pursue density bonus or variance, Increase unit mix efficiency, Look for cost savings elsewhere, Walk away
• How long are you willing to stay in negotiation or redesign to recover unit yield before you abandon the purchase? Options: Less than 2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 1–2 months, 2–3 months, Longer than 3 months

The Money Line — Where the Numbers Break

• If per-unit hard-plus-soft cost exceeds your acceptable range, at what point does the deal fail? Options: Above pro forma by any amount, Above pro forma by 5%, Above pro forma by 10%, Above pro forma by 15%+, We would renegotiate first
• What is your acceptable per-unit construction cost range (enter low and high or pick the closest)? Options: <$200k, $200k–$300k, $300k–$400k, $400k–$500k, >$500k
• Please specify the exact per-unit hard-plus-soft cost you modeled in the pro forma.
• Which cost components worry you most and should receive the most scrutiny? Options: Substructure / excavation, Parking structure or parking footprint, Facade and envelope, Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing, Site work and utilities, Soft costs (entitlement, design, permits), Escalation / inflation
• What contingency or buffer percentage do you want built into our preliminary cost estimate? Options: No contingency, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5%+, Unsure — advise me
• Have you experienced consistent cost overruns on past deals? If yes, briefly describe the typical cause.

Time Is Interest — How Fast Does This Need to Move?

• If first-unit delivery slips past 24 months, what consequence is most painful for your returns? Options: Equity IRR drops below target, Increased land carry triggers sale, Lender terms change / financing is at risk, Market window missed for absorption, Other
• What is your ideal date for first unit delivery? Options: Within 12 months, 12–18 months, 18–24 months, 24–30 months, Unsure / need advice
• What is the latest acceptable date for first unit before you consider altering the plan? Options: Within 18 months, Within 24 months, Within 30 months, Beyond 30 months triggers re-evaluation
• Which parts of the schedule feel most fragile right now (pick all that apply)? Options: Entitlement review / planning commission, Rezoning or variance timeline, Utility upgrades / agency approvals, CD production time, GC procurement and buyout, Financing closings
• If we needed to compress schedule, what trade-offs are you willing to make (e.g., lower finishes, smaller amenity scope, phased delivery)? Options: Lower finishes, Reduce amenity scope, Phase units / podiate delivery, Accept higher early design fees for faster CDs, None — schedule cannot be compressed
• How has your team handled compressed timelines previously—and what caused the biggest friction?

Design & Entitlement Red Lines — What We Cannot Compromise

• What is the absolute minimum entitlement outcome you would accept to proceed to closing? Options: By-right development without variances, Minor variance or administrative relief, Density bonus approval required, Conditional use approval acceptable, Full rezoning required
• Which planning outcomes would you classify as deal-killers (select all that apply)? Options: Significant unit loss (>10%), Parking requirement increases, Height or massing reductions, Major public easements or dedications, Infeasible mitigation costs, Design requirements that add >X% to cost
• How important is an architect’s track record with the local planning commission to your decision? Options: Critical — would not proceed without it, Very important, Helpful but not essential, Not important
• Are you willing to pursue a density bonus or affordable-housing trade to hit unit targets? If so, which concessions are acceptable? Options: Yes — affordable set-aside, Yes — public benefit amenities, Yes — design concessions, No — prefer market-rate-only approach, Unsure — need guidance
• Which entitlement scenarios have caused the longest delays in your experience, and why?

Construction Confidence — How Much Ambiguity Can You Live With?

• What level of completeness do you require in permit-ready documents to feel comfortable (e.g., 80% detail vs 100%)? Options: Rough schematic sufficient (high-level), 60–80% permit readiness, 90–100% complete CDs before buyout, We require full CDs + coordination sets
• How involved do you want the GC to be during design to reduce change orders? Options: Full GC preconstruction engagement, Selective GC input on key trades, GC after CDs for buyout only, We prefer design-bid-build without early GC
• What is your acceptable level of contract contingency for the construction budget? Options: 0–5%, 5–10%, 10–15%, 15%+
• Have ambiguous drawings led to change orders on past projects? If yes, share a specific example and impact.
• Do you require references from GCs who have built the architect’s recent designs before engaging? Options: Yes — required, Yes — preferred but not required, No — not necessary

What Would Truly Delight Your Stakeholders?

• Imagine the entitlement process finishes with the pro forma intact—what did we deliver that made that possible? Options: Accurate unit count that matched commission expectations, Clear, constructive elevations and massing, A tightly argued entitlement strategy, Fast, coordinated CDs that reduced design cycles, Strong stakeholder communications and outreach
• What evidence will convince your Development VP that the architect’s projection is reliable? Options: Past entitlement success in jurisdiction, Comparable completed projects and counts, Data-backed unit yield analysis, Pre-submission planning commission briefing, GC cost validation
• What would reassure your Construction Manager that change orders will be minimized? Options: Greater CD detail, Early GC involvement, Clear material and systems decisions, Third-party constructability review, Regular coordination meetings
• What three metrics will your equity partner watch most closely during diligence and entitlement? Options: IRR / returns, Schedule to first unit, Cost per unit, Entitlement certainty, Absorption timing, Loan covenant adherence
• How would success feel to you at the end of this engagement?

Decisions, Trade-offs, and Next Moves — Committing to the First 60 Days

• If we could guarantee only one deliverable in the next 60 days, which should it be to de-risk your close? Options: A reliable buildable unit count with memo, A preliminary per-unit cost estimate, A clear entitlement pathway and timeline, Massing studies showing likely planning response, A recommendation for purchase negotiation
• Which of these deliverables would you like combined in an accelerated package (select up to three)? Options: Site constraints map and risk register, Unit yield and massing options, Cost-per-unit estimate with contingencies, Entitlement strategy with likely decision gates, Pre-submission planning commission memo, CD schedule to permit-ready
• What documents or data can you provide immediately to speed our analysis (select all that apply)? Options: Title report, Existing surveys / topo, Previous entitlement history, Soils/geotech reports, As-builts or demolition plans, Existing zoning code excerpts, Market pro forma assumptions
• Who on your team will be our primary point of contact and who must sign off on the feasibility memo?
• What decision gate and date do we need to hit to influence whether you close on the land? Options: Immediate (within 7 days), Within 14 days, Within 30 days, Within 60 days, Flexible / advisory only
• Is there anything else we should know about internal dynamics, timelines, or hidden constraints that might change priorities?

• Solution Experience Kickoff — Data, Roles & One‑Sentence Current State
• Current State Confirmation — Constraints, Entitlement History & Risk Quantification
• Buildable Program Modeling Workshop — Live Massing, Unit Yield & Returns Tie‑In
• Entitlement Pathway & Permit‑Ready Timing Review
• Validation & Mutual Commitment Checkpoint

• Define clear acceptance criteria for each milestone so design and approvals can be measured.
• Define Target Outcomes for Modeling
• Produce 2–3 validated buildable program options tied to the parcel's constraints.
• Demonstrate how each option affects per‑unit cost and returns to make the trade-offs explicit.
• Force validation from stakeholders that the selected program meets their minimum acceptance criteria.
• Document the preferred option to feed the entitlement pathway and permit‑ready schedule.
• Design team to produce preliminary massing sketches, unit mix, and parking layouts for the preferred option.
• Finance lead to update pro‑forma reflecting chosen option and deliver sensitivity tables.
• Schedule Entitlement Pathway session to convert the preferred program into a timed permit plan.
• One‑Sentence Future State
• Create a validated entitlement sequence with dates and owners that tie directly to permit‑ready CD delivery.
• Ensure the entitlement plan preserves the returns of the preferred program or outlines explicit mitigations.
• Introductions & Objectives
• Confirm outreach and stakeholder tactics to improve first‑submission approval probability.
• Assign milestone owners for each entitlement step and publish the milestone calendar.
• Prepare a planning commission briefing packet and stakeholder outreach plan.
• Identify and contract any required studies (traffic, shadow, arborist) needed to meet permit‑ready criteria.
• Review Agreed Program & Consequence Link
• Obtain explicit, documented validation from all key stakeholders that the program and schedule meet their acceptance criteria.
• Lock the entitlement and permit‑ready CD milestone calendar with owners and contingency triggers.
• Ensure the developer has what they need to make a go/no‑go purchase decision tied to returns.
• Clarify any remaining assumptions (surveys, geotech) that must be satisfied and who will supply them.
• Issue a Solution Experience summary memo capturing the one‑sentence current and future state, chosen program, entitlement path, schedule, and acceptance criteria for signatures.
• Deliver a signed milestone calendar and the list of outstanding investigations with delivery dates.
• Confirm contract/scope amendment (if required) to proceed to permit‑ready design and collect any required retainer.
• Produce and confirm a single-sentence current-state summary everyone accepts.
• Surface and quantify the business consequence if feasibility is unknown by the due-diligence deadline.
• Agree on required inputs, owners, and delivery deadlines to enable modeling.
• Confirm stakeholder decision roles and the next meeting schedule.
• Client to deliver available documents: current survey, title, prior entitlements, and any past planning submittals.
• Assign internal owner to prepare the one‑sentence current-state and consequence statement for distribution.
• Schedule Current State Confirmation workshop and Buildable Program Modeling Workshop.
• Recap One‑Sentence Current State
• Establish a validated, itemized list of site and regulatory constraints that will drive design decisions.
• Quantify the consequence of each major constraint to returns and schedule.
• Identify data gaps and assign investigations required before finalizing a preferred program.
• Agree whether to proceed to interactive program modeling with current inputs.
• Procure/confirm outstanding investigations (detailed topo, geotech, wetlands survey) with delivery dates.
• Update risk register with quantified impacts and assign mitigation owners.
• Provide clarifying answers on entitlement history items and prior approvals to the design team.
• Constraint Inventory Review
• Baseline Massing & Option A (Conservative)
• One‑Sentence Current State
• Walk Through Entitlement Timeline to Permit‑Ready
• Entitlement Sequence & Timeline
• Acceptance Criteria & Signoffs
• Explicit Consequence
• Option B (Optimized with Density Bonus)
• Open Risks & Unknowns
• Milestones to Permit‑Ready CDs
• Option C (Max Yield with Mitigations)
• Consequence Quantification
• Force Validation Questions
• Success Metrics & Returns Targets
• Commission & Stakeholder Strategy
• Contingencies & Impact on Returns
• Financial Tie‑In: Pro‑Forma Sensitivity
• Required Inputs & Pre‑work
• Decision: Proceed to Modeling?
• Next Steps, Immediate Actions & Commitment

• Zoning-Conforming Site Plan Set
• Unit Yield and Massing Diagrams
• Schematic Design Floor Plans and Elevations
• Planning Commission Submission Package
• Permit-Ready Construction Document Set
• Coordinated Structural and MEP Drawings
• Exterior Facade and Material Palette Package
• Parking and Landscape Plan
• Accessibility and Life-Safety Plans
• Detailed Per-Unit Construction Cost Estimate
• Permit Application Package and Forms
• Energy Compliance and Sustainability Documentation
• Construction Observation and RFI Management

Zoning-Conforming Site Plan Set

• What is the parcel's current zoning designation (including overlays)?
• What is the parcel area (square feet or acres) and lot dimensions?
• Are current boundary and topographic surveys available? Options: Boundary + topo (<=12 months), Boundary only, No survey available, Survey older than 12 months
• Are there known easements, deed restrictions, or encumbrances that affect buildable area? Options: Yes, No, Unknown - need review
• What existing site constraints must be shown on the plan (utilities, steep slopes, floodplain, historic features)?
• What level of deliverable do you require for the site plan? Options: Conceptual (zoning envelope), Schematic (planning review), Permit-ready (civil coordination)

Unit Yield and Massing Diagrams

• What target unit count does the developer require for feasibility?
• What unit mix is desired (select all that apply)? Options: Studio, 1BR, 2BR, 3BR, Townhome/Rowhouse, Other
• Are there maximum height or floor-count limits we must honor? Options: Yes - specify, No, Unknown (please advise review)
• Is the project pursuing density bonuses or other zoning incentives? Options: Yes - affordable housing, Yes - transit-oriented, No, Undecided
• What parking strategy should massing diagrams assume? Options: Surface parking, Structured parking, Podium/underbuilding, Reduced parking (shared/remote), TBD
• What minimum/acceptable variance in unit yield is tolerable for feasibility (e.g., ± units or %)? Options: ±0-5%, ±6-10%, ±11-20%, Accept wide variance

Schematic Design Floor Plans and Elevations

• Which unit prototype(s) should be developed in schematic plans? Options: Typical 1BR, Typical 2BR, Accessible unit, Townhome prototype, Other
• What target gross/net unit sizes (sq ft) should schematics reflect for each prototype?
• What architectural character or precedent images should elevations align with?
• Are there specific facade or material constraints imposed by the jurisdiction or HOA? Options: Yes - provide guidelines, No, Unknown
• What level of coordinate detail is needed at schematic (e.g., window widths, floor-to-floor heights)? Options: High-level massing only, Moderate (general dimensions), Detailed schematic (approaches permit level)
• Do you require floor plan layouts that optimize for construction efficiency (e.g., repetitive stacks) versus maximized unit variety? Options: Optimize efficiency, Maximize unit types, Balanced approach

Planning Commission Submission Package

• Is a formal planning commission hearing already scheduled or anticipated within the due-diligence timeline? Options: Scheduled - date known, Anticipated - timeline estimate, No hearing required/administrative
• What supporting studies are required or expected for submission (select all that apply)? Options: Traffic/TSI, Shadow/solar, Noise, Archaeology, Affordable housing study, Other
• Is community outreach or an existing neighborhood engagement plan required? Options: Yes - formal outreach, Informal/staff-level, No
• Do you need renderings, 3D massing views, or physical model deliverables for commissioners? Options: 2D elevations only, 3D massing + renderings, Photomontages/visual simulations, All of the above
• Are there prior planning commission comments or precedent decisions we should address in the package? Options: Yes - provide notes, No, Unknown
• What acceptance criteria will define a successful commission submission (e.g., approval, conditional approval, consensus)? Options: Full approval on first hearing, Conditional approval (minor revisions), Guidance only - likely multiple hearings

Permit-Ready Construction Document Set

• Do you require a full permit set covering architectural, structural, MEP, and civil disciplines? Options: Full multi-discipline permit set, Architectural only (MEP/struct to be provided separately), Partial permit set (phased)
• What permit jurisdiction(s) and any local submittal requirements should we plan for?
• What target delivery timeline do you require for permit-ready documents? Options: <12 weeks, 12-16 weeks, 16-24 weeks, >24 weeks
• Are there pre-approved detail libraries, master specifications, or GC preferences to use in the CD set? Options: Yes - provide library, No - create new, TBD
• What level of coordination and clash-checking with consultants is expected prior to issue for permit? Options: Full coordination + clash report, Basic coordination (clash at 50%), Minimal coordination
• Will any phased permitting (e.g., foundation only) be pursued that affects the CD deliverables? Options: Yes - phased permits planned, No - single permit package, Undecided

Coordinated Structural and MEP Drawings

• Will structural and MEP scopes be provided by in-house teams or external consultants? Options: In-house, External consultants (we hire), External consultants (owner/GC hires)
• What degree of structural and MEP design is required at the schematic versus permit stage? Options: Schematic-level only, Schematic + permit-level coordination, Full design to permit
• Are there any special systems to accommodate (e.g., elevators, central plant, chilled beams, rooftop equipment)?
• What is the desired approach to coordination deliverables (RCPs, ceiling coordinations, utility riser diagrams)? Options: Full RCP + risers, Essential risers and equipment layouts, Minimal documentation
• Are there existing geotechnical or soils reports to inform structural design? Options: Yes - provide report, No - need to scope geotech
• Do you require BIM model exchange and clash detection between disciplines? Options: Yes - BIM coordination required, No - 2D coordination acceptable, Optional

Exterior Facade and Material Palette Package

• What level of material documentation is required (material board, specifications, mockup details)? Options: High-level palette only, Material board + key details, Full spec + mockup requirements
• Are there mandated materials or palette restrictions from the jurisdiction or HOA? Options: Yes - mandates, No, Unknown
• Do you require cost-checked material options or choices matched to the cost estimate? Options: Yes - costed options, No - aesthetics prioritized, Balanced
• Will facade mockups or shop mockups be required prior to permit or during construction? Options: Yes - mockup required, Optional, No
• Are sustainability or maintenance criteria influencing material selection (e.g., low-VOC, durable rainscreen)? Options: Yes - specify targets, No, Undecided
• Who will own facade submittals and coordination with manufacturers (architect, GC, owner)? Options: Architect, GC, Owner, Manufacturer

Parking and Landscape Plan

• What parking ratio or total parking count should plans target? Options: Jurisdiction minimum, Market target (specify), Reduced/shared parking, TBD
• Is structured parking required or is surface/podium preferred? Options: Surface, Structured/garage, Podium, Combination
• Are there landscape scope drivers we must include (stormwater BMPs, tree preservation, streetscape standards)? Options: Yes - provide standards, No, Unknown
• Do parking plans need to incorporate EV charging, car-share, or accessible van spaces? Options: EV ready/charging, Car-share spaces, Accessible van spaces, None
• Are civil or grading studies required to validate parking layout and drainage? Options: Yes - required, Optional, No
• What deliverable format is needed for landscape/parking (plan sets, planting schedules, specification)? Options: Plan + planting schedule, Plan + specs, High-level exhibit only

Accessibility and Life-Safety Plans

• What accessibility standards must the project meet (ADA, local accessibility code, Fair Housing Act)? Options: ADA + local code, FHAct required, Local code only, Specify other
• How many accessible units and Type A/B units are required or desired?
• Are there specific life-safety constraints (fire separation, sprinklering, egress travel distances) known up-front? Options: Yes - provide notes, No, Unknown
• Do you require a code analysis document demonstrating compliance with the adopted codes? Options: Yes - full code analysis, Summary only, No
• Is early coordination with the fire marshal or life-safety reviewer expected or required? Options: Yes - required, Optional, No
• Should accessibility retrofit strategies (for existing buildings) be included, or is this new construction? Options: New construction, Existing building - retrofit, Hybrid/partial

Detailed Per-Unit Construction Cost Estimate

• What level of cost estimate accuracy is required (order-of-magnitude, conceptual, detailed unit-cost)? Options: Order-of-magnitude (±20%), Conceptual (±10-15%), Detailed (±5-10%)
• Should the estimate include hard costs only or soft costs and contingencies as well? Options: Hard costs only, Hard + soft costs, Hard + soft + contingency
• Do you have a target per-unit construction budget that the estimate should validate against?
• Should cost estimates reflect alternate material or systems scenarios (e.g., wood frame vs podium vs concrete)? Options: Yes - provide alternates, No - single scenario
• Will the estimator require subcontractor or GC input, and who will coordinate that (architect, owner, GC)? Options: Architect to coordinate, Owner/GC to provide, Estimator to solicit
• Do you require a per-unit cost breakdown by scope (structure, MEP, exterior, finishes) for financial modeling? Options: Yes - detailed breakdown, Summary only, TBD

• Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA)
• Engagement Agreement / Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Fee Schedule & Payment Terms
• Escrow / Deposit Payment
• Milestones & Acceptance Criteria
• Decision Gates & Due-Diligence Deadline
• Assumptions & Dependency Register
• Entitlement & Permitting Commitments
• Change Order & Scope Control Process
• Risk Allocation & Contingency Plan
• Termination & Exit Terms
• Sign-off & Handover Checklist

• Success Review — Project Outcomes vs Targets
• Entitlement Post‑Mortem
• Schedule & First‑Unit Delivery Retrospective
• Continuous Improvement & Shared Channel Setup

• Capture signoffs from Development VP, Construction Manager, and Equity Partner on the Outcomes Summary.
• Compile a short Entitlement Lessons Learned document (including sample planning commissioner comments and responses) and post to the shared channel.
• Update the entitlement submission checklist to include the agreed mitigations and assign a maintainer.
• Identify two recent planner/commissioner contacts to re‑engage on future projects and document their preferences.
• Current State — Schedule Snapshot
• Reach a single reconciled schedule projection for first‑unit delivery and a clear list of obstacles that prevented hitting 24 months (if missed).
• Agree on specific schedule controls and accelerators to standardize across future projects.
• Assign schedule owners and establish a standing reporting cadence for any active projects aiming at 24‑month delivery.
• Publish an updated Project Schedule with critical path and assigned owners to the shared channel.
• Create a Schedule Control Checklist (surveys, early long‑lead procurement, simultaneous permit tracks) to be applied on new engagements.
• Set up weekly 15‑minute schedule standups for active projects within the next business week.
• Current State — Communication Gaps
• Create and launch a shared channel with clear rules, owners, and triage workflow for ongoing issue resolution and continuous improvement.
• Define measurable KPIs for the improvement program and schedule the first review sessions.
• Secure stakeholder commitment to use the channel and to the agreed governance cadence.
• Create the shared channel (platform of record) and populate with the Outcomes Summary, Entitlement Lessons Learned, and Schedule Summary.
• Assign a Channel Owner responsible for triage, SLA enforcement, and scheduling the monthly lessons‑learned review.
• Publish the set of KPIs (first‑pass entitlement rate, avg schedule variance to 24 months, change‑order $/unit) and the reporting template.
• Schedule the first monthly CI review and the first quarterly playbook update meeting.
• Provide a single agreed statement of project success vs the developer's targets (unit yield, entitlement outcome, schedule).
• Surface financial and schedule consequences of any deviations to inform go/no‑go or remediation choices.
• Obtain explicit stakeholder acceptance or documented objections for each acceptance criterion.
• Assign immediate owners for any remediation or escalation actions and set deadlines.
• Publish a one‑page Outcomes Summary (units, entitlement status, per‑unit cost variance, schedule variance) to the shared channel.
• If any acceptance criteria failed, create a Remediation Plan with owners, milestones, and financial impact within 5 business days.
• One‑sentence Current State
• Schedule follow‑up checkpoint in 2 weeks to review remediation progress (if applicable).
• Current State — Entitlement Result Snapshot
• Produce a clear map of cause/effect showing why entitlement outcomes occurred and their project impacts.
• Identify 3–5 repeatable entitlement practices that materially improve first‑submission success rates.
• Assign owners to update the entitlement playbook and integrate key lessons into templates/checklists.
• Shared Channel Design
• Quantitative Outcomes Review
• Sequence of Events & Evidence
• Milestone Variance Analysis
• Triage & Escalation Workflow
• Consequence Summary
• Root Causes & Consequences
• Consequence Mapping
• What Proved the Future State
• Continuous Improvement Cadence
• Diagnosis: Why Outcomes Were Achieved or Missed
• Proven Accelerators
• Validation Against Acceptance Criteria
• Validation & Adoption
• Agreed Schedule Controls
• Failure Modes & Mitigations
• Decision & Next Steps
• Validation & Practice Changes