Analysis Logic
This page outlines how early stage development feasibility is evaluated in practice. It translates the decision framework into a structured sequence of analysis used to determine whether a site should move forward.
The objective is not to advance projects. The objective is to resolve uncertainty in the correct order and stop when risk becomes dominant.
Scope of analysis
The analysis focuses on early stage feasibility only. It is intentionally limited to questions that materially affect go or no go decisions before capital is committed.
Later stage work such as detailed underwriting, entitlement strategy, or execution planning is not addressed here.
Sequence logic
Early stage analysis follows a fixed order. Each step exists to answer a specific question and to determine whether further work is justified.
Once a blocking issue is identified, the analysis does not continue downstream.
Stage 01
Context and adjacency
The analysis begins with the physical and contextual reality of the site. Surrounding uses, scale, street conditions, access, and adjacency conflicts are reviewed before any zoning metrics.
If the site is fundamentally misaligned with its immediate context, zoning capacity alone does not justify further analysis. Context failure at this stage is treated as a hard stop.
Stage 02
Zoning envelope reality
Zoning is evaluated based on what can realistically be delivered on the actual site. Envelope controls, height limits, setbacks, street wall conditions, and lot geometry are tested together.
As of right compliance establishes eligibility, not feasibility. It is treated as a baseline, not a conclusion.
Stage 03
Achievable scale
This stage translates allowable density into achievable development scale. Theoretical FAR is converted into realistic gross floor area after envelope constraints, circulation, cores, and efficiency losses are applied.
Sites that rely on perfect layouts, aggressive efficiency, or optimistic assumptions around floorplates and depth do not progress. If scale only exists in theory, it is not treated as viable.
Stage 03
Achievable scale
This stage translates allowable density into achievable development scale. Theoretical FAR is converted into realistic gross floor area after envelope constraints, circulation, cores, and efficiency losses are applied.
Sites that rely on perfect layouts, aggressive efficiency, or optimistic assumptions around floorplates and depth do not progress. If scale only exists in theory, it is not treated as viable.
Stage 04
Parking and circulation
Parking, access, loading, and internal circulation are evaluated early due to their structural impact on feasibility. These elements are tested against zoning requirements and physical constraints simultaneously.
If parking or circulation cannot be resolved cleanly without variances, design distortion, or operational compromise, the analysis stops. Parking feasibility is treated as a gating condition, not a downstream coordination issue.
Stage 05
Risk balance check
Zoning clarity is weighed against execution risk. Entitlement exposure, construction complexity, phasing constraints, operational friction, and coordination risk are assessed together.
When execution risk begins to dominate the development outcome, further analysis is not justified. Technically compliant but structurally fragile sites do not advance.
Stage 06
Decision outcome
Each analysis concludes with a clear decision. Proceed, pause pending resolution, or stop.
Conditional outcomes are treated as unresolved risk rather than approvals. If the conclusion is not clear, the site does not move forward.
How this logic is used
This logic is applied consistently across sites to ensure comparable decision making. It is designed to support disciplined screening, clear internal communication, and early capital protection.
The output is not a business plan. It is a decision boundary.
Relationship to the decision framework
The Decision Framework defines how development risk is evaluated. This Analysis Logic applies those principles through an ordered feasibility process.
Together, they form a system for early stage decision making.