Screening Outcomes: Proceed, Proceed with Risk, or Stop
Early-stage assessment does not establish feasibility, massing, or yield.
It establishes a decision.
Before deeper analysis begins, the process must determine whether a site advances — and under what conditions. Without a clearly framed outcome, early work becomes descriptive rather than decisive, allowing unresolved risk to drift into later stages.
Effective evaluation concludes with a recorded decision.
Why Binary Thinking Is Insufficient
Screening is often treated as a simple pass–fail exercise. In practice, this framing is incomplete. While some sites clearly fail structural thresholds and must be stopped, others fall into a middle category where as-of-right development is possible but materially constrained.
Treating all viable sites as equal obscures risk. Treating all constrained sites as failures discards opportunities that may still justify further analysis under the right assumptions.
A disciplined screening process distinguishes between viability and risk.
The Three Outcomes
1. Proceed
A “Proceed” outcome indicates that the site clears all primary screening thresholds.
As-of-right development is achievable
No structural zoning or physical gates are present
The buildable envelope translates cleanly into workable massing
These sites warrant progression into massing and underwriting without qualification. Any remaining questions are optimization-related, not feasibility-related.
2. Proceed with Risk
A “Proceed with Risk” outcome applies when a site is viable but materially constrained.
As-of-right development is achievable
Structural gates are absent
Envelope sensitivity, bulk compression, or yield limitations are present
In these cases, screening does not eliminate the site, but it does reframe expectations. Risk is acknowledged upfront, and downstream analysis proceeds with a clear understanding of what may limit performance.
This outcome is not a hedge. It is a decision to proceed with documented constraints.
3. Stop
A “Stop” outcome is reached when the site fails one or more structural thresholds.
As-of-right feasibility breaks down
The buildable envelope collapses under zoning or geometry
Non-negotiable physical or legal constraints are present
At this stage, further analysis does not clarify viability—it delays an inevitable conclusion. Stopping early preserves time, capital, and analytical credibility.
A stopped site is not a failed analysis. It is a completed one.
What Screening Explicitly Does Not Decide
Final massing configuration
Optimal unit mix or efficiency
Financial yield or return metrics
These are downstream questions that assume an early-stage decision has already been reached. Screening determines whether those questions should be pursued — not how they should be answered.
Why Documenting the Outcome Matters
An early-stage review without a documented outcome is not screening.
It is observation.
Recording a clear decision aligns expectations across teams, anchors downstream analysis, and prevents unresolved risk from migrating silently into later stages. It also creates accountability: when a site advances, the rationale for doing so is explicit.
Decision clarity at the earliest stage is what allows flexibility later.
Outcomes as Inputs, Not Conclusions
Screening outcomes are not endpoints. They are inputs into the next stage of analysis. A “proceed” decision frames massing assumptions. A “proceed with risk” decision defines where sensitivity testing should concentrate. A “stop” decision prevents further work entirely.
When outcomes are clearly framed, downstream analysis becomes targeted rather than exploratory. Work begins with known constraints instead of rediscovering them through iteration.
Key Takeaway
Screening is complete only when a clear outcome is recorded: proceed, proceed with risk, or stop.
In Practice
Strong screening does not accelerate the pipeline by moving more sites forward. It accelerates the pipeline by ensuring that only the right sites do.
By framing outcomes explicitly, early-stage assessment protects downstream work and preserves focus on opportunities with a structurally viable path forward.