The typical feasibility workflow
We usually start demos of Arcol by asking the person to tell us about their firm’s current feasibility workflow. While there are slight nuances in each case, the answer is generally the same. This is actually a good thing, because it means that Arcol can solve the same problems for lots of people!
Every so often the person in the demo seems surprised that other firms have the same workflow — “Oh really? I thought we were the only ones who did things this way”. Presumably this is because they realize that their workflow is a bit clunky, and they assume that other firms have it figured out...which just isn’t true! This article is meant to get us all on the same page. We’ll describe the feasibility workflow that we’ve heard from talking to LOTS of architects, and then show how Arcol makes the entire process better to allow you to spend more time designing and win more work.
Key Takeaways
Fragmented Workflows: Most firms use a disconnected mix of Excel, SketchUp/Revit, and InDesign, leading to data silos.
Manual Errors: Traditional methods require manual updates across multiple platforms, increasing the risk of out-of-sync data.
Integrated Metrics: Arcol provides real-time calculations for FAR, GFA, and parking while you model.
Automated Presentations: Built-in boards eliminate the need for manual data entry in external tools like InDesign.
Rapid Context: Site boundaries and GIS data can be imported in under 30 seconds to inform design constraints immediately.
Programming
Excel
Most firms we speak to start in Excel for gathering basic programming requirements. Some jump straight to hand sketches and bubble diagrams, but from our experience Excel is much more common as a starting point because it allows the owner to speak in the language they understand best — numbers and dollars. The main issue is that this data is separate from the 3D model, leading to massing attempting to loosely match the Excel numbers without actually being sync’d.
Massing
Tool | Market Share | Primary Use & Limitations |
|---|---|---|
Sketchup | ~60% | Easy massing and exploration; lacks automated metrics for areas/parking. |
Revit | ~25% | Valuable for schedules/areas; slower modeling and limited iteration speed. |
Rhino | ~10% | Powerful computational design; requires high internal support and custom plugins. |
AutoCAD | <5% | Used for 2D site planning and setbacks; requires an extra tool for 3D work. |
Presentation
InDesign
InDesign is ubiquitous across all firms we speak to, and it involves a lot of manual entry to create a presentation document. Numbers from Excel and massing screenshots (or modified images from Illustrator) are placed onto sheets. If anything changes in Excel or the massing model, everything needs to be updated manually or else the documents become out of sync. This happens often.
How does Arcol make all this better?
Arcol is purpose-built for the feasibility workflow, and we’ve crafted it to make sure you can design and iterate quickly while keeping everything in sync automatically.
Instant Site Context:Import boundaries, surrounding buildings, and GIS data in under 30 seconds.
Real-Time Metrics: Automatically calculate GFA, FAR, and parking stall counts as you design.
Dynamic Design Options: Mix and match parking and building options to compare performance instantly.
Intuitive Modeling:Sketchup-like ease-of-use with "first-class primitives" for deeper data extraction.
Auto-Sync Presentations: Model views and metrics update on sheets automatically, eliminating manual re-linking.
Don’t just take our word for how great it is. Go read some of our customers talk about using Arcol. If you’d like to improve your workflow and see all that Arcol can do,
Click here to get started with a trial of Arcol!
Footer
Copyright 2025 Arcol. All rights reserved.