Scorecard · 4 pages · version 2026-09-18.1
Development Feasibility Scorecard
A structured self-scoring sheet across control, land and approvals, utilities, cost basis, delivery and governance — designed to surface the weakest link rather than produce a flattering total.
- Written for
- Owners, sponsors and landowners testing whether a project is worth pursuing
- Decision it supports
- Whether to continue, to investigate a specific gap, or to stop early.
- Dates
- Published September 18, 2026Updated September 18, 2026
What is inside
- Six scored domains with plain criteria
- A scoring method that highlights the weakest link
- What a low score in each domain actually means
- Evidence to attach to each score
- A one-page summary sheet
The full contents
How to score
- Score each item 0 (no evidence), 1 (asserted), 2 (documented) or 3 (documented and current).
- Use the lowest domain score, not the average: feasibility fails at the weakest link.
- Attach the evidence reference beside every score above 0.
- Re-score on a date, and keep the prior sheet. Movement matters more than a single reading.
- A domain you have not investigated scores 0. It does not score "probably fine".
Domain 1 — Control
- Site or asset control documented and unexpired.
- Authority to transact confirmed for every owner.
- Encumbrances identified from a current title report.
- Deadlines and extension rights understood.
Domain 2 — Land and approvals
- Current zoning and use rights confirmed in the jurisdiction's own record.
- Required approvals identified with their process and timing.
- Conditions of any existing approval read in full.
- Site constraints surveyed: floodplain, topography, access, environmental history.
Domain 3 — Utilities and infrastructure
- Capacity confirmed by the provider, in writing, with a date.
- Connection distance, routing and easements identified.
- Offsite requirements and who pays for them identified.
- Timing of provider processes understood against your schedule.
Domain 4 — Cost basis
- Cost built from quantities and dated sources, not from a rate of thumb.
- Soft costs, financing costs and carrying costs included.
- Contingency stated separately and sized to the stage of information.
- Allowances and unresolved scopes listed as exposure.
Domain 5 — Delivery
- Delivery method chosen with reasons, not by default.
- Design status sufficient for the pricing basis being used.
- Contractor or builder capability tested against this scope, not in general.
- Long-lead items identified with current availability.
Domain 6 — Governance
- Decision rights documented among the participants.
- Reporting cadence and format agreed.
- Conflicts and affiliated-party arrangements disclosed.
- A written plan for disagreement, shortfall and delay.
This is the document's actual contents — the PDF is the same material set out as a working sheet, with room to write against each item.
Where it applies
Development
How feasibility, entitlement and delivery work is structured.
Project Readiness Self-Check
A faster browser-based version; nothing stored, nothing sent.
The writing behind it
Site readiness: what an assumptions register should actually contain stays public in full. This document is the same guidance as a sheet you can work through.
Have it emailed instead
Send me a copy of this document.
Entirely optional — the download above is the same file, and needs nothing from you.
General working material, not advice for a specific project. Nothing in this document is an offer of financing or securities, a commitment of funds, an appraisal, or a legal, tax or engineering opinion. Verify every item against your own counsel, licensed design professionals and the authority having jurisdiction.
Explore Development
Score honestly. An early stop is a result, not a failure.