Working material for the board and invited collaborators.
The conditions that appear when this kind of work holds up, set out as tests rather than claims.
Each condition is stated so that it can be checked against a real precedent and found false. The wording is provisional: phase two either finds each one in the cases or drops it.
| Candidate condition | What would confirm it | What would contradict it |
|---|---|---|
| The owner held the land before the design work began | A case where acquisition preceded design and the project completed | A completed case that assembled land after design, on time and on budget |
| One organization held the relationships over a long period | A case with the same lead organization across a decade or more | A case that changed lead partway and completed anyway |
| The capital did not need a market rate return | A case financed largely by mission capital or public subsidy | A comparable case financed at market and still delivering the same rents |
| Growth happened inside the zoning that already applied | A case that built to its program without a rezone | A case whose rezone arrived on schedule and cost little |
| Ownership was spread across more than one entity | A case where multiple owners each drew from a fund open to one applicant | A single owner case that drew the same total from the same funders |
| The bedroom mix matched the households already in the neighborhood | A case whose mix tracked local household size and held occupancy | A case with a mismatched mix that held occupancy anyway |