Architecture bureaus: that decision is worth more than the fee you charge for making it - and right now it leaves the practice as a PDF.
Turning a brief, a plot and a building code into something that is both permitted and buildable is the whole craft - and it is exercised in the judgment calls, not in the drawing production that surrounds them.
Reading the site, the authority and the client: which scheme gets approved, what the code will tolerate, what the contractor will actually build.
Code checks, area schedules, drawing set assembly, datasheet collection, tender documents, option comparison, fee proposals.
Your approach becomes the system’s standard: the software prepares and checks, your architects decide and sign.
Not a chatbot in your inbox. Whole workflows in production - across every person and system they touch - on one layer that the next workflow reuses.
A massing option checked against zoning envelope and building code as it changes, instead of a manual review cycle that costs days each time the volume moves.
Early feasibility studies and area schedules generated per option - the week of unpaid work you currently spend to win the commission.
Drawing sets assembled from the model and compliance-checked before submission, rather than a junior cross-referencing sheets by hand for a fortnight.
Specifications written to your standards with product datasheets gathered and kept current, instead of chasing manufacturer PDFs by email.
Contractor tender packages compiled from the specification and drawing set, consistent by construction rather than by proofreading.
Client revision rounds tracked with options compared on area, cost and compliance side by side, so the meeting decides instead of deferring.
Fee proposals and project programmes drafted from scope and precedent projects - hours of partner time per pursuit, most of which never converts.
Every project your practice specifies creates information that manufacturers currently cannot see. The interesting company is not another drawing tool; it is the layer that turns specification decisions into structured data.
A specification tool your practice and others use free, turning spec decisions into structured data. Building product manufacturers pay heavily to learn they were specified on 340 projects and swapped out on 90 at tender - and nobody owns that layer in Europe.
A generator for the repetitive building types in your market: the same typology, the same authority, the same set - productised for the developers who currently buy it as a service.
Both routes need real projects, real authorities and real specifications to be credible. A software company can build the interface; only a bureau can supply the substance.
Snaptrude takes a brief to an LOD 300 model in seven to ten minutes, respecting adjacencies, zoning, building codes and climate, and pitches global firms on hiring fifty people at the price of two. It has 20,000+ users across 30+ countries. It sells software to architects. What it does not own - and what no European player owns - is the specification data that flows out of the decisions architects make.
Code, models, prompts and runbooks transfer to your practice. If we disappeared tomorrow, the system keeps running.
The second workflow costs a fraction of the first, because permissions, integrations and audit trail are already built.
Human-approved gates, evidence on every output, separation between client projects, ISO 27001 and GDPR alignment, deployable in your own environment.
Our engineers sit inside your practice until it runs - then your people build on it, not just operate it.
We invest €50,000 of engineering into one real process inside your firm. Two minutes to apply, twenty to find out if you are a fit.