Everything else you lend against, you can go and look at. A construction file is a promise that something can be built — and that promise rests on a permit nobody has applied for, under a code nobody in the room has read. We read it, for that one address, and cite every line.
Sit down with us for half an hour — we will walk your team through what the report catches and where it stops — and we will run ten properties of your choosing, free, so you can see what we would have flagged on files you already know the ending of. Addresses only; no loan files, no borrower information.
Offered to institutions that provide real-estate lending — banks, credit unions, mortgage and private construction lenders. Not available on an individual basis.
Not because anyone is careless — because the answer is genuinely hard to get. It lives in two departments that do not talk to each other, in documents that were amended after they were published.
Planning tells you what may go on the lot. Building safety tells you what it will cost to build it there — sprinklers, separations, egress, energy. A project can clear one and be wrecked by the other, and the two counters rarely compare notes.
Local amendments, overlay districts, and recorded planned-development plans sit on top of the adopted code and routinely override it. A parcel inside a PD can carry standards found only in an instrument recorded at the county.
By then the loan is committed, the borrower has paid for drawings, and the options are a redesign, a variance, or a project that does not finish. This is the scenario the whole file was supposed to avoid.
Whether to lend, at what advance rate, and how much of the contingency is really contingency.
The expensive version of this problem is a draw request on a project that has stalled at the counter. Every question we answer is one that would otherwise surface after the money is out.
Declining fast is worth nearly as much as approving fast. If a property cannot carry what the borrower described, that is better known before the file has consumed anyone's week.
Every answer is cited to the subsection it came from, with the adopted code editions named and dated. When someone reviews the decision a year from now, the reasoning is still in the folder.
A second unit, a change of use in a leased bay, a scrape-and-rebuild — the limit on writing more of these files is rarely demand. It is confidence that the thing described can actually be built on that lot.
One is a subsidy that only exists in certain towns. The other is a building-code event that a change of use sets off, and that shows up in the file as cost.
A bay that was retail and becomes a restaurant, an office that becomes a clinic, a warehouse that becomes a gym — the zoning may allow every one of those, and the building code still re-opens: sprinklers, egress, accessibility, energy. None of it is in the purchase price, and it shows up in the file as cost. The report names the triggers for that address so the budget line exists before the draw schedule does.
Jurisdictions certified by DOLA as ADU Supportive unlock CHFA’s ADU finance programs — interest-rate buydown and credit enhancement — for borrowers in those towns. 27 are certified statewide, and 18 of them sit in our service area. We can answer in full for 8 of 27 today: Berthoud, Boulder, Erie, Lafayette, Longmont, Louisville, Lyons, Superior. Not yet, in progress: Adams County, Brighton, Commerce City, Fort Collins, Larimer County, Loveland, Timnath, Westminster, Wheat Ridge, Windsor.
A subsidized loan still has to be a buildable project. The program makes the money cheaper — it does not make the lot bigger, move the setback, or waive the sprinkler trigger.
We are not affiliated with DOLA or CHFA and have nothing to do with program eligibility. It is simply checkable at the link above.
The same shape you already use for valuation — a standard product on every file, a closer look on the ones that warrant it.
Zoning district, adopted code editions with dates, buildable envelope, allowable use, overlays, and any planned-development plan governing the parcel. Every answer cited. Ordered by address; delivered in minutes.
When the file turns on whether the borrower’s actual project fits the lot, the workspace answers that question rather than the property’s in general — the building placed on the site plan, the envelope re-checked as it moves, and the code that bites reported against it. Twelve months on that parcel, because a scheme under review rarely stays still.
Flat, published pricing per property. No monthly billing, no minimum — a fixed fee is also the simplest thing to place on a disclosure.
We would rather say it here than have you find it. It is exactly the sort of thing that ought to make a credit officer pause, so here is how it is handled — and the rules below apply to every file we report on, a tenant fit-out as much as a second unit.
Where we have supplied a report to a lender as independent work, we will not afterwards take the construction contract on that property. We keep the list, and it is open to inspection by any lender we work with.
If Addwell already holds the contract, any analysis we produce says so on its face and is not offered as independent. Where you need independent verification on one of our projects, get it from someone with no interest in the outcome.
We do not pay for introductions and we do not accept payment for them. One service, one published price, to whoever wants it. It keeps everything simple.
Nothing we do restricts who a client banks with, and nothing here is conditioned on where a loan is placed.
That third one is the one most worth reading. A tool that answers everything confidently is more dangerous to you than one that admits its edges.
Half an hour with your team, and we will run ten properties of your choosing at no charge — addresses only, nothing else, no borrower information. You already know how those files ended, which makes them the fairest test there is. If we would have caught nothing, that is a genuinely useful answer too.
Questions about how this would sit in your process, or what a compliance review would want to see? Ask directly — joshua@addwell.design.