OnlyPlans: Intent-Based Design vs. Tectonic Modelling
(a.k.a. Why I’m Done Drawing the Same Wall Twice)
Ever finish a 60-hour week and wonder why you’re redrawing that same damn wall section for the fifth project in a row? Yeah, me too.
Let’s talk about two very different ways to model buildings—and why one of them scales, and the other one just burns time.
Intent-Based Design: Let the Computer Do the Boring Stuff
This is the world I live in.
You start a design by telling the system what it is: “Multifamily over podium, 1B zoning, 62% efficiency, 5 stories, 1-hour rated corridors.” That’s your intent. The machine handles the rest. It figures out the layout, the fire rating logic, the unit counts, the stairs, the trash chute. It’s not magic—it’s just logic that’s been encoded.
The goal isn’t to replace the architect—it’s to elevate them. When the system handles the low-leverage stuff, you get to focus on the real work: context, form, flow, experience. Design.
It’s not about less thinking. It’s about thinking better.
Upside: Your decisions scale. You can explore more options, faster.
Downside: You’ve gotta have systems in place. And yeah, some of them will suck until you fix them.
Tectonic Modelling: Manual Mode
This is how most of us were trained. You start with a blank wall. Add the studs. Add the gyp. Insulation. Vapor barrier. Sealant. Every layer, a click. Every detail, a choice.
It’s got a certain romance to it. You’re crafting something. But let’s be real—it’s slow. And if you’re doing production work, it’s wasteful. That same wall you built on Project A? You’re rebuilding it on Project B, even though 98% of it is identical.
Tectonic modelling gives you ultimate control. But it doesn’t scale. It doesn’t teach the machine anything. It doesn’t create leverage.
Upside: Pure control. Every line is yours.
Downside: Every mistake is too.
So What Do We Do With That?
We blend it.
We use intent-based systems to get to 80%—fast. Then we layer in tectonics where it matters. On the joints, the transitions, the moments that make the building sing. But we don’t start from scratch unless we have to.
The real play is in shortening feedback loops. That’s how you unlock iteration. That’s how you stop saying “it’s too late to change” in week 10 of design.
When the boring stuff’s automated, we get to spend our time solving better problems—like housing, affordability, livability. The stuff that actually matters.
Bottom Line
Tectonic modelling is for when you don’t trust your system yet.
Intent-based design is for when you do.
So build your systems. Teach the machine. And let it take care of the repetitive work—so we can get back to doing what we’re actually good at: designing.
Until next time, stop drawing the parking stalls. Start fixing the housing crisis.