My project lead in Denver last month pushed for full 3D modeling on a simple site plan, and I'm still not sure it was worth the extra time.

We had a basic commercial lot layout, maybe 2 acres total. He insisted we model every curb, light pole, and drainage swale in 3D, saying it helps clients 'see the vision'. That added about 15 hours to the schedule. I argued that a clean 2D plan with good notes would have been just as clear for permitting and saved a bunch of time. Now I'm curious where others draw the line. For a straightforward site plan, when do you think 3D modeling is actually needed versus just being extra work?

2 comments

2 Comments

dakota7873d ago

Disagree completely. That extra 15 hours is an investment, not a waste. Most clients can't read a 2D plan to save their life. Seeing a simple 3D model makes the whole thing click for them and avoids costly change orders later. For a two acre site, modeling the key features is totally worth it. I've found it actually speeds up the approval process because the reviewers get it faster too. Your lead was right on this one.

the_kim3d ago

Missing the real cost here, which is file management and future updates. That 3D model isn't a one-time deliverable, it's a new asset you have to maintain. When the client inevitably asks for a tweak to the curb layout six months from now, you're not just editing a 2D line. You're updating the model, re-rendering views, and checking for clashes. That 15 hours upfront can easily turn into 30 hours of long-term overhead for a simple site.