These are buildings where basic optimization work (controls, EMS, steam balancing, TRVs, operational fixes) appears sufficient to materially reduce fines and potentially get close enough to compliance without major capital work. The goal is a standardized, lower-touch pathway focused on execution rather than strategic decision-making.
These buildings benefit from optimization but still face meaningful 2030 exposure, requiring deeper decisions such as heat pumps, hybrid systems, fuel switching, tariff changes, or larger capital projects. These are the buildings where technical expert involvement adds value because tradeoffs, economics, and pathway selection matter.
3. Capital Inflection / Financing / Fossil Lock-In Opportunity #
These buildings are already preparing to spend meaningful capital — boiler replacement, risers, refinancing, cooling upgrades, or major infrastructure work. They are high-priority because a near-term decision may either future-proof the building or lock it further into fossil infrastructure, making timing and pathway evaluation critical.
Momentum or public data surfaces something that does not look right: square footage appears off, fuel type conflicts with building age, boiler dates mismatch, BBL/address ambiguity exists, or recommendations do not pass a sanity check. In these situations, recommendations should pause until core facts are verified.
5. Momentum Not Well Suited / Outside Automated Pathway Space #
These are buildings where Momentum is useful for benchmarking, fines, or compliance context but not reliable for automated scope recommendations — for example glass curtain wall towers, schools, unusual mixed-use buildings, commercial properties, or highly custom systems. These require a custom or partner-assisted process rather than standard pathway generation.
The inquiry is procedural rather than project-driven: filing requirements, deadlines, who can submit reports, or LL88/LL97 questions. These should be handled quickly while gently converting the interaction into a project discovery conversation.
These buildings have meaningful fines or clear decarbonization potential, but there is insufficient information about owner intent, building plans, or timing. The immediate goal is not analysis but structured discovery to determine whether there is urgency, readiness, or an actionable pathway.
These buildings lack a meaningful near-term trigger — no major fines, no failing equipment, no refinancing, and no obvious capital moment. Rather than force a project, the objective is to warehouse the opportunity and automatically reactivate it when incentives, equipment age, policy, or economics change.
Recurring Discovery Questions
What are your goals — avoiding fines, lowering costs, replacing equipment, improving comfort, cooling, or long-term planning?
Have you completed any recent work (TRVs, controls, EMS, audits, windows, boiler work)?
Do you have upcoming capital events such as refinancing, boiler replacement, riser work, façade projects, or reserve spending?
What major equipment is near end of life?
Are you evaluating alternatives or already committed to a direction?
What constraints matter most (cost, disruption, invasiveness, timing, board appetite)?
Momentum should automatically classify buildings into case types such as Optimization Candidate, Advanced Pathway Needed, Capital Inflection Opportunity, Data Integrity Review, Outside Scope, Compliance-Only, Prime-but-Unknown, or Future Nurture. This automates the judgment layer currently being applied manually by the technical expert.
Momentum should explicitly surface when confidence is low and explain why — square footage mismatch, boiler data inconsistency, address ambiguity, implausible fuel type, or unusual building typology. Instead of projecting false precision, the software should flag uncertainty and route users toward verification.
Momentum should rank buildings based on fine severity, capital timing, likelihood of action, solution fit, and readiness signals. This mirrors how buildings were implicitly prioritized during triage and helps outreach teams focus scarce attention where action is most likely.
Inbound leads should automatically answer a short set of discovery questions about goals, equipment age, recent upgrades, refinancing, capital plans, and project interest. Responses should drive automated routing into the correct triage pattern instead of requiring manual interpretation.
6. Better Handling of Buildings Outside Momentum’s Pathway Space #
Instead of silently failing or showing weak recommendations, Momentum should explicitly explain when the building type is outside automated pathway modeling and recommend a custom review, partner support, or engineering process.
Momentum should proactively flag suspicious square footage, mismatched boiler ages, fuel inconsistencies, improbable configurations, or BBL/address mismatches. Many of the technical expert interventions in the session were simple sanity checks that software could surface automatically.
8. Capital Timing / Mechanical Inflection Detection #
Momentum should identify buildings approaching major decision moments by using signals like boiler age, DOB permits, refinancing timing, major violations, cooling mandates, or recent infrastructure work. These are disproportionately valuable moments for intervention.
I know a lot already in motion here but Momentum should integrate directly with Salesforce opportunity and building records so outreach teams can send buildings into Momentum without manual exports, PDFs, or CSV conversion. Instead of exporting opportunity lists and attempting to infer addresses from opportunity names, Momentum should pull structured address data (street, zip code, BBL, BIN where available) directly from Salesforce and automatically create or refresh building collections.
At minimum, users should be able to click “Analyze in Momentum” from a Salesforce opportunity list or report and have the relevant buildings instantly appear in a Momentum collection. Longer term, this should support bidirectional syncing so Momentum pathway status, triage category, confidence flags, and recommended next steps flow back into Salesforce automatically.
This didn't come up -- and I know it is on the board -- just sticking that it woudl have been nice to be able to identify if a building is a rental or co-op / condo... I have talked with WES in past about how to approach these different kidns of decision makers differently
Strategy Notebook
1. Optimization Likely Enough #
These are buildings where basic optimization work (controls, EMS, steam balancing, TRVs, operational fixes) appears sufficient to materially reduce fines and potentially get close enough to compliance without major capital work. The goal is a standardized, lower-touch pathway focused on execution rather than strategic decision-making.
2. Optimization Insufficient → Advanced Pathway Needed #
These buildings benefit from optimization but still face meaningful 2030 exposure, requiring deeper decisions such as heat pumps, hybrid systems, fuel switching, tariff changes, or larger capital projects. These are the buildings where technical expert involvement adds value because tradeoffs, economics, and pathway selection matter.
3. Capital Inflection / Financing / Fossil Lock-In Opportunity #
These buildings are already preparing to spend meaningful capital — boiler replacement, risers, refinancing, cooling upgrades, or major infrastructure work. They are high-priority because a near-term decision may either future-proof the building or lock it further into fossil infrastructure, making timing and pathway evaluation critical.
4. Data Integrity / Confidence Issue #
Momentum or public data surfaces something that does not look right: square footage appears off, fuel type conflicts with building age, boiler dates mismatch, BBL/address ambiguity exists, or recommendations do not pass a sanity check. In these situations, recommendations should pause until core facts are verified.
5. Momentum Not Well Suited / Outside Automated Pathway Space #
These are buildings where Momentum is useful for benchmarking, fines, or compliance context but not reliable for automated scope recommendations — for example glass curtain wall towers, schools, unusual mixed-use buildings, commercial properties, or highly custom systems. These require a custom or partner-assisted process rather than standard pathway generation.
6. Compliance / Filing Question Only #
The inquiry is procedural rather than project-driven: filing requirements, deadlines, who can submit reports, or LL88/LL97 questions. These should be handled quickly while gently converting the interaction into a project discovery conversation.
7. Prime but Unknown #
These buildings have meaningful fines or clear decarbonization potential, but there is insufficient information about owner intent, building plans, or timing. The immediate goal is not analysis but structured discovery to determine whether there is urgency, readiness, or an actionable pathway.
8. Low Urgency / Future Nurture #
These buildings lack a meaningful near-term trigger — no major fines, no failing equipment, no refinancing, and no obvious capital moment. Rather than force a project, the objective is to warehouse the opportunity and automatically reactivate it when incentives, equipment age, policy, or economics change.
Recurring Discovery Questions
What are your goals — avoiding fines, lowering costs, replacing equipment, improving comfort, cooling, or long-term planning?
Have you completed any recent work (TRVs, controls, EMS, audits, windows, boiler work)?
Do you have upcoming capital events such as refinancing, boiler replacement, riser work, façade projects, or reserve spending?
What major equipment is near end of life?
Are you evaluating alternatives or already committed to a direction?
What constraints matter most (cost, disruption, invasiveness, timing, board appetite)?
Near-Term Product Upgrade Ideas
1. Triage Engine (Highest Priority) #
Momentum should automatically classify buildings into case types such as Optimization Candidate, Advanced Pathway Needed, Capital Inflection Opportunity, Data Integrity Review, Outside Scope, Compliance-Only, Prime-but-Unknown, or Future Nurture. This automates the judgment layer currently being applied manually by the technical expert.
2. Confidence / Data Integrity Flags #
Momentum should explicitly surface when confidence is low and explain why — square footage mismatch, boiler data inconsistency, address ambiguity, implausible fuel type, or unusual building typology. Instead of projecting false precision, the software should flag uncertainty and route users toward verification.
3. Opportunity Prioritization Score #
Momentum should rank buildings based on fine severity, capital timing, likelihood of action, solution fit, and readiness signals. This mirrors how buildings were implicitly prioritized during triage and helps outreach teams focus scarce attention where action is most likely.
4. “Why This Building Matters Now” Summary #
Momentum should auto-generate a short narrative explaining why a building deserves attention now.
Example:
This compresses technical expert reasoning into plain English for outreach staff.
5. Structured Intake Questionnaire Automation #
Inbound leads should automatically answer a short set of discovery questions about goals, equipment age, recent upgrades, refinancing, capital plans, and project interest. Responses should drive automated routing into the correct triage pattern instead of requiring manual interpretation.
6. Better Handling of Buildings Outside Momentum’s Pathway Space #
Instead of silently failing or showing weak recommendations, Momentum should explicitly explain when the building type is outside automated pathway modeling and recommend a custom review, partner support, or engineering process.
7. Automated Data Sanity Checks #
Momentum should proactively flag suspicious square footage, mismatched boiler ages, fuel inconsistencies, improbable configurations, or BBL/address mismatches. Many of the technical expert interventions in the session were simple sanity checks that software could surface automatically.
8. Capital Timing / Mechanical Inflection Detection #
Momentum should identify buildings approaching major decision moments by using signals like boiler age, DOB permits, refinancing timing, major violations, cooling mandates, or recent infrastructure work. These are disproportionately valuable moments for intervention.
9. Escalation Rules and Routing #
Momentum should automatically route buildings:
10. CRM Auto-Notes and Next-Step Recommendations #
Momentum should automatically generate structured CRM notes summarizing the building pattern, rationale, and recommended next step.
Example:
This reduces manual note-taking and standardizes follow-up quality.
11. Salesforce ↔ Momentum Address Integration #
I know a lot already in motion here but Momentum should integrate directly with Salesforce opportunity and building records so outreach teams can send buildings into Momentum without manual exports, PDFs, or CSV conversion. Instead of exporting opportunity lists and attempting to infer addresses from opportunity names, Momentum should pull structured address data (street, zip code, BBL, BIN where available) directly from Salesforce and automatically create or refresh building collections.
At minimum, users should be able to click “Analyze in Momentum” from a Salesforce opportunity list or report and have the relevant buildings instantly appear in a Momentum collection. Longer term, this should support bidirectional syncing so Momentum pathway status, triage category, confidence flags, and recommended next steps flow back into Salesforce automatically.
12. Identify the "Who" #
This didn't come up -- and I know it is on the board -- just sticking that it woudl have been nice to be able to identify if a building is a rental or co-op / condo... I have talked with WES in past about how to approach these different kidns of decision makers differently