The site portrait
Every graded site has two pages here. The same facts, the same sources, not one datum more — but two readers who share neither the time nor the question. Confuse them and you lose one.
Two pages, two readers
The site portrait
For whoever lives next to it, sits on the council, or covers the story.
- What weighs most on the grade, in three points
- Where the procedure stands, and until when anything can still be done
- What is still worth asking for, and of whom
- Built to be printed and put on a table
The technical sheet
For whoever reads indicators: operator, analyst, insurer, consultancy.
- The twenty-six indicators, one by one
- Every value with its source and its date
- The state of each measure: measured, announced, absent from the file
- Comparable sites, graded on the same grid
The portrait is not a simplified sheet. It removes nothing: it orders differently, and it goes as far as the question the sheet does not ask — “and now, what do I do?”.
What the portrait adds
The points that will decide
Three, not twenty-six. Chosen by the calculation, not by us: the factor the engine names as dominant first, then what the territory imposes before what the developer announces. The distinction matters: one is not negotiable, the other is.
Where the procedure stands, and until when
The appeal deadline, the comment window, the complaint route once the site is running — read in the statute of the country or state concerned, never in a commentary. Where we have not read it, we say so and say what to ask for instead.
What is still worth asking for
Each question comes from a measure the file leaves blank, and it is conjugated to the stage of the procedure: “to ask before the application is filed”, “to put to the inquiry”, “to get written into the approval”, “to claim under the operating conditions”. A question without its verb is a wish.
What it does not do
- No claim about health. We measure no health effect and we do not claim to. We publish what is in the file, and what is not.
- No sentence written by hand. Everything on a portrait is derived from the same data as the sheet. A sentence written case by case would be a claim nobody could check — and it would be highlighted, therefore believed.
- No letter the sheet withholds. Where a site's or a pillar's grade is not publishable, it does not appear here either. The two pages say the same thing, or they say nothing.
How it is built
The portrait and the sheet read the same artefact, produced by the same calculation. Nothing is entered twice, so nothing can diverge. The questions come from an “indicator × state × stage” table; the procedure from a registry where every claim carries its article, a link to the text, and the date we read it. Where a jurisdiction is unread, the portrait does not invent it: it says what remains true without it. The method and the grade step by step set out the calculation.
Finding a site's portrait
There is no list of portraits: there is one per graded site, and you reach it through the site. Start from the place, or from the grade.
Search the map → Browse the ranking →
Three examples, three different situations:
- Campus IA Fouju (France) ↗ — a project under review: the comment window is open, and the French procedure is read in full.
- STAMP Data Center (New York) ↗ — an announced US project: a mandatory development-agency hearing, SEQRA review, a four-month challenge window.
- Hoffman Estates (Illinois) ↗ — a state whose law we have not read yet: the portrait says what remains true, and what to ask for instead.