Having some troble getting started with Hektar or just need some tips along the way? We got you covered!
From Hektar one can export 3D files such as .3dm and .obj. The 3D files are organized into layers that correspond to the different functions and geometry types in your scenario. Buildings, parking, roads, and zones each sit on their own layer, One can also export .pdf and .xslx which presents the data points of the scenario.
Yes. You can share a project by inviting someone who already has a Hektar account. If the person you're trying to invite hasn't signed up, you can invite them to create a free account so they can access your project. You can also use a shareable link to invite anyone to your project, but only send it to people you want to have access — anyone with the link can see your project.
Yes. Statistics zones can overlap each other and any other feature, including the site boundary and generative zones. If a building's centroid sits inside two overlapping zones, it counts fully in both, which is useful for phased or layered analysis but means zone totals do not always sum to the project total.
Buildings, units, and floors are assigned by building centroid. If the centroid sits inside the zone polygon, the whole building counts for that zone. If the centroid is outside, none of it counts, even if part of the building visually overlaps. Roads, parks, and parking use area intersection instead, so partial overlaps are counted proportionally.
A statistics zone is a polygon you draw on the map to report areas, ratios, and unit counts for a part of the site separately from the project total. Use them for neighbourhoods, phases, or ownership boundaries. They only group results, they do not change generation or any other feature.
It depends on the complexity of the project, but usually it should take no more than 5-10 minutes to complete the setup and start seeing design alternatives pop up. After that, the parameters can be refined and more alternatives generated, so the project is never really done until you think it is.
Sky View Factor (SVF) define the amount of the skydome visible from the first floor of the building facade. Direct Sun Hours define the average duration of uninterrupted sunlight hitting the first floor of the courtyard facade measured over a year.
Yes, very soon! Though Hektar's strongest fit is multi-family and mixed-use development. Single-family housing works for projects with multiple units on a shared site, such as row houses, point houses, or small clusters. For a single villa on a single lot, Hektar is overkill. The tool's value scales with the number of decisions to make about typology, layout, and density. The more parcels and typology options on the table, the more useful Hektar becomes.
Yes. Master plans are one of Hektar's strongest use cases. The tool handles large sites with multiple parcels, road networks, and varied typology zones. For municipal master planning, Hektar produces comparison scenarios that show how different density targets, typology mixes, or street networks affect outcomes. This is particularly useful for early dialogue with stakeholders, where comparing three master plan options side by side is more productive than presenting one finished proposal.
Yes, there is! We’ve collaborated with multiple developers and architects to integrate custom building systems in Hektar. To know more about this, send us an email and we’ll setup a call to discuss the possibilities further.
Hektar's scenarios are designed for early-stage decision support, not for construction documentation. The geometry is accurate enough to inform acquisition, typology selection, and density negotiations. KPIs like FAR, coverage, and daylight hours are calculated from the actual generated geometry, not estimated. The trade-off is that Hektar does not replace detailed structural, MEP, or compliance verification. A scenario that performs well in Hektar still requires later validation. The accuracy is calibrated for the decisions made at this phase: yes or no to acquisition, which typology to develop further, how to negotiate density with the municipality.
BTA (Bruttoarea) is the total gross floor area including external walls. BOA (Boarea) is the net habitable area inside dwellings, excluding shared spaces and walls. BYA (Byggnadsarea) is the building footprint measured at ground level. All three are used in Swedish planning but for different purposes. Detaljplan rules typically constrain BTA. Pricing and sales materials use BOA. Coverage ratios use BYA. Confusing them is one of the most common sources of miscommunication between architects, developers, and municipalities. Hektar exposes all three for every generated scenario.
E-tal in Sweden, also called Floor Area Ratio (FAR) internationally, is the ratio of gross floor area to site area. An e-tal of 1.0 means buildings can have a total floor area equal to the site area. E-tal is the most common density metric in Swedish planning, used in detaljplan documents and in municipal density targets. It is a useful starting point but not a complete picture. Two schemes at the same e-tal can produce very different outcomes in terms of unit mix, daylight, courtyard quality, and political reception. E-tal tells you how much, not how.
Byggrätt is the legally permitted building volume on a parcel, typically expressed in BTA (gross floor area). It is determined by the detaljplan and constrained by zoning rules, height limits, coverage ratios, and protected zones. Calculating byggrätt accurately requires understanding the interaction between site geometry, daylight requirements, parking norms, and typology behavior, not just the e-tal on paper. The difference between paper byggrätt and tested byggrätt is often substantial. A site with a stated e-tal of 1.2 may only carry 0.9 in practice once daylight, noise, and slope are layered in.
Time savings depend on project scope, but the pattern is consistent. Manual volume studies for a typical residential parcel take one to three weeks of architect time, plus iteration loops with developers and engineers. Hektar reduces this to hours for the initial study and minutes for follow-up scenarios. The largest savings come from the comparison phase. Testing what happens if you change typology, height, or coverage on the same site is near-instant in Hektar. In a manual workflow, each variation is a new study. Teams typically run more variations as a result, which improves decision quality.
The most common outcome is shorter feasibility cycles. Studies that previously took two to three weeks of manual work can be completed in hours, including comparison of multiple typologies and density scenarios. The second outcome is better decisions. Because comparing scenarios is fast, more options are tested. Teams catch trade-offs they would have missed in a manual workflow, such as a courtyard that fails daylight at a specific height, or a typology that delivers the same FAR with better unit mix. The third outcome is sharper conversations with municipalities and clients. Comparing three scenarios side by side reframes density from a number into a design discussion.
Yes, raw land acquisition is one of the highest-value use cases. Before a bid, Hektar tests buildable density against the actual site constraints rather than rules-of-thumb. A site that looks weak under traditional density modeling can look strong when typology and constraint geometry are tested together. A site that looks strong on a coverage ratio basis can look weak when daylight, noise, and slope are layered in. Acquisition decisions made on tested density carry less hidden risk than those made on paper density.
Hektar handles projects from single-parcel infill to multi-hectare master plans. The most common use case is housing development on raw or under-utilized land, where typology and density are the main questions. Single-family housing projects work, as do mixed-use schemes where residential is the dominant function. The tool is at its strongest when the brief is to test what a site can carry rather than to refine a known design. If you already have a fixed scheme and need to detail it, Hektar is not the right phase.
Hektar is built for the phase before a zoning plan. Use it during land acquisition due diligence, before a markanvisning submission, when scoping the volume potential of a site, or when negotiating density and typology with a municipality. The earlier in the project, the more value Hektar delivers, because the cost of changing direction is still low. By the time construction documents start, Hektar has done its job. Later phases are better served by BIM tools like Revit or by detailed structural and MEP modeling.
Hektar is the only generative design tool in the world which utilizes a vast quality controlled library. Design solutions are choosen from the library based on user specified selection criterias. Most feasibility tools either focus on detail (BIM, Revit) or on broad zoning analysis (GIS). Hektar sits in the middle, at the resolution where typology, coverage, and daylight intersect. Compared to manual Grasshopper or Rhino workflows, Hektar removes the setup overhead and lets non-computational designers run parametric studies. Compared to traditional feasibility consultancies, it shortens the loop from weeks to minutes. The trade-off is depth at later stages. Hektar is not a substitute for detailed design or compliance verification. It informs decisions when the cost of changing direction is still low.
Hektar addresses the gap between target density and achievable density. Most early-stage projects lose value through small revisions that compound: a reduced footprint here, a lowered height there, a courtyard that needs to grow for daylight reasons. Hektar enable you to in a very simple way test these constraints upfront by generating scenarios against actual site geometry. It also solves the comparison problem. Three schemes at the same FAR can look radically different in terms of unit mix, daylight, parking, and political reception. Hektar makes those differences visible side by side, so decisions about typology and density are made on evidence rather than rules of thumb.
Hektar serves three core audiences. Property developers use it to test buildable density before acquisition and to compare typology scenarios for the same parcel. Architecture firms use it for early-stage volume studies, replacing manual Grasshopper or Rhino workflows when speed matters more than detail. Municipalities use it for master planning, zoning evaluation, and feasibility analysis of public land. The common thread is anyone who needs to understand what a raw land site can carry, in terms of density and typology, before committing direction.
Hektar is a platform for early-stage parametric volume studies on raw land. It generates massing scenarios with associated KPIs, including coverage, BTA, daylight hours, parking ratios, and typology distribution. The tool reads site geometry, slope, noise contours, and other constraints, then tests where buildings can stand and what they would yield. Hektar is built for the feasibility phase before zoning plans are in place, when decisions about typology, density, and acquisition viability carry the most risk. It replaces the slow back-and-forth between architect, developer, and engineer with a single platform that produces and compares scenarios in minutes.
We're constantly working to make Hektar better, but we're still at an early stage and some features are still to come. We choose what to build next mostly based on feedback from our users, so if there's a feature you'd like to see, please let us know through the feedback form in Hektar or by sending us an email.
We take privacy seriously. We host all our servers in the EU, and none of our solution providers that handle personal data have servers outside the EU. You can read our privacy policy linked in the footer of the page.
Like many other companies, Hektar came to be out of a frustration we felt ourselves when working with early-stage planning and development. We wanted to create a solution that was as powerful as it was simple to use, and that has been the design philosophy behind Hektar from the start.
Not entirely, but it changes what consultants do. Hektar handles the generative and exploratory phase of feasibility: testing typology options, comparing density scenarios, producing initial KPIs. Consultants then focus on judgment-heavy work where their expertise matters most: validating compliance, refining the selected scheme, navigating local planning politics, advising on acquisition strategy. The shift is from consultants spending most of their time producing scenarios to consultants spending it interpreting them. Several Hektar customers use the tool internally and engage consultants for the validation and refinement phase only.
Parametric design uses rules and parameters to drive geometry rather than drawing each scenario by hand. In urban planning, it means defining typology rules, site constraints, and density targets, then letting the system generate combinations that satisfy them. The advantage is exploration. Instead of designing three schemes manually over two weeks, parametric workflows can test thirty scenarios in an hour. The trade-off is that parametric tools require clearly defined inputs. Vague briefs produce vague output. Hektar makes this approach accessible to non-computational designers by handling the parametric logic in the background.
A volume study is an early-stage analysis of how much building mass a site can carry. It tests typology, coverage, height, orientation, and site constraints to produce a buildable-density estimate. Volume studies sit between zoning analysis and detailed design. They answer questions like: how many units fit on this parcel, what typology mix works, how does daylight perform, and what is the BTA potential. Volume studies are typically the first quantitative analysis in a project, used to support land acquisition decisions, markanvisning submissions, and early negotiations with municipalities.
Generative design is a design philosophy where we use goals and constraints to guide the design instead of drawings. One advantage of using generative design in an early design phase is that it can account for many different types of rules at once, and it makes it easier to explore a vast design landscape quickly.
Yes. Subscriptions can be cancelled at any time directly from your account settings. There is no minimum contract period on Pro plans. If you cancel, your projects remain accessible until the end of your current billing period, and you can export them as .obj, .3dm, .pdf, or .csv to preserve your work.
Yes. The enterprise plan is built for organizations running multiple projects across teams. It includes dedicated onboarding, training for your staff, ongoing support, and the ability to integrate custom building systems or organization-specific rulesets into Hektar. Pricing is based on team size and use case. Contact us through the contact page to discuss your setup.
Hektar Pro is offered in three tiers based on usage. Each tier includes the same core features and data access. The difference is the number of generations included per month. You pay for the volume of feasibility work you actually do, not for unlocking features. Most individual users decide on plan 1 or 2. Larger teams typically benefit from the enterprise plan.
The free tier lets you test Hektar on real projects with a limited number of generations per day. You still get full access to data layers including property regions, cadastral data, and administrative boundaries, so the workflow is identical to a paid plan. The free tier is built for evaluation and small one-off feasibility checks, not for teams running multiple projects in parallel.
Yes, it is. Please contact us and we’ll help you to get started.
Yes, the base tier of Hektar is free and will continue to be so. There are some limitations however in the free tier. Please have a look at our pricing page for the full list of features in each tier.
We aim to get back to you within 1-2 business days. However, depending on the topic answering times may vary. For urgent matters, please call us on +46 72 252 114.
* Required fields to fill in.
