Side-by-Side Modeling: Reusing Previous Projects as “Live” References Instead of template file

[alghgifari]

Hi

I work in a small office mainly designing similar two-story residential houses, so I’ve started using a “Side-by-Side” workflow instead of relying on a template file.

My Workflow:

1. Save As: I start by doing a “Save As” from a previous project that’s close to the new brief.
2. Live Reference: I keep the old model inside the same file, just moved off to the side, while I build the new design in its proper position.
3. Attribute Pickup: I use the Eyedropper/Syringe (Alt+Click) to quickly grab wall composites, window settings, floor heights, etc. I also copy furniture and lighting directly from the old model when needed.
4. Layout Integration: Since the layers and Layout Book are already set up for a similar house, I just need to update the view
5. Cleanup Before Export: Once everything is ready for export (PDF/DWG), I just delete the old project geometry from the file.

It’s honestly been faster for me than building everything from Favorites or constantly rebuilding a template, but I’m starting to wonder about long-term file size and stability.

Questions for the community:

• Does anyone else work like this, and is it actually a good long-term workflow?
• My file keeps getting bigger over time—what’s the best way to reduce/clean it up?
• At what point do you think it’s better to switch back to a proper template-based (.tpl) workflow?

thanks.

[alghgifari]

I actually tried the Hotlink method once, but I gave up on the idea almost immediately.

It completely destroyed my DWG setup. Because of the way Archicad handles Hotlink Master IDs, it started showing the Hotlink ID instead of the actual Element IDs I needed. Since my final handoff is in AutoCAD, having incorrect or 'infected' IDs on my layers and blocks makes the file useless for the rest of the team.

[alghgifari]

"Au contraire indeed! 🤣

I fully realize that being a solo Archicad user is the only reason my 'rule-breaking' works. If I had to manage 100 users, I’d be a template tyrant too—I can only imagine the chaos if everyone brought their own legacy files into the mix!

Since I’m on my own, my focus is purely on getting the work out to Structural and MEP engineers who live in AutoCAD. I’ve streamlined my process so that 90% of the documentation happens in Archicad, and then I just do a final pass after exporting to fix 'ByLayer' settings for the DWG deliverable.

But this leads to my second point: honestly, documentation often feels faster and easier in AutoCAD than in Archicad. If the final handoff is just a flat CAD file, what is the point of pumping hours into a 'perfect' BIM template? For me, if the workflow gets the job done and the engineers are happy, why over-complicate it?

I’d love to know your input—does the strict template actually save you time on the documentation side, or is it just about keeping 100 people from breaking the file

[jl_lt]

Engineers should not be happy, the Architect is the one that should be happy.