Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280
^^^ I'm not certain they need to go back to the city on this. I believe the only real PD triggers are height and FAR and the intent of this design is to pack all of the FAR into a lower height thereby increasing the profitability of the design.
|
How do you figure? The foundation's already in the ground, so Related is paying for 1047' of height whether they use it all or not.
Also - cramming FAR into a lower height makes sense for office property, where added lease depth is desirable, but not for residential or hotel where you want to maximize the perimeter for access to light. People will pay more for a light-filled unit than they will for a deep one with a solitary window at the end. If you can save on foundation costs it makes sense to quash the height, but as I already said, the foundation for a supertall at Waterview is a (literally) sunk cost.