Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhome
Can someone explain the problem here? I thought that there are two main limitations for every site: a limit on FAR (floor area ratio), and height. If the height is not changed here, developers will still be able to build an equally voluminous building. An increase in height will simply allow the developer to build a thinner, taller building, but not one that houses more people. This has been my issue with the whole height debate v. affordable housing. Doesn't it generally cost more money to build higher? There are a lot of well-informed people on this forum, so I'm interested to hear the argument.
|
Yes, It does cost more to go taller. There often is a minimum height to achieve in order to justify the increased cost. Below that minimum and the cost per square foot can exceed the return needed to justify it. The valuation for the the land basis has an impact as well and can be mitigated by building more area (dilute first costs) and by building taller (quality = higher return).
There are sometimes site land-use parameters that can make it difficult to actually utilize the allowable FAR in a low-rise method of construction, and the height limit being raised will help in those cases. But I can't confirm that is the case here without looking into it.
Generally speaking:
Assuming there is an identified market willing to pay for it, then it's all about FAR utilization and how the quality of that space can be enhanced or properly programmed for the building use, to maximize the potential of the investment. Height helps with the flexibility of layout = quality.
A housing tower will often need to be thinner in plan, than an office tower because that is how the living spaces lay out effectively. On the other hand, An office floor to floor height is taller, so a building will run out of allowable height, faster. So it depends on what you are doing.
Building tall is expensive, but can be financially justifiable over something lower. Generally if it's considerably higher, it helps. Marginally often doesn't. It's not black or white as there are other parameters in play, but that is part of it.
Of note, some of the SOWA blocks developed as low rise housing, ended up being just as dense enough overall, to justify abandoning the high rises the city envisioned on those parcels.
Sometimes but not always, the only way to make the financial case to build on a site, is to go tall.