Quote:
Originally Posted by strange_brew
I have a question directed towards anyone knowledgeable with the fiscal aspects of development in Los Angeles. It's self evident that L.A. is built out horizontally and for the past 10 or 15 years there's been a dearth of new housing supply. Land prices are high. Current stock prices are high. Shoddy dingbats from the 70's and 80's command prices in the 3 or 400$/sq. ft. range in certain areas. Yet currently, all that seems to be proposed and built are wood framed building 5-7 stories tall. I understand that wood frame construction is significantly less expensive than steel or concrete, but by how much on a cost per sq. ft. basis? With land prices being what they are, would the economies of scale gained by building taller justify the increased construction costs? How can cities like Miami and Chicago build tall and sell in the $300/sq. ft. range, but Los Angeles Can't? Is it a confluence of zoning, litigation, and funding keeping builders on the sideline?
|
I'm not quite sure either. However, I know that, in the next year, at least ten apartment buildings with concrete construction will by underway in L.A. My guess is developers were simply hesitant because of the economy.