4 ms·
To be clear, you don't have to build a skyscraper, you could build a "5-over-1" (5 floors of apartments over ground floor retail) which would not be out of plac
by kevinburke 5y ago
To be clear, you don't have to build a skyscraper, you could build a "5-over-1" (5 floors of apartments over ground floor retail) which would not be out of place at all in Davis. One of the earliest test cases for the law was just a guy who wanted to build an ADU without also building two parking spaces for it, back when that was legal for cities to require. https://twitter.com/CSElmendorf/status/1474286668936998914 https://twitter.com/CSElmendorf/status/1474286668936998914
It's just that you probably want the biggest building possible so the potential profit is worth the years of delay while inevitable legal challenges and possibly an EIR work their way through the courts and planning process.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> It's just that you probably want the biggest building possible ...to maximize the loss when the lack of local infrastructure to support people using a building of that size makes it impossible to sell or lease space in it. There's still giant holes in the ground from abandoned skyscrapers the Sacramento market wouldn't support a decade ago, and that was a place not obviously insane for them.
- kevinburke 5y agoThis law wouldn't exempt you from paying any impact fees that Davis charged to e.g. support additional school or water infrastructure. I'll also note that the alternative to infill housing is single family home suburban sprawl, which is a lot more taxing infrastructure wise - apartment dwellers use less water, less electricity, and are less likely to own a car than suburban single family homeowners. Further the consequence of less homebuilding in California is more homebuilding in places like Texas, which are a lot less friendly for the environment.
- brendoelfrendo 5y agoPedant time! "5-over-1" doesn't refer to five floors of residential over one floor of retail, but any configuration of timber stick construction (IBC Type 5) over a concrete podium (IBC Type 1). Thus, you can have a 5-over-1 that's only 4 stories, or a 5-over-1 that's all residential, etc.
- ISL 5y agoTIL.
- sokoloff 5y agoThat was very informative pedantry; thanks!
- kevinburke 5y agoCorrect, but the law at issue is specifically about housing needs, so you’d need to build apartments in this case, you couldn’t build commercial.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoWikipedia says the proliferation of these 4 and 5 stories of wood construction above 1 story of steel/masonry happened because of a 2009 revision to the International Building Code. If that is true, then it would seem like one plus five, one plus four, 5 over 1, and 4 over 1 buildings would refer to how many wood floors the building has above the first floor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-over-1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-over-1 I do not know how good the source is for Wikipedia, but I have only ever seen 5 and 6 story buildings, and never 7 or more stories with the first floor having masonry/steel and then wood for the rest.
- brendoelfrendo 5y agoYou are correct that these buildings were only made possible due to changes in the code as to how many timber stories you could build, and the max is 5 stories. But my point was that they're not called that because they're 5 stories.
- wsinks 5y agoThank you for the more detailed thought! I wasn't sure how tall it would have to be to be a 'skyscraper', but a 5 over 1 seems like a useful building in Davis.