One of my favorite websites is Lifehacker.com. I was happy to find this article that highlights the potential downfalls of living on the top floor of a building. Though, depending on the desires of my clientele, quality of the building, and height of the building, I will advocate for the top floor. For instance, if they are sensitive to sound, I’ll point out that having nobody live above you means less risk of some girl in high heals, or a guy in boots with a penchant for pacing, to keep them up at all hours. On the other hand, the top floors will frequently cost more to cool. Especially if the attic space (if any) is poorly insulated.
Below is a quote from the story.
“Apartments are constructed at the cheapest costs possible and change hands often. I frequently pay more in utility bills than friends who have twice the space I do (and the temperature control doesn’t always guarantee comfort). Third floor units often offer vaulted ceilings, which are cool for aesthetic but bad for budgets.”
This statement is a generalization, but I’m comfortable agreeing with it when discussing older complexes and some new construction outside of downtown. High rise apartment buildings like the Monarch, Legacy, and Ashton, which are built from concrete and metal, are not immune to these issues, but they are much less prone to excessive noise and increased energy costs. In most downtown Austin buildings, energy costs are driven by which side of the building you face. If you face west, then you get the scorching hot evening sun. Interview residents in any building oriented north-south, on average those who live in units that face east will have lower energy bills than those living in units that face west.
Lifehacker: “Avoid The Top Floor To Save On Aparment Expenses
Related:
The Downtown Austin Blog studies Austin’s penthouse economics
-Jude
