Low Costs, High-Quality Construction
Download
NEW TOWERS WILL RESHAPE THE CHARLOTTE center city skyline by the end of 2009. But the entire county also continues to witness new construction or expanding facilities. This can be attributed to Charlotte’s competitive construction costs, skilled construction workers, and convenient transportation of raw materials. For these and other reasons, companies continue to relocate new or expand current facilities in Charlotte. Favorable weather conditions year-round simply boost the benefits of locating in a city that can boast construction costs well below the national average.
The R.S. Means Company City Cost Index reflects the total cost, excluding cost of land and other peripheral expenses (e.g., architectural fees), of residential, commercial and industrial construction. Many cities have seen higher costs recently, but Charlotte has experienced a construction boom. Developers announced more than 27 million square feet of new office, industrial and other commercial facilities in 2008 alone. The following construction cost index table indicates Charlotte’s competitive construction cost advantage.
Charlotte also shines in the Marshall & Swift Valuation Service rankings. Charlotte’s construction costs rank as one of the lowest of the major U.S. Distribution Centers and cities of comparable size. The average cost of construction has consistently been lower than other major markets such as Memphis, Atlanta and Dallas.
The attraction of the area is apparent in the numbers. In 2008, Charlotte awarded more than 16,000 building permits representing more than $3.7 billion of new construction. The following factors exemplify reasons for Charlotte’s consistently low construction costs.
A Construction Center The growth of Charlotte is a magnet for construction companies. Low costs, high construction activity levels, and convenient access to both materials and skilled labor provide the reasons that over 4,660 construction firms employ 51,471 qualified workers in the metro area. These companies come in a wide variety of sizes, from a number of small, more personal operations to at least 80 firms each employing more than 100 people.
Quality Services In addition to the quality and choices you will find with Charlotte’s construction companies, you will also find a wealth of additional services to design new or reconfigure the perfect quarters for your business. Charlotte has 352 engineering firms with 6,042 employees. In addition, there are 198 architectural firms in the region with a total of 2,318 employees. Over half of these architectural firms are members of the American Institute of Architects, an organization dedicated to the highest standards of professionalism, integrity and competence.
Stable Wages and Talented Workers The North Carolina Right-to-Work law ensures stable wages and dedicated workers. Community colleges and apprenticeship programs offer comprehensive courses that train construction workers to be the best in their field.
Favorable Weather Conditions The Charlotte region enjoys the best qualities of each of the four seasons. One benefit is the ability to build throughout the year and with considerably less insulation costs than Charlotte’s competitor cities. Crews are also able to work with fewer interruptions, making the whole construction process more efficient and cost-effective.
A Wealth of Raw Construction Materials North Carolina is one of the leading producers of brick, lumber and laminates. This assures convenient selection and minimum transportation costs.
The Bottom Line By building your new quarters in Charlotte, you will benefit from the area’s strong economic growth, high quality of life and centralized location. You’ll also have the area’s experienced construction services organizations (who practice the newest and most efficient techniques), easy access to raw materials, and a large number of workable days at your disposal. The bottom line for you is quality construction at a comparably low cost.
|
Charlotte-Mecklenburg's 5-Year Construction Summary
|
|
|
Permit Value (millions)
|
|
Year
|
Permits
|
Residential
|
Non-Residential
|
Total
|
|
2008
|
16,243
|
$1,473.10
|
$2,240.20
|
$3,713.20
|
|
2007
|
21,462
|
$2,223.70
|
$1,823.40
|
$4,047.10
|
|
2006
|
24,250
|
$2,709.50
|
$1,560.90
|
$4,270.40
|
|
2005
|
22,037
|
$2,063.20
|
$1,297.60
|
$3,360.70
|
|
2004
|
19,243
|
$1,730.80
|
$1,326.10
|
$3,056.90
|
|
New Residential Construction By Type
|
|
Year
|
Single Family
|
Multi- Family
|
Total Units
|
|
2008
|
3,758
|
6,747
|
10,505
|
|
2007
|
7,494
|
6,306
|
13,800
|
|
2006
|
10,215
|
7,874
|
18,089
|
|
2005
|
9,775
|
3,827
|
13,602
|
|
2004
|
8,730
|
3,959
|
12,689
|
Average Office Building Cost of Mid-Sized Cities*
in Dollars per Square Foot
|
|
City
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dallas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Houston
|
|
|
|
|
|
Memphis
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atlanta
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charlotte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lexington
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richmond
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cincinnati
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denver
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jacksonville
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portland
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cleveland
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas City
|
|
|
|
|
|
Washington DC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pittsburgh
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baltimore
|
|
|
|
|
|
St. Louis
|
|
|
|
|
|
Detroit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minneapolis
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seattle
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chicago
|
|
|
|
|
|
Los Angeles
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philadelphia
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boston
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newark
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Francisco
|
|
|
|
|
|
New York
|
|
|
|
|
Marshall and Swift, January 2009 *Population between 400,000 and 1,000,000
Average Commercial Building Cost of the Largest Distribution Cities in the U.S.*
in Dollars per Square Foot
|
| City |
Distribution
Warehouse Class C
|
Industrial Light Manufacturing
Class C
|
Industrial Flex Building
Class C
|
Discount Retail Class C
|
Store Class C
|
| Houston |
37.95
|
38.78
|
38.77
|
62.28
|
49.94
|
| Dallas |
38.33
|
38.78
|
38.77
|
62.28
|
49.94
|
| Atlanta |
38.71
|
39.56
|
39.54
|
63.53
|
50.94
|
| Lexington |
38.78
|
39.64
|
39.62
|
63.65
|
51.04
|
| Memphis |
38.78
|
39.64
|
39.62
|
63.65
|
51.04
|
| Charlotte |
39.13
|
39.99
|
39.98
|
64.22
|
51.5
|
| Richmond |
40.41
|
41.3
|
41.28
|
66.32
|
53.7
|
| Cincinnati |
40.87
|
41.77
|
41.75
|
67.07
|
53.78
|
| Denver |
41.7
|
42.62
|
42.6
|
68.44
|
54.88
|
| Jacksonville |
42.53
|
43.47
|
43.45
|
69.81
|
55.98
|
| Baltimore |
43.81
|
44.78
|
44.76
|
71.9
|
57.66
|
| Washington DC |
43.81
|
44.78
|
44.76
|
71.9
|
57.66
|
| Cleveland |
44.2
|
45.18
|
45.16
|
72.55
|
58.17
|
| Pittsburgh |
44.24
|
45.21
|
45.19
|
72.6
|
58.22
|
| Portland |
44.62
|
45.6
|
45.58
|
73.23
|
58.72
|
| Kansas City |
45.87
|
46.88
|
46.86
|
75.28
|
60.37
|
| St. Louis |
46.29
|
47.31
|
47.29
|
75.97
|
60.92
|
| Detroit |
47.12
|
48.16
|
48.14
|
77.34
|
62.01
|
| Minneapolis |
47.96
|
49.01
|
48.99
|
78.71
|
63.11
|
| Seattle |
49.21
|
50.29
|
50.27
|
80.76
|
64.76
|
| Chicago |
50.87
|
52
|
51.97
|
83.5
|
66.95
|
| Los Angeles |
50.87
|
52
|
51.97
|
83.5
|
66.95
|
| Philadelphia |
52.48
|
52.6
|
52.58
|
84.47
|
67.73
|
| Boston |
54.02
|
55.21
|
55.18
|
88.66
|
71.09
|
| Newark |
54.87
|
56.08
|
56.05
|
90.05
|
72.21
|
| San Francisco |
56.71
|
57.96
|
57.94
|
93.08
|
74.64
|
| New York |
58.7
|
59.99
|
59.96
|
96.34
|
77.25
|
| Source: Marshall and Swift, January 2009. *Population between 400,000 and 1,000,000 |
Send this page to a friend |