Not that I am aware of. Square footage calculations only indicate the relative floor area of the unit not the value of the unit itself. If you have say 8 units that are all the same size stacked one above the other like in a corner of the building–well the unit on the first floor which doesn’t have a view is not going to rent as much as the unit of the eighth floor. So even though all of them are say 750 SF the one on the first floor might rent for $1 SF with the one on the eighth floor renting for $1.5 SF. That is how they add the value of the view and/or the cathedral ceiling. So in your example the value of the 400 SF would be in an assessment of the unit and NOT on the SF only.
HGTV airs a number of shows that were produced in Canada, maybe more than half of their total programming.
Of course. It’s an area measurement, not a volume measurement.
One question I have - do you measure the helipads as part of the house’s square footage?
Mumbai billionaire’s home boasts 27 floors, ocean and slum views
By Mark Magnier, Los Angeles Times, October 24, 2010 | 7:35 p.m.
But that’s kinda my point. If you’re looking for a place there’s then no indicator that one might be more spacious (read attractive) than another. If one has a vaulted entrance or a living room that’s 2 stories high, that added area isn’t represented in the measurement presented.
No, square footage is interior space.
I haven’t run across that problem in too many residences (three helipads). Two helipads are the max around here.
I agree that it would be too big. I had a home in Arizona that was 6000 Sq Ft and had 4 large BR plus maids quarters etc. The 550 Sq Meter home has 5920.2 Sq Ft. Very large for a 2 BR home. Also very small if 550 Sq ft. Something seems to be wrong with the measurements.