- By price? Then all housing in a hot market is luxury, even what everyone would agree is a dump. Wanting to stop development because the market is hot is exactly backwards.

- By price relative to the market? New construction is usually more desirable than old construction, today's cheap housing was luxurious when new, and we'd better make more so that there will be cheap housing still standing in 50 years.

- By marketing language? Then developers can appease community concerns by changing their brochures a little.

- By square feet? That'd be one truly enormous condo to have a square footage that's offensive when compared to a typical house, although I guess it could be what's happening. If the units turn out to be too big for the market, can't they be subdivided later?

- By amenities? I can speak from experience that media rooms, demo kitchens, event spaces, etc. are not that exciting and certainly not worth even a few hundred extra per month. Most people would rather go to a real gym.

- By interior finishings? Isn't this, like, a few tens of thousands of dollars per unit at the high end? Compared to an overall unit price of $500k+ this doesn't seem like a huge deal.

I've always been confused about what this category means and why it's a useful separator of acceptable vs. bad development.

>Houses over $5million aren't selling like they once did. That doesn't do anything for working people looking to rent apartments.

Do you think we're going to meet demand at $200k without also meeting demand at $4m?