Abstract
Urban verticalisation is a defining feature of metropolitan growth, yet its dynamics in Latin American cities remain underexplored, particularly regarding project-level traits and broader urban context. This study analyses verticalisation in Santiago, Chile, identifying spatial patterns, urban drivers, and links to socio-economic and regulatory conditions. Using a mixed-methods approach, 892 high-rise residential permits (2010–19) are grouped into six clusters through principal component and cluster analyses. Logistic and ordered logistic regressions assess the influence of urban attributes on vertical development. Results show that proximity to major public transport hubs significantly increases verticalisation likelihood, aligning with global transit-oriented trends. However, lower land values and regulatory flexibility encourage dense projects in areas such as Estación Central, while wealthier zones resist vertical growth due to high land prices and community opposition. The findings highlight verticalisation’s dual nature: it optimises land use and expands housing supply, but also reinforces existing inequalities, segregation and overcrowding. This challenges the assumption that verticalisation responds primarily to luxury demand, linking it instead to affordability, market dynamics and uneven urban governance.
POLICY RELEVANCE
Evidence reveals how urban verticalisation in Santiago is shaped by affordability and regulatory flexibility rather than luxury demand. High-rise projects are a spatially uneven urban development: they are concentrated in areas with lower land values and weaker planning instruments, while wealthier municipalities resist vertical growth through higher land prices and organised opposition. For policymakers and practitioners, these findings underline the risks of unbalanced densification: overcrowded micro-apartments, limited access to green areas and reinforced socio-spatial segregation. Opportunities exist to align vertical development with sustainability goals. Strategic interventions include strengthening planning frameworks, integrating transit-oriented development with quality standards, and ensuring equitable access to housing and urban amenities. Yet the extent to which they can reduce segregation and protect vulnerable groups depends on the broader social, economic and political dynamics of Latin American urban governance, where regulatory fragmentation and market power often constrain public action.