Not unlike the house I live in in terms of scale though a different style. House I'm in was build ca. 1896-1906, about 1550 square feet with 3 bedrooms upstairs

Not unlike the house I live in in terms of scale though a different style. House I'm in was build ca. 1896-1906, about 1550 square feet with 3 bedrooms upstairs (one of which is quite small and my office.) The material costs are not directly comparable to modern materials of similar quality and the HVAC and electricals (and probably plumbing) would be lacking. Still, you could build a house like that for probably 65-85k$ in material (including concrete for foundation, excluding real bricks) depending on where you are in the US (or Canada.) I'm in Canada so we need a bit more insulation then you can get away with in some part of the US. That material cost does not include the cost of the lot, the cost of utility installation, the road, sewers and so on (those are usually included in builder's prices in new subdivisions) and it doesn't include labor. By which point you're probably looking at 125-250k$ minimum. The two biggest variables being land costs and labor. If the house was factory built for assembly onsite (closer to that sears house) like "modular homes" than labor will be much cheaper but so will be the overall finishing level, something like this: http://www.kenthomes.com/kent-homes-browse-homes-two-storey-southhaven.aspx http://www.kenthomes.com/kent-homes-browse-homes-two-storey-... I've seen urban tax assessments (in Montreal) where the house was practically worthless compared to the land value. My own tax assessment puts the bare lot as over 50% of the value.