3 ms·

There are countless millions of people who are qualified and even have the capital required to finance/build a basic, durable shelter that is nice enough to hav

There are countless millions of people who are qualified and even have the capital required to finance/build a basic, durable shelter that is nice enough to have guests spend the night in. The materials, when purchased from Home Depot, would cost $20,000 and require maybe $7,000 worth of labor to construct. When you consider that most suburban land about 1hr outside city by car can go for even just $20,000, it seems pretty ludicrous to pay $400,000 for something that can be had for $50,000. The ONE thing stopping this from being a reality is the town government/mortgage lender junta. They've basically made it illegal in most metropolitan areas to purchase anything other than a big, rotting house.

gizmo686 8y ago
>When you consider that most suburban land about 1hr outside city by car can go for even just $20,000 Isn't this the point. Most people don't want to live 1hr away, so are forced into more expensive land.
- anoncoward111 8y ago
  1hr is "close" by NY standards now.
  - perl4ever 8y ago
    1 hour is 50 miles in my part of NY.
    - scarejunba 8y ago
      It's 7 miles from the Outer Sunset to the Embarcadero in SF.
      - mmt 8y ago
        This corresponds, IIUC, to a 45-minute minimum ride on public transit, not counting waiting and walking times. I'm not sure if driving is any faster, but maybe not, when parking and walking (if in-building parking is unavailable or prohibitively expensive). That means it could still be a full hour away. That intra-SF travel by transit motor vehicle could be slower than coming from outside the city could be a quirk specific to SF, something I mentioned in another thread [1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17839636 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17839636
ianai 8y ago
And those rentals are largely rotting as well. I’ve got a sheet metal “patio” with sheet metal stair cases. I have to climb up and downstairs regardless of whether I’m coming or going. Oh and I signed off on asbestos and lead paint in the agreement. So glad the free market regulates itself so well.
- wmil 8y ago
  > So glad the free market regulates itself so well. It's nimby rules passed by the municipal government causing the problem. The free market would be a huge step up. Whatever other problems it has, it's good a building new stuff.
tejohnso 8y ago
I think your estimate is too low [1], but I share the sentiment. I'd love to see suburbs with fewer mcmansions and more reasonable housing. 700sqft with a small accessory unit on a quarter acre lot would be a huge step up for many families and should be considerably cheaper than the typical over-sized homes we see all over the place. There aren't enough options. [1] For a durable shelter nice enough for guests...assuming this means an actual house, modestly outfitted... There's site prep, foundation materials and labor, plumbing/elec work, hookup fees, development fees, permit fees, lawyer, real estate fees, appliances, furnishings, all in addition to the actual structure and land materials and labor cost.
- paulddraper 8y ago
  > 700sqft with a small accessory unit on a quarter acre lot Most people think that houses are expensive. They are, but in developed areas the land itself plays are large role. (That's why the top three important factors in real estate are location, location, and location. It's not that much more expensive to build a structure in San Francisco than Bakersville.) So it's unlikely that in most suburban areas it will make economic sense to build a only 700 sq ft house on a entire quarter acre. At that point, a duplex/quadplex makes far more market sense. And a duplex/quadplex is cheaper to build per resident.
hellisothers 8y ago
$27,000 / 270sqft is $100 per sqft for “new construction” which is really low and 270sqft is really tiny, bit too tiny to have guests stay over. I agree $400,000 is too much but there are plenty of sub $100,000 properties in the Midwest suburbs (I’ve looked). And no, you shouldn’t be allowed to just buy a 400sqft patch of land to build a shed for yourself in the suburbs :)

gizmo686 8y ago

>When you consider that most suburban land about 1hr outside city by car can go for even just $20,000 Isn't this the point. Most people don't want to live 1hr away, so are forced into more expensive land.

anoncoward111 8y ago
1hr is "close" by NY standards now.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  1 hour is 50 miles in my part of NY.
  - scarejunba 8y ago
    It's 7 miles from the Outer Sunset to the Embarcadero in SF.
    - mmt 8y ago
      This corresponds, IIUC, to a 45-minute minimum ride on public transit, not counting waiting and walking times. I'm not sure if driving is any faster, but maybe not, when parking and walking (if in-building parking is unavailable or prohibitively expensive). That means it could still be a full hour away. That intra-SF travel by transit motor vehicle could be slower than coming from outside the city could be a quirk specific to SF, something I mentioned in another thread [1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17839636 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17839636

ianai 8y ago

And those rentals are largely rotting as well. I’ve got a sheet metal “patio” with sheet metal stair cases. I have to climb up and downstairs regardless of whether I’m coming or going. Oh and I signed off on asbestos and lead paint in the agreement. So glad the free market regulates itself so well.

wmil 8y ago
> So glad the free market regulates itself so well. It's nimby rules passed by the municipal government causing the problem. The free market would be a huge step up. Whatever other problems it has, it's good a building new stuff.

tejohnso 8y ago

I think your estimate is too low [1], but I share the sentiment. I'd love to see suburbs with fewer mcmansions and more reasonable housing. 700sqft with a small accessory unit on a quarter acre lot would be a huge step up for many families and should be considerably cheaper than the typical over-sized homes we see all over the place. There aren't enough options. [1] For a durable shelter nice enough for guests...assuming this means an actual house, modestly outfitted... There's site prep, foundation materials and labor, plumbing/elec work, hookup fees, development fees, permit fees, lawyer, real estate fees, appliances, furnishings, all in addition to the actual structure and land materials and labor cost.

paulddraper 8y ago
> 700sqft with a small accessory unit on a quarter acre lot Most people think that houses are expensive. They are, but in developed areas the land itself plays are large role. (That's why the top three important factors in real estate are location, location, and location. It's not that much more expensive to build a structure in San Francisco than Bakersville.) So it's unlikely that in most suburban areas it will make economic sense to build a only 700 sq ft house on a entire quarter acre. At that point, a duplex/quadplex makes far more market sense. And a duplex/quadplex is cheaper to build per resident.

hellisothers 8y ago

$27,000 / 270sqft is $100 per sqft for “new construction” which is really low and 270sqft is really tiny, bit too tiny to have guests stay over. I agree $400,000 is too much but there are plenty of sub $100,000 properties in the Midwest suburbs (I’ve looked). And no, you shouldn’t be allowed to just buy a 400sqft patch of land to build a shed for yourself in the suburbs :)