3 ms·
Your first problem is that two and three families cost more per square foot to build than single family detached and they sell at a discount to single family de
by rufus_foreman 5y ago
Your first problem is that two and three families cost more per square foot to build than single family detached and they sell at a discount to single family detached. As you go up the chain, it gets even more expensive per square foot. Anything other than single family only makes sense when land gets really expensive, and/or when it is subsidized.
Your second problem is democracy.
- endisneigh 5y agoIs a duplex actually more expensive tho? Randomly just Google'd and found this link suggesting the opposite: https://www.turnerandsonhomes.com/blog/cost-to-build-is-a-2-story-house-plan-less-expensive https://www.turnerandsonhomes.com/blog/cost-to-build-is-a-2-... As for your second point, that's true. Though, if voting were mandatory I doubt it'd be difficult to pass.
- rufus_foreman 5y agoThere's something darkly hilarious about the concept of a democracy forcing people to vote.
- snowwindwaves 5y agoIn desireable locations the land cost is often more than the construction cost, so splitting that land cost across multiple dwellings makes them more affordable. Sure the cost per sq ft is higher when you are putting in three dwellings under one roof than for a McMansion, but you are getting three dwellings that in aggregate should be worth more than one McMansion.
- rufus_foreman 5y agoThat was the "Anything other than single family only makes sense when land gets really expensive" part.
- snowwindwaves 5y agoAre there cities with land that isn't expensive?
- rufus_foreman 5y agoIn most cities in the US, land costs are not going to be a large part of the costs of building new construction. Materials and labor will be most of it.