In the uk for instance, the exact same new house, exact same materials, can be 100k GBP less in a cheaper area. Or even half in extreme cases.
Actually, the labor and land costs invert if you go to really unpopular areas, where the land is much cheaper, but no one lives there so labor is much more expensive.
Of course, vinyl windows, cheap flooring, builder grade kitchen and bathrooms bring the cost down significantly. But it still adds up. Foundations aren’t cheap.
Thats what puzzles me.
What changed in the dynamics of the american society in such way that new cities are no longer built? I get it in europe there barely and land left to develop, but the us and canada have plenty.
I can sort of paint the picture of what takes place here (Canada - also a large land mass country).
we have a rather large public rail system run by the government (GO Transit: https://www.gotransit.com/en/)
it is fairly cost effective, modern, and the trains are all new and comfortable.
we also have a major problem with a population which seems to refuse to accept they cant afford to live where they want.
Everything is about "affordable housing in Toronto", but this is unrealistic.
Once i had a conversation at work on this. A younger employee was complaining that he wasnt able to afford a nice house in Toronto and how "unfair" this was.
The problem is he was making these comments to 5 others, not one of us lived in Toronto either, as we cant afford it.
He refused to commute, and felt he was somehow "entitled" to live where he (and millions of others) want to live.
So in short, while the US and Canada have plenty of space, the population doesn't want to live there because the commutes are around an hour each way to work.
we also have serious NIMBY issues, where any attempt to increase population density is met with fierce resistance by the local residents who are concerned about their own property values.
> Everyone wants that 3,000 square foot house, and naturally it has to be within walking distance from work.
The density that was built 100+ years ago was built pre cars. The cities that are dense are dense because they happened to develop at the right time.
Now, everyone in the political process of building a new city is going to question where they are going to have space for large cars, which leads to parking lots, 35ft+ or 10m+ wide streets, and of course quarter acre lots for detached single family homes with garages and driveways.
Creating a new Manhattan type region is simply out of the question due to costs. If the nation cannot even do proper upkeep on existing Manhattan, then there is not much chance of digging all the rail tunnels and etc etc for a new Manhattan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area
A bunch of places towards the top of the list (not just a few) have doubled or more in population over the past 30 years. It is just that in the US people have a death wish and often flock to places like Phoenix and Las Vegas and San Bernardino rather than some place sensible and organize cities into the same endless sprawl everywhere.
We don’t have this as much in the USA. People generally want single family homes that are 2000 square feet+ and 1/5 acre of land. This is a lot of roof, a lot of siding, a lot of timber, a lot of flooring, a foundation, etc. Easily 6-figures in materials and even more for labor, etc. Especially if you go with premium materials. Windows installed are $2k/window. My would cost $70k to install all new, premium windows for example.
Premium hardwood quarter-sawn flooring in a 3000 sq foot gone is another $30k, etc. You can start to see how this adds up from $100k+ in materials for trash to many hundred thousand for premium, quality materials.
But yes, I did some quick research and it appears homes in the UK are among the smallest in Europe. Lots of people on that island I guess. It's no wonder so many of them choose to move to the USA!
Here's an interesting graphic: https://www.businessinsider.com/ons-english-homes-are-a-thir...
