How much does it cost to build a subdivision of houses on a large plot of land?
"A bank may not like loaning money to you for this. That is one snag. You listed 500,000-600,000$ for a monster of a house (3000 sqft is over three times the average size of homes a hundred years ago). Add in the price of the land at 60K (600K divided ten ways). Where I live, there is a 15% VAT tax on new homes. I can't find out if California imposes a VAT tax on new homes. Anyway, returning back to the topic, because of the risk of loaning you 660K for a piece of land and construction, the bank may only let you borrow half or less of the final expected cost (not value). Another huge snag is that you say in a comment to quid ""I came up with this conclusion after talking to someone who had his property built in early 2000s in bay area for that average price"". Let's apply 3% inflation over 15 years to that number of 200$/sqft. That brings the range for construction costs to 780K-930K. Even at 2% inflation 670K-810K. Edit: OP later expanded the question making it an inquiry on why people don't collaborate to buy a plot of land and build their homes. ""Back in the day"" this wasn't all that atypical! For example, my pastor's parents did just this when he was a young lad. Apart from the individual issues mentioned above, there are sociological challenges that arrive. Examples: These are the easy questions." Obviously you're missing that there is no house on the land so the cost comparison between a house and land isn't terribly valid.   The land might not have connections to the municipal sewage/power/electrical and may need zoning changes and permits for those connections.   You're missing that you don't know how to design and build a house so you'll need to hire people for those tasks; then live through the process, headaches, and probable budget overruns. Edit: You're also missing that lending for speculative land development is significantly different from lending for a single family home. The estimated cost of $200 sqft of living space is achievable by builders who are following one the their standard plans. They build hundreds of homes each year across the region using those standard plans. They have detailed schedules for constructing those homes, and they know exactly how many 2x4s are need to build house X with options A, F,  and P. They buy hundreds of dishwashers and get discounts. That price also includes the cost of the raw land and the required improvements of the property.  You need to know the zoning for that land. You need to know what you can build by right, and what you can get exceptions for. You don't want to pay $600 K and then find out you can only build a 1 level house and you can only use 1/4 acre. You would need to start with a design and then have the architect and the builder and a real estate lawyer look over the property. Then they can give you an estimate of what it would cost to put that design on that property.  83k sqft? I mean it can accommodate at least 10 houses. It depends on what is the minimum lot size. If the maximum allowable density is three houses per acre you can get 6 in 2.2 acres, but if the minimum lot size is supposed to be 5 acres, then you will need an exception just to build one house. And exceptions involve paperwork, hearings and lawyers. Let's think like a real estate developer. First you need to check with the zoning commission the restrictions for the area. Let's say that the plot is actually suitable for 10 homes. You buy the land. You also need to finance the build itself. If you don't have enough cash you need to acquire financing from banks and perhaps from other sources as well, because banks won't loan you the entire amount.  Next you need to divide the plot into 10 pieces, making sure that each piece has driveway access to the street and plan access to utilities (water/sewer/electricity/broadband/phone lines). Plan the size and position of each house. Get building approval. This is a process that can take some time, especially if they have follow-up questions. Get a builder to build the houses, including ground work and preparation for utilities. Get approval for the finished houses. A building inspector will check that the houses follow the permission and all laws and regulations that apply. This step can entail time and added cost.  Get a real estate agent to sell the new homes. Often, the selling process starts in the planning phase and early buyers are able to influence both the layout of the house and the finish. Your cost estimate included a profit of 140k for each house. From that a builder needs to subtract financing costs, real estate agent costs, any costs that you forgot to factor in, budget overdrafts, contingency costs, and salaries for your staff and yourself. I estimate the project time to 1.5-2 years. So, we have an $8M project with a gross profit of $1.4M (not including all costs). Net profit probably just a few hundred thousand. Or less.  Real estate developers with local knowledge would be able to make a much more accurate estimate on both time and cost. My guess is that they have, and since the plot hasn't sold in a while, either the price is at the upper end of what makes a profitable project or there are other restrictions that limit the number/size of homes that can be built on it. "The basic answer is that you are comparing apples and oranges.  On the one hand, you are considering a case where someone buys a single already-built house.  On the other hand, you are considering a case where someone buys a large piece of land, builds 10 houses, and (presumably) sells or rents the 9 they're not living in. Those are two totally different endeavors.  It might be reasonable to compare the cost of a plot of land sized for a single house to the cost of a similar plot with a house already on it.  But you can't directly compare the cost of buying 10 houses worth of land to the cost of one house.  As other answers have mentioned, building 10 houses involves a massive amount of work: an architect has to design a house, somebody has to get permits to build it, someone may have to get water/power/sewage hookups, somebody has to physically build it -- then multiply all that by 10 for 10 houses.  Once you're done, you still haven't recouped your investment.  You just have 10 houses.  Now you have to sell them, which is a whole other job in itself. Because the things you're comparing are so different, the potential buyers for the two cases are also completely different.  This explains the ""inconsistency"" between the asking price and your perception of its value.  The two kinds of properties are in two different markets.  The people looking to buy a single home are just regular people looking for a place to live (or maybe trying to get a rental property).  The people looking to buy a 10-house plot are real estate developers with a whole different set of concerns.  There could be many reasons why the land hasn't been purchased yet, but you can't compare it to the cost of comparable houses, because almost no one who is looking for a house is going to consider buying 2 acres of land instead.  It's like asking why filling up your car with gas is so much more expensive per gallon than buying a gas station and giving yourself free gas.  They're just not the same thing.   But given the size of the land, I can join forces with other people which are also in the market and totally bring down the land price per piece to say 100k? You can do that, but basically what you'll be doing is forming a real estate development company of some sort.  This opens a whole other world of possible snafus (for instance, how ownership is to be divided, and what happens if the owners disagree on appropriate development of their portions). It is absolutely possible to make money by buying land and building houses on it, especially in California.  People do it all the time.  But it's not something you should attempt if you don't know what you're doing, and it's definitely not the same thing as just buying a house to live in." You can hire a builder to build for you on a lot that you would be happy to live on with utilities already connected. Subdividing a large piece of land gets a little more complicated. What easements exist, and what new easements would need to be created when connecting utilities? Would all of the lots already have street access, or do you need to dedicate some of the land to building a new road in the subdivision? Also, I edited your post because 83,000sqft is 1.9 acres. Building homes on .19 acre parcels (assuming no need for a road to take another 15% of the lot) reduces the value of the homes that you are building. You should run the numbers with 6 houses and see how attractive the math looks. Also, you should look for updated numbers on cost to build. Custom homes are likely closer to $275-$350 (where an architect is involved with drawing the plans).
Interesting.  How would they account for it? Monthly? And if so do they modify the cost basis for each lot for the month and then restate?   It's hard to imagine they do that.   I have a million questions regarding this topic do you know where in the regs it is covered? I gather it's been up until now cost prohibitive to build upward, and in such an environment, cities have a vested interest in maintaining their skyline. They'll probably need to adapt, but the idea that zoning is capricious is false. Where do you live? I have not seen a single instance where renting is cheaper per month then purchasing a home. You are obviously doing well, so I'm not questioning the logistics just curious.   $200,000 home or less is roughly $1,300 - $1,500 a month with everything included (property taxes, etc), based on when I was looking at homes to purchase. To rent the same size home would have been about the same (or more) depending on the area. Texas and California being my main two areas of interest. The property I purchased now was being rented out for $1,100 but a 30-year fixed mortage w/ property taxes is only about $630 a month. If there is land for sale, you can buy it. The United States doesn't have many restrictions on the purchase of land. However, you need to be able to afford it. Dependent on where you are looking $20,000 can either be a lot or very little land, I suspect that the question you were looking to ask is 'can I afford it?'. Have a look around, there should be plenty of places for you to find land for sale. As for credit, it is more important that you don't build bad credit. With things like mortgages, your salary is likely to be more important than your credit score alone, but no one will give you a dime if you have a record of not paying your bills. Don't know about other places, but in Seattle the *average* cost of a house (a regular house, not a mansion) if you're lucky enough to find one that isn't being bid on by a dozen other people, is around 700k right now. Don't you guys have tollbooths? If the roads is built by a private contractor, it could potentially charge more, or do a cheap job and come back patch the holes 3 years later (and charge twice). There's plenty of ways to make profits. "I think the builders need to get their heads out of their asses and see who is actually looking to buy a house, and what sort of house. There is a new development of two-story duplexes that was built near me 6 months ago; they are asking $595,000 for each *unit*. Everybody that walks by it says ""Are you shitting me?"" For $250,000 they would be nice houses. The builders are wondering why they aren't selling." The basis of the home is the cost of land and material. That's it.  Your time isn't added to basis. No different than if you spend 1000 hours in a soup kitchen. You deduct miles for your car and expenses you can document but you can't deduct your time.  Over 2 years, you could have a gain up to $500K per married couple and pay no tax. You can't calculate how many houses it will take. To do so you would have to know how much you can charge in rent compared to how much is costs to run that particular location. If the desirability of that location changes, so does the ability to rent the place, and so does the amount you can charge. It is possible to create a business in real estate that would allow you to generate retirement income. But you would be focusing all your income in your retirement years on one segment of the entire investment universe. The diversification would have to come from spreading the money through different types of real estate: condo, apartments, houses, commercial, warehouse, light industrial. You would even have to decide whether you want them all in one micro-market, or spread throughout a larger market, or an even wider area diversification.  As your empire grew and you approached retirement age you would have to decide if you wanted to liquidate your investments to minimize risk. The long leases that provides stability of income would make it hard to sell quickly if the market in one area started to weaken. Here's my view, as a 38yr old NZer who grew up in Auckland: When you purchase a residential property, whether or not you intend to live in it, you're essentially counting on the possibility that one of the following will occur: This report by the NZ Royal Society (going by memory from a presentation I attended) predicts ongoing population growth in NZ, mainly driven by immigration, and mostly in Auckland. Building of new housing isn't keeping up with population growth, so my bet would be that the property values, especially in Auckland, are going to continue to climb.  Other factors that might influence your decision are things only you can know, such as where you might be likely to settle down, how much risk you're willing to take, how much capability you have to look after a rental property, and how much knowledge you have about the property market. Bear in mind that government schemes and world events may change the outlook for number of houses being built and immigration levels, both of which heavily affect property values. My personal view is that the government isn't doing nearly enough to provide affordable housing for our young adults in NZ. Not only that; the govt is essentially responsible for the problem in the first place, as zoning rules for local authorities artificially inflate land prices which prevent the building of affordable houses. Furthermore, foreign investment in rental properties is unregulated and unmeasured. Both these problems could be resolved with appropriate legislation, though central city prices are unlikely to be relieved as much as other areas simply because prices are also inflated due to the desirability to live centrally. The problem is a severe one, and high housing prices for even the smallest dwellings are going to make inequality, and the social problems that go with it, far worse. I'd like to see new cities or towns being planned and built from scratch, such as Pegasus and Canberra. "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/real-estate-prices-housing-inequality-by-robert-j--shiller-2017-07) reduced by 92%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; In some cities, higher-priced homes may tend to turn over more rapidly than in others.  &gt; Some cities may be inhabited by larger families, implying bigger houses than in other cities.  &gt; Using satellite data for major US cities, the economist Albert Saiz of MIT confirmed that tighter physical constraints - such as surrounding bodies of water or land gradients that make properties unsuitable for extensive building - tend to correlate with higher home prices.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6os52x/shiller_on_housing_prices/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~172691 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **city**^#1 **home**^#2 **price**^#3 **housing**^#4 **income**^#5" I'm confused why you think you need a $450k house. That seems extremely high in today's market except perhaps in certain major urban locations. If you're going to live in suburbia or a smaller town/city, you should be able to find a nice 3br house for well under $300k. Before you rule out buying a house, I'd spend some time researching the real estate listings in your area, foreclosures, properties owned by bankruptcy court, etc. - you might be surprised to find a great home for as low as $150-200k. Of course if you live in a place where what I'm saying is completely off-base, please disregard my answer. You've just pushed the problem off to trying to figure out the market value of property, not to mention that property values are subject to bubbles. I don't particularly worry about the problems that would cause the government, but it makes it really hard on businesses (and people) that now have to pay a lot more than they budgeted for.   Property taxes are a useful thing, and serve an important purpose, but you don't want to bet budgets on them alone. Diversification is important in all kinds of investments. Yeah those are similar numbers to the largest cities in the US.  You can buy a house in or near a mid-sized US city for 100K but it would be a very basic house in good not great neighborhood.  After the downturn, I bought 2 houses as investments.  One I bought for 31,000 USD and after renovations I had 85,000 in it.  Sold it for 115,000.  The other I bought for  $91,000.  I still have that one.  It rents for $1200/mo and is currently worth maybe $140,000 (3 Bedrooms, 1 full bath, 1 half bath, 1400 sq ft).  It is a very safe area but Cincinnati city schools.  FYI Cincinnati has a STEM academy that is one of the top public schools in the country but you have to test into that specific school.    Those prices just blow me away.  I make a very good living plus the investment income and I don't think I could even sort of make the payment on 1.4 million for a shack.  Everyone can't be a trust fund baby or a Google millionaire.  FYI(2) I joined a Bay Area internet startup back in the day and in the end it got bought up by an ERP company.  My stock that I hoped to make millions on got me a $45,000 payday (so a lot better than nothing but in no way buying me a house in the Bay Area) Actually to be truth full..it was a little more.I believe 62 before closing costs.We also had to do a few repairs....However still yea it would be hard to buy the land and build for that price.Unless your in a really depressed area.