Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Even in areas where building is effectively unlimited, land is effectively free (or less than $5k/acre) a new house is still moderately expensive. There's a minimum price below which you cannot realistically go, because of flat-cost items, and minimum building requirements.

So you end up where a smallish house costs $200k to build/sell at a modest profit, and a nice large house costs not terribly much more but can be sold at a much higher profit margin.



Sure, but those costs (including land costs) are reduced with triplexes/quadplexes/townhomes, which require moving a mountain to get approved in most zoning districts.


In Oregon we recently re-legalized 4-plexes and some other, denser forms of housing by right in our cities. But it's a pretty incrementalist reform, and it'll take time to see the effects.


The quadplexes have to age and trickledown to being boring housing stock; around here the apartments and quads are going for about the same as older stand-alones and only a bit cheaper than new stand-alones. And when you factor in the usual HOA cost the payment ends up being the same.


In housing the term is 'filtering', which is different from 'trickle down'.


>Even in areas where building is effectively unlimited,

That's pretty much nowhere in the US. Or at any rate, not where people are.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: