Re: [C-L] How to develop a group for 50+ without family
From: Brian Bartholomew (bbstat.ufl.edu)
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
Marganne <marganne [at] macnexus.org> writes:

> there's an idea that attached dwellings that stick to design
> guidelines is more economical than detached homes. It's probably
> true if a traditional home or condo is the goal.

In my polity, attached similar dwellings are NOT more economical than
detached homes.  Once houses get close enough that they are labeled a
"subdivision", there's a lot of extra stuff the city commission
obligates you to build, and a huge variety of economizing approaches
the city commission bans you from using, such as self-building.

My personal estimate of the numbers in my own local situation is that
in the absence of zoning, I could have built a house situation for a
$60K buy-in.  But in the real world with all the zoning, permitting,
and guilds, the price increases to $225K.  That's almost four times
more resources used.  The biggest improvement you can make in
affordability is to relocate out of the grasp of polities that will
quadruple your costs.

The costs of a weathertight box to live in that contains a shower,
stove, sink, and bed are negligible.  For instance, I hear FEMA
trailers are being auctioned for $700.  If you were to cluster 20 of
them on 20 acres, that gives you somewhere to live while the bunch of
you built something nicer -- but good luck finding a polity that
allows you to live this affordably.

                                                        Brian

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.