Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Cost of land vs. lots

[Rob Sandelin (robsan]

Harry Pasternak wrote:
* It makes sense to buy a bigger piece of land and keep to single family
homes. By the way, the price of land drops drastically if the parcel is 25
acres or more--typically, one lot will cost the same as 25 acres!

This might be true, in the beginning.  Then you start adding up the 
"development costs" plans, rezones, utilities, roads, and pretty soon 
it adds up.  At Sharingwood, to date, the cost of development slightly 
exceeds the purchase price of the land.  As development continues, it 
will probably be twice the cost of the land eventually.

In our area the difference between Urban and Rural land cost is huge, 
but the per unit cost for land can work out .  Recently a 1 acre 
developable parcel in Seattle sold for 1.2 million.  Not far from where 
I live in rural Snohomish County there is a 150 acre farm for sale, 
with 2 houses, 3 barns and its own water system,  with  river frontage, 
for 750K.  The rural cluster subdivision would allow for 22 homes on 
the second parcel (assuming the soil perks).  The 1 acre parcel in the 
urban area is on sewer and is being developed into  70 units of 4 story 
high-rise condos.

Assuming you divided the land costs equally by units, the "cheaper" 
rural land with its maximum unit development would cost 34K per unit 
for the land, the more expensive Urban land would cost, after 
development of maximum units, about 17K per unit for land.  If you only 
did 35 units on the Urban land it would still cost pretty much the same 
 in the end as the rural site for the land.

Then the main difference is in the location and environment - a rural 
farm, on a river, with lots of acres left over, or an urban site, 
pretty much used up by housing, but with all the amenities of city 
living.  Each site would make good cohousing, and although one site 
costs lots more up front, the per unit land cost works out about the same.

Rob Sandelin
Puget Sound Cohousing Network