The building permit is California is more than $4000 dollars and it is about the same in almost every state so this number is only suitable for third world countries and the ones I have been in the poor cannot afford $4000 for a house.
The concept of 3D printed homes has been around for a while. Good to see it in actual practice here, although I was surprised to hear this is the very first one in America, and it hasn’t been field tested yet. This will surely become more prevalent in the future, though.
The $4K price must just be for the cost of the concrete framing only. There’s no way that includes roofing, wiring, labor, etc.
Most local ordinances in the U.S. have a set minimum square footage when building new homes in towns and cities. My area has a 1,500 square foot minimum – it’s actually against code to build anything smaller. The tiny home movement tries to get around those ordinances by building homes on trailers. As they’re not a permanent structure, they can bypass the coding.
The decade after WWII is interesting in that the U.S. built a bunch of under 1,000 square foot homes. The emphasis was on getting the majority housed rather than seeing a minority get massive homes. The monstrosities being built today are far more than anyone really needs, and it’s no wonder why housing costs are so extreme.
A smarter route would be to have ordinances on maximum square footage rather than minimum. Of course, that would go against the growth desires of the vast majority.
The building permit is California is more than $4000 dollars and it is about the same in almost every state so this number is only suitable for third world countries and the ones I have been in the poor cannot afford $4000 for a house.
The concept of 3D printed homes has been around for a while. Good to see it in actual practice here, although I was surprised to hear this is the very first one in America, and it hasn’t been field tested yet. This will surely become more prevalent in the future, though.
The $4K price must just be for the cost of the concrete framing only. There’s no way that includes roofing, wiring, labor, etc.
Most local ordinances in the U.S. have a set minimum square footage when building new homes in towns and cities. My area has a 1,500 square foot minimum – it’s actually against code to build anything smaller. The tiny home movement tries to get around those ordinances by building homes on trailers. As they’re not a permanent structure, they can bypass the coding.
The ordinances largely exist as a way to ensure profits for the construction industry. There are also some assumptions by city planners that Americans need ever larger and larger homes:
https://www.newser.com/story/225645/average-size-of-us-homes-decade-by-decade.html
The decade after WWII is interesting in that the U.S. built a bunch of under 1,000 square foot homes. The emphasis was on getting the majority housed rather than seeing a minority get massive homes. The monstrosities being built today are far more than anyone really needs, and it’s no wonder why housing costs are so extreme.
A smarter route would be to have ordinances on maximum square footage rather than minimum. Of course, that would go against the growth desires of the vast majority.
Related article in NYT today:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/realestate/a-3d-print-out-you-could-call-home.html