> Aren't traditional styles of single family homes also far too expensive to build now for non-luxury-premium prices too though?
That's a good question. I'm not an expert, but I think what was cheap in the 20th century is still generally pretty cheap now. A stick-built bungalow or ranch house with siding was cheap then and is cheap now.
I also think there's more room in the market for not-quite-the-cheapest-thing when it comes to single family homes. Like private automobiles, single family homes can be more expensive than they need to be, if the extra cost allows the buyer express their individual taste or their social status. If someone prefers a brick facade, they might pay extra for it, just like they might pay extra to drive a $60k car that has roughly the same practical utility as a $30k car that is also available in the market.
> the issue is that we just don't like cost-competitive new construction much, whatever the layout
That's a good question. I'm not an expert, but I think what was cheap in the 20th century is still generally pretty cheap now. A stick-built bungalow or ranch house with siding was cheap then and is cheap now.
I also think there's more room in the market for not-quite-the-cheapest-thing when it comes to single family homes. Like private automobiles, single family homes can be more expensive than they need to be, if the extra cost allows the buyer express their individual taste or their social status. If someone prefers a brick facade, they might pay extra for it, just like they might pay extra to drive a $60k car that has roughly the same practical utility as a $30k car that is also available in the market.
> the issue is that we just don't like cost-competitive new construction much, whatever the layout
Agree 100%.