[netcan]

I'm not sure this is practical. You can't have wells and septics at high density, though you could probably localize certain things more than they are now.

Cities, small towns and rural locals have different costs. Rural areas maintain more kms of road per home, for example. Power/Data lines also cost more per home. Maybe these won't be necessary in the future, but they are for now. Obsolete is a strong word, still.

Like you though, the $10k price tag seems high to me. Is it really this high for the right reasons?

[justanotherc]

But its not the high density that's expensive (the downtown core is actually the profit areas), its the medium density with sprawling suburbs that is what us so expensive to maintain for the very reason that localized infrastructure may work -- space between homes.

[netcan]

I still don't see how rural solutions apply. How is a dirt road a solution?

Honestly, I think it's hard to even discuss this without first understanding how road maintenance (sounds like this is the majority) adds up to $8000 per home.

[justanotherc]

Forget the dirt road. Rural solutions for water/sewage/power work because their viability is not dependent on close geographic proximity. Its apparent that the urban solution being applied to suburban areas is not viable, so why not flip things around the other way?

[netcan]

I think most of the $8k is for roads. Wells (shallow wells certainly) will go dry if an entire suburb is drawing on the spring. Sceptics... With enough houses, someone somewhere will have a stinky one, but these could probably work. I doubt most suburbanites wants one.

Power... IMO, we're just not there yet. Maybe close, but even most rural homes use central power.

There might be some stuff that can be imported, but without more info it's hard to know what matters.