>"Many Vermont towns have strict zoning laws that establish minimum lot size to preserve low population density..."

Yep, that sounds about right. Vote for a socialist, but keep costs high and fiercely protect your own property and prevent others (the "wrong sort") from encroachment. Sounds familiar to some Europeans, I'm sure.

I'm surprised Texas is pretty low considering the large plots of land out there. I'm also surprised that the average lot size in Hawaii is so high.

Seems like just another case of r/peopleliveincities

States with lots of cities (California, Texas) are skewed smaller. Even though the lot sizes in those cities are large compared to other cities

There should be a “residential lot size” version of this.

Because half the people live in cities

[removed]

10,890 ft^2 = 1/4 acre, just in case you were wondering.

Well another part is that Western states have a greater percentage of their land owned by the Federal government. So, looking at Nevada, where over 80% of the land is owned by the feds skews how much could be developed. In New England, the feds have such a small percentage of land, it’s laughable, so those states can build almost anywhere.

Colorado, Florida, North Dakota, New Jersey and Ohio all came out with an average lot size of 10,019 square feet. Those states have very different population densities and climates. Later in the same article it gives data for average price per square foot -- $55.20 in Florida compared to $29.27 in North Dakota, to pick two.

It's deeply weird that these five states came out with an exactly identical average lot size, to the foot, despite their very different conditions.

Interesting how you intentionally left out the environment protection part…

The USA is NOT Europe btw

Suburban sprawl in Texas cities, my entire neighborhood is almost all 6000sqft lots except corner and cul-de-sac lots. The 4 story townhomes they're building inside the city are all 3500 sqft houses on 2000sqft lots. Completely outnumbers all the 60 acre faux ranches in bumfuck nowhere.

The list is for median lot size, not average. Seems like those states just break up a ton of their lots into a quarter acre?

EDIT: Yes, every title and headline says average, but the actual data tables say median.

Texas so low is not surprising if you live here. The builder buys land and shoves as many houses as possible on it. You can touch the neighbor’s house from your kitchen window.

That did strike me as odd that 3 states all “tied” with that number.

(Still confused how lots in NY are larger than Iowa, SD, and Utah though…)

Illinois can just suck it on so many levels.

I'm assuming lot size is only for homes and many people in NYC don't own a house. Rural NY has some pretty large lots.

[deleted]

That makes a lot more sense. Median is generally a better measure of central tendency anyway.

Title is misleading. Seems it’s a median, not an average, of only municipal areas that had an arbitrary 500 single family homes for sale at the time of the sample. This also links to an article that links to another article that seems to provide only the analysis and not actual data.

[removed]

There is something to add to this which may help people understand why some of the western states like Nevada are so low is not just that people live in cities. That plays a part especially in places like TX, but in other states like Nevada the government owns A TON of public land. Vermont is rural and lacks density like those other states but also has a very small amount of public land. Hence, there is more land proportionally to spread around.

Also there’s electricity and well access pretty much even in the most rural spots. Grew up in Upstate NY on 50 acres and I didn’t really have a large property compared to others. Now I live in AZ on a 1/2 acre and if I wanted a similar sized lot I would be in the desert hauling water and living off grid or spending $$$ on prime property.

How do several states have the exact same figure (MI, MO, etc)?

My brain remembered the sizes of Vermont and New Hampshire and insists upon calling bullshit.

Basically everyone has multiple acres?

In states barely bigger than RI and DE?

Just... how?

Are developers aware of this?

Chartwise it looks good but man, but looking up data is too tough. Example, find Ohio

How many football fields is it?

Live in a 2002 house in Denver metro with a 10k lot, most new you are lucky to get a 6k lot now even in the burbs.

The median makes much more sense to use though!

True. But when you say average average readers assume you mean mean.

Wow, great viz. I knew before clicking that Nevada would have to be last. The homes are soooo close together in Vegas with such tiny, tiny backyards.

Living in Texas suburbs, I believe it. They are selling 2,000 sq ft homes, with basically no yards, for 700k. All 20-30 miles out of downtown major cities.

That's how the New England states keep out the poor people.

[removed]

Density. There's no big cities in those states with small lots. Lots of small towns with big multi-acre lots

[removed]