Skip to content
Every Line Item

Methodology

Every cost figure on this site is a modeled median built from public data. It is not a quote, and it is not an average of quotes we received. This page explains exactly how the numbers are produced.

The unit of analysis is one specific scenario

We never publish a range as a headline. Each post models one defined build: a fixed square footage, a fixed jurisdiction, a fixed construction type, a fixed finish grade, and a stated site condition.

That is what makes the number checkable. A range cannot be wrong. A specific scenario can.

The six-phase ledger

Every build is priced into the same six phases, in the same order, regardless of building type or region.

PhaseContents
Soft costsDesign, engineering, building permit, plan check, impact and connection fees
Site work + foundationExcavation, grading, footings, slab or stem wall, sewer lateral, utility trenching
Framing + structureLumber package, framing labor, trusses, sheathing
Building envelopeRoofing, windows, exterior doors, siding, weather barrier
Systems + interiorElectrical, plumbing, HVAC, insulation, drywall, flooring, paint, trim, kitchen, bath
Landscaping + hardscapePaths, stoops, planting, sod, finish grading

Holding this schema fixed is the single most important methodological decision on the site. It is what makes cross-project comparison possible.

Sources

Primary — regulatory and permit records

Secondary — cost structure and benchmarks

How a figure is produced

  1. Define the scenario. Square footage, jurisdiction, construction type, site condition, finish grade — all fixed and stated in the post.
  2. Anchor to permit records. Pull declared construction valuations for comparable recent builds in the same jurisdiction. This sets the plausible total.
  3. Allocate across the six phases. Use published phase-level cost shares, adjusted for the specific scenario.
  4. Sanity-check per square foot. Compare against published per-square-foot benchmarks for the region and construction type — and account for the small-unit premium described below.
  5. State it as a median, with the variables that move it. Every post lists the factors that push the number up or down and by roughly how much.

Why ~$400/sq ft is not a contradiction of NAHB ~$167/sq ft

Step 4 compares our models to NAHB’s Survey of Construction square-foot prices. For contractor-built (custom) single-family detached homes started in 2024, NAHB’s national median was $166 per square foot; the Pacific division median was $167 per square foot (Eye on Housing, Oct 2025). Those figures exclude improved lot value.

Our Los Angeles County mid-grade detached ADU models land near $400/sq ft (800 sq ft) and $537/sq ft (400 sq ft). That is roughly 2.4× the Pacific custom-home median on the 800 model — and it is intentional, not a failed check.

What NAHB SOC measuresWhat our ADU models measure
Full-size new single-family detached homesAccessory units of 400–800 sq ft
Economies of scale across a whole houseOne kitchen + one bath that barely shrink
National / Census division mediansSouthern California mid-grade, site-built
Contract price ÷ finished floor areaSame six-phase build cost ÷ ADU floor area

Small-unit premium (why the multiple exists):

  1. Fixed rooms dominate. A kitchen and a bathroom cost nearly the same at 400 or 1,200 sq ft. On an 800 sq ft ADU they are almost half the budget; on a 2,400 sq ft house they are a much smaller share.
  2. Fixed site and utility work. Sewer lateral, electrical service run, and foundation mobilization do not scale linearly with floor area.
  3. Soft costs and fees are front-loaded. Design, plan check, and many agency fees are closer to fixed (or step-function) than to $/sq ft.
  4. Geography and product. Pacific custom medians mix a wide range of house sizes and markets; our scenarios are small Southern California ADUs with mid-grade finishes.

So the NAHB number is a floor and a scale check, not a target $/sq ft for an ADU. If an ADU model came in near $167/sq ft for a detached SoCal build, we would treat that as suspiciously low relative to permit valuations and phase shares — not as “validated.”

The 750 sq ft impact-fee cliff

California law draws a hard line on many impact fees (not connection or capacity charges):

See Government Code §66311.5 and the HCD ADU Handbook. School developer fees sit under a separate Education Code framework (with a distinct ~500 sq ft threshold in current law) — always verify with the school district.

That cliff matters for sizing: our 400 model sits below it; the 800 model sits just above it. Soft-cost totals in this series still only diverge by about $4,000 between those two models because design and plan check dominate phase one in Los Angeles County mid-grade scenarios, and many local ADU fee schedules were already compressed. In cities that still levy large proportional impact fees above 750 sq ft, the soft-cost step can be much larger than our LA County medians imply. Details and local verification steps: ADU soft costs.

Known limitations

We would rather state these than have you find them.

How this content is produced

Research, drafting, and modeling on this site are AI-assisted. Every figure is traced to a named, linked source that you can open and check yourself, and every correction is logged in public.

We disclose this because the alternative — being quiet about it — would contradict the only thing this site is actually selling, which is that you can verify what we tell you.

Corrections policy

See Corrections.