[jefftk]

I'm not sure what distinction you're getting at? I'm in Somerville Massachusetts, houses are very expensive, and the land is all built out. If you tore down a house, you would not be able to build as large a house in its place, in almost all circumstances. You definitely couldn't build a bigger one. What are you trying to get at with "new houses" versus "new homes"?

[cortesoft]

You could if you built a multistory apartment complex.

[my_username_is_]

Most housing in Somerville, and lots of the urban northeast, is made up of multistory apartments (sometimes referred to as "three deckers")

[cortesoft]

You can always build higher!

[jefftk]

I see, you're using "new houses" to mean new buildings, and "new homes" to mean new units.

[toomuchtodo]

Anything over 5 stories gets expensive per sq ft quick.

[jefftk]

Even five stories would let you get about double a density we have today. The typical Somerville home is two full stories and half a third story.

If it were legal to build much taller, though, I do think people would be happy to do that next to the subway stations. Yes, the cost goes up, but people are very interested in living right next to the station.

[an_opabinia]

It’s funny because barely any houses in Somerville are up to code. It’s like less than 5%. So the regulations have achieved a double nothing.

[jefftk]

The regulations came into place after Somerville was almost entirely built out. What they achieved was preventing additional building, which may or may not have been the intent.