[eightysixfour]

> 3. Tearing down existing houses for replacement only makes economic sense in two cases. The first is when the value of the land justifies more expensive construction (e.g. MacMansions). The second is when redevelopment is not for the market (e.g. Habitat for Humanity).

Interesting you chose “MacMansions” as the example instead of increased density. In my (very) urban area they tear down single family homes and replace them with 6-9 town homes.

[brudgers]

I chose MacMansions because it was clear and ordinary and uncomplicated.

Building a six pack is driven by the same basic economic condition, the existing building is economically obsolescent.