3 ms·

>The old houses still around are the exception to the rule, not the norm. You need to get outside the beltway or at least go to some of the "bad" neighborhoods

>The old houses still around are the exception to the rule, not the norm. You need to get outside the beltway or at least go to some of the "bad" neighborhoods within it. The only place your statement is close to true is very wealthy areas that are constantly being redeveloped. Other than the occasional prime lot or desirable commercial site new construction fills in around the old or adds on to it. Big lots get subdivided and a new structure goes on the empty chunk and buildings get additions. Basically nobody is demolishing any building that is sound because buildings are expensive and why would you waste a perfectly good one. Generally speaking you only see good buildings get demolished when the land becomes worth so much relative to the structure that it makes economic sense to knock it all down and do a clean sheet because the little extra optimization you get from doing that is worth more than what you would have saved by keeping the sub-optimal structure.

scsilver 5y ago
Alot of new development is that architecture from the 80's and 90's is not tailord to modern life, was adapted to the car revolutions of the late mid century, and is agressive towards pedestrians. All the new construction in my area is tearing down old warehouse, office buildings and parking lots, to be replaced with wide sidewalks, brick paved streets with clear crossings, and high rise young adult "luxury" apartments with amenities. It's making the neighborhood nice and connecting all the bike routes and walk routes. Being right outside the city core helps justify the price of redevelopment. However, I think the larger buildings are getting facelifts rather than rebuilds.
com2kid 5y ago
> Generally speaking you only see good buildings get demolished when the land becomes worth so much relative to the structure that it makes economic sense to knock it all down and do a clean sheet because the little extra optimization you get from doing that is worth more than what you would have saved by keeping the sub-optimal structure. My city has passed so many building code requirements on remodels that now days it is, from what contractors have told me, about the same price to remodel as to tear down and replace. I was quoted over 150k to add a new bedroom to the 2nd floor, most of that is because the city would require me to completely replace my roof structure with a brand new one to bring it up to modern insulation standards. I imagine, without doing the math, that the carbon footprint of tearing down a house and building a new one is much higher than whatever energy is going to be wasted by having amazing-but-not-the-best-insulation in my attic.

scsilver 5y ago

Alot of new development is that architecture from the 80's and 90's is not tailord to modern life, was adapted to the car revolutions of the late mid century, and is agressive towards pedestrians. All the new construction in my area is tearing down old warehouse, office buildings and parking lots, to be replaced with wide sidewalks, brick paved streets with clear crossings, and high rise young adult "luxury" apartments with amenities. It's making the neighborhood nice and connecting all the bike routes and walk routes. Being right outside the city core helps justify the price of redevelopment. However, I think the larger buildings are getting facelifts rather than rebuilds.

com2kid 5y ago

> Generally speaking you only see good buildings get demolished when the land becomes worth so much relative to the structure that it makes economic sense to knock it all down and do a clean sheet because the little extra optimization you get from doing that is worth more than what you would have saved by keeping the sub-optimal structure. My city has passed so many building code requirements on remodels that now days it is, from what contractors have told me, about the same price to remodel as to tear down and replace. I was quoted over 150k to add a new bedroom to the 2nd floor, most of that is because the city would require me to completely replace my roof structure with a brand new one to bring it up to modern insulation standards. I imagine, without doing the math, that the carbon footprint of tearing down a house and building a new one is much higher than whatever energy is going to be wasted by having amazing-but-not-the-best-insulation in my attic.