Classical real option theory has progressed some way towards identifying main real option categories like the option to delay or defer investment, the time to build option, the option to alter scale, the abandonment option, the switch option, growth option and compound options (see Trigiorgis, 1996). These categories cover much flexibility in economic activities, also in real estate. Theoretical studies like Titman (Titman, 1985), Williams (Williams, 1991, Williams, 1997), Capozza and Li (Capozza and Li, 1994)and others have investigated flexibility in real estate development, including the option to delay development, time to build option, the option to alter land density, the option to switch land use and others. Quigg (1993) empirically confirms the value of the option to delay in land development in the US, while for the UK (Sing and Patel, 2001a, Sing, 2001, Sing and Patel, 2001b), Japan (Yamazaki, 2001) and Hong Kong (Chiang et al., 2006) show that waiting value is significant in land price and the real option method is an effective tool to evaluate the pricing of vacant land. Practical application of real options theory in real estate development is however rare, although important texts (Geltner, 2007) have included real option theory as a core part of land development decision-making. Lucius (2001) suggests it may be due to "theoretical difficulties", "mathematical complexity", identification of real option categories and other problems. In theory, real option analysis can be applied to describe and model various categories of flexibility, but such theoretical categories are also often problematic when industry-specific problems are analyzed, as theory typically assumes that options occur in a perfect, institution-free world.