MTO wrote: buildomaha wrote: MTO wrote: Omababe wrote: Garrett wrote:
One acquaintance of mine who is a realtor has been saying it's a seller's market for some time now. It seems like, at least in the southwest 'burbs, "For Sale" signs don't last very long and I'm aware of two homes that have recently sold without a sign at all.
Kinda surprised to see Detroit on that list. I would have expected that to be more of a buyer's market.
Well thats good news then, even though I'm pro dencity in general a healthy population growth will keep our economy strong. I'm getting the impression that south west corner of the metro is hot hot hot right now. I wish if we have to have suburbs they had the density requirements like the left coast.
I assume you mean the east coast because LA is THE definition of urban sprawl... BUT, I don't think In Omaha, NE having density regulations would ever work. People come here because of our job availability and cheap, big houses and a yard. Until Omaha has more than that to offer, there isn't the demand to sustain those types of regulations. And Omaha won't have anything else special to build the demand if we continue building boring suburb after suburb.
I was talking west coast because I was talking about suburbs. If you look at your average California suburb from satellite you can see they are quite small lots with large houses.
The first step for Omaha would be to relax zoning regulations to allow
higher density in suburban areas. The current regs generally restrict higher density and mixed use development to some extent in suburban areas. I don't think you can ever "require" higher density, just allow it to happen naturally if the demand exists. People who prefer to live in low-density areas will always fight higher density coming in to their neighborhood, even though their property values could actually increase if there is a higher demand for their property to be redeveloped into something denser.