
Subscribe to Brandon Donnelly to receive new posts directly to your inbox.
Last year, Pew Research Center asked over 5,000 adult Americans whether they would rather (1) live in a community with smaller houses that are within walking distance of schools, stores, and restaurants, or (2) live in a community with larger houses, but where schools, stores, and restaurants are several miles away. The result:
On average, most respondents preferred the latter option -- the larger home. However, there are some demographic groups that feel differently. If you're young (under 29), highly-educated, Democratic-leaning, and/or Asian, this survey suggests that you have a preference for smaller houses in more walkable communities.
More specifically, in this chart, it's interesting to note that 62% of Asians (survey only counted English speakers), 55% of those aged 18-29, 54% of those with a post-graduate degree, and 65% of liberal Democrats prefer denser places that allow you to walk to more places.
A lot of this isn't surprising, but I don't think I've seen data supporting such a strong leaning from Asian adults before. What makes this even more interesting is that White and Asian households are by far the two richest ethnic groups in America. And here, when it comes to built form preferences, they're on opposite ends of the spectrum.
Another important consideration is the cost of living in walkable versus car-oriented communities. Generally speaking, the latter is less expensive on a cost per square foot basis for homeowners; though, this obviously doesn't include the indirect costs of transportation and the additional time it to takes to commute places.
It is also more expensive to service and bring infrastructure to more spread-out communities. There are real economies to density. Despite this, higher-density living tends to be more expensive. Part of this has to do with higher build costs and more restrictive zoning, but it could also be a scarcity of supply (most of the US is car-oriented).
Indeed, there is a well-established premium to living in walkable communities, which creates an interesting dynamic. The thing that the majority of people reportedly don't want or don't prefer is actually more expensive. This always makes me wonder: What if this wasn't the case? What would happen if we didn't have this cost-of-living differential?
Charts from Pew Research Center; cover photo by Dmitry Tomashek on Unsplash
Over 4.1k subscribers
Would be interesting to see this data include single vs married, and w/ kids vs no kids. Many families not only prefer more space and a bigger yard, but also the quality of public schools is a big consideration. Unfortunately, most walkable/urban communities have below-average schools, higher crime rates, and other deterrents for people deciding where to raise their children. In the cases where a walkable community is in an area with good schools and relatively low crime, the average home prices tend to be out of reach for most middle-class families.
I wrote about this last year when it came out and was so depressed by it, concluding: "I have been struggling for an hour to figure out how to end this post because I always try to be positive and keep saying that we know what to do to solve our climate problems. But it is hard to be positive when you just see more division and polarization every day, and it feels like we are just going to watch everything go up in flames through the windshield of our pickup truck." https://lloydalter.substack.com/p/i-keep-saying-people-want-walkable
Surveys can be misleading. There is typically a big cost differential between urban and suburban/rural housing. I think if we reduced the barriers for the former, we'd see that there's more latent demand.