> Society has already decided that these costs are well worth it for the value of living in suburbia Maybe - I mean I'm not sure that society is really making

> Society has already decided that these costs are well worth it for the value of living in suburbia Maybe - I mean I'm not sure that society is really making a choice since there doesn't seem to be any sort of market mechanic to decide what to build. But also you'll notice that houses in dense areas are more expensive than suburban homes so the market has decided that the suburban homes are less valuable. It's also not necessarily a good argument in terms of what we should or should not do. > It's debatable whether it's the need for a detached house that makes housing unaffordable outside of city cores. Again, the solution is to decentralize. We are decentralized. > Great, but they love to select their desired area then try to force changes on existing residents that purchased a home in the area for a suburban feel. That's the concern people have. Nobody would mind if density advocates founded a new jurisdiction to build a place like this. See point #1. Alternatively if the people who move there "decide as a society" that it should be different then that's an equivalent argument from your perspective.