I guess I'm just anti-sprawl. My mother used to live in a small village near a small city, an exurb. Now, it's becoming suburbia, but not the good kind, the 'f

I guess I'm just anti-sprawl. My mother used to live in a small village near a small city, an exurb. Now, it's becoming suburbia, but not the good kind, the 'full detached home' kind (not joking, there isn't even a single semi-detached home here). I see how it changed everything, in the wrong direction. It killed the local bar/dinner in exchange for a monstrosity old people cannot access. It killed the community, the traffic tripled, you had to attach yourself to waste management (and now they have issues). My mother had to add a wall/fence to break the sound of the road, when trees and plants were sufficient, and during rush hour you still feel like you live in a city, without the city access advantages. I would typically call most of Seattle suburbia. It does not seems as sprawly than Stockton (that I actually visited unlike Seattle), but it doesn't look good. Also, high rise is as bad as suburbia in my opinion, I hate it with less passion because I only had to live in high rise building temporarily. But the cost each time you rise 3 meters is exponential for everything (except electricity), so if your city is 10% high rise, 80% detached/semi-detached homes, no shit it'll be expensive. Is Boise, ID a suburban sprawl? Or is it a fairly dense city without a shit ton of high-rise units?