This development seems to be for higher income earners who want to live a less car centric, higher density urban life. I feel like that’s a relatively niche demographic for the US generally, but especially for the Wasatch Front area. I’m originally from this area and although I haven’t lived there in several years, when I did live there I would say the majority of higher income earners would’ve preferred a detached single family home.
Utah is a very outdoorsy state. That means boats, jet skis, four-wheelers, camping trailers, and all sorts of other recreational equipment. That means a big truck, and a big garage with an RV pad. It’s the culture there, or at least it was, maybe it’s changed since I lived there but I do still have a lot of family there and if they’re any indication, that culture is still alive and well.
But, cultural change has to start somewhere. That said, if there’s any place that embodies the American dream of owning your own detached single family home in the suburbs, it’s Utah. That dream isn’t going to die easily. What’s ultimately going to kill it is price. The dream dies when it becomes unaffordable. But developing an equally unaffordable alternative isn’t a solution. People aren’t going to be super thrilled about having to give up their dream of owning their own home just to go give half of their hard earned income to some rich landlord.
I find that urban density projects are extremely popular once you can keep out poor people.
The driving factor behind suburban development is to stay away from poor people and not have any of your tax dollars educating them.
Then there’s race. The word urban is often black-coded.
I’m surprised this is coming from Utah, IME people from Utah seem to prefer the outdoors
