While Americans express concerns about growth and related issues, particularly traffic, they are generally satisfied with the quality of life in their neighborhoods and prefer current growth patterns over higher density development, according to the 1999 Consumer Survey on Growth Issues by the National Association of Home Builders. The written survey of 2,000 randomly selected households nationwide was conducted in early 1999 and showed that Americans associate growth with economic opportunities and strongly believe that government should plan and manage growth rather than restrict or stop it. Significantly, survey results were consistent across regions and metro markets.

Furthermore, the survey confirmed that Americans overwhelmingly prefer a single-family detached home in the suburbs over any other type of home. And even though they cite traffic as a major concern, the majority drive to work in their own car and want to continue to do so.

Specifically, 89% said they are somewhat to very satisfied with the quality of life in their neighborhood; 71% said they believe the quality of life in their area is better than five years ago or about the same; and 65% said they expect living conditions in their area five years from now to be about the same as today or better. What's more, a total of 53% said the pace of growth in their area is either about right or too slow or that they are not concerned about growth.

In fact, the people who were surveyed were generally in favor of growth and indicated that it has a number of positive aspects. Almost three-quarters, 73% agreed or strongly agreed that when managed properly, growth is good for the community. Fifty-four percent said it creates jobs; 48%  indicated that it generates economic growth; and 44% said it results in better shopping and services.

Overwhelmingly, those polled were most concerned with traffic issues. Three-quarters agreed or strongly agreed that growth creates traffic problems, and the majority indicated that heavier traffic is the most negative aspect of growth in their area. Seventy-nine percent cited traffic as the most negative aspect of growth, whereas crime and reduced open space were cited by 47% and 45%, respectively. Only 39% cited crowded schools.

To solve traffic problems in their area, 44% chose widening roads, and 27% chose building new streets and roads. One-third chose making more public transportation available.

Ironically, even though a substantial number advocated the use of public transportation, those responding to the survey overwhelmingly choose not to use public transportation when it is available and instead prefer driving their own car. For example, 47% said they have access to bus or trolley service, but only 3% use it to commute to work. Sixteen percent have access to train or light rail, but only 2% use it; 17% have access to a car pool, but only 4% make use of it; and 6% have access to a subway, but only 2% use it.

Almost all of the people surveyed-92%-said they have a car, and 85% said they use it for commuting.

Growth should also remain a local issue, the survey showed. Seventy-two percent of those polled said that addressing growth should be a local government responsibility. Only 14% said it should be a state responsibility and 3% thought the federal government should be responsible.

Further, local government should plan and manage growth, according to 75% of those surveyed. Only 12% said government should pass laws to restrict growth, and only 2% said there should be laws to stop growth. Almost three-quarters said that the government zoning and planning process should accommodate expected population increases.

Most believe that local government should be responsible for planning and managing growth, but 69% think that government does a fair to poor job of managing it. They were equally critical of the way local government deals with various issues related to growth, including roads and highways, crime, schools, environmental quality and preserving open space. In each category, 60% or more rated local government's performance as fair to poor.

The poll results also showed that despite concerns about growth, the American Dream of a single-family detached home is alive and well, and that people overwhelmingly  reject higher density housing both for themselves and for their communities.

The survey asked people to choose from two equally priced options: a $150,000 townhouse in an urban setting close to public transportation, work and shopping or a larger $150,000 detached single-family home in an outlying suburb with longer distances to work, public transportation and shopping. The vast majority, 83% chose the single-family detached house in the outlying suburbs.

The people surveyed also adamantly opposed the higher density options that are often put forward as solutions to growth issues. A total of 77% either oppose or strongly oppose building higher density single-family homes in their neighborhood, and 78% oppose multi-family apartment buildings. More than half, 54%, oppose townhouses in their neighborhood.

Of those surveyed, 88% said they prefer a single-family detached house. Higher density options including a townhouse/single-family attached unit, a multi-family condo or apartment building and a mobile home were each selected by fewer than 10%. These results are consistent with the results of previous NAHB surveys conducted in 1989 and 1995.

When asked what specific features they would look for in choosing a new home, 69% said more energy efficiency. Almost half, 42%, said they wanted a bigger house, and an equal number said they would look for an area with less traffic. Only 16% wanted a home closer to work, and 10% said they would look for a home closer to public transportation. A small minority, 6% would choose a central city location.

Equally telling, the most important community amenity that would influence people to move to  a new community was highway access, which was cited by 55%. Park areas were selected by 51% and walking-jogging trails by 48%. Only 24% said a location near public transportation would seriously influence them to move to a new community.

Asked what they would be willing to accept if they could not afford to purchase the house of their choice, 58% chose a location that is farther from shopping, entertainment and other services. The same proportion chose unfinished spaces that could be finished at a later date. Forty-two percent would accept a smaller house, 40% would accept a longer commute to work, 38% would accept a house with fewer amenities, 28% would accept a smaller lot, and 11% would accept a home built with less expensive materials.

When asked what their major concerns would be if they had control over the growth in their community, 69% said having good quality schools would be their major concern and 64% said reducing traffic congestion. Paying for public improvements as growth occurs was cited by 59%, and 58% said protecting the environment.

As for what builders can do to help improve or preserve the environment, 88% said build more energy-efficient homes, and 87% said leave or plant as many trees as possible.

(Article came from NAHB (National Association for Home Builders) Smart Growth Report magazine)