If your dense housing leads to higher housing costs that's actually great news; it means that your city is enabling higher-productivity arrangements that boost local incomes, and all the concern about "lowering property values" was 100% bunk. That's the pattern you see in places like Manhattan. Wouldn't it be nice if most people in the U.S. had a bunch of Manhattan-level cities in their state that they could easily move to if they wished?
> Want truly affordable housing? Bring jobs to smaller cities. You don't have ANY other option.
Want big houses and cars? Bring good jobs to smaller cities, that still have little need for density. That's a pretty natural pattern of development. But the really high incomes will most likely still come from the very densest places, where people willingly put up with tradeoffs like living in a smaller place and doing without a car, because they're actually a lot better than the alternative.
> Want truly affordable housing? Bring jobs to smaller cities. You don't have ANY other option.
Want big houses and cars? Bring good jobs to smaller cities, that still have little need for density. That's a pretty natural pattern of development. But the really high incomes will most likely still come from the very densest places, where people willingly put up with tradeoffs like living in a smaller place and doing without a car, because they're actually a lot better than the alternative.