Should the government incentivize the construction of high density residential buildings?

No

If you're going to subsidize places they all should be subsidized regardless of population. No one has control who where who moves where

Yes, because we need to house the whole population more efficiently. But again, focus on city design and infrastructure first.

Yes, but only in the interest of creating more affordable housing options and reducing the amount of condos.

Make rules and bureaucracy fairer and let the market sort it out.

If it’s through repurposing old buildings/lot then sure

No, townhouses, terraces houses, semi detached, etc but not high density. High density runs into it's own social issues.

would depend on the very definition of high density no one would like the government to go back like the 70's and rebuild the projects.

Yes, but only for companies that are selling the condos and not renting them.

No, there is already too many rental co do building and townhouse complexes as is. This only increases population density and traffic.

Yes but only empty or abandon buildings. Not current buildings that are in good shape and have tenants.

More Single family homes should be built rather than apartment buildings.

More housing availability yes, but higher density in already congested cities no.

Change existing laws so that the market can supply adequate housing.

Yes, make Single-family detached homes more expensive, since its unsustainable.

Yes, higher density housing/communities can lower the risk of destruction of local ecosystems.

Yes and incentivize Housing Co-op's rather then private housing

Yes, as long as it is affordable housing and not luxury condominiums

Yes, only if they are not luxury condos and are multi-purpose

I think they should if living situations are tuff / if the area is overpopulated, but if the area doesn't actually need it then I don't see the point in there funds going towards that when there are so many other things they could use the money on.

Living in such places is not good for people. Increase employment and services in rural areas and build houses that enhance life quality there

I believe a mix is needed. The affordability of urbanization is harmful to densification. We need to slow urban sprawl in some cities where vacancy rates are high on high residency buildings or find a way to convert high density buildings from ownership to rentable housing. Home and condo ownership is beyond reach for many but the cost of living in urban centres is also too high.

Only in places that don't hurt nature or historical locations.

Yes, but only if certain ratios and quotas for floor space and family oriented homes are met.

Yes, and should be prioritised over single, family homes, especially in cities.q

What personal advantages or disadvantages do you see in living in a high-density residential area compared to a more spacious, single-family home neighborhood?

Do you believe that the environment benefits more from high-density living situations than from suburban sprawl? Give reasons for your view.

How do you envision the future of housing in big cities, and what role do you see high-density residential buildings playing in it?

Considering your personal lifestyle, how well would you adapt to living in a high-density residential building, and what factors would influence your decision?

Would you prefer to live in a high-density residential building if it meant shorter commutes and more amenities? Why or why not?

Do you think there's a stigma associated with living in high-density housing, and if so, what could change that perception?

Have you or someone you know ever experienced a change in neighborhood character due to new high-density developments? What was that like?

In your opinion, could high-density residential buildings help solve housing affordability issues in your city? Why or why not?

How do you think the presence of high-density housing impacts the sense of community and neighborly connection in an area?