In the case of important topics such as "housing", in addition to the "hard" facts, the subjective attitudes and perceptions of the population are also central. For this reason, questions have been asked in the city of Zurich as part of the periodic population survey since 1999. Since there are no comparable assessments of the population on the subject of housing at the regional level so far, Stadtentwicklung Zürich has collected some questions on the subject of housing outside the city of Zurich and had them evaluated for the area of Regional Planning Zurich and surroundings (RZU). The area of the RZU includes the city of Zurich and the six adjacent planning regions (Figure 1; further explanations at the end of the article). Of particular interest are the differences between different types of municipalities (explanations of the community typology also at the end of the article).

The results will be published in two web articles.  This web article sheds light on attitudes to structural changes and densification. The other web article on the same survey is dedicated to the perception of the problem and the attitudes of the population to the housing situation.

Creating more living space through structural change

The creation of more living space in response to the scarce supply is clearly advocated in all types of municipalities. This is most evident in the core city of Zurich (identical to the "large centres" type of municipality in the present evaluations), followed by the workplace municipalities (Figure 2).

The expansion of the offer has resulted in structural changes, which are associated by the population with various advantages and disadvantages.

A majority of respondents think that the construction activity of recent years has made their own residential community (or city) more beautiful and livable (Figure 3). An even stronger majority, on the other hand, is of the opinion that one should preserve the quarters in one's own residential community as far as possible as they are (Figure 4). Similarly clear support is found in the statement that it is a pity that more and more open spaces have been lost as a result of construction activity (Figure 5). A majority also supports the statement that many new buildings and renovations are too luxurious for their own taste (Figure 6).

Despite clear agreement to an expansion of the housing supply, some effects of this expansion are therefore viewed critically.

Attitudes towards these changes are most critical in high-income municipalities: On the one hand, there is the lowest agreement with the statement that the community has become more beautiful and livable through construction activity (Figure 3). On the other hand, the statement that the quarters should be preserved as they are is most supported (Figure 4). All other types of municipalities are less critical of change in this respect.

With regard to the finding that more and more open spaces are being lost as a result of construction activity, the differences between the types of municipalities are small and hardly significant. Here, the approval rate in all types of municipalities is just under 70 % (Figure 5).

The perception that many new buildings and renovations are too luxurious is more common in the core city of Zurich and in the workplace communities than in the other types of municipalities (Figure 6).

A clear majority of respondents are in favour of expanding the housing supply. A majority is also of the opinion that the construction activity of recent years has made their own residential community more beautiful and livable. Thus, the existing housing dynamics are basically supported. At the same time, however, some of the effects of this expansion are critically assessed (change in the districts, loss of open spaces, luxurious new buildings and renovations). This indicates that an approach sensitive to the needs of the population and carefully adapted to local conditions is important in the further internal development of cities and villages.

The greatest scepticism about change exists in the high-income communities. At the same time, significantly more people in these municipalities than in the other municipalities consider their apartments to be outdated (see web article "Attitudes of the population to the housing situation in the greater Zurich area"). This controversial situation – on the one hand a widely recognized need for renewal and on the other hand a widespread scepticism about the effects of structural renewal – requires a special sensitivity in these communities to any replacement new buildings. In high-income communities, as is well known, there is often a high proportion of rather loose forms of development. A study by the Office for Spatial Planning of the Canton of Zurich (see bibliography) also showed that the residents of loose forms of development tend to be more critical of structural densification than elsewhere.