So um, why are the houses and nature mutually exclusive? I live in a suburban detached single family home, and my whole neighborhood is filled with trees, wildlife and even a tree lined creek that separates the back yards on my street from the back yards on the opposite side. You can’t even see my actual yard from google maps because it’s nearly entirely covered by tree canopy (at 6pm in summer my yard is 100% shaded). We have all sorts of wildlife including deer, foxes, owls, frogs, mallards, rabbits, squirrels, etc.
While I agree that we do need more housing options of all sorts, I don’t for a second agree that nature and suburban housing are mutually exclusive. We just need to stop tearing down all the trees when we build, and plan better.
I live in suburban Kansas City and these are the distances to the things you mentioned -
The closest publicly accessible business to me is a fast food restaurant about a mile away.
Basically if I need anything, it’s a 30 minute walk one way to get there. It just isn’t really viable as a regular thing to spend an hour walking to get to/from a convenience store, or 2 hours for a grocery store. Instead, I spend 10-20 minutes in my car for those errands, and save the extra time for walking my dog (since he couldn’t go into any of the places mentioned above either, so his walks would have to be in addition anyway.)