What Makes a Place Livable? Residential Location Priorities and Scenario-Based Area Preferences Across Preferred Work Arrangements in a Mid-Sized U.S. Metropolitan Area

<jats:p>The expansion of remote work has raised new questions about how residents evaluate housing locations, particularly as daily workplace proximity may become less central for some workers and space, amenities, and lifestyle considerations may become more salient. This study examines residential location priorities and scenario-based area-type preferences across preferred future work arrangements in the Roanoke Metropolitan Statistical Area, Virginia, a mid-sized U.S. metropolitan region. Data were drawn from a 2023 cross-sectional online survey of verified adult residents, producing an eligible analytical base of 636 respondents. Thirteen residential-priority items were analyzed using complete cases (n = 620). Exploratory factor analysis, supported by parallel analysis and interpreted using polychoric correlations with oblique rotation, identified two related exploratory priority orientations: a broad space/stability/community-related orientation and an accessibility/amenity-related orientation. Kruskal–Wallis tests with Benjamini–Hochberg correction showed statistically significant but generally modest differences across preferred work-arrangement groups, with the largest differences observed for proximity to the central business district and rural/suburban lifestyle preference. Scenario-based area rankings were analyzed among respondents with valid paired rankings under both in-person and remote-work conditions (n = 579). Under the remote-work scenario, suburban areas were ranked significantly more favorably, while city center/CBD locations were ranked significantly less favorably; changes in urban and rural rankings were not statistically significant after correction. These findings indicate that preferred future work arrangements and hypothetical remote-work scenarios are associated with differentiated stated residential preferences in this mid-sized metropolitan sample. The results should be interpreted as stated preference paĴerns and scenario-based ranking differences, not as evidence of actual relocation behavior, realized housing-market demand, verified access to remote-capable employment, or causal effects of remote work on urban spatial change.</jats:p>