Urban proximity planning is foreseen as a solution to foster a “sustainable” city, including economic viability, environmental soundness and social inclusivity. This paper focuses on the inclusivity aspects by questioning the adoption of urban proximities: how far planning for urban proximities resonates or conflicts with current residential preferences and practices? Based on functional, social, and sensitive attributes, five latent residential preferences have been identified: spatial proximity, tranquility, elitism, social proximity, and conviviality. These aspirations form the basis for a longitudinal, spatial, and clustering analysis. The results of the analysis, conducted on 2200+ respondents in Geneva, reveal characteristics in residential preferences. Firstly, preferences are stable over time, but malleable to changing circumstances. Secondly, some preferences show clear spatial distribution patterns when regressed with residential location choice. Thirdly, the gap between preferences and actual residential practices varies across morphological attributes. As a main result, the clustering analysis shows that 43 % of the population aspire more to tranquility than to functional proximity; and those aspiring for proximities (32 %) are the youngest and wealthiest. This questions the relevance of models of urban proximities as an inclusive solution – raising issues of generational divide, territorial segregation, and injunctive and targeted planning.