This article looks at the different meanings of the argument for “quality of life” used in support of an urban densification project in Geneva destined for a suburban area located at the gates of the city. It sheds light on the different values that underline this argument and stresses the dangers of using the term “quality of life” in the promotion of inclusive and sustainable cities to justify socially burdensome choices framed by both ecological and rationalist debates without taking into sufficient account the underlying social realities and concerns of the different parties involved. This article analyzes the controversies surrounding an urban densification project, showing how they refer to differentiated visions of “quality of life,” more or less socially and morally legitimized.