Quote:
Originally Posted by WestEndWander
You have nothing of substance to impart. If you think you are some great educator as to the "benefit" of suburban development, I've got some news for you. Run off to studio and get those head pats. Maybe one day they will do you a real educational service and direct you to peer reviewed economic studies of subdivision development and their costs to cities and taxpayers. I'm glad you can do division and show how many people are living on a parcel of land!
You're screaming into a void. Enjoy!
|
But you literally said to “investigate density” and then you completely disregarded the initial argument made when I presented to you what density is.
For the record, I support all infill development regardless of location. That’s why I’m usually the one on Winnipeg construction thread posting about infill through all parts of the city whether it be St. Vital, Northgate, or Downtown. That’s why I’m able to say for certainty why some projects such as this are better for the city then others.
Oh also, all of those “economic studies of suburban development” all stem from North America and the western world at large. This might come as a shocker but every single city on the planet that is experiencing population growth has some form of outward growth. However, those skyscrapers at the edge of Shenzen are just as much suburban as the single-family house seen in the edges of Phoenix. It’s the type of density in the development itself that determines whether an area can be a net detriment or loss for taxpayers. Not the vague concept of “suburban development” itself because it encompasses a wide range of urban form.
Even in Winnipeg as Bomberjet mentioned Park City Commons, are we going to argue even that development is bad? I don’t think a bunch of midrises anywhere is bad especially ones next to restaurants, grocery stores, and schools.