Quote:
Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek
Lol thank you for that I was completely oblivious to the difference in population size. I couldn’t have possibly been making a comparison about how different places can and have built successful suburbs for decades. Of course Winnipeg’s suburbs are far from perfect but they are improving. In fact, at this point Winnipeg shouldn’t even be expanding outwards as there are many parts of the city ripe for infill. However, with recent communities that have been established for nearly a decade they have already been built where thousands of people live the conversation should be more productive and discuss how to improve neighborhoods that people such as yourself are completely dissatisfied with.
I’m not screaming into any void considering that you’re replying to my comments and with the reception of other posters here about these developments clearly people are still giving their time of day to interact on this post when one can easily just ignore it.
You’re very good at completely disregarding or blatantly not even considering large portions of what I say to further your narrative and I don’t appreciate that very much. At least I try to address most if not all of your points in my rebuttals. You do it with other posts do but I usually agree with the narrative you present in most instances so I don’t generally feel the need to call you out on it.
For future reference, the snark remarks and personal jibs greatly diminish the points you present no matter how accurate or intuitive the point may be and exudes immaturity.  |
Here is the thing. I'm not here to stroke your ego or tell you how good you are at analyzing "density" or considering the "nuances" of suburban development.
I'm here to state that your position of presenting suburban development outside established neighborhoods as "successful" is incorrect, blatantly wrong, and simply just ignorant. There is nothing to consider successful about your arguments or about developments that stretch already thin city resources even thinner. They hold no weight.
The positions you bring forward are not considered or regarded because, why would I? It's my job to design/develop/promote city building methods that are the exact opposite of this. I have nothing remotely positive to say about developments such as Waverly West, Sage Creek, etc. I'm not going to pretend to support your arguments so you can feel good about trying to analyze a green field development into some sort of net positive. Gotta love it when the city is responsible for more fire/police/ems stations, schools, sewers, roads, street lights in the middle of nowhere.....you get the idea? Of course you don't.
I'm not here looking to make poorly designed suburbs better for those who live there after the fact. If you have to do that then your plan has been a failure from the outset. I'm certainly not here to make you feel better about your love for Waverly West.
Your smug attitude is terribly off putting and leads to the responses you get from me. School isn't the real world. The sooner you realize that the better off you will be.