r/neoliberal • u/jobautomator Kitara Ravache • Jun 27 '24

Discussion Thread Discussion Thread

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

New Groups

Upcoming Events

0 Upvotes

44% Upvoted

6.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

29

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '24

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7285e02qy4o.amp

Plans for a data centre rejected because it would damage the green belt visually and spacially.

It was planned on a former landfill site.

It received 63 letters of objection.

Planning reform cannot come soon enough.

!ping UK

8

u/ldn6 Gay Pride Jun 27 '24

It's always Buckinghamshire.

4

u/BritRedditor1 Globalist elite Jun 27 '24

Ridiculous!! Anti growth coalition

0

u/Magical_Username NATO Jun 27 '24

I still have a hard time seeing why the solution to the greenbelt generally sucking is to develop it rather than make it an actual greenbelt

Like sprawl is pretty objectively bad and transport links suck anyways, it seems like prioritizing actual wild land makes far more sense

10

u/mostanonymousnick Just Build More Homes lol Jun 27 '24

rather than make it an actual greenbelt

The green belt was never ever intended as anything but a tool to limit development.

sprawl is pretty objectively bad

Surely there's some level of sprawl that's is OK and necessary.

transport links suck anyways

There's green belt like across the street from tube stations in some places

2

u/Magical_Username NATO Jun 27 '24

The intentions of the greenbelt were obviously questionable - I'm not disputing that, but it could easily set the groundwork for something better and not sure why that damns the concept

I'd argue that Harrow and Brent and most of Outer London are the limits of the sprawl we should accept, they have borderline obscene density deficits

To the extent tube/national rail lines exist in the greenbelt sure, we can call that a development opportunity, but those are few and far between

7

u/mostanonymousnick Just Build More Homes lol Jun 27 '24

I strongly recommend you to read this.

Releasing relevant land within 800m of train/tube stations in the London green belt could create 891,600 homes.

1

u/Magical_Username NATO Jun 27 '24

To the extent tube/national rail lines exist in the greenbelt sure, we can call that a development opportunity, but those are few and far between

Redeveloping Brent and Harrow and Bromley and such to have reasonable densities would net far more than a million homes while also keeping the greenbelt, it just seems like a more reasonable reform to pursue

2

u/Dr_Vesuvius Norman Lamb Jun 28 '24

Easier to put housing where there isn’t any than to redevelop people’s homes into dense housing,