3 ms·
Smaller countries like Japan/UK have other issues with sprawl which is that people often want the best of both. I'm happy to enjoy the buzz of working in a city
by lbriner 4y ago
Smaller countries like Japan/UK have other issues with sprawl which is that people often want the best of both. I'm happy to enjoy the buzz of working in a city and its lots of choice of shops and restaurants but I want to live somewhere quiet with space and wildlife so we have the commute.
Problem is that when you don't have a lot of space overall, cities start to sprawl and before you know it, the end of one city joins the beginning of another. Valuable open space and rural space is lost and often the housing it is replaced with is nothing near the same habitat for wildlife even if the gardens are big.
The UK introduced "greenbelts" into planning law in the 20th century to try and prevent it but they do not exist automatically and so more and more rural areas get spoiled with low-density housing.
I think there is still something to be said about well thought-out high density housing where everyone doesn't necessarily need their own garden but some open shared spaces to enjoy.
- Sharlin 4y agoDense zoning along transit corridors, with public green spaces left inbetween, can give the best of both worlds, but only if the temptation to fill those green spaces with SFH sprawl is resisted.
- Sharlin 4y agoDownvotes? Why? This is like sustainable development 101, nothing controversial.
- brigandish 4y agoPart of the problem with greenbelts like the one around London is that they increase demand by making an already in-demand area nicer to live while reducing the potential supply because building can't happen anymore. I think land use is more important, and number one for that would be a reversal of the policies that turned London from somewhere anyone in the country could expect to live into a primate city where only the rich can afford to buy while others can scratch along in their vicinity. (Which might mean less need for greenbelts as people would spread out more naturally, as they used to). However, that would mean dealing with immigration based on reality[1], the capture of the UK by banks, and probably making it incredibly hard for MPs to benefit from property (and hence voting for measures that benefit them), along with a whole host of other things. I'm not hopeful. [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/city-eye-facts-on-a-plate-our-population-is-at-least-77-million-5328454.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/city-eye...
- throw0101a 4y ago> Problem is that when you don't have a lot of space overall, cities start to sprawl and before you know it, the end of one city joins the beginning of another. Valuable open space and rural space is lost and often the housing it is replaced with is nothing near the same habitat for wildlife even if the gardens are big. A video of what's available via a fifteen minute bicycle ride from Amsterdam: * https://twitter.com/notjustbikes/status/1528394830086275075 https://twitter.com/notjustbikes/status/1528394830086275075 See also: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s
- silisili 4y agoI'm much the same, but what I don't get are the worst of both buyers. I live on the outskirts of a city, where each house has at least an acre. It's peaceful, but not close to much. The nearest grocery is about 15 mins by car on the expressway. Just last year, they started building a new subdivision behind us. 5000ish sq ft plots. I can't figure out who in the world would choose a commute and no space...