The Insane Engineering of Green Belts Around Cities
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 апр 2023
- Discover the shocking truth behind greenbelts and their hidden effects on your personal finances in this eye-opening video. We will talk about the pros and cons of greenbelts all around the world. Explore the controversial impact of greenbelt policies, including the famous London Greenbelt, on housing prices, city living, and sustainable development. Delve into the benefits and drawbacks of green spaces and their influence on urban sprawl and land use policy. Join us as we unravel the complex debate around greenbelts and their ecological impact on a global scale. Don't miss this crucial investigation into how greenbelts are secretly draining your wallet and affecting your life. #GreenbeltEffects #UrbanPlanning #housingprices
Support CuriousReason:
✔ Patreon: / curiousreason
✔ Stuff I recommend: www.amazon.com/shop/curiousre...
✔ PayPal: paypal.me/Diyorbek
✔ RUclips Membership: https: bit.ly/2Qt5Gna
Interesting stuff I found for myself:
✔www.amazon.com/shop/curiousre...
Special Thanks to Patreon Supporters:
Sannu, Bill Pearce, Miroslav Houdek
Lets chat:
✔Twitter: / reasoncurious
✔Facebook: / curiousreason1
✔Subreddit: / curious_reason
✔Instagram: / curious_reason
Business inquiries: thecuriousreason@gmail.com
#Greenbelt #UrbanPlanning #london #costofliving 
Наука
I reject your final question. We can have the green belt AND more affordable housing. If we stopped building single family homes in places like London, and focused on higher density, walkable neighbourhoods, you can increase the availability of housing units without needing to build on more green belt land. You can complement this with bans on second home ownership within the city, bans on non-resident foreigners and investors, take empty or dilapidated into public ownership, etc.
Urbanists: just ban single family homes and everything will work out.
You are assuming NIMBYs don't exist and vote and have political influence. They do exist and they do vote and have influence.
@@Geotpf change the planning system so they have less influence to outright block proposals
Though that may be the case, not everyone wants to live in high density accommodation. Many people want a detached dwelling. You can't just say "f*** em"
@@Sancarn cool. That's fine. Just so long as you pay the full economic cost of your choice. I.e., your property taxes should be higher to pay for the fact that running services, roads, etc., to your house is much more expensive.
Humble opinion: I think green belts should include inside green corridors that connect points (e.g. a circle with chords/secants). Proper landscape and urban design is needed. In Spain, Vitoria-Gasteiz is famous for it's green belt. I live in Taiwan now. Taipei is surrounded by green mountains, but inside the city I miss planned greenness. Similar goes for Hualien, one of the main rural cities, despite being close to mountains.
Building hedge rows and buoswales would help,, if in a small way.
We rediscovered how Roman concrete was made. We can expect more beautiful, durable, affordable construction in the future.
The strong emphasis on the green belt vs housing/prices argument makes the video fall into a false dilemma fallacy, discrediting other interesting aspects and discussion surrounding greenbelts.
Your 'either/or' question at about 8:35 is reductive. It sounds formulated by greedy opportunists.
It's like saying that we should pick between '$$$$ regreening and $$$$ food,' or 'would you please just croak?'
We can produce more nutritious, good quality, more quantity, eco- and health-restoring foods (including meat, dairy and eggs) at less cost than conventional, poisonous ag.
We can certainly target greenbelts to the midst of impoverished areas instead of rich areas. Add mixed use, multiple economic strata housing same buildings. Make sure everybody has direct outdoor access. Add bioswales and hedgerows for more regreening power.
Bring equity and access.
Hear me out: Keep the green belt, but slash zoning restrictions, height limits, and protected lines of sight within the city proper (not in the green belt). Without these roadblocks, it would be much easier to build housing. Cities should serve the people living in them, not just a limited few or some prestigious ideal.
That would be still be exploited by the rich. There would be segregated tenement blocks with little or zero direct outdoor access. The best places would be occupied by the rich. Those near impoverished areas, hazardous waste sites, smelly industry, swamps, prisons, etc.
You need mixed use housing with rail, bike paths, bioswales, large balconies, etc.
We have Roman concrete again so obsolescence plays less of a factor. We can build for long term affordability and durability.
Have you heard of restoration ag and Mark Shepard; and rainwater harvesting and Brad Lancaster?
@@b_uppy "smelly industry" this is fear mongering by NIMBYs. People used to live by the factories they work in. There is a decaying sewing machine factory in my neighborhood. I can walk there, but it sits vacant. I have to get in my car and drive to work. The highway that this new zoning necessitates is noisy and smelly, but spread over a much larger area than a single smelly factory.
Do all the stuff I said but also have environmental regulations. See how easy that was?
@@CompuBrains27
Thank you for reframing what I said to fit your argument. Now let me ignore your logical phallusy.
I did see how easy that was.
I’m sorry, but that’s a TERRIBLE idea
@@TfL1901
Not entirely. Much of zoning is just costly and creates more problems than it solves.
Dedicated and protected green spaces should still be preserved, however, these urban developments and housing should be designed carefully in such a way that it doesn't not destroy these green belts.
Add mixed use, all classes housing in the same building. Add rail and walkability/bikeability. Bioswales and hedgerows expand the benefits.
Are you using A.I. or did you hire an actor? Or did your English improve? I can't figure it out either way keep up the good work glad you're finally getting some recognition
Great video 😊
we must watch out the man' s encroaching action against the green belts and preserve one .thanks for your reminding us of the function & importance of a green belts.😍
Modernizing public transportation. I'm in southwestern ohio and it takes me longer to get from where I live in the suburbs to downtown cincy on public trans than it does for me to drive from cincy to Columbus. You wanna keep cars off the streets? Furthermore, make streets irrelevant? Practical public transportation. Preserve green zones or spaces or whatever? Build efficient and modern public transpo that makes it impractical for me to put that gas guzzling carbon emitting steering wheel in my hands. Cuz I hate driving! Seriously...I hate it. You preserve the green zones by traveling underneath them. Only answer in my mind. Lol thank you for this great video that made me think about this just now. Lol
Most suburbs are too spread out and too low density for effective public transportation to be built. Subways ain't cheap to build or operate.
Good video, but you should have included Hong Kong...
Acres and football fields? Really? If you're gonna dedicate one unit to Americans, please just use km² or hectare for the other
The greenbelt question is actually a microcosm of the global discussion on climate change/alt energy/environmental matters - Developed nations want their environmental aesthetics, nations with environmental aesthetics/resources want development - how to balance the two?
If you love the nature, don't stay close to it. Just leave the nature alone.