• OrlandoDoom@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    14 days ago

    Leave the green belt alone, build on golf courses. It’s a shit sport that toffs use to run private business meetings and uses far too much land.

    • frankPodmore@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      A lot of the ‘green’ belt is golf courses. Also, a lot of it isn’t really all that green, certainly not if ‘green’ means something other than the colour (like ‘biodiverse’, for example). It’s very often low-quality, inaccessible, economically unproductive land that would be much better off with people living on it.

      • OrlandoDoom@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 days ago

        I didn’t know that, thanks. I was under the impression that green belt meant somewhat wild, not monocultures of grass and a couple of ornate trees

        • frankPodmore@slrpnk.netOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 days ago

          Yep, part of the difficulty is that people have a very inaccurate picture of what the ‘green belt’ looks like. When the green belts were drawn (70 years ago!), they inevitably included some already developed land which now can’t be redeveloped. As a result, it currently includes not only low-quality ‘green’ spaces but in some cases car parks, disused petrol stations, dumping grounds next to railway sidings - it’s ridiculous.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      For what it’s worth, “green belt” can be quite a misnomer.

      The name implies luscious countryside and national parks. In reality much of it is unproductive fields, disused ‘farmland’, etc.

      Misleading people with what “green belt” means is a typical tactic amongst NIMBYs.