View Single Post
  #96  
Old Posted May 18, 2017, 9:00 PM
Jonesy55 Jonesy55 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnyc View Post
^ i think that is because we have more drivers commuting here than london does. just a guess. anecdotal, but i work with people who commute from places like danbury, bridgeport, the pocanos, way upstate and deep in nj, who drive most of the time. crazy commutes and horror stories -- i dk how they do it.

and i can get with what muppet is saying above that too, its reasonable. the greenbelt functions similarly to what the more impermeable water, swamps of nj and hills and dales of westchester and upstate do for ny metro. if the greenbelt is seen as failing, that is only because it can fail, there is nothing stopping it from succeeding or failing, but politics. ny is more wedged in by both physical barriers and politically by the tri-state, but sprawl always finds its way.
You would need to be an idiot to commute into central London by car every day from outside Greater London I think, it's expensive and would be very time-consuming. The Green Belt does have a useful purpose in containing sprawl, but imo a nice compromise would be to allow mid to high density development anywhere within 2 km of an existing rail station within the greenbelt, there are dozens of those.

That would still protect 95% of the greenbelt from sprawl but also enable several hundred thousand more homes.
Reply With Quote