We keep hearing, that in certain places, green belt land may be built on.
Can this be right under any circumstances?
2007-01-22 10:29:57 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment
Absolutely not. The reason they build on them is for money. There are thousands of empty houses in the UK, crying out for some TLC. The countryside with its wildlife, forests and rivers is one of the few resources left in the uk and should be preserved. We can't have ever growing cities until the whole country is covered in concrete!
2007-01-22 10:35:06 · answer #1 · answered by Stef 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Green Belt is a term made up by the government to describe land that they intended to set aside as bufferzones to stop cities from merging into one another. Alas it isn't a sacred cow and governments being what they are, will allow developments if they can get benefits from it. Groups like the the RSPB may be able to get planning applications blocked, you'd need to bring it to the attention of the Senior Planning Officer for your area though.
http://www.rspb.org.uk/
2007-01-22 10:39:01 · answer #2 · answered by Red P 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Building on green belt land is the least of your worries; building on ex-farm land also means that productive as well as green land is being wasted to greedy land developers.
2007-01-22 10:39:29 · answer #3 · answered by Ta 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Certainly not in the short term. There are so many brown field sites in existing towns that could be utilised, so many ramshackle buildings that could be done up for housing. This is where needs to be developed first.
But there needs to be legislation to make new buildings more env friendly including grey water recycliong and solar heating. this should come as standard on new builds.
2007-01-22 20:17:49 · answer #4 · answered by NEIL B 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Green belt - brown belt, this is not the issue, if the government allowed 'Earth shelters' to be built anywhere, then with their zero-impact on the environment and their zero carbon footprint, they destroy the argument completly!
Constructing more and more tower-block apartments with air-conditioning etc., etc., is insanity!
The question should not be 'where should we live?' as much as 'How should we live?!'
WAKE-UP...time is running out!
2007-01-22 12:48:40 · answer #5 · answered by THINKER 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps where it provides jobs in areas of high unemployment. That is the only excuse. Thus Spurs should not be allowed to builf their proposed training ground at Bull's Cross and Fortress Wapping should not have been moved to Cheshunt
2007-01-22 10:33:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
lower back Door guy - The doorways Kitchen human being - The associates Fly on the Wall - XTC (properly, no element in it being too sparkling) enable There Be more suitable mild - pink Floyd in the course of the Kitchen table - light Fountains living on the Ceiling - Blancmange unmarried mattress - Fox Throw in some Inspiral Carpets and also you're taken care of. and outdoors: backyard - The Groundhogs purely ward off: Burning Down the homestead - speaking Heads
2016-10-15 23:08:17 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely! Where else are we going to build? We set aside land for parks, & some places just can't be built on. Why not use what we can? The economy would stagnate if we didn't.
Personally, I like money.
2007-01-22 10:33:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Absolutely not. We need our green spaces.There are plenty of "brown field" sights that can be built on.
2007-01-22 10:51:57 · answer #9 · answered by G 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well if a Black Belt wanted to build a house - I would argue with him!
2007-01-22 10:32:48 · answer #10 · answered by fumingpuma 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋