You’re missing my point. Development density doesn’t preserve green space. It just puts more people in a smaller space. Protecting green spaces requires actual protections.
This graphic implies that there is a market solution to protecting green spaces. It’s suggesting that NIMBYs who oppose high-density zoning are the reason for suburban wastelands. Zoning regulation should prioritize preserving green spaces and public lands, but deregulation is not the fix (as is implied).
Anytime a complicated subject is condensed to such simplicity as in the original image, all the nuance of the topic is left out. It’s a problem with all true political topics.
You’re missing my point. Development density doesn’t preserve green space. It just puts more people in a smaller space. Protecting green spaces requires actual protections.
This graphic implies that there is a market solution to protecting green spaces. It’s suggesting that NIMBYs who oppose high-density zoning are the reason for suburban wastelands. Zoning regulation should prioritize preserving green spaces and public lands, but deregulation is not the fix (as is implied).
I agree with you actually. As usual, text conversations don’t really convey the entirety of the thought/concept, and lead to misunderstandings.
Anytime a complicated subject is condensed to such simplicity as in the original image, all the nuance of the topic is left out. It’s a problem with all true political topics.