tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28078378.post7757112425087170835..comments2023-10-30T11:00:05.243+00:00Comments on Bacon Butty: Land use strategy - discussUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28078378.post-46065156530187668182007-04-28T17:11:00.000+01:002007-04-28T17:11:00.000+01:00Gerry's (anon) comment is here.I think both Gerry ...Gerry's (anon) comment is <A HREF="http://cpredebates.wordpress.com/2007/03/09/david-milibands-vision-for-the-future-of-the-land/#comment-38" REL="nofollow">here</A>.<BR/><BR/>I think both Gerry and John make good points - the key is that there must be economic activity in the countryside and rural towns - and this must go beyond traditional rural industries like farming. I'm optimistic - I think a revolution in telecoms and collaborative working techniques means people will be able to work more remotely more often from their normal place of work - or work itself will be come geographically decentralised.<BR/><BR/>I agree that 'what people want' shouldn't be the way we determine land use - there lies the the route to the tragedy of the commons. On the other hand, we do protect nature because people like it, and one of the best ways to experience it is to live and work in it. <BR/><BR/>I think what the Policy Exchange makes use face is that through the planning system and high house prices, it is possible for a select group to 'capture' the countryside and keep its pleasures exclusive to them. <BR/><BR/>I agree with Caspar about access, but one of the best ways of doing that is to bring green space into the urban areas - the green belt isn't really something people visit much.Clive Bateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15614056019814665135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28078378.post-59675290811605381612007-04-04T20:45:00.000+01:002007-04-04T20:45:00.000+01:00There is a good deal of sense in most of Alan Bate...There is a good deal of sense in most of Alan Bates's comments but I think we need to be careful about rural building simply because it encourages commuting unless we can build genuinely sustainable communities. Where we can provide genuine new employment opportunities then of course we should look at rural building centered on existing communities - but in doing so we need to remember that there will always be more workers than managers and the housing needs to reflect this. It does not do so at present. To be sustainable a community also needs to be self contained rather than commuter based.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28078378.post-3131157252196653662007-03-27T21:52:00.000+01:002007-03-27T21:52:00.000+01:00I've replied to some of the points in this post on...I've replied to some of the points in this post on the CPRE blog, which led me to this blog. I'd be curious to hear your response. - GerryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28078378.post-80756075139218809312007-03-14T09:15:00.000+00:002007-03-14T09:15:00.000+00:00This agenda hits a lot of good points. One sugges...This agenda hits a lot of good points. One suggested addition: a strategy and implementation plan for access. This would not be the same as a "right to roam" (welcome though that may be under certain conditions). It would include much greater thought, planning and resources about transport into and across rural areas. For example, a comprehensive, funded programme for the re-development of more disused railway lines for very low or zero carbon travel.Caspar Hendersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04667141284390082748noreply@blogger.com