tobyaw: (Default)
Toby Atkin-Wright ([personal profile] tobyaw) wrote2010-06-09 09:05 am
Entry tags:

Brown field

I see that England has reclassified gardens in planning terms so they are no longer “brownfield” sites (a category otherwise used for post-industrial land). This means that councils can make the planning process for building on gardens more arduous, which I welcome. Suburban gardens should be treasured and valued, rather than viewed as a money-making development opportunity. In particular, I don’t think that houses should be built on gardens in a way that significantly changes the housing density or character of a neighbourhood.

In covering this story on the BBC News channel, their report said that new houses will still need to be built. Do they?

[identity profile] hobbitomm.livejournal.com 2010-06-09 07:10 pm (UTC)(link)
I seem to recall the howls of protest when the Scottish Government took the decision to move some department or other (?Sport? Culture?) to Inverness. I think the crying would be deafening if you moved (and I think they should) major departments out of London. As far as I can see, the only Government Department with a decent reason to be in London at all is the Foreign Office, and that only because all the Ambassadors are there...

Hrmmm.... Move Defence to somewhere between Portsmouth, Brize Norton, and Salisbury Plain. Winchester, perhaps? Salisbury? Home office to Manchester. Environment to Newcastle. Treasury to Birmingham. Can you hear the lamentation of the masses already? And yet presumably it would net a massive amount for the treasury, as you sold all that prime housing land in central london.