Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
More myths. Concreting over the countryside. Urban sprawl. Emotive terms ...

...Land reform must mesh with decent relaxed planning laws that allow the population to build on all land...

...Building on a larger mass of land will eliminate the unappealing high density, high impact developer estates; the sort that make people shudder, with many having to buy as they have Hobson?s choice....

...Best read the links I give. It will become clearer.
This is politicised, un-knowing and irresponsible nonsense.

The UKGBC (amongst others) publish figures of our carbon footprint and how we generate it.

A consistent statistic is that we generate about 40% of our carbon footprint by building our buildings, making the bricks, cutting timber etc and a further 25% in transportation between home and work.

Dispersing the cities into the countryside not only generates a lot of damage to the environment through the creation of new building materials and building operations but also greatly increases travel carbon by increasing distance, erodes carbon capture potential and displaces agriculture overseas thus generating more carbon footprint bringing our food in from around the globe (apart from that it's fine!)

On the face of it, we would do rather better to convert existing buildings (even if stuffing them with insulation) in inner city brownfield sites rather than endless and anonymous suburban sprawl; along the way creating vibrant and appropriately dense and enjoyable city communities.

Liverpool is not that densely populated in any event. Its previous density has fallen from 20,000 plus people per square mile to about 11,000 ie., there is plenty of room in the inner city; just take a walk around the North End for brownfield sites or Smithdown Road for boarded up houses; where as Inner London including all those ugly, rich, conservative-voting people in Mayfair and Fulham has fallen to about 23,000 and beautiful those areas are too.

Spreading the cities is killing the planet.