Yes I read your response with interest. I agree that the more housing is needed in Oxford but we have to think about more sustainable ways forward that provide people with the access to goods and services that they need. I am still not convinced that sticking people out in soul-less suburban neighbourhoods where they have to rely heavily on a car to more around is the answer. Best make use of existing ‘brownfield sites’ in Oxford City. I’m thinking of land in the city that could be brought to more productive use than car parking i.e. Worcester St car park. I also like the idea of moving Southfield golf course to the greenbelt and replacing this inaccessible exclusive land with good quality housing for those in most need.

Tim Jones
OX4 4QR

The UK would not fall apart if the % of built up land were increased to (say) 15%, but a lot more lower income families would be able to afford to live somewhere near their work.

I could go on (and on), but one item on the radio this morning was a typical example of the distorting effects of this policy.

Rail passenger demand has increased by 10%. Rail companies wanted to buy extra carriages just to keep up with demand. They want a subsidy because the carrages were only being used for a couple of hours a day - ie by more commuters.

So we have people commuting increasing distances, taking record time to get to work, paying more for travel than other countries, living in ever smaller but more expensive houses, using more energy to do so.

Its a social, economic and environmental mess.