Sir, It is not time for a “Garden City” (Herald, May 28). When even Kirsty Alsopp, of Location, Location, Location, states that it is not necessary to build on green-field sites (on Question Time recently), stating that there are brown-field sites that would meet our housing need, then, that is the question that has to be asked for me.

Surely what we need is a proper plan that is not wildly inaccurate as the CPRE report on the Strategic Housing Market Assessment makes plain.

We need housing, yes, but in the right place so that communities thrive where they already are. If there are brown-field sites and a million empty houses, then it must make sense to use the houses first because the countryside is a finite resource: once it’s gone, it’s gone and no one can deny that.

The alternative, then, to a free-for-all is a proper national plan which looks at how our towns an cites work (or not) in terms of housing and what can be done to improve that environment so that there are fewer empty shops and buildings before countryside is sacrificed.

Secondly, if we build on countryside and cover it in solar farms etc, where do our farmers farm?

In my book, it is time for a fundamental rethink on what has long-term value in the countryside.

M Fysh

Whitecross

Abingdon