Earlier this week we reported how hundreds of people took part in a protest against plans to build thousands of houses north of Dorchester. Here's what readers had to say...

  • Each property of all those protesting was once in open countryside. A fact they should remember. Oscarmilde
  • They do. That aside, 3,500 homes are not required for the local population, which would be falling were it not for people moving to retire in the county. Building lots of homes to accommodate people from elsewhere in the UK is a valid goal, but that's not how these things tend to be presented. In terms of the need for homes for local people, there appear to be sufficient brown field sites. Rocksalt
  • There are not that many brownfield sites in Dorset excluding large gardens, parks etc. Brownfield sites are and will be brought forward by developers if viable - presumably. Dorset will remain a place well to do retirees from the SE and elsewhere etc will wish to purchase properties in. If that demand is not met by building new homes presumably house prices of existing homes in Dorchester will rise increasing the affordability gap for locals employed in the tourism and care industries earning relatively low wages. Jgriffin80
  • Recent academic work suggests that new building in popular areas actually fuels demand and increases prices. What you suggest would happen only actually works when the demand is relatively finite. As for developers queuing up to use brownfield sites, they avoid them if there is any prospect of a greenfield. And there certainly are brownfield sites, including very sizeable one in Crossways. Rocksalt
  • You’re right, these homes are not required by the local population. But at least a new school is being built. Unlike in Weymouth where we have seen houses on green belt and the town green, houses of which are being advertised in the Midlands. I agree that these houses are unnecessary for the locals, but people are fleeing the cities and need to go somewhere. tackleberry