Go back to the height of the industrial age and the relationship between homes and employment was very different.

Rows of terraced streets pointed like arrows towards the factories, mills, coal mines and shipyards where local people worked. In many industrial communities, the workplace wasn’t a 30-minute drive away. It was a walk down the road.

There was a practical reason for this proximity.

People needed to live close to their work and employers needed access to a local workforce. So, shops, schools, pubs and other services grew around them.

Just look at Howe Bridge in Atherton, or Gin Pit Village in Astley, where I grew up. They’re fantastic examples of model villages that still stand today.

In these places, there was a genuine sense of connection between where people lived and where they worked – a proper community, bonded by shared values and experiences.

But we shouldn’t just look back through rose-tinted glasses, either.

The same proximity that made these communities economically efficient also created terrible living conditions. Pollution, overcrowding, poor sanitation, noise and dangerous working environments were common. Housing – usually two-up two-down terraces – was often cramped and poorly built. Industries often had devastating consequences for health and the environment.

We quite rightly moved away from that model.

Planning began to separate uses, creating distance between homes and industry to create better conditions. Perhaps over time, looking back, we’ve gone too far in the other direction.