SO Councillor Fulham believes we need to ensure our generation and future generations have the the best possible choice of affordable housing and jobs in a quality environment.


I am in total agreement but please explain this.


On 78 available brownfield sites, 4,744 new homes are to be built. 
Add to this a further 1,365 new homes are anticipated on windfall brown sites (according to St Helens First magazine) and the new total is 6,109 homes.


The council has highlighted the need to build 570 new homes per year up to 2033, which equates to a minimum of 8.3 years, maximum 10.7 years worth of available land for house building.


Please explain the urgency to propose releasing such a large amount of greenbelt land in 2017 when it appears there is sufficient brownfield to build on up to mud 2027.


Exactly what are the exceptional “circumstances for offering up this land now?”


Perhaps the council should take a step back and review their Local Plan. 
What evidence do you have that 8,550 new families will want to move to the borough by 2033. Currently, 3500 empty properties in St Helens (approximately) are attracting little interest. How will your new build be any different?


Homes should be built to address need and not just to provide revenue. 
After five years of build (2850 new homes) see how many houses are actually lived in to assess further demand.


Your targets many need to be adjusted. 


Use this time to identify additional brownfield sites and to decontaminate those currently deemed unsuitable for housebuilding to be used in the future. 


We need to maintain our quality environment by protecting our valuable greenbelt, farmland, and open spaces for as long as possible. All other options should be exhausted first.


G Barton, Billinge