Knowsley accused of rushing through Everton plans

Nov 19 2008 by Richard Down, Liverpool Daily Post

OPPOSITION authorities yesterday claimed that Knowsley’s “opportunist” regeneration plans had hijacked proper planning process.

The council was accused of rushing through the £400m plans at the expense of other towns that have gone through a longer and more reasoned development protocol.

But Knowsley Council told the inquiry they could not have reasonably been expected to predict that Everton FC and Tesco would come forward with a combined scheme for Kirkby.

Roger Lancaster, speaking for the coalition of opposition authorities, refused to accept this explanation.

He said: “This (planning decision) has effectively hijacked the planning process.

“Anything that changes the status of a town within the regional retail hierarchy should be initially addressed through the Regional Spacial Strategy, not a planning decision by a particular authority.”

If Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Hazel Blears accepts the bid, Kirkby will rise from 16th to at least 6th in the regional standings.

Stephen Sauvain, speaking on behalf of Liverpool City Council, said this was not appropriate for a town the size of Kirkby.

He added: “Knowsley has been successful in pursuing regeneration and most of this has been within its unitary development plan.”

He argued there was no reason to deviate from this pattern now.

Martin Kingston, for Knowsley, said that the opportunity was simply too good to miss and delaying the deal would have killed it off.

He said: “This plan will cause regeneration within a reasonable time frame and is reliant on market forces – which is something that this inquiry should be supporting.”

He also maintained that the development was broadly in line with regional development criteria.

Mr Lancaster, however, said the effect would “condemn” plans to regenerate Skelmersdale even though these had been out to public consultation and had gone the approved regional planning pathway.

Mr Sauvain said the council and the applicants were obstructing a full understanding of how necessary, or even viable the application really is.