| Day
1 - Tuesday 18th November 2008
The
Kirkby Public Inquiry opened at spot on 10.00am, with the Inspector,
Mrs Wendy Burden looking as if she will take no nonsense. It started
with all sides
making opening statements.
*
Mr
Patrick Clarkson QC (Tesco Stores Ltd) was first up.
He went on about the need for regeneration in Kirkby. He also
went on to say that Everton Football Club's need to move was chronic,
quoting a survey, which placed Everton 19th out of 20th in facilities
in the Premier league and that 53% of the seats at Goodison were
obstructed.
He
says: "Kirkby and Everton have never before reached
this stage of deliverability. It is a once in a generation opportunity
for Kirkby. There is no alternative that can deliver this combination."
* Mr Martin Kingston QC (Knowsley
Borough Council) was next. Again he went on about it
being a great opportunity for Kirkby and stressed that only a
development of this scale would provide the major boost required
for major regeneration.
He
says: "The problems that persist in Kirkby are,
quite literally, from the cradle to the grave. There exists in
these proposals the opportunity to break the cycle of depravation.
The
Club needs a new ground in order to continue to make a positive
economic contribution and in terms of image. There is no suitable
location for a new ground anywhere else."
*
The planning inspector reminded the applicants that after several
requests many documents were still to be released by the applicants
to the inquiry.
*
Mr Stephen Sauvain QC (Liverpool City Council)
tried to demonstrate that the applicants case was hopelessly inadequate
in relation to local, regional and national planning policies.
He also raised into question the financial breakdown of the stadium
costs and the contribution the Club would be making in relation
to Tesco.
He
says:
“The role of the stadium in these application proposals seems
to be confused. Initially the planning statement repeated again
and yet again that the proposed quantum of retail development
was required in order to perform an enabling function by meeting
a £52M gap in funding for the stadium. Knowsley were left
in no doubt that the faced a “once in a lifetime” opportunity
however the applicant and the local authority now seem very coy
about providing any information which would explain the financial
relationship between the quantum of development proposed and the
cross-subsidy which, we are told, is required by the club”
*
Mr Roger Lancaster (Combined Authorities: Sefton / Lancashire
/ West Lancashire & St Helens). He went on about
the fact the application would see a 235% increase in retail floor
space in Kirkby and that this would undermine other regional centres
in the area. Mr Lancaster suggested a smaller development would
provide the necessary boost to the town and not impinge on other
centres.
He
says: "Five neighbouring planning authorities are
at odds with the size of the proposal."
*
Tony
Barton (First4Kirkby) says: "This
development will have a detrimental impact on every resident in
Kirkby, with every road in the town blocked on every match-day
and match-night."
*
Peter Fisher (Knowsley Constituency Liberal Democrats). He
questioned the likelihood of 14,000 match goers utilising the
proposed park-and-ride and park-and-walk services. He also suggested
there was no evidence to suggest Everton had the fan base to fill
a 50,000 stadium based on average attendances last season and
this.
*
Dave Kelly (KEIOC). He questioned the exclusivity agreement
between Everton, Tesco and Knowsley BC. He welcomed regeneration
of his hometown but not Everton Football Club, as a 50,000-seat
stadium doesn’t belong in a 42,000 resident town.
He
say: "Southdene not Dixie Dean."
The
first witness called was Mr John Francis standing as an expert
on Planning Issues. He was questioned by Mr Clarkson followed
by cross-examination by Mr Sauvain.
Public
Inquiry Index
More
Details Here Knowsley
Council website
|
