allegedly allegedly

[SuitsBlue]

knowsley council leader has finally waded into the kirkby stadium shenanigans...

KNOWSLEY'S council leader broke his silence today to say why he believes Everton's proposed move to Kirkby is vital for the club and the town.
Cllr Ron Round is well-known for his dislike of speaking directly to the media, and has so far avoided publicly entering the debate.
But today in an exclusive interview with the ECHO he offered some hard-hitting views to defend the £400m project before November's public inquiry which will decide its fate.


Cllr Round:
* Criticised Liverpool council for objecting to the plans, and accused the city's Evertonian party leaders of putting club allegiance above public duty.
* Denied the plans breach the council's planning policies, saying that was only because "no-one dreamed" a Premiership club would one day choose Kirkby.
* Claimed Goodison Park will be condemned in just five years.
Cllr Round insisted that after three years of hard work and Knowsley council's unanimous support he is convinced the project is right for Kirkby.
Without Everton, he said, Tesco would build a supermarket and nothing else.
Meanwhile, he said the people of Kirkby suffered "the indignity" of not having a quality shopping centre and had to go to Liverpool or Manchester for decent clothes and decent restaurants.
Cllr Round said: "If I didn't think this was right for Kirkby I would be the first to stop it."
The lifelong Liverpool FC fan added: "I was surprised at Liverpool council. If Warren Bradley and Joe Anderson were Reds I think they would have a different view.
"Destination Kirkby could bring 1.2 million people into Kirkby annually and generate £13.6m in revenue. But if you share that between the surrounding councils it's peanuts.
"In my view, you have two political leaders in Liverpool who are not facing up to their responsibilities. I have never allowed my passion for Liverpool FC to influence my decisions."
Cllr Round said fears of traffic congestion could be dispelled by the M57, dual carriageway and rail stations.
Any anti-social behaviour would be quickly targeted.
The council leader believes the local election defeat of 1st 4 Kirkby, the candidates who stood specifically against the project, proved people did approve of the plans for a 50,000 seater stadium, superstore, shops, a hotel and offices.
He said: "I think they realise, yes, it's a football stadium but it will give us what we want.
"Now Blues fans must realise Destination Kirkby is their only option too."
Cllr Joe Anderson said: "Cllr Round's passion for this project is affecting his view. I am passionate for Everton Football Club, but above all I'm passionate for this city, and that's why I'm standing up against this scheme."
Cllr Warren Bradley said: "Liverpool council's objections are based around council planning policy issues. It has nothing to do with football."

 

[Robin Sisland]

knowsley council leader has finally waded into the kirkby stadium shenanigans...

This may be unpopular with some posters, but that reads as one of the more sensible, better thought out comments on the Kirby proposals.

He's explained his motives as being purely to facilitate the regeneration of Kirkby, and hints that the opposition by Liverpool City Council is a rearguard 'sour grapes' action.

Personally I don't have an axe to grind on where any new stadium is built, and it wouldn't bother me at all if it was in Kirkby. That should be a matter for the local authorities and the people who have to live with it / in its shadow, rather than fans who don't necessarily even live in the area.

That said the impression I've been getting all along is that LCC realize they royally screwed up and so have been reduced to 'spoiler' tactics on the only other project under discussion.

 

[coyney]

This may be unpopular with some posters, but that reads as one of the more sensible, better thought out comments on the Kirby proposals.

He's explained his motives as being purely to facilitate the regeneration of Kirkby, and hints that the opposition by Liverpool City Council is a rearguard 'sour grapes' action.

Personally I don't have an axe to grind on where any new stadium is built, and it wouldn't bother me at all if it was in Kirkby. That should be a matter for the local authorities and the people who have to live with it / in its shadow, rather than fans who don't necessarily even live in the area.

That said the impression I've been getting all along is that LCC realize they royally screwed up and so have been reduced to 'spoiler' tactics on the only other project under discussion.

Robin you appear to accept that the Evertonian councillors are biased which is fair enough,but as the other councillor is a Liverpool supporter could he not be biased as well ,as I have not met any Liverpool fans that are not delighted at the prospect as they put it one team one city. Personally my experiance with politicians is that they are if not strangers to the truth distance relatives all the debating in the world will not solve this both sides being unprepared to accept anything the other side say so lets just wait and see the decision.

 

[modfather]

"Now Blues fans must realise Destination Kirkby is their only option too."

Our only option at the moment he should have said.

"I think they realise, yes, it's a football stadium but it will give us what we want.

Does he mean the people of Kirkby, or the greedy fat cats who will see their wallets grow.

 

[Goat]

* Claimed Goodison Park will be condemned in just five years.


This is something that continues to worry me, GP is an old stadium, very old stadium, there is only so much touching up that can be done, sooner or later its gonna get to the point were it becomes unsafe.

Im not saying im 100% behind Kirkby, but wasnt Kirkby classed as part of Liverpool a few years ago? Yes the transport plans appear to be very flawed and some of the sums dont add up and yes BK has been known to tell a few porkies, but i honestly believe him when he says we need this Stadium to survive.

I would honestly prefer us to rebuild GP, but the more i think about it, the harder that would be, we CAN NOT afford the loss of earnings whilst the work was being done and the work needed is so big that it could not be done pre-season.

LCC have washed their hands with us, for 1 reason or another and are not being very helpful from what i can gather. Ive driven around Liverpool, i saw lots of sites that COULD have been used. 1 that springs to mind is Edge Lane, there was more than enough space there before they re-built it all.

Anyway, i did indeed vote no for Kirkby when we had the chance and i suppose if i had another vote i would again vote no. But thats not to say im still against it, i just feel that the current plan leaves a lot to be desired. So i would suggest that the board works on DK a bit more and then hopefully any fears that ppl like me have could be resolved.

Not every1 is against the idea cos its "outside of the city", some ppl have objections cos in its form atm its unworkable.

 

[njligernj]

* Claimed Goodison Park will be condemned in just five years.
This is something that continues to worry me, GP is an old stadium, very old stadium, there is only so much touching up that can be done, sooner or later its gonna get to the point were it becomes unsafe.

Later ... much later. Someone on TW (I think) actually bothered to research this by contacting those in charge of safety concerns. He was told there was nothing GP needed to do in terms of upgrades (this was thrown around at one point -- that we needed to spend millions a year to meet safety standards ... turns out that wasn't true) and its perfectly safe and in no immediate danger of any problems in the immediate or mid-term future.

We do need a new stadium (be it redeveloped Goodison, one in the city or the mess in Kirkby) but it is NOT, under any circumstances, because GP is about to fall down.

 

[Sharpys top lip]

I [Poor language removed] hate the Kirkby debate so much. It's just lies and bollocks from every one concerned. Every one has their own agender an slant on things. Iv never been so unsure about anything in my life. Iv read so much [Poor language removed] on both sides it's untrue. I just don't know hhat to think about all this......

On another note thou. Warren Bradly is a [Poor language removed] Cuunt. An i do know i hate him. He should never be allowed in G.P again!!

 

[Robin Sisland]

Robin you appear to accept that the Evertonian councillors are biased which is fair enough,but as the other councillor is a Liverpool supporter could he not be biased as well ,as I have not met any Liverpool fans that are not delighted at the prospect as they put it one team one city.

I haven't accepted anything of the sort. I don't believe that LCC's recent actions have been motivated because the current council leaders support Everton. On the contrary I think their concern is in part down to the fact that Kirkby will be attracting new investement that could have been made instead in Liverpool, and that the departure of Everton - a major business, major money earner and a significant employer, will negatively affect other businesses within the city. Not to say in part down to the negative impact the preceding will have on the electorate's perception of the council's performance. Natch, if Everton go, the council loses twice.

And I certainly haven't accepted that the leader of Kirkby council is attempting to lure Everton to Kirkby in order to make Liverpool FC the only club in the city. Frankly that's a very silly suggestion.
On the contrary I think Round makes it very clear that he views the projects stadium purely as commercial venture with the potential to regenerate the run down Kirkby town centre.

What I do accept - albeit from a very long way away and I stand to be corrected if this is not the case - is that until very recently LCC have made little or no effort to try and keep Everton FC within the city boundaries. And, that early informal indications of interest from the club in building a new stadium in Stanley Park were met with the response from LCC that there were legal barriers to building in the park which could not be overcome, which was, as we have later seen, not true.

Personally my experiance with politicians is that they are if not strangers to the truth distance relatives all the debating in the world will not solve this both sides being unprepared to accept anything the other side say so lets just wait and see the decision.

I'm hoping you'll edit that so I can respond.

 

[Goat]

And, that early informal indications of interest from the club in building a new stadium in Stanley Park were met with the response from LCC that there were legal barriers to building in the park which could not be overcome, which was, as we have later seen, not true.


Yes, this is something that cant be overlooked, we were basically told NO! And then the RS were given persmission without a 2nd thought.

 

[Makis]

Yes, this is something that cant be overlooked, we were basically told NO! And then the RS were given persmission without a 2nd thought.

Of course, despite any applications being public, no-one has been able to find any application from EFC regarding this.

 

[Goat]

Nor have we seen LCC denying this is true.

 

[Robin Sisland]

Of course, despite any applications being public, no-one has been able to find any application from EFC regarding this.

There wasn't one. As far as I'm aware LCC have always maintained that there wasn't, and this hasn't been contradicted by the club.

The account I've heard was that 'an informal inquiry' was made, to which the response was that the conditions under which the land which became Stanley Park was gifted to the city made it impossible for it to developed. On the strength of that rejection no formal application was developed or submitted.
I don't have a source for this, I can't remember where exactly I read it so I'm quite happy to be proved wrong if it turns out to be my bad memory or just some unsourced rubbish I found on the net.

 

[Makis]

Nor have we seen LCC denying this is true.

I don't think they have ever been asked directly.

The account I've heard was that 'an informal inquiry' was made, to which the response was that the conditions under which the land which became Stanley Park was gifted to the city made it impossible for it to developed. On the strength of that rejection no formal application was developed or submitted.
I don't have a source for this, I can't remember where exactly I read it so I'm quite happy to be proved wrong if it turns out to be my bad memory or just some unsourced rubbish I found on the net.

To my knowledge, the club has only asked if they could build a carpark at our end of SP. Not a stadium.

 

[gordonjblair]

the key difference that has been quoted was that we asked in poassing about building a car park on a proper green bit of the park, whereas they wanted to build a Stadium on the carpark-y bit of the park, and redo their shithole as green space.. ergo minimal loss of proper green space.

We'll never know what would have happened if we'd have pushed the issue. Perhaps, if we'd have put in a formal planning request, it would have got turned down and set a precedent that would have put the skids under the ShiteDome, but we never did.

 

[davek]

Kopite Ron Round wants to keep his nose out of Everton affairs. He needs to start looking to attract Tranmere to Kirkby because Everton wont be going. As Trevor Skempton said, if they couldn't get this fiasco through first time of asking then they stand little chance now when all the evidence will be seen by an independent party. Just on the transport plan alone this will be laughed out. And on the retail side of the equation for cross-funding purposes, we now have evidence that the more prestigious Liverpool One development is having to give away free rental to attract retail. A Kirkby stadium, according to the DK development team, only stands up if they attract enough retail. Free rental at L1 or paying rental to be next to Tesco in a run down Merseyside district? Hmmm, let me think.

It's a joke this is still ongoing, tbh.