Preston City Council clarifies whether it asked government if it could change Ashton Park football plans, as campaigners vow to fight on

Freddie Bailey was speaking to the Lancashire Post in the wake of an uproarious council meeting during which locals opposed to the overhaul made their feelings plain from the public gallery.

The debate was dominated by the subject of whether amending the £9.7m vision for Ashton Park – of a new 3G football pitch, six grass pitches, a two-storey sports and community pavilion and new car park – would jeopardise the total £20m grant Preston had received from the government’s Levelling Up Fund for a wider package of regeneration work in the city.

Other schemes dependent on that funding include the replacement of the crumbling Old Tram Bridge in Avenham Park and less controversial upgrades to Waverley, Grange and Moor parks.

As the Post reported in October, Levelling Up Fund rules allow local authorities that have received a grant to make a so-called “project adjustment request”, via which they can seek permission from the government to make changes to agreed schemes.

The Fight for Ashton Park group – which opposes the 3G and pavilion elements of the plans for Pedders Lane green space – seized upon that guidance as evidence the city council could redraw the proposal in order to make it more acceptable to the 2,000 people who had signed a petition against it.

>» Join our new WhatsApp Community to get the latest news and top stories from across Lancashire directly to your phone.

Two Ashton ward councillors referred to the rules during the council debate, with Elizabeth Atkins saying they provided for the possibility that schemes might encounter “bumps along the road” – and James Hull adding it was “established” that there was a degree of “wiggle room”, which meant it was not a case of Preston having all or nothing.

However, deputy Labour council leader Martyn Rawlinson said the authority “can’t know” what would actually happen if it were to submit a revised blueprint for Ashton Park. He told councillors they would be risking a total of £24m for the city – including related funding from other sources – if they adopted a Liberal Democrat proposal to replace the 3G surface with another grass pitch and reduce the pavilion building to a single level.

While much deliberation ensued on that point, the ruling group was not directly asked what discussions the council had – or had not had – with the government over the matter.

So, the day after the meeting, the Post asked Cllr Bailey whether the city authority had approached the government with a “theoretical” proposal to scale back the Ashton Park project, in order to establish what such a scenario would mean for the other Levelling Up Fund schemes.

Cllr Bailey – the cabinet member for environment and community safety – said the council had “had conversations with civil servants” over the matter, but never received “a solid answer”. For that reason, he added, much uncertainty still surrounded the situation.

“If we had taken up …the Lib Dems’ amendment, there would have still been a risk that we lost the funding for all the other projects – or they might have just said [they would allow us] to keep the funding for the rest of the projects, but…just pull all the funding from Ashton Park,” Cllr Bailey explained.

He said he did not believe the government “would ever give us a straight answer unless [we] said we are officially changing the plans” – and he acknowledged that there “wasn’t as much need” to approach Whitehall with such a definitive proposition once the principle of the Ashton Park scheme had been agreed at a council meeting back in December.

At that time, the decision to approve the project was taken behind closed doors because of concerns over commercial confidentiality, but was recently ripped up after the threat of a legal challenge from the Fight for Ashton Park group – hence it being considered afresh, in public, at the budget meeting held on Thursday.

At the December gathering, Conservative opposition group leader Sue Whittam had called for the matter to be deferred in order to get the kind of clarity from the government that the ruling Labour group says is still lacking more than two months later.

Cllr Whittam told the Post that although her previous push for deferral was ultimately defeated, she was nevertheless “very disappointed that the cabinet member did not get a definitive answer from the government” in the interim.

“[Not] having that information meant there was too much of a risk – [and] we could not risk losing the whole £20m+ from the Levelling Up Fund,” Cllr Whittam said, adding that she had been compelled to abstain in the vote as a result.

However, deputy Lib Dem group leader Neil Darby blasted the fact councillors had been put in the position that they were.

“It seems incredible that the council were not given a straight answer if they were making good faith enquiries regarding their funding bid to the government – and the ambiguity of this position was used aggressively by the Labour cabinet to squeeze councillors unhappy with the unaltered scheme into voting for it.

“It was notable that several of the Labour councillors in the chamber seemed to share our doubts on the statement.

“The amended scheme proposed by the Lib Dems retained most of the advantages of the sports development whilst simultaneously resolving or ameliorating most of the concerns raised by residents in Ashton and Larches,” Cllr Darby told the Post.

Speaking after the meeting, one nearby resident of the park – who did not wish to be named – accused the council of using “scare tactics” over the claimed threat to the other Levelling Up Fund projects.

“You would find out your position [for certain] and then you could argue your case strongly,” she said.

“If they really don’t know…then it’s just incompetence.”

The scheme will still require planning permission to be granted before it can go ahead. Preston City Council’s chief executive Adrian Phillips reminded councillors who also sit on the independent, cross-party planning committee that they must approach their decision in that forum with an open mind, without having a pre-determined position – irrespective of how they voted on the substance of the scheme at the budget meeting.

‘IT’S NOT OVER’

The Post understands residents have served Preston City Council notice that the authority would be breaching an historical covenant that protects households close to the park from “nuisance or annoyance” if it presses ahead with the Ashton Park plans.

They claim, amongst other things, that there would be noise disturbance from “whistle-blowing [and] shouting” emanating from the 3G pitch – which it is proposed will be open from 9am until 10pm, seven days a week – as well as “excessive illumination” from floodlights. Concerns are also cited about the environmental impact of the micro-plastic “rubber crumb” that makes up the 3G surface.

Separately, the Fight for Ashton Park group has said it will step up its legal challenge if planning permission is ultimately granted as part of the battle against what some residents see as the ruination of the site.

“We’re not going away – we’re more [resolute] than ever,” said founder member James Walmsley, who has lived overlooking the park for most of his 72 years.

“The council kept saying, ‘We don’t know’ [about the possibility of changing the scheme]. Well, come with us and we’ll show you – because we do know,” he added.

During the meeting, Ashton ward councillor Elizabeth Atkins warned that the changes on the table were irreversible if they proved to be a mistake.

“[If we] interfere with the park and its integrity, we cannot put it back when we change our mind,” said Cllr Atkins, adding that even just the loss of topsoil would likely result in the release of carbon.

According to the city council's own figures, the development – excluding the grass pitches – would take up just under 15 percent of the park’s surface area.

GAME ON

A junior league football coach who says there is a severe shortage of 3G pitches in Preston has heralded the Ashton Park plans as game-changing for grassroots teams like his.

Christopher Murray, who manages the Springfields under-8s girls side in Ashton, has previously told the Post that wet weather and the ballooning number of teams looking for space to play and train has meant facilities are at a premium – and kids wanting a kickabout are often left disappointed.

“My girls had their game cancelled every week in February. This weekend, they played on 3G at the college, but that’s at our expense and doesn’t count to our league [Mid Lancs Colts Juniors]

“Last week, I spent hours searching for a 3G pitch for three hours worth of bookings – and couldn’t even find one hour anywhere in Preston,” Christopher said.

Papers presented to the council meeting where the green light was given to the scheme for a second time state that three more 3G facilities are needed in the city.

BIG PLAYERS

The business case for the Ashton Park project – on which councillors based their majority approval back in December – has now been put in the public domain for the first time.

It reveals that the Preston North End Community and Education Trust has “potential interest in becoming the operational management organisation” for the pavilion building.

A separate report to councillors states that the most cost-effective way of operating the facility is through an external provider with the specialist skills to do so. However, it also warns that while the arrangement would be cost-neutral to the council, it would leave the authority with “no direct control” over how the facility would be operated on a day-to-day basis, beyond the stipulations it would set out in a contract agreed with any provider.