A campaigner has said a landmark regeneration scheme "betrayed" the community it promised to serve.
Project Jennifer was a £150m project that was set to transform Great Homer Street in Everton. The long running scheme was delayed partly due to the economic crash of 2009.
Project Jennifer eventually delivered a Sainsbury's superstore, McDonald's drive-thru, an adjacent retail park and around 100 new homes. The regeneration project included the refurbishment of the Marwood Tower building.
READ MORE: Liverpool Council's chief executive accused of 'feeding the police' with information by sacked regeneration boss
However it has now emerged that the scheme, backed by developers St Modwen and Liverpool Council, did not result in a Section 106 payment to the community. Section 106 payments typically require developers to pay money to the local authority which is used to benefit the immediate community.
The cash is typically spent on creating more public space, road improvements, cycling infrastructure or increasing education or health services.
The council, in response to a recent freedom of information act request by Kevin Robinson-Hale, has revealed that Project Jennifer resulted in a S106 of £8,076. However the council spent the money on legal costs and monitoring.
A spokesman for the local authority said Project Jennifer provided huge benefits to the north Liverpool community including improved housing and transport infrastructure. The spokesman added that this would have mitigated against any S106.
Kevin Robinson Hale, a Green Party candidate at the 2023 local elections, said "We know that the Tesco superstore on Mather Avenue in south Liverpool resulted in a 106 of around £1m in 2005. Surely this sums up the north - south divide in Liverpool. In leafy Allerton developers pay huge sums of money to benefit the community but in Everton there is no need. What a joke."
Kevin said that the community was also promised other resources which failed to materialise.
He said: "So they demolished the old medical centre but we were promised a new one, and a dentist. Both have failed to materialise. And there was supposed to be a new library. So there are plenty of places where big business can make money, but no resources for the community."
In response to a question by Mr Robinson-Hale about the plans for a new medical centre, dentist and library on the new site, the council responded with the line:
"The grant of planning permission did not require specific facilities to be provided within a specific timescale." In their response to a question about section 106 money related to Project Jennifer, the council said the 106 was worth £8076. The council confirmed they spent £1600 on legal costs and £6,476 on monitoring the planning application.
A spokesperson for developers St Modwen said: “Section 106 contributions are determined by local authorities and dependent on several factors, including development risk and the cost of preparing the site. The relevant factors were considered in the determination for Great Homer Street, a project which began shortly after the great financial crisis and required several years of site preparation.”
