LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR

REVIEW OF

METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF ST HELENS

Boundaries with: in HALTON in CHESHIRE WEST in LANCASHIRE

WEST LANCASHIRE

WIGAN

KNOWSLEY ST HI iNS

WARRINGTON

HALTON

REPORT NO. 625 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION

FOR ENGLAND

REPORT NO 625 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND

CHAIRMAN SIR GEOFFREY ELLERTON CMC MBE

MEMBERS MR K F J ENNALS CB

MR G PRENTICE

MRS H R V SARKANY

MR C W SMITH

PROFESSOR K YOUNG THE RT RON MICHAEL HESELTINE MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

REVIEW OF MERSEYSIDE

THE OF ST HELENS AND ITS BOUNDARIES WITH THE BOROUGHS OF WARRINGTON AND HALTON IN THE COUNTY OF CHESHIRE AND THE DISTRICT OF WEST LANCASHIRE IN THE COUNTY OF LANCASHIRE

COMMISSIONS FINAL REPORT

INTRODUCTION

1 . On 1 September 1987, we wrote to St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council announcing our intention to undertake a review of St Helens as part of our review of the Metropolitan County of Merseyside and its Metropolitan Districts under section 48(1) of the Local Government Act 1972. Copies of the letter were also sent to the adjoining Metropolitan District Councils; to the County and District Councils bordering the Metropolitan County; to parish councils in the adjoining districts; to the Local Authority Association; to Members of Parliament with a constituency interest; and to the headquarters of the main political parties. In addition, copies were sent to those government departments, regional health authorities and statutory undertakers which might have an interest, as well as to the English Tourist Board, the local press and the local television and radio stations serving the area, and to a number of other interested persons and organisations.

2. The Metropolitan Borough of St Helens was requested, in co- operation as necessary with other principal authorities, to assist us in publishing the start of the review by inserting a notice for two successive weeks in local newspapers so as to give a wide coverage in the areas concerned. The Councils were also asked to ensure that our consultation letter was drawn to the attention of those services in respect of which they had a statutory function.

3. A period of seven months from the date of our letter was allowed for all local authorities, including those in the surrounding districts, and any person or body interested in the review, to send us their views on whether changes to the borough boundary were desirable and, if so, what those changes should be and how they would serve the interests of effective and convenient local government, the criterion laid down in the Act.

THE SUBMISSIONS MADE TO US

4. In response to our letter of 1 September 1987, we received representations from St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council, from Warrington Borough Council, , Cheshire County Council, West Lancashire District Council, Winwick Parish Council, Parish Council and Bold Parish Council. We also received representations from Mr Doug Hoyle MP, and from other interested bodies and residents of the local authorities concerned.

SUGGESTIONS FOR CHANGE AND OUR INITIAL CONSIDERATION

THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS AND WARRINGTON

DRAFT PROPOSALS

(a) Hermitage Green

5. St Helens had suggested the realignment of its boundary with Warrington to unite the divided community of Hermitage Green in its area, and to consolidate community facilities for the benefit of residents. 6. Cheshire County Council submitted an alternative suggestion to unite Hermitage Green in Warrington, on the grounds that the area had no strong links with St Helens as a whole, or, in particular, with Newton-le-Willows to the north west of Hermitage Green, in St Helens. Its affinities were with Winwick in Warrington. The County Council took the view that there was no evidence to support St Helens' suggestion. Cheshire's alternative suggestion was supported by Warrington Borough Council and by Winwick Parish Council.

7. Objections to St Helens' suggestion were received from Mr Doug Hoyle MP, the Local Committee of the Council for the Protection of Rural England and eleven residents of the area. A petition bearing 41 signatures opposing the suggestion was also received.

8. We noted that the present boundary clearly divides the community of Hermitage Green, and considered that it would be in the interests of effective and convenient local government to unite it in one authority. Having considered all the submissions and comments received, we concluded that Hermitage Green's links appeared to be with Winwick and Warrington, in which Borough most of the community lies, rather than with Newton-le-Willows, in St Helens. We therefore decided to adopt Cheshire's suggestion, to unite Hermitage Green in Warrington, as our draft proposal, subject to the boundary being tied to clearly defined features.

(b) Sankey Brook

9. St Helens had suggested realigning its boundary with Warrington along the present course of Sankey Brook. Warrington supported St Helens' suggestion, but with minor modifications. It reported that the suggestion to realign the boundary along the Brook also had the support of Winwick and Burtonwood Parish Councils. While supporting St Helens suggestion subject to Harrington's proposed modifications Cheshire County Council suggested that it be extended to follow the course of Newton Brook.

10. We noted that all the local authorities concerned supported a realignment to the present course of Sankey Brook. We considered that the use of Sankey Brook and Newton Brook would provide a more readily identifiable boundary. We therefore decided to adopt Cheshire's suggestion as our draft proposal.

(c) Collins Green

1.1. St Helens had suggested a realignment of the existing boundary, which it considered to be unsatisfactory and difficult to identify, to unite Collins Green in its area. It commented that the residents of Collins Green travelled to Newton-le- Willows in St Helens, for shopping and other facilities.

12. Cheshire County Council had opposed St Helens' suggestion as being an excessive solution to the boundary anomalies in the area, and argued that the community of Collins Green related more to Burtonwood in Warrington than to St Helens. The County Council stated that this letter view was supported by a petition (not submitted to us) signed by 83 residents of the area. As an alternative, the County Council suggested uniting Bold Colliery in St Helens.

13. Warrington also opposed St Helens' suggestion, on the grounds that Collins Green's links are with Burtonwood and Warrington. It considered that these links had been enhanced by changes in employment, such as the closure of Bold Colliery, which had led to re-employment being sought and provided within its Borough. As an alternative, Warrington suggested uniting the Bold Colliery site in St Helens, subject to realigning the boundary to the course of the Sankey Brook. Objections were also received from the Burtonwood Parish Council and from the Vicar of St Michaels Church, Burtonwood. 14. We considered all the submissions received and concluded that St Helens had not provided sufficient evidence to support its case that Collins Green had xxxxxx affinity with its Borough than with Warrington. We therefore decided to adopt Cheshire's suggestion to unite Bold Colliery in St Helens, as our draft proposal, subject to minor modifications to tie the boundary to identifiable ground features.

(d) Moat House Farm

15. St Helens had suggested realigning its boundary in the area of Moat House Farm to tie it to identifiable ground features. Cheshire County Council agreed that the boundary was anomalous, but submitted an alternative alignment. Burtonwood Parish Council had supported Cheshire's alternative suggestion. Warrington Borough Council commented that it saw no advantages in adopting either of the suggested realignments.

16. We noted that the present boundary in this area is identifiable on the ground. We agreed that St Helens suggestion would satisfactorily resolve the anomalies and therefore decided to adopt it as our draft proposal, subject to a modification to make better use of ground detail.

(e) Finch's Plantation to Four Too'd Oak

.17. St Helens had suggested a realignment of its boundary from the vicinity of Finch' s Plantation to Four Too' d Oak, on the grounds that it is difficult to follow. Cheshire supported the suggestion, but proposed an alignment which would transfer a larger parcel of land north of the to railway to its area. Warrington, which, said that its view was supported by both and Parish Councils, opposed St Helens' suggestion, on the grounds that the present boundary is reasonably straight and no change is therefore required.. 18. We considered the suggestions from St Helens and Cheshire County Council. However, we took the view that although the present boundary crosses open land, it did not appear to hinder effective and. convenient local government in the area. Consequently, we took an interim decision to make no proposal.

THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS AND WARRINGTON/HALTON IN CHESHIRE

DRAFT PROPOSAL

(a) Four Too'd Oak to Mill Green Lane

19. St Helens had suggested realigning its boundary along Farnwood Road to Mill Green Lane on the grounds that the boundary in this area is difficult to follow. Cheshire County Council, Warrington and Halton all submitted similar suggestions. However, Bold Parish Council and two residents had opposed the suggested realignment which would transfer two farm to Cheshire.

20. We agreed that the boundary was anomalous in this area. However, we felt that a better line could be found by following the north/west side of the Liverpool to Manchester railway to the point at which it crosses Farnworth Road, and then west along the north side of Farnworth Road to Mill Green Lane. We therefore decided to adopt a draft proposal to this effect.

THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS AND HALTON IN CHESHIRE

DRAFT PROPOSAL

(a) Mill Green Lane to the M62 interchange

21. St Helens had suggested the continuation of its suggestion for the section of boundary between Four Too'd Oak and Mill Green Lane (discussed in paragraphs 10 and 20 above). It suggested a realignment from Farnworth Road westwards, along Derby Road, Lunts Heath Road and Norlands Lane to meet the M62 west of the interchange Cheshire County Council suggested two alternative realignments from Farnworth Road, to use either:

(a) Mill Green lane, along the rear of properties to the north of that road, to meet the line of the proposed By-pass;

or

(b) along Mill Lane, Twyford lane and Warrington Road, to met the M62 Interchange. Halton Borough Council submitted a similar suggestion to Cheshire's second alternative.

22. Nine residents of Lunts Heath Road wrote to us complaining of the problems caused by the present boundary. One claimed that the boundary splits his home and business premises. He suggested that the problem could be resolved by uniting his properties in Cheshire. The remaining eight residents had objected to St Helens' suggestion on the grounds that it would transfer their properties on the north side of Lunts Heath Road to St Helens but that their affinity lay more with Widnes in Halton, than with St Helens. This view was supported by Halton Borough Council.

23. We noted that St Helens' suggestion would cut off properties on the north side of Lunts Heath Road from the remainder of the built-up area of Farnworth, on the outskirts of Widnes in Halton. We also noted that Cheshire's second suggestion would leave those properties in Halton and that other properties to the north, which the County Council had also suggested be transferred, appeared to be part of the same area. However, we decided that it would be premature to use the line of the proposed Widnes By- pass before the road had been constructed. We therefore decided to adopt as our draft proposal a combination of Cheshire's two alternative suggestions, realigning the boundary along Mill Green Lane and to the rear of properties on the north side of that road, Twyford Lane and Warrington Road to the M62 interchange. THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS AND WEST LANCASHIRE IN LANCASHIRE

DRAFT PROPOSAL

(a) Coach Road and Kenyon's Wood

24. St Helens had suggested a realignment of its boundary northwards along Coach Road to meet the Liverpool to railway, turning east to follow the railway to the present boundary. It also suggested uniting Kenyon's Wood in St Helens.

25. We agreed that the present boundary is unsatisfactory in this area and that it would be logical to unite the Wood in one authority. We therefore decided to adopt St Helens' suggestion as our draft proposal.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF OUR DRAFT PROPOSALS/INTERIM DECISION

26. The letter announcing our draft proposals and interim decision was published on 26 March 1991 . Copies were sent to the local authorities concerned and to all those who had made representations to us. We arranged for a notice to be published announcing our draft proposals and interim decision. In addition, the Metropolitan Borough of St Helens and Warrington and Hal ton Borough Councils, West Lancashire District Council and Cheshire County Council were asked to post copies of the notices at places where public notices are customarily displayed. They were also asked to place copies of our letter on deposit for inspection at their main offices for a period of eight weeks. Comments were invited by 26 May 1991.

RESPONSE TO OUR DRAFT PROPOSALS/INTERIM DECISION

27. In response to our draft proposals we received comments from St Helens, Cheshire County Council, Warrington and Halton Borough Councils and West Lancashire District Council, we also received comments from the , British Gas PLC, (North Western), West Lancashire Conservative Association, Bickerstaffe Parish Council, Mr Kenneth Hind MP, and from four members of the public.

28. As required by section 60(2) of the Local Government Act 1972, we have carefully considered all the representations made to us and set out below our final proposals.

OUR FINAL PROPOSALS AND DECISIONS

THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS AND WARRINGTON

(a) Hermitage Green

29. Our draft proposal to unite Hermitage Green in Warrington was supported by St Helens, Warrington and Cheshire County Council. It was also supported by a local resident, who felt that the proposed realignment would remove confusion over the location of his house and would reflect the ties which he and his wife have with Winnick and Warrington.

30. In the absence of any opposition to our draft proposal, we have decided to confirm it as final.

(b) Sankey Brook

31 . Our draft proposal to realign the present boundary along the course of the Sankey Brook and Newton Brook was supported by St Helens, Warrington and Cheshire County Council. In the absence of opposition, we have decided to confirm it as final.

(c) Collins Green

32. St Helens opposed our draft proposal to unite the Bold Colliery Site in its authority, and submitted an amended version of its original suggestion. This followed the existing boundary to the Liverpool to Manchester railway, then along the railway in a north-easterly direction to Broad Lane, south-east along Broad Lane to Bold Lane, south-west along Bold Lane to Back Lane, and then southerly along Back Lane to the existing boundary. St Helens claimed that this would affect only . a small number of residential properties; be easy to follow; and would be in line with its Unitary Development Plan. Warrington and Cheshire County Council both supported our draft proposal.

33. We noted that St Helens' amended suggestion would involve the transfer of the Burtonwood Brewery and several other properties to its area . We took the view that, while St Helens' suggested realignment would provide a good, identifiable boundary, the Brewery was likely to be more closely linked with Collins Green and with surrounding communities in Warrington, than with St Helens. We have therefore decided to confirm our draft proposal as final.

(d) Moat House Farm

34. St Helens, Warrington and Cheshire County Council, all supported our draft proposal to realign the boundary in the area of Moat House Farm to tie it to firm ground detail. In the absence of opposition we have decided to confirm our draft proposal as final.

(e) Finch's Plantation to Four Too'd Oak

35. Our interim decision to make no proposal in the vicinity Finch's Plantation to Four Too'd Oak received general support from Cheshire County Council and Warrington. In the absence of opposition, we have decided to confirm it as final.

10 THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS HARRINGTON AND HALTON IN CHESHIRE

(a) Four Too'd Oak to Mill Green Lane

36. St Helens, Warrington, Halton and Cheshire County Council all supported our draft proposal to realign the boundary along the north/west side of the Liverpool to Manchester railway to the point at which it crosses Farnworth Road, and then west along the north side of Farnworth Road to Mill Green Lane. In the absence of opposition, we have decided to confirm it as final.

THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS AND HALTON IN CHESHIRE

(a) Mill Green Lane to the M62 Interchange

37. Our draft proposal to realign the boundary along Mill Green Lane, Twyford Lane and Warrington Road to the M62 Interchange was supported by Cheshire County Council and Halton. However, it was opposed by St Helens, which resubmitted its original suggestion with an amendment to realign the boundary along Lunts Heath Road and Wilmere Lane to join our proposed realignment Warrington Road. Lane. A resident had suggested a slight modification to realign the proposed boundary along South Lane, thereby transferring his property, with others in the area, to Halton. He stated that his family's links were with Halton and not with St Helens.

38. We considered St Helens' alternative suggestion but concluded that the Council had provided insufficient supporting information to justify adopting its suggestion. We also considered the modification requested by a member of the public. We noted that the respondent considered his family's links to be with halton rather than with St Helens. However, we did not consider that sufficient evidence had been provided to suggest that the transfer of an additional area of land, to the north.of

11 Farnworth Road, from St Helens would be justified in terms or providing more effective and convenient local government. We therefore decided to confirm our draft proposal as final.

THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ST HELENS AND WEST LANCASHIRE IN LANCASHIRE

(a) Coach Road and Kenyons Wood

38. Our draft proposal to realign the boundary along Coach Road to meet the railway line running east and also to unite Kenyon's Wood in St Helens was supported by St Helens. However, it was but opposed by West Lancashire, which submitted an alternative suggestion, tying the boundary to clearly defined features in the Kenyon's Wood area. Our draft proposal was also opposed by the West Lancashire Conservative Association, Bickerstaffe Parish Council, the residents of Moss Farm and New Lodge, and by Mr Kenneth Hind Mp.

39. In the light of the representations received, we accepted that the affinities of Moss Farm and New Lodge lay more with West Lancashire than with St Helens. We noted that, while West Lancashire's alternative suggestion would provide a good, clear boundary in the vicinity of Kenyon's Wood, it would transfer several properties to West Lancashire. We did not consider such change to be justified given the minor nature of the boundary anomaly in this area. Accordingly, we have decided to withdraw that part of our draft proposal for Kenyon's Wood, but to confirm the remainder as final subject to realigning the boundary to the south of Moss Farm.

CONCLUSIONS

40. We believe that our final proposals, which are summarised in Annex C to this report, are in the interests of effective and convenient local government, and we commend them to you accordingly.

12 PUBLICATION

41 . A separate letter is being sent to the Metropolitan Borough of St Helens, and to Cheshire and Lancashire County Councils to the Boroughs of Warrington and Halton and to West Lancashire District Council/ asking them to deposit copies of this report at their main offices for inspection for a period of six months. They are also being asked to put notices to that effect on public notice boards. Arrangements have been made for similar notices to be inserted in the local press. The text of the notice will explain that the Commission has fulfilled its statutory role in this matter and that it now falls to you to make an Order implementing the proposals, if you think fit, though not earlier than a period of six weeks from the date our final proposals are submitted to you. Copies of this report, with the maps attached at Annex A illustrating the proposed changes, are being sent to all those who received our draft proposals letter of 26 March 1991, and to those who made written representations to us.

13 Signed G J ELLERTON (Chairman)

K F J ENNALS

G R PRENTICE

HELEN SARKANY

C W SMITH

K YOUNG

R D COMPTON Secretary 19 December 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND METROPOLITAN BOUNDARY REVIEW

ST HELENS MB

AFFECTING THE BOROUGHS OF WARRINGTON AND HALTON IN CHESHIRE AND WEST LANCASHIRE DISTRICT IN LANCASHIRE

FINAL PROPOSALS

Existing Boundary Proposed Boundary Other existing boundary Other proposed boundary

Produced by for the Local Government Boundary Commission for England. LOCATION DIAGRAM

ST HELENS MB ST HELENS MB

WARRINGTON B.

Crown Copyright 1991 \\\ xrrj ST HELENS MB

WARRINGTON B. ST HELENS MB

o2 TJ £) Crown Copyright 1991 ST HELENS MB

WARRINGTON B. / ~"N

Areo C Areo E

T Bold Colliery ST HELENS MB

=^WARRINGTQN B.

O Crown Copyright 1991 WARRINGTON B

c; Crown Copyright 1991 c> Crown Copyright 1991 WEST LANCASHIRE DISTRICT

*\ ST HELENS MB

KNOWSLEY MB

Crown Copyright 1991 CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGES

MAP AREA MAP AREA FROM TO FROM TO NO. REF. NO. REF.

Merseyside Counly Cheshire Counly Merseyside Counly Cheshire Counly SI Helens MB Worringlon B A St Helens MB Worrinqton B non parished area Winwick CP 3 non porished area Burtonwood CP Newton East Ward Winwick Ward Newton West Wor-d Burlonwood Ward ond Soulhworth ED Burlonwood EO

1 Merseyside Counly Cheshire County Merseyside County Cheshire County St Helens MB B Warrington B St Helens MB Warrington B non porished area Croft CP non porished area Burtonwood CP Newton East Ward Culcheth, Glazebury and Haydock Ward Burtonwood Ward Croft Ward Burlonwood ED Culchelh and Southworlh ED Cheshire County Merseyside County Worringlon B St Helens MB Cheshire County Merseyside County B Burtonwood CP non parished area AB Warringlon B St Helens MB Burlonwood Word Newton West Ward Burlonwood CP non parished area Burtonwood Ward Newton Easl Word /, r\-> nLJ Burtonwood ED Cheshire Counly Merseyside County Warrington B St Helens MB Cheshire County Merseyside Counly Burlonwood CP Bold CP Warrington B St Helens MB F Burtonwood Ward Sullon ond Bold Ward ? h Winwick CP non parished area Burtonwood ED Winwick Word Newton East Ward Culchelh and Southworlh ED r Merseyside Counly Cheshire County ^y St Helens MB Warringlon B Merseyside Counly Cheshire County Bold CP Burlonwood CP SI Helens MB Warringlon B F Sutton ond Bold Word Burtonwood Word non porished area Winwick CP Burtonwood ED Newton East Ward Wtnwick Word Culcheth ond Southworlh ED CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGES MAP AREA MAP AREA FROM TO FROM TO NO. REF. NO. REF.

Cheshire County Cheshire Counly Merseyside County Merseyside County Holton B Worrlngton B St Helens MB . SI Helens MB non parished area 5 A Burtonwood CP A CP Bold CP Farnworlh Word Burlonwood Ward Rainhill Ward SuMon and Bold Ward Blrchfleld ED ' Burlonwood ED 7 Merseyside County Cheshire Counly SI Helens MB Hollon B Cheshire Counly Merseyside Counly B Bold CP non parished otea Hallon B St Helens MB Sutton ond Bold Ward Farnworlh Word B Bold CP non porished area Birchfield ED Sutton and Bold Ward Farnworth Ward Btrchfleld ED Lancashire County Merseyside County Merseyside County Cheshire County Wesl Lancashire Dislrict St Helens MB 8 A CP 6 51 Helens MB . Holton B Bickerstaffe CP C Bold CP non parished area Blckersloffe Ward Rain'ord Ward Sulton and Bold Ward Hallon Ward Wesl Lancashire South ED Woodend ED

Merseyside County Cheshire Counly f St Helens MB Warrington B Bold CP CP Sutton and Bold Word Penketh and Cuerdley Ward Penketh ond Whltecross ED

b • ANNEX C

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES BETWEEN ST HELENS AND HARRINGTON AND HALTON AND WEST LANCASHIRE

Hermitage Green - Minor realignment to Paragraph 30 unite Hermitage Green Map 1 in Warrington Sankey Brook Minor realignment Paragraph 31 along the course of Maps 2, 3 and 4 the Sankey Brook and Newton Brook

Collins Green Minor realignment of Paragraph 33 the boundary to unite Map 4 Bold Colliery in St Helens Moat House Farm Minor realignment of Paragraph 34 the boundary to tie Map 5 it to firm ground detail . Four Too'd Oak to Minor realignment of Paragraph 36 Mill Green Lane the boundary along Map 6 the north/west side of the Liverpool to Manchester railway and west along the northside of Farnworth Road to Mill Green Lane Mill Green Lane to Minor realignment of Paragraph 38 the M62 Interchange the boundary along Map 7 Mill Green Lane, Twyford Lane and Warrington Road to the M62 Interchange Coach Road and Minor realignment of Paragraph 40 Kenyons Wood the boundary to the Map 8 South of Moss Farm