“Allerdale – aStrategy great place for to live, Infrastructure work and visit” September 2013

PART ONE: BASELINE ASSESSMENT 1. Introduction

Background

1.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires local planning authorities to assess the quality and capacity of infrastructure for transport, water supply, wastewater and its treatment, energy (including heat), telecommunications, utilities, waste, health, social care, education, flood risk and coastal change management, and its ability to meet forecast demands.

1.2 With specific reference to infrastructure, the NPPF states that in producing local plans, local planning authorities should develop policies that: • Identify priority areas for economic regeneration, infrastructure provision and environmental enhancement • Create, protect, enhance and manage networks of biodiversity and green infrastructure • Address potential barriers to investment including any lack of infrastructure • Develop strategies for the provision of viable infrastructure necessary to support sustainable development

1.3 The NPPF states that in order for local plans to be found sound they must demonstrate that they are deliverable across the period over which they will run. This includes making it clear what infrastructure is needed, its criticality and when it is likely to be provided.

Policy Context

1.4 The NPPF states that Local Plans should be supported by evidence of what physical, social and green infrastructure is needed to enable the amount of development proposed for the area over the plan period. The process should identity infrastructure needs and where possible, phasing, costs, funding sources and responsibilities for delivery.

1.5 Guidance from the Planning Inspectorate suggests that it should be clear what new infrastructure is required to enable the delivery of the plan and who is going to fund and provide it. Infrastructure that is critical to the delivery of the aims and objectives of the plan needs to be identified. In circumstances where an element of infrastructure is critical but there is an element of uncertainty whether it will delivered, the consequences of non-delivery should be identified.

Aims and Objectives

1.6 This document seeks to provide a baseline with regards to current physical, social and green infrastructure items in the Borough and then consider the implications of the growth strategy set out in the Local Plan on those items. The aim and purpose of this document is to ensure that any potential deficits in infrastructure that could

1 prevent the identified growth targets from being met are identified. In this regard, the study has four key objectives: • Identification of existing infrastructure provision and their relative pressures. • Identification of the growth strategy set out in the Local Plan • Identification of critical infrastructure deficits • Identification of specific infrastructure requirements with regards to the phasing, costs, funding sources and responsibility for delivery.

Structure of report

1.7 The subsequent chapters of the report comprise of the following:

Part 1: • Chapter 2 outlines the methodology used and defines the infrastructure items to be considered in the study • Chapter 3 provides a baseline assessment of these infrastructure items and identifies existing and/or projected deficits Part 2: • Chapter 4 sets out the population and household projections for Allerdale and the future strategy for growth that is set out in the Local Plan. • Chapter 5 identifies specific requirements that have been identified by infrastructure providers that will be required in order to support the delivery of the local plan.

2 2. Methodology

Approach

2.1 This ‘Strategy for Infrastructure’ document updates and supersedes the ‘Infrastructure Delivery Plan’ that was produced in 2010. Information and data used in this study were collected over the period of 2009-2010 and where necessary and relevant, updated in 2013.

2.2 For the purposes of consistency, the study area is broken up into the six localities used in the Local Plan: Workington, Maryport, Cockermouth, Wigton, Aspatria and Silloth. These were originally defined in the West Cumbria Sustainable Community Strategy and are an amalgamation of parish council geographies. Levels of infrastructure provision have been assessed within the context of these six localities. The locality boundaries for Allerdale are illustrated in Figure 2-1.

Figure 2-1 Localities in Allerdale

2.3 Using locality level geography to appraise infrastructure may, inevitably, mask deficits that may exist at the local level. The fact that an infrastructure deficit is not identified in this document does not mean that it cannot be recognised in future decision-making. Conversely, locality geographies are inappropriate for the analysis of particular infrastructure items, especially ‘networks’ within the physical and utilities typology, which must be assessed at a wider spatial scale.

Infrastructure Items

2.4 The infrastructure items included in this study fall within two main categories: physical/utilities and community infrastructure. Infrastructure items included are based on the list indentified within Section 216 of the Planning Act 2008 and are highlighted in Table 2-1.

3

Table 2-1 Infrastructure Items Physical/Utilities Community Road Network Primary Education Public Transport Secondary Education & Further Education Off Street Car Parking GP Surgeries & Community Hospitals Water supply Network Dental Surgeries Waste Water Network Elderly Care Energy Distribution Network Sports & Leisure Facilities Flood Defences Open Spaces Source: Planning Act, 2008

Measuring levels of accessibility to infrastructure items

2.5 In order to measure accessibility, appropriate core travel time indicators have been applied to measure the relative accessibility of different parts of Allerdale to different types of infrastructure items. The relative accessibility thresholds applied to the different types of infrastructure items is shown in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2 Travel Time Indicator Lower Threshold Upper Threshold Primary Schools <15mins <30mins Secondary Schools <20mins <40mins FE Establishments <30mins <60mins GP Surgeries <15mins <30mins Hospitals <30mins <60mins Source: Department for Transport

2.6 Five types of infrastructure items have been included for the assessment of accessibility within Allerdale, these are: primary schools, secondary schools, further education establishments, GP surgeries and hospitals.

Criticality of infrastructure items

2.7 Infrastructure items have been categorised in terms of their critically in supporting the levels of housing and economic growth, and specific projects, set out in the local plan. The criticality levels employed in this study are highlighted in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3 Criticality Levels Level Definition Infrastructure Types 1 The delivery of the identified infrastructure is Road Network, Public Transport, critical, without which development cannot Water Supply, Waste Water commence (i.e. a “show stopper”) Network, Energy Distribution, Flood Defences 2 The delivery of the identified infrastructure is Primary Education, Secondary & essential to support new development, but the Further Education, GP Surgeries, precise timing and phasing is not critical Community Hospitals, Dental Practices 3 The delivery of the identified infrastructure is Off Street Car Parking, Elderly preferred in order to build sustainable communities. Care, Sports & Leisure Facilities, Timing and phasing is not critical Open Spaces

4

2.8 Where critical deficiencies in infrastructure are identified but the project is not committed or requisite funding not secured, a risk assessment of the upgrade(s) not proceeding is required. The risk levels on which such an assessment will be based are set out in Table 2-4.

Table 2-4 Risk Levels Level Definition High Critical infrastructure requirements with no clear responsibility for delivery or mechanism for funding. Medium Critical infrastructure requirements with clear responsibility for deliver and robust mechanism for funding. Low Critical infrastructure requirements with clear responsibility for delivery and (fully or partly) secured funding.

Sections and Identifiable Tasks

2.9 The remainder of this study is divided into three key sections, underpinned by a number of identifiable tasks:

• Section 3: Baseline Assessment: • Identify existing infrastructure provision in Allerdale and where relevant, the level of accessibility. • Identify any existing infrastructure deficits.

• Section 4: Development Context • Identify the current and projected population and demographic structure in Allerdale. • Identify the growth/spatial strategy and settlement hierarchy set out in the emerging Local Plan for the period 2011-2028.

• Section 5: Identification and delivery of infrastructure • Identify specific infrastructure items required for Allerdale over 2011-2028 with regards to the phasing, location, costs, funding and responsibilities for delivery. • Assess the criticality of specific infrastructure items to the delivery of objectives of the Local Plan. • Identify the consequences and mitigation measures where an item has been assessed as being critical but its future delivery is not certain.

5 3. Baseline Assessment

Strategic Road Network

3.1 Access to the Allerdale area from the strategic (motorway) highway network is via the A66 and the A595, the former being wholly trunked and the latter partially in specific sections. Other notable routes within the study area are the B5289, A596, A5302, A597 and A591. Trunked routes are managed and maintained by the Highways Agency and non-trunked routes by Cumbria County Council (the Local Highway Authority). Figure 3-1 illustrates the major road network in Allerdale.

Figure 3-1 Major road network

3.2 An assessment has been carried out by Cumbria County Council to identify the demands on the highway network in Allerdale. A comparison of traffic demand to network capacity along sections of key highway routes was undertaken to identfy areas of ‘stress’. Network stress is defined as any part of the network where the ratio of flow to capacity is above 0.90 (or 90% capacity). The assessment for Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-1 and illustrated in Figure 3-2.

Table 3-1 Assessment of Network Stress 2008 Flows Traffic Counter & Location AM Peak PM Peak Worst 1. A595 - East of Thursby 0.576 0.390 0.576 2.A596 - Wigton Bypass 0.248 0.190 0.248 3. B5302 - West of Wigton, between Waverbridge / 0.078 0.129 0.129 Abbeytown 4. A596 - Sandraw, between Waverton / Aspatria 0.172 0.109 0.172 5. A595 - Mealsgate 0.266 0.269 0.269 6. A596 - Birkby, North East of Maryport 0.181 0.153 0.181 7. A594 - Ellenborough, East of Maryport 0.153 0.181 0.181 8. A595 - Papcastle Bypass 0.246 0.324 0.324 9. A66 - A595 to A5086, East of Papcastle 0.348 0.368 0.368 10. A66 - A5086 and A591 near Keswick 0.296 0.298 0.298 11. A66 - Between A5986 and B5289, South of 0.306 0.288 0.306 Cockermouth

6 12. A5086 - Deanscales, South of Cockermouth 0.171 0.309 0.309 13. A596 - Washington Street, Workington 0.343 0.371 0.371 14. A596 High Street, Workington 0.321 0.343 0.343 15. A66 - Between A596 and A595 0.547 0.524 0.547 16. A596 - South East of Workington 0.162 0.196 0.196 17. A595 - Between A66 and A596 0.449 0.394 0.449 18. A597 High Harrington, Workington 0.139 0.209 0.209 Source: CCC 2009

Figure 3-2 Assessment of Network Stress

3.3 According to the assessment none of the highway links in Allerdale have experienced stress above 0.90 (or 90% capacity). While this suggests that there is sufficient capacity in the highway network, it should be noted consideration was not given to the capacity of junctions. Therefore the assessment is unlikely to highlight localised highway issues that may exist.

Public Transport

3.4 Two types of public transport are considered for this study: bus and rail services. Stagecoach is the main bus operator in the Borough. The Cumbria Coast Line rail service is provided by Northern Rail and the tracks themselves are managed and maintained by Network Rail.

3.5 With regards to bus services in Allerdale, all the main towns have at least one major bus route connecting them to the network. However this coverage starts to break down in more rural areas, particularly in the northern part of the Borough. Figure 3- 3 illustrates the distributions of bus routes and stops in Allerdale.

7 Figure 3-3 Bus Network

3.6 With regards to rail services, the Cumbrian Coast Line route runs through Allerdale providing stops within the towns of Workington, Maryport, Aspatria and Wigton, in addition to the villages of Flimby and Harrington. The rail route also carries substantial volumes of freight. The towns of Cockermouth and Silloth are not accessible by rail. Figure 3-4 illustrates the distribution of railway routes and stops.

Figure 3-4 Railway Network

3.7 The Capacity Utilisation Index produced by Network Rail has used to measure capacity on the Cumbria Cost Line. The route experiences a high utilisation with a score of 70-80% but capacity (current and future) is not identified as a major problem. However investment is needed to upgrade/modernise infrastructure along

8 the route (i.e. signal boxes, viaducts and sea defences). The Capacity Utilisation Index score for Allerdale’s rail stations is summarised in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2 Rail Capacity Utilisation Index for Allerdale 2006 Harrington Workington Flimby Maryport Aspatria Wigton Rail Rail Rail Rail Rail Rail Station Station Station Station Station Station CUI 20-40% 70-80% 70-80% 70-80% 70-80% 70-80% Source: NR 2008

Off-street car parking

3.8 Majority of the off street car parks in Allerdale are owned and managed by Allerdale Borough Council, excepted for the multi storey car park in Workington, which is operated in partnership with Park Safe Ltd. Three types of car parks have been examined for this study, pay & display, free and reserved or permit. Figure 3-5 illustrates the distribution of off street car parks in Allerdale.

Figure 3-5 Distribution of Off Street Car Parks

3.9 Allerdale has 31 off street car parks providing 2,307 spaces; 19 are pay & display car parks providing 2,063 spaces; 9 are free car parks providing 223 spaces and 3 are reserved or permit car parks providing 21 spaces. Around 52% of pay & display parking spaces within the Borough are provided within the principal town of Workington. The provision of off street car parks and spaces in Allerdale are summarised in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3 Provision of Car Parks and Spaces Car P&D Free Disabled Reserved Total Parks Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces Workington Locality 13 1,080 64 34 21 1,169 Maryport Locality 5 250 17 9 0 273 Cockermouth Locality 6 486 0 6 4 499 Wigton Locality 3 247 0 10 0 257

9 Aspatria Locality 1 0 26 0 0 26 Silloth Locality 3 0 116 0 0 116 Allerdale 31 2,063 223 59 21 2,340 (ex. Keswick) Source: ABC 2007.

3.10 Generally there is a reasonable distribution of parking spaces in Allerdale that permit convenient access to town centres. Capacity is generally sufficient in most towns, although there are emerging issues within Cockermouth and Aspatria due to increasing demand.

Water Supply

3.11 Water supply in Allerdale is provided by United Utilities PLC. Allerdale is part of the “West Cumbria Resource Zone”, which serves about 152,000 people and is mainly supplied from Ennerdale Water and Crummock Water. The Zone has 62.9 million litres per day of deployable output and 58.9 million litres per day of water available for use. Taking into account sustainability reductions and climate change, this is set to reduce to 51.9 million litres per day and 48.2 million litres per day by 2034/35 respectively. The forecasts of deployable output and water available for use are summarised in Table 3-4.

Table 3-4 Water Supply Forecast for West Cumbria Zone (Ml/d) 2006/07 2009/10 2014/15 2024/25 2034/35 Deployable Output 62.9 60.5 52.0 51.9 51.9 Process Use & Losses -2.8 -2.1 -2.1 -2.1 -2.1 Outage Allowance -1.2 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 Water Available for Use 58.9 57.8 48.4 48.3 48.2 Source: UU 2009

3.12 In terms of future demand, a significant reduction in water available for use is expected to occur in 2014/15 as a result of reduced levels of abstraction from Ennerdale Water due to biodiversity constraints. Consequently a shortfall will begin to emerge by 2014/15 and is projected to continue beyond 2030. The supply- demand balance is summarised in Table 3-5 and illustrated in Figure 3-6.

Table 3-5 Initial Supply-Demand Balance 2006/07 to 2034/35 (Ml/d) 2006/07 2009/10 2014/15 2019/20 2024/25 2034/35 Water Available for Use 58.9 57.8 48.4 48.3 48.3 48.2 Dry Weather Demand 57.9 55.0 54.8 53.8 53.6 54.6 Target Headroom 1.4 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.5 Supply-Demand Balance -0.4 1.0 -8.3 -7.1 -6.7 -7.8 Source: UU 2009

10

Figure 3-6 Initial Supply-Demand Balances 2006/07 to 2034/35 (Ml/d)

Source: UU 2009

Waste Water Network

3.13 The waste water distribution network is provided and maintained by United Utilities PLC. The main towns and the majority of the larger villages within the Borough are connected to the main sewer network. An assessment of the capacity of Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) has been undertaken by United Utilities based on the growth target and spatial strategy set out in the local plan preferred options. The assessment is based on three capacity categories: green, amber and red.

3.14 A ‘green’ assessment key means that infrastructure capacity available for level of growth proposed in the Local Plan. An ‘amber’ assessment key means that growth should be phased throughout the plan period to ensure there is sufficient capacity. A ‘red’ assessment key means that the treatment works is operating at capacity and the level of growth cannot be accommodated without measures to increase capacity. In these settlements UU has requested that development be phased growth towards the latter periods of the plan period to allow the necessary investment to take place. Table 3-6 illustrates the catagorisation of the larger settlements by United Utilities.

Table 3-6 catagorisation of the larger settlements by WwTW capacity. Red Amber Green Brigham Allonby Aspatria Cockermouth Kirkbride Abbeytown Dearham Wigton Great Clifton Thursby Workington Broughton

11 Silloth Maryport Flimby Prospect Source: UU, 2012

3.15 The assessment indicates capacity problems in the towns of Cockermouth and Silloth, and also in the larger villages of Brigham, Dearham and Thursby. Further discussions with United Utilities have identified that load-flow solutions may be able to overcome capacity issues in the short term in some of these settlements. Notwithstanding this, United Utilities maintain that any programmed growth should be profiled to the back end of the plan period.

Energy Distribution

3.16 Two types of energy infrastructure are considered for this study: electricity and gas distribution. The electricity distribution network is provided by Electricity North West Ltd, while the gas distribution network is provided by Northern Gas Networks. Both providers have suggested that there is currently adequate provision in place to meet current demand although it was acknowledged that problems do exist in specific outlying areas.

3.17 Based upon the growth rates (for the main settlements) identified in the Local Plan preferred options an exercise was carried out to model the potential demand for energy distribution and the capacity of existing distribution network to accommodate it. The results are summarised in Table 3-7.

Table 3-7 Capacity of Existing Distribution Networks Dwellings Electricity Gas Growth Rate (p.a.) Years supply at Growth rate Availability Workington Locality Great Clifton 7 0 Yes Little Clifton 0.5 12 Yes Seaton 40 0 Yes Workington 80 1 Yes Maryport Locality Broughton Moor 7 3 Yes Crosby 7 1 Yes Dearham 7 4 Yes Flimby 7 12 Yes Maryport 84 1 Yes Cockermouth Locality Broughton Cross 0.5 12 Yes Branthwaite 0.5 12 Yes Bridekirk 0.5 12 No Brigham 20 2 Yes Great Broughton 20 5 Yes Cockermouth 52 0 Yes Dean 2 3 Yes Dovenby 0.5 12 No Eaglesfield 0.5 12 Yes Papcastle 0.5 12 Yes Tallentire 0.5 12 No Wigton Locality Abbeytown 5 1 No Bolton Low Houses 2 7 No Bowness 2 12 No Ireby 2 0 No

12 Kirkbampton 2 12 No Kirkbride 5 0 No Thursby 5 4 Yes Welton 2 12 No Wiggonby 2 1 Yes Wigton 52 3 Yes Aspatria Locality Allonby 5 5 Yes Aspatria 13 3 Yes Blennerhasset 2 7 Yes Bothel 5 2 No Greysouthern 0.5 12 Yes Plumbland 2 3 No Prospect 5 1 No Westnewton 2 7 Yes Silloth Locality Silloth 13 0 Yes Sources: UU/Northern Gas Networks, 2009

3.18 For electricity distribution, if the indicative growth rates are applied, the results suggest network capacity may need to be reviewed in the settlements of Great Clifton, Cockermouth, Ireby, Kirkbride and Silloth. Several other settlements may also fall into this category.

Flood risk

3.19 The Allerdale area is susceptible to tidal flooding from the Irish Sea as well as fluvial flooding from the River Derwent, River Cocker, River Marron, River Ellen, River Waver and River Wampool. The provision of flood warning systems and defences are the responsibility of the Environment Agency, who also monitor river levels and flows and undertakes repairs and maintenance to Allerdale’s flood defences.

3.20 To establish any deficit in the provision of flood defences, settlements with a known concern with flooding have been identified by the Environment Agency:

• Workington locality o Bridgefoot: The village has a history of flooding and the River Marron channel will be managed to maintain the current level of protection. o Workington: Fluvial flood risk relates to areas along the corridor of the Derwent, which were significantly affected by the event in 2009. There are currently no raised flood defences in the town

• Maryport locality o Maryport: The town has a history of tidal flooding and tidal defences were completed in 2004 and give a 1 in 200 year level of protection. The fluvial flood risk from the River Ellen is limited and there are currently no raised flood defences in the town. o Dearham: Flooding problems in the village are regular occurrence at commercial corner crossroads area and are thought to be surface water drainage network related.

• Cockermouth locality

13 o Cockermouth: The town has a well documented history of fluvial flooding and the extreme event of 2009 has led to a review of existing defences in the town. New measures included embankments and a protective wall

• Wigton locality o Wigton: The town is susceptible to localised flooding and the Environment Agency is currently investigating ways to reduce flood risk by constructing defences or utilising upstream storage. There are currently no raised flood defences in the town. o Kirkbride: The village has a history of tidal flooding in within the Angerton area

• Aspatria locality o Allonby: There are a number of properties at risk of tidal and fluvial flooding although are currently no plans to carry out any major flood alleviation works. The B5300 regularly floods due to wave overtopping at Dubmill Point

• Silloth locality o Silloth: The main flood risk areas are to the east of Silloth around the Skinburness area. The town has raised defences that are maintained by the Environment Agency.

3.21 Surface water flooding is not considered to be a significant problem within Allerdale, although there are a number of localised problems. Table 3-8 identifies the locations that Cumbria County Council, as the Local Flooding Authority, has identified that surface water flooding issues exist:

Table 3-8 Location of known surface water flooding issues Site Locality Lillyhall Ind. Estate Workington Derwent Howe Ind. Estate Workington Port of Workington, Ind Estate Workington Glasson Industrial Estate Maryport Low Rd, Cockermouth Cockermouth Princes Way, Derwent Howe Workington Gray St, Workington Workington Land off Bellaport Gardens, Harrington, Workington Workington Cumbria Ballroom, Corporation Road, Workington, Cumbria Workington Corus Rail Steel Works, Lakes Road, Workington, Cumbria Workington St Leonard’s Close, Cockermouth Cockermouth Allerdale House, Low Road, Brigham Cockermouth Land adjacent to Fitz Park, Low Road, Cockermouth Cockermouth Land adjacent to Ellenborough Place Maryport Wilson Farm, Main Street, Dearham Maryport Land at Browside Road, Dearham Maryport Land at Stonehenge Workington Land at Woodville Way Workington Land adj White Croft Maryport Source: CCC, 2012

14 Primary Education

3.22 Cumbria County Council is the local education authority in Allerdale. There are 56 primary educational establishments in the Borough providing 7,191 places. The provision of primary education in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-9.

Table 3-9 Provision of Primary Education Infant Junior Primary Total Places Places Places Places

Workington Locality 414 776 1,133 2,323 Ashfield Infant School 162 0 0 162 Ashfield Junior School 0 240 0 240 Beckstone Primary School 0 0 266 266 Derwent Vale Primary School 0 0 90 90 Northside School 0 0 70 70 Seaton CE Junior School 0 216 0 216 Seaton Infant Academy St Gregory's Catholic Primary School 0 0 196 196 St Mary's Catholic Primary School 0 0 147 147 St Michaels Nursery and Infant School 90 0 0 90 St Patrick's Catholic Primary School 0 0 203 203 Victoria Infant and Nursery School 162 0 0 162 Victoria Junior School 0 320 0 320 Westfield Nursery and Primary School 0 0 161 161

Maryport Locality 315 368 385 1,068 Broughton Moor School 0 0 56 56 Crosscanonby St John's CE School 0 0 63 63 Dearham Primary School Ellenborough and Ewanrigg Infant School 60 0 0 60 Ewanrigg Junior School 0 160 0 160 Flimby Primary School 0 0 105 105 Grasslot Infant School 81 0 0 81 Maryport CE Junior School 0 208 0 208 Maryport Infant School 105 0 0 105 Netherton Infant School 69 0 0 69 Our Lady & St Patrick's Catholic Primary School 0 0 161 161 Cockermouth Locality 162 232 560 954 All Saints CE Primary School 0 0 189 189 Bridekirk Dovenby CE Primary School 0 0 105 105 Broughton Primary School Dean CE School 0 0 105 105 Eaglesfield Paddle CE VA School Fairfield Infant School 162 0 0 162 Fairfield Junior School 0 232 0 232 St Bridget's CE School 0 0 105 105 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School 0 0 56 56

Wigton Locality 162 240 798 1,200 Boltons CE School 0 0 91 91 Bowness-on-Solway Primary School 0 0 84 84 Fellview Primary School 0 0 77 77 Ireby CE School 0 0 56 56 Kirkbampton CE School 0 0 98 98

15 Kirkbride Primary School 0 0 91 91 St Cuthbert's Catholic Primary School 0 0 154 154 Thomlinson Junior School 0 240 0 240 Thursby Primary School 0 0 105 105 Wiggonby CE School 0 0 42 42 Wigton Infant School 162 0 0 162 Aspatria Locality 0 0 490 490 Allonby Primary School 0 0 56 56 Blennerhasset School 0 0 28 28 Oughterside School 0 0 56 56 Plumbland CE School 0 0 56 56 Richmond Hill School 0 0 161 161 St Matthew's CE School 0 0 49 49 St Michael's CE School 0 0 84 84 Silloth Locality 0 0 336 336 Holm Cultram Abbey CE School 0 0 70 70 Holme St Cuthbert School 0 0 56 56 Silloth Primary School 0 0 210 210

Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 1,053 1,616 3,702 6,371 Source: CCC, 2013.

3.23 In conjunction with Cumbria County Council an assessment of primary school capacity has been undertaken. The results are summarised in Table 3-10 and illustrated in Figure 3-7.

Table 3-10 Capacity Primary Education Establishments Places NOR Surplus Capacity Available JAN 13 Capacity Level

Workington Locality 2,323 2,162 200 93.1% Ashfield Infant School 162 163 0 100.6% Ashfield Junior School 240 221 19 92.1% Beckstone Primary School 266 285 0 107.1% Derwent Vale Primary School 90 86 4 95.6% Northside School 70 61 9 87.1% Seaton CE Junior School 216 223 0 103.2% Seaton Infant Academy 0 0 0 St Gregory's Catholic Primary School 196 206 0 105.1% St Mary's Catholic Primary School 147 141 6 95.9% St Michaels Nursery and Infant School 90 65 25 72.2% St Patrick's Catholic Primary School 203 193 10 95.1% Victoria Infant and Nursery School 162 164 0 101.2% Victoria Junior School 320 235 85 73.4% Westfield Nursery and Primary School 161 119 42 73.9%

Maryport Locality 1,068 941 151 88.1% Broughton Moor School 56 41 15 73.2% Crosscanonby St John's CE School 63 55 8 87.3% Dearham Primary School 0 0 0 Ellenborough and Ewanrigg Infant School 60 48 12 80.0% Ewanrigg Junior School 160 163 0 101.9% Flimby Primary School 105 108 0 102.9% Grasslot Infant School 81 62 19 76.5% Maryport CE Junior School 208 137 71 65.9%

16 Maryport Infant School 105 79 26 75.2% Netherton Infant School 69 71 0 102.9% Our Lady & St Patrick's Catholic Primary School 161 177 0 109.9% Cockermouth Locality 954 909 58 95.3% All Saints CE Primary School 189 165 24 87.3% Bridekirk Dovenby CE Primary School 105 113 0 107.6% Broughton Primary School 0 0 0 Dean CE School 105 93 12 88.6% Eaglesfield Paddle CE VA School 0 0 0 Fairfield Infant School 162 147 15 90.7% Fairfield Junior School 232 225 7 97.0% St Bridget's CE School 105 107 0 101.9% St Joseph's Catholic Primary School 56 59 0 105.4% Wigton Locality 1200 1018 189 84.8% Boltons CE School 91 96 0 105.5% Bowness-on-Solway Primary School 84 67 17 79.8% Fellview Primary School 77 48 29 62.3% Ireby CE School 56 38 18 67.9% Kirkbampton CE School 98 96 2 98.0% Kirkbride Primary School 91 55 36 60.4% St Cuthbert's Catholic Primary School 154 98 56 63.6% Thomlinson Junior School 240 221 19 92.1% Thursby Primary School 105 103 2 98.1% Wiggonby CE School 42 32 10 76.2% Wigton Infant School 162 164 0 101.2% Aspatria Locality 490 374 137 76.3% Allonby Primary School 56 19 37 33.9% Blennerhasset School 28 41 0 146.4% Oughterside School 56 18 38 32.1% Plumbland CE School 56 52 4 92.9% Richmond Hill School 161 169 0 105.0% St Matthew's CE School 49 31 18 63.3% St Michael's CE School 84 44 40 52.4% Silloth Locality 336 258 78 76.8% Holm Cultram Abbey CE School 70 45 25 64.3% Holme St Cuthbert School 56 53 3 94.6% Silloth Primary School 210 160 50 76.2%

Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 6,371 5,662 813 88.9% Source: CCC, 2013.

17 Figure 3-7 Location of Primary Education Establishments

3.24 The assessment indicated out of the 56 primary education establishments, 10 are classed as having a “high” level of surplus capacity (<80%) are highlighted in Table 3-11

Table 3-11 Undersubscribed Primary Education Establishments Workington Maryport Cockermouth Wigton Locality Aspatria Silloth Locality Locality Locality Locality Locality

Victoria Junior Grasslot Bowness-on- Allonby Silloth School Infant School Solway Primary Primary Primary School School School Westfield Maryport Fellview Primary Oughterside Holm Nursery and Infant School School School Cultram Primary Abbey CE School School St Michael’s Maryport CE Ireby CE School St Michael’s Nursery & Junior School CE School Infant School St Cuthbert's St Matthew's Catholic Primary CE School School Wiggonby CE School Broughton Kirkbride Primary Moor School School

3.25 30 of the primary education establishments in Allerdale were operating with numbers on roll in excess of, or close to, their net capacity (>95%). These are highlighted in Table 3-12

18 Table 3-12 Oversubscribed primary education establishments Workington Maryport Cockermouth Wigton Aspatria Silloth Locality Locality Locality Locality Locality Locality

Beckstone Ewanrigg Junior Fairfield Junior Boltons CE Blennerhasset Primary School School School School School Seaton Infant Netherton Infant Bridekirk Kirkbampton Richmond Hill School School Dovenby CE CE School School Primary School St Patrick’s Flimby Primary St Bridget’s CE Thursby Catholic Primary School School Primary School School Ashfield Infant Our Lady & St St Joseph’s Wigton Infant School Patrick's Catholic Primary School Catholic Primary School School Derwent Vale Ewanrigg Junior Primary & School Nursery School Seaton CE Junior School St Gregory’s Catholic Primary School Victoria Infant & Nursery School St Mary's Catholic Primary School

3.26 Allerdale is generally well served in terms of accessibility to primary schools. Around 92% of pupils were able to reach a primary education establishment via walking or public transport within 15 minutes and only 1% has difficulties reaching a primary school within 30 minutes of travel. Accessibility levels are illustrated in Figure 3-8.

Figure 3-8 Accessibility of primary education establishments by walking and public transport

19 Secondary Education & Further Education

3.27 Cumbria County Council is the local education authority in Allerdale. There are 8 secondary education establishments in the Borough providing 6,880 places. 5 of these offer further education provisions. The provision of secondary education places and availability of further education provision in Allerdale are summarised in Table 3.13 .

Table 3-13 Provision of Secondary Education Secondary Education Further Education Places Available Provision Workington Locality 2,360 Yes Southfield School 815 Yes Stainburn School 890 Yes St Joseph's Catholic High School 655 No Lakes College West Cumbria N/A Yes Maryport Locality 1,085 Yes Netherhall School 1,085 Yes Cockermouth Locality 1,423 Yes Cockermouth School 1,423 Yes Wigton Locality 1,499 Yes Nelson Thomlinson School, The 1,499 Yes Aspatria Locality 350 No Beacon Hill Community School 350 No Silloth Locality 305 No Solway Community School 305 No Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 7,022 Yes Source: CCC, 2013.

3.28 For secondary education provisions, the number on roll in 2010 was used to establish the demand for secondary education places. The number on roll for secondary education in Allerdale stands at 6,068 pupils. Similar to the assessment of primary education provisions, an assessment of “capacity level” has been undertaken for secondary education. The assessment of capacity level for secondary education provision in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-14 illustrated in Figure 3.9.

Table 3-14 Capacity Level of Secondary Education Establishments Secondary Education NOR Surplus Capacity Places Available Jan 13 Capacity Level

Workington Locality 2,360 1,908 452 80.8% Southfield School 815 391 424 48.0% Stainburn School 890 877 13 98.5% St Joseph's Catholic High School 655 640 15 97.7% Maryport Locality 1,085 646 439 59.5% Netherhall School 1,085 646 439 59.5%

Cockermouth Locality 1,423 1,425 0 100.1%

Cockermouth School 1,423 1,425 0 100.1%

Wigton Locality 1,499 1,396 103 93.1% Nelson Thomlinson School, The 1,499 1,396 103 93.1% Aspatria Locality 350 163 187 46.6%

20 Beacon Hill Community School 350 163 187 46.6% Silloth Locality 305 160 145 52.5% Solway Community School 305 160 145 52.5%

Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 7,022 5,698 1,324 81.1% Source: CCC, 2012

Figure 3-9 Location of secondary education providers

3.29 Four of the secondary education establishments in Allerdale are operating with numbers on roll in excess of, or close to, their net capacity (>95%). These are highlighted in Table 3-15

Table 3-15 Oversubscribed secondary education establishments Workington Locality Maryport Cockermouth Wigton Locality Aspatria Silloth Locality Locality Locality Locality St Joseph’s Cockermouth Catholic High School School Stainburn School & Science College

3.30 Due to the rural geography in parts of Allerdale, accessibility to secondary education schools can be an issue as illustrated in Figure 3-10.

21 Figure 3-10 Accessibility of secondary education establishments

3.31 For secondary education provision, around 71% of pupils in Allerdale were able to reach a secondary education establishment via walking or public transport within 20 minutes and around 8% of pupils have difficulties reaching a secondary school within 40 minutes of travel.

GP Surgeries & Community Hospital

3.32 The Cumbria Clinical Commissioning Group plans and commissions the provision of GP services and acute and community hospital care. The Borough currently has 15 GP practices providing 102,271 patient places, summarised in Table 3-16 .

Table 3-16 Provision of GP Surgeries Places Number of Available FTE GPs Workington Locality 37,950 19 Beechwood Group Practice (John Street Surgery) 7,000 4 Dr P Crosby & Partners 8,000 2.5 James Street Group Practice 10,000 6 Oxford Street Surgery 7,200 4 Solway Health Services (Community Hospital) 5,750 2.5 Maryport Locality 14,000 9 Maryport Health Services 14,000 9 Cockermouth Locality 17,700 12.75 Derwent House Surgery N/A* 4.5 Fitz Road Surgery 3,200 2.25 South Street Surgery 7,800 6 Wigton Locality 17,500 9.5 Caldbeck Surgery 6,000 3.75 Kirkbride Surgery (The Croft Surgery) 4,000 2.5 Wigton Group Medical Practice N/A* 5.75 Aspatria Locality 9,400 4 Dr D S Wheatley 2,900 1 West Street Practice 6,500 3 Silloth Locality 5,721 3 Silloth Group Medical Practice 5,721 3 Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 102,271 59.75 Sources: ABC, 20010.

22

3.33 An assessment of the current capacity of GPs has been undertaken based upon a comparison of places available to patients registered. The assessment of capacity level for GP surgeries in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-17 and illustrated in Figure 3-11.

Table 3-17 Capacity Level of GP Surgeries Places Patients Surplus Capacity Available Registered Capacity Level Workington Locality 37,950 34,100 3,850 90% Beechwood Group Practice 7,000 6,600 400 94% Dr P Crosby & Partners 8,000 5,100 2,900 64% James Street Group Practice 10,000 9,500 500 95% Oxford Street Surgery 7,200 7,200 0 100% Solway Health Services 5,750 5,700 50 99% Maryport Locality 14,000 13,500 500 96% Maryport Health Services 14,000 13,500 500 96% Cockermouth Locality 17,700 17,100 600 97% Derwent House Surgery N/A* 6,700 0 100% Fitz Road Surgery 3,200 2,700 500 84% South Street Surgery 7,800 7,700 100 99% Wigton Locality 17,500 15,340 2,160 88% Caldbeck Surgery 6,000 4,500 1,500 75% Kirkbride Surgery 4,000 3,340 660 84% Wigton Group Medical Practice N/A* 7,500 0 100% Aspatria Locality 9,400 7,930 1,470 84% Dr D S Wheatley 2,900 2,400 500 83% West Street Practice 6,500 5,530 970 85% Silloth Locality 5,721 4,221 1,500 74% Silloth Group Medical Practice 5,721 4,221 1,500 74% Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 102,271 92,191 10,080 90% Source: ABC, 2010.

Figure 3-11 Capacity Level of GP Surgeries

3.34 7 of the GP surgeries in Allerdale are at, or approaching full capacity these are: Beechwood Group Practice, James Street Group Practice, Oxford Street Surgery, Solway Health Services (Workington locality), Maryport Health Services (Maryport

23 locality), Fitz Road Surgery, South Street Surgery (Cockermouth locality) and Dr D S Wheatley (Aspatria locality).

3.35 Around 80% of households in Allerdale were able to reach a GP surgery via walking or public transport within 15 minutes and only around 3% have difficulties reaching a GP surgery within 30 minutes of travel. Accessibility to GP surgeries are illustrated in Figure 3-12.

Figure 3-12 Accessibility to GP surgeries by walking and/or public transport

3.36 Allerdale has 4 community hospitals located within Workington, Maryport, Cockermouth and Wigton. Their distribution is illustrated in Figure 3-13 and patient bed spaces provided is summarised in Table 3-18 .

Table 3-18 Provision of Bed Spaces in Community Hospitals Available Patient Bed Spaces Workington Community Hospital 14 Maryport Community Hospital 16 Cockermouth Community Hospital 11 Wigton Community Hospital 30 Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 71 Source: ABC, 2010

24 Figure 3-13 Distribution of Community Hospitals

3.37 Around 84% of households were able to reach a community hospital via walking or public transport within 30 minutes and only around 3% have difficulties reaching a community hospital within 60 minutes of travel. The accessibility of community hospitals in Allerdale is illustrated in Figure 3-14.

Figure 3-14 Accessibility by walking and public transport

Dental Practices

3.38 The Cumbria Clinical Commissioning Group plans and commissions the provision of dental services for the population of Allerdale. There are 13 dental practices in the Borough providing 90,700 patient places.

25

3.39 An assessment of current capacity has been undertaken based upon a comparison of places available to patients registered. The assessment of capacity level for dental practices in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-19 and illustrated in Figure 3-15.

Table 3-19 Capacity Level of Dental Practices Places Patients Surplus Capacity Available Registered Capacity Level Workington Locality 25,500 25,000 500 98% Mr Archers & Associates 10,000 10,000 0 100% Whitecross Dental Care 15,500 15,000 500 97% Maryport Locality 8,100 7,600 500 94% Mrs JM Stevenson 1,600 1,600 0 100% Steele & McBride 6,500 6,000 500 92% Cockermouth Locality 37,300 37,000 300 99% Derwent House Orthodontics 500 200 300 40% Goodwin & Associates 29,000 29,000 0 100% Miss Siddle & Associates 2,800 2,800 0 100% St Helens Dental Surgery 5,000 5,000 0 100% Wigton Locality 10,400 10,300 100 99% RB Shann & PF Knight, High Street 2,100 2,000 100 95% The Dental Surgery 8,300 8,300 0 100% Aspatria Locality 6,500 6,000 500 92% King Street Dental Practice 6,500 6,000 500 92% Silloth Locality 2,900 2,900 0 100% Mr Steele 900 900 0 100% Mrs Buchanan N/A* 2,000 0 100% Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 90,700 88,800 1,900 98% Source: ABC, 2010

Figure 3-15 Location of dental practices

3.40 Majority of practices in Allerdale have limited or are at maximum capacity. 8 of the dental practices in Allerdale have reached their maximum capacity and are not accepting any new patients, these are: Mr Archers & Associates (Workington locality), Mrs JM Stevenson (Maryport locality), Goodwin & Associates, Miss Siddle

26 & Associates, St Helens Dental Surgery (Cockermouth locality), The Dental Surgery (Wigton locality), Mr Steele and Mrs Buchanan (Silloth locality).

Elderly Care

3.41 Adult social care is the responsibility of Cumbria County Council, although the provision of elderly care in Allerdale is provided by a mix of private and council providers. There are 45 elderly care homes in the Borough providing around 1,018 bed spaces, 40 are residential care homes providing 795 bed spaces and 5 are nursing care homes providing 223 bed spaces. The provision of elderly care facilities in Allerdale are summarised Table 3-20 .

Table 3-20 Provision of Elderly Care Homes Residential Bed Residential Bed Nursing Care Bed Spaces - Private Spaces - Public Spaces Workington Locality 300 69 107 Amathea Care Centre 40 0 0 Briarfield 6 0 0 Branthwaite Nursing Home 0 0 57 Cavendish House 6 0 0 Clarendon House 25 0 0 East Croft Residential Care Home 31 0 0 Holly Dyke 6 0 0 Home Farm Camerton Care Home 6 0 0 Newlands Nursing Home 0 0 50 Richmond Park 0 29 0 Rosecroft Residential Home 51 0 0 Stanbeck 13 0 0 Stainfield House Care 12 0 0 Stilecroft Private Residential Home 43 0 0 West House 47 0 0 West Winds Residential Home 14 0 0 Woodlands 0 40 0 Maryport Locality 102 31 60 47 Sandy Lonning 6 0 0 Allanby House (Learning Disability) 6 0 0 Granville Court 11 0 0 Jah-Jireh Rest Home 17 0 0 Parkside 0 31 0 Riverside Court 0 0 60 Seaview House 4 0 0 Solway House 18 0 0 The Dales 40 0 0 Cockermouth Locality 104 0 0 2a Waterloo Street 10 0 0 Gatesgarth 4 0 0 Hames Hall 25 0 0 Holmewood Residential Home 25 0 0 Kirklands 40 0 0 Wigton Locality 55 40 18 52 South End 5 0 0 Grange Bank 19 0 0 Inglewood 0 40 0 Meadow Bank Nursing Home 0 0 18 Midtown House 19 0 0 Redmayne House 5 0 0 Rydal Mount 4 0 0 Springfield House 3 0 0 Aspatria Locality 6 15 0

27 Low Fauld Langrigg Care Home 6 0 0 Park Lodge 0 15 0 Silloth Locality 73 0 38 Chichester Hall 20 0 0 Little Acre 14 0 0 Silloth Nursing & Residential Care 0 0 38 The Good Companies 39 0 0 Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 640 155 223 Source: ABC, 2010

3.42 Individual care providers were contacted to ascertain the capacity level of elderly care facilities in the Borough. The number of people registered for residential and nursing care stands at 930 people, 753 for residential care and 177 for nursing care. The assessment of capacity level of elderly care facilities in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-21 and illustrated in Figure 3-16 .

Table 3-21 Capacity level of elderly care establishments Total Places People Surplus Capacity Available Registered Capacity Level Workington Locality 476 434 42 91% Amathea Care Centre 40 38 2 95% Briarfield 6 5 1 83% Branthwaite Nursing Home 57 45 12 79% Cavendish House 6 6 0 100% Clarendon House 25 25 0 100% East Croft Residential Care Home 31 30 1 97% Holly Dyke 6 5 1 83% Home Farm Camerton Care Home 6 6 0 100% Newlands Nursing Home 50 45 5 90% Richmond Park 29 29 0 100% Rosecroft Residential Home 51 51 0 100% Stanbeck 13 10 3 77% Stainfield House Care 12 11 1 92% Stilecroft Private Residential Home 43 31 12 72% West House 47 46 1 98% West Winds Residential Home 14 14 0 100% Woodlands 40 37 3 93% Maryport Locality 193 167 26 87% 47 Sandy Lonning 6 6 0 100% Allanby House (Learning Disability) 6 6 0 100% Granville Court 11 11 0 100% Jah-Jireh Rest Home 17 17 0 100% Parkside 31 27 4 87% Riverside Court 60 50 10 83% Seaview House 4 4 0 100% Solway House 18 18 0 100% The Dales 40 28 12 70% Cockermouth Locality 104 101 3 97% 2a Waterloo Street 10 10 0 100% Gatesgarth 4 4 0 100% Hames Hall 25 22 3 88% Holmewood Residential Home 25 25 0 100% Kirklands 40 40 0 100% Wigton Locality 113 105 8 93% 52 South End 5 5 0 100% Grange Bank 19 19 0 100% Inglewood 40 36 4 90% Meadow Bank Nursing Home 18 14 4 78% Midtown House 19 19 0 100% Redmayne House 5 5 0 100% Rydal Mount 4 4 0 100%

28 Springfield House 3 3 0 100% Aspatria Locality 21 19 2 90% Low Fauld Langrigg Care Home 6 6 0 100% Park Lodge 15 13 2 87% Silloth Locality 111 104 7 94% Chichester Hall 20 20 0 100% Little Acre 14 14 0 100% Silloth Nursing & Residential Care 38 37 1 97% The Good Companies 39 33 6 85% Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 1,018 930 88 91% Source: ABC, 2010.

3.43 Currently only 4 of the elderly care homes in Allerdale have surplus capacity of 10 or more places, these are: Branthwaite Nursing Home, Stilecroft Private Residential Home (Workington locality), Riverside Court, The Dales (Maryport locality).

Figure 3-16 Location of elderly care establishments

Sports & Leisure Facilities

3.44 The provision of sports & leisure facilities in Allerdale is provided by a mix of private and council providers (including education partners). Leisure centres in the localities of Workington and Cockermouth are managed by Carlisle Leisure Ltd. Five types of leisure and sport facilities are considered for this study, these are swimming pools, sports halls, synthetic turf pitches, fitness centres and golf facilities. Figure 3-17 illustrates the distribution of sports & leisure facilities in Allerdale.

29 Figure 3-17 Distribution of Sports & Leisure Providers

3.45 Allerdale has 29 sports & leisure providers, offering 5 swimming pools, 19 sports halls, 2 synthetic turf pitches, 615 health & fitness stations and 5 golf courses (SE 2009). The locality of Workington has the highest provision with 9 providers offering a range of sports & leisure facilities including 2 swimming pools, 6 sports halls, 6 fitness centres and 1 golf course. In contrast provision is much lower within the locality of Aspatria with only 3 providers and limited to sports halls and fitness centres. The provision of sports & leisure facilities in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-22.

Table 3-22 Provision of Sports & Leisure Facilities Swimming Sports Synthetic Fitness Golf Pools Halls Pitches Stations Courses Workington Locality 2 6 0 251 1 Energize Fitness 0 0 0 69 0 Intrim Fitness Centre 0 0 0 85 0 Lakes College West Cumbria 0 1 0 19 0 Oval Centre 0 0 0 24 0 Southfield Tech College 0 1 0 0 0 St Josephs Catholic High School 0 1 0 14 0 Stainburn School & Science College 0 2 0 0 0 Workington Golf Club 0 0 0 0 1 Workington Leisure Centre & Pool 2 1 0 40 0 Maryport Locality 1 3 1 54 1 Bodyflex & Body & Soul 0 0 0 30 0 Maryport Civic Hall 0 1 0 0 0 Maryport Golf Club 0 0 0 0 1 Netherhall Community Sports 1 2 1 24 0 Centre Cockermouth Locality 1 3 1 145 1 Cockermouth Golf Club 0 0 0 0 1 Cockermouth Leisure Centre 1 1 0 50 0 Cockermouth School 0 2 1 0 0 Grasmoor Sports Centre 0 0 0 15 0 Lifestyle & Shapers Fitness Centre 0 0 0 80 0

30 Wigton Locality 1 3 0 85 1 Brayton Park Golf Club 0 0 0 0 1 Nelson Tomlinson School Sports 0 3 0 0 0 Hall Water Street Health & Fitness Club 0 0 0 60 0 Wigton Sports Club 0 0 0 25 0 Wigton Swimming Pool 1 0 0 0 0 Aspatria Locality 0 2 0 60 0 Allonby School Sports Hall 0 1 0 0 0 Beacon Hill School 0 1 0 0 0 Brownz Total Fitness 0 0 0 60 0 Silloth Locality 0 2 0 20 1 Silloth on Solway Golf Club 0 0 0 0 1 Solway Community Tech College 0 2 0 0 0 Solway Fitness Centre 0 0 0 20 0 Allerdale (ex. Keswick) 5 19 2 615 5 Source: SE 2009.

3.46 To assess whether there is a deficit in current provision, Sport England’s Sports Facilities Calculator (SE 2010) was applied. The provision standard for sports and leisure facilities as put forward by the SFC are summarised in Table 3-23 .

Table 3.23 Provision Standards for Sports and Leisure Facilities Swimming Sports Halls Indoor Synthetic Pools Bowls Turf Pitches SFC Provision Standard per 1,000 9.33 sq m 0.27 Courts 0.08 Rinks 0.03 Pitches people 0.18 Lanes 0.07 Halls 0.01 0.04 Pools Centres Source: SE 2010.

3.47 Based on a population of 87,350 people, Allerdale has a demand of 4 swimming pools, 6 sports halls, 1 indoor bowls centre and 2 synthetic turf pitches. The requirement for sports & leisure facilities in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-24

Table 3-24 Requirements for Sports & Leisure Facilities Swimming Sports Halls Indoor Synthetic Pools Bowls Turf Pitches SFC Requirement for Allerdale 815.93 sq m 23.29 6.85 Rinks 2.42 Pitches (Based on population of 87,350 15.36 Lanes Courts 1.14 people) 3.84 Pools 5.82 Halls Centres Provisions in Allerdale 2009 5 Pools 19 Halls 0 Rinks 2 Pitches Allerdale Balance 2009 1.16 Pools 13.18 Halls -1.14 -0.42 Centres Pitches Source: SE 2010.

3.48 The SFC suggests there is currently surplus capacity in the provision for swimming pools, sports halls and sufficient capacity in the provision of synthetic turf pitches. However with no available provision of indoor bowls facility in Allerdale, there is currently a deficit of 1.14 centres, based on a population of 87,350 people.

Open Space

3.49 Allerdale Borough Council is responsible for the management and maintenance of open spaces in Allerdale. As part of the Core Strategy evidence base, an audit of open spaces provision in Allerdale was undertaken in 2008 - Open Space, Sport

31 and Recreation Study . Allerdale has 301 open space sites, offering 401.26 ha of open spaces, including 70.61 ha of parks & gardens, 130.60 ha of natural & semi natural spaces, 63.25 ha of amenity green spaces, 6.10 ha of provision for children, 0.13 ha of provision for young people, 108.56 ha of outdoor sports spaces and 22.01 ha of allotment spaces (ABC 2008). The provision of open spaces in Allerdale are summarised in Table 3-25 and illustrated in Figure 3-18.

Table 3-25 Provision of Open Spaces

Open Space Sites ParksGardens & (Ha) Natural& Semi NaturalSpaces (Ha) AmenityGreen Spaces(Ha) Provisionfor Children(Ha) Provisionfor Young People (Ha) Outdoor Sports Spaces(Ha) Allotment Spaces(Ha) Open Total Spaces(Ha) Workington 130 56.45 91.36 21.91 2.99 0.13 40.04 8.86 221.74 Locality Maryport 44 0.72 23.20 13.22 0.88 0.00 14.90 7.48 60.40 Locality Cockermouth 48 10.61 3.42 2.66 0.67 0.00 24.36 0.73 42.45 Locality Wigton Locality 34 1.55 7.22 2.15 0.28 0.00 15.88 2.20 29.28 Aspatria Locality 45 1.28 5.40 23.31 1.28 0.00 13.38 2.74 47.39 Silloth Locality Allerdale 301 70.61 130.60 63.25 6.10 0.13 108.56 22.01 401.26 (ex. Keswick) Source: ABC 2008.

Figure 3-18 Provision of Open Spaces Sites

3.50 Provision of open spaces is highest within the locality of Workington, with 130 sites and 221.74 ha of open spaces. Provision is much lower within the locality of Wigton with 34 sites and 29.28 ha of open spaces. The largest type of open space in Allerdale is natural & semi natural spaces with 130.60 ha accounting for around

32 33%, while the smallest type of open space is provision for young people with 0.13 ha.

3.51 To assess whether there is a deficit in the provision of open spaces in Allerdale, local provision standards as identified by the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study (ABC 2008) have been adopted. The local provision standards for open spaces in Allerdale are summarised in Table 3-26 .

Table 3-26 Provision Standards for Open Spaces

Parks & Gardens (Ha) Natural & Semi Natural Spaces (Ha) Amenity Green Spaces(Ha) Provision Children(Ha) for Provision Young for (Ha) People Outdoor Sports Spaces(Ha) Allotment Spaces(Ha) Total Spaces(Ha) Open Provision 0.83 1.52 0.74 0.08 or 0.2 or 0.25 1.27 4.89 Per 1,000 0.67 1.5 People facilities facilities Source: ABC 2008

4.52 Based on a population of 87,350 people, in 2009, Allerdale has a demand of 427.14 ha of open spaces. The requirement for open spaces in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-27 . The analysis of provision for open spaces in Allerdale is summarised in Table 3-28 .

4.53 The analysis indicated Workington is the only locality where the current level of provision is greater than the requirement as set by the local provision standards. All other localities have demonstrated a deficit in the overall provision of open spaces. Across all typologies, deficit is highest for the provision of allotment spaces.

Table 3-27 Requirements for Open Space Provision

Population Parks & Gardens(Ha) Natural& NaturalSemi Spaces(Ha) Amenity GreenSpaces (Ha) Provisionfor Children(Ha) Provisionfor Young People (Ha) Outdoor Sports Spaces (Ha) Allotment Spaces(Ha) Open Total Spaces(Ha) Workington 30,656 25.4 46.6 22.7 2.5 6.1 7.7 38.9 149.9 Locality Maryport 15,171 12.6 23.1 11.2 1.2 3.0 3.8 19.3 74.2 Locality Cockermouth 15,405 12.8 23.4 11.4 1.2 3.1 3.9 19.6 75.3 Locality Wigton 14,605 12.1 22.2 10.8 1.2 2.9 3.7 18.6 71.4 Locality Aspatria 6,577 5.5 10.0 4.9 0.5 1.3 1.6 8.4 32.2 locality Silloth 4,936 4.1 7.5 3.7 0.4 1.0 1.2 6.3 24.1 Locality Allerdale 87,350 72.5 132.8 64.6 7.0 17.5 21.8 110.9 427.1 (ex. Keswick) Source: ABC 2008 (updated).

Table 3-28 Surplus / Deficit Analysis for Open Spaces Provision

33

Parks Gardens(Ha) & Natural Semi Natural & Spaces(Ha) Amenity Green Spaces (Ha) Provision for Children(Ha) Provision for Young People (Ha) Outdoor Sports Spaces(Ha) Allotment Spaces(Ha) Total Spaces(Ha) Open Workington 31.0 44.8 -0.8 0.5 -6.0 32.4 -30.1 71.8 Locality Maryport -11.9 0.1 2.0 -0.3 -3.0 11.1 -11.8 -13.8 Locality Cockermouth -2.2 -20.0 -8.7 -0.6 -3.1 20.5 -18.8 -32.9 Locality Wigton -10.6 -15.0 -8.7 -0.9 -2.9 12.2 -16.4 -42.1 Locality Aspatria -8.3 -12.1 14.8 0.4 -2.3 10.5 -11.9 -8.9 locality Silloth Locality Allerdale -1.9 -2.2 -1.4 0.1 -17.3 86.7 -88.9 -25.9 (ex. Keswick) Source: ABC 2008 (updated).

34

PART TWO: IDENTIFYING FUTURE INFRASTRUCTURE

DEFICITS 4. Development Context

Population and Demographic Structure

4.1 According to the 2011 Census the total population of Allerdale Borough was 96,422. The population and demographic structure of the localities within the Allerdale plan area (excluding Keswick) are summarised in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1 Population and Broad Demographic Structure 2011 Workington Maryport Cockermouth Wigton Aspatria Silloth Allerdale Locality Locality Locality Locality Locality Locality 0-4 1882 870 713 606 370 196 4921 5-9 1617 783 782 688 326 210 4706 10-14 1727 902 961 883 386 245 5470 15-19 1935 989 874 888 429 274 5790 20-24 1773 779 613 557 345 223 4610 25-29 1972 860 634 513 307 172 4808 30-44 6055 2940 2,839 2487 1232 686 17560 45-59 6817 3022 3,709 3196 1611 941 20920 60-64 2308 1153 1,301 1171 624 403 7604 65-74 3339 1742 1,780 1620 762 632 10856 75-84 2039 920 1,105 991 462 403 6622 85-89 526 235 316 230 88 106 1687 90+ 244 114 144 122 59 61 868 Total 32234 15309 15771 13952 7001 4552 96422 Source: Census 2011 Key Statistics (ONS, 2013)

4.2 According to the 2011 Census the total number of households within the Allerdale Borough was 42,345. The number of and type of households within the localities within the Allerdale plan area (excluding Keswick) are summarised in Table 4-2.

Table 4-2 Households and household composition 2011 Workington Maryport Cockermouth Wigton Aspatria Silloth Allerdale Locality Locality Locality Locality Locality Locality Single 4787 2064 2102 1628 887 617 13169 Person Family 9161 4287 4586 3996 2059 1275 27389 household Other 535 302 279 251 118 86 1787 Total 14483 6653 6967 5875 3064 1978 42345 Source: Census 2011 Key Statistics (ONS, 2013)

Population and household growth projections

4.3 The growth projections paper (GVA, 2011) presents three different population projection scenarios, based on a range of data inputs and assumptions:

• Scenario 1: The scenario considers the trend of migration change over 10 years, going back from 2009/10. • Scenario 2: This scenario bases the projected change in migration on more recent trends i.e. the last five years going back from 2009/10.

34 • Scenario 3: This scenario matches up the level of working age population required to meet the anticipated employment requirements in the Borough going forward.

4.4 Based on the above scenarios, by 2026 the total population of the Borough could range between a decline of 2,883 to 89,585 and an increase of 10,763 to 102,770. The three scenarios are summarised in Table 4-3

Table 3-3 Population projection scenarios 2011-2026 Change 2011 2026 No. % Scenario 1 92633 92243 -390 -0.4 Scenario 2 92468 89585 -2883 -3.2 Scenario 3 92007 102770 10763 10.5 Source: CCC, GVA (2011)

4.5 Under all the population projection scenarios, the demographic structure will shift considerably with an increase in the elderly population. Table 4-4 sets out the demographic change of broad age groups under the three development scenarios.

Table 3-4 Change in age structure 2011-2026 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 2011 2026 2011 2026 2011 2026 0-4 5.3% 4.5% 5.3% 4.4% 5.3% 5.0% 5-9 5.1% 4.8% 5.1% 4.8% 5.1% 5.2% 10-14 5.6% 5.2% 5.6% 5.1% 5.6% 5.2% 15-19 6.0% 5.4% 6.0% 5.4% 6.0% 5.2% 20-24 4.6% 4.2% 4.6% 4.3% 4.6% 4.2% 25-29 4.7% 4.5% 4.7% 4.6% 4.7% 4.9% 30-34 4.6% 5.3% 4.6% 5.4% 4.6% 6.3% 35-39 5.7% 4.9% 5.7% 4.9% 5.7% 5.6% 40-44 7.4% 5.1% 7.4% 5.0% 7.4% 5.3% 45-49 7.8% 5.0% 7.8% 4.9% 7.8% 4.9% 50-54 7.4% 6.1% 7.4% 6.1% 7.4% 5.9% 55-59 6.8% 7.7% 6.8% 7.8% 6.8% 7.4% 60-64 8.0% 7.9% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 7.5% 65-69 6.2% 7.2% 6.2% 7.2% 6.2% 6.8% 70-74 5.2% 6.2% 5.2% 6.2% 5.2% 5.8% 75-79 4.1% 6.6% 4.1% 6.7% 4.2% 6.1% 80-84 2.9% 4.5% 2.9% 4.5% 2.9% 4.2% 85-89 1.7% 2.9% 1.7% 2.9% 1.7% 2.7% 90+ 0.9% 2.0% 0.9% 2.0% 0.9% 1.9% Source: CCC, GVA (2011)

4.6 Based on the above scenarios, by 2026 the total number of households within the Borough could be range between an increase of 1,610 to 43,213 and 7,236 to 48,662. The three scenarios are summarised in Table 4-5

Table 4-5 Household projection scenarios 2011-2026 Change 2011 2026 No. No. Including 3% Vacancy Change % Annual Increase Scenario 1 41677 44385 2708 2789 6.7 186 Scenario 2 41603 43213 1610 1658 4.0 111

35 Scenario 3 41427 48662 7236 7453 18.0 497 Source: CCC (2010), GVA (2011)

4.7 Based on these projections the future annual increase in the number of households in the Borough could range between a minimum of 111 and a maximum of 497.

4.8 All the population and household projection scenarios indicated a much higher rate of household increase relative to their population change. Data from Cumbria Intelligence Observatory (CIO 2010) suggest this is mainly contributed to the significant increase of single person households. Table 4-6 sets out the household growth by type under the three development scenarios.

Table 4-6 Household projection scenarios by type 2011-2026 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 No. % No. % No. % One person 2,232 82% 1,877 117% 3,600 50% Couple household 1,803 67% 1,350 84% 3,205 44% Family -1301 -48% -1561 -97% 355 5% Other -26 -1% -57 -4% 75 1% Source: CCC (2010) GVA (2011)

4.9 The projections under all of the scenarios show a significant uplift in single person and couple households. This reflects the ageing of the population and wider national trends. The impact of the in-migration of working age people under scenario 3 shows a different trend in family households than shown under the demographic scenarios.

Level of growth and spatial strategy set out in the Local Plan

4.10 The Local Plan sets a target of 5168 dwellings over the plan period 2011-2028. This equates to an annual requirement of 304 dwellings, which has been taken as a mid point between household growth projections set out in scenarios 2 and 3 (i.e. 111+497/2 = 304).

4.11 The spatial strategy set out in the local plan seeks to ensure that the majority of development is located in the existing urban centres that provide the best range of services, employment opportunities and access to public transport. In order for smaller rural settlements to remain sustainable there needs to be opportunities for appropriate small-scale development in order to help meet the local need for housing and employment. The settlement hierarchy is summarised in Table 4-7.

Table 3-7 Local Plan settlement hierarchy Principal Centre Workington (including 35% Harrington, Seaton, Siddick and Stainburn), Key Service Maryport 12% Centre Cockermouth 10% Wigton 10% Silloth 3% Aspatria 4% Local Service Abbeytown, Allonby, Brigham, In combination up to 20% Centre Broughton, Broughton Moor,

36 Dearham, Flimby, Great Clifton, Kirkbride, Prospect and Thursby Limited Growth Blencogo, Blitterlees, In combination up to Villages Branthwaite, Bridekirk, Bolton- Low-Houses, Bothel, Crosby, Dean, Eaglesfield, 6% Fletchertown, Glasson, Gilcrux, Greysouthen, Ireby, Kirkbampton, Little Clifton/Bridgefoot, Mawbray, Newton Arlosh, Plumbland, Skinburness, Tallentire Source: Allerdale Local Plan Pre-submission Draft, 2013

Proposed housing targets

4.12 Based on the proposed distribution of the overall target, the housing numbers for each tier of the settlement hierarchy are summarised in Table 4-8.

Table 4-8 Settlement hierarchy housing targets Plan Period Target Annual Requirement Principle Service centre 1809 106 Key service centres 2015 119 Local service centres 1034 61 Rural villages 310 18 Total 5168 304 Source: Allerdale Local Plan Pre-submission Draft, 2013

Strategy Inputs

4.13 Themes relating to the provision of infrastructure run throughout the Local Plan. The vision for Allerdale looks forward to the Borough being environmentally, economically and socially sustainable, with a diversified and well-connected local economy and the objectives set out in the Core Strategy reflect that.

4.14 The provision and improvement of infrastructure underpins the majority of the strategic objectives of the plan, but the following are especially applicable:

• SO1d Ensure the sustainability of towns and villages by supporting a stable and balanced population, ensuring accessible services that meet a range of community needs. • SO1f Promote renewable and low carbon energy production in the Plan Area. • SO2c Ensure a deliverable supply of housing land that meets the needs of the community and local economy. • SO3b Encourage the development of business clusters, maximise the economic opportunities identified in the West Cumbria Economic Blueprint and Implementation Plan and ensure the timely improvement and delivery of

37 essential infrastructure, such as the Port of Workington to support economic growth. • SO3c Promote Lillyhall as an important employment site, encouraging the growth of nuclear technology and research clusters while building on its existing education and skills role through the Energy Coast Campus. • SO3d Provide a wide range of modern, high quality employment sites and premises to meet existing business needs and emerging sectors. • SO3f Support improved digital connections, especially in rural areas. • SO3h Promote the principles of sustainable tourism, the provision of high quality accommodation and attractions, and support key projects such as Derwent Forest, and Roman Maryport. • SO3i Promote the vitality and viability of town centres, including the night time economy and support the retention of existing rural services. • SO3j Enable the long-term sustainability of the ports at Workington and Silloth by supporting appropriate port related activities and lobbying for improved road and rail links. • SO4b Support essential road and rail infrastructure improvements required to deliver economic growth and key economic projects. • SO4c Work with partners to improve sustainable transport, both within and outside Allerdale. • SO4e Develop and maintain safe, efficient, high quality, modern and integrated transport networks with good internal links and connections to key routes including A595/6 corridor, A66, M6, and West Coast mainline. • SO4f Enable the delivery of transport hubs across the Plan Area, linking the Cumbria Coastal Railway to other transport modes. • SO5a Ensure that all new development meets high standards of quality of design, energy efficiency, safety, security and accessibility, and relates well to existing development, enhances the public realm and develops locally distinctive and high quality places. • SO5c Protect and enhance existing social, community and utility related infrastructure, such as education, health, arts, cultural and leisure facilities. • SO5d Enhance green infrastructure by developing a comprehensive network of high quality open space such as parks, woodlands, gardens, natural green spaces and allotments. • SO5e Minimise the risk from flooding and support the incorporation of mitigation measures as part of the overall design solution. • SO6c Promote opportunities to improve access to the countryside and coast. • SO6e Promote, protect and provide a comprehensive network of green infrastructure, incorporating multi-functional green and blue spaces both within developments, linking across and between settlements throughout the area.

4.15 The central strategic policy is S2: Sustainable Development Principles , which contains a number of relevant elements, such as • Improving communications within the area as well as nationally and internationally, both in terms of digital connections, transport infrastructure and services.

38 • Promoting the economic opportunities from the West Cumbria Economic Blueprint including key projects identified in the implementation plan • Enhancing town centre vitality and viability by improving the retail, commercial, cultural and leisure offer and quality of the built environment • Supporting the delivery of high quality tourism attractions and accommodation as well as key projects • Supporting the delivery of school facilities, training programmes and lifelong learning through providing opportunities and the provision of up to date facilities, in particular, supporting the role of the Energy Coast Campus • Encouraging the development of renewable or low carbon energy resources in appropriate locations • Promoting health, well-being and active lifestyle by protecting, maintaining and enhancing green infrastructure, sports and recreation facilities; • Ensure physical and social infrastructure is fit for purpose and will support improvement • Ensure development (either cumulatively or in isolation) will not harm highway safety and does not result in undue traffic congestion. • Promote high standards of design that make a positive contribution to the local area and ensure that, wherever possible, existing natural, historic and environmental assets are enhanced and in all circumstances conserved.

4.16 Policy S3 sets out the spatial strategy and framework for the growth of the Borough over the next plan period. This strategy seeks to locate the majority of future growth in the largest settlements to make the best use of existing infrastructure.

4.17 Policy S15 seeks to support and encourage development that contributes towards raising the level of education, skills. A key element of this will be achieved by working with partners in the provision and enhancement of sustainable educational facilities (both schools and further education facilities).

4.18 Policy S20 sets out the Council’s approach to dealing with the Major Infrastructure Unit for nationally significant projects and ensuring that their contribution to the Borough’s economy and quality of life is optimised.

4.19 Policy S21 sets out the Council’s framework for developer contributions via a Supplementary Planning Document and introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy if deemed appropriate and viable to do so.

4.20 Policy S23 provides a level of support and safeguarding of land forming part of programmed or committed new road/rail routes. The policy also provides support for safeguarding non-transport infrastructure, such as major education and health and sites needed for the upgrade of utility services.

4.21 Policy S24 seeks to promote the creation of green infrastructure wherever possible in order to improve the sustainability and attractiveness of the development. Green infrastructure provides social and environmental benefit to both local communities and other users.

4.22 Policy S25 seeks to safeguard existing areas of open space, land and buildings used for sports and recreational activities, having regard for deficits and surpluses

39 identified in Open Space, Sport and Recreation strategies. The Council will protect existing provision and where possible enhance it, especially in areas where there are identified deficits.

4.23 Policy S26 safeguards local communities against the loss of facilities such as community halls, local shops, theatres, public houses, meeting places and schools. These types of facility are seen as supporting sustainable and inclusive communities especially in rural areas, where they will be robustly protected as they not only provide for residents’ day to day needs, but also serve as spaces for social interaction.

4.24 Policy S27 seeks to conserve and enhance all heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their intrinsic historic value and significance. The policy has a presumption in favour of conserving all heritage assets and the strength of this presumption will be affected by the level of designation and importance of the heritage asset and the amount of public benefit of the proposals.

4.25 Policy S29 strongly resists development in high flood risk areas and seeks to steer new development to lower flood risk areas. It also supports the provision of design solutions to prevent future flooding. The policy encourages the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDS) within new development to reduce the risk of surface water flooding.

4.26 Policy S37 supports proposals for new or replacement coastal defence schemes where the works are consistent with the management approach for the frontage presented in the relevant Shoreline Management Plan and there will be no material adverse impact on the environment.

40 5. Identification and delivery of infrastructure

Overview

5.1 In terms of land and property prices the Borough is one of considerable contrast. The south western area, which includes Maryport and Workington, continues to suffer from a depressed property market as a result of the decline of the traditional industries. In contrast the south eastern area, which includes Cockermouth, is subject to significant development pressure due to in-migration due to its attractive landscape setting close to the boundary of the Lake District National Park. The large geographically dispersed northern area of the Borough is subject to moderate localised demand.

5.2 The spatial strategy set out in the Local Plan set out in sections 4.10 to 4.12 identifies that the bulk of future growth will be located in the main centres of population. This means that a high proportion of development will be directed towards the south western area of the Borough. Workington and Maryport, cumulatively, account for 47% of total growth.

5.3 Given the moderate level of future growth projected within the Borough and the issue of economic viability in relation to development in the lower value areas, the scope for raising funds from planning contributions is modest. Therefore it would be unwise to present a strategy based on an assumption that development will come in the quantities, with the requisite profit margins, that would enable a certain timetable for the delivery of infrastructure to be set

5.4 Therefore this section of the document, rather than being a ‘delivery plan’, is instead more a ‘statement’ that highlights the projects which the Council will seek to enable, aided by a combination of development funding and any other sources of funding that may become available the future. The prospect of significant levels of public funding is unlikely in the current economic climate, which, again does not give the Council any real certainty that programmed projects will be delivered.

Identification of infrastructure items on which Local Plan strategic objectives are dependent

5.5 Part one of this report provided a baseline assessment, which identified existing infrastructure deficits within the Borough and future deficits, based on growth projections available at the time, which would need to be addressed.

5.6 Part two seeks to build upon that work by modelling potential emerging deficits with more certainty and with greater accuracy. During November 2012 - March 2013 further consultation was undertaken with relevant infrastructure providers, with the Council supplying the consultation document contained in Appendix B. This document set out the growth targets for the Principal, Key and Local Service Centres and, where appropriate, broad locations for future growth. Each infrastructure provider was asked to consider the implications of these growth scenarios on their current assets, any necessary upgrades and their criticality.

41 Physical and Utilities Infrastructure

5.7 Road Network: No road improvement projects have been identified as being critical to the delivery of the strategy set out in the Local Plan. A number of infrastructure projects have been identified that would support the future development of the Port of Workington and Lillyhall Estate. Similarly projects have also been identified that would reduce the volume of traffic and improving air quality within settlements that lie along the A595/A596.

Road network improvements Implementation Cumbria County Council; Allerdale Borough Council; agencies responsible Relevant strategies, Local Transport Plan (LTP3); Allerdale Council Plan programmes (ACP), Port of Workington Development Plan (PoWDP) Baseline situation A595, A596 and A66 routes in need of improvement. Current plans and • A595 and A5066 improvements from A66 to proposals Sellafield/Nuclear New Build (LTP3) • Port Access Bridge (PoWDP) • Workington Southern Link (LTP3) • Wigton Eastern bypass (LTP3) • B5300 realignment (LTP3) • Locally administered County Council programmes for road safety, pedestrian access improvements. Relevance to Local Plan Improved road capacity will support inward investment implementation and possibly reduce relocations outside the Borough. Smaller schemes contribute to quality of life objectives. Role of the Local Plan Local Plan provides background priorities to inform future spending. Consequences of needs Failure to improve road capacity would not compromise not being met development strategy set out in the Local Plan. However it may compromise the ability to attract inward investment and support the objectives of the West Cumbria Economic Blueprint in the longer term. Failure to implement smaller projects would not impact on strategy implementation but could compromise local highway safety.

5.8 Public transport: No public transport improvement projects have been identified as being critical to the delivery of the strategy set out in the Local Plan. A number of improvements to the Cumbria Coast Line have been identified, such as the general upgrading of station environments and the provision of interchange facilities. The latter project is associated with nuclear new build and the need to reduce the potential volume of commercial, freight and passenger traffic using the local highway network.

Local public transport improvements Implementation Cumbria County Council; Allerdale Borough Council; agencies responsible Network Rail; Northern Rail; Bus operators Relevant strategies, Local Transport Plan (LTP3); Nuclear New Build programmes Transport Assessment (NNBTA); Bus/Rail operators’

42 investment plans Baseline situation West Cumbria Coast Line substandard with single track along many parts of the route, which means that capacity, is finite. Irregular passenger schedules and poor station environments are a disincentive to use of the route. In rural areas bus service schedules fall short of community needs. Current plans and • Workington Station Hub (NNBTA) proposals • Maryport Station Hub (NNBTA) Relevance to Local Plan Improved public transport network will reduce levels of implementation car dependency and strain on the highway network. Increased use will contribute to sustainability and climate change objectives. Role of the Local Plan Local Plan policy supports transport infrastructure upgrade projects and provides background priorities to inform future spending. Consequences of needs Potential decline in public transport usage, leading to not being met increased dependency on private transport and strain on the local highway network. The sustainability and climate change objectives of the Local Plan may not be met.

5.9 Water Supply and foul drainage: No critical water supply and foul drainage issues have been raised by United Utilities (UU) that would undermine delivery of the strategy set out in the Local Plan. However there is strain on both forms of infrastructure. With regards to water supply UU are required to reduce the levels of abstraction from Ennerdale Water as a result of the requirement to safeguard the population of pearl mussels that the River Ehen, downstream of the lake, supports. In relation to waste water infrastructure, there is ‘strain’ in certain settlement within the Borough, where the treatment works are operating at full capacity. In these instances UU has requested that the Council profile any future programmed growth to the latter stages of the plan period to allow the necessary upgrade works to be undertaken.

Water supply and foul drainage Implementation United Utilities agencies responsible Relevant strategies, United Utilities Asset Management Plans (AMP) programmes Baseline situation There is a shortfall in water supply against projected needs, and in the Ehen catchment extraction from the river must be reduced. Boreholes in Egremont area are programmed to meet the shortfall, but in the long term supply may need to be further extended to cater for growth. In terms of foul drainage, improved waste water treatment works is needed at Cockermouth. Current plans and Boreholes in current AMP programme; upgrade of proposals Cockermouth WwTW is candidates for the next. Relevance to Local Plan Improvement of Cockermouth waste water treatment implementation plant is critical to achievement of plan aims for the town.

43 Role of the Local Plan Identification of areas where investment is needed. Consequences of needs Role and function of Cockermouth as a key service not being met centre could be significantly inhibited.

5.10 Energy supply: No critical energy supply issues have been raised by the main providers that would prejudice the delivery of the strategy set out in the Local Plan. The main settlements have adequate capacity and future expansion to the networks will be development led. There are localised transmission issues in more outlying areas but these are related to the need to upgrade transmission equipment rather that inadequate capacity.

Energy supply Implementation National Grid; Electricity North West; British agencies responsible Gas/Centrica Relevant strategies, Electricity North West Network Investment Plan; programmes National Grid Regional Investment Plan; British Gas/Centrica Network Investment Plan Baseline situation Gas and electricity networks assessed as adequate for current and forecast demands, subject to need for development-led upgrading in localised areas Current plans and • Unknown proposals Relevance to Local Plan Local Plan seeks to support and enable necessary

implementation infrastructure to facilitate identified growth. Overarching principle that growth should not be constrained by network undersupply

Role of the Local Plan Identification of areas where housing and employment growth is to occur so that any supply shortfalls can be predicted and addressed.

Consequences of needs Given there are no critical supply issues no direct

not being met consequences have been identified. However growth

could be delayed if potential network shortages are not

identified early.

5.11 Telecommunications Infrastructure: Although the average broadband speed in Cumbria is similar to the national average, speeds in the rural parts of the Allerdale are significantly lower. Projects to improve Superfast Broadband availability and access within the Borough are currently being progressed.

Telecommunications Implementation Cumbria County Council; BT agencies responsible Relevant strategies, Connecting Cumbria programmes Baseline situation Current broadband provision is adequate in urban areas but rural coverage is poor and unreliable. None of the providers have plans to roll out superfast broadband as part of their own investment plans Current plans and • Connecting Cumbria

44 proposals Relevance to Local Plan Local Plan seeks to support and enable necessary implementation infrastructure to facilitate identified growth. Super fast broadband is integral to this objective to mitigate against problems of peripherality Role of the Local Plan Support and encourage the provision of superfast broadband and indentify employment sites where such services will be expected and/or required. Consequences of needs May result in aspirations for future growth of 5.12 Waste and recycling: No critical waste disposal issues have been raised by the main providers not being met employment sites being stymied. i ncreases in population.

Waste and recycling Implementation Cumbria County Council agencies responsible Relevant strategies, Waste and Minerals Local Plan programmes Baseline situation Cumbria County Council considers that the Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC) in West Cumbria could accommodate the demands placed on them by the growth forecasted.

Current plans and • New HWRC at Lillyhall, Workington proposals Relevance to Local Plan Local Plan requires that adequate infrastructure and implementation community facilities are available to serve existing and future needs of local communities, including waste disposal and recycling facilities Role of the Local Plan Identification of areas where housing and employment growth is to occur so that any supply shortfalls can be predicted and addressed. Consequences of needs Failure to deliver adequate waste disposal and not being met recycling facilities may result in the sustainability and climate change objectives of the Local Plan not being met.

5.13 Flood risk: No critical flooding issues have been raised by the main providers that would prejudice the delivery of the strategy set out in the Local Plan. Although there are several settlements identified within the settlement hierarchy that are the subject of significant constraint in this regard, the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) indicates that there are sufficient sites within low risk areas to meet growth targets. Cockermouth, which is especially vulnerable, is currently subject of substantial food defence upgrading works. In terms of surface water flooding, there are a number of localised flashpoints

RelevantFlood risk strategies, Shoreline Management Plan; EA Flood risk and coastal programmesImplementation agencies managementEnvironment Agencyschemes working with developers. Baselineresponsible situation Several settlements identified in settlement hierarchy

45 are subject to flood risk. • Current plans and Upgrading of flood defences in Cockermouth proposals Relevance to Local Plan That development within the Borough is not inhibited implementation and the role and function of Cockermouth as a key service centre is not significantly constrained.

Role of the Local Plan Provides the policy framework to ensure that development has regard to flood risk avoidance and mitigation.

Consequences of needs Development may be prevented where flood prevention not being met measures could legitimately have enabled it.

Community Infrastructure

5.14 Elderly needs housing : It is anticipated that some extra care housing schemes on appropriate sites may be supported directly by CCC themselves with potential funding through a range of means including capital budget, developer contributions, government funding, any contributions the Borough Council may seek to provide and the remainder by private developers .

Elderly needs housing

Implementation agencies Cumbria County Council

responsible

Relevant strategies, Adult social care district plan

programmes

Baseline situation Facilities currently adequate although transition to

more extra-care orientated provision may give rise to

localised issues

• Current plans and New/upgraded community hospitals for Maryport proposals and Wigton Relevance to Local Plan Local plan seeks to provide a balanced housing implementation market that meets the needs of all sections of the community, including the elderly. Role of the Local Plan Identification of areas where housing and employment growth is to occur and also local priorities. Consequences of needs May impact on health outcomes and quality-of-life and not being met housing objectives

5.15 Education: There are no critical capacity issue at any primary/secondary education providers and in cases where ‘stress’ has been identified, it can be mitigated through developer contributions. Those schools identified as having potential stress are distributed throughout the Borough however there is a particular concentration within the Cockermouth area. In terms of further education, the need for a new further education facility has been identified to provide the requisite training and

46 skills so that local people can take advantage of the employment opportunities arising from the West Coast Economic Blueprint.

Education Implementation agencies County Council; The University of Cumbria, University responsible of Central Lancashire, GEN II, Lakes College, The University of Manchester and Centre of Leadership Performance (NMP) Relevant strategies, Strategy for Cumbria’s Primary Schools; West Cumbria programmes Economic Blueprint; Energy Coast Campus Five Year Programme.

Baseline situation Number of primary and secondary schools are approaching or are at full capacity. • Current plans and No primary schools improvements currently proposals programmed, former ‘Building Schools for Future’ projects being under review.

• Energy Coast Campus

Relevance to Local Plan Local plan seeks to support and enhance education

implementation provision to boost skills and attainment.

Role of the Local Plan Will ensure that developer contributions are sought in

order to provide additional school capacity where

development would create a deficit.

Consequences of needs Quality of education may suffer if schools become

not being met overcrowded, impacting skills and economic

competitiveness of workforce.

5.16 Healthcare: No critical infrastructure shortages have been indentified in relation to healthcare provision. NHS Cumbria Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) is in the process of delivering the ‘Closer to Home’ strategy, which involves the transferral of services that were previously only available from acute hospitals to community hospitals. Part of the strategy includes the upgrading of community hospital facilities within the county. New facilities have already been delivered in Workington (2005) and Cockermouth (due to open 2013) which have been funded through a combination of public and private sector funding.

Healthcare Implementation agencies NHS Cumbria Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) responsible Relevant strategies, Currently under review due to NHS reorganisation. programmes Baseline situation Facilities adequate overall, subject to accessibility difficulties in the most rural areas. Current plans and • New/upgraded community hospitals for Maryport proposals and Wigton Relevance to Local Plan Local plan seeks to maintain and enhance access to implementation community services. Role of the Local Plan Identification of areas where housing and employment growth is to occur

47 Consequences of needs May impact on health outcomes and quality-of-life not being met objectives

5.17 Sports and leisure facilities: Various studies indicate that overall the Borough has sport and recreation provision in quantity terms. There is significant deficiency for children and, in particular, teenagers. In terms of indoor facilities broadly there is adequate provision but that the quality of the facilities needs to be improved. None of the deficiencies are identified as being critical and can be addressed through public sector funding and developer contributions.

Sports and leisure facilities Implementation agencies Borough Council, leisure facility providers. responsible Relevant strategies, Allerdale Council Plan; Allerdale Open space, sport programmes and recreation study (to be updated) Baseline situation General undersupplies in open space throughout the Borough, with particular shortfall in children’s play spaces. Built facilities need enhancement. Current plans and New sports centre for Workington identified in Council proposals Plan Relevance to Local Plan Local plan seeks to support and enhance the provision implementation of open space and indoor sports facilities, thereby contribution to health and quality-of-life objectives Role of the Local Plan Will ensure that developer contributions are sought in order provide additional open space/sports facilities where development would create a deficit. Consequences of needs May impact on health outcomes and quality-of-life not being met objectives

5.18 Green infrastructure and open Space: Overall the Borough has a shortfall of open space provision in quantity terms, although this masks an oversupply in natural open space and deficiencies in amenity open space. None of the deficiencies are identified as being critical and can be addressed through public sector funding and developer contributions.

Green infrastructure Implementation agencies Parish Councils; Borough Council, County Council, responsible Natural England, National Trust; Forestry Commission; Lake District National Park Relevant strategies, Allerdale Council Plan; Allerdale Open space, sport programmes and recreation study (to be updated) Baseline situation Provision of natural and semi-natural open space above threshold in most areas, although quality of space has been identified. Deficiencies in amenity green space throughout the Borough. Current plans and No current programmes proposals Relevance to Local Local plan seeks to deliver a high quality built

48 implementation environment and enhancement and protection of the natural environment. Role of the Local Plan Will ensure that developer contributions are sought in order to provide open space and other forms of green infrastructure where development would create a deficit. Consequences of needs No direct impacts but may impact on health outcomes not being met and quality-of-life objectives

49 6. Taking the strategy forward

The review of infrastructure provision has identified that although infrastructure ‘gaps’ do exist in the Borough, it is not considered that the levels and location of development provided for in the Local Plan will be compromised by infrastructure shortcomings, taking into account the level of growth proposed. However, there are road network and public transport improvement projects that are regarded as being essential to the realisation of the objective of the West Coast Economic Blueprint. The key strategic employment sites indentified in the Plan, such as the Port of Workington and the Lillyhall Estate, could continue to function without this infrastructure investment, but network upgrades would be required to accommodate nuclear new build activity without significant detriment to local transportation networks.

The Strategy for Infrastructure should not be interpreted as a programme of delivery. It is unlikely that public sector funding will be forthcoming to assist in the delivery of identified projects/needs and given the economic viability issues in large areas of the Borough, that they could be met through developer funding or a CIL. This Strategy therefore is intended to provide an overview of the areas of infrastructure ‘strain’ and the priorities which will guide the Council in its negotiations with developers, discussions with infrastructure providers and external funding agencies.

Community Infrastructure Levy

The Council has not as yet decided whether it will adopt a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). A key consideration will be whether adopting a CIL would compromise development viability. This will be especially important in those parts of the Borough where the Local Plan identifies the bulk of development will occur – the south western area, including Workington and Maryport – where land values and development yields are low.

Any future CIL would be based on the infrastructure needs and priorities identified in this (and any successor/updated) document, and in accordance with the policies of the Local Plan. Pending the adoption of a CIL, developer contributions will be sought in accordance with guidance set out in Circular 05/2005.

50 7. List of indentified infrastructure projects

Project Identification source Funding sources Estimated Programmed Likely Criticality Cost timescale of Level delivery Road Workington Local Transport Plan Developers; Regional Growth £10-20m No Post 2020 2 Network Southern Link Fund; Major Schemes Port Access Port of Workington Developers; Regional Growth £10-20m No Post 2020 2 bridge Development Plan Fund; Major Schemes Corus/Derwent Planning Application Local Pinch Points £1-5m No Post 2020 2 Howe route Programme; Major Schemes Wigton Eastern Local Transport Plan Developers; Regional Growth £10-20m No Post 2020 3 Bypass Fund; Major Schemes B5300 Local Transport Plan Major Schemes £5-10m No Post 2020 3 Realignment Village speed Community Travel Developer Contributions; £50-100k No Pre 2020 3 management Plan Transport Capital Programme Trial Schools Community Travel Developer Contributions; £50-100k No Pre 2020 3 "20mph" Plan Transport Capital Programme Maryport King Community Travel Transport Capital Programme £50-100k No Pre 2020 3 Street Plan Improvements A595/596 Community Travel Transport Capital Programme £200-500k No Pre 2020 3 Review Plan Public Workington Local Pinch Points £1-2m No Post 2020 2 Nuclear New Build Transport Station Hub Programme; Major Schemes Maryport Local Pinch Points £500k-1m No Post 2020 2 Nuclear New Build Station Hub Programme; Major Schemes Customer Community Travel Train Operators; Transport TBC No Pre 2020 3 Information Plan Capital Programme System at Railway Stations Customer Community Travel Transport Capital Programme £25k No Pre 2020 3 Information Plan

51 System at Bus Stops Wigton Station Community Travel Transport Capital Programme TBC No Post 2020 3 Hub Plan Cycling/ Hadrians Wall Hadrians Wall Major Schemes; Transport £100-200k No Pre 2020 3 Pedestrian Cycleway Management Plan Capital Programme; DfT Extension Cycling funds Crosby – Community Travel Transport Capital Programme £200-500k No Pre 2020 3 Maryport dual Plan use route Fletchertown Community Travel Transport Capital Programme £100-200k No Pre 2020 3 Mealsgate Plan Improvements Bessemer way Community Travel Transport Capital Programme £100-200k No Pre 2020 3 cycle link Plan Bridgefoot Community Travel Transport Capital Programme £20-50k No Pre 2020 3 footway Plan Water and Upgrade to United Utilities UU Asset Management Plan TBC No Post 2020 2 wastewater Cockermouth Investment Plan WwTW Waste and New HWRC at Waste and Minerals CCC Capital Programme £1-2m Yes Pre 2020 3 recycling Lillyhall, Local Plan Workington Flooding Improved flood EA Flood risk and EA Capital Programme £4-5m Yes Pre 2020 2 defences at coastal management Cockermouth schemes Education New Energy West Cumbria Nuclear Decommissioning £10m Yes Pre 2020 2 Coast Campus Economic Blueprint Agency Healthcare New Maryport NHS Cumbria Clinical Public-private TBC TBC No Pre 2020 3 cottage hospital Commissioning Group New Wigton NHS Cumbria Clinical Public-private TBC TBC No Pre 2020 3 cottage hospital Commissioning Group Sports and New Allerdale Council TBC TBC No Pre 2020 3 leisure Workington Plan sports centre

52 Appendix A Provision Standards Analysis (Quantity) Existing Population Primary Secondary Further GP Community Dental Elderly Swimming Sports Indoor Synthetic Open Provisions Education Education Education Surgeries Hospitals Surgeries Care Pools Halls Bowls Turfs Spaces (People) (Places) (Places) (Places) (Places) (Beds) (Places) (Beds) (Pools) (Halls) (Centres) (Pitches) (Hectares) Existing Provision

Workington 30,656 2,538 2,210 N/A 37,950 14 25,500 476 2 6 0 0 221.74 Locality Maryport 15,171 1,279 1,053 N/A 14,000 16 8,100 193 1 3 0 1 60.40 Locality Cockermouth 15,405 1,248 1,363 N/A 17,700 11 37,300 104 1 3 0 1 42.45 Locality Wigton 14,605 1,270 1,499 N/A 17,500 30 10,400 113 1 3 0 0 29.28 Locality Aspatria 6,577 520 350 N/A 9,400 0 6,500 21 0 2 0 0 47.39 Locality Silloth 4,936 336 295 N/A 5,721 0 2,900 111 0 2 0 0 locality Allerdale 87,350 7,191 6,880 N/A 102,271 71 90,700 1,018 5 19 0 2 401.26 Provision Standards (per 1,000 71.27 68.52 N/A 1054.32 0.52 1015.54 10.64 0.04 0.07 0.01 0.03 4.89 people) 2009 Balance (Baseline Estimates) Workington 321 208 N/A 3,850 N/A 500 42 N/A N/A N/A N/A 71.83 Locality Maryport 223 265 N/A 500 N/A 500 26 N/A N/A N/A N/A -13.79 Locality Cockermouth 26 0 N/A 600 N/A 300 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A -32.88 Locality Wigton 175 128 N/A 2,160 N/A 100 8 N/A N/A N/A N/A -42.14 Locality Aspatria 164 184 N/A 1,470 N/A 500 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A -8.91 Locality Silloth 57 110 N/A 1,500 N/A 0 7 N/A N/A N/A N/A Locality Allerdale 966 895 N/A 10,080 N/A 1,900 88 1.16 13.18 -1.14 -0.42 -25.88

53 Appendix B: Strategy for Infrastructure Consultation Document

54 55

56 57

58 59

60

61

62 63

64

65 66 67 68 69

70

71 72 73

74