Public Document Pack

SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL South Lakeland House Kendal, Cumbria LA9 4UQ www.southlakeland.gov.uk

You are requested to attend a meeting of the Cabinet on Wednesday, 23 July 2014, at 10.00 am in the District Council Chamber, South Lakeland House, Kendal

Membership

Councillors

Giles Archibald Town Centres and Small Business Portfolio Holder Jonathan Brook Strategic Growth Portfolio Holder Chris Hogg Culture, Arts and Events Portfolio Holder Sue Sanderson Environment and People Portfolio Holder Peter Thornto n Leader of the Council and Promoting South Lakeland and Finance Portfolio Holder Graham Vincent Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder Janet Willis Deputy Leader of the Council and Innovation and Improvement Portfolio Holder

Monday, 14 July 2014

Debbie Storr, Director of Policy and Resources (Monitoring Officer)

For all enquiries, please contact:- Committee Administrator: Inge Booth Telephone: 01539 793190 e-mail: [email protected] AGENDA

Page Nos. PART I

1 APOLOGIES To receive apologies for absence, if any. 2 CABINET EXECUTIVE DECISIONS 5 - 16 To authorise the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the Executive Decisions made by Cabinet on 25 June 2014 (copy attached). 3 DELEGATED EXECUTIVE DECISIONS 17 - 18 To receive the Delegated Executive Decisions made by Portfolio Holders or Officers on 3 July 2014 (copy attached). 4 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST To receive declarations by Members of interests in respect of items on this Agenda. Members are reminded that, in accordance with the revised Code of Conduct, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests. (It is a criminal offence not to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest either in the Register or at the meeting.) Members may, however, also decide, in the interests of clarity and transparency, to declare at this point in the meeting, any such disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared in the Register, as well as any other registrable or other interests. If a Member requires advice on any item involving a possible declaration of interest which could affect his/her ability to speak and/or vote, he/she is advised to contact the Monitoring Officer at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. 5 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 - EXCLUDED ITEMS To consider whether the item in Part II of the Agenda should be considered in the presence of the press and public. 6 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Any member of the public who wishes to ask a question, make representations or present a deputation or petition at this meeting should apply to do so before the commencement of the meeting. Information on how to make the application can be obtained by viewing the Council’s Website www.southlakeland.gov.uk or by contacting the Democratic and Electoral Services Manager on 01539 793186. (1) Questions and Representations To receive any questions or representations which have been received from members of the public. (2) Deputations and Petitions To receive any deputations or petitions which have been received from members of the public. 7 PROGR ESS REPORT 19 - 22 To note progress in relation to outstanding Executive Decisions as at 14 July 2014. 8 NOTICES OF INTENTION TO TAKE KEY DECISIONS/EXECUTIVE 23 - 28 DECISIONS IN PRIVATE To note the contents of the Notices published on 11 July 2014 (copies attached). 9 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE NOMINATIONS TO CUMBRIA HEALTH AND WELLBEING SCRUTINY COMMITTEE To approve the nominations made by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 15 July 2014 to the Cumbria Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee for 2014/15 (representative and substitute), details to be reported verbally at the meeting. 10 MEMBER PAYMENTS ANNUAL REPORT 2013/14 29 - 34 To provide details of allowances paid to Members and Co-optees in the Financial Year 2013/14. 11 REVENUE AND CAPITAL OUTTURN 2013/14 35 - 60 To consider the 2013/14 year end position as presented in the report. 12 TREASURY MANAGEMENT ANNUAL REPORT 2013/14 61 - 74 To consider the 20013/14 Treasury Management Annual Report. 13 DRAFT MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 75 - 162 To consider the draft Medium Term Financial Plan. 14 WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE CAPITAL GRANT 163 - 166 To consider the establishment of a budget to receive a grant to enable householders in South Lakeland to purchase food waste digesters at a discounted price. 15 PROPOSED SHARED USE ROUTE THROUGH ROTHAY PARK, 167 - 196 AMBLESIDE To consider the proposed shared use of the path through Rothay Park in Ambleside. 16 LAND AT CROSS -A-MOOR, SWARTHMOOR, DRAFT DEVELOPMENT 197 - 328 BRIEF To consider approval of the Land at Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor, Draft Development Brief, for a six week public consultation. 17 REGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS ACT 2000 - ANNUAL 329 - 350 REVIEW To review the operation of the Council’s surveillance policies and practices under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. PART II

Private Section (exempt reasons under Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, specified by way of paragraph number)

18 PROPERTY SEARCHES LITIGATION - Paragraph 3, 5 - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) - Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings. To receive a report from the Director of Policy and Resources. Papers copies of this report have been circulated on a restricted basis. 1 Item No.2 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

EXECUTIVE DECISION NOTICE

CABINET

A record of the decisions made at the meeting of the Cabinet held on Wednesday, 25 June 2014, at 10.00 am.

Present Councillors Peter Thornton (Leader of the Council and Promoting South Lakeland and Finance Portfolio Holder) (Chairman) Giles Archibald Town Centres and Small Business Portfolio Holder Jonathan Brook Strategic Growth Portfolio Holder Chris Hogg Culture, Arts and Events Portfolio Holder Sue Sanderson Environment and People Portfolio Holder Graham Vincent Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder Janet Willis Deputy Leader of the Council and Innovation and Improvement Portfolio Holder

Also in attendance at the meeting were Shadow Executive Members Roger Bingham, Tom Harvey, John Holmes, Janette Jenkinson and David Williams. Councillor Mark Wilson was also present. Apologies for absence were received from Shadow Executive Members James Airey and Ben Berry. Officers Inge Booth Senior Democratic Services Officer Lawrence Conway Chief Executive Phil Greenup Public Protection Manager Julie Jackson Senior Housing Strategy Officer Michael Keane Assistant Director Strategic Planning Caroline Leigh Economic Development and Asset Group Manager Richard Machin Senior Communications Officer Sandip Mahajan Democratic Services/Scrutiny Officer Shelagh McGregor Assistant Director Resources (Section 151 Officer) Nick Pearson Street Scene Manager Alan Raven Revenues and Benefits Manager Simon Rowley Assistant Director Neighbourhood Services Debbie Storr Director of Policy and Resources (Monitoring Officer) David Sykes Director of People and Places

CEX/1 CABINET EXECUTIVE DECISIONS

RESOLVED – That the Chairman be authorised to sign, as a correct record, the Executive Decisions made by Cabinet on 14 May 2014.

Page 5 2 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

CEX/2 DELEGATED EXECUTIVE DECISIONS

RESOLVED – That the Delegated Executive Decisions made by Portfolio Holders or Officers on 8 and 22 May and 5 June 2014 be received.

CEX/3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

RESOLVED – That it be noted that no declarations of interest were made.

CEX/4 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 - EXCLUDED ITEMS

RESOLVED – That, should discussion be necessary, the item in Part II of the Agenda be dealt with following the exclusion of the press and public.

CEX/5 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The Leader informed Members that an application to speak had been received from Shaun Halfpenny to speak in relation to the item on Government Flood Repair and Renewal Grant. Mr Halfpenny having not yet arrived at the meeting, the Leader undertook to allow him to speak prior to discussion on the item, should he be present at that stage.

RESOLVED – That it be noted that an application to speak had been received from a member of the public in respect of this meeting.

CEX/6 CABINET PORTFOLIOS AND SCHEME OF DELEGATION

Further to announcements made by the Leader at the Annual meeting of the Council on 10 June 2014, Members were provided with an updated copy of the document outlining the Allocation of Portfolios to Cabinet Members and the Scheme of Delegation for the discharge of the Executive functions of the Council.

The Shadow Executive Leader, Councillor David Williams, was invited to announce the allocation of portfolios to the Shadow Executive, which were as follows:-

• Shadow Leader and Promoting South Lakeland and Finance Portfolio – Councillor David Williams • Shadow Deputy Leader and Innovation and Improvement Portfolio – Councillor Tom Harvey • Culture, Arts and Events Portfolio – Councillor Roger Bingham • Environment and People Portfolio – Councillor Janette Jenkinson • Health and Wellbeing Portfolio (and assistance with Finance Portfolio) – Councillor Ben Berry • Strategic Growth Portfolio – Councillor John Holmes • Town Centres and Small Business Portfolio – Councillor James Airey

Page 6 3 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

RESOLVED – That the allocation of Portfolios to Cabinet Members by the Leader be noted and the respective Cabinet Job Descriptions be signed by each Cabinet Member.

CEX/7 CABINET APPOINTMENTS TO/REPRESENTATION ON OUTSIDE BODIES 2014/15

Summary

Cabinet was asked to give consideration to the appointments of representatives to serve on outside bodies for the year 2014/15.

Decision

RESOLVED – That the following appointments of representatives to serve on outside bodies for 2014/15 be made:-

(1) Community Safety Partnership – Councillor Graham Vincent;

(2) County Council Local Committee for South Lakeland – Councillors Peter Thornton and Graham Vincent;

(3) Cumbria Leadership Group – Councillor Peter Thornton;

(4) Cumbria Partnership Forum – Councillor Peter Thornton;

(5) Furness Enterprise Supervisory Board – Councillor Jonathan Brook;

(6) Lancaster Canal Northern Reaches Restoration Group (Executive) – Councillor Peter Thornton;

(7) Lancaster Canal Northern Reaches Restoration Group (Steering Group) – Councillor Roger Bingham, Councillor Brian Cooper, Councillor Shelia Eccles, Councillor David Evans, Councillor Clare Feeney-Johnson, Councillor Brenda Grey, Councillor Phil Walker and Councillor Graham Vincent;

(8) Local Enterprise Partnership – Councillor Peter Thornton (second year of two year appointment on rotation with Leader of Barrow Borough Council);

(9) Local Government Association Rural Commission – Councillor Stan Collins; (9) One South Lakeland – Councillor Peter Thornton; (10) Safer Cumbria – Councillor Graham Vincent; and (11) South Lakes Housing – Councillor Giles Archibald (to September 2014).

Page 7 4 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

Reasons for Decision

To assist in the delivery of the Council Plan through partnership working.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not to appoint representatives to Outside Bodies – this would affect the Council’s ability to influence partners on important strategic issues.

CEX/8 PROGRESS REPORT

Consideration was given to progress in relation to the implementation of Executive Decisions as at 16 June 2014. Comments were raised as follows:-

EX/055 – New Road Common Land – In response to a query raised, it was reported that the possible options available were either for the site to remain as common land and be managed appropriately or seek to have its status changed and greater flexibility in use and management. In the interim, only maintenance work to address health and safety requirements would be considered.

CEX/92 – Council-owned Land and Property – Stock Ghyll Cottage and Adjacent Building, Stock Ghyll Lane, Ambleside – The Assistant Director (Strategic Planning) undertook to provide Members with an update on the result of the recent auction of the property.

CEX/112 – Langstone House, Windermere – Declare Surplus to Requirements with an Option for Affordable Homes or Open Market Disposal – The Leader confirmed that Windermere Town Council had requested further discussion with the District Council on the future use of Langstone House.

CEX/140 – Community Infrastructure Levy (KD29/2013) – In response to a query raised, Members were advised that the public consultation period was now over. Parish Councils had been included, CALC having been provided with a full presentation. A full report to Cabinet in August would confirm the next stages of the process.

RESOLVED – That the Executive Decisions Progress Report, as at 16 June 2014, be noted.

CEX/9 NOTICES OF INTENTION TO TAKE KEY DECISIONS/EXECUTIVE DECISIONS IN PRIVATE

RESOLVED – That the contents of the Notices published on 13 June 2014 be noted.

Page 8 5 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

CEX/10 DISCRETIONARY BUSINESS RATES NEW BUILD EMPTY PROPERTY RELIEF (KD40/2014)

Summary

The Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder advised that the proposals contained within the report aimed to stimulate construction. Construction decisions took into account the risk of paying empty property rates on newly built commercial property if the property did not become fully occupied straight away. Reducing the risk might persuade some commercial property projects to go ahead that might not otherwise.

Government guidance detailing the operation and funding arrangements for the Business Rates New Build Empty Property Relief Scheme had been issued in September 2013. The policy was for a new build exemption from the payment of unoccupied Business Rates for the first 18 months following completion, if completed after 1 October 2013 and before 30 September 2016. Total relief would be up to State Aid De Minimis Limits.

It was for each local authority to adopt a local scheme and to decide in each individual case when to grant relief under Section 47 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988, as amended.

Central Government would fully reimburse local authorities for the local share of the discretionary rate relief using a grant under Section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003. The Government expected local authorities to grant relief to qualifying ratepayers.

Decision

RESOLVED – That

(1) the Business Rates New Build Empty Property Relief Scheme, as specified in the guidance issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government to support local authorities in administering the scheme announced in September 2013, be adopted; and

(2) the identification and determination of qualifying properties and ratepayers be delegated to the Assistant Director (Resources) and Section 151 Officer subject to the arrangement for appeals as set out in the Guidelines for determining applications for discretionary rate relief under the Localism Act 2011 agreed by Cabinet on 29 January 2014 (Minute CEX/123). Reasons for Decision To assist in the delivery of the Council Plan – Economy – Enabling and delivering opportunities for sustainable economic growth – We will achieve inward investment to at least three major employment sites creating 1000 new jobs in South Lakeland – We will help our towns and villages to thrive commercially whilst retaining their distinctive character.

Page 9 6 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

As the award of relief is discretionary, the Council could choose not to grant the relief if that is considered appropriate, for example, if Members consider the awarding of relief would not be in accordance with the Authority’s wider objectives. For this reason, Government is encouraging Members to be consulted on the scheme to be adopted.

CEX/11 GOVERNMENT FLOOD REPAIR AND RENEWAL GRANT

Further to CEX/5, Shaun Halfpenny, having arrived at the meeting, addressed Cabinet prior to Members’ discussion on the item. He was the representative of a number of householders who had got together to form a group to speak out on flooding issues in the Canal Foot, South Ulverston Area. Cumbria County Council not having taken up the scheme, Mr Halfpenny welcomed the report and urged Members to approve the recommendations contained therein. He, however, wished to add a suggestion to pool monies for the installation of a flood gate in order to seal off tidal surge.

Summary

The Environment and People Portfolio Holder presented a report to enable Cabinet to consider the introduction and implementation of the Government’s Repair and Renew Grant Scheme which provided grants of up to £5,000 for homes and businesses that had been flooded, to fund additional flood resilience or resistance measures. Local authorities were responsible for the administration of the Scheme, which was to cover needs arising from the flooding of winter 2013-14. To be eligible for the Scheme, householders and businesses must have suffered internal flood damage between 1 December 2013 and 1 March 2014. The Government would reimburse local authorities that provided the Repair and Renew Grant Scheme in line with the eligibility criteria under Section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003. It was highlighted that, as Cumbria County Council as lead local flood authority had made a decision not to administer the scheme, the District Council would deliver it for the benefit of affected local communities.

The Public Protection Manager provided clarification to a number of technical queries raised by Members and, in particular, drew attention to the fact that the measures referred to related to “reducing” risk rather than “preventing” risk of flooding.

Councillor Mark Wilson, Ward Member for Ulverston East, expressed thanks to officers for their work on this matter and talked about the excellent work being done in general in relation to flood defence within the area.

Members were keen to ensure that the scheme was made available to anybody who was eligible to use it and that it was suitably publicised.

Page 10 7 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

Decision

RESOLVED – That

(1) the Repair and Renew Grant Scheme as announced by the Government on 12 February 2014 be adopted;

(2) an appropriate budget be established; and

(3) the identification, determination and payment of the grant to qualifying properties be delegated to the Director of People and Places.

Reasons for Decision

The scheme links directly to the Council Plan Priority of “Providing Housing to Meet Need.”

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

As the Repair and Renew Grant Scheme is discretionary, the Council could choose not to participate in the Scheme. This is not recommended, as residents and businesses of South Lakeland would not benefit from this grant assistance.

CEX/12 STRATEGIC HOUSING MARKET ASSESSMENT UPDATE 2014 (KD34/2014)

Summary

The Strategic Growth Portfolio Holder informed Members that the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) was a key piece of evidence supporting the provision of housing, particularly affordable housing. The 2014 Update highlighted the fact that less people could now afford market housing than was the case in 2011. The purpose of this report was to present an update of the 2011 South Lakeland District Council SHMA which had been commissioned by the Council from housing consultants Arc4 and to request adoption of the 2014 report as South Lakeland District Council’s SHMA.

The Portfolio Holder expressed thanks to officers for their work in the production of the document, and in particular to the Senior Housing Strategy Officer. He also suggested that a presentation could be arranged on the subject prior to a forthcoming Council meeting and Members agreed that this would be a helpful session. Members were also keen to ensure that the document was brought to the attention of town and parish councils, local areas partnerships and ward groups.

The Senior Housing Strategy Officer provided answers to a number of technical queries which were raised.

Page 11 8 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

Decision

RESOLVED – That

(1) the findings of the 2014 Strategic Housing Market Assessment update report be noted;

(2) the report be adopted as the Council’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment (to replace the 2011 version); and

(3) a briefing session on the subject be arranged to be held for all Members prior to a forthcoming Council meeting.

Reasons for Decision

The SHMA relates to the Council’s priority of ‘providing homes to meet need’ and subsequent target to provide 1,000 affordable homes to rent over the period 2014-2025 providing a key evidence base to support affordable housing provision. Evidence from the SHMA update portrays deterioration since 2011 in the ability of households, and particularly newly forming households, to afford market housing. Therefore, this evidence supports the Council’s approach in planning policy in relation to the housing target of 400 per annum and strengthens the need for additional affordable homes. Increasing the supply of affordable housing provides opportunities for working age households to live and work within the District ‘creating opportunities for economic growth’.

The SHMA presents evidence of the need to address the condition of housing in the private sector where damp and cold conditions can have a significant impact on health and wellbeing. The Council has a limited budget to assist landlords with renovation grants and is launching a landlord accreditation scheme to drive up standards.

Evidence is provided on the need for older people’s housing and the sorts of assistance and adaptations that will help older people remain independent and prevent unnecessary hospital admissions. Supported housing provision set out in Chapter 4 highlights the preventative services currently provided that prevent more costly health and social care services. Evidence shows that the Council’s approach on preventing homelessness and policy to discharge the homeless duty into the private rented sector is having a positive effect on homeless applications which have reduced significantly. Research shows the detrimental effects homelessness can have on health (including mental health) and wellbeing.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

The Council could decide not to adopt the 2014 SHMA update. However, this is not recommended, as the Council would not have an up-to-date robust evidence base to support planning and housing policy assisting in the delivery of affordable homes.

Page 12 9 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

CEX/13 LITTER REVIEW

Summary

Councillor Nick Cotton, Chairman of the Litter Task and Finish Group, was unable to attend the meeting and the Environment and People Portfolio Holder presented the findings and recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Review of Litter in the District. The Task and Finish Group had reviewed litter as a District-wide issue and how it could be tackled to improve the environment for all people, including residents, businesses and visitors. This meant identifying best practice, promoting individual responsibility whilst raising awareness across the District, and how best to work with partners at local level to make effective flexible use of limited resources in tackling common goals. Enhanced communications had been seen as central, with partners sharing relevant information, such as location of “hot spot” litter areas and optimising available resources across the partners through to effective signage.

The report contained the Task and Finish Group’s recommendations for improving working practices and relationships. In addition, advice from the Assistant Director (Neighbourhood Services) and the Street Scene Manager had been attached at Appendix 1 to the report to help to identify whether the recommendations were achievable, were already being pursued or if alternative solutions might be more appropriate. Alongside this, a practical approach for timetabling implementation of agreed recommendations had been suggested.

The Group’s recommendations had been considered in detail by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 8 May 2014 and accepted, with a revised Recommendation 8.

The Portfolio Holder thanked the Task and Finish Group and the Street Scene Manager for their work on the review.

Decision

RESOLVED – That following consideration of the responses provided at Appendix 1 to the report, the following be approved:-

(1) improving community education with regard to litter prevention by initiating a litter awareness campaign throughout the District highlighting all aspects including the high costs of litter collection; (2) parish and town councils be informed:- • South Lakeland District Council (SLDC) encourages a more active approach with regard to volunteer litter picks; • from a road safety aspect which road verges can be litter picked by volunteers and those areas which are private or dangerous areas; and • of the problems with regard to gulley and verge cleansing adjacent to roads, these should be explored with Cumbria County Council with a view achieving a more effective and efficient service;

Page 13 10 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

(3) events organisers be given a protocol to follow before and after events have taken place with regard to waste generated on event days together with a list of charges should they require the Council to clean up after the event. Organisers also to be made aware of other areas outside the events site such as approach roads which may need to be cleaned by the Council as a consequence of an event and they be requested to contribute to the cost;

(4) parish and town councils be approached with regard to the following:-

• co-operation and communication be embraced with regard to the effectiveness and efficiency of litter collection; • to take part in a survey asking for their views on the District Council’s performance with regard to the litter collection service; • relevant SLDC Officers discussing the issue of litter in general; • the provision of a service schedule detailing what the Council currently provides; • what SLDC can provide additionally without cost; • discuss the promotion of voluntary litter picking; and • awareness of the options and services available for the provision of more bins;

(5) SLDC to contact the Lake District National Park Authority to underline the problems with litter on their car parks and remind the Authority of its legal duties with a view to the Authority addressing those problems;

(6) SLDC explore the possibility that waste collection vehicles empty litter bins and encourage flexible operations and working with others where operationally possible; and

(7) when new developments in the District are going through the planning process, their green routes and paths consider the efficiency of Streetscene operations to be accommodated. Also, that all large development plans consider the practicalities and needs of litter and waste collection in their design and this would need to be taken up with the Highways Department, Cumbria County Council.

Reasons for Decision

To assist in the delivery of the Council Plan - ‘Protecting our Environment’ (Quality of Life) through litter prevention and cleaner local environments. Achieving these goals may also make the District more attractive to businesses (e.g. retailers) and visitors so supports the Economy priority.

Page 14 11 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

The range off working methods and patterns for Streetscene and partnership working have been investigated together with community involvement.

CEX/14 CASTLE DAIRY ROOF REPLACEMENT (KD39/2014)

No members of the press and public being present, and Members feeling that some discussion would need to be held in relation to Appendix 1 to the report which contained exempt information, a vote was taken to move into Part II.

CEX/15 PRESS AND PUBLIC

RESOLVED – That, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12 A of the Act as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006 by virtue of the Paragraph indicated.

CEX/16 CASTLE DAIRY ROOF REPLACEMENT (KD39/2014) - APPENDIX 1

- Paragraph 3 - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

Summary

The Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder reported that a structural survey having being carried out by a specialist conservation Surveyor, the sandstone slates on the roof of Castle Dairy needed replacing. The slates had to be sources from Ladycross Quarry in Hexham and Listed Building Consent had to be approved before works could proceed. A tender exercise had been carried out and six responses received, all of which had been higher than the original estimate. Additional capital funding was, therefore, requested to complete the replacement roof.

The Culture, Arts and Events Portfolio Holder advised that a full photographical record had been requested for historical evidence.

Members considered the financial implications of the proposal.

Decision RESOLVED – That (1) approval be given to the additional funding for the works for the roof replacement at Castle Dairy, as detailed in Part II Appendix 1 to the report; and (2) the contract for the work be awarded to the tenderer identified in Part II Appendix 1 to the report.

Page 15 12 25.06.2014 Cabinet Executive Decisions

Reasons for Decision

To assist in the delivery of the Council Plan – Environment – protects our environment. Maintaining a Grade 1 listed building will ensure that the District’s high quality environment is enhanced and makes a positive contribution to its quality of life.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not to carry out any work to the roof. This option is not feasible, as the roof is in a poor state of repair, is leaking and is in need of replacement.

To replace the sandstone roof with Westmorland slate. This option is enhanced and makes a positive contribution to its quality of life.

The meeting ended at 12.10 pm

Page 16 Item No.3 1 03.07.2014 Delegated Executive Decisions

DELEGATED EXECUTIVE DECISIONS

A record of delegated decisions made by individual Portfolio holders or officers week ending Friday, 4 July 2014.

The reports (unless exempt under Section 100(B)(2) of the Local Government Act 1972, on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12 A of the Act as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006 by virtue of the Paragraphs indicated and, in all the circumstances of the case, it is considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing it) are available for inspection from the Democratic and Electoral Services Manager, South Lakeland House, Kendal.

DEX/1 APPLICATION FOR RATE RELIEF ON GROUNDS OF HARDSHIP (DIRECTOR POLICY AND RESOURCES (MONITORING OFFICER))

Summary

Consideration was given to an application for Rate Relief on the grounds of hardship.

Decision

In respect of Case Ref. No.53045688, the application for Rate Relief on the grounds of hardship made by Underwood’s Consultants and Chartered Surveyors on behalf of Team Wizard Limited in respect of Holmescales Activity Centre be refused as:-

(1) it has not been sufficiently demonstrated that hardship is being experienced as a consequence of the Valuation Office Agency including an assessment in the Local rating List backdated to 1 st April 2010;

(2) the rateable value allocated to the property is based purely on estimated receipts of the business and it would not be in the interests of persons liable to pay the Council Tax set by this Council to award relief under these circumstances;

(3) the number of people employed in the business and services provided do not meet the Council’s guidelines to be in the interests of persons subject to pay the Council Tax set by this Council, and

(4) a long term payment arrangement be offered to clear the debt.

Page 17 2 03.07.2014 Delegated Executive Decisions

Reason for Decision

It has not been sufficiently demonstrated that hardship is being experienced or it is in the interests of Council Taxpayers to award relief.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

The application could be approved. This would involve the Council under the Business Rate Retention Scheme meeting 40% of the costs of the award. However this was not recommended.

Page 18 23 July 2014 EXECUTIVE DECISIONS - PROGRESS REPORT (as at14 July 2014)

Executive Decision Report Title Action Required or Date Officer Progress or Outcome of Cabinet Decision Ref. Date Completed Completion Report Due

EX/055 15.7.11 New Road Common Land Implement decisions David Sykes March 2014. The Canal tbc [Michael Keane] Head development scheme, as envisaged by the previous Progress Report, is no longer likely to proceed. Cabinet wish for the options to be further investigated before proposals for New Road are considered.

Page 19 CEX/153 20.3.13 Council Tax Premium - Policy guidelines to be Shelagh McGregor Full Council agreed policy Oct-14 Policy Guidelines for reviewed in 2013/14 in for local exceptions to Determining Local conjunction with general Council Tax Premium in Exceptions review of discounts March 2013. A review has been undertaken and Cabinet approved that the Policy remains unchanged during the next financial year. It will be reviewed

again by the end of Item No.7 October. 23 July 2014 EXECUTIVE DECISIONS - PROGRESS REPORT (as at14 July 2014)

Executive Decision Report Title Action Required or Date Officer Progress or Outcome of Cabinet Decision Ref. Date Completed Completion Report Due

CEX/68 18.9.13 National Green Deal and Contract/Initiative to be David Sykes Jan-15 Energy Company reviewed before expiry [Michael Keane] Obligation (ECO) (April 2015) and reported Schemes and Funding for back to Cabinet. the Council's New Draught Busters Scheme (KD16/2013) CEX/85 30.10.13 Annual Review of the Refer to Council. Shelagh McGregor Council approved the October 2014 Local Council Tax Recommendations in the Cabinet Reduction Scheme Report.

Page 20 CEX/86 30.10.13 Review of Council Tax Refer to Council. Shelagh McGregor Council approved the October 2014 Discounts and the Council Recommendations in the Cabinet Tax Premium Report. CEX/87 30.10.13 Review of the Implement subject to Shelagh McGregor October 2014 Discretionary Rate Relief comments from O&S. Cabinet Policies CEX/89 30.10.13 Assessing the Impact of Further report to Cabinet Shelagh McGregor Dependant on information tbc Universal Credit when further details and coming through from Council's role established central government. with the DWP. 23 July 2014 EXECUTIVE DECISIONS - PROGRESS REPORT (as at14 July 2014)

Executive Decision Report Title Action Required or Date Officer Progress or Outcome of Cabinet Decision Ref. Date Completed Completion Report Due

CEX/92 30.10.13 Council-owned Land and Final decision on any such Debbie Storr The property failed to Oct-14 Property - Stock Ghyll transfer of trusteeship to [Matthew Neal] meet its reserve at the Cottage and Adjacent be subject to further report Pugh and Co auction on Building, Stock Ghyll to Cabinet. 12th June 2014. Ongoing Lane, Ambleside discussions are taking place with under bidders with a view to agreeing a suitable value. If these discussions are unsuccesful then the property will have to be re-

Page 21 marketed.

CEX/111 11.12.13 Ulverston Asset Transfer Discussions to continue David Sykes Work in progress Aug-14 with Ulverston TC and [Michael Keane] support to Ulverston TC's application for further funding. CEX/112 11.12.13 Langstone House, Further report detailing David Sykes Work in progress Sep-14 Windermere - Declare options investigated and [Michael Keane] Surplus to Requirements recommendations for the with an Option for future of the building to be Affordable Homes or brought back to Cabinet. Open Market Disposal

CEX/140 12.2.14 Community Infrastructure Schedule approved for David Sykes Consultation is in progress tbc Levy (KD29/2013) public consultation prior to [Michael Keane] adoption by Council. 23 July 2014 EXECUTIVE DECISIONS - PROGRESS REPORT (as at14 July 2014)

Executive Decision Report Title Action Required or Date Officer Progress or Outcome of Cabinet Decision Ref. Date Completed Completion Report Due

CEX/187 14.5.14 Delivery of Building Further report to Cabinet David Sykes Lancaster City Council Dec-14 Control Services on to approve finalised [Michael Keane] have approved Behalf of Lancaster City delivery model. recommendation to Council continue present arrangements in principle.

CEX/12 25.6.14 Strategic Housing Market Arrange briefing session David Sykes Assessment Update 2014 for Members prior to [Michael Keane] (KD34/2014) forthcoming Council meeting. Page 22 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 NOTICE OF INTENTION OF KEY DECISIONS TO BE TAKEN Notice is hereby given, in accordance with Regulations 5 and 9 of the above Regulations that the following Key Decisions are to be considered by the Authority. The definition of a Key Decision is defined in Article 13.03 of the Council’s Constitution as being - A key decision means an executive decision which, in relation to an executive function, has a significant effect on communities in two or more Wards of the Council (or one Ward in respect of two-Member Wards) and/or is likely to result in the Authority incurring expenditure or making savings above £60,000. Where the Decision Maker is shown as being Cabinet, please note membership, as follows:- • Leader and Promoting South Lakeland Portfolio Holder – Councillor Peter Thornton Page 23 • Deputy Leader and Innovation and Improvement Portfolio Holder– Councillor Janet Willis • Environment and People Portfolio Holder – Councillor Sue Sanderson • Finance Portfolio Holder – Councillor David Evans • Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder – Councillor Graham Vincent • Strategic Growth Portfolio Holder – Councillor Jonathan Brook • Town Centres and Small Business Portfolio Holder – Councillor Giles Archibald

Item No.8

Key Matter to be Decision to Decision Date/ Documents being Lead Officer Deadline Decision decided be taken in Maker period submitted to decision Contact for repre- Ref No / private? in maker in relation to Information sentations Date added Y/N (if Yes, which the matter (i.e. in respect please quote de- background of reasons the relevant cision documents) why category of will be decision Schedule made to be 112A of the taken in local private * Government Act 1972) ) Page 24 KD41/2014 Award of contract Yes - Cabinet 27.8.14 n/a Caroline Leigh – 13 August Information c.leigh@southla 27.5.14 for the 2014 refurbishment of relating to the keland.gov.uk Milnthorpe Public financial or Convenience business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). (Paragraph 3)

KD42/2014 Consider approval No Cabinet 27.8.14 Cabinet Report to be Alastair McNeill, N/A 9.6.14 to publish and accompanied by an Development invite updated Community Plans Manager representations on Infrastructure Levy or Dan Hudson, a Draft Charging Viability Study, Development Schedule and its updated Infrastructure Strategy and subsequent Delivery Plan and Draft Housing submission for Charging Schedule. Manager. examination.

KD43/2014 Review of Local No Cabinet 27.8.14 Report – Local Lettings Julie N/A 13.6.14 Lettings Policy & & Local Connection Jackson/Laurie Local Connection Policy for Affordable Priebe – Senior Policy for Housing, plus Housing Page 25 Affordable Housing appendices. Strategy Allocations Policy on Officers. Cumbria Choice 01539 793371/2 Website. j.jackson@ southlakeland.g ov.uk laurie.priebe@ southlakeland.g ov.uk

Subject to any prohibition or restriction on their disclosure, the documents submitted to the decision maker as listed above can be viewed at the offices of South Lakeland District Council in South Lakeland House, Kendal, and on the Council’s Website. Please be aware, that other documents other than those listed may subsequently be submitted to the decision maker. If you wish to request details of those documents (if any) as they become available, please contact the appropriate Lead Officer as indicated above.

* Where it is indicated that a decision on the item may be taken in private and you wish to make representations in respect of the reasons why this decision will be taken in private please contact Democratic Services, South Lakeland District Council, South Lakeland House, Lowther Street, Kendal, Cumbria LA9 4UQ or email [email protected] by the date shown.

Debbie Storr Page 26 Director of Policy and Resources (Monitoring Officer)

Date 11 July 2014 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012

NOTICE OF INTENTION TO TAKE EXECUTIVE DECISION(S) IN PRIVATE Notice is hereby given in accordance with Regulation 5 of the above Regulations that the following matters are likely to be considered in private –

Date of Decision Matter to be decided Reasons why the matter is be decided Deadline for proposed Maker/ Meeting in private representations in decision/ respect of reasons why date decision to be taken in added private

Page 27 - Information relating to the financial or 29 October Cabinet Langstone House - 11 June 2014 2014 disposal business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). (Paragraph 3) - Information relating to the financial or 27 August Cabinet Award of contract for the 13 August 2014 2014 refurbishment of business affairs of any particular person Milnthorpe Public (including the authority holding that Convenience information). (Paragraph 3)

Should you wish to make representations in respect of the reasons why this decision will be taken in private please contact Democratic Services, South Lakeland District Council, South Lakeland House, Lowther Street, Kendal, Cumbria LA9 4UQ or email [email protected] by the date shown.

Debbie Storr, Director of Policy and Resources (Monitoring Officer)

Date 11 July 2014 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 28 Item No.10

South Lakeland District Council Cabinet 23 July 2014 Member Payments Annual Report 2013/14

PORTFOLIO: Councillor Peter Thornton - Finance Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: Shelagh McGregor - Assistant Director (Resources) and Section 151 Officer

REPORT AUTHOR: Dawn Bousfield - Payroll Officer June Lee - Financial Services Officer

WARDS: All Wards

KEY DECISION NO: Not applicable

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME 1.1 This report is presented to provide details of allowances paid to Members and co-optees in the financial year 2013/14 prior to their publication in the press. Officers will arrange to place a notice in the Westmorland Gazette and on the Council’s website based on the contents of Appendix 1 together with some short explanatory notes.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that Cabinet receive the report and acknowledge that the information at Appendix 1 will be published in the local press.

3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 The Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England) Regulations 2003 requires Local Authorities each year to publicise within the Council’s area details of the allowances paid to Members and Co-optees.

3.2 Members are asked to consider the attached details of allowances paid to Members prior to their publication in the press.

4.0 CONSULTATION 4.1 Not Applicable 5 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 There are no alternative options. The report is presented for information prior to wider publication in the local press.

Page 29 6 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 The payments to Members enable them in their role, which includes contributing to the priorities in the Council Plan. 7 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial and Resources 7.1.1 The revenue cost in 2013/14 was £280,454 compared to £291,430 in 2012/13. The details of the 2013/14 payments are shown in Appendix 1. 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 This report has no direct impact on the staffing of the Council. 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 There are no direct legal consequences of this report. 7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 Not applicable. This is a retrospective report on Member Allowance payments. 7.5 Equality and Diversity 7.5.1 Not applicable. This is a retrospective report on Member Allowance payments.

7.6 Risk

Risk Consequence Controls required Non Publication of Failure to meet Ensure publication in details of allowances legislative requirement press

CONTACT OFFICERS June Lee Financial Services Officer 01539 793152 [email protected] Dawn Bousfield Payroll Officer 01539 793294 d.bousfield @southlakeland.gov.uk

APPENDICES ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT

Appendix No. 1 Member Payments 2013/14

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE Name of Background Where it is available document 2012/13 Member payments http://tinyurl.com/oawb5ez

Page 30 TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 19/6/2014 24/6/2014 n/a 19/6/2014 n/a Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer 23/7/2014 n/a n/a 19/6/2014 19/6/2014 Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s) Services Manager n/a n/a n/a

Page 31 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 32 APPENDIX 1

COUNCILLORS ALLOWANCES 2013/2014

The purpose of this appendix is to detail the amounts paid to Councillors during the financial year ended 31 March 2014.

Special Dependant Travel and Co-optee Basic Total Resp. Carers Subsistence Allowance £ £ £ £ £ £ Airey James 3,879.96 347.23 4,227.19 Airey Caroline 3,879.96 3,879.96 Archibald Giles 0.00 0.00 Berry Ben 3,879.96 504.96 4,384.92 Bingham Roger 3,879.96 504.96 222.30 4,607.22 Boden Robert 3,879.96 3,879.96 Brook Jonathan 3,879.96 6,060.00 472.40 10,412.36 Clough John 3,879.96 180.00 4,059.96 Coleman Stephen 3,879.96 1,863.00 5,742.96 Collins Stanley 3,879.96 3,879.96 Cooper Brian 3,879.96 490.50 4,370.46 Cotton Nicholas 3,879.96 403.20 4,283.16 Curwen Joss 3,879.96 836.75 4,716.71 Dawson Julie 3,879.96 3,879.96 Dixon Philip 3,879.96 49.50 3,929.46 Eccles Sheila 3,879.96 1,863.00 299.70 6,042.66 Emmott Sylvia 3,879.96 1,863.00 5,742.96 Evans David 3,879.96 6,060.00 238.40 10,178.36 Feeney-Johnson 3,879.96 1,002.39 72.75 4,955.10 Clare Fletcher David 3,879.96 3,879.96 Gardiner Andrew 3,879.96 434.37 4,314.33 Gardiner Gillian 3,879.96 303.30 4,183.26 Graham Clive 3,879.96 3,879.96 Gray Brenda 3,879.96 1,863.00 332.10 6,075.06 Hall Doreen 3,879.96 3,879.96 HallIiday Heidi 3,879.96 3,879.96 Harvey Tom 3,879.96 504.96 4,384.92 Holland Christopher 3,879.96 3,879.96 Holmes John 3,879.96 504.96 857.25 5,242.17 Irving Helen 3,879.96 514.80 4,394.76 Jenkinson Janette 3,879.96 504.96 1,220.70 5,605.62 Jones Colin 2,252.53 91.80 2,344.33 Jupe Prudence 3,879.96 799.17 4,679.13 Lawson Sonia 3,879.96 3,879.96 McPherson Ian 3,879.96 2,328.96 426.15 6,635.07 Orr Mary 1,638.21 1,638.21 Page 33 Special Dependant Travel and Co -optee Basic Total Resp. Carers Subsistence Allowance £ £ £ £ £ £ Rajan Bharath 3,879.96 1,049.75 4,929.71 Rawlinson Annie 1,720.95 1,720.95 Rees Vivienne 3,879.96 597.40 4,477.36 Rigg Amanda 3,879.96 3,879.96 Ryder David 3,879.96 193.50 4,073.46 Sanderson Susan 3,879.96 5,212.90 2,495.95 11,588.81 Shine Andy 3,879.96 1,863.00 5,742.96 Stephenson Hilary 1,053.43 341.55 1,394.98 Stephenson 3,879.96 260.42 148.05 4,288.43 Jonathan Stewart Ian 3,879.96 847.10 108.00 4,835.06 Thornton Peter 3,879.96 13,365.00 2,567.94 19,812.90 Vincent Graham 3,879.96 6,060.00 294.65 10,234.61 Westwood Evelyn 3,879.96 1,732.45 976.79 6,589.20 Williams David 3,879.96 2,207.36 390.25 6,477.57 Willis Janet 3,879.96 7,015.67 2,960.75 13,856.38 Wilson Mark 3,879.96 372.00 505.80 4,757.76 Wilson Mary 3,879.96 260.41 859.95 5,000.32

Co- optees

Borer Jennifer 36.16 36.16 Bradshaw Elwyn 12.60 36.16 48.76 Ford Patricia 37.80 65.21 103.01 Henderson Penelope 0.00 Martakies Robin 36.16 36.16 Smith William 20.80 36.16 56.96 Tweddle David 249.96 120.31 370.27 Westworth Colin 6.75 108.48 115.23 Willacy David 4.50 72.32 76.82

Total 192,903.20 66,796.74 0.00 20,363.14 390.65 280,453.73

Councillors are paid an annual basic allowance to recognise the duties and responsibilities of their office, including attendance at Council meetings. Special Responsibility allowances are paid to Councillors holding particular positions with extra responsibilities. These allowances are subject to deduction of Income Tax and National Insurance; the amounts shown are gross payments prior to these deductions being made. Councillors are reimbursed their reasonable travel and subsistence expenses incurred in attending meetings and carrying out other approved duties.

Shelagh McGregor Assistant Director Resources & Section 151 Officer

Page 34 Item No.11

South Lakeland District Council SMT 26 June Cabinet 23 July 2014 Council 28 July 2014

Revenue and Capital Out-Turn 2013/14

PORTFOLIO: Councillor Peter Thorntion – Leader and Promoting South Lakeland and Finance Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: Shelagh McGregor - Assistant Director (Resources) and Section 151 Officer

REPORT AUTHOR: Helen Smith - Financial Services Manager Pete Notley - Chief Accountant.

WARDS: All Wards

KEY DECISION NO: Not applicable

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME The expected outcome is that 1.1 the 2014/15 capital and revenue budgets approved by Council 25 February 2014 will be amended to reflect any approved carry forwards from 2013/14.

1.2 The performance for 2013/14 and impact on reserves balances be noted with reference to starting the 2015/16 budget process.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION Cabinet is asked to recommend that Council:- 2.1 note the outturn figures and variance explanations set out in the report and appendices; 2.2 approve the contributions to and from reserves detailed in Appendix 2 including a £490k set aside for timing differences on NDR income and payments. 2.3 approve the carry forwards listed in Appendix 3 and Appendix 5; 2.4 approve the draft Capital Programme in Appendix 6 and the funding of the Capital Programme in Appendix 7; Council is requested to approve the items above.

Page 35

3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 General Fund Revenue outturn 3.1.1 Appendix 1 sets out the final revenue outturn figures and shows service expenditure and income variances against budget. Variance explanations are included where these are material. Overall the services show an underspend of £1,392k, greater than the overall projected variance of £848k predicted in the latest (Quarter 3) Corporate Financial Monitoring report and represents a 5% variance on the gross service budget of £26m (excluding capital charges, recharges and benefit payemnts). The impact of these variances are being addressed in the review of the Medium Term Financial Plan. 3.1.2 The main reasons for the overall variation in services can be summarised as follows: a) Overall there was an underspend of £391k on staffing budgets. It should be noted that these savings have been planned to assist with the achievement of future years recurring revenue savings needed. b) Overall there was an underspend of £614k on running costs against a budget of £11m. This included £69k on vehicle fuel costs, £94k on IT costs and £102k on consultancy costs. Of this underspend, carry forward requests have been submitted totalling £199k. c) Expenditure on grants and contributions given were £208k lower than expected including £34k on conveniences due to delays in the transfer of Milnthorpe toilets and £50k on Locally Important Projects. These budgets are heavily dependent upon other organsiations and relate to a number of carry-forward requests, totalling £118k. d) Income from government grants was £77k higher than expected and other grants and contributions £63k higher. While income from planning applications was £179k higher than expected, this was offset by lower than expected income on building control of £189k. There are requests to carry-forward £47k of this additional income into 2014/15. e) The remainder of the underspend is taken up by other efficiencies that are individually less than £100k but that are shown in Appendix 1 3.1.3 The final position on service expenditure shows a reduced requirement of £1,392k in the year. This is not the final position on the General Fund working balance however, as a number of transactions are made to reflect statutory accounting practices. Contributions to and from reserves and corporate interest payments and receipts, as shown in Appendix 2 . The net impact of these is an increase in the contribution to General Fund working balance of £1.957m. Major varainces included: a) Lower than anticipated income on balances invested, partially offset by reduced interest payments as a result of repayment of PWLB debt b) Lower than budgeted Minimum Revenue Provision: this is partially due to the reprofiling of the capital programme for the vehicle and plant replacement programme and partially due to the application of capital receipts in 2013/14 to offset notional borrowing in previous years.

Page 36 c) Additional income from Non Domestic Rates (NDR). From 1 April 2013 the Council has received a proportion of rates collected rather than a fixed grant from Government. Unfortunately the details of income the Council could retain, particularly the funding of the Small Business Rate Relief, were not finalised until spring 2014. Once this guidance was received it was identified that additional income of £865k would be generated from this source. Under the accounting arrangements for Non Domestic Rates there is an offsetting deficit on the NDR collection fund of £490k which will be charged to the General Fund in 2015/16. The movement on the General Fund working balance is shown in the following table: Table One: General Fund variances Description Variance £000 £000 Carry-forward requests (388) Other sevice variances (1,004) Total service variances (1,392)

Decreased interest receipts 195 Decreased interest payments (54) Decreased MRP (419) Increased income from Non Domestic Rates (865) less contribution to reserve 490 Other net increase in contributions to reserves 80 Other adjstments 8 Total variations (1,957) 3.1.4 Council on 28 February 2014 approved the GF working balance should be set at £1.5m and that any surplus above this level should be transferred to the General Reserve. Accordingly £4.812m has been transferred from GF working balance to the General Reserve. Table Two: General Fund working balance General Fund working balance £000 £000 Balance at 1 April 2013 (5,170) General Fund underspend 2013/14 (1,957) Expected use of GF Working balance 2013/14 815 (1,142) Contribution to general reserve 4,812 Balance at 31 March 2014 (1,500) Revenue Carry-forwards 3.1.5 Appendix 3 shows the requests from managers and approved by Portfolio Holders for carry-forwards of unspent expenditure and additional income. The requests for carry-forward total £388k. All requests comply with the requirement in the constitution for carry-forwards to be of no more than 10% of the total gross budget for a service (excluding unplanned underspends) for use on specific items of expenditure which will have no on-going cost implications for subsequent years. Where a grant or contribution has been received for

Page 37 which there are no repayment conditions and the grant is unspent at the end of the financial year the manager can request the grant be carried forward. 3.3 Capital 3.3.1 Appendix 4 shows the approved Capital Programme and expenditure and funding for 2013/14. There was an underspend of £1,190.5k, most of which is requested to be carried-forward to 2014/15 onwards. The largest variance relates to the purchase of a number of vehicles planned for 2013/14 but which were not ready for delivery until 2014/15 . 3.3.2 The original Approved Capital Budget has been underspent by 65%. Although the majoiry of this relates to vehicle purchases there is still a need to review and more closely scrutinised the expected timing of schemes before requesting that Council approve them as part of the Budget in February 2014. The aim will be to improve the profiling of such schemes. Capital Carry forwards 3.3.3 Appendix 5 shows the requests for carry forward of items within the capital programme and relate to projects that have either underspends or additional income received during 2013/14. 3.3.4 Appendix 6 shows a revised Capital Programme for 2013/14 – 2017/18 including the requested carry forwards. 3.4 Other Capital Programme requests 3.4.1 The Draft Capital Programme incorporates several other requests for amendments to the capital expenditure. The main changes are: a) Cabinet on 25 June 2014 approved a request for an increased capital programme budget of £45,000 for the replacement roof at Castle Dairy, Kendal due to the specialist slates due to increases in costs of supply of specialist slate and labour required by the conservation specification. b) The higher than expected capital receipt arising from the sale of the former nursery site at Nobles Rest, Kendal has to be ring-fenced for expenditure at Nobles Rest park: an additional £86k is shown in future years.

Appendix 5 includes these additional capital programme adjustments and three additional items for capital programme to be funded from earmarked reserves: c) Upgrade of the integra finance system server, funded from the IT replacement reserve £18.3k d) Various other IT works to be funded from the IT replacement reserve £90k, e) Roller brake testing equipment invest to save, to be funded from the waste contract reserve £30.5k. 3.4.3 Appendix 7 shows the suggested funding of the Draft Capital Programme adjusted for actual income and funding applied in 2013/14. The capital receipts relating to the housing transfer were: a) Under the VAT shelter agreement the Council receives 50% of VAT recovered; for 2013/14 this was £749k; b) Following the Government’s changes to Right to Buy discounts, South Lakes Housing sold 22 properties: the Council is entitled to a share of the

Page 38 receipt and in 2013/14 this was £985k. This money is earmarked to the Right to Buy replacement scheme in the capital programme. The capital programme will be fully reviewed as part of the annual budget process to ensure it meets the Council plan priorities, is affordable and is deliverable. 3.4.4 At the time of the housing transfer it was intended to repay the element of debt attributable to the Housing Revenue Account of £7.7m. Due to lower than expected long-term interest rates the premium on repayment was higher than expected so repayment was deferred until 2013/14. Repayment was made during the last half of 2013/14. Appendix 7 shows the use of capital receipts and the remaining balance on the HRA Major Repairs Reserve to fund the actual premium of £1.10m, which was considerably lower than the estimate in February 2013 of £1.79m. The premium varies depending on long-term interest rates and the repayment was timed to attempt to minimise the premium paid. 3.5 Reserves 3.5.1 Appendix 8 summarises the balances on the Council’s reserves and working balances from 31 March 2013 to 31 March 2018. Appendix 2 shows the detailed movements on reserves and the comparisons with budgeted movements for 2013/14. Council approval is needed for movements to and from reserves. The majority of the contributions to and from reserves were approved by Council in February 2014. The major variances in the contributions to and from reserves are: a) The balance at 1 April 2013 on the fund of revenue monies for capital purposes has been used to fund the Capital Programme. b) The balance on the HRA Major Repairs Reserve was applied in the funding of the premium on premature repayment of PWLB debt. c) Any monies from the additional income from second homes discounts not spent on revenue have been transferred to the Second Homes Income Reserve (£554.5.k). Most of this has been used to fund the Capital Programme (£355.1k). d) The approved budget for 2013/14 assumed all the income from the New Homes Bonus would be spent on projects. The total grant received has been transferred to the New Homes Bonus reserve (£228.1). Most of the total grant received has been used to fund the capital programme (£196.7k) or revenue grants (£73.6k). The remainder will be used to fund the carry forward request on LIPs. e) The internal streetcare contract has realised net expenditure savings and additional income of £109.2k after allowing for statutory pension adjustments; the £109.2k has been transferred to the Waste Contract Reserve. Part of the balance on the Waste Contract Surplus Reserve has been used to fund the capital programme (£338.6k): this has contributed to the lower than expected Minimum Revenue Provision. f) The Building Control income reserve had accumulated a negative balance of over £460k since 2010/11. The reserve is the accumulated surpluses and deficits on the chargeable element of the building control service and should break-even over a three-year period but due to the slow-down in construction, income has been lower than expected. Council in February

Page 39 2014 approved the deficit balance should be offset against the working balance in 2013/14. g) As mentioned above, there is additional income in 2013/14 from Non Domestic Rates but some of this will be required in 2015/16 to offset the deficit on the NDR Collection Fund. Therefore a new reserve has been created and £490k transferred into the reserve out of the 2013/14 surplus. h) The Government gave an additional grant to fund the introduction of the Council Tax reduction scheme. The unspent element of this has been transferred to a new Revenues and Benefits IT Reserve to fund future changes to the Council Tax system required by the IT supplier to reflect new flexibilities in the possible schemes to be provided. i) Under the Social Lettings scheme the Council rents private sector properties for use by homeless families. A reserve of £20k has been set up from income on these lettings to cover potential shortfalls or repair bills under the scheme. 4.0 CONSULTATION 4.1 The report presents historic data in relation to out-turn for 2013/14. Budget holders and Members have been presented with monitoring information throughout the year. Budget and Portfolio holders have been consulted with respect to variances and carry forward requests. 5 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 No alternative options are proposed. Not approving the proposed carry forwards may challenge service delivery during 2014/15. 6 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 This report forms a key part of the financial governance arrangements that support all Council priorities. 7 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial and Resources 7.1.1 As detailed in the report. 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 This report has no direct impact on the staffing of the Council. 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 This report has no direct legal implications. 7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 An equality and diversity impact assessment has not been carried out as this report is a historic review of financial performance for 2013/14. 7.5 Equality and Diversity 7.5.1 An Equality Impact Assessment was provided as part of the 2013/14 Budget process.

Page 40 7.6 Risk

Risk Consequence Controls required Recommended Some commitments and Understanding of changes not approved. corporate priorities not delivered the reasons for the due to insufficient resources. changes. Statement of Accounts approved on 27 June 2014 for audit would not reflect final outturn, leading to material errors CONTACT OFFICERS Pete Notley, Chief Accountant, [email protected]; tel 01539 793157 Helen Smith, Financial Services Manager, [email protected], tel 01539 793147 APPENDICES ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT Appendix No. 1 General Fund Expenditure and Income Variances 2013/14 by service 2 General Fund Expenditure and Income Variances 2013/14 summary 3 Requested Revenue Carry Forwards 2013/14 4 Capital Expenditure 2013/14 5 Requested Capital Carry Forwards 2013/14 6 Draft Capital Programme 2014/15 to 2017/18 7 Capital Income and Financing 2014/15 to 2017/18 8 Reserves and Working Balances 2014/15 to 2017/18

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE Name of Background Where it is available document 2013/14 Budget report http://tinyurl.com/naopneb

2013/14 Quarter 3 budget http://tinyurl.com/orzuh86 monitoring

Page 41 TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 23/6/2014 24/6/2014 n/a 26/6/2014 n/a Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer 23/7/2014 n/a 28/7/2014 23/6/2014 24/6/2014 Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s) Services Manager n/a 24/6/2014 n/a

Page 42 Appendix 1 The purpose of this appendix is to detail the revenue variances for the year.

General Fund Expenditure and Income Variances 2013/14 by Service

Service Portfolio Budget Budget Expenditure Income Overall Reported Q3 Carry forward Commentary on Major Variances Expenditure Income Full Variance Variance Variance requests Full Year Year to Date to Date to Date £ £ £ £ £ Resources ECL Legal Environment and People 303,517 -302,063 9,151 -10,605 -1,454 EFS Financial Services Finance 739,568 -724,048 -14,416 -1,104 -15,520 -25,000 -2,600 Mainly relates to employee underspend; DCLG Transparency Code grant received £2588 require carry forward request. ERB Revenues and Benefits Environment and People 2,176,849 -2,166,775 8,975 -19,049 -10,074 Additional income linked to grant payments to support the Revs and Bens service, offset by additional costs to support set up of Kendal BID. £10k to be contributed to Revs and Bens IT reserve. GFS Unapportionable PensionAdj Finance 449,516 -170,800 -10,607 -1,698 -12,306 -20,000 Small variances on pension strain on retired employees and lump sum adjustments from the County Council. GFT Council Tax Cost Collect Environment and People 580,910 -130,000 -4,905 -15,301 -20,206 Mainly linked to more income than budgeted recovered through legal and court costs. GRA Rent Allowances Environment and People 19,976,888 -19,746,685 -136,692 119,124 -17,568 Out-turn expenditure lower due to demand, Page 43 income also lower but not by as much due to ability to both claim subsidy on non SLDC error overpayments and recover the debt directly from the claimant. GRB Discretionary Housing Bens Environment and People 60,000 -60,000 36,323 -35,456 867 More discretionary housing benefit was paid than budgeted but this was all fully grant funded.

GTH Other Items Finance 20,000 0 -15,573 -4,569 -20,143 -15,000 Consultancy underspend due to reduced spending on obtaining external advice.

GTW Audit and Inspection Finance 109,508 0 -16,889 0 -16,889 Audit underspend £17k mainly due to Audit Commission rebate granted Other Resources 1,682,304 -1,187,624 -10,359 14,734 4,375

Total Resources 26,099,060 -24,487,995 -154,992 46,076 -108,916 -60,000 -2,600 Service Portfolio Budget Budget Expenditure Income Overall Reported Q3 Carry forward Commentary on Major Variances Expenditure Income Full Variance Variance Variance requests Full Year Year to Date to Date to Date £ £ £ £ £ Policy and Performance ECH Human Resources Environment and People 692,574 -653,302 -39,211 -61 -39,272 -15,000 -37,000 Underspend on legal fees £15k propose carry forward to fund Wintime time recording and door security system upgrade; underspend on corporate training £22k propose carry forward to fund CPD training.

EDM Democratic and Member Environment and People 382,824 -350,548 -32,276 0 -32,276 -28,000 Vacant posts, recruited in January, one off saving Services in year.

ERI Information Services Innovation and Improvement 1,428,533 -1,423,838 -20,475 15,780 -4,695 -10,000 Underspend on employee costs £15k due to vacant posts, reduced hours and sick leave; offset by corressponding reduced recharge to Eden £15k. EXS Policy and Performance Health and Well Being 689,393 -599,178 -77,082 -13,133 -90,215 -81,800 -18,900 Underspend on employee costs £49k due to vacant posts, partially offset by agency staff; carry forward request for underspend on one-stop-shop £11.8k; carry forwared request for DEFRA Information Management grant £7131.

GCC Corporate Communications Promoting South Lakeland 150,480 -21,120 -12,408 20,734 8,326 Underspend on employee costs due to vacant Page 44 post £10k; offset by shared manager income shortfall £15k. GCD Partnerships and Communities 308,357 0 -43,248 -1,394 -44,641 -30,000 -43,900 Underspend £43.9k, request carry forward to fund Young People community scheme year-2 and LAP projects continued into year-2. GCG Community Grants Health and Well Being 479,541 0 -58,257 0 -58,257 -24,000 -57,700 Underspend on Members' Small Grants £8.3k, and £49.4k on Locally Important Projects request carry forward (Council already approved carry forward of Members' Small Grants into Locally Important Projects in the Budget Report 25th February 2014).

GEL Elections Environment and People 195,537 -80,500 19,502 -76,894 -57,393 -50,000 Underspend of £50k due to district elections fallow year and spend on by-elections lower than budgeted. GEM Emergency Planning Environment and People 56,745 0 -16,876 0 -16,876 -22,000 -14,800 Saving £14.8k on disaster recovery project request carry forward to part-fund emergency generator upgrade (remainder will be funded from NPS maintenance carry forward request £20.2k in Planned Maintenance). GER Electoral Registration Environment and People 166,463 -8,200 -5,468 -13,243 -18,711 -12,800 Carry forward request for Cabinet Office IER grant £12.8k. GXW Carbon Change Prog Savings Innovation and Improvement 15,000 0 -15,000 -9,614 -24,614 -15,000 -19,600 Carry forward request £19.6k to fund programme of schemes to be developed in support of Council Plan 2014-19 commitment to reduce carbon emissions and become more energy efficient.

Other Policy and Performance 2,889,631 -912,034 -23,025 -4,475 -27,500 Other smaller variances within this AD area that individually are <£15k

Total Policy and Performance 7,455,078 -4,048,720 -323,825 -82,299 -406,124 -275,800 -204,700 Service Portfolio Budget Budget Expenditure Income Overall Reported Q3 Carry forward Commentary on Major Variances Expenditure Income Full Variance Variance Variance requests Full Year Year to Date to Date to Date £ £ £ £ £ Strategic Planning ECC Strategic Planning Admin Health and Well Being 556,291 -540,269 -9,469 -6,553 -16,022 GBC Building Control Town Centres and Small 734,162 -460,918 -110,813 128,767 17,954 Income shortfall £130k due to depressed market Busness conditions (there is an action plan under development); income shortfall is partially offset by underspends on employee costs £85k, consulting engineers £14k and software £7k. Deficit on trading account £96k is to be added to the brought forward deficit on the Building Control reserve, and the 2013/14 closing balance on reserve £462k is to transferred to the General Fund. GDC Development Control Town Centres and Small 883,411 -308,180 -22,584 -188,675 -211,259 -200,000 Income surplus £189k due to increased volume of Busness applications and a number of large individual receipts in year; underspend on employee costs £14k due to vacant posts partially offset by agency staff. GDS Dangerous Structures Health and Well Being 55,000 -35,000 -28,164 39,017 10,853 -10,000 Saving of £11k on costs to repair wall at Fountain Brow; charge for Helmside Road income bad debt provision £25k. GED Economic Development Strategic Growth 496,085 -51,550 24,533 7,375 31,908 Expenditure £37.8k funded from LABGI and KEDF reserves; underspend balance £5.9k to be Page 45 transferred to Econ Dev reserve. GHL Town View Fields Hostel Environment and People 342,007 -263,624 -14,986 5,713 -9,273 -17,000 Underspend £10k on day-to-day premises repairs (potential recurring saving as budget covered by NPS contract; charge for income bad debt provision £10k. GHM Homelessness Environment and People 356,927 -94,000 6,039 -33,451 -27,412 -35,000 Income urplus on the Social Lettings scheme £35k; proposed to be used to set up a £20k property damage reserve. GHT Housing Standards Strategic Growth 909,470 -262,723 -17,816 2,717 -15,099 Underspend on consultancy £13k.

GLC Local Land Charges Town Centres and Small 226,239 -221,000 5,161 -17,847 -12,686 Net surplus £12.4k to be transferred to Local Land Busness Charges reserve. GLP Local Plans Strategic Growth 566,917 -102 -48,568 71 -48,498 -40,000 Underspend on employee costs £48k, partially offset by agency staff. GNH New Homes Strategic Growth 4,726 -208,900 0 -19,208 -19,208 Income surplus due to DCLG grant £19k higher than when the provisional budget was estimated.

GPL Planned Maintenance Environment and People 20,167 0 -20,167 0 -20,167 -20,200 Underspend on planned maintenance £20.2k to be carry forward to part-fund emergency generator upgrade. GRM Kendal Regeneration Town Centres and Small 20,000 -20,000 -4,445 -8,500 -12,945 -10,000 -18,000 Underspend due to being demand-led resource Consultncy Busness and maternity leave; £5k expenditure to be funded from Econ Dev reserve; underspend balance £18k to be carry forward request. GRP Kendal Regeneration Town Centres and Small 93,535 -25,000 -37,563 21,000 -16,563 -16,000 -16,600 Underspend due to being demand-led resource Busness and maternity leave; underspend balance £16.6k to be carry forward request. Service Portfolio Budget Budget Expenditure Income Overall Reported Q3 Carry forward Commentary on Major Variances Expenditure Income Full Variance Variance Variance requests Full Year Year to Date to Date to Date £ £ £ £ £ GSH Second Home Discounts Strategic Growth 157,756 -610,800 -33,899 16,979 -16,920 -20,000 -16,900 Underspend due to demand-led Handy Person scheme £10k and Draught Buster scheme £23k; income shortfall £17k due to County contribution lower than estimated; carry forward request £16.9k to fund Draught Buster scheme and AONB Housing Needs Survey. GSY Sundry Properties Health and Well Being 340,374 -129,424 17,888 -14,964 2,924 Windermere cemetery culvert repair £20k, off-set by £20 insurance claim recovery. GTF Town Centre Facilities Town Centres and Small 73,162 0 -42,928 0 -42,928 -18,000 Saving £18k on CCTV payments made to Barrow Busness Borough Council (potential recurring saving for the year and future years); underspend on maintenmance £10k plus £12k one off income from over-accrued expenditure in 2012/13.

Other Strategic Planning 2,128,625 -1,550,619 -15,479 6,210 -9,269 Other smaller variances within this AD area that individually are <£15k

Total Strategic Planning 7,964,854 -4,782,109 -353,261 -61,349 -414,611 -366,000 -71,700 Page 46 Service Portfolio Budget Budget Expenditure Income Overall Reported Q3 Carry forward Commentary on Major Variances Expenditure Income Full Variance Variance Variance requests Full Year Year to Date to Date to Date £ £ £ £ £ Neighbourhood Services EPX Offices Environment and People 965,454 -975,916 -19,010 29,472 10,462 20,000 Underspend on employee costs due to vacant cleaners' posts £18k; rental income shortfall £30k due to un-let space at South Lakes House. EUN Community Services Environment and People 1,473,639 -1,424,150 -51,134 1,645 -49,489 -20,000 -18,000 Underspend on employee costs £20k due to vacant posts; underspend on scanning £18k request to carry forward. GCK Car Parks Town Centres and Small 2,729,754 -4,347,694 -63,054 26,185 -36,869 -15,000 Income shortfall £26k is off-set by £64k of savings Busness (employee costs £13k; surfaces £23k; premises £28k). GCM Cemeteries Health and Well Being 356,718 -217,650 -14,659 12,431 -2,228 -10,000 Income shortfall £12k due to reduced demand; off- set by by £10k savings on grave digging.

GCN Conveniences Town Centres and Small 200,298 0 -71,221 -1,710 -72,931 -45,000 Underspend on contributions to retail Busness organisations for the community toilet scheme £34k (the Kendal scheme is fully funded, and £30k savings have been made to 2014/15 and future years' budgets); underspend £15k on legal costs due to delay in transfering Milnthorpe toilet to Parish; underspend £17k on parish grants due to under-accrual. GCS Caravan Site Health and Well Being 131,526 -233,070 43,930 -69,279 -25,349 Expenditure to end of season £149k, Page 47 manegement fee £26k, income £302k; net income £127k; resulting in an income surplus against budget of £25k. GDY SLDC Depots Environment and People 269,895 -226,874 -12,531 -30,226 -42,757 Rental income higher than budgeted £25k. GGK Car Park Enforcement Town Centres and Small 323,986 -389,091 11,300 53,805 65,105 80,000 Enforcement income lower than anticipated; Busness shortfall £54k. GGR Glebe Road Recreation Ground Health and Well Being 59,217 -71,635 8,262 3,016 11,278 12,000 United Utilities works have impacted on income collection from golf, income shortfall £12k, partially off-set by £9k compensation claim from UU for ground re-instatement works.

GHP Noise Air Water Pollution Environment and People 272,866 -45,802 -73,268 -381 -73,649 -66,000 -30,000 Underspend £40k due to vacant post and reduction of hours; request carry forward for Defra Air Quality grant received in advance £29k and KTC grant £1k. GHS Health Safety Health and Well Being 156,991 0 -27,299 0 -27,299 -28,000 -27,300 Legal fees underspend £27.3k propose to fund Jaymar Health & Safety prosecution (case completed 9th June, guilty plea entered, fine imposed £95k, and SLDC awarded £59k costs).

GLE Leisure Centres Health and Well Being 979,357 -11,540 130,724 -114,652 16,072 Overspend on leisure contact £18k due to additional costs for dealing with: challenge from unsuccessful tenderer; Miller Ground sailing base; additional schedule of conditions surveys and leasehold transfer, addressing a dilapidations claim and its effect on leasehold surrenders; additional external legal advice due to an internal solicitor leaving SLDC. Also includes costs for dilapidations £94k and school use of the leisure centres £21k, which is to be recovered from Lakes Leisure and Kirkbie Kendal School. Service Portfolio Budget Budget Expenditure Income Overall Reported Q3 Carry forward Commentary on Major Variances Expenditure Income Full Variance Variance Variance requests Full Year Year to Date to Date to Date £ £ £ £ £ GLW Lake Windermere Town Centres and Small 489,465 -1,100,645 29,908 32,649 62,557 19,000 Moorings income shortfall £18k; charge for Busness encroachment income bad debt provision £19k; Ferry Nab redevelopment consultancy which cannot be capitalised £34k. GMD Licensing Act Environment and People 121,313 -198,080 -712 8,099 7,387 10,000 GMK Markets Town Centres and Small 273,209 -288,389 -17,028 9,204 -7,824 Busness GPH Public Halls Health and Well Being 847,451 -299,181 -27,674 -3,594 -31,268 -10,000 £20k efficiency savings on casual staff, overtime, and flexi working.

GPK Parks Town Centres and Small 1,129,291 -77,741 -42,776 -14,849 -57,625 Underspend on grounds maintenance £19k; Busness underspend on Play areas maintenance £20k; DEFRA Rural Payments grant income £8k; SLH green waeste disposal income £6k. GPO Promoting South Lakeland Promoting South Lakeland 75,000 0 -24,205 -9,500 -33,705 -33,700 Underspends on Cycle path project £15k; ToB £8k; second homes study £8.6k; uncommitted £2k; underspend £33.7k carry forward request, balance remaining on reserve £5k. GWK Kerbside Recycling Client Environment and People 2,575,106 -1,175,510 -3,841 92,003 88,161 -30,000 Income shortfall on kerbside and leaf recycling credits 21K (part offset by a corressponding £9k underspend on Contractor tipping and disposal); shortfall on sale of materials £71k due to to a

Page 48 slump in the demand-led market price.

GWR Waste Recycling Environment and People 215,050 -107,200 -57 -46,205 -46,263 -40,000 Recycling credit income surplus £44k higher that budgeted.. STG Street Cleansing Contractor Environment and People 1,448,743 -1,392,476 -36,842 -21 -36,864 -23,000 Underspend on employee costs £58k due to STS Transport Environment and People 573,933 -553,206 9,469 -30,196 -20,727 vacant posts (all of which have now been filled); SWK Kerbside Recycling -Contractor Environment and People 3,398,464 -3,525,544 -68,606 -12,654 -81,260 underspend on fuel £66k due to greatly reduced forecourt fuel prices; underspend on tipping and disposal £9k (part offsets a corressponding income shortfall on Client kerbside and leaf recycling credits). Surplus on actuals, after pension and impairment adjustments, £109k to be transferred to Waste Contract reserve.

Other Neighbourhood Services 4,022,208 -299,404 -37,536 -12,347 -49,883 Other smaller variances within this AD area that individually are <£15k

Total Neighbourhood Services 23,088,934 -16,960,798 -357,864 -77,104 -434,967 -146,000 -109,000

FUA Accumulated absences -27,750 -27,750 This is purely an accounting presentational adjustment and is reversed below in the corporate items.

Services 64,607,926 -50,279,622 -1,189,942 -202,426 -1,392,368 -847,800 -388,000 Appendix 2 GENERAL FUND SUMMARY

2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 Comment Approved Working Actual Variance Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000

Neighbourhood Services 6,223.2 6,128.1 5,693.2 (434.9) Strategic Planning 2,905.5 3,182.7 2,768.1 (414.6) Policy and Performance 3,108.3 3,406.4 3,000.2 (406.2) Resources 1,568.9 1,611.1 1,502.2 (108.9) Accounting adjustments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Service Expenditure 13,805.9 14,328.3 12,963.7 (1,364.6) For more details see Appendix 1

Financing Entries: Interest Payable 897.4 897.4 843.0 (54.4) Interest & Investment Income (296.3) (296.3) (101.3) 195.0 Effect of Statutory and Proper Accounting Practices: Reversal of Depreciation on assets (1,439.6) (1,879.4) (1,879.4) 0.0 Reversal of Revenue Funded from Capital Under Statute (REFCUS) (860.0) (880.0) (880.0) 0.0 Reversal of Impairments 0.0 (487.9) (487.9) 0.0 Minimum Revenue Provision 485.6 485.6 65.8 (419.8) Adjustments relating to Pensions and other employee adjustments 0.0 481.8 481.7 (0.1) SLDC Expenditure 12,593.0 12,649.5 11,005.6 (1,643.9)

Support to Capital Programme 145.0 196.8 1,328.7 1,131.9 For more details see next pages Grant to Parish Councils 92.0 92.0 91.8 (0.2) For more details see next pages Contributions to Reserves 598.9 1,161.8 2,286.8 1,125.0 For more details see next pages Contributions from Reserves (166.7) (684.0) (2,370.9) (1,686.9) For more details see next pages

SLDC Budget 13,262.2 13,416.1 12,342.0 (1,074.1)

Revenue Support Grant (2,954.0) (2,954.0) (2,953.4) 0.6 Efficiency Support for Services in Sparse Areas Grant (43.8) (43.8) (43.8) 0.0 New Homes Bonus Adjustment Grant (16.7) (16.7) (16.7) 0.0 Council Tax Freeze Grant (81.2) (81.2) (82.9) (1.7) Other general grant 0.0 0.0 (15.6) (15.6) Share of Business Rates (net of tarrif to Government) (1,831.0) (1,831.0) (2,695.7) (864.7) Special Expenses chargeable to relevant Parishes (36.7) (36.7) 0.0 36.7 Parish Precepts and Special Expenses 1,338.2 1,338.2 1,299.8 (38.4) (Surplus)/Deficit on Collection Fund 32.4 32.4 32.4 0.0 SLDC Council Tax incl Parishes & Special Expenses (9,008.3) (9,008.3) (9,008.3) 0.0 Surplus / Deficit for year 661.1 815.0 (1,142.2) (1,957.2)

Phased increase in Working Balance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (Use of)/ Addition to Working Balance (661.1) (815.0) 1,142.2 1,957.2 (0.0) 0.0 0.0 (0.0)

Working Balance at 1 April 3,536.3 5,170.0 5,170.0 0.0 (Use of)/ Addition to Working Balance (661.1) (815.0) 1,142.2 1,957.2 Transfer of Working Balance to General Reserve 0.0 (2,855.0) (4,812.2) (1,957.2) Working Balance at 31 March 2,875.2 1,500.0 1,500.0 0.0

Page 49 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 Comment Approved Working Actual Variance Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000 FINANCING ENTRIES

SUPPORT TO CAPITAL PROGRAMME:

Capital Expenditure met by transfers from: - Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes 100.0 100.0 171.1 71.1 Approved Council 28.02.13 - IT Replacement Reserve: 45.0 45.0 46.5 1.5 Approved Council 28.02.13 - HRA Major Repairs Reserve 0.0 0.0 253.0 253.0 Approved Council 25.07.13 - Waste Contract Surplus Reserve 0.0 0.0 338.6 338.6 Approved Council 25.07.13 - LABGI 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.4 - New Homes Bonus 0.0 0.0 196.7 196.7 Approved Council 25.07.13 - Second Homes Income Reserve 0.0 0.0 355.1 355.1 Approved Council 25.07.13 - Other small revenue contributions 0.0 51.8 0.0 (51.8) less Ferry Nab capital to revenue 0.0 0.0 (34.7) (34.7) 145.0 196.8 1,328.7 1,131.9

CONTRIBUTIONS TO RESERVES: General Reserve: - Annual contribution 200.0 200.0 200.0 0.0 Approved Council 28.02.13 Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes: - Support to Capital Programme 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 Approved Council 28.02.13

Economic Development Fund Contribution 0.0 0.0 5.9 5.9 Second Homes Reserve 0.0 544.6 544.5 (0.1) Approved Council 25.07.13 General Fund Properties Major Repairs Reserve 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 Approved Council 28.02.13 IT Replacement Reserve 40.0 40.0 40.0 0.0 Approved Council 28.02.13 IT Replacement Reserve 0.0 0.0 18.3 18.3 Revs & Bens IT Reserve 0.0 18.3 10.0 (8.3) Approved Council 25.02.14 Building Control Fee Income Reserve 208.9 208.9 461.9 253.0 Approved Council 28.02.13 NDR deficit Reserve 0.0 0.0 490.0 490.0 New reserve: approval required New Homes Bonus 0.0 0.0 228.1 228.1 Local Land Charges 0.0 0.0 7.4 7.4 Statutory accounting entry Social Lettings 0.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 Approved Cabinet 30.10.13 s106 Greengate House 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 New reserve: approval required Waste Contract Surplus 0.0 0.0 109.2 109.2 598.9 1,161.8 2,286.8 1,125.0 Transfer balance of Working Balance over £1.5m target 0.0 (2,855.0) 4,812.2 7,667.2 598.9 (1,693.2) 7,099.0 8,792.2

Page 50 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 Comment Approved Working Actual Variance Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM RESERVES: General Reserve: Leisure Services contract review 0.0 (60.0) (60.0) 0.0 Approved Council 28.02.13 Promoting South Lakeland 0.0 (60.0) (29.9) 30.1 Approved Council 28.02.13 Planned Maintenance 0.0 (250.0) (230.0) 20.0 Approved Council 28.02.13 Contingency 0.0 (18.0) 0.0 18.0 Approved Council 28.02.13 Write off of Buidling Control Deficit 0.0 0.0 (461.8) (461.8) Approved Council 25.02.14

Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes: Support to Capital Programme (100.0) (100.0) (171.1) (71.1) Approved Council 28.02.13 Second Homes Income Reserve: support to capital programme 0.0 0.0 (355.1) (355.1) LABGI Reserve: Fixed term Project Officer, Culture & Economy (12.1) (12.1) (2.4) 9.7 Approved Council 28.02.13 ISUS 0.0 0.0 (13.2) (13.2) Economic Development Fund (4.6) (4.6) 0.0 4.6 Approved Council 28.02.13

IT Replacement Reserve: Replacement of IT equipment & software (50.0) (45.0) (46.5) (1.5) Approved Council 28.02.13 Building Control Fee Income Reserve: deficit 2013/14 0.0 0.0 (105.0) (105.0) Statutory accounting entry New Homes Bonus Reserve Contribution to capital programme 0.0 0.0 (196.7) (196.7) Locally Important Projects 0.0 (80.3) 6.7 (73.6) Members Small Grants 0.0 (51.0) 51.0 Kendal Employment Development Fund 0.0 0.0 (5.1) (5.1)

HRA MRA: Contribution to debt repayment 0.0 0.0 (253.0) (253.0) Approved Council 25.07.13 Waste Contract Surplus Support to Capital Programme 0.0 0.0 (338.6) (338.6) Approved Council 25.07.13 Local ArtsStrategic Fund 0.0 (3.0) (4.5) (1.5) Kendal Business Start Up Kendal Business Start Up 0.0 0.0 (13.2) (13.2) Kendal BIDS 0.0 0.0 (7.9) (7.9) Shop Fronts 0.0 0.0 (3.3) (3.3) (166.7) (684.0) (2,370.9) (1,686.9)

Page 51 Appendix 3 The purpose of this appendix is to detail the revenue carry forward requests

Requested Revenue Carry Forwards 2013/14

Service Ref Service Area Area (AD) £k Revised Outturn Comment Code

1 EFS Financial Services R (SMcG) 2.6 DCLG Transparency Code grant received £2.6k in respect of the introduction of statutory transparency code, to fund required software emhancements.

2 ECH Human Resources PP (SMcV) 37.0 £37k underspend on legal fees and corporate training, to fund Wintime time recording system upgrade and Chief Executive CPD training course fees.

3 EXS Policy and Performance PP (SMcV) 18.9 £11.8k underspend on one-stop-shop to fund Customer Services Programme; DEFRA Information Management grant £7.1k received for the three-year INSPIRE project, to fund work with Barrow BC and Eden DC to provide environmental information to DEFRA.

4 GCD Partnerships and Communities PP (SMcV) 43.9 £31k underspend on Community Development grants to fund delivery of Children and Young People community scheme; underspend on LAPS £12.9k, propose to fund projects in Grange, High Furness, Ulverston and Upper Kent.

5 GCG Community Grants PP (SMcV) 57.7 £57.7k underspend on Members' Small Grants and Locally Important Projects; LIPS budget fully committed and any unspent Member grants to top up 14/15 LIPS budget as per Budget Report 25th February 2014. Funded through New Homes Bonus.

6 GEM Emergency Planning PP (SMcV) 14.8 £14.8k saving on disaster recovery project to part-fund generator upgrade as part of business continuity arrangements (remainder will be funded from NPS maintenance carry forward request £20.2k in planned maintenance).

7 GER Electoral Registration PP (SMcV) 12.8 £12.8k Cabinet Office IER grant received; required to comply with transition to Individual Electoral Registration, mainly to fund the purchase of computer hardware and to assist with public engagement.

8 GXW Carbon Change Prog. Savings PP (SMcV) 19.6 £10k underspend and external funding £9.6k received from iChooser to support and delivery of community carbon saving programmes (e.g. draft busting roadshows to help reduce fuel bills), and support the Council's draft busting scheme.

9 GPL Planned Maintenance SP (MK) 20.2 £20.2k underspend on planned maintenance to part-fund generator upgrade as part of business continuity arrangements (remainder will be funded from £14.8k Emergency Planning carry forward request above).

10 GRM Kendal Regeneration Consultancy SP (MK) 18.0 £18k external funding received; propose to fund continuation of post, Kendal Economic Regeneration Action Plan (KERAP), tourism signage scheme, new leaflets and website.

11 GRP Kendal Regeneration SP (MK) 16.6 £16k external funding received; propose to continue to fund a number of projects: Highgate Public Realm improvements; New Road consultation; Kendal BID training; Kendal BID websites.

12 GSH Second Homess Discounts SP (MK) 16.9 Net underspend of £16.9k to fund to fund Draught Buster scheme and AONB Housing Needs Survey.

13 EUN76 Community Services NS (SR) 18.0 £18k underspend on scanning to fund completion of document management project and to ensure Civica/APP users comply with Data Protection Act.

Page 52 20/06/2014 Service Ref Service Area Area (AD) £k Revised Outturn Comment Code

14 GHP Noise Air Water Pollution NS (SR) 30.0 Defra Air Quality grant £29k and KTC grant £1k received; propose to fund Ar Quality Go Easy campaign to reduce vehicle journeys and promote increased cycling.

15 GHS Health and Safety NS (SR) 27.3 £27.3k legal fees underspend; propose to fund Jaymar Health & Safety prosecution (case completed 9th June and SLDC awarded costs but these will not be receivable until 2015/16).

16 GPO Promoting South Lakeland NS (SR) 33.7 £33.7k underspend to fund completion of Cumbria Cycle path project £15k and other committed projects.

388.0 Total Requested Revenue Carry Forwards

Summary by Assistant Director: £k Resources R 2.6 Policy and Performance PP 204.7 Strategic Planning SP 71.7 Neighbourhood Services NS 109.0 Total Requested Revenue Carry Forwards 388.0

Page 53 20/06/2014 Appendix 4 The purpose of this appendix is to show the capital expenditure and financing along with explanations for any variances

Carry- 2013/14 2013/14 Programme Variance forward Comments Approved Funding Feburary 2014 Actual Funding Revised Actual request £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Brockbeck play area refurbishment delayed until Housing Play Areas 20.0 0.0 (20.0) 20.0 (20.0) Single Capital Pot (grant) 0.0 2014/15 Ecclerigg Depot 4.2 0.1 (4.1) 0.0 (4.2) Single Capital Pot (grant) (0.1) Single Capital Pot (grant) Dog Order Signage 15.0 7.0 (8.0) 0.0 (15.0) LSVT receipt (7.0) LSVT receipt Refurb replace Recycling Bins 69.0 43.4 (25.6) 24.0 Delay in delivery of extra bins and boxes. (69.0) LSVT receipt (43.4) LSVT receipt Roof tiles on a 12 month lead time. Start on site Castle Dairy Roof 37.5 7.2 (30.3) 30.3 (37.5) LSVT receipt (7.2) LSVT receipt summer 2014. Public Conveniences (Upgrade 10.9 9.4 (1.5) 0.0 (10.9) Single Capital Pot (grant) (9.4) Single Capital Pot (grant) And Hand Over) (242.0) DFG grant (252.1) DFG grant Grants totalling £133k committed, grants to be Disabled Facilities Grants 495.0 353.7 (141.3) 133.0 0.0 Contribution (101.6) paid in 2014/15 (253.0) 2nd homes fund Affordable Housing Renovation (180.2) New homes bonus 436.6 415.1 (21.5) 20.0 Empty homes grant works delayed to 2014/15 (436.6) 2nd homes fund Grants (AHRG) (234.9) 2nd homes fund Delayed site acquisition so works £50k committed Page 54 Site Assembly Fund - Second 100.0 0.0 (100.0) 100.0 in 2013/14 now due to commence in 2014/15. (100.0)2nd homes fund 0.0 Homes Contingency for Berners Close £50k Site Assembly Fund - New Homes 200.0 200.0 0.0 0.0 (200.0) New homes bonus (165.0) New homes bonus (35.0) reserves Kirkby Lonsdale Affordable 167.0 167.4 0.4 0.0 (167.0) S106 agreement (167.4) S106 agreement Options for customer relationship management CRM Development 60.0 0.0 (60.0) 60.0 (60.0) LSVT receipt 0.0 software under review and delayed until 2014/15 IT Replacements 49.6 46.5 (3.1) 0.0 (49.6)IT reserve (46.5)IT reserve not capitalisable funded through revenue; Additional work on design and planning of Ferry Nab Redevelopment Phases revenue financing of capital programme 15.0 34.5 19.5 (19.5) scheme exceeded 2013/14 budget, which will be (15.0) LSVT receipt (34.5) 1, 2 and 3 (DRF) reduced by the same amount to deducted from 2014/15 budget ensure no net impact on the general fund. Nobles Rest 64.2 0.5 (63.7) 63.5 Scheme remains in development (64.2) Earmarked capital receipt (0.5) Earmarked capital receipt Delays to scheme mean costs of new machines, Westmorland Shopping Centre Car 368.1 42.6 (325.5) 325.5 redecoration and pothole repairs will take place in (368.1) Single Capital Pot (grant) (42.6) Single Capital Pot (grant) Park Refurbishment 2014/15 DDA Works, Various car parks 31.7 1.4 (30.3) 0.0 (31.7) Single Capital Pot (grant) (1.4) Single Capital Pot (grant) Rydal Road Car Park, Ambleside Restrictions on when work can be carried out 50.0 12.1 (37.9) 37.9 (50.0) (12.1) Works to Bridge means work will be completed in 2014/15 Town and Car Park Signs 18.2 7.2 (11.0) 7.8 Delay due to consultation with stakeholders (18.2) (7.2) Grange Regeneration - Berners 306.3 308.6 2.3 (1.8) (306.3) Single Capital Pot (grant) (308.6) Single Capital Pot (grant) 2.4 0.0 Highgate Public Realm 0.0 2.4 0.0 (2.4) LABGI Improvements 0.0 0.0 Delivery of two new refuse collection vehicles Vehicle & Plant Programme 568.0 259.2 (308.8) 307.2 (568.0) Borrowing (259.2) Borrowing delayed until 2014/15 Transformation Change - Access to 22.5 0.0 (22.5) 22.5 SLDC branding work delayed until 2014/15 (22.5) Single Capital Pot (grant) 0.0 Services Total 3,108.8 1,918.3 (1,190.5) 1,130.4 (3,108.8) (1,918.3) Total less items reclassified as revemue 1,883.8 (1,883.8) Appendix 5 The purpose of this appendix is to detail the capital carry forward requests.

Requested Capital Carry Forwards from 2013/14 into 2014/15

Ref Code Service Area Area (AD) £k Comment

1 KNM Housing Play Areas NS (SR) 20.0 Brockbeck play area refurbishment delayed 2 KEB Refurb replace recycling bins and boxes NS (SR) 24.0 Delay in delivery of extra bins and boxes

3 KCD Castle Dairy Roof SP (MK) 30.3 Delay in delivery of specialist roof tiles 4 KGD Disabled Facilities Grants SP (MK) 133.0 Grants committed in 2013/14 but payment delayed 5 KGS Affordable Housing Renovation Grants SP (MK) 20.0 Empty Homes grant payment delayed until 2014/15

6 KGT Site Assembly Fund SP (MK) 100.0 Delayed site acquisition (£50k) and contingency for Berners Close (£50k) 7 KCR CRM Development PP (SMcV) 60.0 Options under review 8 KLL Ferry Nab development SP (MK) -19.5 Overspend in 2013/14 to be deducted from 2014/15 9 KLR Nobles Rest NS (SR) 63.5 Scheme remains in development 10 KPY Car Parks NS (SR) 371.2 Westmorland Shopping Centre refurbishment & new machines (£325.5k), Rydal Road car park bridge (£37.9k), town and car park signs delayed due to consultation with stakeholders (£7.8k)

11 KSC Vehicle and Plant Programme NS (SR) 307.2 Delivery of two new Dennis Eagle refuse vehicles delayed

12 KXF Access to Services PP (SMcV) 22.5 SLDC 'branding' work delayed to 2014/15 13 KRE Grange Regeneration - Berners SP (MK) -2.3 Overspend in 2013/14 to be deducted from 2014/15

1,129.9 Total requested Capital Carry Forward Additional budget adjustments: 1 KLR Nobles Rest NS (SR) 86.0 Additional Capital receipt in 2013/14 ring fenced for scheme in future years 2 KCD Castle Dairy Roof SP (MK) 45.0 Additional budget required as per Cabinet 18/6/2014

3 KIT Integra Ledger upgrade R (SMcG) 18.3 Upgrade the finance system funded from reserves.

4 KIT Other IT infrastructure PP (SMcV) 90.0 Various works to be funded from the IT replacement reserve.

5 KRE Grange regeneration contribution to SP (MK) 10.3 S106 contributions received in 2013/14 for payment to Network Rail Network Rail 6 KNM Play area contribution NS (SR) 13.4 Contributions received in 2013/14 to go towards play area renewals 7 KSC Roller brake testing equipment NS (SR) 36.0 Invest to save proposal to purchase roller brake testing equipment, to be financed from the waste contract reserve 8 Right to buy replacement scheme SP (MK) 135.0 Right to buy capital receipts were £135k more than budgeted, these are applied to the right to buy replacement scheme 1 year in arrears. 434.0 Total other adjustments

Summary by Assistant Director: £k Resources R 18.3 Policy and Performance PP 172.5 Strategic Planning SP 451.8 Neighbourhood Services NS 921.3 Total 1,563.9

Page1 55 09/07/2014 Appendix 6 The purpose of this appendix is to show the changes proposed to the capital programme

Carry forward 2014/15 2014/15 Total 2013/14 Programme Spending by Project 2013/14 2013/14 Actual and 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Approved Amended to 2017/18 adjustment £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Play Area Renewals 20.0 0.0 20.0 33.4 53.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 113.4 Grange Open space contribution 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 10.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 Ecclerigg Depot 4.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Public Conveniences (Upgrade And Hand Over) 10.9 9.4 85.0 0.0 85.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.4 Disabled Facilities Grants 495.0 353.7 456.8 133.0 589.8 383.9 374.8 393.1 2,095.3 Affordable Housing Renovation Grants (AHRG) 436.6 415.2 0.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 435.2 Site Assembly Fund For Affordable Housing 467.0 367.4 460.0 100.0 560.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 927.4 Mobile Working 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 IT Replacements 49.6 46.5 40.0 108.3 148.3 40.0 40.0 40.0 314.8 Ferry Nab Redevelopment Phases 1, 2 and 3 15.0 34.5 400.0 (19.5) 380.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 415.0 Nobles Rest 64.2 0.5 0.0 149.5 149.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 150.0 Westmorland Shopping Centre Car Park Refurbishment 368.1 42.6 0.0 325.5 325.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 368.1 DDA Works, Various car parks 31.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 Rydal Road Car Park, Ambleside Works to Bridge 50.0 12.1 270.0 37.9 307.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 320.0 Grange Regeneration 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Page 56 Grange Regeneration - Berners Site 300.0 308.6 150.0 (2.3) 147.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 456.3 New Road Common 0.0 0.0 27.1 0.0 27.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.1 Kendal Public Realm Improvements 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 Vehicle & Plant Programme 568.0 259.1 1,877.5 343.2 2,220.7 148.0 373.0 1,606.8 4,607.6 Transformation Change - Access to Services 22.5 0.0 0.0 22.5 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.5 Windermere Steamboat Museum contribution 0.0 0.0 200.0 0.0 200.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 CRM Development 60.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 South Lakeland House - Universal Credit interview rooms 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 Castle Dairy New Roof 37.5 7.2 112.5 75.3 187.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 195.0 Town and Car Park signing 18.2 7.2 35.0 7.8 42.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 Recycling bins & boxes 69.0 43.4 0.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.4 Dog order signage 15.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 Stockghyll Wood footbridge 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 Kendal Town Centre Public Realm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Right to buy replacement scheme 0.0 0.0 850.0 135.0 985.0 640.0 420.0 210.0 2,255.0 Affordable Homes, Town Centre Properties and Empty homes 0.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 2,000.0 Waterhead Public Realm 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 200.0 0.0 0.0 250.0 Town Centre Improvement Fund 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 Kendal Leisure Centre 0.0 0.0 61.5 0.0 61.5 425.5 0.0 0.0 487.0 Kendal Leisure Partner 0.0 0.0 659.0 0.0 659.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 659.0

Total 3,108.8 1,918.3 6,419.4 1,563.9 7,983.3 2,482.4 1,752.8 2,769.9 16,906.7

As per Appendix 5 Appendix 7 The purpose of this appendix is to show the revised position on capital funding

B/f resources Income Use in capital Support of Debt Unallocated programme revenue repayment, savings** VRP and other

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Revenue funds for capital 71.1 500.0 134.5 0.0 136.6 300.0 Labgi (part) 2.4 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Second homes income reserve 230.7 2,684.5 503.1 2,392.8 0.0 19.3 IT replacement reserve 154.7 200.0 305.0 0.0 0.0 49.7 New homes bonus* 60.1 1,184.4 837.3 407.2 0.0 0.0 GF MRR 335.7 250.0 485.0 0.0 0.0 100.7 General Capital grants 256.0 54.5 257.5 0.0 0.0 53.0 S106 funds k village 100.0 41.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 141.6 Page 57 s106 housing 0.0 552.7 552.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Capital receipts 14,716.7 455.3 2,762.5 0.0 9,948.8 2,460.7 DFG 0.0 1,220.1 1,220.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 HRA MRR 253.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 253.0 0.0 Streetcare reserve (part) 338.6 36.0 36.0 0.0 338.6 0.0 RTB receipt 0.0 2,465.0 2,255.0 0.0 0.0 210.0 VAT Shelter receipt 0.0 3,429.5 2,325.0 0.0 0.0 1,104.5 Funding from borrowing. 0.0 0.0 5,230.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 16,519.0 13,073.6 16,906.7 2,800.0 10,677.0 4,439.5

*based on 60/40 split, capital/revenue ** 4 years @ £700k p/a

Unallocated as per approved capital budget February 2014 3,673.0 Variance 766.5 Explained by: Saving on debt repayment 766.9 Additional income (net of additional capital expenditure) 96.2 Budget no longer required 38.4 New schemes funded from existing resources (see Appendix 5) -135.0 766.5 Reserves Summary Appendix 8

Balance2013/14 Balance2014/15 Balance2015/16 Balance2016/17 Balance2017/18 Balance

SUMMARY PURPOSE AND COMMENTARY Actual Use Planned Use Planned Planned Use Planned Use Planned Use Planned 31 March 2018 March 31 31 March 2013 March 31 31 March 2014 March 31 31 March 2015 March 31 2016 March 31 2017 March 31 Actual Contribution Planned Contribution Planned Contribution Planned Contribution Planned Contribution Planned £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 REVENUE RESERVES Buffer against future financial risks: changes in General Reserve 1,528.2 5,012.2 (781.5) 5,758.9 200.0 (388.0) 5,570.9 200.0 - 5,770.9 200.0 - 5,970.9 200.0 - 6,170.9 government funding, pension contributions, legal challenges, on-off costs of service reviews. Appropriate non-recurring initiatives, with a LABGI Reserve 86.6 - (15.6) 71.0 - (56.6) 14.4 - - 14.4 - - 14.4 - - 14.4 preference for economic regeneration. GF Major Repairs Reserve 335.7 50.0 - 385.7 50.0 (61.5) 374.2 50.0 (423.5) 0.7 50.0 - 50.7 50.0 - 100.7 Major repairs and renewals of Council assets IT Replacement Reserve 136.4 58.3 (46.5) 148.2 40.0 (40.0) 148.2 40.0 (40.0) 148.2 40.0 (40.0) 148.2 40.0 (40.0) 148.2 Replacement of IT equipment New reserve: Government grant received towards Revs & Bens IT Reserve - 10.0 - 10.0 - - 10.0 - - 10.0 - - 10.0 - - 10.0 the introduction of Council Tax reduction schemes earnarked for future IT costs Page 58 Economic Development Fund 5.1 5.9 (5.1) 5.9 - - 5.9 - - 5.9 - - 5.9 - - 5.9 Encouraging economic development in the District Monies provided by Planning Delivery Grant in Planning Delivery Grant 84.0 - - 84.0 - (32.0) 52.0 - (32.0) 20.0 - - 20.0 - - 20.0 2009/10 carried forward for use in a subsequent Reserve years

Local Arts Strategic Monies provided towards Arts Strategy and related 55.7 - (4.5) 51.2 - - 51.2 - - 51.2 - - 51.2 - - 51.2 Partnership Reserve activies carried forward for use in subsequent years.

New reserve to enable forward funding of eligible New Homes Bonus Reserve 100.1 228.1 (270.3) 57.9 353.0 (353.0) 57.9 347.0 (347.0) 57.9 394.0 (394.0) 57.9 419.0 (419.0) 57.9 schemes through the Council's New Homes Bonus protocol Promoting South Lakeland ------Promoting South Lakeland Reserve Accumulated surpluses or deficits on the Council's Waste Contract Reserve 438.6 109.2 (338.6) 209.2 - - 209.2 - - 209.2 - - 209.2 - - 209.2 waste contract; also used to support capital costs of waste vehicles.

New reserve: income from the social lettings Social Lettings Reserve - 20.0 - 20.0 - - 20.0 - - 20.0 - - 20.0 - - 20.0 scheme set aside for potential losses or repair bills

New reserve: under the arrangements for Non Domestic Rates (NDR) localisation of business rates there is a timing gap - 490.0 - 490.0 - - 490.0 - (490.0) ------Deficit Reserve between recognising additional s31 grant and recognising offsetting NDR collection fund deficits.

HRA Environmental Warranty Environmental insurance in 2022 relating to 341.0 - - 341.0 - - 341.0 - - 341.0 - - 341.0 - - 341.0 Reserve warranties given as part of the housing transfer. Total: Revenue Reserves 3,111.4 5,983.7 (1,462.1) 7,633.0 643.0 (931.1) 7,344.9 637.0 (1,332.5) 6,649.4 684.0 (434.0) 6,899.4 709.0 (459.0) 7,149.4 CAPITAL RESERVES Monies provided from revenue to support the Fund of Revenue Monies for 71.0 100.0 (171.1) (0.1) 100.0 (100.0) (0.1) 100.0 - 99.9 100.0 - 199.9 100.0 - 299.9 Capital Programme & fund expenditure that may not Capital Purposes be capitalisable

Second Homes Income Initiatives to enable the provision of affordable 230.7 544.5 (355.1) 420.1 530.0 (700.0) 250.1 550.0 (632.7) 167.4 550.0 (550.0) 167.4 550.0 (550.0) 167.4 Reserve housing: transfer of unspent balance at end of year Total: Capital Reserves 301.7 644.5 (526.2) 420.0 630.0 (800.0) 250.0 650.0 (632.7) 267.3 650.0 (550.0) 367.3 650.0 (550.0) 467.3 Reserves Summary Appendix 8

Balance2013/14 Balance2014/15 Balance2015/16 Balance2016/17 Balance2017/18 Balance

SUMMARY PURPOSE AND COMMENTARY Actual Use Planned Use Planned Planned Use Planned Use Planned Use Planned 31 March 2018 March 31 31 March 2013 March 31 31 March 2014 March 31 31 March 2015 March 31 2016 March 31 2017 March 31 Actual Contribution Planned Contribution Planned Contribution Planned Planned Contribution Planned Contribution Planned £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000

Page 59 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 STATUTORY EARMARKED RESERVES Kendal Employment Assistance to eligible developing firms in the Kendal 38.1 - (24.4) 13.7 - - 13.7 - - 13.7 - - 13.7 - - 13.7 Development Fund area Statutory ring fenced reserve to record surpluses Local Land Charges Reserve (15.0) 7.4 - (7.6) - - (7.6) - - (7.6) - - (7.6) - - (7.6) and losses on local land charges. Building Control Fee Income Statutory ring fenced reserve to record surpluses (356.9) 461.9 (105.0) ------Reserve and losses on building control. Greengate House s106 New reserve: Income received under a s106 - 1.5 - 1.5 - - 1.5 - - 1.5 - - 1.5 - - 1.5 Reserve agreement not spend in year HRA ring fenced reserve; to be used 2013/14 for HRA Major Repairs Reserve 253.0 - (253.0) ------debt repayment Total: Earmarked Reserves (80.8) 470.8 (382.4) 7.6 - - 7.6 - - 7.6 - - 7.6 - - 7.6

TOTAL RESERVES 3,332.3 7,099.0 (2,370.7) 8,060.6 1,273.0 (1,731.1) 7,602.5 1,287.0 (1,965.2) 6,924.3 1,334.0 (984.0) 7,274.3 1,359.0 (1,009.0) 7,624.3 Buffer against unforeseen & emergency GENERAL FUND 5,170.0 - (3,670.0) 1,500.0 - - 1,500.0 - - 1,500.0 - - 1,500.0 - - 1,500.0 expenditure, inflationary demands, adverse cash WORKING BALANCE flow, inability to use capital resources. Total balances 8,502.3 7,099.0 -6,040.7 9,560.6 9,102.5 8,424.3 8,774.3 9,124.3 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 60 Item No.12

South Lakeland District Council Overview and Scrutiny 15 July 2014 Cabinet 23 July 2014 Council 28 July 2014 Treasury Management Annual Report 2013/14

PORTFOLIO: Councillor Peter Thornton - Finance Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: Shelagh McGregor - Assistant Director (Resources) and Section 151 Officer

REPORT AUTHOR: Pete Notley - Chief Accountant.

WARDS: All Wards

KEY DECISION NO: Not applicable

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME 1.1 The attached report reviews performance during 2013/14 year against the Council’s Treasury Management Strategy. This is a historic review for noting by Members.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 Overview and Scrutiny Committee are asked to note the 2013/14 Treasury Management Annual Report, as attached at Appendix 1. 2.2 Cabinet is asked to recommend that Council accept the 2013/14 Treasury Management Annual report, as attached at Appendix 1. 2.2. Council is recommended to accept the Treasury Management Annual Report for 2013/14, as attached at Appendix 1.

3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 This Council is required through regulations issued under the Local Government Act 2003 to produce an annual treasury report reviewing treasury management activities and the actual prudential and treasury indicators for 2013/14. This report meets the requirements of both the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management (the Code) and the CIPFA Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities (the Prudential Code).

Page 61 3.2 In line with requirements of the Code, the Treasury Management Framework (including Prudential indicators) was approved prior to the start of the financial year (Council 28 February 2013).Detailed reports have been presented to Performance Sub Committee, Cabinet and Council throughout the year. There were no breaches of any indicators or limits during quarter 4.

3.3 Overall, there were significant changes to the balance sheet with reductions in external debt, investments and the underlying borrowing requirement, mainly linked to the repayment of £7.7m of PWLB loans following the housing stock transfer in 2012. There was also a significant level of re-profiling and revision in the capital programme, which was mainly linked to two large schemes, Ferry Nab and the Vehicle and plant programme. Importantly, gross borrowing remained consistent with the Capital Financing Requirement showing that the Council was not funding any revenue activity through borrowing, a key prudential indicator.

3.4 Net interest payable, taking into account the savings on interest payable due to repayment of PWLB loans in year, and decreased interest income due to market conditions, was £141k more than the budget. However, this was more than off-set by MRP savings in year of £420k following repayment of debt linked to waste vehicles purchased in prior years.

3.5 Looking forward the expectation is that interest rates may start to rise and this would improve investment returns but could also make the option of further debt repayment more attractive if repayment premia fall significantly.

4.0 CONSULTATION 4.1 The Treasury Management Framework satisfies statute and guidance issued by DCLG and CIPFA. It is a mainly technical document that reflects the decisions made as part of the wider budget process. It was prepared in consultation with the Council’s Treasury advisor (Capita Asset Services). Senior management and the Portfolio holder have been consulted. The report presents historic data on Treasury performance during 2013/14.

5 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 There are no alternative options, the report presents historic data on Treasury performance during 2013/14. 6 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 The Treasury Management Framework including Prudential Indicators forms part of the corporate governance arrangements that support all Council priorities.

7 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial and Resources 7.1.1 The report is historic with the financial and resource implications forming part of the out-turn report for 2013/14.

Page 62 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 This report has no direct impact on the staffing of the Council. 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 This report forms part of the framework for treasury management in accordance with legislation. There are no other legal implications. 7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 An equality and diversity impact assessment has not been carried out as this policy does not impact on individuals. 7.5 Equality and Diversity 7.5.1 Equality Impact Assessments will be provided as part of the Budget process.

7.6 Risk

Risk Consequence Controls required Long-term borrowing is Council incurs Treasury advice is taken taken at rates that are unnecessary interest on optimum timing of not advantageous. costs. borrowing Repayment of long term Council occurs Treasury advice is taken borrowing at rates that unnecessary premium on optimum timing of are not advantageous costs loan repayment Investment of principal Loss of principal due to Stringent and cautious sums with insecure default by borrower. lending criteria are built counterparties. into the Council’s Investment Strategy. Investment returns are Underperformance and Monitoring of volatile and may fall underachievement of performance of fund short of expectations. budgeted income levels. manager’s and in-house investments; planned withdrawal of funds from manager to stabilise returns. Borrowing is not Financial pressure on Prudent borrowing in affordable. the General Fund. accordance with the Strategy and indicators. Forecast borrowing costs are factored into the 2014/15 Budget and Medium Term Financial Plan.

Page 63

CONTACT OFFICERS Pete Notley, Chief Accountant, [email protected]; tel 01539 793157 Helen Smith, Financial Services Manager, [email protected], tel 01539 793147

APPENDICES ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT

Appendix No. 1 Treasury Management Annual Report 2013/14 2 Investec holdings at 31/3/2014

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE Name of Background Where it is available document 2013/14 Treasury http://tinyurl.com/psg3ckq Management Framework

TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 24/6/2014 24/6/2014 n/a 26/6/2014 15/7/2014 Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer 23/7/2014 n/a 28/7/2014 24/6/2014 26/6/2014 Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s) Services Manager n/a n/a n/a

Page 64 Appendix 1

The purpose of this appendix is to detail the Council’s performance against the Treasury Management Framework, including Prudential Indicators, for 2013/14.

Treasury Management Annual Report 2013/14

Purpose 1. The Council is required through regulations issued under the Local Government Act 2003 to produce an annual treasury report reviewing treasury management activities and the actual prudential and treasury indicators for 2013/14. This report meets the requirements of both the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management (the Code) and the CIPFA Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities (the Prudential Code).

2. This report includes: • Capital activity during the year; • Impact of this activity on the Council’s underlying indebtedness (the Capital Financing Requirement, CFR); • Reporting of the required prudential and treasury indicators; • Overall treasury position identifying how the Council has borrowed in relation to this indebtedness, and the impact on investment balances; • Summary of interest rate movements in the year; • Review of debt and investment activity. 3. During the year a decision was taken to repay £7.7m of debt and external borrowings linked to the housing stock transfer and a further £1.87m of debt linked to vehicles that had been bought in prior years. In addition, in year monitoring had picked up a significant level of re-profiling required on the capital programme. These factors were reflected in revised estimates that formed part of the 2014/15 Treasury Management Framework, approved in February 2014. For completeness, both the originally approved estimates and the revised figures are presented, where relevant.

Page 65 2

Summary 4. During 2013/14 the Council complied with its legislative and regulatory requirements. Detailed reports have been presented to Performance Sub Committee, Cabinet and Council throughout the year. There were no breaches of any indicators or limits during quarter 4. 5. The key statistics in relation to 2013/14 are as follows:

Table 1: Capital expenditure, Capital Financing Requirement and cash resources. 2012/13 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 Feb 13 Feb 14 Actual Actual estimate estimate £000 £000 £000 £000

Capital expenditure (see para 8) 3,901 5,568 3,052 1,884

Capital Financing Requirement (see 23,398 25,504 14,319 14,025 para 10)

External debt (see para 25) 20,500 20,500 12,800 12,800

Total Investments (see para 27) 20,189 20,476 11,565 13,217

6. Overall, there were some large reductions in external debt, investments and the underlying borrowing requirement, mainly linked to the repayment of £7.7m of PWLB loans following the housing stock transfer in 2012. There was also a significant level of re-profiling and revision in the capital programme, which was mainly linked to two large schemes, Ferry Nab and the Vehicle and plant programme. Importantly, gross borrowing remained consistent with the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR, see table 3 for more details) showing that the Council was not funding any revenue activity through borrowing, a key prudential indicator.

7. Net interest payable, taking into account the savings on interest payable due to repayment of PWLB loans in year, and decreased interest income due to market conditions, was £141k more than the budget. However, this was more than off-set by MRP savings in year of £420k following repayment of debt linked to waste vehicles purchased in prior years.

The Council’s Capital Expenditure and Financing 2013/14 8. The Council undertakes capital expenditure on long-term assets. These activities may either be: • Financed immediately through the application of capital or revenue resources (capital receipts, capital grants, revenue contributions etc.), which has no resultant impact on the Council’s borrowing need; • Un-financed capital expenditure which leads to an increase in the Council’s CFR. This increases the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP, see 13 below) charge to the Revenue account to ensure that resources are set aside to pay for the asset over its useful life.

Page 66 3

9. The actual capital expenditure forms one of the required prudential indicators. The table below shows the actual capital expenditure and how this was financed. The explanations for the variances are included within the out-turn report to Council 28 July. From a treasury viewpoint, the reduced spend on capital against both the original and revised budget has resulted in higher cash balances than anticipated and a reduced level of unfinanced capital expenditure required to fund the vehicle and plant programme. Re-profiling of the vehicle and plant programme was largely picked up through in year monitoring in time for the 2014/15 Minimum Revenue Provision budget to be adjusted down.

Table 2: Capital expenditure and financing. 2012/13 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 Feb 13 Feb 14 Actual Actual estimate estimate £000 £000 £000 £000 Capital expenditure 3,900.90 5,568.00 3,052.00 1,883.80 Resourced by: • Capital receipts 597.30 1799.7 1266.5 595.2 • Capital grants 1204.4 586.3 502.6 428.90 • Reserves 888.00 649 729.9 600.5 Unfinanced capital expenditure 1,211.20 2,533.00 553.00 259.20

Borrowing need and external debt limits

10. The CFR is the Council’s debt position in relation to capital assets. It results from the capital activity of the Council and what resources have been used to pay for the cumulative capital expenditure. It represents the 2013/14 and prior years’ unfinanced capital expenditure which has not yet been paid for by revenue or other resources.

11. Part of the Council’s treasury activity is to address the funding requirements for this borrowing need. Depending on the capital programme, the treasury service organises the Council’s cash position to ensure sufficient cash is available to meet the capital plans and cash flow requirements. This may be sourced through borrowing from external bodies (such as the Government, through the Public Works Loan Board [PWLB] or the money markets), or utilising temporary cash resources within the Council.

12. Statutory controls are in place to ensure that capital assets are charged to revenue over the life of the asset. The Council is required to make an annual revenue charge, MRP, to reduce the CFR.

13. The total CFR can also be reduced by: • the application of additional capital financing resources (such as unapplied capital receipts); or

Page 67 4

• charging more than the statutory revenue charge (MRP) each year through a Voluntary Revenue Provision (VRP).

14. The Council’s 2013/14 MRP Policy (as required by CLG Guidance) was approved as part of the Treasury Management Strategy Report for 2013/14 on 28 February 2013.

The Council’s CFR for the year is shown below, and represents a key prudential indicator.

Table 3: CFR movement

2012/13 2013/14 2013/14 2013/14 Feb 13 Feb 14 CFR Actual Actual estimate estimate £000 £000 £000 £000 Opening balance 22,419.1 23,456.8 23,398.0 23,397.7 Add unfinanced capital expenditure (as 1,211.0 2,533.0 553.0 259.2 above) Less MRP -232.4 -485.6 -65.8 -65.8 Less VRP -9,566.0 -9,566.6 Closing balance 23,397.7 25,504.2 14,319.2 14,024.5

15. The variance against the indicator originally set in February 2013 is mainly due to three factors. Firstly, the decision taken in year to repay £7.7m of borrowing, linked to the housing stock transfer. Secondly a further £1.87m of debt, linked to vehicle and plant expenditure that had been incurred in prior years, was repaid. Thirdly, re- profiling of the vehicle and plant programme meant that only £259k was added to the CFR rather than the projected £2,533k.

16. The repayment of debt and borrowing was intended to reduce the interest payable on PWLB loans and to bring down the MRP charge linked to the vehicle plant expenditure. This has provided savings to support the 14/15 budget but also created savings in 2013/14 with interest payable £54k lower than budget and MRP £420k lower than budget.

17. The borrowing activity is constrained by prudential indicators for gross borrowing and the CFR, and by the authorised limit. In order to ensure that borrowing levels are prudent over the medium term the Council’s external borrowing must only be for a capital purpose and not to support revenue expenditure. The closing CFR was £14,025k, whereas external borrowing was £12,800k; the Council was ‘under- borrowed’ by £1,225k. This means internal cash balances are being used rather than taking on external loans. This approach is consistent with the action taken in year to pay off borrowings and reduce investment balances.

18. The authorised limit is the “affordable borrowing limit” required by s3 of the Local Government Act 2003. The Council does not have the power to borrow above this level. The table below demonstrates that during 2013/14 the Council has maintained gross borrowing within its authorised limit.

Page 68 5

19. The operational boundary is the expected borrowing position of the Council during the year. Actual external borrowing did not exceed the operational boundary at any point in the year.

20. The ratio of financing costs to net revenue stream identifies the trend in the cost of capital (borrowing and other long term obligation costs net of investment income). The reduction compared to the original estimate is due to the repayment of borrowings and reduction of investment balances. This reduced the net interest payable. The slight increase between the February 2014 updated estimate and the actual out-turn is due to less income than budgeted from the Investec portfolio.

Table 4 Summary of debt and debt cost indicators

2013/14

£000 Authorised limit 31,504.0 Operational boundary 28,547.0 Actual Maximum gross borrowing 20,500.0 position Estimate of Financing Costs : Net 8.40% revenue stream (Feb 13 estimate) Estimate of Financing Costs : Net 5.33% revenue stream (Feb 14 estimate) Actual of Financing Costs : Net revenue 5.99% stream

Treasury Position as at 31 March 2014 21. The Council’s debt and investment position is organised by the treasury management service in order to ensure adequate liquidity for revenue and capital activities, security for investments and to manage risks within all treasury management activities. Procedures and controls to achieve these objectives are well established both through Member reporting and through officer activity detailed in the Council’s Treasury Management Practices. At the beginning and the end of 2013/14 the Council‘s treasury position was as follows:

Table 5: Cash position and Capital Financing Requirement (CFR).

31/3/2013 Rate/ Average 31/3/2014 Rate/ Average Principal Return Life Principal Return Life £000 % yrs £000 % yrs External Borrowing: PWLB loans 20,500 4.35% 35.58 12,800 4.43% 40.76 CFR 23,398 14,025 Over/ (under) borrowing -2,898 -1,225 Investments and cash: Cash 1,536 0.005 call 3,106 0.32% call Investments 20,189 1.12% 0.35 13,217 0.26% 0.82

Page 69 6

22. The maturity structure of the debt and investment portfolio was as follows: Table 6: Maturity structure of borrowing and investments 31/03/2013 31/03/2014 31/03/2014

Actual Approved Actual Fixed Interest Borrowings: Under 12 months 0 Up to 25% 0 12 months and within 24 months 0 Up to 25% 0 24 months and within 5 years 0 Up to 25% 0 5 years and within 10 years 0 Up to 100% 0 10 years and above 100% Up to 100% 100% Investments: Greater than 1 year 0% 0% 0%

23. The ‘greater than 1 year’ limit in the table above relates to the internally managed investments. The investment strategy allows greater freedom to the external fund manager to place longer term investments. A full listing of the deposits held by the fund manager is presented in Appendix 2 . 24. The exposure to fixed and variable rates was as follows:

Table 7: Fixed and variable rate borrowings: 31/03/2013 31/03/2014 31/3/2014

Actual Approved Actual £m £m £m Fixed rate Up to 24.9 Up to 23 12.8 Variable rate (maturing<1 year) Up to 2.49 Up to 5 0.0

Borrowing and Investments

25. No new long term borrowing was undertaken during the year. No short term borrowing was undertaken either although £443k of interest payable to the PWLB, classed as short term borrowing on the 31/3/213 balance sheet, was paid in year.

26. £7.7m of PWLB loans were repaid during the year. In addition, a premia for early repayment of £1.1m was payable; this had no impact on the revenue account as statutory provisions allow this to be financed from capital receipts. The repayment of borrowing had a positive impact on the revenue account in year; interest payable was £54k lower than budget, mainly as the PWLB interest cost budget was based on a full year of interest payable. The 2014/15 budget reflects the lower interest payable on the reduced balance of loans.

27. The tight monetary conditions following the 2008 financial crisis continued through 2013/14. The Central Government Funding for Lending initiative provided relatively cheap cash for the high quality counterparties used by the Council; this depressed

Page 70 7

interest rates further in 2013/14. Bank Rate remained at its historical low of 0.5% throughout the year (see also the economic background section below).

28. Although there was no major deterioration in counterparty quality, the pool of institutions that the Council will trade with remains relatively small. As counterparty quality is a consideration for all investors, demand to place deposits with low risk counterparties is relatively high, which means that rates remain relatively low.

29. The Council used Investec external fund managers to invest £20m of its cash balances during 2013/14 although £9m was withdrawn during the year to pay for the £7.7m of PWLB loans plus the £1.1m of premia that were repaid. Investec place investments in line with the Council’s lending list but apply monetary limits and time criteria as set out in the fund management agreement, with the objective being preservation of capital . A full listing of the deposits held by the fund manager is presented in Appendix 2 .

30. Interest receivable was £195k lower than budgeted due to the market conditions noted above. In addition, a 3 year Gilt purchased by the external fund manager (Investec) saw some reduction in its market value as the cost of Government borrowing rose (see para 38 below). However, any losses recognised in 2013/14 will be reversed over the remaining life of the Gilt so that over its life, it will return circa 1%. The 2014/15 budgets were adjusted to reflect a lower projection on interest rates and lower cash balances following the repayment of borrowing. The performance against the benchmark return was:

Table 8: Investec performance Investments Gross Fund Manager Held at Benchmark Return 31/3/2014 Investec Asset 11,312 0.23% 0.41%

31. The Council also maintained an average balance of £13.5m of internally managed funds earning an average rate of 0.40%. The comparable performance indicator is the average 7-day LIBID rate which was 0.41%.

32. Overall, net interest payable, taking into account the savings on interest payable due to repayment of PWLB loans in year, and the decreased interest income, was £141k more than the budget.

Economic background

33. Until 2013, the economic recovery in the UK since 2008 had been the worst and slowest recovery in recent history. However, growth rebounded during 2013 to surpass all expectations, propelled by recovery in consumer spending and the housing market. Forward surveys are currently very positive in indicating that growth prospects are also strong for 2014, not only in the UK economy as a whole, but in all three main sectors, services, manufacturing and construction. This is very encouraging as there does need to be a significant rebalancing of the economy away from consumer spending to construction, manufacturing, business investment and exporting in order for this start to recovery to become more firmly established.

Page 71 8

34. However, wage inflation had been significantly below CPI inflation, so disposable income and living standards were being eroded, (although income tax cuts had ameliorated this to some extent). The recent fall in inflation (see table below) has narrowed the gap between wage increases and inflation and this gap could narrow even more during this year, especially if there is also a recovery in growth in labour productivity (leading to significant increases in pay rates). 35. With regard to the US, the main world economy, it faces similar debt problems to those of the UK, but thanks to reasonable growth, cuts in government expenditure and tax rises, the annual government deficit has been halved from its peak without appearing to do too much damage to growth, although labour force participation rates remain lower than ideal. 36. As for the Eurozone, concerns subsided considerably during 2013. However, sovereign debt difficulties have not gone away and major concerns could return in respect of any countries that do not dynamically address fundamental issues of low growth, international un-competitiveness and the need for overdue reforms of the economy, (as Ireland has done). It is, therefore, possible over the next few years that levels of government debt to GDP ratios could continue to rise to levels that could result in a loss of investor confidence in the financial viability of such countries. This could mean that sovereign debt concerns have not disappeared but, rather, have only been postponed . 37. The impact in year of these factors has been an initial pressure on Gilt prices due to private sector driven growth. The increase in the cost of government debt negatively impacted the value of Gilts already held by the authority. This was partially off-set by events later in the year such as disruption in the Ukraine, which lead to a flight to quality and reversed much of the increase. The 40 year PWLB certainty rate started the year at 4.05% peaked at 4.52% in September and fell back to 4.31% by year end.

Table 9: Summary Economic Data

Changes Economic Data 31/03/2013 31/03/2014 % FTSE 100 6,491 6,598 1.65% Target Inflation (CPI) 2.80% 1.60% -42.86% Headline Inflation (RPIJ) 2.70% 1.80% -33.33% UK Bank Rate 0.50% 0.50% 0.00%

Conclusions

38. Overall, 2013/14 has seen a continuation of the themes from previous years, namely relatively low investment returns and the use of a limited pool of high quality counterparties.

39. The out-turn on the capital programme has not led to any new borrowing being required, however there has been repayment of £7.7m of long term loans in the year. This has significantly reduced the level of borrowing, debt and investments which has had a positive impact on the revenue budget in both 2013/14 and future years. There may be scope to repay further debt in future. As interest rates are expected to rise, the level of premia should fall but so will the relative net interest cost; the position will continue to be monitored by Officers and the Capita Asset Management.

Page 72 Appendix 2 The purpose of this appendix is to give details of the balances held by Investec as at 31/3/2014

Long term Sovereign Rating Value including Counterparty Instrument type Country (lowest) accrued interest Maturity date Yield (%) UK Government Gilt UK AA+ 2,974,504 07/09/2017 1.36 National Australia Bank Ltd Certificate of deposit Australia AAA 701,369 19/05/2014 0.43 Nationwide Building Society Certificate of deposit UK AA+ 800,445 20/05/2014 0.43 Svenska Handelsbank Certificate of deposit Sweden AAA 500,925 30/05/2014 0.45 Standard Chartered Certificate of deposit UK AA+ 900,407 30/05/2014 0.46 Bank of Nova Scotia Certificate of deposit Canada AAA 500,131 04/06/2014 0.46 Deutsche Bank Certificate of deposit Germany AAA 800,473 14/05/2014 0.48

Investec Money Fund Money Market Fund UK AA+ 4,038,631 2 day notice 0.17 Page 73 Cash Cash UK AA+ 94,730 2 day notice 0

Total balance 11,311,615

Terms used: The value of Gilts may vary as there is an active secondary market for these instruments. However, if held to maturity, the full capital value is repayable along with the interest payable.

Certifiactes of deposit are short-term marketable instruments with a maturity up to five years.

A money market fund is a highly liquid investment vehicle where investors purchase units in a fund built up of a range of short term, low risk instruments. This page is intentionally left blank

Page 74 Item No.13

South Lakeland District Council Cabinet 23 July 2014 Council 28 July 2014 DRAFT MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN

PORTFOLIO: Councillor Peter Thornton - Promoting South Lakeland and Finance Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: Shelagh McGregor - Assistant Director Resources and S151 Officer

REPORT AUTHOR: Helen Smith - Financial Services Manager

WARDS: Not applicable

KEY DECISION NO: Not applicable

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME 1.1 This report presents the draft Medium Term Financial Plan, incorporating the Financial Strategy and the Budget Strategy (referred to collectively as the MTFP). The report was considered by Overview and Scrutiny on the 15 July. Cabinet are being asked to consider the Plan prior to Council being asked to approve it at their 28 July meeting. The Plan ensures the Council has a sound basis for allocating resources and effective financial management over the medium term.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that the Cabinet:- (1) Consider comments from Overview and Scrutiny Committee (2) Consider the Draft Medium Term Financial Plan (3) Agree comments to be taken forward for consideration at the Council meeting on 28 July 2014

It is recommended that the Council (1) Consider the comments from Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Cabinet regarding the Draft Medium Term Financial Plan (2) Approve the Draft Medium Term Financial Plan attached as the Council’s formal Plan

Page 75

3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 The Council has produced a MTFP for several years, usually approved alongside the budgets in early spring. Last year the MTFP was updated in July to give an opportunity to incorporate the outcomes of the Spending Review. It was felt this was beneficial in giving an opportunity for an additional year of actual expenditure to be built into the plan and to link the outturn report to the strategy. This year the timing has been repeated but the Budget Strategy, normally a separate report to Cabinet in August and Council in September has been incorporated into the MTFP. 3.2 The financial projections were last reported to Council in February 2014. These projections have been updated to reflect the 2013/14 outturn. Officers are still finalising the 2018/19 projections, which will be reported in more detail during the forthcoming budget process. The national economic outlook has been based on forecasts produced by the Office of Budget Responsibility in March 2014. 3.3 A number of national studies have been produced considering the state of Council finances and considering best practice in the preparation of financial plans. Relevant messages have been incorporated into the draft MTFP. A list of documents is included as an appendix to the MTFP. 3.4 The Draft MTFP is attached at Appendix 1 (the document includes 13 supporting documents). Key messages from the updated MTFP are:

a) Projected surplus and deficits – this MTFP presents a largely balanced position for each of the 3 future years ie 2015/16 to 2017/18. It should be noted however that this position is based on a significant number of assumptions as detailed in the following pages, in particular the delivery of agreed savings totalling £1.7m by 2017/18. The indicative position for 2018/19 is an additional deficit of circa £0.5m. This position will be constantly reviewed and reported as part of the 2014 Budget Process and update reports. b) Balancing the Budget – Options totalling £2.9m, that enable a largely balanced position to be reached annually to 2017/18 have been developed by the Senior Management Team and Cabinet Members. Savings totalling £1.2m were included as part of the base budgets from 2014/15. Work is progressing well to implement the options designed to deliver the remaining balance of £1.7m by 2017/18.

c) Revenue Support Grant reduced by 19% in 2014/15 and is expected to reduce by a further £1.5m by 2018/19: an overall reduction of 73% from April 2013. The position following the General Election is difficult to predict but the assumptions included in the Government’s Budget 2014 have been used as an indication of the likely level of cuts.

Page 76

d) New Homes Bonus – While the estimated grant for this Council in 2014/15 is £358k, a considerable increase on the £230k received in 2013/14, it is still the fifth lowest level in the country. Many other authorities are able to offset reductions in other grants using this source; SLDC is at a considerable disadvantage. Following many years of low growth in housing numbers, it is projected that 250 new homes will be completed annually from 2015/16 onwards. e) Non Domestic Rates (NDR) – From 2013/14 district authorities retain a proportion of the increase in NDR collected. This is a very complex system and there were considerable uncertainties about how exactly it would work; regulations were still being approved in May 2014. The financial model presumes net nil growth and adds inflation at 2%. This produces income of circa £3m per annum. f) Fees and Charges generate circa £9m. The financial model assumes a 2% increase per annum in these income budgets with the exception of car parking fees. g) Capital Funding – It is a challenge for the Council to generate significant general capital funds as the majority of its uncommitted capital resources are earmarked for specific purposes. The need to meet the cost of maintaining the value of the Council’s key assets is under constant review. The financial model assumes all vehicles purchased from April 2014 will be funded from borrowing. h) Reserves - the Council is currently in a strong financial position notwithstanding the issues raised above. Revenue reserves and working balances projected to total £9m by the end of 2014/15, of which £2m is earmarked. i) Council Tax - the Council froze the Council Tax for the fourth consecutive year. This was achieved by maximising efficiency savings and setting income generation at realistic levels with no significant impact on front line services. While this is the strategy that Members are keen for the authority to pursue, front line services could be affected by the remaining £1.7m in savings yet to be implemented over the next 3 year period. 3.6 Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the MTFP at their meeting on 15 July 2014. Comments from that Committee will be reported to Cabinet on 23 July and Council on 28 July 2014. The MTFP, once approved, will form the basis of the budgets to be prepared during the remainder of 2014/15 for approval in February 2015. 4.0 CONSULTATION 4.1 Various modes of consultation will be undertaken including consideration of this Plan by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Senior Management Team, Operational Managers, and Members prior to the request for approval at the 28 July 2014 Council meeting.

Page 77

5.0 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 The assumptions forming the MTFP could be amended. This is not recommended, as the proposals are regarded as the most appropriate option when considered against the need to secure financial resilience and deliver the Council Plan priorities. 6.0 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 The MTFP indicates the resources available to fund the Council Plan and how these resources will be allocated. 7.0 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial and Resources 7.1.1 Included in the report. 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 It is likely that some initiatives included will have an impact on staff. Staff will continue to be consulted where that is relevant. 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 This report has no direct legal implications 7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 Has a sustainability impact assessment been carried out? NA 7.5 Equality and Diversity 7.5.1 An equality and diversity impact assessment has not been carried out for this Plan. One is carried out as part of the future years Budget Report that will follow this strategic direction. Risk Consequence Controls required The Council does not Potentially expenditure Robust short, medium have adequate could exceed resources and long-term financial arrangements for the available planning. identification and addressing of financial risks A full analysis of the Council’s key financial risks are detailed within the MTFP

CONTACT OFFICERS Report Author - Helen Smith, Financial Services Manager, [email protected] , 01539 793147 ANNEX ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT Annex No. 1 Draft Medium Term Financial Plan (including Appendices 1 to 13)

Page 78

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE Name of Background Where it is available document 2014/15 Budget Report http://tinyurl.com/knlx7fs

Other background documents Identified (with links) in Appendix 13 to the Draft Medium Term Financial Plan TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 09/07/14 09/07/14 09/07/14 09/07/14 This report Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer 23/7/14 n/a 28/7/14 09/07/14 09/07/14 Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s) Services Manager n/a 09/07/14 n/a

Page 79 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 80 Annex 1

SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

DRAFT MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN INCLUDING FINANCIAL STRATEGY AND BUDGET STRATEGY

2014/15 TO 2018/19

The figures in the Strategy will change as further work is undertaken. After consideration of the Strategy at the 28 July 2014 Council meeting regular updates will be provided in the light of the changing circumstances and the budget process

Date to be considered by Council 28 July 2014 Document Author & contact details Helen Smith, Financial Services Manager, [email protected] Accountable Director Shelagh McGregor, S151 Officer (co-author) Document Reference MTFP 2014-2019 Previous Review Dates and Changes Made July 2013 full review Feb 2014 updated financial position Date For Review July 2015 + at least quarterly update of financial model

Page 81

Contents: Page 1 Purpose and Key Messages 3 2 Introduction 4 3 Objectives 5 4 Financial Strategy 5 5 Vision for South Lakeland and Local Context 6 6 Financial Planning Framework 7 7 General Fund Revenue Account 7 8 Sensitivity Analysis and Scenario Planning 16 9 Reserves 17 10 Capital 18 11 Value for Money and Efficiency 19 12 Working with Partners 19 13 Consultation Strategy, Approval and 19 Communication Process 14 Equalities Impact Assessment 20 15 Budget Strategy 20 16 Conclusion and Way Forward 23

Page 2

Page 82 PURPOSE AND KEY MESSAGES FROM THE CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER

1.1. The purpose of the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) is to enable South Lakeland District Council to ensure the effective planning and allocation of resources to enable the Council to meet the objectives it has set out in its Council Plan. This has been prepared at a time of considerable uncertainty with regard to the economy and central government’s approach to public sector funding. The MTFP was considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the 15 July and will be considered by Cabinet on the 23 July before approval at Council on the 28 July 2014. Regular update reports will be provided as part of the 2014 budget process. 1.2. Projected surplus and deficits – this MTFP presents a largely balanced position for each of the 3 future years ie 2015/16 to 2017/18. It should be noted however that this position is based on a significant number of assumptions as detailed in the following pages, in particular the delivery of agreed savings totalling £1.7m by 2017/18. The indicative position for 2018/19 is an additional deficit of circa £0.5m. This position will be constantly reviewed and reported as part of the 2014 Budget Process and update reports. 1.3. Balancing the Budget – Options totalling £2.9m, that enable a largely balanced position to be reached annually to 2017/18 have been developed by the Senior Management Team and Cabinet Members. Savings totalling £1.2m were included as part of the base budgets from 2014/15. Work is progressing well to implement the options designed to deliver the remaining balance of £1.7m by 2017/18. 1.4. Central Government Funding - The fundamental change in the way local government is financed introduced in April 2013 is still developing. The key elements of funding (as well as income) for SLDC are now Revenue Support Grant (RSG) and retained Non Domestic Rates (NDR). RSG reduced by 19% in 2014/15 and is expected to reduce by a further £1.8m by 2017/18: an overall reduction of 61% from April 2013. The position following the General Election is difficult to predict but the assumptions included in the Government’s Budget 2014 have been used as an indication of the likely level of reductions in government funding. 1.5. Nationally a significant element of funding coming from central government is New Homes Bonus . The estimated level for this Council in 2014/15 is £358k which is one of the lowest levels in the country. Many other authorities are able to maintain their centrally funded element of their budgets using this source; SLDC is at a considerable disadvantage. 1.6. Non Domestic Rates (NDR) – From 2013/14 district authorities retain a proportion of the increase in NDR collected as measured against the 2012/13 base level. This is a very complex system and there were still uncertainties about how exactly it will work until very late in 2013/14. The financial model presumes net nil growth and only adds inflation to produce circa £3m per annum . 1.7. Fees and Charges generate circa £9m. The financial model assumes a 2% increase per annum in these income budgets with the exception of income from car parking fees. 1.8. Capital Funding – It is a challenge for the Council to generate significant general capital funds as the majority of its uncommitted capital resources are earmarked for specific purposes. The need to meet the cost of maintaining the value of the Council’s key assets is under constant review. The financial model assumes all vehicles purchased from April 2014 will be funded from borrowing. 1.9. Reserves - the Council is currently in a strong financial position. Revenue reserves and working balances are projected to total £9m by the end of 2014/15, of which £2m is earmarked. 1.10. Council Tax – in February 2014 the Council froze the Council Tax for the fourth consecutive year. This was achieved by maximising efficiency savings and setting income generation at realistic levels with no significant impact on front line services. While this is the strategy that Members are keen for the authority to pursue, front line services could be affected by the remaining £1.7m in savings yet to be implemented over the 3 year period. Shelagh McGregor, CFO South Lakeland District Council July 2014 Page 3

Page 83 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1. The MTFP, its assumptions and their impact on the total resources picture is visited formally twice a year, initially prior to and as part of the next year’s budget round and again as part of the Budget considered by Council annually in February. Regular updates will continue to be provided. 2.2. Medium term financial planning is a crucial part of the Council’s strategic planning and performance framework. The current economic climate and Central Government approach to how public services are to be funded in the future have significant impacts on the way the Council will be required to operate to deliver the Council Plan objectives within the resources projected to be available. Key financial decisions need to be set in the context of a plan that looks beyond the next financial year. Forward planning more effectively links service and financial planning and performance over the medium to longer term. 2.3. The Financial Strategy provides the foundation against which the Council will strive to deliver the best possible value for money in the provision of efficient and cost effective services across the District. Through the effective development and delivery of the Authority’s financial and other resource strategies it seeks to build upon past achievements as well as provide clear direction to the attainment of the Council’s longer-term goals. Financial Planning Horizons 2.4. Different techniques are used when considering the short, medium and long-term financial planning horizons since each makes a distinctive contribution to the financial health of an organisation: • Long-term planning horizon is focused on enabling the transformation of the organisation with an emphasis on being strategic and customer-led, future orientated, proactive in managing change and risk, outcome focused and receptive to new ideas. This is seen in the Financial Strategy. • Medium-term planning horizon is focused on supporting performance with an emphasis on responsiveness to customers, efficient and effective, and with a commitment to improving performance. This is seen in the Medium Term Financial Plan • Short-term planning horizon is focused on securing stewardship with an emphasis on control, probity, meeting regularity requirements and accountability. This is seen in the annual budget process which shows the detail from the Medium Term Financial Plan for the following year to set the Council tax. This document incorporates the Council’s Budget Strategy for the first time to ensure consistency between the three time horizons: short, medium and long-term financial planning. Financial Stability 2.5. The issue of financial stability is one that requires strong corporate governance supported by effective procedures, processes and controls with Council-wide involvement in supporting an integrated approach to the preparation of soundly based capital and revenue bids for resources. The Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) is based on sound financial assumptions that are based on robust assessments. The ‘robustness’ of the MTFP is highlighted in the Appendices to this strategy which show the key elements of the Council’s financial management framework. The risks log at Appendix 11 summaries the key financial risks facing the Council and the steps to be taken to mitigate these risks. 2.6. The medium-term financial planning process has been in place for a number of years and is an established part of the budget setting process. It provides a forecast of the cost of continuing to provide existing levels of service and the resources that are likely to be available to the Council over the period. It identifies any shortfalls and sets out how this will be managed. This document is reviewed regularly during the year; regular review and update is essential to ensure the MTFP takes full account of any changes in the Council’s Page 4

Page 84 aspirations, strategic and service delivery priorities, changes in government legislation, financial regulation and funding streams. 2.7. The Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) sets out how the Council will manage its revenue finances up to 2018/19 and also covers a five-year capital programme. The Strategy also highlights the longer term challenges particularly in respect of the Council’s assets. The MTFP supports the delivery of the Council’s objectives and priorities as set out in the Council Plan 2014-2019. 2.8. Underpinning the Council Plan are the individual service plans and a number of other key strategies and plans: • Corporate Asset Strategy • Capital Strategy • Information Technology Services Strategy • Workforce Plan • Procurement and Commissioning Strategy • Risk Management Strategy • Treasury Management Strategy • Economic Strategy • Housing Strategy Each strategy is approved by Full Council under the Council’s Budget and Policy Framework. 3. OBJECTIVES 3.1. The objectives of the Financial Strategy are: • To ensure priorities identified as part of the Corporate Planning process inform the MTFP including legislative requirements, timing and financial implications • To provide projections of spending, including spending pressures and income; and set expectations on Council tax increases, over the next four years • To provide projections for our investment in assets, (our capital spend) and its impact on general day to day revenue spending • To provide a robust framework to assist the decision making process • To test sensitivity of, and apply risk analysis, to projections. • To provide a framework for consultation with the public and partners about our service priorities and resources allocated to them. 4. FINANCIAL STRATEGY The Council approved its financial strategy in the 2013/14 – 2017/18 Medium Term Financial Plan approved in July 2013. The following principles were approved: • Balanced budgets : Maintain a balanced budget position, and to set a medium term financial plan maintaining and strengthening that position • Five year budgets : the Council sets budgets for a five year period. • Strong financial management: The Council controls and monitors the actual position of the authority on a regular basis setting out actions to correct any emerging issues; • Understanding of key cost-drivers: The Council analyses and reviews the key elements of the service areas including the use of benchmarking; • Asset maintenance : the Capital Programme should ensure adequate programmes of maintenance to sustain values of key assets, especially income-generating assets. • Legal transactions : the approval and adoption of the Council’s Constitution, particularly the Financial Procedure Framework and the Contract Procedure Rules set foundations for ensuring legal transactions alongside the whole system of internal control reviewed annually in the Annual Governance Statement. • Affordable investment ; to undertake a prudent level of capital investment to meet the Council’s strategic priorities and remain within prudential borrowing limits

Page 5

Page 85 • Maximise resource base; the Council will ensure the best use of physical and other assets including staff time; • Value for money ; Continuous review of budgets to ensure resources are targeted on key objectives and deliver value for money to local taxpayers. • Working with others: to ensure all services are delivered by the most appropriate body. This may require the Council to work in partnership or to facilitate provision by other bodies. • Minimise financial risk including holding reserves as appropriate and sustainable levels of debt The rest of this paper uses these principles to construct the Medium Term Financial Plan for 2014/15 – 2018/19. 5. VISION FOR SOUTH LAKELAND & LOCAL CONTEXT 5.1. The MTFP aims to support the Council’s overall vision for the District: “Making South Lakeland the best place to live, work and explore”. 5.2. The Council Plan recognises that, to continually deliver on our vision, the Council will need a more community focused strategy to deliver sustainable and cost effective services. As the Council makes further significant efficiencies it will increasingly look to share work with its communities in addressing common issues. To achieve this will need a mixed approach to service delivery. The model chosen will be dependent upon a sound business case and the most efficient delivery method, retaining in-house or private sector delivery where appropriate to do so. The Council will look to develop a social enterprise type approach where possible. 5.3. The Council Plan sets out the strategic approach to how the Council will shape delivery of the outcomes. It will be done in a number of ways: • More local – embracing neighbourhood working, engaging communities and empowering them to deliver on things that matter • Stewardship - to continue to plan and manage its resources effectively and will enhance its role as an environmental steward • Entrepreneurship – looking at where there are opportunities to reduce costs by using our knowledge and skills to become more entrepreneurial in the way we do business. • Our Members, Our Workforce – our elected members act as advocates to ensure that the needs of the local communities are identified. We need a workforce that is in the right place, at the right time, with the skills and motivation, to deliver on the Council’s priorities. 5.4. The Council plan details the Council’s Corporate Priorities, which are • Economy : “Enabling and delivering opportunities for sustainable economic growth”. • Housing: “Providing homes to meet need”. • Environment : “Protecting our environment”. • Health and Wellbeing : “Improving health and reducing health inequalities”.

The Council has a long term ambition for “1000 jobs and 1000 affordable homes for rent”. The budget setting process takes into account the priority framework and the priorities have a direct implication on the acceptability of the budget. 5.5. The Medium Term Financial Plan therefore provides the resources required to deliver the priorities stated within the Council Plan.

Page 6

Page 86 6. FINANCIAL PLANNING FRAMEWORK 6.1. The Council operates a medium term revenue and capital investment programme over a five year period. The programme is revised annually to roll forward so as to incorporate a new year, as well as to review and revise the old financial years. 6.2. The future impact of all issues have been considered as part of the 2014/15 budget setting process, including those which we already know about which may not impinge on our budgets until after the first year (2014/15). Appendix 1 shows the key stages involved in producing the budget. 7 GENERAL FUND REVENUE BUDGET Financial Context 7.1 The development of this Medium Term Financial Plan has taken place during a challenging period for Local Government balancing an unsettled economic outlook, the national budget deficit and Government-imposed austerity measures which has reduced local authority funding in recent times. 7.2 The Budget Reports for 2014/15 included updates of the financial model and concluded that the Council’s future financial outlook was likely to continue to be challenging over the next few years as reductions in overall public spending and changes in local government funding. Meeting new cost pressures requires a rigorous approach to identifying efficiencies, enhanced productivity, and reprioritisation of spending within services. Economic Outlook 7.3 The economic outlook has improved over the last 12 months with growth for 2013 of 1.8%. Consumer spending was the main driver of growth in 2013 with lower saving playing a bigger role than higher incomes in financing the rise in spending during the year. The economic growth predictions for future years are shown below: Year Growth Projection Growth Projection Budget March 2013 March 2014 2013 0.6% 1.8% (actual) 2014 1.8% 2.7% 2015 2.3% 2.3% 2016 2.7% 2.6% 2017 2.8% 2.6% 2018 n/a 2.5%

7.4 Inflation measured using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) fell slightly more quickly than expected during 2013/14 mainly due to improved domestic production of food reducing food price inflation and falling global commodity prices. At the time of writing this report, the Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) stood at 1.5% and the Retail Price Index (RPI) at 2.4%. The forecasts for future years are shown below: Year CPI projection CPI projection March 2013 (OBR) March 2014 (OBR) 2013 2.8 2.6 2014 2.3 1.9 2015 2.1 2.0 2016 2.0 2.0 2017 2.0 2.0 2018 2.0 2.0 7.5 In the short term, the CPI inflation will continue to be running around the government target of 2% and is expected to remain at, or a little below, 2%. The RPI measure is predicated to remain at a higher level compared to CPI. It is important to note that many of the Council’s

Page 7

Page 87 contracts are linked to either RPI or RPIX as an inflationary increase (although this is reviewed as part of each procurement process). 7.6 The Bank of England base rate remains at a historical low level of 0.5%, this was unchanged since March 2009 and this has had a major impact on the Council’s investment income. The base rate of interest is predicted to increase slightly from December 2015: Now March June Sept Dec Mar Mar 2015 2015 2015 2015 2016 2017 Bank Rate 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.75% 0.75% 1.75%

However, interest rates have been predicted to increase in 18 months for the last four years. The financial model prudentially assumes base rate remains at 0.5% for the duration of the model. Key Issues & Assumptions: Inflation 7.7 The 2011 Autumn Statement capped public sector pay awards at an average of 1% for both 2013/14 and 2014/15). This cap was extended in the 2013 Budget into 2015/16. The 2013 Budget also announced that the Government will seek significant further savings through reforms to progression pay in the Spending Round. While government does not control pay awards within local government it is expected that the funding to local government will be adjusted on the assumption of comparable action being taken. Local government pay was frozen for 2011/12 and 2012/13 but increased 1% from April 2013. 7.8 The MTFP financial model assumes pay inflation of 1% until 2015/16 and 2% from April 2016 onwards. The financial impact of a 1% movement in pay inflation is around £120k change in the general fund employee budget. 7.9 In the MTFP financial model inflation on contract prices has been uplifted by appropriate indices as stated in the conditions of the contracts. The projection assumes an overall averaged inflation rate of around 2% in each year. No inflationary increase has been applied to the general services budget, except specific items such as utilities. The financial impact on running costs of a 1% movement in inflation is around £100k. Pensions 7.10 South Lakeland District Council employees are eligible to be members of the Local Government Pension scheme, of which the Government sets the terms and conditions nationally. This is a statutory condition of employment available to all local government employees. 7.11 The most recently published actuarial valuations (2013) for the whole fund show that the South Lakeland Council element of the fund continues to be in deficit. The Council pays employer contributions based on a set percentage contribution for future service accrual and a fixed monetary contribution each year for past service liability instead of a set percentage contribution covering both. This should avoid the reduction in recovery of past service liability as staffing levels decline following reduction or transfer of services. The deficit will be recovered over a 16-year period. 7.12 The fixed contribution for past service liability for the 3 years from April 2014 to March 2016 has been paid as a single lump-sum payment to the pension fund in April 2014. The pension scheme can use a wider variety of investment to generate higher returns than those available to SLDC. As a result of this prepayment savings of around £230k will be made over the three year period. 7.13 The Government announced in the Budget in March 2013 that the single tier State Pension will begin in 2016/17. As part of the changes, the ability of members of a defined benefit occupational pension scheme to “contract out” of the state second pension will end. For SLDC 90% of staff are “contracted out” and as a result the Council pays a contribution rate

Page 8

Page 88 of 10.4% instead of 13.8%. Based on existing staffing, this change will increase Council’s budget from 2016/17 by around £200k per year. Service Demand & Other Budget Pressures 7.14 The economic downturn has placed additional pressures on the demand for Council services (e.g. increase in the administration of Housing benefit and Council tax discount claimants). There is also an imposed demand by Central Government on local authorities to take a major part to revitalise the local economy and at the same time bear a significant part of the governments overall austerity measures from reduced funding. 7.15 The reintroduction of the public health function to local government from April 2013 means that district councils will need to take part to promote better public health/health equality and ensure more effective health prevention with the link to sport and fitness. 7.16 Sufficient funds have been identified to allow further investment in the repairs and maintenance of Council buildings. This addresses work identified as necessary by NPS, the Council’s property management contractor. 7.17 The Council has recognised that transformational change will be required to deliver the establishment savings required in future years. It is proposed to set up the Digital Innovation Fund to finance the up-front costs of implementing the IT and associated changes required. 7.18 The 2014/15 – 2017/18 financial model assumes levels of demand will remain constant. Increases in demand are addressed as a service growth bid within the annual budget setting process. Savings 7.19 As a result of the significant deficits projected in the budges approved in February 2013 and confirmed in the MTFP approved in July 2013 officers proposed a number of savings proposals. A programme of savings was approved by members during 2013/14 and incorporated into the 2014/15 budget process. These savings are already incorporated into the financial projections in Appendix 2. 7.20 The delivery of the approved savings is closely monitored through a working party of officers and Members. During June 2014 a number of savings have been identified as unlikely to be delivered in the timescales originally set and are shown in the table below as Savings Working Group June 2014 review. Other savings include reductions in the staffing establishment which will reduce the capacity to deliver front line services in their current form. Investments in the Digital Innovation Programme are intended to address this issue, therefore some of these savings have been reprofiled. 7.21 The financial projection has been updated for these changes. The latest list of savings is shown at Appendix 2a. Cumulative 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 £000 £000 £000 £000 Savings Council February 2014 1,182 2,202 2,757 3,057 Savings adjusted by Savings Working Group 0 -125 -25 -175 Further adjustments required 0 -200 -100 0 Revised Savings Targets June 2014 1,182 1,877 2,632 2,882

of which: Savings Proposals implemented 1,182 1,182 1,182 1,182 Savings Proposals where work is in progress 695 1,450 1,700 1,182 1,877 2,632 2,882

Page 9

Page 89 Council Tax Reduction Scheme 7.22 As part of the Government’s wider policy of decentralisation, the Government localised support for Council Tax from April 2013, reducing funding by 10%. The Council is has the discretion to decide who should pay less Council tax and how much less they should pay. Council approved South Lakeland’s localised Council tax support scheme in its December 2012 meeting. The shortfall was funded through changes to the discounts and premiums for Council tax. 7.23 Council Tax Benefit Subsidy will be replaced by cash grant so the Council (and other major precepting authorities) will need to bear any costs that may arise for any increases in the Council tax benefit take up rate from April 2013 onwards. For 2013/14 the Council received grant of £565k (plus £92k relating to parish councils). From April 2014 the grant is not separately identified as it is rolled into Revenue Support Grant. 7.24 Councils are required to review their schemes on a regular basis. A paper detailing the options for the scheme is being considered by O&S in July before being forwarded for considered by Cabinet and Council later in the year. The MTFP assumes no change to the existing scheme. Universal Credits 7.25 Universal Credits were to be introduced between 2013 and 2017 through the Welfare Reform Act. However, there have been significant delays in the rolling out of the scheme. 7.26 Universal Credits is an integrated working-age credit that will provide a basic allowance with additional elements for children, disability, housing and caring. It will support people both in and out of work. For local authorities, this means the link between Housing Benefit and Council tax discounts will be broken and that universal credits will be administered by the Department of Work and Pensions. It is unclear at this stage whether there is a role for local authorities under the new system. 7.27 The fraud investigation function is transferring to the DWP’s Single Fraud Investigation Service in July 2015. The Council will need to review its own requirements moving forward and this will be reported as part of the budget process. For the purpose of the MTFP, it is assumed that the costs resulting from the reform will be fully met by the government under the new burdens doctrine. Treasury Management and Debt 7.28 The Council will continue to invest in accordance with the Treasury Management Strategy and will plan any consideration of borrowing closely through the MTFP, Corporate Asset Strategy and five year Capital Budget. It is assumed interest rates do not increase during the life of the plan. 7.29 At 1 April 2013 the Council had £20.5m borrowed from the Public Works Loan Board, an arm of H M Treasury. All was borrowed prior to March 2009, over a 40 year period to fund the Housing Decent Homes programme. Of this, £7.7m of the £20.5m was attributable to the Housing Stock and up until the end of 2012/13 interest was chargeable to the HRA. This debt was repaid during 2013/14. 7.30 The Council’s capital programme assumes the Vehicle and Plant replacement programme is funded through borrowing. Interest payments increase year-on-year in the financial model to reflect this borrowing. External Income 7.31 The Council relies on a number of external income sources and over the last few years the economic downturn affected our income streams, in particular in service areas linked to building and housing e.g. land charges and building control income. It is estimated that the total income forgone due to the economic downturn since 2008/09 is approximately £590k.

Page 10

Page 90 7.32 A number of significant fees, including liquor licences and planning application fees are set by Government. The Local Government Association has campaigned for local freedom for authorities to set fees based on local circumstances. 7.33 All fees and charges for 2015/16 onwards should be set in accordance with the Council’s Policy on Fees and Charges as set out here: Policy on Fees and Charges a. The Council is looking to optimise the potential income from fees and charges. A significant proportion of our income is from fees and charges and a balance has to be struck between meeting our statutory responsibilities and our subsidies on providing discretionary services. The Council takes the view that raising charges to recover part of costs is more preferable to removing the service completely. b. Charges are set after taking into account local circumstances (including economic conditions) and the user’s ability to pay. The Council’s fees and charges will normally increase at least in line with inflation or where appropriate statutory defined fees and charges increases. However, raising fees does not automatically increase income: the impact of changes in fees on overall income will be considered as part of the review of fees and charges. Increased or reduced income due to volume changes or charge proposals above or below inflation are addressed through the budget setting process. c. It is recognised that in developing a charging basis for specific charges it is important to consider a number of factors on an options appraisal basis i.e. considering affordability, comparability and the implications of changing charges on forecasted income levels. It is also recognised that fees and charges can be used to manage the demand for services. d. Concessionary charges should be as appropriate to the circumstances of the customer while encouraging increased participation for less advantaged groups. This should not lead to unjustifiable preferential treatment. e. The Council’s longer term policy has three fundamental principles: i. Services should explore raising income wherever there is a power or duty to do so. ii. The income raised should normally cover the full costs of providing the service including all overheads. iii. Any departures from this policy must be justified in a transparent manner with reference to the Council’s priorities and policies. f. When the Council does not raise income in areas where it has the power to do so, it foregoes the opportunity to raise money to improve services and leaves less money available for spending on high priority services. Members must be supplied with information to allow them to make decisions in a structured and explicit manner. A decision to forego income or to subsidise a service is a policy decision about resources as significant as any decision made in the budget setting process. 7.34 The Council has a good history of debt collection. The Council continues to build on this to maximise income received and minimise income written off. Monitoring information which is produced monthly has been enhanced to provide information on evaluating the effectiveness of debt recovery actions, associated costs, and the cost of not recovering debt promptly. 7.35 The financial model assumes income from external charges in general increases by 2% annually with the exception recycling credits (assume frozen) and car park income. Car parking has been excluded from this target for 2014/15 and 2015/16 to boost the economy of the area during the current economic challenge but individual charges will still be reviewed to ensure the balance of income generation is appropriate.

Page 11

Page 91 External Interest 7.36 Historically a key income stream for the Council has been the income generated from investment of cash balances. Every 1% of movement in interest rates is equivalent to approximately £100k in income; however the actual interest earned will also be affected by the level of cash balances available. In 2008/09 the Council earned £1,483k in interest on investments, by 2013/14 this had fallen to £101k despite the levels of investments being higher for the majority of the year. 7.37 The financial model assumes interest rates remain constant at 0.5% until 2017/18. Business Rates Retention 7.38 The government introduced fundamental changes to the way local government is financed from April 2013. In particular, non-domestic rates (also known as business rates) are no longer pooled and redistributed in full nationally; instead local authorities retain a proportion of business rates locally. The income will partially replace the formula grant that local authorities received to March 2013. 7.39 The Council currently collect around £40m of business rates; after the national share is paid to Government and a share is paid to Cumbria County Council a tariff is deducted and the Council estimates it will retain around £2.7m in 2014/15, rising to £2.9m by 2017/18. 7.40 The business rates retention scheme is intended to create incentives for local authorities to promote business growth over the long term, thereby strengthening the link between local authorities and local businesses without changing the way that businesses pay their business rates, nor increasing the level of business rates that they pay, and reduce local authorities’ dependency upon central government. 7.41 From the financial planning’s perspective, how much income each local authority can retain is difficult to predict and can potentially fall or rise during a financial year. Additional complication was caused by very late amendments to the calculation of the scheme, particularly the treatment of grants to offset additional discounts announced in the 2013 and 2014 Budgets. The financial model assumes: • net nil growth in rateable values (with increases from new businesses offset by reductions through appeals and refunds) • the multiplier (pence paid in the pound), which is set by Government, increases by inflation • around 25% of appeals are successful • the existing arrangements for small business rate relief and other reliefs announced in the 2014 Budget continue and the s31 grant currently paid continues in its current form. • No changes in the calculations for reliefs, grants and levy. No adjustments have been made for the impact of the revaluation of rateable values in 2017: the model assumes the tariff will be adjusted to ensure a neutral impact for individual authorities. 7.42 From April 2014 the Council has entered a business rates pool with Cumbria County Council and all the district councils in Cumbria except Copeland. The pool expects to reduce the total amount of levy paid by authorities within the pool but would not be eligible for payment from the Government safety net if income fell substantially. The additional levy is shared between the pooling authorities based on the additional levy generated and the amount of business rate income retained after tariffs and top-ups. The table below shows the amount it is estimated the Council would have paid in levy if the pool did not exist and an estimate of the levy that would be retained by SLDC. These figures are particularly difficult to estimate because they are also based on the business rate accounts of four other local authorities.

Page 12

Page 92 Potential income from pool: 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Levy due to Government except for pool: 766.6 711.0 724.7 738.7 752.9 Allocation of surplus from pool: 40% based on levy 306.6 284.4 289.9 295.5 301.1 40% based on baseline 6.7 6.2 6.3 6.5 6.6 where the SLDC baseline as % of whole pool is 2.19% 2.19% 2.19% 2.19% 2.19% 20% to volatility reserve 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 313.3 290.6 296.2 301.9 307.7 Under the pooling agreement all additional income as a result of the pool must be earmarked for economic development. The MTFP assumes that this additional income will not be recognised until the pool accounts have been audited so the use of the 2014/15 income would be determined during the preparation of the 2017/18 budget process during autumn 2016. Each authority in the pool has to review each year if it wishes to continue to remain in the pool. Revenue Support Grant 7.43 From April 2013 the Local Government Finance Settlement replaced formula grant with retained business rates and a recalculated Revenue Support Grant (RSG). RSG is the main general government grant received by local authorities. Under the new system the Council received £3.0m of grant in 2013/14 but has dropped to £2.388m for 2014/15 and will drop to £1.678m by 2015/16 (based on the provisional settlement figures given by the DCLG in February 2014). 7.44 The percentage drop in RSG is greater than the overall reduction in local government funding as the funding from retained business rates rises by inflation. When the Settlement Funding Assessment was introduced in April 2014 funding was split with 60% from RSG and 40% from Baseline Funding Level (for business rates). By 2015/16 the proportion from RSG will have fallen to 54%: 2014/15 Final Illustrative Movement Settlement 2015-16 Settlement £m £m % Settlement Funding Assessment 4.392 3.736 -15% of which: Revenue Support Grant 2.389 1.678 -30% Baseline Funding Level 2.003 2.058 3% 7.45 The figures in the financial model are based on Government announcements including the Budget 2014 and the final settlement 2014/15. They are based on models produced on behalf of SPARSE and the Rural Services Network, who co-ordinated the response of many rural authorities to proposed changes in the apportionment of RSG. They reflect all Government announcements up to and including the Budget 2014 and the final settlement 2014/15. RSG will fall significantly as the austerity cuts are projected to continue until at least 2017/18. 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Estimated RSG £000 -3014 -2389 -1598 -1370 -1140 -805 Movement year-on year £000 625 791 228 230 335 Movement year-on year % -21% -33% -14% -17% -29%

New Homes Bonus Scheme 7.46 The New Homes Bonus Scheme was introduced in 2011/12 as a way to encourage local authorities to facilitate housing growth. In essence, for every additional property built or

Page 13

Page 93 brought back into use, the government match funds the additional Council tax, with an additional amount for affordable homes, for the following six years. The grant is top sliced from Revenue Support Grant and paid as a un-ring fenced grant and it is split 80% to district councils and 20% to the relevant county council. South Lakeland received a new homes bonus grant of £358k in 2014/15. 7.47 For the purpose of the MTFP, the income beyond 2014/15 is estimated to increase based on an additional 250 new homes per annum. 7.48 The Council resolved to earmark the monies from the New Homes Bonus into an earmarked reserve to be split 60:40 between support for affordable housing and Locally Important Projects (LIPs), including community planning. The locally important projects element includes use of New Homes Bonus to fund a budget of £51,000, giving £1,000 for each member for community projects identified by each member in their wards. Any unspent grant at the end of the year returns to the main LIPs budget. New Homes Bonus: 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Total £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 February 2014 projection 358.0 415.2 471.4 501.9 534.4 2,280.9 July 2014 projection 358.0 568.3 778.5 962.9 1,124.7 3,792.4 Additional NHB projected 0.0 153.1 307.1 461.0 590.3 1,511.5

40% allocated to Locally Important Projects 143.2 227.3 311.4 385.2 449.9 1,517.0 60% allocated to Affordable Housing 214.8 341.0 467.1 577.7 674.8 2,275.4 358.0 568.3 778.5 962.9 1,124.7 3,792.4 Council tax Freeze Grant 7.49 The Localism Act gives local communities the power to approve or veto excessive Council tax rises. The Secretary of State will determine a limit for Council tax; if an authority proposes to raise taxes above this limit they will have to hold a referendum to approve or to veto the rise. For 2014/15 this level was 2%. 7.50 The MTFP assumes Council tax will continue to be frozen for 2014/15 and 2015/16. This Council last increased the Council tax in April 2010. Although the Council has received Council tax freeze grant to offset some of the income foregone by freezing the Council tax this does not fully offset the impact of the freeze on the baseline for calculating future year’s income. Whilst the current political environment supports this approach, it significantly erodes the base income level from this source. Council Tax 7.51 The Council is committed to do all it can to reduce the financial burdens placed upon its residents during the current economic downturn and the Council was able to freeze its average band D Council tax for the fourth consecutive year in February 2014. 7.52 The Council has limited income generated from Council tax; for every 1% increase in the average Band D Council tax; there is only an additional £44k of income. 7.53 The MTFP assumes the Council’s average band D Council tax will be 0% and 2.0% for 2015/16 and 2016/17 onwards respectively. Due to the uncertainty surrounding the level of future funding from government and the unpredictability of external income Council tax is the most stable of income sources for the Council. The current rules prevent future increases in Council Tax above a certain level (currently 2%). Therefore any decision to freeze Council Tax must consider the medium and long-term implications on the Council’s financial stability. The decision on Council Tax will be reviewed every year as part of the budget and Council tax setting process. Taxbase for Council Tax Setting 7.54 The Local Government Finance Act 2012 included a number of ‘technical changes’ to Council tax that give Councils the opportunity to change existing discounts or exemptions and to introduce premiums. In order to offset the additional costs of the Council tax Page 14

Page 94 Reduction Scheme, the Council opted to remove the discount on second homes from (previously 10%) and amend the discounts for certain empty properties. Properties that are classified as empty for more than 2 years will pay a 50% premium. 7.55 The financial model assumes the taxbase will increase by around 250 properties, in line with the projections for New Home Bonus. It is assumed there will be no changes in the levels of discounts granted and levels of discounts are being closely monitored to see if this assumption is reasonable. 250 new properties will generate around £40k pa of additional Council tax. 2014/15 General Fund Budget 7.56 As part of the 2014/15 budget setting process, information was examined relating to the level of existing resources in each service areas, including the number of staff employed and comparisons have been drawn with historical expenditure data to identify savings areas. All budget options have been considered in the context of current service performance and priorities and all the growth bids went through a challenge process. 7.57 The details of the 2014/15 general fund revenue budget, including growth and savings can be found in the 2014/15 Budget report submitted to Council in February 2014. Budget Surplus / Deficit 7.58 As a result of the updates to assumptions the financial model (detailed in Appendix 2) shows modest surpluses and deficits over the future 3 year period. The table below shows the latest projected surpluses and deficits and the reasons for the changes: 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 £000 £000 £000 £000 Projected (surplus) / deficit February 2014 Council: 0.0 (333.0) 11.0 187.0 Movement in projected deficit since February 2014 (for (14.0) 219.0 (105.0) (114.0) analysis of movement, see below) Latest projected (surplus) / deficit (14.0) (114.0) (94.0) 73.0

Reason for movement: Additional income on investments (24.0) (22.0) (56.0) (18.0) Savings from pension prepayment (26.0) (76.0) (128.0) 0.0 Additional income from business rates (64.0) (349.0) (331.0) (316.0) Savings Working Group June 2014 changes 0.0 125.0 25.0 175.0 Additional investment in Repairs and Maintenance 0.0 200.0 200.0 0.0 spend Digital Innovation Fund 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 Reprofiling of savings 0.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 Assume no inflationary increase in car parking income 0.0 81.0 165.0 165.0 Assumed increase in taxbase 0.0 (40.0) (80.0) (120.0) Total Movement in projected (surplus) / deficit (14.0) 219.0 (105.0) (114.0)

The most significant changes in the projections are as a result of updating the income from business rates to reflect the final outturn for 2013/14 and applying the same principles to the calculations for future years. 7.59 These projections are based on the achievement of all savings proposals approved to date and that the underlying assumptions around income and expenditure changes are robust. First draft projections for 2018/19 suggest the deficit will increase to just over £500k, mainly as a result in the reduction in government grant. Further work will be carried out to test the underlying assumptions: updates on the projected deficit for 2018/19 will be reported during the 2014 budget process. 7.60 The Council is focused on achieving savings, primarily through efficiencies. During the budget and planning process there is an emphasis on ensuring resources are directed in

Page 15

Page 95 the appropriate areas with service efficiencies monitored and reviewed highlighting where further savings can be made. 7.61 The Council has a good record for delivering savings: the base budgets already included over £3m of savings which were achieved prior to March 2013. A further programme of savings was approved by Members during 2013/14 which is included in the projections above. These savings proposals are closely monitored to ensure they are still achievable. 8 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS AND SCENARIO PLANNING 8.1 Risk Management is a key feature of the Council’s financial planning process. The Council is very aware of the need for effective risk management and considers that the assessment and minimisation of all types of risk to be vital. It has an adopted Risk Management Strategy in place, and the financial risks to the Council are assessed in the context of the Council’s overall approach to risk management. 8.2 To mitigate risk the Council: • regularly monitors its budgets, • the corporate Risk Management Process is used by South Lakeland to identify, monitor and report on risks, • Quarterly performance monitoring reports provides a platform for the Members to scrutinise the financial and non-financial performance (e.g. local and national indicators). 8.3 Details of the risks facing the Council were discussed in section 7 and the table below summarises the financial implications if assumptions made in the MTFP change in the future (the details of which are included in section 7 also). This gives some indications to the kind of risks which need to be allowed for in considering the level of reserves in future years. Estimated financial impact 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Assumption £000 £000 £000 £000 Inflation - Pay award 1% higher than assumed 121.7 124.8 129.7 128.2 Pension contribution - contribution rate 1% higher 193.4 227.3 282.7 288.4 than expected Inflation on contracts - 1% higher than assumed 110.9 92.7 91.4 90.0 Average investment interest rate - 1% lower than 61.2 51.7 46.6 45.6 assumed Retained Business Rates income 1% lower than 20.6 21.7 22.6 23.5 assumed RSG 1% lower than assumed 22.3 18.1 14.2 14.2 Income from car parks 1% lower than assumed 41.7 42.5 43.4 43.4 Income from Council tax £1 lower than assumed 78.2 79.8 81.4 83.0 8.4 Some of the greatest risks are around the assumptions relating to income from non- domestic rates and from Government through RSG. The Spending Round 2013 and Budget 2014 clarified the overall assumptions to be taken for projecting future RSG entitlement, although figures for individual authorities often vary significantly from the average overall change. Individual figures will not be known until the Local Government Finance settlement in December 2014. 8.5 There are also a number of variables that will have an impact on income from business rates. Depending on the assumptions made, income retained by the Council in 2017/18 could vary by around 25% or £700k. 8.6 The Council constantly reviews the form and content of its MTFP to ensure it meets good practice. During 2013 Grant Thornton, the Council’s external auditors, produced a good practice questionnaire: this has been completed and is included as Appendix 3.

Page 16

Page 96 8.7 All local authorities are required to ensure there are sufficient resources available to meet the expenditure in the year: the Council receives a formal report from the Chief Finance Officer (for SLDC the Assistant Director Resources) as part of the budget setting process. There are a number of factors that may push a local authority into tipping into unstainable expenditure. Grant Thornton identified a number of scenarios which may cause this “tipping point”, shown at Appendix 4. Not all authorities share the same level of resilience or risk. 8.8 The Local Government Association assessed the particular issues addressing individual local authorities. Appendix 5 summarises their funding position for this Council. The main risk identified is the low tax buoyancy due to low levels of house building in the district over the last 5 years. Providing the assumptions in this MTFP are sound, the policies and recommendations are followed and the savings targets are met the Council is not expected to fall into deficit. 9 RESERVES 9.1 The Council will retain its approved minimum Working Balance level of £1.5m, reviewing this regularly in the light of changing financial risk assessment. Risks to the Council’s financial position could derive potentially from budget overspend, loss of investment income, contractual/legislative failure or challenge and emergency events. Historically, the Council has a good record of outturn financial position being within budget, therefore this is not seen as a high risk to the Council and it is not necessary to make additional significant provision. 9.2 The Council also considers the impact of holding monies unnecessarily in reserves given the ongoing impact of the economic downturn to local residents and taxpayers. The Department for Communities and Local Government has been critical of councils holding significant reserves in these difficult economic times, encouraging them if at all possible to release some of them. The External Auditor closely examines the Council’s actual and required reserves position each year to ensure the amounts held are sufficient but not excessive. It should be stressed that there is no theoretically “correct” level because the issues that affect an authority’s need for reserves will vary over time. 9.3 The level of risk posed by contractual or legislative failure and emergency events is difficult to predict, but it would be a low probability with a potentially high impact. However, it is not appropriate to set aside large amounts of reserve against the possibility of this happening. Appendix 6 assesses the main financial risks facing the General Fund revenue accounts and the suggested appropriate level of reserve required to offset this risk, were it to materialise. 9.4 In setting budgets and projections for individual years, it is important that the use of reserves is sustainable and not increasing and creating an unsustainable future problem. The fundamental principle within the Council’s Policy on Reserves and Balance governing the use of reserves is that they should not be used to fund recurring expenditure. If exceptional circumstances make this a necessity, the use of the reserve should be clearly stated and approved as an exception to the rule. 9.5 Actual levels of reserves are expected to be around £9m by 31/3/15 of which around £2m are earmarked. A summary of the expected levels of reserves at the start and end of 2014/15 are shown below. A copy of the policy for reserves and balances can be found in Appendix 7 including details of the projected balance on each reserve. A reserve to enable the investment in economic development projects is earmarked from the General Reserve in 2014/15. The balances beyond 2014/15 are less certain as expenditure from reserves and working balances to meet unexpected demands obviously cannot be predicted.

Page 17

Page 97 Projected Balance Balance 31/3/14 31/3/15 £000 £000 Revenue Reserve 5,758.9 5,570.9 Capital Reserves 420.0 250.0 Earmarked Reserves 1,881.7 1,781.6 Working Balance 1,500.0 1,500.0 Total Reserves and Balances 9,560.6 9,102.5 10 CAPITAL Capital spend and funding 10.1 The Council’s Capital Strategy sets out how the Council will manage its capital investments in the future. It is agreed on an annual basis and serves the following purposes: • It sets out how capital contributes to the achievement of the Council’s corporate objectives. • It establishes the criteria for the allocation of capital resources. • It provides a framework for the administration of capital projects and monitoring of outcomes 10.2 The Capital Strategy approved by the Council in July 2013 was the basis for the preparation of the current Capital Programme. Appendix 8 updates the Capital Strategy to reflect the current financial situation. All capital investment and disposal decisions have been made with reference to the strategic objectives within the Council Plan . 10.3 The Council’s capital programme has in general been funded by the use of capital receipts, contributions, major repairs reserve or from capital grants. The current five year capital programme is underpinned by capital receipts generated through the LSVT. Other capital income has declined significantly - capital grants have diminished and there are few non- earmarked capital receipts. The Council is able to use receipts from sales of General Fund assets and Council House sales to fund any type of capital expenditure. 10.4 The Capital Programme needs to reflect the capital expenditure necessary to maintain its key assets over the long-term, especially revenue generating assets such as multi-storey car parks. 10.5 The capital programmes for 2013/14 to 2017/18 was approved by Council in February 2014. The programme shown at Appendix 9 has been updated for requested carry- forwards from 2013/14 underspends and new requests. Ideally any new schemes would bring alternate external funds or new capital receipts from the sale of assets. Revenue implications of capital programme 10.6 One of the key drivers for the Council’s approach to capital expenditure is revenue affordability. Most Capital Projects have financial implications on the annual Revenue Budget. The revenue implications can take a variety of forms and they include: • Capital financing costs • Loss of investment income • Annual non-capital financing costs, e.g. salaries, rent, rates, energy costs, on-going maintenance costs and any income generated from the scheme or project 10.7 One of the largest revenue cost is the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP). This is the statutory requirement to charge the revenue account with the principle cost of borrowing over the life of the asset created. For the purposes of this calculation, borrowing is treated as any expenditure not funded by capital receipts or contributions.

Page 18

Page 98 10.8 The Council’s Capital Strategy has traditionally used leasing or borrowing to fund the purchase of vehicles and plant. This has resulted in a large increase in the projected MRP. By applying capital receipts to the Vehicle and Plant spend for 2010/11 and 2012/13 it has been possible to reduce the MRP, although it has reduced the level of resources available for funding future capital expenditure. 10.9 The table below shows how the MRP is projected to increase to reflect the additional costs arising from using borrowing to fund the vehicle and plant replacement programme: 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Projected vehicle and plant capital expenditure 2,221 148 373 1,607 1,199 Projected MRP 145 413 407 461 690 These projections are included in the General Fund financial model in Appendix 2 and the General Fund deficit projections discussed above in section 7. 11 VALUE FOR MONEY AND EFFICIENCY 11.1 Value for Money (VFM) is an assessment of whether or not we obtain the maximum benefit from the goods and services we both acquire and provide, within the resources available to achieve it. This assessment includes considerations about suitability, quality, whole life costs and the relationship between economy, efficiency and effectiveness. 11.2 Value for money remains an integral part of the external audit opinion. The general feedback was that the Council had consolidated previous improvements and demonstrates good value for money across our services. 11.3 The Council’s Value for Money Strategy (Appendix 10) provides a framework on how the Council aims to maximise its resources. 12 WORKING WITH PARTNERS 12.1 The Council is committed to working with partners and other key stakeholders to deliver services within South Lakeland. This includes • Formal contractual arrangements as a result of competitive tendering • Transfer of assets between organisations • Sharing of premises • Informal collaborations The One South Lakeland strategic partnership exists to promote strong partnership working in areas where the Council is not the lead organisation. Some shared arrangements exist for providing services within the organisation: currently South Lakeland shares procurement, IT and Revenues and Benefits management with Eden District Council. 13 CONSULTATION STRATEGY, APPROVAL AND COMMUNICATION PROCESS 13.1 The Council carries out regular consultation with local people, customers, stakeholders, and partners organisations to establish current and future needs and priorities of the community. The MTFP is submitted to Cabinet annually for approval. It is subject to challenge and scrutiny through the Overview and Scrutiny Committee before final approval by Council. 13.2 Once approved the MTFP will be communicated to stakeholders. This will include using the internet/intranet and newsletters to staff and customers. 13.3 The MTRP is reviewed at least quarterly and forecasts are updated as necessary and reported as part of the Quarterly Corporate Financial Monitoring process and during the Budget process. 13.4 The Council consults on its budget proposals with business ratepayers in accordance with statutory requirements.

Page 19

Page 99 14 EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENTS (EIA) 14.1 The Council is committed to ensuring equality and diversity issues are given proper consideration. Equality Impact Assessments are an important part of our decision making to enable us to assess the impact of decisions on our residents, stakeholders and customers. Where the impact is high mitigation plans can be developed to reduce the impact of decisions. These are completed in accordance with national guidance and best practice. 14.2 In developing individual budget proposals officers have undertaken equality impact assessments. An overall equality impact assessment was prepared for the 2014/15 budget process and proposals and this will be reviewed as part of each annual budget process. 15 BUDGET STRATEGY 15.1 In previous years the Council’s Budget Strategy has been considered as a separate document during the late summer prior to the preparation of the detailed budgets. It is considered to be more effective to combine the budget strategy with the MTFP: this ensures the two parts of the budget process are seamless and consistent. Therefore the proposed budget strategy is shown below: Proposed 2015/16 Budget Strategy a) This proposed Budget Strategy explains the approach to setting a balanced budget for 2015/16 in accordance with the timetable set out in Appendix 1. Through the MTFP updates, corporate issues have been addressed that alter the position from the budget that was approved on 25 February 2014. b) To address future deficits, savings options have been approved for 2014/15 and for future years. Savings will also be sought to provide funding for growth and budget pressures to ensure the Council Plan priorities are delivered. Members will be asked to consider the range of options for savings put forward and which are to be consulted on. These may include: • increasing income • reducing costs by improving service efficiency • reduction of costs through cutting overheads • alternative service delivery mechanisms • ceasing to deliver services c) The detailed service and capital budgets will be reviewed to ensure that these remain reasonable, with reference to the 2013/14 out-turn, monitoring during 2014/15 and the Service Managers’ knowledge of any changes due to take effect over the budgeting time frame. General Fund Services d) The savings identified through the Organisational Review and previous corporate savings exercises have been built into the base budgets as part of the 2014/15 approved budget. The overall General Fund Service budget strategy is that: • budgets will be updated by Finance for known, externally-driven changes to salaries including inflation; they will also update capital charges and recharges; • all establishment changes must be treated as growth bids and forwarded to Human Resources Committee at the appropriate time; • virements and minor (less than £25k gross) cost neutral changes can be made to base budgets without bid documents; • cost-neutral budget changes of £25k (gross) and above need to be submitted as savings and growth bids, signed-off by the Assistant Directors (AD); • all other changes, including those that are statutory or demand led will need to be brought forward as savings and growth proposals, signed-off by the AD and Portfolio Holder. e) More detail of the approach is given below: Page 20

Page 100 i. Salary budgets are increased by known incremental advances. For 2014/15 and 2015/16 1% will be included for inflationary pay awards with 2% included from 2016/17 onwards. A 3% reduction will be allowed for vacancies and turnover on all salary cost centres; posts which are currently vacant will be budgeted at the scale mid-point; rates and thresholds for PAYE and LGPS deductions will be updated. ii. No allowance will be made for inflation in expenditure budgets unless contractually committed or unavoidable (e.g. energy, fuel and utility bills); the current inflation assumptions built in to the base will be reviewed and updated where necessary. iii. Future year’s income base budgets already have inflationary growth built into them (with the exception of car parking for 2015/16 and 2016/17). Where this cannot be met or managed through reductions in expenditure, this will be identified as a growth bid. iv. Fees and Charges need to be consistent with income budgets. This process must involve: a. review of 2013/14 out-turn and any relevant multi-year trends; b. review of current 2014/15 budget position; c. review of future year income budget; and d. assessment of the options for any changes to fees (structures as well as tariff) and the impact of this on the income budget. e. For any service area where income budgets are £100k or more per annum, this process will be documented. All services will review the potential for new fees. v. Growth bids: the delivery of the Council Plan requires constant review of budgets to ensure funding is available to deliver the Council Plan priorities. Any increases to expenditure or decreases to income base budgets (excluding i and ii above) will be either matched corporately by a compensating saving or will need to be submitted as growth bids. The de- minimis is set at £25k. Growth bids will be required to demonstrate how they will deliver the Council Plan priorities. vi. Existing base budgets will be challenged to identify savings that can be released to offset projected budget deficits and to fund growth. Growth will only be released in the budget process when a balanced budget is achieved. An element of growth is built into the MTFP figures with £150k in 2015/16 growing to £450k by 17/18. vii. Work to date on the Corporate Property Strategy will be reviewed to ensure that budgets reflect any changes as a result of the on-going review of the Council’s property assets. viii. Reserves will be used in accordance with their agreed policies with the fundamental principle that they are not used to fund recurring expenditure. ix. Effective consultation will be carried out in accordance with the Corporate Consultation strategy. x. Schemes which attract external funding should be considered in the light of the capacity to deliver these and need to be prioritised with reference to the Council plan. xi. The Budget assumes a 0% Council tax increase for 2014/15 and 2015/16 and then 2% onwards. The decision on the actual Council tax each year

Page 21

Page 101 will be taken by Council in February and will be influenced by current Government policy and the influence of this on local government funding. xii. The working balance contributions be reviewed against the current long- term target minimum General Fund working balance of £1,500,000 by 31 March 2017; any surplus over this target should be transferred to the General Reserve. Capital f) The approach to setting the capital programme will be as follows: i. A longer-term view will be taken of spending needs to balance priorities and resources more evenly over the life of the capital programme. The Council’s property advisors (NPS) will be consulted as to the on-going maintenance programme with the aim being to develop a 10 year programme for recurring capital costs. ii. Bids for new initiatives which recover the investment in a 5 year period will be prioritised. Capital Bid documents will be required prior to a scheme being accepted as part of the Capital Programme. These are to be signed- off by the relevant Portfolio Holder and will be prioritised by Members as part of developing the 2014/15 to 2024/25 Capital Programme. iii. Schemes which attract external funding should be considered in the light of capacity to deliver these and need to be prioritised with reference to the Council plan. iv. Existing schemes within the programme will also be reviewed with reference to their progress and any external funding restrictions v. Capital receipts will only be committed once they have been received. Although there are known sources of capital receipts (e.g. South Lakes Housing VAT Shelter/Right to Buy receipts), future aspirations will take into account the resources required to support unavoidable recurring costs. Right to Buy receipts will be earmarked for social housing to replace the units sold that generated the receipt. Budget Process

g) The approach to the review of the current-year budget, based on budget monitoring, will continue. In addition, a service mapping exercise will be undertaken to review the Council’s revenue costs. The 5 year position will be set out as part of the process. h) Regular budget reports will be provided to inform Members on the emerging issues. This is will integrate information from review of base budgets, higher level factors (such as the grant settlement) represented in the MTFP and the corporate savings process. i) Following approval of these proposals, Assistant Directors, managers and finance staff will work together on the preparation of budgets based on the strategy set out (ensuring consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holders). Work will continue to be undertaken on refining the options for reducing the deficits currently projected and inclusion in the future Budget reports. j) The Draft Budget and Council Plan will be consulted on in accordance with the Consultation Plan. The Draft Budget will also be subject to the statutory four week period post the 11 December 2014 Council meeting.

Page 22

Page 102 16 CONCLUSION AND WAY FORWARD 16.1 The MTFP should be considered in the context of the following issues: • The current economic climate and the major reductions in local government funding. • The Council is in a very positive financial position as shown by the adequate General Fund balances and reserves, robust financial management practices and excellent track record in achieving efficiency savings • Challenging decisions will still need to be made to deliver savings while safeguarding frontline services to maintain a balanced budget. • Significant changes to the local government finance system from 2013/14 including the impact of the Localisation of Council Tax Support and the Localisation of Business Rates. There is a possibility that the funding levels in future years could be materially different compared to the assumptions made in this document.

16.2 The financial position over the medium term is shown in Appendix 2. This shows a largely balanced position for the next three years. This is dependent upon the prompt and full delivery of savings approved and anticipated in the 2014/15 Budget. Work to implement these savings and ensure a balanced budget for 2017/18 and an improved position for 2018/19 will continue. Initial figures suggest the deficit for 2018/19 will increase to around £0.5m, mainly as a result of reduction in government grant. Officers will continue to work on these figures to test the assumptions made and updates will be provided during the 2014 Budget Process.

Page 23

Page 103 Appendices 1 Key stages in 2015/16 – 2018/19 Budget Process 2 General Fund Revenue Account Forecast 2014/15 – 2018/19 & analysis of movements 3 Towards a tipping point – assessment 4 Towards a tipping point – scenarios 5 LGA Funding Position 6 Risk Assessment of the General Reserve & Working Balance 7 Policy on Reserves and forecast reserves 2014/15 – 2018/19 8 Capital Strategy 9 Capital Expenditure & Income Forecast 10 Value for Money and Efficiency Strategy 11 Risk & Opportunity Log & Matrices 12 Glossary 13 Key Source Documents

Page 24

Page 104 Appendix 1

2015/16 HIGH LEVEL BUDGET PROCESS TIMETABLE

Task Who Date Financial Strategy, Medium Term SMT and Cabinet Members 23 July Financial Plan and Budget Strategy Preparation of detailed estimates Budget holders and Finance September M December Complete Capital Bid Pro forma & SMT and PHs Initial bids by 29 August Savings Pro forma with final bids signed off by PH 19 September Informal Cabinet Meeting to score the SMT Cabinet Members Finance 29 September Capital proposals Submission of Service Development Budget Holders and Assistant By 30 September Proposals - Revenue Growth Bids & Directors in consultation with Savings Options Portfolio Holders and appropriate Members Updated MTFP & Yr End Forecasts Assistant Directors & Chief Final report deadline Accountant in consultation with Fees and Charges Options 15/10 for the meeting Portfolio Holders Early draft Capital Programme 29 October Cabinet

Draft Budget Report including: Section 151 Officer and Assistant 1) Updated MTFP & Yr End Forecasts Directors Final Reports deadline 2) Draft 5 year Detailed Base Budget options aligned to corporate 13/11 for 26 November Revenue and Capital Budgets priorities and draft Council Plan 3) Draft 5 year Budget Options for Service Growth & Savings 4) Draft Fees and Charges Options Cabinet Fees and Charges Lake Admin. 28 November Cabinet (if needed) 10 December 1st Draft Budget (as above) Council (with Draft Council Plan) 11 December 4 weeks Statutory Consultation From 12 December period commences 1st Draft Budget O&S 02/01 for 13 January

Relevant Service Budget Report Licensing Committee 20 January extracts inc Fees & Charges Lake Admin Committee 23 January

Planning Committee 29 January 2nd Draft Budget inc. consideration of Cabinet 28 January O&S and other consultees comments on the 11/12 Draft Budget proposals Formulation of Final Budget proposal Cabinet 11 February

Approval of Budget and Council Tax Council 24 February

1 Page 105 Appendix 2 Medium Term Financial Forecast - General Fund: July 2014

2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19* Approved Projection Projection Projection Projection Budget* £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Expenditure: Direct Employee Costs 9,965.9 10,102.4 10,280.0 10,471.2 National Insurance 777.8 794.7 1,016.8 1,038.2 Pension 2,315.0 2,305.7 2,306.2 2,465.0 Running Costs 11,162.7 10,741.3 10,828.4 10,791.7 Capital Charges 4,416.7 3,688.3 3,138.5 2,752.8 Uncommitted Growth 0.0 150.0 300.0 450.0 Approved Savings Targets 0.0 (695.0) (1,450.0) (1,700.0) 28,638.1 27,087.4 26,419.9 26,268.9 tbc Income: New Homes Bonus (358.0) (568.3) (778.5) (962.9) Other Government Grants (excl NHB) (571.7) (514.3) (514.3) (514.3) Other Contributions (1,114.8) (1,117.5) (1,119.9) (1,122.3) Car Parking Income (4,136.2) (4,136.7) (4,135.8) (4,220.5) Lake Income (1,151.7) (1,173.8) (1,196.4) (1,219.5) Recycling Credits (1,025.0) (1,025.0) (1,025.0) (1,025.0) General Income (4,199.7) (4,278.5) (4,304.8) (4,372.5) (12,557.1) (12,814.1) (13,074.7) (13,437.0) tbc

Total service expenditure 16,081.0 14,273.3 13,345.2 12,831.9 tbc Corporate Items: Interest payable 706.8 719.4 754.6 816.5 Interest receivable (121.6) (115.0) (145.3) (106.4) Council Tax Freeze Grant (83.5) (247.0) 0.0 0.0 SLDC Council Tax (excluding parish precepts) (7,724.4) (7,732.1) (7,911.7) (8,134.6) Parish share of CT benefit grant 92.0 92.0 92.0 92.0 NNDR retained (2,709.7) (2,769.0) (2,824.0) (2,880.0) Revenue Support Grant (2,388.7) (1,598.0) (1,370.1) (1,140.0) New Homes Bonus Adjustment Grant (7.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reversal of Capital Charges (4,416.7) (3,688.3) (3,138.5) (2,752.8) Minimum Revenue Provision 144.8 412.8 407.5 460.8 Support to Capital Programme Direct Revenue Financing 405.0 423.9 507.3 617.6 Deficit on Collection Fund 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Transfer from Reserves Other Funds/Reserves (1,276.0) (1,225.0) (1,238.0) (1,268.0) Transfer to Reserves General Reserve 1,284.0 1,339.0 1,427.0 1,536.0 Planned Use of Working Balance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Corporate Items (16,095.0) (14,387.3) (13,439.2) (12,758.9) tbc

PROJECTED (SURPLUS) / DEFICIT (including savings) (14.0) (114.0) (94.0) 73.0 tbc

Projected (surplus) / deficit February Council: 0.0 (333.0) 11.0 187.0 n/a Latest projected (surplus) / deficit (14.0) (114.0) (94.0) 73.0 n/a Movement in projected deficit since February 2014 (14.0) 219.0 (105.0) (114.0) n/a Reason for movement: Incorporated into MTFP July 2014: Additional income on investments (24.0) (22.0) (56.0) (18.0) n/a Savings from pension prepayment (26.0) (76.0) (128.0) 0.0 n/a Additional income from business rates (64.0) (349.0) (331.0) (316.0) n/a Savings Working Group June 2014 changes 0.0 125.0 25.0 175.0 n/a Additional investment in Repairs and Maintenance spend 0.0 200.0 200.0 0.0 n/a Digital innovation fund 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 n/a Reprofiling of savings 0.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 n/a Assume no inflationary increase in car parking income 0.0 81.0 165.0 165.0 n/a Assumed increase in taxbase 0.0 (40.0) (80.0) (120.0) n/a Total Movement in projected (surplus) / deficit (14.0) 219.0 (105.0) (114.0) n/a

Indicative deficit for 2018/19 is circa £0.5m - verification being sought

Page 106 Appendix 2a

Savings Proposals

The purpose of this appendix is to show the details of the savings options being proposed and the amounts to be saved in each year. Figures are cumulative. Option description 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Commentary £ £ £ £

Review of organisation following use of 0 300,000 430,000 430,000 Some opportunities have been identified and technology and improved processes, work is underway to enable the delivery of these including central services. reduced costs/additional income. There are also some vacant posts that are being reviewed.

-200,000 -100,000 Reprofile to allow for implementation of the Digital Innovation Project Property Services - Contract to 31/03/2016 0 0 100,000 100,000 Contract due to be market tested before expiry.

Ulverston assets 0 100,000 200,000 200,000 Ulverston have secured grant funding to develop the business case. We have agreed to work with them to explore options. Will report back when the business case is developed further.

Kendal Museum 0 0 100,000 100,000 Negotiations proceeding. Langstone House Windermere 0 15,000 15,000 15,000 Property options being developed to deliver the savings. Community Services / new ways of 0 25,000 50,000 200,000 Through the council's approach to localism and working devolution we are looking at how the council, parishes, towns, partners and local community groups can work together to increase value for money and improve the quality of services in their locality.. Waste Management Contract - Review 0 150,000 150,000 150,000 Work is underway to develop opportunities to Service Costs & Alt service delivery - deliver this saving. Some of the work involves Contract due for renewal 1/04/2017 the review being carried out by Waste Resources Action Programme who are due to report in January 2014. There is an issue re recurring Vehicle and Plant funding which is under consideration ( linked to 5 above).

Leisure Services 0 200,000 350,000 350,000 The new contract commences 1/4/2014. The first year of the contract involves one off set up costs hence no saving in 14/15. Recovery of Court Costs 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 Magistrates approved a modest increase to generate an additional circa £5k from 2014/15. Outside the Council's direct control.

Non Central Services Efficiencies 0 100,000 150,000 150,000 £ 30k Courtesy Toilets. Car Park Advertising £10k. Share operational base at Ferry Nab £10k. CCTV Reduced costs £18k. Homelessness/Housing Advice £20k. Hostels £17k. These deliver 2014/15 target.

Savings proposals where work is in 0 695,000 1,450,000 1,700,000 progress: Non Central Services Efficiencies 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Waste Management Contract - Review 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Service Costs & Alt service delivery - Contract due for renewal 1/04/2017

Page 107 Option description 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Commentary £ £ £ £

LAPs 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 This looks at the withdrawal of the £5k funding for each LAP. LAP chairs have been advised of the proposals which were expected but support will continue in the form of admin support.

V&P Extension to 7 yr life and 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Experience has shown that the V&P replacement examination of other options for further programme is consistently underspending. Work extending life will continue to more accurately reflect service needs in future inc the option to extend the vehicle replacement period.

Reallocation of Housing Resources. 700,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 Revenue budgets will be reduced by this amount. Funding for Housing provision is now included in the Draft Capital Programme.

Building Control 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 Currently working with Lancaster to determine the potential to develop additional revenues across the two district boundaries. SLHouse, Lowther St etc Income 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 This is being progressed with CCC. Westmorland Shopping Centre Pay on Exit 17,000 17,000 17,000 17,000 Retain the current pay on foot system and merge the Westmorland Shopping Centre Car Park Operations with the Kendal Markets Operation.

Open the third floor SLH Car Park to the 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Allow all users to park unhindered either by Public permit or pay and display at all times .

Encroachment Fees 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 It is proposed that Lake Administration Committee consider through either a fee increase or discount reduction or combination of both a targeted increase in revenue of £10,000 per annum. NPS carry out rent reviews and renegotiate leases renewals with targets of £20k.

Savings proposals implemented: 1,182,000 1,182,000 1,182,000 1,182,000

Total Savings Targets 1,182,000 1,877,000 2,632,000 2,882,000

Reconciliation to Appendix 2: Savings incorporated into the service 1,182,000 1,182,000 1,182,000 1,182,000 expenditure and service income projections Approved Savings Targets 0 695,000 1,450,000 1,700,000 1,182,000 1,877,000 2,632,000 2,882,000

Page 108 Appendix 3

Appendix - Towards a Tipping Point

Good Practice Questionnaire 3 X Comments Key indicators of financial performance Regular monitoring of key indicators of financial performance 3 Corporate Financial Monitoring report The authority operates within a locally determined appropriate level of reserves and balances 3 Reserves strategy reviewed annually as part of MTFP process: levels of reserves formally approved by Council in February as part of budget report. The general fund balance is maintained at or above the locally agreed minimum level 3 Surplus above minimum level to be transferred to General Reserve at 31/3/14 Working capital is at, or above, a ratio of current set by the Section 151 officer X The s151 does not set a target for working capital or current capital Manageable levels of long-term borrowing within prudential borrowing limits 3 Repayment of long-term debt in 2013/14 following housing transfer Targets have been set for future periods in respect of key indicators, such as reserve balances 3 Reserves reviewed annually in MTFP and forecast for 4 and prudential indicators years: prudential indicators reviewed annually and set for 3 years as part of Treasury Management reports

Page 109 The authority has a track record of spending to budget and proactively managing forecast 3 Effective virement process to manage overspends: overspends in-year underspends a greater issue A robust organisational approach and focus on absence management to improve productivity, 3 Monthly monitoring of absences for managers: quarterly reduce costs and enhance customer service reporting to HR Committee Strategic financial planning Focus on achievement of corporate priorities is evident through the financial planning process. 3 MTFP reflects corporate priorities: growth & capital The MTFP focuses resources on priorities prioritised against corporate priorities Service and financial planning processes are integrated 3 Services plans incorporate priorities & feed into growth and capital programme bids The MTFP includes outcome measures, scenario planning, benchmarking, resource planning Partial MTFP includes scenarion planning, resource planning and details on partnership working and details on partnership working. Outcome measures & benchmarking to be incorporated into 2014/15 plan

Annual financial plans follow the longer-term financial strategy of the authority 3 Five-year budget process based on MTFP financial projections all based on financial strategy within MTFP

There is regular review of the MTFP and the assumptions made within it. The authority 3 Financial projections reviewed and reported quarterly, responds to changing circumstances and manages its financial risks whole MTFP reviewed annually The authority has performed sensitivity analysis on its financial model using a range of 3 Incorporated into MTFP process economic assumptions including the impact of SR10 and SR13 The MTFP is linked to and is consistent with other key strategies, including workforce 3 MTFP links to Council Plan and other key strategies KPIs can be derived for future periods from the information included within the MTFP Appendix 3

Good Practice Questionnaire 3 X Comments Key indicators of financial performance Zero based budgeting on priority based budgeting is used to improve strategic prioritisation X Although zero based budgeting is used for the during the financial planning cycle development of new services and policy changes it is not used for strategic prioritisation. Previous attempts suggest it has not delivered significant benefits for the resources required compared to other costing models.

Effective treasury management arrangements are in place 3 Treasury Management strategy and policy approved annually & monitored quarterly as part of Corporate Financial Monitoring process to O&S. Financial governance There is a clear understanding of the financial environment the council is operating within 3 MTFP summarises key financial issues facing the Council & projects likely financial impacts of changes

Regular and transparent reporting to members. Reports include detail of action planning and 3 Key changes in financial forecast are reported to

Page 110 variance analysis members regularly as part of the MTFP and budget preparation process. Actions have been taken to address key risk areas 3 The MTFP approved July 2012 forecast significant deficits in future years: by Feb 2014 the Council's five- year budgets incorporated proposals to meet the majority of the deficits The chief finance officer is a key member of the leadership team 3 Council's s151 office is a member of the Senior Management Team (SMT) and the Assistant Director Team (ADT) Officers and managers across the authority understand the financial implications of current and 3 All proposals for change are accompanied by an analysis alternative policies, programmes and activities of the financial implications of the proposals before approval The leadership ensures appropriate financial skills are in place across all levels of the 3 Training for officers and members in financial skills and organisation – for example, a good understanding of unit costs and cost drivers understanding their financial responsibilities The leadership fosters an open environment of open challenge to financial assumptions and 3 Both officers (through SMT) and members (particularly performance portfolioholders) challenge financial assumptions. Performance is also challenged through O&S and reporting to Audit Committee and Council

There is an effective scheme of delegation, ensuring clarity of financial responsibilities and 3 Financial Procedure Rules reviewed annually accountabilities There is engagement with stakeholders, including budget consultations 3 A review would be beneficial to judget the effectiveness of engagement with stakeholders on budget and financial issues Appendix 3

Good Practice Questionnaire 3 X Comments Key indicators of financial performance There are comprehensive policies and procedures in place for members, officers and budget 3 Financial Procedure Rules reviewed annually holders which clearly outline responsibilities Internal and external audit recommendations are not overdue for implementation 3 Recommendations reviewed at Audit Committee: recommendations are being implemented promptly Committees and cabinet regularly review performance and it is subject to appropriate levels of 3 See Performance Management Framework (reviewed scrutiny annually for effectiveness): Quarterly performance monitoring to O&S There are effective recovery plans in place (if required) 3 Longer-term V2 saving process Financial control Budgets are robust and prepared in a timely fashion and the authority has a good track record 3 Budgets prepared in accordance with budget strategy by of operating within its budget service and finance staff, using budget preparation module of the main finanacial information system. First draft reported to Cabinet & Council in Nov / Dec prior to consultation and final approval by Council in Feb.

Budgets are monitored at an officer, member and cabinet level and officers are held 3 Budgets monitored monthly (from period 3 onwards) and Page 111 accountable for budgetary performance reported to SMT; quarterly Corporate Financial monitoring report, incorporating treasury management, reported to O&S, Cabinet and Council quarterly.

Financial forecasting is well-developed and forecasts are subject to regular review, including Partial Benchmarking is not yet integrated into forecasting: trend analysis, benchmarking of unit costs, risk and sensitivity analysis remaining elements incorporated into budgeting process.

Budget profiles are accurate and regularly monitored 3 Profiles signed-off by managers before start of financial year & reviewed as part of the budget monitoring process. There is particular focus on monitoring income related budgets 3 Particularly volatile income budgets such as car parking fees, building control fees, planning fees and interest on balances. Robust approach to income budget setting.

Savings programme reporting includes effective management information on countervailing 3 V2 savings programme reported regularly to SMT and savings and the use of RAG ratings members The capacity and capability of the finance department and service departments are fit for 3 purpose for effective financial planning and financial management Key financial systems have received satisfactory reports from internal and external audit 3 All key financial systems have been reviewed in 2013/14 and received a Substantial or Reasonable assurance from internal audit: not major weaknesses identified by internal or external audit Appendix 3

Good Practice Questionnaire 3 X Comments Key indicators of financial performance Financial systems are adequate for future needs, for example commitment accounting 3 Financial systems reviewed to ensure remain fit-for- functionality is available purpose: commitment accounting integrated to main systems - no purchase order, no payment system There is an effective internal audit which has the proper profile within the organisation and 3 Internal audit service provided by contractor: operates agreed internal audit recommendations are routinely implemented in a timely manner under a charter reviewed annually in accordance with PSIAS, effectiveness of internal audit formally reviewed annually by Audit Committee There is an assurance framework in place which is used effectively by the authority and is how 3 See Risk Management Process (reviewed annually for business risks are managed and controlled effectiveness): Corproate risks reported quarterly through performance monitoring process, service risks managed by officers. The annual governance statement gives a true reflection of the organisation 3 Prepared annually by offices, including input from internal audit contractor: reviewed by a panel of members of Audit Committee before approval Page 112 Appendix 4

Grant Thornton: Tipping point 2016? "#$%&'()*+,R.%$/0$1)2,%2(3+0'1.4%512)0%"#'1)0')4%61'3(*$3%2%3'*(7$)0%O9:;<%0+66+)=%6'+)0>%,,$)=+)=%0#$%&(11$)0P%.(7721+.+) g the results of their financial health checks of English local authorities. The report identified a number of scenarios which may lead to an authority tipping into financial difficulties, which are summarised below:

Tipping point scenario Description Decision paralysis Local authorities fail to make the challenging but necessary decisions required to manage financial and other challenges. This has been identified as a potentially over-arching tipping point Statutory A local authority can no longer meet its statutory responsibilities to deliver a broad range of services with the fundingavailable, leading to legal challenges and protests from impacted stakeholders Financial The Section 151 officer is unable to set a balanced budget, leading to an unbalanced budget report to members

Page 113 in line with Section 114 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 (England and Wales); or where the increased uncertainty leads to budget overspends that reduce reserves to unacceptably low levels; or where an authority demonstrates characteristics of an insolvent organisation, such as a failure to pay creditors. Bankruptcy is a potential outcome of this scenario, as has happened for some US local authorities, most recently Detroit Industrial In response to pay restraints, changes to terms and conditions and job losses, employees and trade unions enact prolonged strike action, leading to major service disruption and long-term industrial relations disputes External A major supplier fails, due to general economic conditions, leading to significant service disruption and reputational damage to the authority. A further banking/financial crisis would increase the risk of this scenario Incremental Multiple, smaller failures in individual service areas lead to an eventual critical mass of tipping points Militancy A local authority ignores or defies one or more statutory obligations Civil disturbance Where service cuts run so deep that the dissatisfaction of users leads to widespread civil disturbance, as was experienced in relation to the Community Charge/Poll Tax. This could impact on business continuity and extreme and prolonged civil disturbance could impact significantly on the overall resilience of an authority Doomsday A further banking/financial crisis leads to even greater levels of austerity, over a significantly longer timeframe

Appendix 5

LGA: Assessing the Financial Position of Authorities

Since 2012 the Local Government Association has developed its Future Funding Outlook model to indicate the funding gap which is continuing to open for the sector and individual authorities up to the end of the decade. There are many factors which determin $%0#$%1+.@.%0'%2)%2(0#'1+0AR.%B+)2)*+2,%.(.02+)2C+,+0AD%"#$.$%+)*,(3$%Q.'B0R4%3+BB+*(,0%0'%7$2.(1$%B2*0'1.%.(*#%2.F% #%"#$%$BB$*0+H$)$..%'B%B+)2)*+2,%6$1B'172)*$%7')+0'1+)=% #%"#$%$BB$*0+H$)$..%'B%C(3=$0+)=%2)3%6,2))+)=% #%"#$%$BB$*0+H$)$..%'B%='H$1)2)*$%2 nd arrangements for delivering value for money #%"#$%$BB$*0+H$)$..%2)3%*262*+0A%'B%B+)2)*+2,%,$23$1.#+6%2)3%72)2=$7$)0%

As part of this approach, the LGA identified 7$2.(1$.%I#+*#%#2H$%.'7$0#+)=%0'%.2A%2C'(0%2)%2(0#'1+0AR.%1$,20+H$%B+)2)*+2,%6'.+0+')%2)3 reflect strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats that authorities might take account of in their planning.

EXPLANATION OF THE METRICS The charts identify eight numerical indicators which were identified as saying something about an authority R.%B+)2)*+2,%6'.+0+')D%J'(1%'B%0#$.$%21$%+)0$)3$3%0'% Page 114 +)3+*20$%+)B'1720+')%')%2)%2(0#'1+0AR.%61$.$)0%B+)2)*+2,%6'.+0+')%2)3%B'(1%1$B,$*0%')%+0.%6'0$)0+2,%B(0(1$D% There are clearly many indicators that could have been used. The ones chosen for the model are designed to be relatively easily available and to be broadly complementary to each other. The Q"#$%$&'R)*&+*,-'.#%) +3$)0+BA%0#$%1$,20+H$%.020$%'B%0#$%2(0#'1+0AR.%B+)2)*$.%2.%0#$A%.02)3%20%0#$%7'7$)0D%"#+.%+.%C2.$3%')%6(C,+.#$3%3202%B1'7%0#$ 2011/12 accounts and use of reserves in the last published budget. Authorities with strong indicators relating to their present position will have more capacity to respond to the costs of delivering cuts than those who do not. The Q/0'0#$R)*&+*,-'.#%) are based on the K5LR.%J(0(1$%J()3+)=%M(0,''@%7'3$,%2)3%2,.'%*260(1$%+)B'1720+')%')%1$*$)0%01$)3.%+)%02/C2.$%=1'I0#%2)3%,$H$,.%'B% grant dependency. Authorities with a weak future score are those that will face a tough passage in the medium term.

All the indicators are ma 66$3%')0'%2%Q.6+3$1R%3+2=127%I#+*#%61'3(*$.%2%#+=# -impact visual representation of the indicators, with the Future indicators on the left of the diagram and Present indicators on the right. In addition there are slide-rule charts for each indicator showin =%#'I%0#$%2(0#'1+0A%*'7621$.%2*1'..%N(210+,$.%2)3%2%02C,$%I#+*#%.(7721+.$.%0#$%2(0#'1+0AR.% data.

Appendix 5

The factors used are as follows;

Future Indicators F1 Future Funding Outlook Proportion of forecast spend The purpose of this indicator is to measure the medium-term prospects for authorities which is covered by forecast relative to each other based on a forecast of spending against a forecast of funding. income in 2019/20 according to A full description of the Future Funding Outlook and the assumptions included within it is the LGA Future Funding available on the LGA website. Outlook model released in July http://www.local.gov.uk/finance/-/journal_content/56/10180/4057616/ARTICLE 2013. It is believed to be the most sophisticated and detailed modelling available of the likely Data: LGA Future Funding impact of government cuts at both national and local authority level. Outlook June 2013

F2 Welfare reform Proportion of working age Welfare reform is not fully reflected in the FFO. This indicator assumes that authorities households claiming benefit where benefit claimants live will see see higher pressure than those with fewer claimants. . Data: CESI analysis for the LGA It is arguable that the impact of welfare reform will be to encourage claimants to move from based on DWP data current high density areas to low density areas. There is no easy way of modelling this. The indicator used here is from CESI analysis of the impact of welfare benefits reform Page 115 conducted for the LGA and represents the proportion of working age households in an area which are in receipt of benefit.

F3 Tax buoyancy M Business Percentage increase in "#+.%7$2.(1$%#'I%7(*#%0#$%21$2R.%C(.+)$..%120$.%02/C2.$ has grown in the last ten years. Rates business rates taxbase from This is a measure of relative economic growth in the recent past and the assumption is that 2002 to 2012 this is a momentum indicator M recent growth is more likely to continue where it is already Data: DCLG published taxbase taking place. In contrast, an area where there has been little economic growth is less likely figures and CIPFA revenue to see a sudden growth spurt. Since this is a relative measure it does not matter if growth collection statistics. in general has slowed down as long as it is taking place in more or less the same places. Authorities with high business rates growth will receive a financial boost from locally retained business rates income. There is a risk that this indicator may be affected by large single developments such as new shopping centres or power stations, especially in smaller authorities. F4 Tax buoyancy- Council Tax Percentage increase in Council The principle behind this measure is similar to the business rates buoyancy measure and Tax base from 2009 to 2012 the logic is the same. Authorities with Council Tax growth will receive a boost from Data: DCLG published statistics increase in the Council tax base and also from New Homes Bonus. Unfortunately full data is not available over a longer period.

Appendix 5

Present Indicators P1 Working capital Working capital (current assets This measures the extent to which an authority could cover existing expenditure from less current liabilities) as a % of working capital if necessary. Authorities with strongly positive indicators would have little Net Revenue Expenditure difficulty liquidating sufficient assets to continue to operate in the event of a cash flow (NRE) crisis; authorities with negative indicators may have to borrow to carry on, incurring Data: LGA analysis of Council additional costs. balance sheets as at 31st March 2012 O9%P$0%I'10#%'1%QQN(+0AR% Net assets (total assets less This is a measure of the relationship between net assets (equivalent to total reserves) and total liabilities) as a % of NRE expenditure. Data: LGA analysis of Council An organisation with a negative net worth is technically insolvent, as it could not sell its balance sheets as at 31st assets in order to pay off its liabilities. This is less meaningful for public bodies, which March 2012 would normally have the luxury of planning to pay for liabilities over a long period of time free of challenge from creditors. On the other hand, public bodies are also usually not in a position to sell their operational assets.

Page 116 However the Net Worth indicator does differentiate those authorities which over time have a high level of liabilities to fund and limited assets from which to do so and these authorities are likely to incur additional financing costs in the years ahead.

P3 Level of unringfenced Unringfenced reserves as a % This measures the period over which an authority could continue to operate without grant reserves of Net Revenue or tax income by utilising reserves. Reserves, of course, are set aside against risks and Expenditure (NRE) there is no way of measuring relative risk. There is a danger that unringfenced reserves Data: 2013/14 RA returns. includes reserves set aside against risks that have a high likelihood of crystalising. P4 Use of reserves Net use of reserves 2010/11 to This is an indicator of whether unringfenced reserves have been used or supplemented 2013/14 over the last four years M roughly an electoral cycle. This is after taking account of capital Data: RA and RO returns expenditure charged to revenue, which is a one-off expenditure which should be matched 2010/11- 2013/14 to one-off use of funding.

Appendix 5

Page 117 RISK ASSESSEMENT OF LEVEL OF RESERVES APPENDIX 6

Financial Balance Risk Exposure Required Potential Risk Score Weighting (£000) (£000) Comment (Basis of Financial Exposure) Base Budget Contingency for inflation or other 4 50% 639 319 Assumed at 1% of Gross Revenue Budget unanticipated rise. Underachievement of Charges Income targets 4 50% 456 228 Estimate of 5% Customer Receipts Income forecasts for 2014/15 and spending exceeds budgets Underachievement of Investment Income 4 50% 65 33 0.5% of exposure of average balance of £13m Unspend budgets and grants from 2012/13 include in working balance at 31/3/13 but carried- Funding of carry-forwards 9 100% 343 343 forward for spending 2013/14. Bellwin scheme cuts in at 0.2% of net budget and provides for up to 85% of eligible costs (assume Civil Emergencies 6 75% 146 110 £1m cost - not covered by insurance) Insurance Excesses 2 25% 32 8 Based on 10% of insurance premia payments

Potential costs of legal challenges 2 25% 700 175 Based on estimated cost of a public enquiry or legal challenge

Savings not achieved 2 25% 3,057 764 Target savings from 2014/15 onwards Page 118 Vacancy target not delivered 2 25% 355 89 Staff vacancy target topsliced from salary budgets

Pay increase 3 50% 121 61 1% allowance made in budget for pay increase for 2014/15. Impact of 1% pay award

Increase in pension contributions 4 50% 360 180 Allowance for 1.5% increase in pension fund contributions at next triennial revaluation Changes to existing government funding 9 100% 569 569 25% of Total of RSG funding, based on 2014/15 settlement regimes Changes to existing government grants 4 50% 774 387 25% of total revenue grants received, excluding benefit subsidy and formula grant

Impact of introduction of Universal Credit 2 25% 450 113 Increase in homelessness, changes in administration arrangements, reduction in collection rate etc Inability to recover debts outstanding due to current economic situation, based on 50% of debts over Write-off of unrecoverable debt 4 50% 109 54 1 years old Localisation of business rates 4 50% 400 200 Assume 5% of maximum exposure to reduction in rateable values

Localisation of business rates 2 25% 215 54 Assume 50% of appeals allowed: budget assumed 30% allowed

Council tax reduction scheme 4 25% 558 140 Based on 10% increase in claims based on 2012/13 estimate £5,578,000

Earmarked reserve for delivery of savings 9 100% 650 650 Potential one-off costs of delivery of savings

Risk Management 9 100% 850 850 Monies set aside to meet the one-off costs of risk management

Emergency Contingency 9 100% 1,000 1,000 Emergency contingency fund - Council practice to allocate £1m for any unforeseen emergencies

TOTALS 11,848 6,325 RISK ASSESSEMENT OF LEVEL OF RESERVES APPENDIX 6

Maximum Risk Based Reserve Balances 11,848 Total Financial Exposure

Recommended Risk Base Reserve Balances 6,325 from previous page

Minimum Risk Based Reserve Balances 2,962 25% of Total Financial Exposure

Current Level of Reserves

- General Fund Working Balance 1,500 Estimated balance 31/3/15

- General Reserve 5,571 Estimated balance 31/3/15

Current Level of Reserves (Projected as at 31/03/15) (General Fund ) 7,071

Page 119 Projected (Shortfall)/Excess of Current Reserve Balance over Risk Based 746 assumes use the recommended risk based balance Reserves Appendix 7

Policy on Reserves and Balances Purpose A Policy for Reserve and Balances represents good financial management and should be reviewed annually. The Local Government Finance Act 1992 and Local Government Act 2003 set out that a range of safeguards to mitigate against local authorities over-committing themselves financially. These include:  the balanced budget requirement  &#+$B%J+)2)*$%MBB+*$1.R%3(0A%0'%1$6'10%1'C(.0)$..%'B%$.0+720$.%2)3%23$N(2*A of reserves when considering the budget requirement.  Requirement for local authority to make arrangements for proper administration of their financial affairs and that the Chief Finance Officer is that responsible person (Section 151 duties) Page 120  the requirements of the Prudential Code .  the External Auditor will consider whether audited bodies have established adequate arrangements to ensure that their financial position is soundly based. Types of Reserves Reserves can be held for three main purposes: #%2%I'1@+)=%C2,2)*$%0'%#$,6%*(.#+')%0#$%+762*0%'B%()$H$)%*2.#% flows and avoid unnecessary temporary borrowing M this forms part of general reserves #%2%*')0+)=$)*A%0'%*(.#+')%0#$%+762*0%'B%()$/6$*0$3%$H$)0.%'1%$7$1=$)*+$. M this also forms part of general reserves #%2%7$2).%'B%C(+,3+)=%(6%B()3.4%'B0$)%1$B$11$3%0'%2.% earmarked reserves, to meet known or predicted liabilities. The Council also holds other reserves that arise out of the interaction of legislation and proper accounting practice. This reserves are not resource backed and cannot be used for other purposes include : #%2%O$).+').%R$.$1H$%S%1$N(+1$3%()3$1%TLU;V ). This is a specific accounting 7$*#2)+.7%(.$3%0'%1$*'=)+.$%0#$%&'()*+,R.% share of pension fund liabilities in its balance sheet. As this is a reserve which arises from an accounting standard it is not available to finance Council expenditure. #%2%R$H2,(20+')%R$.$1H$%M this records unrealised gains in the value of fixed assets. Appendix 7

#%2%&26+02,%L3W(.07$)0%L**'()0%M this is a specific accounting mechanism used to reconcile different rates at which assets are depreciated under proper accounting practice and financed through the capital controls system. For each earmarked reserve held by the Council there should be a clear protocol setting out: #%0#$%1$2.')%B'1X6(16'.$%'B%0#$%1$.$1H$ #%#'I%2)3%I#$)%0#$%1$.$1H$%* an be used #%61'*$3(1$.%B'1%0#$%1$.$1H$R.%72)2=$7$)0%2)3%*')01', #%2%61'*$..%2)3%0+7$.*2,$%B'1%1$H+$I%'B%0#$%1$.$1H$%0'%$).(1$%*')0+)(+)=%1$,$H2)*$ and adequacy. This Reserves and Balances Policy ensures that when establishing reserves, South Lakeland Council complies with the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom (the Code) and in particular the need to distinguish between reserves and provisions. Y)3$1%0#$%&'()*+,R.%&').0+0(0+')4%0#$%6'I$1%0'%$.02C,+.#%B+)2)*+2,%1$.$1H$.%+.% limited to full Council except that Cabinet can set aside

Page 121 7+)'1%27'()0.%S(6%0'%![\4:::%+)%2==1$=20$]%I#$1$%0#+.%I'(,3%2..+.0%+)%0#$%$BB+*+$)0%'6$120+')%'B%0#$%&'()*+,R.%2*0+H+0+$.D%%U imilarly Council determines the use of reserves although Cabinet can make or adjust transfers from reserves up to £35,000 to assist in the &'()*+,R.%B+)2)*+2,%72)2=$7$)0D%%J'1%C2,2)*$.%')%R$.$1H$.%.$$%Appendix 3 . Policy "#+.%.(7721A%.$0.%'(0%0#$%&'()*+,R.%6',+*A%')%$2*#%')$D%%T0%3$02+,.%0#$%,$H$,%2)3%)20(1$X6(16'.$%'B%$2*#% reserve. In all cases these are based on an assessment of needs and risk. The fundamental principle governing the use of reserves is that they should not be used to fund recurring expenditure. If exceptional circumstances make this a necessity, the use of the reserve should be clearly stated and approved as an exception to the rule.

Appendix 7

Purpose Target Level General Reserve To provide a buffer against future The level of this reserve is determined in conjunction with that of the General Fund financial risks in the medium term: Working Balance. (For more details of the risk and an assessment of the potential pension fund contributions, government financial exposure please see the Risk Assessment of Level of Reserves M at grant, investment income, contract Appendix 6). The main use of this reserve in recent years has been to fund the review factors one-off costs of staff redundancy and early retirements to enable organisational To enable the Council to progress major reorganisation and the discontinuation of direct provision of services. This reserve organisational and transformational also includes unspent revenue budgets carried-forward between years. changes by providing resources to fund The Medium Term Financial Plan provisionally assumes a £200,000 annual the initial costs of those developments. contribution to the Reserve, depending on quantification of the potential impact of these factors. Any balance on the General Fund working balance above £1.5m is Page 122 transferred to this reserve as part of the closure of accounts. Taking these into account alongside an allowance for organisational changes, the target minimum balance for the reserve should be £2.0m with a preferred level of £2.5m which is approximately 10% of revenue expenditure. The maximum balance should be set at £10.0m Unless allocated for a particular purpose, revenue budget under-spending and windfalls are added to the General Reserve. Following the closure of the Risk Management Fund, and the transfer of the balance on that fund to the General Reserve, £100,000 has been earmarked for risk management activities. A further £100k has been earmarked to support Economic Development initiatives in 2014/15.

Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18

£5,758,900 £5,570,900 £5,770,900 £5,970,900 £6,170,900 Appendix 7

Purpose Target Level LABGI Reserve To fund non-recurring initiatives that "#$%R$.$1H$%2**(7(,20$3%B()3.%B1'7%0#$%5'H$1)7$)0R.%K'*2,%L(0#'1+0A%^(.+)$..% contribute directly to one or more of the Growth Incentive (LABGI) scheme grant. Grants received under the LABGI scheme &'()*+,R.% 61+'1+0A% +)+0+20+H$.4% I+0#% 2% should be the only contributions to the Reserve M there should be no minimum or preference for economic development. maximum contribution. The minimum balance on the reserve should be zero. This fund is now practically fully committed and should be closed once the committed

spend is achieved. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £71,000 £14,400 £14,400 £14,400 £14,400

General Fund Major Repairs Reserve

Page 123 To fund major repairs and maintenance The Reserve has been accumulating funds so that it can deal with the larger repairs to General Fund properties that are not for which it was established. The annual contribution is £50,000. A minimum capitalisable and would be difficult to backstop requirement of £50,000 per annum should be set for the contribution to the accommodate in the annual planned Reserve with a target of at least £100,000 and a maximum of £500,000 in advance maintenance programme, on the basis of an abnormal maintenance year. that the Reserve: Balance Projected Balance  acts as a backstop for emergency major 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 repairs £385,700 £374,200 £700 £50,700 £100,700

 accumulates funds as necessary to meet an abnormal year in maintenance terms  is able to assist in meeting regular maintenance costs.

Appendix 7

IT Replacement Reserve To fund the replacement of hardware and The Reserve has been used regularly since its inception and is a valuable addition software with a preference for the to mainstream funding. With the introduction of the IT shared service there will no updating of the corporate and networking longer be a requirement for SLDC alone to fund all replacement of servers, for infrastructure. example. Additionally, the use of virtual servers and increased use of thin-client technology has reduced the costs of IT replacements. The minimum level should

be £40,000 and a maximum of £250,000. It is proposed the annual contribution is a minimum of £40,000. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £148,200 £98,200 £98,200 £98,200 £98,200

Revenues and Benefits IT Reserve Page 124 To fund the development of Revenues A Government grant was received in 2013/14 towards the costs of implementing and Benefits software by the supplier for the Council Tax support scheme. Although some software amendments were the Council Tax support scheme. made by the software supplier there will be further amendments required. The minimum level should zero and a maximum of £10,000. There is no further

expected contribution Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000

Economic Development Fund To encourage economic development in The Fund assists the Economic Development Strategy by carrying forward the District and to ensure that unused resources that cannot be spent at the end of a budget year. Its maximum level funds in a particular year can be carried .#'(,3%C$%,+)@$3%0'%0#$%&').0+0(0+')R.%,+7+0.%2)3%.$0%20%![\4:::%6,(.%27'()0.% forward. earmarked for specific purposes. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £5,900 £5,900 £5,900 £5,900 £5,900

Appendix 7

Planning Delivery Grant Reserve To enable monies provided by Planning Established in March 2010 when Planning Delivery Grant was no longer earmarked Delivery Grant to be earmarked for by government. The balance in the fund represents monies received in 2009/10 expenditure and to be carried forward for but not spent by 31 March 2010. This source of grant funding has now been use in a subsequent accounting period if discontinued and the fund will be closed when the current balance is spent. The necessary. maximum level should therefore be £127,000 and the minimum level zero. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £84,000 £84,000 £84,000 £84,000 £84,000

Local Arts Strategic Partnership Reserve To enable monies received relating to the The Reserve was established with an opening balance of £110,600. The minimum Arts Strategy to be carried forward and level is zero. spend in future years. Balance Projected Balance Page 125 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £51,200 £51,200 £51,200 £51,200 £51,200

New Homes Bonus Reserve To enable monies provided by New The balance in the fund represents monies received from the New Homes Bonus Homes Bonus to be earmarked for received but not spent by 31 March of each year. The maximum level should not expenditure and to be carried forward for exceed £1,000,000 and the minimum level should be zero. use in a subsequent accounting period if Balance Projected Balance necessary. 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £57,900 £57,900 £57,900 £57,900 £57,900

Waste Contract Reserve To enable surpluses generated by the The maximum level should not exceed £1,000,000 and the minimum level should Streetcare service under the Refuse, be zero. Recycling and Street Cleansing contract Balance Projected Balance to be carried forward and used in future 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 years to offset any deficits generated £209,200 £209,200 £209,200 £209,200 £209,200 under the contract. Appendix 7

Social Lettings Reserve To enable income from the social lettings The levels will be reviewed based on the number of properties leased under the scheme to be set-aside for potential scheme but at present the maximum level should not exceed £20,000 and the losses or repair bills minimum level should be £20,000. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £20,000 £20,000 £20,000 £20,000 £20,000

Non Domestic Rates (NDR) Deficit Reserve To enable income recognised in the The balance in this reserve is to meet the future NNDR collection fund deficit as a General Fund to be set aside to meet result of s31 grants to meet changes in the NNDR system being recognised in the deficits in future years. year it is due but a resulting deficit will be recognised in later years. The maximum

Page 126 balance will depend on future changes to the NNDR system: the minimum balance should be zero. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £490,000 £490,000 £0 £0 £0

HRA Environmental Warranty Reserve This reserve was established as part of At the time of transfer the cost of insurances for 20 years was £341,000. The the housing transfer. Part of the costs of maximum level of the reserve should be the estimated cost of insurances to be transfer was to fund insurance for 30- purchased, the minimum balance should be zero when the insurance is fully paid- year environmental warranties given as for. part of the transfer agreement. Since Balance Projected Balance insurance could only be procured for the 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 first 10 years, this reserve is to fund the £341,000 £341,000 £341,000 £341,000 £341,000 purchase of insurance from 2022 onwards. Appendix 7

CAPITAL RESERVES Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes  To provide support to the Capital "#$%,$H$,%'B%0#$%J()3%3$6$)3.%')%0#$%&'()*+,R.%#',3+)=%'B%*26+02,%1$*$+60.%2)3%+0.% Programme aspirations for capital expenditure. The Council aims to build up the Fund in  To supplement the capital finance 61$B$1$)*$%0'%1$02+)+)=%*26+02,%1$*$+60.%CA%*')H$10+)=%2)3%Q.I+0*#+)=R%1$.'(1*$.% available to the Programme by revenue wherever possible when financing capital expenditure. The Fund should have a contributions minimum balance available at the 31 March each year prior to funding the capital  "'% *'H$1% Q=1$A% 21$2R% $/6$)3+0(1$% 2)3% programme of £100,000 to ensure that it has a buffer to meet unexpected un- allow flexibility in financing decisions. capitalisable expenditure. An appropriate operational maximum level for the Fund from 1 April 2011 would be £2,000,000. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £0 £0 £100,000 £200,000 £300,000

Page 127 Second Homes Income Reserve To enable monies provided by reducing The annual income from second homes is currently around £750,000. It is spent council tax discounts to be earmarked for on a mixture of large developments and programmes of minor assistance to meet capital expenditure and to be carried the need for affordable housing. The reserve acts to preserve the funds in the forward for use in a subsequent event of slippage: if expenditure matches plans, the minimum balance will be zero. accounting period if necessary The maximum level should be 25% of the annual income i.e. £250,000 although this could be exceeded in exceptional circumstances where funds are being accumulated over a period of years for a major project. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £420,100 £250,100 £167,400 £167,400 £167,400

Appendix 7

EARMARKED RESERVES Kendal Employment Development Fund To assist economic development in the The Fund was set up by a Section 106 legal agreement that made a contribution of Kendal area. £200,000 to the Council with strict conditions on its use. Since grants are paid out from the Fund and its only on-going source of income is loan repayments the Fund will never exceed the initial contribution. The minimum level is zero. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £13,700 £13,700 £13,700 £13,700 £13,700

Local Land Charges Reserve To record surpluses and losses on the Operating surpluses can only be used for investment back into the service. A

Page 128 chargeable elements of local land minimum level of £100,000 debit is specified as (in theory) the Reserve could fall charges in accordance with statutory into deficit in the first or second years of the accounting cycle. The maximum level guidance of £100,000 is related to the annual turnover of around £200,000. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 -£7,600 -£7,600 -£7,600 -£7,600 -£7,600

Building Control Fee Income Reserve To record surpluses and losses on the Building control operates in a commercial environment with a three year rolling trading activities of building control in accounting period. Operating surpluses can only be used for investment back into accordance with statutory guidance. the service. A minimum level of £300,000 debit is specified as (in theory) the Reserve could fall into deficit in the first or second years of the accounting cycle. The maximum level of £300,000 is related to the annual turnover of around £700,000. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £0 £0 £0 £0 £0

Appendix 7

General Fund Working Balance To provide a general working balance The level of the Working Balance is set by reference to the risks attaching to the and contingency to cushion the Council General Re .$1H$D%%T)%$..$)*$%0#$%_'1@+)=%^2,2)*$%1$61$.$)0.%0#$%&'()*+,R.% against uneven cash flows, sharp backstop contingency and its bare minimum reserve that should never be depleted. budgetary changes and unexpected The level has been £1.0m historically but this was to be increased in £50,000 events or emergencies. annual steps to a target level of £1.5m. Due to General Fund underspends over recent years the Working Balance increased to £5.22m, including the balance of the HRA working balance transferred to the General Fund on 31 March 2013. From 2013/14 any balance over £1.5m will be transferred to the General Reserve. Balance Projected Balance 31 Mar 14 31 Mar 15 31 Mar 16 31 Mar 17 31 Mar 18 £1,500,000 £1,500,000 £1,500,000 £1,500,000 £1,500,000

Page 129 Appendix 8

Capital Strategy 1. Introduction "#+.%&26+02,%U0120$=A%.$0.%'(0%0#$%&'()*+,R.%2661'2*#%0'%7$$0+)=%*'77()+0A% 2)3%.$1H+*$%)$$3.%0#1'(=#%+0.%*26+02,%+)H$.07$)0%61'=1277$D%%"#$%&'()*+,R.% priorities, objectives and corporate outcomes are set out in its current Council Plan which was approved 25 February 2014. The Plan is supported by a set of annual service plans. The Capital Strategy describes how the deployment of capital resources will contribute to the achievement of these objectives. The Capital Strategy will continue to be reviewed with regard to its relevance in the changing context in which local government organisations work. 2. Current Economic Context The current economic climate provides significant challenges for the Council. The demand for investment in the regeneration and renewal of infrastructure and assets continues, whilst at the same time the resources available to the Council are constrained by proposed reductions in public service expenditure following successive Comprehensive Spending Reviews. These reductions impact directly on the Council and on the resources available to partners. 3. Council Assets The Council owned property, plant and equipment, assets, investment properties and heritage assets with a total net book value of £49m at March 2014. Council assets include 47 car parks, 137 parks and open spaces, 9 cemeteries, 5 depots and 3 sports centres. The Council also owns a large number of commercial properties and agricultural land used to generate income . OVERARCHING STRATEGY 4. "#$%&'()*+,R.%*26+02,%.0120$=A%+.%0'%3$ liver a capital programme that:  &')01+C(0$.%0'%0#$%&'()*+,%O,2)4%2)3%0#$%&'()*+,R.%H+.+')4%H2,($.4% strategic objectives and priorities  T.%*,'.$,A%2,+=)$3%I+0#%0#$%&'()*+,R.%L..$0%`2)2=$7$)0%O,2)%  Supports service-specific and other plans and strategies  Is affordable, financially prudent and sustainable, contributes to better value for money 5. The capital strategy will be delivered through:  Effective political and corporate leadership  Adequate and effective performance management arrangements  Clearly defined processes for building and monitoring the capital programme  Clear policies on financing capital expenditure  Effective risk management arrangements  A clear procurement protocol 6. In prioritising the Capital Programme, particular emphasis will be given to schemes that:  L*#+$H$%0#$%&'()*+,R. priorities  Improve performance against national and local targets

Page 130 Appendix 8

 Improve efficiency and effectiveness in service delivery, including through partnership working  Generate or increase income streams  Promote effective Asset Management, including DDA and Health & Safety issues LINKS TO OTHER PLANS & STRATEGIES 7. This Capital strategy links to, and is consistent with, the following other plans and strategies:  Council Plan  Service Plans & Strategies  Medium Term Financial Strategy  Corporate Asset Strategy  Risk Management Strategy  Procurement Strategy  Treasury Management Strategy AFFORDABILITY, SUSTAINABILITY, PRUDENCE AND VALUE FOR MONEY 8. The Prudential Code The CIPFA Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities (the Prudential Code) was introduced by the Local Government Act 2003. It sets out the concepts of affordability, sustainability and prudence as they apply to capital expenditure. A key objective of the Prudential Code is to ensure that the capital investment plans of the local authority are affordable, prudent and sustainable. To demonstrate that these objectives have been met the Code sets out the prudential indicators that must be used, and the factors that must be taken into account. These are designed to support and record local decision-making in a manner that is publicly accountable. Affordability The fundamental objective in determining the affordability of the 2(0#'1+0AR. capital plans is to ensure that the total capital investment remains within sustainable limits. This includes considering the impact on Council Tax. The Council is required to take into account all its current and forecast resources, together with the capital expenditure plans and revenue income and expenditure forecasts for the coming year and the following two years. This is done on a rolling basis, with regard to risk analysis and risk management strategies. Any significant known variations beyond this time frame must also be considered. Prudence and Sustainability Prudence and sustainability year on year are addressed through the prudential indicators for external debt, which must be set and revised taking into account their affordability. The key indicator of prudence laid down by the Code is that net external borrowing should not, except in the short term, exceed the total of the capital financing requirement in the preceding year, plus the estimates of any additional capital financing requirement for the current and next two financial

Page 131 Appendix 8

years. This ensures that, over the medium term, net borrowing will only be for capital purposes. It is also prudent to carry out treasury management activities in accordance with good practice, and the Prudential Code sets a number of indicators to address this. South Lakeland District Council and the Prudential Code The Council addresses the issues of affordability, prudence and sustainability in its capital investment plans by complying with the requirements of the Prudential Code. This includes the setting of the prudential indicators by Council in February and the monitoring of prudential through the Corporate Quarterly Financial Monitoring process. 9. Value for Money It is important that best value for money is obtained from capital investment. The Council is committed to making continuous improvements to processes and practices to increase value for money. Those that are embedded or being developed include:  Improvements to procurement  Investing to improve performance and/or generate efficiency savings (spend to save)  Working with partners to improve efficiency In assessing capital bids the Council first considers whether the proposed capital investment represents the most efficient way of delivering the desired outcomes, i.e. whether there are alternative approaches to resolving the problem that provide greater value for money. 10. Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) The Council is required to make provision for the principal repayment of borrowing. Prior to 2007-08 the Council was required by statute to provide for the repayment of a minimum amount of 4% of General Fund debt principal each year. This debt repayment is known as the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP). New regulations, the Local Authorities (Capital Finance & Accounting) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008, which came into force in February 2008, now require the Council to make instead Q61(3$)0%61'H+.+')R for the repayment of debt. A number of options for prudent provision are set out in the regulations. The underlying principle is that the repayment of debt should be aligned to the useful life of the asset or assets to which it relates. The authority is required, under the new regulations, to prepare an annual statement of their policy on making MRP for submission to Council. The &'()*+,R. policy statement on MRP is set out in the annual Treasury Strategy, which is agreed by Council during Feb/March each year.

Page 132 Appendix 8

FINANCING CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 11. Overview Decisions on capital investment are made against the background of constrained resources, and the Council is heavily dependent upon capital receipts and grants from central government to support its capital programme. Other available funding sources include prudential borrowing, third party contributions, and revenue contributions. These are all actively pursued to support capital investment. 12. Capital Receipts Capital receipts are derived from asset sales. These could include income to the Council as lessor from finance leases. Asset sales come from a variety of sources. Generally speaking, 100% of asset sales can be used to support capital expenditure. Sometimes the asset sale is linked directly to a capital project, for example in a relocation scheme. More often, asset sales relate to surplus assets that are held corporately and are not specific to a scheme or service. The Council completed the transfer of its housing stock to South Lakes Housing, a registered social landlord, in March 2012. Under the terms of the transfer agreement the Council received both an initial capital receipt and will receive future capital receipts from the sale of houses, other assets and from a VAT shelter. The amount of receipts from asset sales is dependent on both the type of asset itself and on economic and market conditions. The current economic climate has significantly reduced the number of sales and the amount of receipts. 13. Unsupported Borrowing The Local Government Act 2003 introduced new flexibilities into the capital expenditure and financing rules governing local authorities. The new rules, contained in the QPrudential Code R, allow local authorities to set their own limits with regard to borrowing undertaken to support capital expenditure. Additional borrowing may now be undertaken, provided that it is, and can be shown to be, prudent, affordable and sustainable. This method of financing *26+02,%$/6$)3+0(1$%+.%*2,,$3%O().(66'10$3%C'11'I+)=PD% In order for unsupported borrowing to be prudent, affordable and sustainable, there must be an identifiable, long-term source of revenue funding for the associated revenue (debt financing) costs. Ideally this will come from revenue savings or additional income arising directly from the capital scheme. For example, refurbishment of a building may generate maintenance and/or energy savings, or the building of a car park could generate income through charges. The cost of borrowing therefore should be borne by the service that uses the asset. 14. Supported Borrowing The other form of borrowing available for funding the capital programme is supported borrowing. This is where the costs of the borrowing are part recognised in the formula grant settlement and are therefore Q.(66'10$3R .

Page 133 Appendix 8

However the formula grant does not cover the full cost of the borrowing undertaken. As a district authority supported borrowing allocations are very limited, generally only housing supported borrowing allocations have been made available in recent years. 15. Government Grants The conditions attached to government grants vary according to the particular grant. Some will fund the full cost of the scheme, others just a percentage, with the local authority having to fund the balance. Most, but not all, grants are time-limited. Government grants tend to be focussed towards central government priorities. 16. Third Party Contributions As with government grants the conditions attached to third party contributions vary. This category of funding is becoming of increasing importance to the Council in a climate of stretched local government resources. Included here are:  Planning obligations funding from Section 106 agreements (developer contributions)  National Lottery grants  Contributions from local bodies.  Contributions from national bodies . 17. Revenue Contributions In the past revenue contributions have been a fairly minor source of capital financing for the Council due to pressures on the revenue budget. They are, however, sometimes used to top up small shortfalls in the funding required for a particular scheme. 18. Reserves The Council uses a number of reserves to fund the capital programme. There are two main types:  Reserves used to collect specific funds to be used over a number of years, such as the Second Homes Discount reserve, the LAGBI reserve or the New Homes Bonus reserve  Reserves can be used to smooth the timing of the application of revenue contributions, for example the IT Reserve and the General Fund Major Repair Reserve. The Policy on Reserves and Balances gives details of the purpose of each reserve. FUNDING STRATEGY 19. The capital funding strategy is proposed as part of the overall capital strategy and is therefore also reviewed on an annual basis. "#$%&'()*+,R s capital funding strategy for 2014/15 to 2018/19 is set out below: Funding streams are allocated in the following ways:  Capital receipts are not allocated or committed prior to receipt, unless inextricably linked to a specific project.

Page 134 Appendix 8

 General fund capital receipts received during the year will be added to the un-earmarked general fund capital receipts reserve and taken into account as a potential funding source for new schemes or variations in the relevant financial year or the following financial year, subject to revenue budget considerations e.g. debt financing budget implications.  General Fund capital receipts received from the capital portion of finance lease income on Council owned properties under new IFRS rules will be earmarked for capital expenditure on the Council's property assets.  Capital Reserves M Capital receipts generated by asset sales will be partly set aside in a capital reserve fund. This reserve provides a funding source for future priority schemes and emergencies.  The only call on the earmarked general fund capital reserve during the year would be for unforeseen high priority emergency capital works that cannot be financed from alternative sources. Agreement will be through the normal channels M that is the submission of a project appraisal or variation to Cabinet with final approval by Council.  Hypothecated funding M i.e. funding linked directly to a specific scheme or service area, such as grants, third part contributions, revenue contributions and supported borrowing M is allocated 100% to the relevant scheme or service.  Supported Borrowing will be used if the unsupported element is affordable.  Unsupported Borrowing will be used to fund capital investment if the cost of the borrowing is affordable. Ideally the capital investment itself will produce revenue savings, which will cover the cost of borrowing to invest.  The IT Replacement Reserve will only be used to fund the replacement of hardware and software with a preference for the updating of the corporate and networking infrastructure.  The Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes will only be used to provide support to the Capital Programme, to supplement the capital finance available to the Programme by revenue contributions and to *'H$1%Q=1$A%21$2R%$/6$)3+0(1$%2)3%2,,'I%B,$/+C+,+0A%+)%B+)2)*+)=%3$*+.+').D  Underspends on schemes may not be automatically diverted to other schemes. This will be considered against the demands of the programme as a whole, any reserve project list and funding requirements for the following year. The funding strategy is used to determine the allocation of funding to the programme at the start of the year and throughout the year. Depending on the timing and restrictions of the funding streams, the most appropriate funding will be used at the year end. Finance staff, under the direction of the Chief Finance Officer, will apply the available funding to the outturn expenditure in line with the best interests of the Council.

20. Revenue Implications of Capital Projects The revenue implications of capital projects are identified through medium term planning and the c 26+02,%26612+.2,%61'*$..4%2)3%B$3%+)0'%0#$%&'()*+,R.

Page 135 Appendix 8

medium term revenue budget to ensure that all revenue implications are taken into account. 21. Leasing (Council as Lessee) Leases are classified in accounting terms as either finance or operating leases. This distinction is important because it dictates whether the lease must be classified as capital (finance leases) or revenue (operating leases), and different accounting treatment is required for each. Items financed through an operating lease are coded to and financed as part 'B%0#$%&'()*+,R. revenue budget. It is the responsibility of the budget holder to ensure that there is sufficient capacity in the revenue budget to fund the annual operating lease costs. "#$%&'()*+,R. preference is not to enter into finance leases unless there are exceptional reasons for doing so. Where an operating lease is either not available or not suitable, a capital purchase funded by prudential borrowing generally offers greater benefits than a finance lease. The introduction of IFRS from April 2010 may reduce the number of instances where operating leases can be used to finance expenditure, particularly in the case of short life assets such as IT hardware, equipment and vehicles. Where this applies it is likely that such items will be purchased through the capital programme and financed by prudential borrowing, with the revenue cost of the borrowing met from the existing service budget. PRIORITISATION PROCESS 22. Prioritising projects All bids for inclusion in the following years programme are considered according to a set of objective criteria to assist with the prioritisation of schemes and the allocation of funds. This ensures that, in a context of limited 1$.'(1*$.4%0#$%*'77()+0A%H+.+')%2)3%.0120$=A%2)3%0#$%&'()*+,R. vision, values, objectives and priorities form the framework for decisions about investment priorities, and that capital allocations are made using clear impartial criteria. The prioritisation process is linked directly to the information given on the completed project appraisals, with weighting given to schemes that strongly .(66'10%0#$%&'()*+,R. objectives and priorities, and those that fulfil an urgent legal or statutory requirement. In summary, each bid can be rated on the extent to which the project contributes:  "#$%&'()*+,R. objectives and priorities  Legal commitments or statutory duties, including DDA & Health & Safety issues  Equalities  Improvements in performance indicators  Efficiency savings  Value for money  The delivery of service objectives  Effective Asset Management  Extent of ring fenced or specific funding

Page 136 Appendix 8

 Levels of financial risk involved  Impact on the revenue budget and income generation Prioritisation of the bids enables officers to put forward a recommended programme that is within available resources. The weighting within the scoring framework will be reviewed on an annual basis as part of a policy of continuous improvement and to take into account any relevant factors. Bids for work required to meet a statutory or legal obligation will be given a high priority. The prioritised programme is for guidance only. Members are responsible for agreeing the capital programme and have the discretion to include or exclude schemes as they deem appropriate. 23. Capital Programme 2013/14 to 2017/18 - Project Appraisals All bids for inclusion in the capital programme are supported by a project appraisal, the preparation of which is the responsibility of the budget holder or project manager. The project manager signs the appraisal to confirm that their Assistant Director, Director and Portfolio Holder are aware of and support the scheme. Project appraisals have been completed for all 2014/15 to 2018/19 capital programme bids. The appraisal pro-forma has been designed to ensure that the information gathered is sufficient in order to make decisions based on the criteria set out above. Project appraisals must consider carefully the deliverability of projects to avoid slippage of the capital programme. The de-minimus level set by the authority for capital expenditure is £10,000. Individual schemes must therefore be £10,000 and above to be included in the authorities capital programme. The only exception is where the funding for the project is external and requires the scheme to be capital. MONITORING THE CAPITAL PROGRAMME 24. Project management & monitoring Project managers are responsible for the proper and effective control and monitoring of their projects, including financial monitoring. This includes ensuring that:  Only capital expenditure is charged to the capital project  Only expenditure properly attributable to the scheme is coded to the scheme  The scheme expenditure is contained within the agreed budget, and that any Qunavoidable R variations are dealt with appropriately  Realistic expenditure profiles are determined  A realistic forecast outturn for the financial year and the project as a whole are calculated and kept under regular review  Any slippage of expenditure from current to future years is identified  Any grants or third party funding is applied for and all grant conditions met  The source of any revenue funding is identified

Page 137 Appendix 8

Project managers are also responsible for carrying out project reviews following scheme completion. The finance team is responsible for providing support and advice to assist project managers in managing and monitoring their capital budgets. It also has a key role in consolidating and co-ordinating the monitoring information that is required for reporting purposes. This involves reporting to Senior Management Team, Cabinet and Council. 25. Capital Programme Monitoring The capital programme position is reported to Senior Management Team, Cabinet and Council as part of Corporate Financial Monitoring report and covers the latest programme and any amendments to be notified or approved, expenditure to date, and the forecast outturn. It also outlines the financing position and any steps needed to deal with potential financing difficulties. At year-end, an outturn report and carry-forward requests are taken to Cabinet and Council. These will include an analysis of programme slippage to the following year, including the reasons for that slippage and how it is to be financed. 26. Changes to the Agreed Programme The programme for the coming year is set and agreed by Council prior to 1st April (at the February Council as part of the Budget process), but it is essential to also have a process that then allows for changes during the year. Changes may be required as a result of proposed additions to the programme, amendments to existing schemes or deletions from the programme. For example tenders may come in above or below estimate; difficulties may be encountered in implementation, which require a change of approach; funding may need to be released to support another more urgent priority. 27. Proposed additions to the programme The need to add a scheme to the programme usually arises from either access to additional funding, such as a grant or third party contribution, or as a response to an unforeseen urgent issue (often related to legal or health and safety concerns). In order to bid for an addition to the programme, a project appraisal must be completed and signed off in the usual way. The funding for the project must be identified at this stage. Where there is no additional funding to support the bid, resources must be identified from within the existing programme. The prioritisation of the proposed addition will need to be considered with reference to any reserve list of projects, as well as projects already in the programme but not yet complete. The request for the addition will either be incorporated into the regular Corporate Quarterly Financial Monitoring report to Cabinet or Council, or approved by Cabinet and Council.

Page 138 Appendix 8

28. Amendments to Existing Schemes If the proposed amendment is one of substance, which results in a scheme materially different from the original project appraisal, then the original project must be withdrawn, and a new project appraisal completed to support the new bid. If, however, the substance of the scheme remains the same, then the change can be dealt with through the Corporate Quarterly Financial Monitoring process. Formal variations to budgets for existing projects must be completed and authorised in the following circumstances:  Forecast total scheme outturn is materially in excess of budget  Additional funding has become available to support a scheme  A forecast overspend is to be funded by a forecast underspend in another project  Funding is released due to a forecast underspend on a scheme  A scheme is to be withdrawn from the programme CONSULTATION 29. Consultation generated by the corporate planning process extends to the Capital Programme.

The detailed capital programme is shown at Appendix 9 .

Page 139 Appendix 9 The purpose of this appendix is to show the changes proposed to the capital programme

Carry forward 2014/15 2014/15 Total 2013/14 Programme Spending by Project 2013/14 2013/14 Actual and 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Approved Amended to 2017/18 adjustment £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Play Area Renewals 20.0 0.0 20.0 33.4 53.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 113.4 Grange Open space contribution 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 10.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 Ecclerigg Depot 4.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Public Conveniences (Upgrade And Hand Over) 10.9 9.4 85.0 0.0 85.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.4 Disabled Facilities Grants 495.0 353.7 456.8 133.0 589.8 383.9 374.8 393.1 2,095.3 Affordable Housing Renovation Grants (AHRG) 436.6 415.2 0.0 20.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 435.2 Site Assembly Fund For Affordable Housing 467.0 367.4 460.0 100.0 560.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 927.4 Mobile Working 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 IT Replacements 49.6 46.5 40.0 108.3 148.3 40.0 40.0 40.0 314.8 Ferry Nab Redevelopment Phases 1, 2 and 3 15.0 34.5 400.0 (19.5) 380.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 415.0 Nobles Rest 64.2 0.5 0.0 149.5 149.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 150.0 Westmorland Shopping Centre Car Park Refurbishment 368.1 42.6 0.0 325.5 325.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 368.1 DDA Works, Various car parks 31.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 Rydal Road Car Park, Ambleside Works to Bridge 50.0 12.1 270.0 37.9 307.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 320.0 Page 140 Grange Regeneration 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Grange Regeneration - Berners Site 300.0 308.6 150.0 (2.3) 147.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 456.3 New Road Common 0.0 0.0 27.1 0.0 27.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.1 Kendal Public Realm Improvements 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 Vehicle & Plant Programme 568.0 259.1 1,877.5 343.2 2,220.7 148.0 373.0 1,606.8 4,607.6 Transformation Change - Access to Services 22.5 0.0 0.0 22.5 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.5 Windermere Steamboat Museum contribution 0.0 0.0 200.0 0.0 200.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 CRM Development 60.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 South Lakeland House - Universal Credit interview rooms 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 Castle Dairy New Roof 37.5 7.2 112.5 75.3 187.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 195.0 Town and Car Park signing 18.2 7.2 35.0 7.8 42.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 Recycling bins & boxes 69.0 43.4 0.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.4 Dog order signage 15.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 Stockghyll Wood footbridge 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 Kendal Town Centre Public Realm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Right to buy replacement scheme 0.0 0.0 850.0 135.0 985.0 640.0 420.0 210.0 2,255.0 Affordable Homes, Town Centre Properties and Empty homes 0.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 2,000.0 Waterhead Public Realm 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 200.0 0.0 0.0 250.0 Town Centre Improvement Fund 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 75.0 Kendal Leisure Centre 0.0 0.0 61.5 0.0 61.5 425.5 0.0 0.0 487.0 Kendal Leisure Partner 0.0 0.0 659.0 0.0 659.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 659.0

Total 3,108.8 1,918.3 6,419.4 1,563.9 7,983.3 2,482.4 1,752.8 2,769.9 16,906.7 Appendix 9 The purpose of this appendix is to show the revised position on capital funding

B/f resources Income Use in capital Support of Debt Unallocated programme revenue repayment, savings** VRP and other

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Revenue funds for capital 71.1 500.0 134.5 0.0 136.6 300.0 Labgi (part) 2.4 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Second homes income reserve 230.7 2,684.5 503.1 2,392.8 0.0 19.3 IT replacement reserve 154.7 200.0 305.0 0.0 0.0 49.7 New homes bonus* 60.1 1,184.4 837.3 407.2 0.0 0.0 GF MRR 335.7 250.0 485.0 0.0 0.0 100.7 General Capital grants 256.0 54.5 257.5 0.0 0.0 53.0 S106 funds k village 100.0 41.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 141.6 Page 141 s106 housing 0.0 552.7 552.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Capital receipts 14,716.7 455.3 2,762.5 0.0 9,948.8 2,460.7 DFG 0.0 1,220.1 1,220.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 HRA MRR 253.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 253.0 0.0 Streetcare reserve (part) 338.6 36.0 36.0 0.0 338.6 0.0 RTB receipt 0.0 2,465.0 2,255.0 0.0 0.0 210.0 VAT Shelter receipt 0.0 3,429.5 2,325.0 0.0 0.0 1,104.5 Funding from borrowing. 0.0 0.0 5,230.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 16,519.0 13,073.6 16,906.7 2,800.0 10,677.0 4,439.5

*based on 60/40 split, capital/revenue ** 4 years @ £700k p/a

Unallocated as per approved capital budget February 2014 3,673.0 Variance 766.5 Explained by: Saving on debt repayment 766.9 Additional income (net of additional capital expenditure) 96.2 Budget no longer required 38.4 New schemes funded from existing resources -135.0 766.5 Appendix 10

Efficiency & Value for Money Strategy

1. Introduction Value for Money (VfM) is defined as the relationship between economy , efficiency and effectiveness SQ[Q.R]D%L*#+$H+)=%aB` means achieving a balance between all three: relatively low costs, high productivity and valued outcomes. This is consistent with the duty of Best Value placed on the Council under the Local 5'H$1)7$)0%L*0%;VVV%0'%O.$*(1$%*')0+)('(.%+761'H$7$)0%+)%0#$%I2A in which [it] exercises [its] functions, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and $BB$*0+H$)$..PD%%"#+.%3(0A%#2.%C$$)%*,21+B+$3%CA%0#$%^$.0%a2,($%U020(0'1A%5(+32)*$% published in July 2011. The Council recognises its duty of Best Value and its responsibility to achieve VfM in service delivery including economic, environmental and social value provision. It will seek to incorporate VfM principles in delivering services by taking account of costs , quality of services and the local context . 2. Objectives The Objectives of this VfM Policy are to identify the Principles of VfM and to ensure 0#20%0#$.$%O1+)*+6,$.%21$%1$B,$*0$3%+)%0#$%&'()*+,R.%.$1H+*$%6,2))+)=%2)3%3$,+H$1AD 3. VfM Principles The Principles of VfM are illustrated in the following diagram:

 Economy is the price paid for inputs (of a given quality) to a service  Efficiency is the level of productivity (the outputs produced for the level of inputs used)  Effectiveness is the quantitative or qualitative impact achieved by the outputs.  Social Value is about seeking to maximize the additional benefit that can be created by procuring or commissioning goods and services, above and beyond the benefit of merely the goods and services themselves. 4. Putting the Principles into Action To demonstrate VfM, the Council will seek to achieve the optimum balance between the above Principles and strive for continuous improvement in all aspects of service delivery by the following means: a) Identifying local needs and priorities We will:  Recognise the Duty to Consult through the involvement of stakeholders through 0#$% (.$% 'B% *+0+b$).R% 62)$,.4% (.$1 -satisfaction surveys and other customer feedback

Page 142 Appendix 10

 Identify priorities to meet the needs of our community, both as an individual service provider and a partner, and ensure that these take account of national and regional priorities  Ensure that community needs and priorities are reflected in our plans and strategies, e.g. Community Strategy, Corporate Plan and Service Business Plans. b) Securing resources at the appropriate price having regard to the level of quality required We will:  Implement our Procurement & Commissioning Strategy to secure the most advantageous combination of price and quality  Consult, and work in partnership as appropriate with, other public and private sector service providers  Use all appropriate methods to achieve economies, including e-procurement, joint working, shared services and market testing.  Ensure that these methods are recorded in our formal procedures, including Contract Procedure Rules, Procurement Code & Toolkit and Financial Procedure Rules  Restrict any budgetary growth and increases in Council Tax to the minimum necessary to achieve our declared aims  Strive to attract external funding to supplement our own resources where appropriate  Ensure that long- 0$17%SQI#',$%,+B$R]%*'.0.%21$%02@$)%+)0'%2**'()0%+)%0#$%2*N(+.+0+')% of resources c) Allocating resources in accordance with agreed aims We will:  Ensure that resources are allocated in accordance with our plans and strategies, including our Medium Term Financial Strategy and Annual Budget  Demonstrate a clear link between our agreed priorities and allocation of resources  Continuously seek to identify opportunities for increased efficiency without adversely affecting service quality d) 1&%0#*&2) %$#3*,$%) -#$) +$4*3$#$+) '.) 5$$') ,0%'.5$#%R) &$$+%6) 0'*4*%*&2) '7$) minimum level of resources required and by the most appropriate means, including via partnerships We will:  Deliver services in accordance with our Business Plans and Customer Service Strategy  Monitor cost levels to ensure they are commensurate with agreed service quality e) Reviewing service delivery to ensure good practice is adopted and to secure continuous improvement We will:

Page 143 Appendix 10

 Adopt working practices M independently and in partnership M to support the drive for increased efficiency and effectiveness, including promoting the use of electronic service delivery and working with other service providers as appropriate  Implement our Performance Management Framework to assist in achieving economy, efficiency, effectiveness and continuous improvement in services, including: - Regularly monitoring performance and ensuring elected Members have quality information to perform the scrutiny function - &'7621+)=% 0#$% &'()*+,R.% 6$1B'172)*$% I+0#% 0#20% 'B% '0#$1% .+7+,21% service-providers - Challenging our own performance by a variety of methods, for example through service reviews, scrutiny exercises, budget reviews, human resource reviews, compliance with our Corporate Governance Framework, internal audit functions and working with external auditors, inspectors and other agencies. Service reviews will be monitored quarterly through O&S Committees. f) Undertaking necessary '#-*&*&2)-&+)+$3$4."5$&')'.)"#.5.'*&2)-)Q8/9),04'0#$R) within the Council and its partners We will:  Ensure that the structure and processes of the organisation are conducive to the achievement of VfM  Utilise training & development programmes as appropriate to inform Members and officers and to foster a VfM culture within the organization

5. Responsibilities While everyone within the Council has a general duty to ensure the Council provides value-for-money services, responsibilities may be summarised as follows:

Body Responsibility Council Ensuring the Vfm policy is approved Cabinet Ensuring that the Vfm Policy is adopted and adhered to Scrutiny Members Holding the Cabinet to account in this duty Senior Management Team Q).(1+)=% 0#20% 0#$% &'()*+,R.% strategic direction is consistent with the contents of this Policy Assistant Directors and all officers Ensuring that services are delivered in accordance with this policy

Page 144 Appendix 11

Medium Term Financial Plan Risks and Opportunities Log REF VULNERABILITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO CONTROL THIS HOOD RISK 1. Revenue budget and Capital Resources not directed to achieving Low Marginal Both the revenue budget and the Programme may not be corporate outcomes, leading to Capital Programme are now integrated and aligned with inappropriate spending. embedded in the corporate Council Plan. planning cycle. All revenue budgets and capital programme schemes are linked to Council plan priorities 2. The programme of budget Council will be forced to cut services Low Critical Universal acceptance of the reductions does not deliver the and/or make knee-jerk and problem by heightened awareness. required level of savings to potentially irrational spending Clear direction and identification of correct the forecast inherent reductions. measures by Members and Page 145 budget deficit. Officers. Strict project management to ensure that proposals are implemented. 3. Resources cannot be identified to Corporate outcomes may not be Low Marginal Accurate assessments of spending fund new service development. delivered. needs to be built into the budget forecast. Project management of reduction programme. 4. Further loss of income from Revenue budget unable to cope with High Marginal Retention of external fund investments as interest rates reduced income managers, close monitoring of reduce. returns, already minimal levels of projected interest receipts.

Page 1 Appendix 11

REF VULNERABILITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO CONTROL THIS HOOD RISK 5.  Provisions for pay, price In-year budgetary pressure and Low Marginal Close monitoring and short-term inflation are inadequate e.g. potential overspending, jeopardising use of revenue contingency fuel service delivery. provision and General Reserve  followed by review for following Income falls below targets year.  Government grant is withdrawn suddenly 6. Whole-place approach to Reduction in funding for other Significant Marginal Monitor proposals for extension of Community budgeting diverts services Community budgeting grant to other service providers

Page 146 7. The resilience of the budget is not Budget may not be able to cope with Low Marginal Close 23#$1$)*$%0'%0#$%O,2)R.% re-enforced by the strengthening unexpected events and spending proposals for the maintenance of of reserves and balances. plans may have to be curtailed. reserves and balances. 8. Government introduction of more Revenue budget unable to cope with Significant Marginal Maintenance of General Reserve stringent capping system through basic inflationary increases, further as a buffer against unexpected the specification of levels above pressure on resources and service restriction on council tax increases. which a referendum will be delivery. The Plan uses realistic triggered assumptions for forward planning. Plan assumes zero Council Tax increases for 2014/15 and 2015/16. 9. Extension of Council Tax freeze Revenue budget unable to cope with Significant Critical Consider carefully longer-term scheme erodes taxbase and increase in costs but freeze in impact of accepting single year ability to generate income income grant offered to freeze Council Tax. through accepting single year Mitigated partly by incorporating of grant but accepting loss of Council Tax freeze for some years longer-term potential income in the baseline for the local government finance settlement.

Page 2 Appendix 11

REF VULNERABILITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO CONTROL THIS HOOD RISK 10. Government proposals for Income streams will be insufficient to Significant Critical Monitor changes in rateable values localisation of business rates fund service delivery. & proposals for new development / increase uncertainty of major closures/ other changes. Monitor income stream. Government proposals for changes in NNDR legislation. Maintenance 10a. Government proposals for of General Reserve as a buffer additional reliefs for business (new) against unexpected changes in rates will not be fully funded funding. 11. Council is reluctant to take tough Income streams may not be Low Critical Financial decisions in non-priority decisions in a number of service optimised leading to reduced areas should be made on areas e.g. fees & charges or resources available for spending on commercial principles backed by grants payable priority services or projected savings sound business cases.

Page 147 may not be generated 12. Budgetary control procedures are Variances from budgets are not Low Marginal Ongoing review of procedures to not understood and followed. identified and acted upon, leading to ensure that budget monitoring inappropriate/unauthorised spending. information is appropriate and meaningful. Greater emphasis on trend analysis and the use of customer data. Closer liaison between Finance staff and budget holders. 13. Ferry Nab development may not Lower than expected income Low Marginal Predicted income now removed deliver the predicted income streams leading to reduced from income budget projections streams to the predicted resources available to spend on timescales priority services 14. Reduction in economic Inability to improve employment Significant Critical If LEP is unable to invest in development funding if Cumbria prospects within the district economic development there will LEP is unable to attract be increased pressure on the significant funding. &'()*+,R.%*26+02,%61'=1277$%0'% invest significant funds.

Page 3 Appendix 11

REF VULNERABILITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO CONTROL THIS HOOD RISK 15. Diversion of funds into Single Lower than expected income Significant Marginal Proposals for top-slicing of New Local Growth Fund reduces streams leading to reduced Homes Bonus now abandoned funding already recognised in resources available to spend on outside London. This will leave projections priority services gaps in the funding proposals of T)H$.0+)=%+)%^1+02+)R.%B(0(1$%1$6' rt and so monitor for any other such proposals and respond to consultation. 16. Additional unexpected costs Budget may not be able to cope with Very low Marginal Careful monitoring of liabilities following LSVT additional costs and spending plans arising from the housing transfer may have to be curtailed. Page 148 17. The Council is unable to meet Service falls below all acceptable Significant Critical Close monitoring of the changing future demand for services standards. needs and levels of demand and review of resource allocation. 18. Pension funding M in particular Budget may not be able to cope with Significant Marginal Movement to alternative method of the deficit on the Cumbria fund additional costs and spending plans contribution based on set

following the international may have to be curtailed. percentage for current service financial slow-down. accrual and fixed contribution for past service costs should reduce inherent problem of declining staff base for contributions. Government reform of pension scheme should alleviate impact of declining investment returns. Rates agreed for next triennial review: review again in 2017

Page 4 Appendix 11

REF VULNERABILITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO CONTROL THIS HOOD RISK 19. Costs of asset maintenance, as Budgetary pressures force cuts in Significant Critical A quinquennial review of identified in the Corporate Asset standards of maintenance. maintenance requirements is Strategy, exceed resources prepared. The General Fund available. Planned Maintenance fund exists to meet abnormal spending needs. 20. Future demographic and other Budget inadequate for additional Significant Marginal Monitor impact of demographic changes demand additional spending demands changes expenditure 21. Potential creation of Internal Unavoidable Levy payable to Internal Very low Critical Monitor proposals, review Drainage Board Drainage Board; under capping treatment as special expense. rules, levies would count against the Under new proposals for &'()*+,R.%&'()*+,%"2/%*266+)=%,+7+0 calculating council tax increases a Page 149 and would generate a referendum. new levy would count towards triggering a referendum. 22. Potential loss of surplus- Budget may not be able to cope with Low Marginal Review all requests against the generating assets through the loss of income Asset Transfer Policy proposed Community right to bid 23. Higher that estimated increase in Budget may not be able to cope with Low Marginal Frequent budget monitoring costs due to international political additional costs and spending plans uncertainty e.g. fuel may have to be curtailed. 24. Reduced ability to attract and Inability to deliver services to current Low Marginal Monitor recruitment activity retain suitably qualified staff due levels or additional costs of to Government announcements temporary staff on pay restraint, pay progression, Local Government pension reform and increased NI contributions for national Single Tier pensions from April 2016.

Page 5 Appendix 11

REF VULNERABILITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO CONTROL THIS HOOD RISK 25. Welfare reform: additional costs Potential increase in support costs High Marginal Monitor proposals and respond to of implementation of Universal and potential increase in consultation Credit due to need to support homelessness cases due to rent digital by default application arrears. process and payment to Loss of administration grant towards claimants rather than landlords. continuing costs 26. Procurement projects: projected Unable to deliver estimated savings, Significant Marginal Review all savings proposals for savings not generated inability to balance budget deliverability, ensure specification of proposed contract is realistic. 27. Procurement projects: challenge Potential legal costs and additional Low Marginal All procurement exercises to follow Page 150 to process costs of service delivery until &'()*+,R.%&')012*0%O1'*$3(1$% challenge resolved Rules, which are updated for changes in legislation. Additional legal advice is procured for major or unusual procurement projects 28. Closure of major employer Reduction in income from business Significant Marginal Monitoring of significant employers rates but increase in demand for affordable housing and council tax reduction scheme. 29. Legal challenge, particularly of Potential need to refund income Significant Marginal The Council has been named in a charging regimes received and contribute to legal costs group action brought by a personal search company. A provision has been made against potential costs of settlement.

Page 6 Appendix 11

REF VULNERABILITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO CONTROL THIS HOOD RISK 30. Need to meet pension O'0$)0+2,%+)*1$2.$%+)%0#$%&'()*+,R.% Low Marginal Monitor financial standing of Lakes guarantees: the Council is future contribution rates to meet any Leisure and South Lakes Housing guarantor for both Lakes Leisure deficits if Lakes Leisure or South and South Lakes Housing Lakes Housing were unable to meet their liabilities 31. Increased tax avoidance, Reductions in income from business Significant Marginal Monitor claims for reliefs, particularly of business rates rates particularly empty properties (new) 32. Restrictions on ability to charge Reduction in income from car Significant Critical Monitor comments of Government for car parking parking charges ministers. (new) OPPORTUNTIES

Page 151 REF OPPORTUNITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO ACHIEVE THIS HOOD OPPORTUNITY A. Significant increase in net Additional funding to support High Marginal Maximise addition of properties (& dwellings increases New either expansion of existing minimise removal of properties) on Homes bonus. services, provision of new valuation list by end of September services or prevents reduction in annually; maximise increase in number existing services of affordable homes through planning requirements or provision of support, financial or otherwise. Although may be significant increase in income, the Council has commitment for use on affordable housing and locally important projects. B. General Power of Potentially could allow Council to High Significant Recently approved by Localism Act, Competence provide additional services review areas where new powers could be used; powers were used to support

Page 7 Appendix 11

REF OPPORTUNITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO ACHIEVE THIS HOOD OPPORTUNITY Power up your community C. Localisation of business rates Potentially could provide funding High Marginal The Government scheme of tariffs limits to support either expansion of the potential for significant gains from existing services, provision of new increased business rates. Monitor services or prevent reduction in planning applications, Local Plan existing services proposals etc. D. Shared services Potentially could provide High Significant Review existing services, work with other additional funding to support public services in the area to review either the existing level of service service provision and potential sharing of or enhanced service levels services: depends on finding a partner.

Page 152 E. New advances in technologies Potentially could reduce staffing Low Marginal Monitor developments in technology requirements or existing non- staffing costs; could permit new or enhanced services F. Community Groups wishing to Potential transfer of costs to Low Significant Monitor requests, including those under take over services alternative provider who may be the Community Right to Challenge. able to provide existing services Currently there appears little appetite or at lower cost or enhanced capacity for further transfers. services at existing cost G. Opportunities for generating Potential increase in income High Marginal Monitor proposals, respond to additional income for services consultation M relaxation of national controls e.g. planning fees H. Significant increase in Ability to improve employment High Significant Funding is allocated directly to schemes economic development prospects within the district so the Council is not involved as funding if Cumbria LEP is able accountable body but funding would to attract significant funding 1$3(*$%61$..(1$%')%0#$%&'()*+,R.%*26+02,% through bidding for Regional programme to support economic Growth Fund or Single Local development schemes.

Page 8 Appendix 11

REF OPPORTUNITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO ACHIEVE THIS HOOD OPPORTUNITY Growth Fund monies. I. Additional capital funding as a Increased capital receipts High Significant Monitor proposed changes and respond result of Government changes increase the potential size of the to consultations. in rules, for example the capital programme and the ability increase in the level of the cap to support funding for new assets on discounts under Right to or to improve existing assets Buy (RTB) has increased the numbers of properties sold under the preserved RTB by tenants of South Lakes Housing J. Cost of debt repayment lower Need to commit less capital High Marginal Monitor interest rates and repay debt Page 153 than expected due to higher receipts to repayment of debt in when premiums are minimised. long-term interest rates and order to deliver interest payment Debt repayment planned by 31 March therefore PWLB premiums reductions 2014. reducing K. Increased income from Additional revenue income offsets Low Marginal Close monitoring of returns, minimal investments as interest rates need to find savings to balance levels of projected interest receipts in improve. budget deficit. MTFP financial model. L. Identification and delivery of Additional revenue savings Low Marginal Close monitoring of deliverability of savings enable funding of beyond those needed to offset proposed savings programme of growth and budget deficit service development M. Corporate assets generate Additional income to offset budget High Marginal Review each asset for alternative use or new income streams, either deficit or to supplement capital sale in accordance with the Corporate revenue or capital programme. Asset Strategy N. Participatory budgeting Sharing or reduction of costs Low Marginal Review outcomes of the participatory delivers opportunities for budgeting pilot exercise. improved services or sharing

Page 9 Appendix 11

REF OPPORTUNITY / TRIGGER CONSEQUENCE LIKELI- IMPACT ACTIONS TO ACHIEVE THIS HOOD OPPORTUNITY of existing costs

Page 154

Page 10 Appendix 12

Glossary

Baseline Funding Level "#$%5'H$1)7$)0R.%2..$..7$)0%'B%0#$%&'()*+,R.%.#21$%'B%C(.+)$..%120$.D%%J'1%9:;[X;c%0#+.% was based on actual NNDR collected in 2009/10 and 2010/11. From 2014/15 this will be increased by inflation. Best Value A general duty for local authorities to demonstrate that they deliver high quality services that provide overall value including economic, environmental and social value. Budget L% .020$7$)0% 3$B+)+)=% 0#$% &'()*+,R.% 6',+*+$.% 'H$1% 2% .6$*+B+$3% 6$1+'3% 'B% 0+7$% +)% 0$17.% 'B% finance. Budgets usually include statements about the use of other resources (e.g., numbers of staff) and provide some information on performance measures. Budget Requirement The estimated revenue expenditure on General Fund services that needs to be financed from the Council Tax, Business Rates and Formula Grant after deducting income from fees and charges, certain specific grants and any funding from reserves. Business rates Income collected from non-domestic ratepayers, formally known as Non-Domestic Rates (see below). Capital Expenditure Spending that will provide benefit over a period of years. This includes spending on the acquisition, construction or improvements of assets (e.g. land, building, vehicles, and equipment) either directly by the Council or indirectly by grants or loans to others. Capital expenditure is defined by legislation: items falling outside of the definition must be charged to a revenue account. Capital Programme L%.*#$3(,$%'B%0#$%&'()*+,R.%*26+02,%$/6$)3+0(1$%6,2).%B'1%2%6$1+'3% of several years together with the funds that will pay for that spending. Capital Receipts The proceeds from the sale of land or other assets. Capital receipts can be used to finance new capital expenditure within rules set down by the Government, but they cannot be used to finance revenue expenditure. Until April 2004, the Government set proportions of receipts that were usable for capital expenditure or reserved (set-aside) for debt redemption. Since April 2004 receipts can be re-invested in new capital expenditure, subject to affordability. Capping A system of controlling the spending of local authorities whereby Central Government limits 2%,'*2,%2(0#'1+0AR.%C(3=$0%1$N(+1$7$)0%$+0#$1%C$*2(.$%+0%+.%3$$7$3%$/*$..+H$%'1%+.%3$$7$3%0'% show an excessive increase over the previous year. Direct capping by Ministers was replaced for the 2012/13 Council Tax setting process by local referendums if Council Tax increased by more than the amount specified by Ministers.

Page 155 Appendix 12

Comprehensive Area Assessment CAA was a system set up by the Government to carry out periodic inspections and 2..$..7$)0.%'B%,'*2,%2(0#'1+0+$.R%6$1B'172)*$4%1$.(,0+)=%+)%$2*#%&'()*+,%C$+)=%6,2*$3%+)%2% grade which is widely publicised. The CAA was abolished by the Coalition Government in spring 2010. Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) The Government sets out its plans for public spending over a three-year period via its Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). The latest full review, CSR10, applies from 202011/12 to 2014/15; it is generally accepted as introducing a very tough regime for local government requiring just under £2bn of savings over four years. A one-year review, Spending Round 2013, continued the reductions in funding. The details for individual authorities are fleshed out in the annual Local Government Finance settlement. Contingency Money set-aside in the budget to meet the cost of unforeseen items of expenditure, or shortfalls in income and to provide for inflation that exceeds that provided in service budgets. Council Plan A document 0#20%.$0.%'(0%0#$%&'()*+,R.%6',+*+$.4%61+'1+0+$.4%'CW$*0+H$.%2)3%021=$0.%B'1%2%6$1+'3% of several years. The Plan is reviewed annually. Previously known as the Corporate Plan. Council Tax The main source of local taxation to local authorities, Council Tax is levied on households within the South Lakeland area by the District Council and the proceeds are paid to Cumbria County Council, Cumbria Police Authority, Parish Councils and its own General Fund. Damping The damping mechanism ensures that each authority received a minimum cash increase, or maximum decrease, in formula grant each year: for losing councils like South Lakeland, in 0#$%62.0%=12)0%I2.%72+)02+)$3%20%0#+.%QB,''1R%,$H$,%H+2%1$3+.01+C(0+')%B1'7%=2+)+)=%2(0#'1+0+$.D% Although the distribution me 0#'3','=A% I2.% *#2)=$3% +)% 9::

Page 156 Appendix 12

External Audit The independent examination of the activities and accounts of local authorities to ensure the accounts have been prepared in accordance with legislative requirements and proper practices and to ensure the authority has made proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of 1$.'(1*$.D% % U+)*$% M*0'C$1% 9:;9% 0#$% &'()*+,R.% external auditors are Grant Thornton. Fees and Charges Income raised by charging users of services for the facilities. For example, local authorities usually make charges for the use of leisure facilities, car parks, planning, building regulations, collection of trade refuse etc. Financial Procedure Rules A written code of procedures approved by the Council as part of its Constitution, intended to provide a framework for proper financial management. These usually set out rules on accounting, audit, administrative procedures and budgeting systems. Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes A reserve set up by the Council by contributions from the General Fund revenue account to provide additional funds to supplement its capital programme and to meet one-off spending associated with capital schemes that fall outside the definition of capital expenditure in legislation. General Fund The main revenue account of the District Council. Day-to-day spending on services is met from the fund. Spending on the provision of Council housing, however, must be charged to a separate Housing Revenue Account. Efficiency Reviews Following its Gershon review, the Government set up a three-year initiative to demonstrate that councils are making efficiency savings in the delivery of their services. These savings could be cashable or non-cashable. An annual target level of savings was set (2.5% for 2005 to 2007): the Council had to submit plans to show how they will be achieved and subsequently account for their implementation. The Gershon programme was superseded by a further requirement to make targeted cashable savings of 3% pa for the years 2008 to 2009 and 4% for 2010. The Government has scrapped the requirement to measure $BB+*+$)*A%.2H+)=.%C(0%0#$%B+)2)*+2,%.$00,$7$)0%B'1%,'*2,%='H$1)7$)0%2..(7$.%&'()*+,R.% I+,,% *')0+)($%0'%*')*$)0120$%')%$BB+*+$)*A%2.%2%7$2).%'B%.2H+)=%7')$AD%%"#$%5'H$1)7$)0R.%M6 en Public Services White Paper sets out its vision on how this can be achieved. Gross Expenditure "#$% 0'02,% *'.0% 'B% 61'H+3+)=% 0#$% &'()*+,R.% .$1H+*$.% C$B'1$% 02@+)=% +)0'% 2**'()0% +)*'7$% B1'7% Government grants and fees and charges for services. Growth Any increase in spending from one year to another which enables the Authority to pay for more services (staff, goods, etc) rather than to meet higher costs. Growth items are also referred to as investment or service development items. Proposals for growth are subject to a competitive bidding evaluation process to assess their contribution to corporate outcomes or statutory/health and safety requirements before being considered for inclusion in the revenue budget.

Page 157 Appendix 12

Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Local authorities are required to maintain a separate account M the housing revenue account M which sets out the expenditure and income arising from the provision of Council housing. The costs of all other services are charged to the General Fund. The Council closed its HRA on 30 March 2013 following the transfer of its housing stock to South Lakes Housing, a registered social landlord. Interest and Investment Income Surplus cash funds held by the Council (reserves, balances, set-aside capital receipts) are invested in order to earn interest that is credited to its revenue accounts. Internal Audit An independent appraisal function established by the management of an organisation for the review of the internal control system as a service to the organisation. It objectively examines, evaluates and reports on the adequacy of internal control as a contribution to the proper, economic, efficient and effective use of resources. Leisure Trust "#$%&'()*+,R.%,$+.(1$%72)2=$7$)0%2*0+H+0+$.%21$%'6$120$3%CA%2)%2(0')'7'(.%'1=2)+.20+')4% Lakes Leisure. This Trust enjoys certain financial and other benefits that would not apply to the Council. The contract to provide leisure services from April 2014 is currently being tendered. Levy Payment to the Government: 50% of income retained by the district council over the baseline funding level. Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive (LABGI) Scheme In 2005/06 the Government introduced a scheme whereby a proportion of business rates generated by increases in rateable values in an area beyond specified thresholds is returned to the principal authorities in that area based on a premise that economic development activity by the authorities will have stimulated the growth. The scheme was initially for a three-year trial period, later extended, and the distribution of monies was made as general grant with no conditions attaching to its use. The Coalition Government has scrapped the scheme. The Council has a LABGI reserve which earmarked the grant received for economic development activities. Net Expenditure Gross expenditure less specific services income, but before deduction of revenue support grant. Non-Domestic Rates Income collected from business ratepayers: calculated as a rateable value (set by the Valuation Office Agency, reviewed on a change in circumstances or as part of an annual revaluation: the last revaluation was in 2010 and the next will be in 2017) and a multiplier (set by Government, usually increased by inflation but capped at a 2% increase in April 2014). Collected by the district council the income is shared with central government (50%), county council (10%) and retained by the district council (40%). Tariffs and top-ups are used to equalise income to need as assessed under the old formula grant settlement but it is intended the formula will not updated from the 2013/14 local government settlement until reset in 2020. Levy of 50% is payable on income above baseline: safety net payments are available if income falls below 92.5% of baseline. Outturn Actual income and expenditure in a financial year.

Page 158 Appendix 12

Pooling A number of councils can form a business rate pool: the baseline funding levels are pooled. In practice this reduces levy to be paid but also reduces the ability to claim safety net if income falls. A pool has to be approved by DCLG annually according to a pre-set timetable. Provisions and Reserves/Funds Amounts set aside in one year to cover expenditure in the future. Provisions are for liabilities or losses which are likely or certain to be incurred, but the amounts or the dates on which they will arise are uncertain. Reserves are amounts set aside which do not fall within the 3$B+)+0+')% 'B% 61'H+.+').% 2)3% +)*,(3$% =$)$12,% 1$.$1H$.% S'1% QC2,2)*$.R]% I#+*#% $H$1A% 2(0#'1+0A% must maintain as a matter of prudence. Procurement Procurement is the process of acquiring goods, works and services, covering both acquisition from third parties and from in-house providers. The process spans the whole cycle from identification of needs through to the end of a services contract or the end of the useful life of an asset. Procurement involves obtaining best value for money by choosing the option that offers the optimum combination of whole life costs and benefits to meet the *(.0'7$1R.%1$N(+1$7$)0D Prudential Regime/Prudential Code Until 31 Marc #% 9::c4% ,'*2,% 2(0#'1+0+$.R% *26+02,% .6$)3+)=% I2.% *')01',,$3% CA% &$)012,% Government, largely by limiting their borrowing. In April 2004 the Government introduced a new prudential system for capital finance. As well as using capital receipts and revenue monies to finance capital expenditure, Councils can now borrow up to limits set by themselves so long as their decisions can be shown to be affordable and prudent. The system is governed by a statutory code which local authorities are obliged to follow. Reserves See Provisions and Reserves Revenue Contributions to Capital R$.'(1*$.% 61'H+3$3% B1'7% 2)% 2(0#'1+0AR.% 1$H$)($% C(3=$0% 0'% B+)2)*$% $/6$)3+0(1$% ')% *26+02,% 61'W$*0.4%B1$N($)0,A%2.%2%Q0'6 -(6R%0'%'0#$1%*26+02,%1$.'(1*$.D%%L,.'%@)'I)%2.%e+1$*0%R$H$)($% Financing (DRF). Revenue Expenditure/Revenue Account Running costs, including employees, premises, supplies, services and debt charges. These are recorded in revenue accounts together with income from Government grants, fees and charges. Revenue Support Grant (RSG) A grant paid by Central Government to aid local authority services in general, as opposed to specific grants, which may only be used for a specific purpose. 512)0%+.%3+.01+C(0$3%0'%&'()*+,.%C2.$3%')%0#$%5'H$1)7$)0R.%2..$..7$)0%'B%0#$+1%.6$)3+)=% needs. This is determined by a set of formulae that reflect factors such as population, geography, deprivation and economic characteristics. Right to Buy (RTB) A Government scheme whereby tenants of Council houses are offered incentives to buy their homes. The sale proceeds represent capital receipts for the Council. Following the housing transfer some tenants still have a preserved right to buy: as part of the transfer agreement the Council shares the proceeds of sales from March 2012.

Page 159 Appendix 12

Spending Power Term introduced by the local government finance settlement in December 2010 to take into account other sources of fund when comparing government grant allocation between authorities. Spending power is the total of Council Tax, formula grant, specific grants & NHS spending to support social care & benefit health. Tariff Payments to the Government due under localisation of business rates: the difference C$0I$$)%0#$%+)*'7$%$/6$*0$3%0'%2)%2(0#'1+0A%2)3%0#$%2(0#'1+0AR.%C2.$,+)$%B()3+)=%,$H$,4%.$0% as part of the local government finance settlement. Top-ups Payments from the Government under localisation of business rates if the income expected 0'%2)%2(0#'1+0A%+.%,$..%0#2)%0#$%2(0#'1+0AR.%C2.$,+)$%B()3+)=%,$H$, , the opposite of a tariff. Treasury Management Management of t #$% &'()*+,R.% *2.#% B,'I4% C'11'I+)=% 2)3% +)H$.07$)0.4% ='H$1)$3% CA% 2=1$$3% policies and annual statements. Value for Money (VFM ) A much-used term that describes a service or product that demonstrates a good balance between its cost, quality and usefulness to the customer. A VFM audit takes into account 0#$% $*')'7A4% $BB+*+$)*A% 2)3% $BB$*0+H$)$..% S@)'I)% 2.% 0#$% Q0#1$$% Q.R]% 'B% 2% ,'*2,% 2(0#'1+0A% service, function or activity. Zero Based Budgeting An approach to building budgets up from scratch which is essential when creating a new budget and useful when reviewing budgets or calculating estimates for periodic and ad hoc income and expenditure. Under this approach, estimates are constructed on the basis of the individual activities the authority plans to enter into and the particular revenues it expects to generate.

Page 160 Appendix 13

KEY SOURCE DOCUMENTS SLDC Documents: Council Plan 2014 M 2019 (February 2014) http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/council-business/council-plan/ Sustainable Procurement & Commissioning Strategy 2013-2016 http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/pdf/ProcurementStrategy_Jan2013.pdf Budget 2014/15 to 2017/18: Reports of Assistant Director (Resources): Council February 2014 http://democracy.southlakeland.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=120&MId=3460&Ver=4 Constitution: Financial and Contract Procedure Rules (Part 4) http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/council-business/councillors-and-decisions/council-constitution/ Treasury Management Framework 2014/15 to 2016/17: approved Council February 2014 http://democracy.southlakeland.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=120&MId=3460&Ver=4

QJ+)2)*+2,%2)3%O$1B'172)*$%U)26.#'0R% - report of Anna Capaldi, Consultant (November 2004)

External Documents: Qe$,+H$1+)=%QBB+*+$)*A%+)%K'*2,%U$1H+*$.Rf%MeO`%T)+0+20+H$%S5$1.#')%R$H+$I] http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20051012022236/http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_localgov/documents/do wnloadable/odpm_locgov_032674.pdf Open Public Services White Paper: HM Government (July 2011) http://files.openpublicservices.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/OpenPublicServices-WhitePaper.pdf Localism Act 2011 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/contents/enacted Best Value Statutory Guidance: DCLG (July 2011) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/best-value-statutory-guidance--4 Local Government Finance Act 2012 and associated documents http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/17/enacted Local Government Finance Review 2012: DCLG https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/giving-local-authorities-more-control-over-how-they-spend-public-money-in-their-area--2 Spending Review 2013: HM Treasury https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spending-round-2013-documents Autumn Statement 2013: HM Treasury https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/autumn-statement-2013-documents Budget 2014: HM Treasury https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/budget-2014-documents Inflation Report May 2014: Bank of England http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/inflationreport/2014/ir1402.aspx Funding outlook for Councils from 2010/11 to 2019/20: Local Government Association June 2012 http://www.local.gov.uk/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=c98405b7-b4a6-4b25-aebf-a63b5bcfa5c1&groupId=10171 CIPFA Documents: Prudential Code for Local Authorities

Page 161 Appendix 13

http://www.tisonline.net/localauthorityaccounting/content/Prudential_Code_2011.pdf Guidance on Local Authority Reserves and Balances (February 2003) http://www.charnwood.gov.uk/files/papers/resources_item_7_appendix_10_march_2004/Resources+Item+7+Appendix+10+March+ 2004.pdf After the Downturn: Managing a significant and sustained adjustment in public sector funding (December 2009) (with SOLACE) http://www.solace.org.uk/library_documents/After_the_Downturn.pdf Rebalancing the Public Finances: the end of the beginning (October 2010) (with SOLACE) http://www.solace.org.uk/library_documents/Rebalancing_the_public_finances_181010.pdf A Practical Guide for Local Authorities on Income Generation (2011) http://www.cipfa.org/policy-and-guidance/publications/a/a-practical-guide-for-local-authorities-on-income-generation-2013-edition Thinking Ahead: Developing a financial strategy (2012) http://www.cipfa.org/policy-and-guidance/publications/t/thinking-ahead-developing-a-finance-strategy The Long Downturn: implications for public sector organisations (2012) http://www.cipfa.org/policy-and-guidance/reports/the-long-downturn External Audit Documents Positively Charged: Maximising the benefits of local public service charges: Audit Commission 2008 http://archive.audit-commission.gov.uk/auditcommission/subwebs/publications/studies/studyPDF/3423.pdf "'(=#%"+7$.%9:;9f%&'()*+,R.%B+)2)*+2,%#$2,0#%+)%*#2,,$)=+)=%0+7$.%P'H$7C$1%9:;9 http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/20121121toughtimes2012.pdf Towards a tipping point? Grant Thornton December 2012 http://www.grant-thornton.co.uk/Global/Publication_pdf/towards-tipping-point-report.pdf 2016 tipping point? Challenging the Current Grant Thornton December 2013 http://www.grant-thornton.co.uk/Global/Publication_pdf/LG-Financial-Resilience-2016-tipping-point.pdf Financial sustainability of local authorities: National Audit Office January 2013 http://www.nao.org.uk/report/local-services-financial-sustainability-of-local-authorities/ Strik +)=% 2% C2,2)*$f% T761'H+)=% *'()*+,R.% 3$*+.+')% 72@+)=% ') reserves: Audit Commission December 2012 http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/strikingabalance.pdf

Page 162 Item No.14

South Lakeland District Council Cabinet 23rd July 2014 WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE CAPITAL GRANT

PORTFOLIO: Councillor Sue Sanderson – Environment and People Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: David Sykes – Director of People and Places

REPORT AUTHOR: Nick Pearson – Street Scene Manager

WARDS: All

KEY DECISION NO: Not applicable

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME 1.1 That a budget is established to receive a grant to enable householders in South Lakeland to purchase food waste digesters at a discounted price.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that Cabinet:- (1) approve the establishment of an income budget to receive grant funding from Cumbria County Council and a corresponding expenditure budget to administer the fund.

3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 Cumbria County Council has made Waste Infrastructure Capital Grant funding available for the purchase of food waste digesters, as part of their waste minimisation programme. This is a result of funding from the Department of Communities and Local Government. South Lakeland District Council has made a successful application for funding from the grant to purchase and distribute 796 discounted food waste digesters. 3.2 There are two types of food waste digester: 3.2.1 Green Cones: The Green Cone takes all household food waste, including vegetable scraps, raw and cooked meat or fish, bones, dairy products and other organic kitchen waste e.g. tea bags, bread etc. The Green Cone comes with a 5-litre kitchen caddy for collecting and carrying household food waste to the Green Cone. The Council has obtained funding for 400 Green Cones.

Page 163

3.2.2 Green Johannas: The Green Johanna is a hot composter, which recycles waste food into compost. The Council has obtained funding for 396 Green Johannas. 3.2.3 Further information about the food digesters can be obtained from the Great Green Systems website, listed in background documents. 3.3 Householders would purchase food digesters through Great Green Systems, suppliers of the equipment, quoting their post code when making the transaction. Orders will be accepted by telephone or via the Great Green Systems website, with a link from the South Lakeland District Council and Cumbria County Council websites. 3.4 The Green Cone will retail to householders at £15.00, the Green Johanna will retail at £20.00; both prices include VAT and delivery. 3.4 Cumbria County Council estimate that up to 179 tonnes of food waste per year could be diverted from collection systems by use of the food digesters. 3.5 The project to supply food digesters at a discounted rate would be completed by April 2017.

4.0 CONSULTATION 4.1 Cumbria County Council have administered the application for funding to maximise the opportunities for householders in Cumbria to minimise their waste, and agreed the distribution of the Waste Infrastructure Capital Grant funding through the Cumbria Strategic Waste Partnership membership. 4.2 The funding tranche for this application has been divided equally between Copeland District Council, Carlisle City Council and South Lakeland District Council. The other authorities in Cumbria have previously been awarded funding for similar projects.

5.0 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 The refusal to participate in the scheme would result in residents in South Lakeland being ineligible to purchase a subsidised food waste digester. This is not recommended.

6.0 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 Maintain and improve satisfaction of residents with the Council’s waste collection service from the current level of 85%. 6.2 Achieve a sustainable and balanced budget. 6.3 Enable residents to reduce the total amount of household waste. 6.4 Progress in reducing carbon emissions and become more energy efficient. 6.5 Ensure the Districts high quality environment is enhanced and make a positive contribution to its quality of life.

Page 164

7.0 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial and Resources 7.1.1 The project is cost-neutral to the Council, other than a small administrative overhead that can be accommodated within existing budgets. A revision to the capital programme is requested to set up an income budget of £45,370 to reflect the income received from Cumbria County Council, and a corresponding expenditure budget of £45,370 to reflect the payments to be made. An income and expenditure budget of the same values will also need to be added in to the service revenue budget as although capital in nature, this will be accounted for as Revenue Expenditure Funded from Capital Under Statute (REFCUS). 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 The scheme will be administered by Great Green Systems on behalf of Cumbria County Council, and will not involve direct participation by SLDC staff. 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 There are no legal implications arising from the proposed establishment of an income and expenditure budget to administer the fund. 7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 A sustainability impact assessment has not been carried out. However it is considered that the scheme would have a positive impact on the environment. 7.5 Equality and Diversity 7.5.1 An equality and diversity impact assessment has not been carried out; as it is not considered likely that some equality groups may be affected more negatively than others. 7.6 Risk Risk Consequence Controls required Not participating in the Discounted food Approve the income and scheme to provide digesters are available expenditure budgets discounted food in other districts in and support the digesters. Cumbria. Not scheme. participating could lead to adverse publicity and reputational risk to SLDC. Dis-satisfied customers Resource implications Direct customers with for SLDC in providing problems or requiring information or advice. assistance to Cumbria County Council and Great Green Systems

Page 165

CONTACT OFFICERS Report Author – Nick Pearson, Street Scene Manager, 01539 793310, [email protected]

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE Name of Where it is available Background document Great Green Systems http://www.greatgreensystems.com/promotions/ggscumbria website

TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 1st July 2014 1st July 2014 1st July 2014 10 th July 2014 N/A Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer 22 nd July 2014 N/A N/A 1st July 2014 1st July 2014 Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s) Services Manager 1st July 2014 1st July 2014 N/A

Page 166 Item No.15

South Lakeland District Council Cabinet 23 July 2014 Proposed Shared Use Route Through Rothay Park, Ambleside

PORTFOLIO: Councillor Giles Archibald – Town Centres and Small Businesses Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: David Sykes - Director People and Places

REPORT AUTHOR: Deborah Wright - Principal Community Spaces Officer

WARDS: Ambleside and Grasmere

KEY DECISION NO: Not applicable

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME 1.1 To consider the proposal from Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA) on behalf of the Go Lakes Partnership, to introduce a new shared use route through Rothay Park, providing safe routes for cyclists into Ambleside. 2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that Cabinet:- (1) Approve the inclusion of the route through the park as part of the cycle route network, with notices displayed requiring cyclists to dismount when travelling through the park. 3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 The LDNPA, on behalf of the Go Lakes Partnership, have developed a programme of works to create new and upgrade existing routes to walkers, less able users and cyclists in the Central and South Eastern Area of the National Park. 3.2 The proposed creation of a shared use route through Rothay Park, Ambleside, to provide a safe and effective link from the centre of Ambleside to the Under Loughrigg Road and wider Go Lakes promoted cycle routes, forms part of this programme. The proposal, together with detailed supportive information, is attached in Appendix 1. 3.3 Rothay Park is a popular, well used park in Ambleside, a strong feature of the village, used for local events, football and children’s play. The proposed shared route is also a popular designated public footpath into the fells.

Page 167 3.4 Currently there are ‘no cycling’ signs at the main gated entrance to the park and at the entrance close to Miller Bridge. Cyclists are requested to dismount, a behaviour which is also promoted through local cycle hire shops. 3.5 The route identified by the LDNPA is a 3 metre wide tarmac path, currently a public footpath, where cycling is not permitted, however some unauthorised cycling does take place as it is currently promoted by third parties such as Sustrans ‘Google Maps’ and ‘Transport Direct’ websites. 3.6 Promoting sustainable travel for walkers, less able users and cyclists is of increasing importance, linkages are being made across South Lakeland to enable other sustainable travel methods. The development of routes which promote sustainable travel will grow in importance, providing popular and important access to our towns, villages and countryside for our residents and visitors. 3.7 There is a risk, if proposals such as this are rejected, without strategic consideration, that in the future some of our towns and villages could become cut off from sustainable travel networks. 3.8 Concern has been raised from some residents, the local Ward Councillors and the Lakes Parish Council with regard to how the shared route will be implemented through Rothay Park and how safe this will be. There is concern that conflict will occur between users. The proposal has also received support from some local residents and visitors. 3.9 Appendix 1 contains summaries of experience and research from the development of other shared use paths. Research and experience indicates that risk of conflict between users is more a perceived risk, rather than actual risk, that risks can be mitigated and that users modify their behaviour in the presence of other users. The Appendix also includes information on the outcome of public consultation and user survey work on the Rothay Park proposal. 3.10 Options for consideration; 1. Approve the re-designation of the pathway through Rothay Park, to include use by cyclists. This would enable the full proposal from the LDNPA to be implemented. Some local concern would remain over potential conflict of use between cyclists and other users of the park. 2. Approve the inclusion of the pathway through Rothay Park as part of the cycle network, with notices displayed requiring cyclist to dismount when travelling through the Park. This would enable a connection between the network and Ambleside to be promoted whilst addressing local concern over potential conflict of use. 3. Reject the proposals to consider the route through the park as being connected to other cycle access routes. This option is not recommended as the connection between the network and Ambleside would not be achieved and would place reliance on cyclists using the main road access to and from Ambleside. 4. Explore possible alternative safe cycle routes into the village. This option could be followed in association with options 1 and 2. To rely solely on option 4 will delay the opportunity to achieve a connection

Page 168 between the cycle network and Ambleside. The deliverability of alternative routes is not certain, due to land ownership and may also attract objection as it would involve shared use of a route which is narrower than the Rothay Park path.

4.0 CONSULTATION 4.1 On 25 March 2014 there was a LDNPA public drop in session at the Parish Centre in Ambleside from 13.00 to 19.00. Appendix 1 reports the outcome of consultation and user survey work. 4.2 On 20 May 2014, LDNPA, the local Ward Councillor, Lakes Parish Councillors and SLDC Officers met, walked the proposed route through Rothay Park and Stoney Lane and discussed the proposals. 4.3 The LDNPA presented the proposal to Lakes Parish Council during May 2014. On the 4th June 2014 Lakes Parish Council resolved to object to the creation of a shared use route through the park. A copy of their Minute is attached in Appendix 2. 4.4 The Ward Councillors have expressed their view of the importance the park for informal recreation by a range of users, including dog walkers, dogs being exercised off the lead and young children at play. Their concern is over the potential for conflict and accident between cyclists and existing park users. Their preference is for an alternative route from Miller Bridge via Stoney Lane. They recognise that the resources are not currently available to achieve this route. If the Rothay Park route is to be considered, they are of the view that cyclists should be required to dismount and walk their cycles through the park. Appropriate signage should be provided to encourage such behaviour.

5.0 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 The alternative options are listed above in paragraph 3.10. 6.0 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 The proposal is linked to the priorities of the Council Plan by enhancing the Environment and promoting Health and Wellbeing. In particular the Council is seeking to encourage cycle tourism. 7.0 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial and Resources 7.1.1 There is no financial implication to this authority, LDNPA have sourced funding for the proposals 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 There are no direct staffing implications for South Lakeland District Council employees

Page 169 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 The route is currently a designated public footpath. If Cabinet is minded to allow shared use, the Council is able to allow the use of the path for cycling on a permissive basis. The Council could alternatively consider dedicating the path as a Public Bridleway which would provide rights of access for cycling in perpetuity. There is no change in status required for cyclists to dismount and wheel their cycles through the park. The Council has not made a byelaw prohibiting cycling in the park. 7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 Has a sustainability impact assessment been carried out? No 7.4.2 This proposal is considered to have a positive impact on sustainability providing travel links to Ambleside and links to existing sustainable travel options 7.5 Equality and Diversity 7.5.1 This proposal is considered to have a positive impact on equality and diversity by providing an opportunity for shared safe access for all abilities from key sustainable routes and the fells into Ambleside 7.6 Risk Risk Consequence Controls required Safe use of shared path Possible conflict of use Research from the Royal Parks Agency has

demonstrated little or no conflict of use of shared cycle and footways Provision of appropriate signage within Park

Missed opportunity to Ambleside will become create sustainable links harder to access to Working strategically visitors and residents and methodically with all wishing to use stakeholders sustainable travel methods

CONTACT OFFICERS Deborah Wright, Principal Community Spaces Officer [email protected]

Jim Maguire, Community and Leisure Manager – [email protected]

Page 170 APPENDICES ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT Appendix No. 1 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 2 Copy of Minute 31 from Lakes Parish Council

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE none

TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 03/07 10/07 10/07 03/07 n/a Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer n/a n/a n/a 03/07 10/07 Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s) Services Manager n/a n/a June/July 2014

Page 171 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 172 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 1 of 9

Appendix 1

1 Proposed Shared Use Route, Rothay Park, Ambleside.

1.1 We are submitting this report to South Lakeland District Council (SLDC) on behalf of the Go Lakes Travel Programme. One of the main aims of Go Lakes Travel (Project5) is: “to create new and upgrade existing routes to provide shared use routes to facilitate more and easier sustainable travel for walkers, less able users and cyclists in the Central and South Eastern area of the National Park.” We are asking SLDC to dedicate a shared path through the park on the route marked A-D on the map below. (The section D-B is in different ownership).

Page 173 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 2 of 9

Various photographs of the route showing widths and nature of current use – including walkers, pram-pushers and even a horse.

Page 174 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 3 of 9

2 Strategic Context

2.1 Go Lakes Travel www.golakestravel.co.uk

2.1.1 The Go Lakes Travel Programme is a £6.9 million initiative, funded by the Department of Transport, and being delivered in partnership by Cumbria County Council, the Lake District National Park Authority and Cumbria Tourism. Between 2011 and 2015 it aims to generate a step-change in how visitors travel to and around the Central and Southern Lake District, enabling them to make greater use of sustainable modes of travel.

2.1.2 Project 5 (P5) of Go Lakes Travel aims to develop safe continuous networks for walking, cycling and wheelchair use.

2.1.3 The map below shows the strategic network of creations and upgrades that are being delivered by the P5 programme. An east–west link connecting Ambleside village centre with the Under Loughrigg road is a key element of the programme to allow safe access from the town to the wider network of improved and developing routes.

Page 175 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 4 of 9

3 SLDC and Local Context

3.1 SLDC own Rothay Park, between points A and D on the map. The path is currently designated as a footpath, and it is within SLDC’s powers to dedicate this as a bridleway, thereby officially enabling cyclists to use it.

3.2 The concept of having this as a cycle route is already within SLDC’s plans, as shown by their website entry for the Park:

Rothay Park, Ambleside, LA22 9DG ‘Rothay Park is one of our most popular parks. Situated in on Rothay Road in the centre of Ambleside, Rothay Park is surrounded by dramatic landscape it offers a range of facilities for local people and visitors. As well as a full-size football pitch there is a children’s play area, large grassed areas, natural rock outcrops and a wetland area. Rothay is an important walkers gateway to some of the most beautiful fells in the Lake District. In addition it will be part of the intended Cumbrian Cycleway which is currently being developed. There are picnic areas and organised activities and events throughout the year’.

3.3 It also fits within SLDC’s policies, namely; - Building on the ‘Olympic Legacy’ to promote healthier lifestyles through exercise and sports activity. - We will work with partners to explore options for sustainable transport schemes including walking and cycling - We will work with partners to attract major cycling events and cycle tourism to the area. - We will help individuals, businesses and the council to achieve energy efficiencies, carbon savings and greenhouse gas reduction.

3.4 The route marked A-D on the map is a 3m wide tarmac route capable of withstanding the weight of service vehicles such as mowing machines and refuse waggons. The sightlines are straight and un-interrupted. It is the route which is already promoted on ‘Google Maps’ as being a cycle accessible route between Ambleside and the Under Loughrigg road.

3.5 It is the route most used by those cyclists who currently use the park, and is the most preferred route (41% of those interviewed) by those who took part in the ‘Ambleside Cycle Route user Survey October 2013’.

3.6 There are currently signs saying that cyclists are prohibited and that offenders will be prosecuted. However, SLDC have confirmed that there are no byelaws restricting or preventing cycling in the park (Cumbria County Council appear to have installed these signs). The sign is routinely ignored, but no-one has ever been prosecuted.

4 Practical Works Connected With the Proposal

Page 176 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 5 of 9

4.1 The Go Lakes Travel Programme will carry out a number of practical works to promote safe and considerate shared use of the route, as well as making minor improvements to the infrastructure along with some interpretational work to the benefit of all users. There will be no cost to SLDC.

These works may include;

 Replacing the ‘cyclists will be prosecuted’ signs with shared use directional signs;  Signs at points A and B suggesting that cyclists push their bikes through the park when it is busy (although this may be unenforceable).  The installation of small shared use reminder signs along the route (3 in total);  Installation of both vehicle and pedestrian gates parallel to the route at the junction of paths (point C on the map) to discourage cyclists from riding down to the children’s play area and to safeguard children from running onto the shared use route;  Re-instatement of the hedge (from A to west of C) where there are gaps to prevent children in particular running onto the path;  Replacement of the old concrete bridge (at point D on the map) with a new purpose built bridge (design to be agreed with SLDC);  Installation of ‘Cyclists dismount’ signs at both sides of Miller Bridge (marked E on the above map);  Installation of cycle racks and an interpretive panel at the Vicarage Road entrance to the park (A on the map) to provide visitors to Ambleside and Rothay Park with a defined parking place for bicycles. The interpretive panel will provide orientation and points of interest for those visitors arriving by bike through Rothay Park before getting into the village centre itself.

Page 177 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 6 of 9

5 Main Benefits of the Proposal

 Formalisation of the existing use of the route through the park by all users (including cyclists).  A reduction in any existing conflict on other non-shared routes elsewhere, such as roadside pavements in the village (cyclists currently struggle to get in and out of the village on the one way road traffic system).  The ability to manage use of the route by cyclists generated as a result of promotion by third parties such as Sustrans ‘Google Maps’ and ‘Transport Direct’ websites as well, as any others in the future.  The opportunity for cycle businesses and those accommodation providers catering for cyclists within the village to promote an additional positive reason for using services and facilities in Ambleside.  Removal of the fear of prosecution from visitors and locals who currently use the route – thereby giving a more rewarding experience.  Access to the wider network of promoted cycle routes via this link to encourage active participation for health benefits via such events as the ‘Local Skyride’ events organised by British Cycling and their partners.  Making Rothay Park and Ambleside ready for the creation of additional promoted cycle routes, such as the Cumbria Cycleway, with the social and economic benefits attached to them.

Other potential links In addition, the National Park is working with SLDC, Lakes Parish Council, Cumbria University, Cumbria County Council and local landowners to upgrade part of an existing footpath, with new additional sections of route, to create a shared use route linking Miller bridge back to the A591 close to the Green Bank housing estate. If successful this will create a formalised traffic free route linking the north and south of the village, via a western access point which will have specific benefits for families from Green Bank with primary aged school children to get to and from the school, without vehicles and without having to use busy roadside pavements.

6 Timescale, funding and monitoring.

6.1 In the Go Lakes Travel P5 programme for 2014/15 there is funding available for the proposed works. The programme ends in March 2015. However schemes must be completed, signed off, invoiced and paid by the middle of February 2015.

6.2 The legal work to create the route as a bridleway or cycleway is minimal on behalf of SLDC if approved by Councillors.

6.3 We will monitor and evaluate the impacts of the change in use in 2015, 2016, 2019 and 2024 to establish long term data sets to inform the future developments of this and other similar routes.

Page 178 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 7 of 9

7 Public Support

7.1 We have carried out the following consultations:  Presentations to Parish Councillors;  Numerous discussions with Parish Councillors and SLDC staff;  User Survey in Park (448 interviewed);  Drop-in session in Ambleside (33 participants);  On site visit with Parish Councillors, SLDC staff, and Cumbria County Council staff;  Formal presentation / discussion at Lakes Parish Council Meeting, May 2014.

7.2 There has also been an on-line debate on the Westmorland Gazette pages, and a petition from the parents of the schoolchildren beside the park.

7.3 The percentage in support of the route being usable to cyclists is consistently high.

8 Public Opposition

8.1 Despite all the surveys demonstrating clear majority support from both locals and visitors for the work of Go Lakes Travel to create and improve more shared use routes, including this one, there remains a minority of strong local resistance.

8.2 This is mainly from Lakes Parish Council - despite petitions from the local populace asking for them to support it. And also from some individual members of the public.

8.3 The Parish Council have directly lobbied SLDC, so their full arguments are not repeated here. But the opposition is mainly based on the belief that shared use between walkers (in particular, children and the elderly) and cyclists is incompatible and dangerous.

9 Conflicts on Shared Use Routes

9.1 There have been numerous studies into this topic, and the results are outlined within a recent report to the Planning Inspectorate on a similar route in Windermere. A copy of the relevant section of the report is at Appendix 2, which summarises evidence relating to local routes and survey work, along with regional and national work.

9.2 The evidence shows strongly that the fears are based on perception rather than reality.

9.3 We have repeatedly sought counter evidence (that is evidence of actual conflict) from those who oppose shared use routes – including from Lakes Parish Council. In all the years we have been promoting such routes, we

Page 179 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 8 of 9

have not been provided with any such evidence which leads us to the conclusion that there isn’t an issue with shared-use paths.

9.4 The fears raised that children in particular will be put at risk has to be considered alongside the evidence that 66 parents of children at Ambleside School (which has around 100 pupils) have signed a petition worded “The following parents at Ambleside School and parents who live in the Parish are in strong favour of a cycle path going through Ambleside Park (Rothay Park).” This petition was presented to Lakes Parish Council.

9.5 The concern that other members of the public using the park will be endangered must be considered alongside the surveys we have carried out, the full details of which can be provided.

Face-to-face survey – October 2013

This survey consisted of 448 face to face interviews representing 1,039 users in total, of which;  63% were visitors staying overnight in the Lake District.  9% were day visitors  16% were local  6% were from elsewhere in South Lakeland  6% were from elsewhere in the county.

Of the total number of respondents 87% were walkers and 31% were cyclists. (This is more than 100% as some people classed themselves as both walkers and cyclists regardless of what they were doing at the time of the interview.)

Of the total number of respondents 94% were comfortable sharing the route with other users.

The executive summary is at Appendix 1.

Drop-in-Day – March 2014

A follow up ‘drop in day’ was held where people were invited to comment on the practical works to encourage safe shared use of the route, details are at Appendix 3. The headline result is that of the 33 responses received, 28 were in favour of the works and 5 against. 21 of the responses were from the Ambleside LA22 postcode area.

9.6 Some 145 members of the public signed an on-line petition in favour, which was also presented to Lakes Parish Council www.gopetition.com/petitions/rothay-park-cycle- path/signatures.html

Page 180 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 9 of 9

9.7 The online debate on the Westmorland Gazette pages contained many comments from those who made the point that shared use routes work very well elsewhere in the country, and elsewhere around the world without major issues (examples below) – and that the same is likely to be the case here. The full comments run to 20 pages; can be viewed here www.thewestmorlandgazette.co.uk/news/cumbria/south_lakeland/11 179498.Fears_over_bid_for_cycle_route_through_Rothay_Park_at_Ambl eside/

HowieMG says...

I was involved in planning and implementing a network of shared use cycle routes across the borough of Rochdale, down in the Lancashire (Greater Manchester officially) cotton belt. In all cases we clearly stated that they were shared routes. There was some vociferous opposition before implementation, and like in your case, cyclists were already using some of these routes, including through parks. In practice there has been no problematic conflict - everyone has to get on and share the space. Allowing cycling in parks has been a positive action, leading to community cycling programmes.

Pedestrians & Cyclists can (and do) live together in perfect harmony using shared use rights of way, Grange-over-Sands Promenade a case in point, a bit of give and take and politeness and consideration of others goes a long way.

9.8 A video showing shared use of busy routes in Manchester, Holland and the Lancaster Canal can be provided if required – or viewed here https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xnwx34w23srb8v2/107oHcjjmT/Lancast er%2C%20Bridgewater%2C%20Manchester%2C%20Groningen%20x2.m p4 The video clearly demonstrates how well shared usage works – because, in general, users tolerate each other, and adapt their behaviour according to the situation to accommodate everyone.

Report End

Written by Steve Tatlock & Nick Thorne, Lake District National Park Authority July 2014

Page 181 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 Page 10 of 9

Page 182 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 1

Appendix 1 – Extract from Report to Planning Inspectorate – relating to conflict between users The full case studies can be provided on request.

11 Conflict between users

11.1 The majority of objections are ones revolving around the potential for conflict between walkers and cyclists – and that the two types of users ‘don’t mix safely’.

11.2 The reason for enabling bicycle use is to help cyclists reach Ferry Nab and the ferry from Windermere with as little road cycling as possible. We appreciate that this does then mean that walkers and cyclists mix, but in general this is safer than having cyclists and motorists mixing.

11.3 Over the years we have found that perception of conflict and danger on paths used by walkers and cyclists is generally far greater than the reality. Internal and official studies about this topic seem to bear our experiences out (see below for more detail).

11.4 The Department of Transport and Sustrans have published guidance on route design, and widths – and we have tried to follow this within the constraints of not impacting too much on the farmland (see below for more detail).

11.5 Interestingly, a lot of the conflict arises where people don’t expect there to be other users. So, for instance, cycling on a footpath seems to cause more issues than the same levels of cycling on a physically identical bridleway. By making this route a bridleway and signing it for cyclists – this particular aspect of potential conflict will not arise.

11.6 We have sought figures for incidents of walkers and cyclists in direct conflict – and there simply aren’t any readily available on public rights of way. We have never actually come across, or heard about, any actual specific incident where a cyclist has caused any physical harm to other

users of rights of way – and the objectors have not been able to provide any either. There have been incidents where cyclists have hurt themselves, but none that we know of where they have injured others.

11.7 There are ample statistics for injuries to cyclists from mixing with motor traffic – which is what has driven much of the national and local strategy on improving cycling facilities.

11.8 Within and around Cumbria there is a growing number of multi-use routes – many of which are similar to the one proposed. Indeed, many are more heavily used – yet narrower and equally confined. We have contacted the bodies who maintain these routes to ask whether they have any records of conflict – they don’t. Using these routes, either on foot or by bike, shows immediately how little conflict there is, and how well walkers and cyclists mix and regulate their behaviour accordingly.

Page 183 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 2

11.9 Examples that are of relevance are:

 Keswick Railway Path multi-user route. We carried out initial surveys that showed that walkers, in general, were concerned about the potential conflict and danger from cyclists. We then continued these surveys once the route was opened, and the fear of conflict fell year- on-year (see case studies).  Kendal Canal Path where there is very heavy mixed usage on a path often much narrower than the 3m provided here.  Morecambe promenade also has mixed usage with a large number of children.  Ings Cycle Route,  Windermere West Shore,  A number around Coniston (Lakeshore – Boon Crag),  Grange-over-Sands promenade,  Lancaster cycle routes – very heavily used, and include narrow towpaths.

11.10 We have also looked at You-Tube videos of usage on cycle routes – which also show how well different users interact. We have taken excerpts from some of the most relevant and compiled a 5 minute video (Lancaster- Carnforth, Bridgewater, Rochdale Canal Manchester and two from Groningen in Holland), which has been placed on a CD and is on the Dropbox facility (below). It is quite clear that the perceived conflict which concerns the objectors rarely, in practice, actually happens. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xnwx34w23srb8v2/107oHcjjmT/Lan caster%2C%20Bridgewater%2C%20Manchester%2C%20Groningen%20x 2.mp4

11.11 In general most users, if tolerant of others, manage to co-exist on such routes compatibly and comfortably.

11.12 The following are photos from Google Images and show the Lancaster - Carnforth Towpath cycle route – which is far narrower, and shared by walkers and cyclists alike. It is also National Cycle Network Route 6, as will the Ferry Nab route be.

Page 184 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 3

Windermere West Shore Route (Westmorland Gazette)

12 Conflict Case Studies

12.1 A number of case studies exist. In general, they are large documents – so only the relevant pages have been attached, with the most relevant sections highlighted in yellow. The entire document can be supplied on request – or can be viewed online where appropriate.

12.2 LDNPA, 2007

12.2.1 The Keswick to Threlkeld railway path forms part of the C2C long-distance recreational cycle route from Whitehaven to Sunderland, and is completed by an average of 12,000 – 15,000 cyclists a year. In many places, the route is only a few metres wide – especially on the long bridges and boardwalk sections. It is also heavily used by walkers, mainly families – but also the less mobile.

Page 185 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 4

12.2.2 The C2C was developed in the late 1990s. Before it came into being we carried out surveys (1995) to provide a baseline for monitoring. We then carried out further surveys in 1999 and 2003. A large number of users were counted, and many were surveyed as to why they were there, their attitudes, and so on.

Year (survey days) 1995 (29) 1999 (31) 2003 (29)

Walkers 4584 5874 6495 Cyclists 1314 2316 (28%) 2929 (31%) (22%) Disabled 75 84 73 Walkers who thought that cyclists 19% 13% 6% should not be allowed to use the track

12.2.3 The key findings from the survey and questionnaire were:  A significant increase in users – especially cyclists.

 The number of walkers who had issues with cycling dropped considerably over the years of the survey.

12.2.4 The surveys imply that with increasing usage of a route by cyclists, and increasing understanding and tolerance between users – the perception and fear of potential conflict drops considerably.

12.3 Kensington Gardens, 2002 (Appendix 15 )

12.3.1 The Royal Parks Agency carried out research when developing the Kensington Gardens shared use trail in 2002. Although this was a wider path, the main point of interest is the surveys of attitudes.

12.3.2 This is described in the summary on pages iii and iv.

 When asked about near misses and collisions between pedestrians and cyclists, a substantial improvement was noticed: 18% considered near misses a regular or serious problem before implementation but a year after this had fallen to only 2%. With actual collisions, the number who considered them a problem dropped from 26% to 2% a year after (Q11 c, d).  When asked about consideration that cyclists and pedestrians showed to each other, there was a substantial improvement noticed: The proportion who considered cyclists behaviour to be good or very good rose from around 40% before to around 80% a year after, with the same result for pedestrians behaviour (Q13d,e).  In summary park users consider the main changes to have been a substantial improvement in pedestrian/cycle accidents, near misses and general consideration for each other.

Royal Parks Agency – Kensington Gardens Shared Use Trail October 2002 http://www.royalparks.org.uk/__documents/the-royal-parks/publications/other- publications,-reports-and-strategies/atkins_report.pdf

Page 186 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 5

12.4 Countryside Agency, 2003 (Appendix 16 )

12.4.1 The Countryside Agency carried out research into how people interact on off-road routes. They looked at two components of conflict ‘perceived’, and ‘actual’, and carried out surveys of almost 1,000 respondents. They concluded that actual conflict is a rare occurrence, and where it occurs, structural issues are important factors. They also concluded that perceived conflict was extremely low, although higher when discussed later – and that discussion and focussing of attention on conflict serves to escalate its perceived existence. Countryside Agency: User interactions in non-motorised share use environments: Phase II, 2003 http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/search?q=CRN69&num=100 – select the top one (CRN 69)

12.5 University of Surrey, 2002 (Appendix 17 )

12.5.1 This study was about user interactions in non-motorised shared use environments – and informed the Countryside Agency’s publication. The whole document is relevant – but the attachment is just the more important findings. In summary:

 Not only was actual conflict rare, but feelings of perceived conflict were minimal.  Out of the 157 interactions observed, only 5% provided examples of actual conflict – mainly on a section of path at Grantchester where the width was less than 1 metre. The suggestion was that the density of users is not the cause of conflict, but the limits on space. For a shared use route to function without conflict the minimum width needs to be 2 metres ( Note - the Ferry Nab path will be 3 metres wide – except for one short bit at the southern end ).  Generally, cyclists are more accepting of sharing than walkers, and do not seem to have the same level of animosity towards walkers as walkers have towards cyclists.  Expectations are important – there is more chance of perceived conflict where people don’t expect other users.  With the postal questionnaire only 4% of respondents had direct experience of collisions – some of which were things like ‘fell off cycle, caused by black ice’ – rather than other user related.  Most cyclists claim that they have had more ‘near-misses’ with other cyclists than they have had with walkers.

Not on the internet

Page 187 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 6

12.6 Sustrans, 2011 (Appendix 18 )

12.6.1 Sustrans carried out a literature based review on the merits of segregated and non-segregated traffic-free paths. Some of the information is drawn from the previous studies. Again, the whole document is worth reading – and we have only attached the most relevant sections. In summary:

 Perception does not meet reality, and walkers who don’t meet cyclists had more negative views of sharing the route than walkers who did meet cyclists. Inferring that once a route is being used the fear of conflict drops.  Good information on who can use a route helps reduce perceived conflict.  Conflict on paths carrying around 100 users an hour is an extremely infrequent occurrence.  Studies show that most cyclists slow down when they meet pedestrians, and average cycle speeds became significantly lower as pedestrian flows increased.  Traffic-free routes are vitally important if cycling and walking are to be encouraged.  A medium flow level (up to 450 pedestrians and 150 cyclists per hour) has a recommended unsegregated path width of 3 metres. (note – the recommended width where the flow rates are classed as low / very low (see below), as on the Ferry Nab path is 2 metres wide. The path is proposed to be 3 metres wide.)  Many of the social conflict issues are based on perceptions of meeting cyclists, which appear to be different to the reality of meeting them, and older walkers are more inclined to hold these views.  Recollections of how many interactions users experienced were different (higher) from the actual number.

Sustrans: The Merits of Segregated and Non-Segregated Traffic-Free Paths [2011] - www.sustrans.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/files/migrated- pdfs/Phil%20Jones%20Associates%20report%20-%20September%202011.pdf

12.6.3 A survey carried out on 31 July 2013 between 2pm and 4.30pm (warm, overcast) at the junction of paths between A and B had the following results:

Southern section to Heading northwards Heading southwards TOTALS point A Adults 54 (9 with dogs, 2 39 (4 with dogs, 1 93 with prams) with pram) Children 12 6 18 Cyclists 2 0 2 Northern Section to point B Adults 40 (1 with dog, 1 15 (5 with dogs, 1 55 with prams) with pram) Children 3 1 4 Cyclists 0 0 0

Page 188 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 7

12.6.4 This (albeit one-off) survey showed a usage of 148 adults and 22 children walking along the path over 2½ hours (and 2 cyclists) – which is an average of 68 an hour. Together with the predicted likely use by cyclists of up to 30 a day during the summer months (see above), which isn’t really very many per day, puts the current and projected use into the low/very low category as defined by Sustrans / Department of Transport. 12.7 Department for Transport, 2012 (Appendix 19 )

12.7.1 The DoT have produced a Local Transport Note relating the ‘Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists’. This contains a lot of information about design standards for various situations. It again recommends a preferred minimum width of 3 metres for an unsegregated route.

12.7.2 The operational review for this report was produced by Atkins – it again refers to previous studies, and comes up with similar conclusions:  Maximum cycle speed decreases as pedestrian flow increases – suggesting that cyclists moderate their behaviour in the presence of pedestrians.  Cycle speed is likely to be higher on commuter routes.  Behaviour was judged to be considerate by both walker and rider user groups – especially on unsegregated routes, suggesting that behaviour is more considerate on these routes, where the requirement to interact with other types of user is clearer.

Department for Transport – Local Transport Note 1/12 Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists September 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9179/shared -use-routes-for-pedestrians-and-cyclists.pdf

Department for Transport – Shared Use Operational Review 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9181/atkins- shared-use-operational-review.pdf

12.8 Grasmere & Ambleside Surveys for Go Lakes, 2013 (Appendix 20 )

12.8.1 As part of the wider scheme, the Go Lakes project hopes to establish cycle paths in the Ambleside and Grasmere area. Surveys have been carried out to find out people’s views as there have been strong objections from some sections of the local community.

12.8.2 In Ambleside (A20-2) , where the proposed cycle route follows a tarmac path through a park, some 448 people were interviewed (representing 1,039 actual users). 94% of these felt comfortable sharing the route [cycling and walking], with 88% of walkers.

Page 189 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 8

12.8.3 In Grasmere, the cycle routes are proposed on rural paths. 360 interviews were carried out, with 90% of the users feeling comfortable sharing the routes (A20-4) . 85% of visitors supported the cycle route development proposals, and just 14 people (5%) presented opposition to the scheme (A20-6) .

12.8.4 This high level of support and feeling of safety / comfort would imply that most users within the Lake District are quite happy to use shared routes.

12.9.1 Objectors supplied various documents which discussed visitor flow, visitor management, conflicts on multiple-use trails and guidelines for these trails.

Cessford, G.R. 2002 Perception and Reality of Conflict: Walkers and Mountain Bikes on the Queen Charlotte Track in New Zealand January 2002 http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=Cessford+GR+2002+Perception+and+Reality+of+Conflict:+Walkers+and+Mou ntain+Bikes&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=SoDBUeyTIoK8Oe-kgJgH&ved=0CCsQgQMwAA

The Federal Highway Administration and The National Recreational Trails Advisory Committee – Conflicts on Multiple-Use Trails http://atfiles.org/files/pdf/Conflicts.pdf

US Dept of the Interior/Bureau of Land Management – Bureau of Land Management, Recreation Public Purposes Act 30 October 1997 (not found on the internet)

SMMART Coordination Project – Report of Multiple Use Trail Guidelines Team http://www.nps.gov/samo/parkmgmt/upload/SmmartMultiUse.pdf

12.9.2 These have not been attached, as, by and large, they don’t seem hugely relevant to a short shared cycle / walking route as at Ferry Nab – and certainly don’t go into anything about actual (rather than possible or perceived) conflict or studies of conflict. And will presumably be presented by Dr Kinsman as part of his case. 12.9.3 The ‘Conflicts on Multiple-Use Trails’ document is the most comprehensive, but does seem to be a bit more wide-ranging in its scope – by talking about roller blading and vehicles, which isn’t likely to be an issue here. There are a few specific bits about mountain bikes – but again, mainly about rougher and wilder trails than this short proposed link. And aimed at different users.

12.9.4 The main paragraphs about conflicts between walkers and bikers (the study of ‘Backpack’ readers) are reproduced below. Even here the issue seems to be as much about a lack of tolerance and understanding (“just being there”), rather than actual incidents. And indeed, early in the report the authors say “In fact, the vast majority of trail users are satisfied, have few complaints, and return often.”

12.9.5 A study of readers of Backpacker magazine found that over two-thirds felt the use of mountain bikes on trails was objectionable (Viehman 1990). Startling other trail users, running others off the trail, being faster and more mechanized, damaging the resources, causing erosion, frightening wildlife, and "just being there" were the biggest concerns (Kulla 1991; Chavez, Winter and Baas 1993). Keller (1990) notes that brightly colored clothes, a high-tech look, and the perception of a technological invasion can all be sources of conflict felt by others toward mountain bikers.

Page 190 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 1, Page 9

12.9.6 So, following this collection of items that can cause conflict on trails, the relevant question is, how big a problem is trail conflict? Certainly, conflict is a major problem on some multi-use trails (Flink and Searns 1993). As mentioned earlier, however, past research has consistently found that outdoor recreationists are well satisfied with their recreation experiences (Kuss et al. 1990, 191). This has been found in a variety of settings, including trails. Because the conflict studies noted above were designed to examine recreational conflict, many of them focused on areas where visible conflicts were occurring. These studies do not give a clear picture of the scope of conflict that might be occurring on trails in general. Conflicts are certainly a serious threat to satisfaction, but serious conflicts may not be the norm.

12.10 Summary of case studies

All the research highlighted above, our own experiences in the National Park, and other’s experiences with very similar routes in and around Cumbria seems to point to the same things:

 There is little actual conflict on shared routes.  Users moderate their behaviour when on shared routes.  Increased sharing leads to greater tolerance and acceptance – reducing the actual conflict even further.  The vast majority of users are quite happy with shared usage.  Actual conflict is more likely on commuting routes – Rothay Park is not aimed at commuters or fast cyclists. It is more aimed at leisure cyclists, family groups looking to access the routes on the western shore of Windermere, and those cyclists who would wish to cycle if more off-road facilities were available. Nor is there much gradient to develop speed.

Page 191 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 2

Appendix 2 – Executive Summary, Ambleside User Survey, 2013.

Page 192 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 3

Appendix 3 - Results of ‘Drop in day’ questionnaire regarding practical works relating to shared use route in Rothay Park.

People were asked the following questions about the proposed practical measures to promote safe shared use of the route.

The number of responses to individual questions are in brackets. Not all respondents answered all the questions.

We had 33 responses overall, not all respondents answers all questions.

1. Replace ‘cyclists will be prosecuted’ signs with directional signs for walkers and cyclists. (33 responses) Strongly disagree (2) Disagree (1) Agree (6) Strongly agree (24)

2. Install information and interpretive panels. (31 responses) Strongly disagree (2) Disagree (0) Agree (13) Strongly agree (16)

3. Install cycle racks adjacent to the toilet block near Vicarage road. (31 responses) Strongly disagree (3) Disagree (5) Agree (10) Strongly agree (13)

4. Install gates and ‘no cycling’ signs at the junction with the track to the playground. (31 responses) Strongly disagree (2) Disagree (0) Agree (11) Strongly agree (19)

5. Replace the old concrete bridge across Stock Ghyll (near Miller bridge) 31 responses. Strongly disagree (3) Disagree (0) Agree (10) Strongly agree (20)

6. Install ‘Cyclists please dismount’ signs at either end of Miller Bridge. (28 responses) Strongly disagree (0) Disagree (1) Agree (17) Strongly agree (10)

7. Install blue and white (shared use) roundals along the route. (30 responses) Strongly disagree (1) Disagree (1) Agree (12) Strongly agree (16)

In overall percentage terms; People who disagree with the proposals count for 15.1% of respondents. People who agree with the proposals count for 84.8% of respondents.

On a question by question basis the percentages are as follows;

Question number. Total responses. Against For 1. 33 9.0% 91.0% 2. 31 6.45% 93.54% 3. 31 25.8% 74.19% 4. 31 6.45% 93.54% 5. 33 9.0% 91.0% 6. 28 3.5% 96.42% 7. 30 10.0% 90.0%

Page 193 LDNPA report on Rothay Park shared use route for SLDC – July 2014 - Appendix 3

People who filled in questionnaires were asked for the first part of their post code so we would have a rough idea where people came from.

The postcodes given are shown below, with the number of people from those post code areas in brackets. LA8 (1) LA9 (2) LA10 (1) LA11 (1) LA12 (1) LA22 (21) LA23 (1) CA11 (1) CA12 (1) FY4 (1) S10 (1) OL6 (1)

People were also asked for their general comments, they are reported verbatim below and broadly grouped into ‘Against’ and ‘For’. Not all people made general comments.

Against.

 Whole route madness. Dangerous to cycle past school-certainly at certain times Most congested junction in the village – Vicarage Rd Compston Rd  Nearly been knocked over 3 times by bikes with NO BELL  Nimby opposition to previous plan-check it out.  Any cyclist who does not abide by the rules should be prosecuted, and their name published  Too many are arrogant and foul-mouthed  Bradley Wiggins and Chris Hoy they are NOT  This scheme is a complete disaster waiting to happen.  I would much prefer the Stoney Lane route, thank you very much.

For.

 Strongly agree that cyclists, walkers, dogs and children can share in harmony. I’ve experienced this in other towns and countries and see No Reason why this can’t happen in AMBLESIDE.  Can we have the toilets open year-round for our new encouraged visitors please.  Signage needs to be ‘in-keeping’ with the rural area. Not intrusive and high colours.  A cycleway through the park is a great idea and is the obvious choice through the area. However, a load of signage and information boards along the route would detract from the visual appeal of the park. Please endeavour to keep any signage minimal and clear  Good luck with your plans - I hope common sense prevails.  Great idea, will help promote cycling in the Lakes and Ambleside.  The route is already regularly used by cyclists. By making it dual use with clear signage will make for a more harmonious relationship with walkers/other users.

Page 194 Page 195 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 196 Item No.16

South Lakeland District Council Cabinet 23 July 2014 LAND AT CROSS-A-MOOR, SWARTHMOOR DRAFT DEVELOPMENT BRIEF PORTFOLIO: Councillor Jonathan Brook - Strateg ic Growth Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: David Sykes – Director of People and Places

REPORT AUTHOR: Damian Law - Principal Development Plans Officer

WARDS: Mid Furness Ward

KEY DECISION NO: N/A

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME

1.1 With the adoption of the Land Allocations document, the Council now has an up to date and ambitious Local Plan to meet the District’s housing and employment needs (outside National Parks). The delivery phase – for housing, employment and critical infrastructure – has begun. As part of this delivery phase, development briefs are being prepared for a number of key employment and housing site allocations. These briefs will help deliver the housing and employment development in the adopted Land Allocations DPD and when adopted will provide guidance on how these sites should be developed. The Cross-a-Moor housing allocation site in Swarthmoor is the subject of one of these development briefs.

1.2 A draft development brief has been prepared for the site (see Appendix 1). This report explains the key features of the Cross-a-Moor Draft Development Brief, refers to consultation already undertaken and seeks Members’ approval to take the next step; a six week public consultation on the draft development brief. Following consultation, the Council can move forward to the next stage of preparing a final development brief for adoption.

2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 It is recommended that Cabinet (1) Approve the Land at Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor Draft Development Brief for six week public consultation.

Page 197 3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS What are Development Briefs? 3.1 Development Briefs are documents that provide site specific planning guidance on large, complex or sensitive sites. They are used as guidance for considering planning applications. The purpose of a Development Brief is to inform developers and other interested groups of the constraints and opportunities presented by a site and the type of development expected or encouraged by the Local Planning Authority. The aim of a Development Brief is to achieve a higher standard of development than would be achieved without one. 3.2 Once adopted, a Development Brief has the status of a Supplementary Planning Document. This means that a Development Brief is a material consideration when deciding a planning application. It also means that the Council must consult with local communities and key stakeholders in their preparation. Key features of the Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor Draft Development Brief 3.4 The Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor Draft Development Brief includes an overarching vision which is set out below: ‘The creation of a new village edge to Swarthmoor, fully integrated and connected to the existing residential community on both sides of the A590, of a design and layout that respects the surrounding countryside setting, and maintains a close relationship to the neighbouring memorial hall and nursery and maintains/makes a feature of important views to the Furness Fells and Hoad Hill. The Cross-a-Moor site will provide a network of green corridors accessible to all linking new areas of open space in a high quality landscaped design of wildlife habitat value. The Cross-a-Moor site will meet a range of housing needs encompassing imaginative urban design and a locally distinctive development with a strong sense of place’.

3.5 The brief explores a range of constraints and opportunities that should be used to shape future development and includes a range of requirements/principles relating to the following matters:

• Housing • Traffic and Movement Framework (how the site will be accessed by all) • Landscape/Green Infrastructure Framework (type and location of green spaces and landscaping etc). • Design and Layout Principles (key principles to inform the design and layout of any future proposed scheme) 3.6 The brief also includes an implementation section outlining who will deliver the brief, and looks at likely infrastructure requirements and means of delivery with reference to the role of the planning application process. Timetable for producing Development Briefs 3.7 The Council is in the process of preparing 8 development briefs in a first phase with the aim of consulting on draft development briefs later this year.

Page 198 As part of early engagement, (see Consultation section of this report) the ‘Phase 1 Development Briefs Proposals Document February 2014’ http://tinyurl.com/pgv9y3t set out the basis on which the Council would consider working with potential developers to bring forward the preparation of Development Briefs to a different timescale, subject to resources. Story Homes Ltd. who has an interest on a large part of the site (southern field excluded) expressed their desire to work with the Council in this manner on the Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor Development Brief. The Council has agreed to work with Story Homes Ltd. to an expedited timetable and it is for this reason that the production of a Draft Development Brief for the Cross-a-Moor site has appeared earlier than for the other ‘phase 1’ sites. No requests from potential developers were made with regard to the other ‘phase 1’ sites. 3.8 If the Council approves the Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor Draft Development Brief for public consultation, the Council will publish the Brief in accordance with the requirements set out in the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement and consult for 6 weeks during the period – 14 th August – 25 th September 2014.

4.0 CONSULTATION

Informal discussion/dialogue with key bodies December 2013/January 2014

4.1 The Council undertook an informal round of discussion and dialogue with key bodies listed in the ‘Phase 1 Development Briefs Proposals Document’ in December 2013/January 2014. This engagement enabled these bodies to respond to matters relating to:

• key issues that need to be considered in the brief; • identification of key local stakeholders; • stakeholders’ roles in the process; • nature of the type of future community engagement exercises; • identification of relevant information particularly infrastructure provision (for example utilities provision).

Public Consultation Issues and Options 4.2 A public consultation was undertaken on ‘Issues and Options’ for 6 weeks in February-March 2014. The results of the Consultation are contained within the Cross-a-Moor, Development Brief Interim Consultation Statement (see Appendix 2). This document sets out the main issues raised and how the Council has responded to these in the Draft Brief. It also includes an Appendix summarising individual comments received. 4.3 The headline issues raised through the consultation were: • Concerns about traffic impact from the new housing development on the site for the A590 Main Road and Pennington Lane junctions and how this will be managed; • Clarity required regarding how the site will be accessed; • Support for new green spaces with multi-functional use on the site accessible to all and connected to surrounding locality;

Page 199 • Support for range of house types but important the design of development is sympathetic to adjacent buildings, wider character of the area and is not built at an intensive scale; • Support for landscaping with a new soft boundary along West/North West edge of the site. 4.4 In responding to the main issues raised, the Council has advised in the consultation statement how each issue has been taken into account in formulating the draft development brief and where an issue cannot be taken into account, for example if the issue is not a material planning consideration or is beyond the scope of the brief i.e. too prescriptive, these reasons are given.

5.0 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 Cabinet could decide not to approve the Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor Draft Development Brief for consultation. This would prevent the completion of preparation of the Brief as public consultation is a requirement for Supplementary Planning Documents under the Town and County Planning Regulations. Cabinet could decide to delay consultation in order to further review the content of the brief. A delay would reduce the Council’s capacity to produce the Brief to an expedited timetable and may require the need for further engagement with key bodies. It could decide to delay the consultation to ensure it runs in tandem with the programme for consultation on the other ‘phase 1’ sites, again, a delay for this reason would reduce the Council’s capacity to produce the Brief to an expedited timetable. 6.0 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 The production of the Development Brief for Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor will assist in the delivery of the Council’s long term ambitions for delivering housing, including 35% affordable housing. It is therefore significant for the delivery of the 2014 – 2018 Council Plan. 6.2 In terms of housing the Development Brief will assist in the delivery of 1,000 affordable homes to rent over the period 2014-2025 and enable new affordable housing and open market housing through private sector led developments. In terms of economy the Brief will enable sustainable development within Swarthmoor providing opportunity for housing services and enhancement of the village’s distinctive character. 6.3 In terms of environment the Brief will ensure Swarthmoor and its surrounding areas high quality environment is enhanced and makes a positive contribution to the quality of life of existing residents in the area and encourage the best standards for new development, demonstrating quality and sustainability. In terms of health and reducing health inequalities the Brief will ensure the design of development is built to a level that ensures future resident’s will have a safe place to live. It also supports the creation of new green spaces and green networks that will support the health and well-being of new prospective residents and existing residents of Swarthmoor.

Page 200 7.0 IMPLICATIONS

7.1 Financial and Resources

7.1.1 This report’s recommendation to consider approving the Cross-a-Moor Draft Development Brief for consultation can be met within existing Council budget. The Council has agreed to share some of the costs of the consultation with Story Homes Ltd. as part of agreed working arrangements. 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 It is considered the consultation on the draft brief can be wholly met within existing staff resources. In addition the Council has agreed to share human resources with Story Homes Ltd. to assist with the consultation as part of agreed working arrangements. 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 The recommendations are in conformity with the requirements of the Regulations. 7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 The purpose of the Draft Development Brief for Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor is to help deliver the planned development set out in the adopted Core Strategy and Land Allocations DPDs. These statutory plans have been the subject of a full process of Sustainability Appraisal http://tinyurl.com/mvgjz62 . The Cross- a-Moor site has therefore already been subject to a Sustainability Appraisal carried out as part of the site assessment process in preparing the Land Allocations DPD. It is therefore unnecessary to undertake further Sustainability Appraisal of the Development Brief. This approach has been approved by the three statutory bodies, Natural England, the Environment Agency and English Heritage. Key findings from the Land Allocations Sustainability Appraisal for Cross-a-Moor have been used to inform the Draft Development Brief. 7.4.2 The appraisals conclude that the plan has a positive impact on sustainability overall, through the mitigation of landscape and biodiversity impacts and positive impacts in terms of the delivery of affordable housing. In terms of the Draft Development Brief itself this supports the creation of: • A healthy safe green housing environment; • An accessible environment for all; • Opportunities for biodiversity habitat creation and enhancement through new green spaces and networks; • A High quality built environment sensitive to surrounding character and context and fully integrated with the rest of Swarthmoor; • A Sustainable environment which maximises the incorporation of energy efficiency measures including use of renewable energy sources and natural resources helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing a positive response to future climate change impacts through minimising harm to air, water, land and soil quality and • A Sustainable housing environment supporting the wider local economy

Page 201 7.5 Equality and Diversity An Equality and Diversity Assessment has been undertaken collectively for the Development Briefs process in liaison with the Council’s Policy and Performance team (see Appendix 3). It is not considered that the draft proposals in the Cross-a-Moor Development Brief are likely to have an adverse effect on any protected group as described by the Equality Act. The assessment is intended to be iterative and will be reviewed and updated as the process of preparing development briefs moves forward. 7.6 Risk Risk Consequence Controls required Delay on consultation of Reduce the Council’s Approve the Cross-a- the Cross-a-Moor Draft capacity to produce the Moor Draft Development Development Brief Brief to an expedited Brief for consultation timetable. Failure to approve the The Council cannot Approve the Cross-a- Cross-a-Moor Draft continue with the Moor Draft Development Development Brief for preparation of the Brief Brief for consultation consultation

CONTACT OFFICERS Report Author –Damian Law, Principal Development Plans Officer 01539 793380 [email protected]

APPENDICES ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT Appendix No. 1 Cross-a-Moor Draft Development Brief 2 Interim Consultation Statement 3 Equalities and Diversity Assessment

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE Name of Background document Where it is available South Lakeland Local Development http://tinyurl.com/odaeyf7 Scheme, March 2013 Core Strategy, October 2010 http://tinyurl.com/l7utyga Land Allocations DPD, December 2013 http://tinyurl.com/mhvt69w Local Plan Phase 1 Development Briefs http://tinyurl.com/pgv9y3t Proposals Document, February 2014 and Appendix 3 document – Cross-a-Moor

Page 202 TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 27 June 2014 27 June 2014 27 June 2014 3rd July 2014 N/A Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer 23 rd July 2014 N/A N/A N/A 27 June 2014

Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s)

Services

Manager N/A N/A 27 th June 2014

Page 203 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 204 LAND AT CROSS-A-MOOR, SWARTHMOOR DRAFT DEVELOPMENT BRIEF

APPENDIX 1: CROSS-a-MOOR DRAFT DEVELOPMENT BRIEF

Page 205

Page 206 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Foreword

This Draft Development Brief has been prepared by South Lakeland District Council in accordance with the Local Plan Land Allocations Development Plan Document to provide guidance, including o n layout and design principles, for the development of land at Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. It will be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document by the Council and will form a material consideration when determining any planning application submitted for the site.

It will provide the development framework for achieving the vision for the site; this is the creation of a new village edge to Swarthmoor integrated with the rest of the village of a design and layout that respects the surrounding countryside setting and neighbouring uses. The site will provide a range of housing types and styles and new open spaces of wildlife habitat value and be of an imaginative urban design.

This document is to be read in conjunction with South Lakeland District Council’s relevant planning policy documents (including the Adopted Local Plan Land Allocations Document and the Core Strategy).

Page 207 1 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

2 Page 208 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Contents

1. Introduction ...... 5 1.1 Purpose and Vision ...... 5 1.3 Delivering the Council Plan and Local Strategies ...... 7 1.4 Planning Policy Context ...... 7 1.5 Sustainability Appraisal (Strategic Environmental Assessment) ...... 8 1.6 Habitats Regulations Assessment ...... 8 1.7 Consultation - Engagement ...... 9 2. Site and Site Context ...... 10 2.1 Site Location ...... 10 2.2 Land Use ...... 12 2.3 Landowners/Developer Interest ...... 12 2.4 Planning History ...... 12 2.5 Landscape Character ...... 12 2.6 Existing Natural and Built Features on and close to the Site ...... 12 2.7 Topography and Views ...... 13 2.8 Accessibility ...... 13 2.9 Archaeology and Heritage ...... 14 2.10 Ground Conditions ...... 14 2.11 Flooding Matters - Drainage ...... 15 2.12 Constraints and Opportunities ...... 15 3. Development Requirements – Land Allocations DPD...... 18 4. Development Framework – Proposals and Requirements ...... 19 4.1 Land Use Proposals Map ...... 19 4.2 Housing Requirements ...... 21 4.4 Housing Density ...... 22 4.5 Traffic and Movement ...... 22 4.6 Landscape/Green Infrastructure Framework ...... 26 4.7 Ecology/Biodiversity ...... 30 4.8 Flood Risk Issues - Considerations ...... 31 4.9 Infrastructure Requirements ...... 31 4.10 Community Infrastructure ...... 33 4.11 Design Principles ...... 33 4.12 General Principles ...... 33 4.13 Site-Specific Principles ...... 35 4.14 Sustainability Principles ...... 35 4.15 Renewable Energy ...... 35 4.16 Sustainable Construction ...... 36 4.17 Air quality ...... 36 5. Implementation and Delivery ...... 37 5.1 Partners ...... 37 5.2 Phasing/Timing ...... 37 5.3 Planning Application ...... 37 5.4 Development Obligations ...... 38 APPENDIX 1: RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES ...... 41

Page 209 3 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

APPENDIX 2: SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL NEW PLAY AREA SPECIFICATION - GUIDANCE ...... 42

4 Page 210 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose and Vision

Development Briefs

1.1.1 Development Briefs are documents that provide site-specific planning guidance on large, complex or sensitive sites and provide guidance in deciding planning applications. The main purpose of a Development Brief is to inform developers, and other interested groups, of the constraints and opportunities presented by a site and the type of development and related requirements expected or encouraged by the local planning authority.

1.1.2 As a Supplementary Planning Document to the South Lakeland Local Plan, this Development Brief will:

• Supplement policies and proposals in the South Lakeland Local Plan – Core Strategy and Land Allocations Development Plan Document;

• Provide a development framework, incorporating appropriate design standards and principles, to ensure a high standard of design and sustainability;

• Provide a framework for the delivery of traffic and movement, landscape, green infrastructure and other types of infrastructure; and

• Set out a framework for delivery, including planning application requirements.

This Draft Development Brief

1.1.3 The adopted Land Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) allocates a 8.02 hectare site (gross) on land at Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor, for housing development and requires a Development Brief to be prepared to guide the phasing, distribution of development, layout, design, landscaping and infrastructure (such as roads, community facilities) for the development of the site.

1.1.4 This Draft Development Brief aims to provide clear guidance for the future development of land at Cross-a-Moor and as a formally adopted Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), will be a material consideration when deciding planning applications. This means it will be taken into account and used to inform a decision on any submitted planning application. Its primary purpose is to deliver the vision for the site.

5 Page 211 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

1.2 Vision

1.2.1 The creation of a new village edge to Swarthmoor fully integrated and connected to the existing residential community on both sides of the A590T, of a design and layout that respects the surrounding countryside setting, and maintains a close relationship to the neighbouring Memorial Hall and nursery and maintains/makes a feature of important views to the Furness Fells and Hoad Hill. The Cross-a-Moor site will provide a network of green corridors accessible to all, linking new areas of open space in a high quality landscaped design of wildlife habitat value. The Cross-a-Moor site will meet a range of housing needs encompassing imaginative urban design and a locally distinctive development with a strong sense of place.

1.2.2 The vision for Cross-a-Moor is to be achieved through the following:

• by creating a high quality residential development and landscaped setting;

• by enhancing the ecological value of the site through the creation of a network of green corridors that is integrated within the landscape framework, linking new areas of open space and creating areas of enhanced wildlife habitat value;

• The provision of shared formal and informal open space with the wider community;

• The creation of a permeable development that is easy to access, as well as to move through, across and around, through the provision of new pedestrian and cycle links and the integration with the Memorial Hall, nursery and the rest of the village, including existing public rights of way ;

• by retaining and enhancing views out of the site towards Hoad Hill / the Sir John Barr o w Monument and the Low Furness Fells/Moors, through the orientation of development within the site;

• Ensuring that new development, whilst being informed by the character and appearance of older properties within the village and in close proximity to the site, provides a mix of designs and styles which expands the housing offer within Swarthmoor as a whole;

• Providing a range of housing, including affordable housing, that meets the needs identified for Swarthmoor and the wider area.

• By ensuring that the site is accessible. Pedestrian links are required from the site to the bus stops on Ulverston Road (A590T). By providing a footpath directly from the south - eastern edge of the site to Ulverston Road (A590T) in close proximity to existing bus stops.

6 Page 212 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

1.3 Delivering the Council Plan and Local Strategies

1.3.1 Delivering the vision for the site through accordance with the Development Brief will contribute to the Council’s strategic aims and objectives for South Lakeland making it the best place to live, work and explore as set out in the Council Plan by:

1.3.2 Supporting the delivery of new homes to meet need, contributing to:

• Delivering the specific target of 1,000 affordable homes to rent over the period 2014 -2025; • Enabling of new affordable housing and open market housing through private sector led developments ;

1.3.3 Enabling and delivering opportunities for sustainable economic growth, contributing to :

• Enabling sustainable development within Swarthmoor providing opportunity for housing services and the enhancement of the village’s distinctive character;

1.3.4 Protecting the environment, ensuring that:

• Swarthmoor and its surrounding area’s high quality environment is enhanced and makes a positive contribution to the quality of life of existing residents in the area;

• Encouraging the best standards for new development, demonstrating quality and sustainability;

1.3.5 Improving health and reducing health inequalities by:

• Retaining the area as a safe place to live;

• Supporting the creation of new green spaces and green networks integrated with the rest of Swarthmoor to be enjoyed by new and existing residents.

1.3.6 Delivering the vision for the site will also contribute to the area strategy for Ulverston and Furness, as set out in the adopted Core Strategy. This seeks the delivery of new housing (including affordable housing) and employment land, to meet the needs and aspirations of the local community. The provision of new green corridors with pedestrian and cycle access will help support key priorities set out in the Cumbria Local Transport Plan 2011 – 2026, which includes enabling opportunities for more people to walk and cycle. 1.4 Planning Policy Context

1.4.1 This section sets out the current adopted planning policy context for the site and other legislation to be considered.

1.4.2 The Development Brief is required to be in accordance with the adopted planning policy context relevant to the site, together with other legislation as appropriate. In this regard, the current ‘Development Plan’ for South Lakeland (outwith the two National Parks), comprises:

7 Page 213 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

• South Lakeland Local Plan - Core Strategy DPD (adopted 20th October 2010) – the adopted Core Strategy identifies a requirement for 8,800 homes to be delivered across South Lakeland within the Plan period (2010 – 2025). Relevant policies contained within the adopted Core Strategy, are included in Appendix 1 to this Brief;

th • South Lakeland Local Plan - Land Allocations DPD (adopted 17 December 2013) – the Land Allocations DPD allocates a site at Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor, for around 161 dwellings (Policy LA1.3). Paragraph 2.77 requires that a Development Brief is prepared for the Cross-a-Moor site, to be adopted by December 2014. It also includes a site specific policy (LA5.6) relating to the site. The suggested number of houses is not fixed. It is based on broad assumptions about the site’s potential capacity;

• South Lakeland Local Plan 2006 - & Alterations (final composite plan) , published September 2007 - This combines the Local Plan adopted in 1997 and the alterations to the South Lakeland Local Plan adopted in March 2006.The adopted South Lakeland Local Plan 2006 contains a number of saved and extended policies of relevance to the development of the site. See Appendix 1 to this Brief;

• Cumbria Minerals and Waste Local Plan - (adopted April 2009) - this sets out how minerals and waste management developments that will be needed in Cumbria by 2020 and beyond will be planned.

1.4.3 The a b o v e documents form the current development plan for South Lakeland and any planning application must be shown to be in accordance with them. The development brief must also be in accordance with these documents.

1.4.4 National Planning Policy Framework (published 27th March 2012) – This is a material planning consideration in planning decisions. It sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. This includes the need to boost significantly the supply of housing (paragraph 47) and the need to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes, widen opportunities for home ownership and create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities (paragraph 50). 1.5 Sustainability Appraisal (Strategic Environmental Assessment)

1.5.1 The Cross-a-Moor site has already been subject to a Sustainability Appraisal carried out as part of the site assessment process in preparing the Land Allocations DPD. It is not, therefore, necessary to undertake further Sustainability Appraisal of the Development Brief. This approach has been approved by the three statutory bodies, Natural England, the Environment Agency and English Heritage. Key findings from the Land Allocations DPD’s Sustainability Appraisal for Cross-a-Moor have been used to help inform the Draft Brief. These are referred to in Section 3. 1.6 Habitats Regulations Assessment

1.6.1 Assessment is required under the Habitat Regulations of the potential impact of Development Plans on sites of international nature importance. The Cross-a-Moor site was assessed in this way as part of the preparation of the Land Allocations DPD. There were found to be no likely significant effects.

8 Page 214 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

1.7 Consultation - Engagement

1.7.1 The Council has undertaken extensive public and stakeholder engagement and consultation in preparing the Draft Development Brief. Full details of the consultation process can be found in the Interim Consultation Statement. All consultation feedback to date has been considered and, where possible, has informed this Draft Development Brief. Details of the comments received through the consultation /engagement process, and how the preparation of the Brief has taken account of them can be found in the Interim Consultation Statement and Appendix 1 to the Statement.

1.7.2 Examples of how key issues raised have been used to inform the Draft Development Brief are:

• A suggestion for a green buffer required along the north western boundary; The Draft Development Brief includes the provision of a green landscaped buffer along the length of the north western boundary; • A pedestrian link requested from the site to t h e bus stops on Ulverston Road. This has been incorporated in to the Brief.

How to Comment

1.7.3 We are seeking y o u r comments on the content of this Draft Development Brief in order to inform the final Development Brief for Cross-a-Moor. You can take part in the consultation by:

• Attending the drop-in event; • Completing a response form; • Writing to or emailing us at the addresses below:

Development Plans Team South Lakeland House Lowther Street Kendal Cumbria LA9 4DQ

[email protected]

1.7.4 The consultation runs from Thursday 14 th August 2014 – Thursday 25 th September 2014 (TBC) and will include a drop-in event in Swarthmoor on Tuesday 9 th September (TBC) . Full details of the consultation and how to respond will be available during the consultation on the Council’s Development Briefs and Consultations web pages.

THE ABOVE IS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL AND TO BE UPDATED ONCE CONSULTATION DETAILS ARE CONFIRMED

9 Page 215 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

2. Site and Site Context

2.1 This section sets out and assesses the site and its context in terms of location, land use, planning history, accessibility and site characteristics. It then explores the constraints and opportunities for the site taking these factors into account. 2.1 Site Location

2.1.1 The site is located north-west of Swarthmoor. It is bounded to the east and south-east by existing housing fronting onto the A590T (Ulverston Road) and the A590 T itself respectively, to the south-west by a dry stone wall aligning Pennington Lane (see photo 1.3) and to the north- west by Pennington Village Hall (the Memorial Hall) and a children’s nursery, together with open fields and pasture adjacent. The site is also relatively close to Pennington Primary School to the north-west. (See figure 1.1)

Photo 1.1 Part of the site - Views of the site from the south-west (from the A590T)

Photo1.2 Existing Hedgerow within the site Photo 1.3 Dry Stone Wall bounding the site along Pennington Lane

10 Page 216

Figure 1.1: Site Location Plan Page 217

Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

2.2 Land Use

2.2.1 The site, in its entirety, comprises agricultural land used for grazing. Whilst the site is open in aspect, it is crossed by hedgerows and dry stone walls (see photos above). To the west of the site are open fields with Pennington Village Hall (the Memorial Hall) and the children’s nursery also directly adjacent to the site to the west. The south-western boundary to the site is defined by Pennington Lane together with existing residential properties at the junction between Pennington Lane and the A590T (Cross-a-Moor). The north-eastern boundary is common with the rear gardens of properties fronting onto the A590T (Ulverston Road), with the south- eastern boundary defined by the A590T itself. 2.3 Landowners/Developer Interest

2.3.1 Three land owners own the site in its entirety. One land owner owns most of the first field that fronts on to Pennington Lane. Here, at its southern extent, the site is close to properties at Cross-a-Moor and has a frontage on to Pennington Lane. A second land owner owns a relatively small part of the aforesaid first field; to the rear of the houses at Cross-a-Moor. A third landowner owns the remainder and majority, (three fields), of the site. The Council currently understands that Story Homes Ltd has secured an option with the owner of the larger portion of the site (three fields) and Story’s intend to develop out this part of the allocation site (subject to the submission and grant of planning permission). It is the Council’s understanding at this point in time, that the landowner of the smaller area along the south-western extent of the site, (the first field off Pennington Lane), has a potential developer/site promoter interested in this first field. 2.4 Planning History

2.3.2 There is no planning history (within the last 5 years) affecting the site in terms of previous planning applications for new development. 2.5 Landscape Character

2.5.1 At a County level, within the Cumbria Landscape Character Appraisal Tool Kit, the site lies within Character Type 2d – Coastal Urban Fringe. These areas are typically generally flat or gently undulating land, largely based on fluvial drift, marine alluvium and undulating bolder clay on Triassic mudstones and sandstones. A mixed land cover of mown grass, pasture, scrub and semi-natural grassland is typical of Landscape Character Type 2d. 2.6 Existing Natural and Built Features on and close to the Site

Natural Features

2.6.1 The site comprises open fields used for grazing. These fields are sub-divided by a combination of hedgerow and dry stone walls within the site. Hedgerows separate the site from further open fields to the north-west. There is also an existing hedgerow bounding the site’s south-eastern extent, separating it from the A590T and a dry stone wall along the site’s boundary with Pennington Lane.

12 Page 218 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Built Features

2.6.2 There are no buildings present on the site. However, adjoining the site to the south-east is a row of mixed single and two storey properties with rear gardens backing on to the site, with the properties themselves fronting onto the A590T. Opposite these single storey properties, across the A590T, is a relatively recently built residential development (Trinkeld Park) comprising of 2, 3 and 4 bed properties within a reasonably mature landscaped setting.

2.6.3 The south part of the site (Cross–a–Moor) is bounded by a row of terraced 2-storey properties, 2 semi-detached, 2 two storey properties and 1 single storey property. Their rear gardens back on to the site. Most of these Cross–a–Moor properties are older and hence more vernacular in character and appearance.

2.6.4 Further a lo ng Pennington Lane and bounding the site to the north-west is Pennington Village Hall (Memorial Hall) and the children’s nursery. The Cross-a-Moor War Memorial is located at the junction between Pennington Lane and the A590T. 2.7 Topography and Views

2.7.1 The site slopes upwards from north-east to south-west with ground levels ranging from around 74m AOD in the south-eastern corner down to 64m AOD in the north-eastern corner of the site.

2.7.2 The site is visible from outwith the site boundaries with the most prominent distant views from Rosside and Horrace Hill (Pennington) from the north-west, where the site has an open aspect. The site is also more visible from the south-west beyond Pennington Lane. More distant views are not available from the south-east due to the existing built form of Swarthmoor. Due to the topography of the site , the south-western part of the site is more visually prominent than the north-eastern part from views to the south.

2.7.3 Close range views of the site are available from existing dwellings bounding the site to the east; the row of terraced houses located at the junction of the A590 T and Pennington Lane which back onto the site and Pennington Memorial Hall and children’s nursery adjoining the site on its north- western boundary. There are also partial views of the site from dwellings (Trinkeld Park) opposite the A590T, which are broken by existing mature trees and a hedgerow.

2.8 Accessibility

Road Access

2.8.1 The site is directly adjacent, on its south-eastern boundary, to the A590T (Ulverston Road). This provides direct links to Ulverston 1.5km to the north-east and Dalton-in-Furness, 4km to the south- west, between which is the settlement of Lindal-in-Furness. The site also adjoins Pennington Lane on its south-western boundary which runs northwards from its junction with the A590T and provides access to Pennington Village.

13 Page 219 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

2.8.2 There is currently no vehicular access into the site, except for agricultural purposes.

Rail Access

2.8.3 There is no railway station at Swarthmoor, with the nearest stations off Springfield Road at Ulverston and Station Road, Dalton-in-Furness.

2.8.4 Local bus services operate along the A590T linking Swarthmoor with Ulverston, Dalton- in- Furness and Barrow-in-Furness. The 6/X6 bus services, operated by Stagecoach, pass the site along the A590T which provides regular services direct to Barrow-in-Furness and via Ulverston to Kendal and vice versa. There are ‘request’ bus stops currently in Swarthmoor for this service, with these located on the A590T adjacent to the site.

Cycle Access

2.8.5 The immediate local area does not have any dedicated/off-highway cycle lanes. However, Pennington Lane forms part of the regional cycle network (National Route 70).

Public Rights of Way

2.8.6 There are pavements on both sides of the A590 T which passes through Swarthmoor abutting the site on its south-eastern boundary. There is also an existing pavement on one side of Pennington Lane bounding the site to the south-west which links Cross-a-Moor junction with Pennington. There is also a signaled pedestrian crossing located on the A590T near to Cross- a-Moor. There is also a public right of way along Rufus Lane to the north of the site. 2.9 Archaeology and Heritage

2.9.1 There are no scheduled monuments, registered parks and gardens, registered battlefields or conservation areas within the site or its immediate vicinity. There are also no listed buildings/ structures recorded within it or in close proximity. Based on County Council advice, there are no known archaeological remains on the site, but remains are recorded very nearby and so it is considered that there is significant potential for currently unknown remains to survive there. A Viking burial has been found close to the site and a number of prehistoric implements have been recovered from adjacent fields.

2.9.2 In line with the National Planning Policy Framework and Cumbria County Council’s Archeological site specific advice, any forthcoming planning application should be supported by a desk-based archaeological assessment and, in this instance, a geophysical survey.

2.10 Ground Conditions

2.10.1 No contamination is either recorded or suspected on the site. However, given the future residential use on the site, a preliminary risk assessment will be carried out in support of any planning application with a full site investigation to follow if the site possesses a potentially significant risk. In addition, whilst there is no evidence of mining within the site on historic maps, it is understood that historic (iron ore / haematite) mine shafts/workings are in the local area. In light of this, a ‘mining assessment’ will also be carried out in support of any submitted

14 Page 220 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

planning application. This will determine if there is any potential historic undermining/risk of subsidence and an appropriately detailed assessment/report will be required to be submitted to support any planning application. 2.11 Flooding Matters - Drainage

2.11.1 The site lies within Flood Risk Zone 1, with both the Environment Agency and South Lakeland District Council’s Environmental Protection confirming that, based on previous history and existing evidence (surface water flooding data and local records), there are no known surface water flooding problems/issues. However, due to the size of the site, a Flood Risk Assessment will be prepared and submitted in support of any planning application. Surface run-off shall not exceed existing green field run-off rates. 2.12 Constraints and Opportunities

2.12.1 In response to the site’s context and characteristics assessed earlier in this section, constraints and opportunities have been identified that have informed and influenced the proposals for the site. (See figure 1.2).

Landscape Setting - Views

2.12.2 As highlighted above, the site is visible from outwith the site boundaries with the most prominent distant views from the north-west, where the site has an open aspect. The landscape framework for the site will need to pay careful consideration to the open aspect along this north-western boundary.

2.12.3 Closer range views of the site are afforded to h o u s e s a n d bungalows backing onto the north-eastern boundary, the row of terraced houses adjoining the site’s southern corner and from Pennington Memorial Hall and children’s nursery which bound the site to the west/north- west. The layout, design and siting of new development will need to be sensitive to existing levels of residential amenity, with issues relating to the potential for visual impact and overlooking/privacy to be addressed through consideration of the scale of dwellings on these common boundaries, the introduction of landscaping/buffers and the separation distances between the existing properties and any new build.

2.12.4 Swarthmoor is fairly uniform in character and with no particularly distinctive character generally. Cross-a-Moor provides a real opportunity to enhance the housing offer in Swarthmoor through a mix of styles and designs with specific reference to older properties in the village of Pennington. There is a need for a development design and layout that respects and enhances this local character and, in particular, helps to integrate the new development with the existing built form opposite the A590 T from the site. In this regard, the proposed development offers the opportunity to ‘soften’ the existing south-western edge of Swarthmoor from wider views.

Natural and Built Features

2.12.5 Mature hedgerow and dry stone walls cross the site internally. These will need to be considered as part of the development layout.

2.12.6 The layout will also need to make allowance for the proximity of the site to the A590 T, which generates considerable levels of noise through passing traffic.

15 Page 221 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Access Opportunities

2.12.7 There are two vehicular access opportunities; an access from Pennington Lane and/or an access from the A590 T (see Traffic and Movement Framework section).

Constraints

• Prominent distant views of the site from the north-west, where the site has an open aspect this will inform the layout and design;

• Sensitive edges with existing houses - close range views from existing residential properties bounding the site to the south-east and south-west;

• Existing mature hedgerows and dry stone walls traversing the site internally;

• Proximity of the site to the A590T;

• Edge of Swarthmoor/open countryside setting.

Opportunities

• To create a high quality residential development utilising long distance views to the north-west;

• To soften the existing edge of Swarthmoor through a development set within a quality landscape framework;

• To enhance the ecological value of the site through the creation of a green corridor integrated within the landscape framework, retaining existing hedgerows within the site and sustainable urban drainage design along the north-western boundary;

• To provide shared formal and informal open space with the wider community;

• To retain and enhance views out towards Hoad Hill and the Sir John Barrow monument through the orientation of development within the site;

• To create a green entrance/focus point from the A590T and possible gateway feature with vehicular access should this be appropriate along with high quality landscaping along site A590T frontage which will also contribute to noise attenuation between the new development and the A590T; and

• Potential to enhance pedestrian and cycling permeability through the provision of new pedestrian and cycle links through the site, integrated with the memorial hall, nursery and rest of the village including existing rights of way where possible and through provision of pedestrian facilities on part of Pennington Lane and to bus stops on the A590T to satisfy policy requirements.

16 Page 222

Page 223

Figure 1.2: Constraints and Opportunities Plan

Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

3. Development Requirements – Land Allocations DPD

3.1 The Local Plan Land Allocations DPD Policy LA5.6 requires that the developm ent at Cross-a- Moor, in addition to addressing other Core Strategy policy requirements, must make provision for the following:

• A Landscape and Green Infrastructure Framework to incorporate significant public open space and ensure that development sits sympathetically with the existing landscape;

• Green infrastructure connecting the site and adjacent residential areas/road networks and open countryside/village hall, pedestrian and cycle links with access to open space/ recreational areas and A590 T;

• Surface water attenuation measures;

• Orientation/layout and design to maximise benefits of solar gain and minimise surface water run-off;

• Pedestrian facilities need to be provided on both sides of Cross -a-Moor (Pennington Lane) including pedestrian access to existing public transport facilities on the A590T.

3.2 In addition, the Sustainability Assessment carried out for the site at Cross-a-Moor highlighted that whilst the site generally scored well in sustainability terms, issues of reducing air quality and impact on the landscape required further consideration. In terms of landscape impact this will be addressed through accordance with the requirements of Policy LA5.6. In terms of air quality, an Air Quality Assessment will be prepared in support of any planning application. Other issues which the SA identified should be addressed through any future proposals on the site include increasing levels of energy efficiency in the design of new development, improving access to recycling facilities and improving access to open space.

18 Page 224 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

4. Development Framework – Proposals and Requirements

4.1 Land Use Proposals Map

4.1.1 The site is to be exclusively residential development integrated within a high quality landscape framework and the rest of Swarthmoor with new public open space. The indicative plan (see figure 1.3 below sets out the land uses at Cross-a-Moor and their associated areas. It also shows an indication of where the main vehicular route leading from Pennington Lane into the site and connections towards the A590T based on the two possible access points could be located and how Cross-a-Moor will respond and cater for cyclists and pedestrians through a connected network of footpaths and cycle routes to the rest of Swarthmoor and surrounding area.

19 Page 225

Figure 1.3: Land Use Proposals Map

Page 226

Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

4.2 Housing Requirements

4.2.1 Cross-a-Moor will provide a mix of housing types and tenures based on local evidence base and viability considerations and subject to further discussions with the District Authority. A range of house types and sizes will be provided to create choice, varied building forms and to help respond to the local context.

Affordable Housing

4.2.2 In accordance with Policy CS6.3 of the Core Strategy, no less than 35% of the total number of dwellings must be affordable. The Council would expect a wide range of different dwelling types to meet evidenced affordable housing needs, including some provision of bungalows. House Types might be influenced by residential amenity considerations, for example lower density/ single/low storey development may be appropriate in order to achieve a positive layout that respects existing character, context and levels of residential amenity. Affordable houses should be mixed/pepper-potted within the scheme. Developers should follow the Council’s Affordable Housing Guidance for Developers .

Open Market Housing

4.2.3 Analysis of general market supply and demand for open market housing suggests that in the Furness Rural Housing Market Sub Area, there are shortfalls in detached houses and properties with 1 bedroom (see Table ES2, page 13 of the South Lakeland District 2014 Strategic Housing Market Assessment Update (SHMA).

Self-Build Properties

4.2.4 The Council is supportive of self-build projects and will encourage an element of this type of property as part of the overall mix.

New Housing Standards

4.2.5 The government is planning to introduce a set of mandatory national standards for new housing, to be implemented through building regulations. New housing development will have to respond to these standards in due course (these will focus on issues to do with environment, spaces, accessibility, water efficiency and energy efficiency) Affordable Housing Guidance for Developers .

4.3 Housing Requirements at Cross -a-Moor

• No less than 35% of the total number of dwellings must be affordable and these should be mixed/pepper potted within the scheme. • Developers should follow the Council’s Affordable Housing Guidance for Developers (Note it is updated annually) • A range of house types and tenures will be provided including some provision of bungalows as affordable and open market housing. Self-build properties will be supported and encouraged as part of the overall mix.

21 Page 227 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

4.4 Housing Density

4.4.1 The scale and massing of development will need to be sensitive to the existing built form, settlement character and setting. This will help inform t he appropriate housing density for the site. A range of housing densities may be appropriate when combined with landscape and building form. This this will assist in providing areas of recognisable character and reinforce a sense of place and provide legibility to the scheme. Given the need to ensure a more gradual transition and a softer interface between the developed edge of Swarthmoor and the countryside beyond, development along Cross-a-Moor’s western and north western edges will be of a reduced scale and massing. Development adjacent to Pennington Memorial Hall and the Nursery, as well as residential properties at Cross-a- Moor, will also need to be of a reduced scale and massing to respect existing amenity, local context and built form. 4.5 Traffic and Movement

The following key considerations need to be considered in the context of the outcome of any future Transport Assessment and advice provided by Cumbria County Council Highways at the planning application stage.

The design of roads, pathways and cycle ways must accord with the adoptable standards set out within the Cumbria Design Guide, Volume 1 – Layout of New Residential Developments, December 1996 (This guidance is under review by Cumbria County Council).

4.5.1 The layout and design of the Cross-a-Moor site should aim to reduce the need to travel by car and encourage alternative modes of transport. It should also integrate Cross-a-Moor with the rest of Swarthmoor and the surrounding countryside and open spaces, by providing a network of pedestrian and cycle routes. It is essential the road layout is direct and clear allowing for people living on the site to have a definitive route to their property from the primary vehicular route (see Figure 1.4 ). It is also essential that the design and layout promotes a safe and comfortable movement framework for all.

4.5.2 Principles established in the Manual for Streets guidance should, where appropriate, be used to inform the layout and design of streets within the site.

22 Page 228

Page 229

Figure 1.4: Traffic and Movement Framework Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Vehicular Access Into and Through the Site

4.5.3 Options for vehicular access will need to be assessed and agreed by the Highways Agency, as the highway authority for the A590T and by Cumbria County Council for the local roads. These include: access via Pennington Lane, joining the A590T at the offset junction with Main Road – which may require realignment or signalisation to achieve safely without undue detriment to the existing traffic flows on the A590T; or potentially a direct access from the eastern end of the site – which may be difficult to achieve with safety-compliant visibility, due to the curvature of the road at this location.

4.5.4 In addition, there is likely to be a requirement for a second access point for use only by emergency services vehicles. All access arrangements should take full account of movements across all modes.

4.5.5 Developers are encouraged to undertake early discussions with both highways authorities, and may be asked to support the testing of their proposals in a PARAMICS microsimulation model of the urban area of Ulverston, being developed jointly by the Highways Agency and Cumbria County Council. This model is held and operated on their behalf by JMP Consultants Ltd. who can supply details of it.

4.5.6 Any proposal must be based on a ‘one or the other’ access option, not both options. The consideration of emergency access options for the site need to be considered in the context of the type of access arrangements considered most appropriate.

4.5.7 A hierarchy of internal streets will be designed to create a low-speed, well connected movement framework that is easy to move through. The streets will be fronted by houses to avoid blank fronts, to ensure active frontages are created within the housing areas. Within the housing areas, the streets will be designed to control traffic speeds. The best way to do this is to design streets that encourage people to drive with caution.

4.5.8 Proposals will take a balanced approach to movement and provide for the needs of all users of the streets and spaces, not just the needs of vehicles. The design and layout will incorporate movement along conspicuous routes and edges that are easy to recognise and follow, such as main roads or defined streets.

4.5.9 Shared surface streets may be appropriate. They are those in which there is no kerb to separate the carriageway from the footway. These work best where there are relatively calm traffic environments. However, they should be designed to accommodate the needs of visually impaired people, to whom they can be problematic.

4.5.10 Proposals should consider and ensure the provision of road access beyond the site in future years, even if this now seems unlikely.

Public Transport

4.5.11 Local bus services operate along the A590T linking Swarthmoor with Ulverston, Dalton-in- Furness and Barrow-in-Furness. The 6/X6 bus services, operated by Stagecoach pass

24 Page 230 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

the site along the A590T which provides regular services direct to Barrow-in-Furness and via Ulverston to Kendal and vice versa. There are ‘request’ bus stops currently in Swarthmoor for this service. The site is within a 400m walkable distance of three bus stops which connects the site with the wider area of Ulverston, Dalton-in-Furness and Barrow-in-Furness. Given there is sufficient access to existing services, there is no need to explore opportunities to extend/provide bus service through the site .

Pedestrian and Cycle Access

4.5.12 There are a number of pedestrian access points possible. These can be located to the west and to the south where the site abuts the public highway. This will make the site as accessible as possible and shorten pedestrian journey times. Pedestrian and cycle access will be clear, and will be easily accessible from throughout the site, forming part of the green corridors that run through the site. Footpaths are designed to work with green spaces and corridors so as to make the most of green spaces throughout the site. These routes will be designed to be safe and pleasant with high levels of natural surveillance and be accessible to all including those with impaired mobility. They should avoid being located to the rear of properties. Where possible, cycle routes and pathways should be off-road .

4.5.13 A footway/cycle link will be provided from the site to the Memorial Hall and Nursery. It would be desirable to provide a footway/cycle link to the Rufus Lane right of way. A footway will be provided on Pennington Lane (east side) and improved access to bus stops on the A590T.

Lighting

4.5.14 All streets and paths should be well lit, but specific attention will be given to the lighting design alongside open space and wildlife corridors. It is desirable for all streets and paths to be overlooked by surrounding buildings.

Parking

4.5.15 Parking provision should provide a balanced mix of parking solutions that are integrated into the design and layout. Parking courts could form part of the suite of parking arrangements. On-plot parking and garages should be sited so they do not appear as dominant features in the street scene. Provision below demand can cause problems, though it can work successfully when adequate on-street parking controls are present and where it is possible for residents to reach day-to-day destinations without the car.

Cycle Parking

4.5.16 The design and layout of the site at Cross-a-Moor will provide sufficient convenient and secure cycle parking. This can be in a shared facility or within dwellings.

Disabled Access

4.5.17 All pedestrian routes should be accessible for all including those with impaired mobility. Careful consideration will need to be given to the surface materials used, the width of pavements, pathways and the relationship to roads and parking areas to ensure there is adequate means of access for all.

25 Page 231 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Surfaces of roads, pavements, pathways

4.5.18 The type of surface of roads, pavements and pathways should be considered in context of the overall strategy for dealing with surface water runoff from the site. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUD’s) comprise a wide range of techniques, such as the use of permeable paving.

Traffic and Movement Framework Requirements • As shown on the land use proposals map (Figure 1.3), the traffic/movement framework will comprise:

• Vehicular access into the site – either from Pennington Lane or the A590T; • Vehicular access through the site – the site will be served by a main road/street serving the whole site which will be accessed either from Pennington Lane or the A590T; • Layout of roads – a hierarchy of internal streets will be created off the main road/street which will be designed to create a low speed, well connected movement framework, easy to navigate and making full provision for pedestrian and cycle use as well as vehicles; • In addition to the hierarchy of internal streets, a series of green corridors with pedestrian and cycle access will be provided utilising existing rights of way and forming part of the Green Infrastructure Framework, (as shown on Figure 1.3);

• Footpath links will be provided from the site onto the A590T to enhance permeability and provide ease of access to existing bus stops and to the Memorial Hall and Nursery.

4.6 Landscape/Green Infrastructure Framework

4.6.1 Green Infrastructure is the term given to a network of multi-functional spaces that can support existing and new wildlife habitats and provide recreational benefits for people. It is made up of a range of assets such as waterways, ponds, open spaces, parks and gardens, play areas, pathways, allotments, woodlands, hedgerows, trees, playing fields, sustainable urban drainage systems and green roofs/walls.

4.6.2 Outdoor public spaces and play areas should be located on a through route/main line of movement (pedestrian or vehicular), be well overlooked by surrounding dwellings without detriment to residential amenity and benefit from natural light. Opportunities to incorporate distinctive features such as public art will be supported. Existing hedgerows will be incorporated into the green infrastructure framework and the landscape framework and retained where possible.

4.6.3 The creation of incidental small areas of open space with little function should be avoided, unless they serve to protect an important natural feature such as a mature tree/group of trees for example in which case they should where possible form part of a larger area of open space. Small greens may be appropriate within the housing areas. Street trees will be supported as part of the overall landscaping framework for the site.

26 Page 232 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

4.6.4 Green Infrastructure can also provide storage for flood waters whilst contributing to health, amenity and biodiversity benefits. The type of open space provided may therefore have an important function as part of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Strategy for the site. The incorporation of green infrastructure into new developments will help mitigate and manage surface flood risk.

4.6.5 Special attention will be given to the lighting design alongside open space and wildlife corridors. Impacts of artificial lighting on bats and other nocturnal wildlife will be reduced by minimising artificial lighting onto these spaces.

4.6.6 A landscape/open space management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than domestic gardens, shall be prepared to secure the long term future of the site’s open spaces.

4.6.7 As shown in Figure 1.5, six areas of open space will be provided on the site as follows:

1. Green Corridor/Landscape Buffer - along the north-western edge

In order to soften the existing north-western edge of Swarthmoor, and in order to integrate development with open countryside to the north, a green corridor/landscape buffer is proposed along the north- western edge of the site. This not only serves to break-up views of the new development from the north, but also provides pedestrian/cycle ways which link in with the rest of the landscape framework, providing access to both the open space to the north-east and also to enable ease of movement through the site to the A590T. The green corridor also will serve to enhance the ecological value of the site, principally with the possible introduction of a sustainable urban drainage system along this edge .

2. Central Green Corridor – Pennington Lane to open space to the north-east

A central green corridor/avenue, running through the site from Pennington Lane to the open space to the north-east, is intended to create a clear and legible site that is easy to navigate. This would be tree-lined with variations to set-backs and a central open green space feature at the heart of the development (see Figure 1.5). This central green corridor would then connect to green corridors running north-east to south-west which will also double up as footpath links to areas of public open space and play space, and Ulverston Road (A590T) to the south-east. There is an opportunity to provide an additional smaller area of informal open space/small green half-way between the central village green space and the public amenity space to the north-east (this is shown on Figure 1.5).

3. Central Green Corridor – from the A590T to the north-western edge

This green corridor will connect with the green corridor/avenue proposed running east-west through the site, providing access to both Pennington Lane and the open space to the north- east, and also provide direct access to the footpath link running along the north-western part of the site.

4. Central Village Green Space – with potential play area/recreational area

27 Page 233 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

The central green space will be multi-functional providing informal open space for residents. This space provides an opportunity to provide recreational facilities in the form of an equipped play area forming part of the overall network of green corridors running throughout the site and acting as a central link to enable ease of navigation within these (see further guidance in Appendix 2).

5. Public Amenity Space

An area of public amenity space will be provided on the north east part of the site. Direct links to this are provided via the pedestrian footpath proposed within the green corridor along the north- western edge of the site, together with the central green corridor running from Pennington Lane and linking up at the central village green space with the green corridor extending from the A590T. This area will be available to both residents and the wider community.

6. Landscape Buffer - along the A590T

A landscaped buffer is to be provided along the south-eastern edge of the site where it abuts the A590T. This will, first, provide a high quality landscape edge to the development at this point together with the creation of a high quality, gateway entrance to the site (if vehicular access is to be taken from the A590T). The landscape buffer will also assist in noise attenuation to those dwellings closest to this boundary from traffic noise along the A590T.

4.6.11 Landscape/Green Infrastructure Framework – requirements at Cross-a-Moor

4.6.12 As shown in Figure 1.5, the landscape/green infrastructure framework will comprise:

Green corridor/landscape buffer along the north-western edge; Central green corridor from Pennington Lane to the public amenity space to the north-east; Central green corridor from the A590T to the north-western edge; Central village green space and potential play/recreational area Public amenity space and Landscaped buffer along the A590T. In addition all hedgerows, wherever possible, on and adjacent to the site, will be retained and incorporated into the layout and design of Cross-a-Moor.

28 Page 234

Page 235

Figure 1.5: Landscaping / Green Infrastructure Framework

Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Landscaping Framework

4.6.8 A Landscape buffer will be provided along the west/north west boundary of the site where it merges into the adjacent open countryside (see Photo 1.4). Developments that form a new long term settlement edge should create a positive relationship with the adjoining countryside, providing an appropriate transition between the built up area and the adjoining landscape. By reducing the scale and intensity of development towards its edges with the countryside, it allows for planting within and between plots to create a featheredge to the settlement.

Photo 1.4 Example of green corridor / landscaped buffer shown for illustrative purposes.

4.6.9 The landscape and planting schemes will be based on a palette of suitable native species where possible, and especially fruiting and flowering species to increase the opportunities for wildlife. A landscape management plan , including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than domestic gardens, shall be prepared to secure the long term future of Cross-a-Moor’s open spaces. 4.7 Ecology/Biodiversity

4.7.1 The Cross-a-Moor site will provide significant habitat and species enhancements. The retention of existing hedgerows and stone walls where possible will help to protect habitat and species, whilst the creation of new green spaces will result in enhancements. The proposed green corridors and green spaces will help to provide a network of wildlife corridors which will help to provide a sense of continuity between Swarthmoor and the countryside and allow species to migrate and reinforce habitats.

4.7.2 The Cumbria Biodiversity Evidence Base used to inform the Local Plan - Land Allocations Document identified the potential for the presence of hare and butterfly (2012 records) amongst 8 key species. Detailed habitat and species surveys as appropriate will be required at the planning application stage. An assessment of all potential ecological impacts

30 Page 236 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

based on up to date baseline data will be used to inform any planning application.

4.7.3 The Cumbria Biodiversity Evidence Base (January 2012) was used to inform the preparation of the Land Allocations DPD, indicating the likely ecological value of sites assessed for housing. For Cross-a-Moor, this identified potential for the presence of hare and butterflies on the site.

4.7.4 Subsequent to this a ‘Habitat and Protected Species Risk Assessment’ has been undertaken by Penn Associates (November 2013) for Story Homes which confirmed that no legally protected species were found either within the site or within 2km, although a number of UK and Local BAP priority species were recorded within 1km from the centre of the site, notably butterflies and moths, farmland birds and Brown Hare. There was also a high risk of bats foraging over the site. It also confirmed that the grassland within the site is species poor and of local importance only. Opportunities to enhance it should be taken.

4.7.5 In light of its findings the assessment recommended, in terms of appropriate mitigation, that wherever possible existing hedgerow and dry stone walls are retained as part of the proposed development.

4.7.6 A biodiversity/green infrastructure establishment and management plan should be provided as part of any planning application. 4.8 Flood Risk Issues - Considerations

4.8.1 As stated the site lies within Flood Risk Zone 1 (tidal, main river and fluvial flooding). Due to the size of the site, a flood risk assessment will be prepared and submitted in support of any planning application. Surface water run-off after development must not exceed green field run off rates. A sustainable urban drainage system will be implemented to manage the disposal of surface water and this should be integrated within the green infrastructure framework, using the natural drainage informed by the topography of the site to dictate the type of measures that may be appropriate (e.g. swales i.e. a ditch, ponds).Maintenance and adoption of the surface water management scheme will be addressed as part of a planning application. As stated, in order to manage surface water disposal as effectively as possible, Cross-a-Moor will be designed so as to ensure materials used in surfaces of roads, paving etc. is permeable. 4.9 Infrastructure Requirements

Utilities

4.9.1 There are no known constraints to the provision of gas, electricity or water supply on the site, nor capacity within the existing public sewer, although the precise means of supply and connection will be confirmed through discussions with the relevant utility bodies as part of any planning application process.

31 Page 237 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Contacts :

United Utilities (waste water and water National Grid Electricity Distribution supply: AMEC on behalf of National Grid Jenny Hope – Development Plan Mr Julian Austin, Liaison, United Utilities Group PLC Gables House, Haweswater House, Kenilworth Road, Lingley Mere Business Park, Leamington Spa, Lingley Green Avenue, Warwickshire CV32 6JX Great Sankey, 01926 439078 Warrington WA5 3LP [email protected] [email protected] National Grid Gas Transmission AMEC on behalf of National Grid Electricity North West Ltd– Electricity: Mr Julian Austin, Mr Ian Povey, Network Design Gables House, Manager, Kenilworth Road, Frederick Road, Salford, Leamington Spa, M6 6QH Warwickshire CV32 6JX 0161 604 1377 01926 439078 [email protected] [email protected]

National Grid Electricity Transmission National Grid Gas Distribution AMEC on behalf of National Grid National Grid Plant Protection Team, Mr Julian Austin, National Grid, Gables House, Kenilworth Road, Block 1, Floor 2, Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, Brick Kiln Street, CV32 6JX. Hinckley, 01926 439078 Leicestershire LE10 ONA [email protected] [email protected]

32 Page 238 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

4.10 Community Infrastructure

Education

4.10.1 Using the County Council’s population model (the methodology of which is outlined in the County Council’s Planning Obligation Policy page 27 Figure 6), it is estimated that a development of 161 houses would yield 32 primary aged children and 23 secondary aged children. These figures are initial outline figures and more detailed assessments, using a dwelling led model (see page 27 Figure 5 in the document referred to above) will need to be carried out when detailed housing plans as part of a planning application come forward.

4.10.2 At this point in time Pennington Primary school has insufficient capacity to accommodate additional children from the proposed site. Cumbria County Council as the Local Education Authority will advise how to accommodate educational needs arising from the development and this will be determined through any planning application. For further details on education requirements, potential developers should contact Owen David, School Organisation Planning Officer, Children’s Services, Tel: 07881264861. Email - [email protected]

Local Facilities

4.10.3 Consultation feedback demonstrates a desire to see additional community facilities within Swarthmoor particularly a local shop.

4.11 Design Principles

The design of Cross-a-Moor will be of a high quality that respects the site’s local context, and character and neighbouring uses as well as its wider rural countryside setting. It will be of a distinct character, taking reference from nearby properties. Houses that all look the same, a layout that responds negatively to the surrounding high quality landscape and local sensitivities and is grey and car dominated in appearance will be avoided.

4.11.1 Core Strategy Policy CS8.10 stresses that the siting, design, scale and materials of all development should be of a character that maintains or enhances the quality of the landscape or townscape and, where appropriate, should be in keeping with local vernacular tradition. Designs that support and enhance local distinctiveness will be encouraged. New developments should protect and enhance key local views and features/characteristics of local importance and incorporate layouts that reinforce specific local distinctiveness. All new development should take account of Saved Policy S2 of the South Lakeland Local Plan (2007), which contains a design code for South Lakeland. 4.12 General Principles

4.12.1 The design of Cross-a-Moor site should take full account of the character of the immediate and wider setting. Key influences on character include history, geography, climate, topography and building materials, as well as local culture. Swarthmoor can be characterised by stone and render types in varied architectural styles with a mix of single and two storey, semi-detached and detached houses. Analysis has been extended to the wider area to include Ulverston to ensure a high quality development, in design terms, which reflects the best aspects of the local vernacular (see photographs 1.5 and 1.6).

33 Page 239 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Photo 1.5 Stonecross Gardens, off Stockbridge Lane, Photo 1.6 Th e Knoll, off Daltongate, Ulverston Ulverston Listed below are a set of general principles to be used to guide the layout and design of the Cross-a- Moor site.

• Townscape – it will respond to the individuality of places in respect of local characteristics such as building forms, materials, traditions, street patterns, roofscapes and spaces. • Character - Development will be integrated into its setting and respond to topography, through landscape planting and edges. The height, massing and scale of housing development will be related to that nearby to create an appropriate relationship with adjoining areas (however, variety within the built form will be encouraged). • It should utilise locally relevant materials associated with landscape character. Building materials and colours will be chosen for their high quality, to complement site context and to strengthen the local distinctiveness of the area. Materials should be durable, robust and maintainable and chosen with regard to their visual qualities and contribution to the character of the area. • Recognise and retain important views within site layout. • Avoid uniform densities across the development by providing variable densities to support areas of character, and landscape setting. • Housing design to be tenure blind i.e. it will aim to be of a similar appearance to open market housing. • Make use of good quality materials in the public realm, including a mix of hard and soft landscape. • Amenity – ensure a satisfactory level of privacy with existing dwellings and between dwellings within the development. Make use of screen walls, fences, ancillary out-buildings and/or planting to moderate overlooking and maintain privacy. Use the separation, placement and orientation of dwellings to one another to ensure reasonable levels of privacy between neighbouring properties. Sloping sites – where the difference levels may aggravate overlooking problems, consider use of appropriate screening. • Consider proposals which provide a hierarchy of buildings and spaces to emphasise key locations within the layout and contribute to the character and legibility of the townscape. • Orientation of buildings – the layout will avoid buildings being located where they cut against the grain. • Boundary treatment defining individual curtilages will be a mix of fencing, railing and walling to reflect the local vernacular. • Settlement edges – development on the north west/west boundary of the site will create a positive relationship with the adjoining countryside, providing an appropriate transition between the built up area and the adjoining landscape. Wherever possible, houses should not turn their back on the countryside, and be orientated so they are outward facing and use trees and hedges and new landscape planting within and on edges utilising native species. Grading the density of development by reducing its scale and intensity towards its edges with the countryside, allows for planting within and between plots to create a featheredge to the settlement. • Garden/communal spaces – consideration should be given to the incorporation of communal spaces and gardens.

34 Page 240 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

• Bicycle Storage/Recycling Storage – consideration should be given to provision of bicycle storage and recycling/bin storage.

4.13 Site-Specific Principles

Scale, Massing and Height

4.13.1 The scheme overall will be of similar scale and massing to that of Swarthmoor currently, in order to ensure development sits within the existing built form. The scale and massing of nearby dwellings is a mix of 2, 3 and 4-bed dwellings of predominantly 2-storeys in height. There is scope for a variation of scale and massing in terms of providing a mix of housing types, particularly in order to respect character/amenity of neighbouring properties where a lower height may be more appropriate.

Landmark Buildings

4.13.2 Use of landmark buildings - to fulfil their role as focal points, landmark buildings will often be of a larger scale than surrounding development and are often positioned on the end and/or corners of streets.

Boundary Treatment

4.13.3 Boundary treatment defining individual curtilages will be a mix of fencing, railing and walling to reflect the local vernacular.

Orientation

4.13.4 Potential for impact on existing residential amenity designed out through appropriate privacy distances, orientation of dwellings and sensitive use of first floor windows. Buildings will be orientated to maximise solar gain.

Noise Impact

4.13.5 Potential noise impact from the A590T to be alleviated possibly through a 12m setback of development with landscaping in between together with appropriate noise attenuation treatment of dwellings nearest to the main road. 4.14 Sustainability Principles

4.14.1 Policy CS1.1 of the Core Strategy sets out sustainable development principles which the Cross-a-Moor site will contribute towards. Policy CS8.7 requires a sustainability statement to be included within the Design and Access Statement as part of any planning application setting out how development meets principles of Policy CS1.1 as well as the National Planning Policy Framework. 4.15 Renewable Energy

4.15.1 In accordance with Policy CS7.7, the Cross-a-Moor site will ensure wherever possible, that opportunities are exploited for reducing the site’s energy use and maximizing the proportion of energy used gained from renewable/low carbon sources. In accordance with Policy CS8.7 the Cross-a-Moor site should seek where possible to include renewable options such as solar,

35 Page 241 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

ground or air source heat pumps based on the technology that may be most appropriate for the site.

4.15.2 Other types of micro renewables such as (micro wind turbines, solar photovoltaics – electricity, solar panels for hot water, small scale micro hydro (water), biomass (burning wood/waste) may also be appropriate. 4.16 Sustainable Construction

4.16.1 The Cross-a-Moor site has potential to maximise energy efficiency and reduce carbon footprint of homes through measures such as:

• Sustainable construction – the use of local materials and reclaimed/re-use of materials. (however, non-traditional/local materials should not be ruled out)

• Opportunities for passive solar gain – orientation of buildings to maximise day lighting and passive solar gain. High levels of insulation, low energy fittings etc.

• Water conservation and recycling

• Rainwater harvesting/recycling could be incorporated into new buildings in ways that mean the water can be accessed for use e.g. in the toilets and garden areas (e.g. all new homes/ places of work to be installed with water butts).

4.16.2 Waste reduction, recycling and bin s torage - Building regulations contain the requirements for waste collection points, such as the maximum distance residents have to walk to bins. The layout of Cross-a-Moor will need to take account of:

• Accommodating space for storage of waste and recycling bins/boxes in a way that is accessible for residents and accessible for waste/recycling collection staff to collect but also avoiding compromise of the character/streetscape (e.g. caused by bin clutter or insensitive/ prominent locations for bin storage) • Street design and the layout of private space takes into account access by waste/recycling collection vehicles and staff

• Possible provision for communal recycling storage/collection (i.e. a single or small number of point(s) where everyone takes their waste/recyclables, composting etc. on site).

Green Roofs and Walls - roof gardens

4.16.3 These have multiple benefits and can help deliver biodiversity, flood risk/surface water management, energy efficiency of buildings (by keeping them warmer/cooler), landscape/aesthetics, health and wellbeing and air quality. The provision of green roofs/walls will be encouraged as valid contributions to meeting a range of other requirements. 4.17 Air quality

4.17.1 In accordance with policy CS10.2 an air quality assessment and travel plan will be required. Consideration should be given to Car Club provisions such as centrally located parking spaces.

36 Page 242 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Appropriate planting and the inclusion of any green roofs/walls will help capture additional pollutants. 5. Implementation and Delivery

5.1 Partners

Who Will Deliver the Development?

5.1.1 Potential private housing developers, and possibly Housing Associations will deliver the Cross-a- Moor site, in close liaison with South Lakeland District Council, Cumbria County Council and relevant third parties and statutory undertakers.

5.2 Phasing/Timing

5.2.1 It is likely the site will come forward in a number of stages given there is more than one developer interest at this point in time. Therefore there are likely to be a number of separate planning applications. It is important that with each stage of development the necessary amount of required infrastructure, and open space is also provided in a timely way. As part of the planning permission there will be key triggers, requiring the construction of other integral elements of the scheme, with these principally relating to :

• Landscaping

• Open space

• Play space

• Sustainable Urban Drainage System

• Pedestrian and cycle links

• Affordable Housing

5.2.2 The precise timing of these elements will be agreed with the developer and controlled by condition/ S106 agreement. 5.3 Planning Application

5.3.1 Any future planning application should be submitted in accordance with national planning application validation requirements and information set out in the Council’s Validation Checklist .

5.3.2 In addition to standard national requirements, which consist of a completed planning application form, location plan and other plans and elevations where appropriate, any planning submission will need to be accompanied by a suite of additional supporting information. The nature of information and the level of detail required will be agreed with the Council, but will likely include:

• Design and Access Statement;

• Planning Statement;

• Transport Assessment and Travel Plan;

37 Page 243 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

• Energy and Sustainability Statement;Ground Conditions Report (including Iron Ore/Haematite Mining (historic) Risk/any risk of subsidence Assessment);

• Land contamination assessment;

• Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment;

• Tree and hedgerow survey and protection/mitigation where appropriate;

• Topographical Survey/Plans;

• Habitats Survey and mitigation where appropriate

• Flood Risk Assessment;

• Archaeological Assessment;

• Affordable Housing Statement;

• Air Quality Assessment and;

• Sustainable Urban Drainage Strategy

5.3.3 Where separate planning applications are submitted for phased development, rather than for the development of the allocation land as a whole, then legal planning obligations will be required to safeguard proportional financial contributions as a starting principle based on the developer contributions requirements. The Council will expect applicants to agree a methodology necessary to deliver the infrastructure appropriate to their phase through the Councils pre-application process.

5.3.4 A Section 106 Draft Heads of Terms should be agreed and submitted as part of any future planning application and this will confirm how developer contributions should be apportioned to each developer.

5.3.5 Pre-application consultation should be carried out in accordance with the guidelines set out in the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (2006 and amended 2008). The scope of such consultation should be agreed with the Council. 5.4 Development Obligations

5.4.1 Listed in the table below are some of the likely infrastructure requirements which have been identified through consultation with various stakeholders for Cross-a-Moor (these are subject to further discussion). South Lakeland District Council intends to introduce a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – by 2015. The nature of development obligations will be dependent on whether a CIL is in place or not. The table lists the type of infrastructure which currently it is considered could be funded through CIL if in place and through S106 contributions. On-site requirements will be funded through Section 106 contributions , whereas wider infrastructure benefits will be collected through the CIL. This is not an exhaustive list. The Council will expect applicants to agree a methodology necessary to deliver the infrastructure appropriate to their phase through the Councils pre-application process.

38 Page 244 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Infrastructure Type On Site or Details S106 or CIL Off Site Landscaping including On-Site On site provision for landscape buffer On site construction Tree Planting along NW edge, and other edges cost? where appropriate and in the site for amenity purposes where appropriate. S106 Open Space On-Site New play area and informal On site construction recreation space, green corridors, cost? amenity spaces S106 Sustainable Urban On-Site On site provision as appropriate On Site Drainage System Construction Cost Walking and Cycling On-Site Possible financial contribution to S106 new links between development and Rufus Lane and the Memorial Hall/ Nursery as appropriate. Education Off-Site Financial contribution to provision of S106 primary school places at Pennington School. Education Off-Site Financial contributions to provision CIL of primary school places at Ulverston Victoria High Secondary School Transport - A590T Off-Site Possible contributions to highways CIL if in place Improvements improvements to A590T network - associated with cumulative impacts of cumulative impact of development. development across district Transport - A590T Off-Site Possible contributions to highways S106 Pennington Lane/Main improvements to junction to Road Junction, site accommodate site specific impact specific impact from development. Transport - pedestrian Off-Site Provision of footway along north side ? S106 footway on Pennington of Pennington Lane to the Memorial Hall Lane Transport - improved Off-Site Possible crossings etc S106 pedestrian connections to bus stops A590T Affordable Housing On-Site 35% affordable housing S106

39 Page 245 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

USEFUL CONTACTS:

SLDC Development Plans Team – Officer Contacts:

Damian Law, Principal Development Plans Officer. Tel (01539) 793380, email [email protected]

Elizabeth Scott – Clarke, Development Plans Officer. Tel (01539) 793384, email e.scott- [email protected]

SLDC Development Management – Officer Contact:

Kate Lawson, Principal Planning Officer. Tel (01539) 793351, email [email protected]

SLDC Housing Strategy – Officer Contact:

Tony Whittaker, Housing Strategy and Delivery Manager, Tel (01539) 793370, email [email protected]

SLDC – Parks and Recreation Team:

Tony Naylor, Green Spaces Officer, Tel (01539) 793166, email [email protected]

Deborah Wright, Principal Community Spaces Officer, Tel (01539) 793434, email [email protected]

Cumbria County Council – Highways:

Jeff Hernandez, Development Control Engineer (South Cumbria), Tel (01539) 713028, email [email protected]

Cumbria County Council Surface Water Drainage:

Doug Coyle, email [email protected]

Cumbria County Council Education:

Owen David, School Organisation Planning Officer, Children’s Services, Tel 07881264861. Email - [email protected]

40 Page 246 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

APPENDIX 1: RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

SOUTH LAKELAND LOCAL PLAN – RELEVANT ADOPTED CORE STRATEGY PLANNING POLICIES THAT ARE RELEVANT

CS1.1 – Sustainable Development Principles CS3.1 – Ulverston and Furness Area CS6.2 – Dwelling mix and type CS6.3 – Provision of affordable housing CS6.6 – Making effective and efficient use of land and buildings CS7.3 – Education and skills CS8.1 – Green Infrastructure CS8.2 – Protection and enhancement of landscape and settlement character CS8.3a – Accessing open space, sport and recreation CS8.3b – Quantity of open space, sport and recreation CS8.4 – Biodiversity and geodiversity CS8.6 – Historic Environment CS8.7 – Sustainable construction, energy efficiency and renewable energy CS8.8 – Development and flood risk CS8.9 – Minerals and waste CS8.10 – Design CS9.1 – Social and community infrastructure CS9.2 – Developer Contributions CS10.1 – Accessing Services CS10.2 – Transport Impact of New Development

SOUTH LAKELAND LOCAL PLAN – ADOPTED LAND ALLOCATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT, PLANNING POLICIES THAT ARE RELEVANT:

LA1.3 – Housing Allocations LA5.6 – Land Off Cross – a – Moor, Swarthmoor

ADOPTED SOUTH LAKELAND LOCAL PLAN 2006, COMPOSITE VERSION SEPTEMBER 2007, (incorporating adopted Local Plan Sept. 1997 & March 2006 Alterations). SAVED AND EXTENDED PLANNING POLICIES THAT ARE RELEVANT:

C5 – External Lighting C19 – Sites of archeological interest C24 – Watercourses and Coastal margins C30 – Solar Power L10 – Rights of Way Tr9 – Better Ways to School S2 – South Lakeland Design Code S3 – Landscaping S10 – Parking Provision in new development S12 – Crime and Design S18 – Trees close to buildings S19 – Percent for Art S26 – Sewage treatment and disposal S27 – Overhead lines

41 Page 247 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

S29 – Waste recycling facilities APPENDIX 2: SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL NEW PLAY AREA SPECIFICATION - GUIDANCE

The creation of cutting edge play areas and intriguing play and learning spaces. Spaces which make use of traditional and natural materials, using equipment to suit all ages, abilities and able or non-able bodied children and families.

Location To be sited in open, welcoming location with good access links for the catchment area. Not to the rear of properties or with narrow access between properties, a minimum of 20 – 30m from property boundary

To be separate from areas of major vehicle movements and accessible directly from pedestrian routes, linked, as far as possible, with other open spaces, footpath systems, amenity planting areas and other devices to provide the maximum separation from nearby residences.

To feel integrated into the development, more than a play space, an area for residents to meet, walk, make friends, hold community events. An opportunity to develop a sense of community, rather than a no go area, or an area for a restricted sector of the community.

Accessibility Accessible by firm-surfaced footpaths suitable for pushchairs or wheel chairs, does not need to be a tarmac surface.

Play Equipment All play equipment and safety surface will conform to European Play Standards EN 1177 and En 1176. Play equipment will meet the needs of children aged 0-14 yrs, a variety of fixed play equipment for different age groups. A challenging and learning play environment in natural surroundings, making use of natural features, ground moulding, boulders etc. appropriately designed for a rural location. Grass mat safety surface is preferred

Where appropriate older teen facilities will be provided in a separate location.

Emphasis should be placed on the importance of design, challenge, accessibility, play value, the setting, and distance from houses

Ancillary Items Depending on the location of the play area, it is not always necessary to fence. Appropriate seating for adults and children, with litter bins and possibly a notice board.

Size Variable size, a minimum of 200m where more than one play facility is present, or from 400m when only play item in catchment area

Maintenance SLDC to agree final equipment section/manufacturer to ensure all equipment can be managed and maintained within existing resources.

Consultation Where appropriate (depending upon location and houses sold) a public consultation event should be held to confirm challenges and equipment selected.

42 Page 248 Draft Development Brief: Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. July 2014

Good use of firm paths to link equipment

Creative use of boulders, logs and earth can be used too

43 Page 249 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 250 LAND AT CROSS-A-MOOR, SWARTHMOOR DRAFT DEVELOPMENT BRIEF

APPENDIX 2: INTERIM CONSULTATION STATEMENT

Page 251 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

2 Page 252 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

Contents 1. Introduction ...... 2 2. Who we have engaged with ...... 3 3. How we have engaged...... 4 4. Summary of the main issues raised and the Council’s response...... 7 Appendix 1: Responses received during the Issues and Options Consultation on the Development Brief for Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor ...... 16

1 Page 253 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

1. Introduction

1.1 This document sets out how the Council has involved the community and relevant organisations in the early stages of the preparation of a Development Brief for the allocated site at Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor. It shows how the Council has complied with Regulation 12 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) 2012 Regulations , which relates to public participation in the preparation of Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs).

1.2 In accordance with Regulation 12, this document sets out:

• Who the Council invited to comment on the SPD (Regulation 12 (a)(i)); • A summary of the main issues raised by those people (or organisations) (Regulation 12 (a)(ii)); • How the issues raised have been addressed in the SPD (Regulation 12 (a)(iii)); • That the Council: - made the relevant documents available at their principal office, on its website and at other suitable locations in the area (Regulation 12 (b)); - gave people 4 weeks to make representations (Regulation 12 (b)(i)); - made it clear where to send representations to (Regulation 12 (b)(ii)).

1.3 Regulation 13 stipulates that any person may make representations about the SPD and that the representations must be made by the end of the consultation date referred to in Regulation 12. Regulation 12 states that, when seeking representations on an SPD, documents must be made available in accordance with Regulation 35, which requires the Council to make documents available; • at the principal offices of the Council and other places within the area that the Council considers appropriate and; • on the Council’s website.

1.4 In addition to the Regulations, the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out further details of how the Council should undertake consultations 1. The Council has exceeded the requirements set out in the SCI relating to early consultation on the preparation of Development Briefs, as set out in Table 1 below.

1.5 All responses made during the early consultation undertaken from Monday 17 th February 2014 to Monday 31 st March 2014 are in the public domain and can be viewed via the Consultations page of the Council’s website .

Table 1: SCI requirements vs. Consultation Methods Used Consultation Method SCI requirement Undertaken for early for early stage Development consultation on Briefs consultation? SPDs? Making consultation documents available at a a Council Offices and local libraries Documents available on the Council’s website a a and electronic consultation response options Using local press, TV and radio a a Using existing channels / networks a a Key stakeholder groups a a

1 Statement of Community Involvement 2006

2 Page 254 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

Table 1: SCI requirements vs. Consultation Methods Used Consultation Method SCI requirement Undertaken for early for early stage Development consultation on Briefs consultation? SPDs? Issuing a questionnaire x a Exhibitions, leaflets and/or posters x a Focus Groups x x Newsletter x a Meetings with the community a a Liaising with schools and colleges x a 3-D Computer modelling x x

2. Who we have engaged with

2.1 Table 2 sets out in broad terms who the Council has engaged with in the early stages of preparing the Development Brief for Cross-a-Moor.

Table 2: Who we have engaged with

Specific Consultation Bodies • Statutory bodies: Natural England, Environment Agency and English Heritage. • Duty to Cooperate bodies (as list of these can be found here ). • Neighbouring Town / Parish Councils and Local Planning Authorities. General Consultation Bodies • Members of the public • Local and County Council Elected Members (Councillors) • Groups representing voluntary, racial/ethnic, national, religious, disability and business interests. • Specific groups representing certain interests who may cover for example environmental, health, education, transport, leisure, economic development and community needs or equalities issues.

2.2 This included all individuals who, at the time of consultation, were identified on the Local Plan consultee database and had indicated to us that they had an interest in the Cross-a-Moor Development Brief; residents at all addresses within an identified area close to the Cross-a-Moor site and community groups, businesses and other organisations registered on our consultation database.

Equalities

2.3 As set out above and below, the Council directly consulted a range of community groups and organisations by contacting them by letter or email through our consultation database. This included organisations representing particular social groups including faith groups, people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds, people with disabilities and particular age groups, including the young and elderly. A range of engagement techniques were used in order to attract all groups to make their views known.

3 3

Page 255 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

2.4 Methods of engagement used to help broaden the accessibility of the consultation include:

• Translation / other formats available for all documents. • Venues for drop-in days are accessible to those with disabilities and open into the evenings (11:00- 19.00). • Large print versions of the planning maps were made available and officers were on hand to explain. • Specific activities aimed at children were part of the drop-in events and special sessions were held for students at a local college • Different methods of responding were available including drawing onto maps and using post-it notes as well as response forms and the option to write a letter or email. • Ensuring the consultation was advertised through as many means as practicable (see paras. 1-5 and 3.5)

3. How we have engaged

3.1 Prior to the first public consultation (Issues and Options stage), the Council undertook early, informal consultation with a range of relevant stakeholders and organisations between October and December 2013 to ensure that the most up-to-date information and guidance available was taken into account on topics such as utilities requirements, biodiversity, heritage and highways, education and health infrastructure and/or to ensure that they were aware of the process. This included;

• landowners • agents representing landowners/developers • developers • parish/town councils • local elected members (Councillors) • other key interest groups • services / infrastructure providers • duty to co-operate bodies

3.2 The outcome of this early engagement has been used to inform the:

• scope of the Development Brief; • key issues that need to be considered in the brief; • identification of key local stakeholders; • stakeholders’ roles in the process; • nature of the type of future community engagement exercises; • identification of relevant information particularly infrastructure provision (for example utilities provision).

3.3 A 6-week Issues and Options public consultation on all 8 Phase 1 Development Briefs took place from 17 February to 31 March 2014 and the following measures were used to help ensure that we gathered communities’ and individuals’ views, thoughts and ideas on what should be covered in each development brief and the direction/focus each brief should take. Additionally, we wanted to ensure that all relevant stakeholders and communities were clear on;

4 Page 256 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

• the development briefs , the purpose for them, the process of preparing them and how and when they may affect them; • how and when they can comment on and get involved in preparing the proposals, what they can and can’t influence ; • how and when their comments will be taken into account by the Council and when they can expect feedback; • the remaining stages in preparing the development briefs and further opportunities to comment.

3.4 It was also important that the consultation helped local people make full use of the opportunity to express community needs and aspirations and made sure that the needs of ‘hard to reach’ groups were taken into account.

3.5 In order to achieve these aims, immediately prior to the start of the consultation we:

• Wrote (by email or letter) to individuals who, at the time, were identified on the Local Plan consultee database and had indicated to us that they had an interest in the Cross-a-Moor Development Brief; • Wrote (by email or letter) to all groups and organisations listed on the Local Plan consultee database • Placed all relevant documents on the Council’s website , with links from the homepage; • Made all relevant documents available at Council Offices and at Local libraries ; • Briefed all relevant District Councillors and County Councillors by email/letter on the proposals and consultation process; • Briefed Town and Parish Councils by email/letter on the proposals and consultation process; • Issued a press release to the local media , which generated coverage in the local press and radio; • Placed formal press notices in the local Westmorland Gazette and Evening Mail newspapers prior to the start of the consultation; • Placed informal adverts in the local Westmorland Gazette and Evening Mail newspapers prior to the start of the consultation; • Used Facebook & Twitter to promote awareness of the development briefs process.

3.6 During the consultation we;

• Placed an article in South Lakeland News (Feb. 2014 issue), a free newspaper that is distributed to all households in the District; • Enabled responses to be submitted online, by email, by post or by hand ; • Held separate interactive drop-in open day events for each of the Development Brief sites (events were held from 11am-7pm and in locations close to the relevant site); • Sent postcards to all addresses within an identified area close to each of the Development Brief sites informing residents about the drop-in exhibition and participation event held specifically relating to that site; • Put up ‘site notices’ at key locations around the periphery of each Development Brief site; • Used Facebook & Twitter to provide reminders about the drop-in events;

5 5

Page 257 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

• Included information in/on Parish/Community newsletters and websites where possible and relevant; • Held a stand at a Local Area Partnership conference (4 th March 2014) to promote awareness of the development briefs process.

3.7 Following the consultation we held two sessions with Kendal College students on 24 th April 2014. These sessions looked at Kendal Parks, Kirkby Lonsdale, Scroggs Wood, South East Milnthorpe and Croftlands sites only as these were the sites most familiar to the students involved. These sessions had been planned to take place during the consultation but had to be re-scheduled.

Drop-in events

3.8 The drop-in event for Cross-a-Moor was held at Swarthmoor Football Club on 25 th February 2014. Around 150 people attended.

3.9 At the drop-in events display boards were used to set out background information and maps and aerial photographs showing the site and photographs/sketches illustrating examples of different design and layout, access or green infrastructure features.

3.10 Very large maps (showing key site features, constraints, opportunities) were laid out on three tables, each focusing on a different theme (open space/green infrastructure, access/transport and design/layout) along with a range of other information to help people understand the context of the site and existing information held about the site and what we were asking them to think about.

3.11 Using the maps and flip-charts, people could use pens/pencils or post-it notes to record their thoughts. They could also use smaller copies of the maps to draw their ideas on and submit as part of their response if they wished. Response forms and other documentation were available to view and take away.

3.12 At each event a ‘House of ideas’ activity for children was used, which involved different sections of a house representing different aspects for consideration such as green spaces or design and stickers being used to enable children to select which aspects they felt were most important.

Recording comments

3.13 All comments received online were automatically recorded the Council’s consultation database. All those received by email, letter or on paper copies of the response form were recorded on the database manually. All these comments are available to view online and are summarised at Appendix 1 of this document.

3.14 All anonymous comments, for instance, those received on post-it notes or flip-charts at the drop-in events or during the Kendal college sessions, were typed up and are recorded in Appendix 1. In the case of annotated maps where the person’s name and address were not given, these were scanned and the ideas they represented considered when drawing up the draft briefs.

6 Page 258 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

4. Summary of the main issues raised and the Council’s response.

4.1 This section provides a summary of the key messages from the comments received about the Cross-a-Moor site in response to the consultation. A summary of all the comments made (categorised by topic) can be found at Appendix 1 . A full list of everyone who responded and the comments they made can be found online .

4.2 The Council’s response to the key messages or main issues raised is set out in a table that is below the text for each topic area. There’s a table for each topic. The table is split in to two columns; one listing the issue raised and the other, the Council’s response. The response will advise how the main issue raised has been taken into account and if not, why not – for example if the issue is beyond the scope of adopted Local Plan Planning Policy, is not a material planning consideration, or is beyond the scope of the brief itself. The responses that the Council will take/has taken into account and which have therefore been used to inform the draft development brief are indicated by a +ive symbol and those that have not been taken into account in the brief are indicated by a –ive symbol. There are other issues which will be considered through the brief but would ultimately be dealt with more comprehensively through the planning application process (these are not highlighted by a colour). These will continue to be explored further in order to determine the final brief.

Traffic and Movement

4.3 Lots of people have concerns about highways, traffic and access, highway safety and the cumulative traffic generation impact. This is one of the main areas of concern. Many people, including Pennington Parish Council, are very concerned about both highway safety and the traffic generation resulting from the site, potential impact on the A590 trunk road and the staggered Cross-a-Moor road junctions (Main Road / Pennington Lane). This is already a concern locally and is exacerbated (especially at peak periods) by existing traffic and parking congestion on Pennington Lane at school pick up / drop off times and by traffic from Croftlands and south Ulverston accessing on to the A590 at Cross-a-Moor. A strong concern is expressed from the local community and the Parish Council that the Cross-a-Moor site’s development has the potential to worsen this existing situation.

4.4 Related to the consideration of traffic generation and the cumulative impact on the Cross-a-Moor Junction/A590 is the need to take into account proposals in Furness at B.A.E. and G.S.K. as well as the Council’s south Ulverston housing allocation sites in any traffic impact modelling work.

4.5 People want clarity about the location of site access(s), how traffic will be managed at the Cross-a-Moor A590 Junction and whether site access will be off the A590 directly or off Pennington Lane. Concern is expressed about a road through the site linking the A590 with Pennington Lane, as this could create a ‘rat run’. Some expressed a view that the existing access to the A590 via Pennington Lane should be ‘blocked off’. Given the existing parking and congestion issues on Pennington Lane at peak times, people want to know whether pavements would be provided on Pennington Lane. Some thought that traffic should be managed using a new roundabout at the Cross-a-Moor Junction, others suggest signalising the junction. There was some support for additional pedestrian crossing(s) on the A590 Ulverston Road.

7 7

Page 259 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

4.6 Another key message is that people want accessible neighbourhoods. The site needs to be accessible for pedestrians and cyclists both within and outwith the site, with links to the rest of Swarthmoor and existing public rights of way. People want links to the existing community facilities, such as the primary school, the Memorial Hall, the A590 and the bus route. Cycle routes within the site should preferably be off-road. To inform the site’s development, it was suggested that a ‘movement framework’ should be provided as part of the brief, to encourage walking and cycling and to integrate these paths into the site’s layout. Where possible, new paths on-site should link into existing paths / Public Rights of Way (PROWs) outwith the site. In this context, a new path to link in with the Rufus Lane PROW out with the site was suggested; although it is acknowledged that this would need to cross 3 rd party land and so may not be deliverable.

4.7 Public transport – There were limited comments about public transport opportunities for the site, other than the need to ensure pedestrian links from the site to Ulverston Road and the nearest bus stops.

4.8 Car parking – a key message here is that there should be ‘adequate’ car parking on the site. Some people suggested two car parking spaces per household. The existing issue of car parking (relating to the Primary School) on Pennington Lane was raised by many.

Table 3 :Traffic and Movement - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Highway safety and traffic Specific requirements/detailed design can only be congestion on Pennington Lane determined through planning application. and A590 Access solution for the site Specific requirements/detailed design can only be determined through planning application.

Options for vehicular access will need to be assessed and agreed by the Highways Agency, as the highway authority for the A590, and by Cumbria County Council for the local roads. Traffic management proposed for + ive The Highways Agency (HA) response may the Cross-a-Moor Junction require improvements to the Cross-a-Moor junction. This will be considered in further detail in liaison with the HA. Links to existing community + ive On site - The draft brief puts forward a facilities; the Memorial Hall and pedestrian/cycle link. Nursery and A590 (bus route) Path ways for pedestrians and + ive The draft brief proposes inclusion of pedestrian cyclists within and outwith the site and cycle links as part of a traffic and movement framework and green infrastructure framework within and outwith the site including aspiration for a link to Rufus Lane (bearing in mind third party land) Public transport Provision + ive The draft brief proposes inclusion of pedestrian/cycle links to A590/existing bus stops. Car parking + ive A range of car parking options is suggested as guidance for the brief, arrangements will need to be agreed with Cumbria County Council at the planning application stage.

8 Page 260 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

Design and Layout Principles

4.9 There were a range of comments on design; that there should be a mix of house type designs i.e. bungalows and houses and also dwelling style and detailing. Some people said that they mostly wanted single storey housing. Others felt that a maximum of two storeys across the site was appropriate with varied housing design and house sizes. Another key message was that the design of any housing should be sympathetic ‘to adjacent buildings’ and that there should be ‘decent’ garden space. . Quite a few people commented that they did not want to see the site overdeveloped; they suggested lower density and the ‘ need to give occupants quality and space’.

4.10 Other key design related messages related to the use / promotion of local materials and the need to incorporate sustainable construction methods and the use of renewable energy, such as green roofs on selected dwellings and grey water recycling systems. Another suggestion was to orientate dwellings so as to maximise solar gain.

4.11 One site promoter / potential developer felt that the brief should not be over prescriptive in terms of housing layout, types and the mix so that the developer has flexibility to adapt to the market.

Table 4 : Design & Layout Principles - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Mix of house designs + ive Mix of house type designs is a guiding principle established in the draft brief . Sympathetic housing design + ive Draft brief - guiding principle; scale, massing and the style of housing should respond positively to local context, including style of neighbouring properties. Suggestion for large garden - ive Too prescriptive – beyond the scope of the draft spaces brief. Density – do not want ‘over + ive Draft brief guiding principle scale, massing and crowded development’ style of housing should respond positively to local context including style of neighbouring properties. Use of local materials + ive Draft brief can guide on the type of materials that could be used, including reference to materials in this part of Furness. However, development should not necessarily create a pastiche of existing development styles. Sustainability principles and use of + ive Draft brief incorporates guiding principles on renewable energy sustainable energy and renewable energy.

Green Infrastructure Framework

4.12 There was a good deal of feedback relating to open space, landscaping and biodiversity. There is support for a good amount of green space within the site; both multifunctional and amenity open space and the more formal equipped play area provision. One of the key messages that came across from the consultation is for the provision of accessible multi-functional green space. There is demand for a connected network of green space that is well integrated with the development layout, the houses and the roads that also includes provision for pedestrians and cyclists. Given the site’s location on the village edge bounding open countryside, it

9 9

Page 261 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

was suggested that the development retains some form of ‘country feel’ (reflected in both the built development and the green infrastructure framework). Linked to this people suggested the need to limit light pollution from site street lighting. Green infrastructure needs to be functional, accessible and meet the needs of the community it serves; it can have health and well-being benefits. This was reflected in the range of types of green space and the potential uses suggested by the local community:

• informal ‘kick about’ grassed areas, • village green type area for siting / community use, • quiet, naturally planted areas for wildlife and biodiversity • informal areas for dog walking / paths • places to sit, generally within green spaces including to make the most of views out of the site to the open countryside and towards Hoad Hill • allotment spaces • equipped play areas.

It was suggested that play areas need to provide for a wide age range - from toddlers through to teenagers. A play area at each end of the site was suggested. The area of the site nearest to the Memorial Hall / Pennington Nursery was also suggested for a play area.

4.13 People also suggested that as well as ‘green areas’, attenuation ponds (blue infrastructure) – as part of Sustainable Drainage Schemes (SuDs) can also form part of the open space provision and potentially can have biodiversity benefits as well as dealing with surface water runoff. For wildlife and biodiversity to benefit, open spaces with tree and hedgerow planting within the site need to be ‘free flowing’ and linked. They need to act like corridors through the site and also to link with the countryside beyond.

4.14 The site’s green infrastructure framework, including the amount, location and type, needs to reflect the site’s rural setting and make the most of views out of the site. The site is open in character with wider views to the ‘Pennington’ hills. The site is clearly visible in wider views from the higher ground in the Pennington Hills. Feedback suggested that there is a need to provide a new boundary along the site’s north western boundary. Where new boundaries and perimeter landscaping is needed, it was suggested that this green buffer or soft landscaping should use characteristic native tree and hedgerow species. It was also suggested that tree and hedgerow planting can have a role as acting as a noise buffer (e.g. on the A590 boundary side of the site). Generally speaking there was support for tree and hedgerow retention and strengthening. It was suggested that there should be new planting of ‘feature trees’ within the site to break up the overall massing of the development. The use of non–permeable surfaces should be minimised to reduce surface water runoff. Another suggestion is the need in appropriate places for hard landscaping and for seating areas / benches to make open spaces user friendly.

Table 5 : Green Infrastructure Framework - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Provision of green infrastructure + ive The draft brief will provide a framework for the (Inc. multi – functional integrated delivery of green infrastructure. It’s a key principle of network of green/blue corridors the brief.

10 Page 262 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

open spaces, play areas, footpaths and cycleways. + ive Draft brief includes requirement for linked green corridors with pedestrian/cycle access linked to a central green space and a landscaped area along W/NW boundary. Provision of open space (multi – + ive Land Allocations Development Plan Document functional and amenity) - Policy LA5.6 refers to significant public open space. Brief to provide guidance on the provision as part of the sites Landscape and Green Infrastructure Framework.

+ ive Draft brief includes proposal for a range of open spaces including landscaped area, amenity space, recreational area with play facilities and green corridors. Provision of play areas for a wide + ive Draft brief provides guidance on the provision age range as part of the sites Landscape and Green Infrastructure Framework.

+ ive Brief includes proposal for a multi-functional green space with potential location of play facilities. Biodiversity – provision for + ive Draft brief advises about biodiversity opportunities (habitat and species enhancement) as part of a Landscape and Green Infrastructure Framework.

+ ive Draft brief features – hedgerow retention where possible. New habitat creation can be through the provision of proposed green infrastructure. Landscaping – the provision of + ive Draft brief - Provision of a landscape / green infrastructure framework. The brief will provide guidance re landscaping, particularly as the site is on the edge of Swarthmoor and bounds open countryside. Incorporate landscape buffer areas proportionate to the scale of development and prominence or sensitivity of settlement edge. Use of existing landscape features + ive The brief will set out principles such as – - native hedgerow / tree species/ ‘Preserve and incorporate natural landscape features such as mature trees, hedges where possible’. Include New ‘feature’ tree planting within a landscaping framework - The landscape and planting site schemes will be based on a palette of suitable native species where possible, and especially fruiting and flowering species to increase the opportunities for wildlife. New ‘feature’ tree planting / street trees. Hard landscaping provision / + ive As part of green infrastructure and landscaping detailing framework. Public realm - make use of mix of hard and soft landscaping. Limit light pollution + ive Design Principles – Include guidance – as the brief site is on the edge of Swarthmoor - ‘carefully consider the design of lighting schemes to minimise light pollution on local amenity and dark landscapes’. Special attention will be given to the lighting design alongside open space and wildlife corridors.

11 11

Page 263 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

Type of development

4.15 The need for low cost affordable housing was acknowledged and supported. There was a suggestion that there should be more than 35% affordable housing on the site. One or two people suggested that the site should include provision for self-build plots. Cumbria County Council commented about social care provision and the need for housing that meets the needs of the elderly. People also commented that they did not want too many large detached houses; conversely 4 bedroomed houses were also suggested. Others felt that the site should have a range of house types and sizes. In terms of community facilities, quite a few people suggested that a village shop was needed as part of the development as there is no shop now in Swarthmoor. A health clinic was also suggested.

Table 6 : Type of development - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Low cost affordable housing + ive In accordance with Policy CS6.3 of the Council’s Core Strategy, no less than 35% of the total number of dwellings must be affordable. More than 35% affordable housing - ive In accordance with Policy CS6.3 of the Council’s Core Strategy, no less than 35% of the total number of dwellings must be affordable. Due to site viability and deliverability, it’s unlikely that more than 35% of units will be affordable. The Council cannot require more than set out in Policy CS6.3. Self-build plots provision + ive Draft brief - The Council is supportive of self- build projects and will encourage an element of this type of property as part of the overall mix. Social care provision / housing for + ive The draft Brief supports the requirement for a the elderly range of house types to meet range of needs. Stipulation housing type / Mix + ive The draft brief can set out guidance that requires provision of a mix of housing types and tenures based on local evidence base and viability considerations and subject to further discussions with the District Authority. A range of house types and sizes will be provided to create choice, varied building forms and to help respond to the different character of the different parts of the site and its local context. Shop and a health clinic provided - ive Although the draft brief can identify needs as part of the development expressed by the community, through consultation, for the provision of onsite community infrastructure; ‘a village shop’ and a ‘health clinic’, the Council cannot insist / require this. The adopted Local Plan Land Allocations Policy for the site – LA5.6 does not require such uses.

Amenity

4.16 There were concerns about protecting the amenity of existing properties. These included retaining privacy and an open view (including where this relates to new properties being built higher up a slope than the neighbouring existing properties on Ulverston Road) and limiting overlooking. Cross-a-Moor House has an elevation with a back kitchen window on it. The rear elevation is right up to the site boundary.

12 Page 264 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

Table 7 : Amenity - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Protect amenity of existing +ive Amenity (privacy and overlooking) is a ‘material’ housing planning consideration which the draft brief can address by setting out design principles; re. the layout, design and siting of new development and the potential use of landscaping/screening/fencing. The Draft brief identifies locations where there is a sensitive edge with adjoining housing and other uses. Protect views / open aspect -ive the right to a view is not a ‘material’ planning consideration. This is an established national planning principle. However, the Draft brief seeks to ensure that the development of the site makes a feature of views towards Hoad and the hills beyond Pennington.

Surface Water Drainage

4.17 There is support for the use of effective Sustainable Drainage Schemes (SuDs) to reduce surface water runoff and the incorporation of green infrastructure. Some comments were concerns about the impact of development on surface water run-off, impacting on the housing and rear gardens of some of the dwellings that back on to the site. This housing is on the A590 / Ulverston Road. Here, the site slopes down towards the existing housing.

Table 8 : Surface Water Drainage - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Use of Sustainable Drainage +ive The draft brief can address surface water Schemes (SuDs) drainage by beginning to identify solutions and mitigation, such as the use of SuDs and by incorporating on site green infrastructure to reduce flow and help store surface water. At the planning application stage, a detailed ‘Flood Risk Assessment’ will need to be submitted to support the application.

Infrastructure

4.18 Although there were many comments on highways infrastructure related issues (see paras. 4.3-4.8), there were also a small number of comments relating to other types of infrastructure. These included concerns over whether the local primary and secondary schools could cope with an increase in pupils and if there is provision for sufficient school places.

4.19 Foul/waste water Drainage - Pennington Parish Council and others commented that an adequate foul drainage system needs to be in place before building work commences and questioned whether there is capacity at Ulverston Waste Water Treatment Works. Existing houses in Cross-a-Moor are served by septic tanks.

4.20 Another key message is concern that there are no longer amenities in Swarthmoor such as a village shop or post office.

13 13

Page 265 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

4.21 Cumbria County Council made comments about the need for provision of social care and extra care housing in Ulverston. This will be taken into account in the preparation of the development brief for Croftlands, Ulverston.

Table 9 : Infrastructure - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Schools – provision of places +ive the draft brief can set out the advice from Cumbria County Council as Local Education Authority concerning yield of children from the site (house unit numbers) and additional school places required. No amenities in Swarthmoor – no -ive Although the draft brief can identify needs shop expressed by the community through consultation for the provision of on-site community infrastructure; ‘a village shop’ and a ‘health clinic’, the Council cannot insist / require this. The adopted Local Plan Land Allocations Policy for the site – LA5.6 does not require such uses.

Ground Conditions / Undermining Potential

4.22 A key message from the feedback was that the issue of potential historic undermining of the site should be investigated to determine whether there is any undermining / subsidence risk on the site.

Table 10 : Ground Condition / Undermining Potential - Issues raised and the Council’s response Main issue raised Council Response Potential for historic undermining An appropriately detailed assessment will be required /risk of subsidence to be submitted to support any planning application.

Archaeology

4.23 Cumbria County Council advise of archaeological finds recorded very nearby, close to the site (Viking burial). There is potential for currently unknown remains. Any planning application must include information on the presence / absence of any heritage assets located on site and evaluate how their significance will be affected by development proposals. There’s a need for an archaeological desk-based assessment and evaluation, in this instance a geophysical survey, to inform whether planning consent will require provision for the recording and the preservation of significant heritage assets in situ.

Table 11 : Archaeology - Issues raised and the Council’s response

Main issue raised Council Response Archaeological assessment and A geophysical survey will be required to be submitted evaluation is required to support any planning application.

14 Page 266 Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement

15 15

Page 267

Appendix 1: Responses received during the Issues and Options Consultation on the Development Brief for Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor

SUMMARY OF RESPONSES

THIS APPENDIX PROVIDES A SUMMARY OF THE RESPONSES RECEIVED DURING THE ISSUES AND OPTIONS CONSULTATION ON THE DEVELOPMENT BRIEF FOR CROSS-A-MOOR, SWARTMOOR

It is broken down as follows: Page 268 Category A comments – these are comments received on matters relating to topics covered by the Development Brief. It is split between members of the public and organisations.

Category B comments – these are comments received on matters not covered by the Development Brief, for example those that may relate to matters of whether the site in principle is acceptable for the development it is allocated for in the Local Plan.

Category C comments – these are comments received about the Proposals document which are general in nature, non-site specific.

Category D comments – these are comments received about Appendix 3 Site Information Working Document (general)

Category E comments – these are comments received about Appendix 3 Site Information Working Document (site specific)

Category F comments - Drop in Event comments – a record of all responses made at the drop in event on the 25 th February 2014.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 16

Category A comments – comments received on matters relating to topics covered by the Development Brief.

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments VISION • Modern, Eco-Friendly housing in keeping with the village • Respect surrounding landscape and enhance with additional facilities to improve area for both new northern edge of Swarthmoor, carbon neutral, and existing residents (Mr Alex Holmes) sustainable living, green open spaces for people and wildlife, provision of local services and readily accessible on foot, bike and public transport (Friends Of the Lake District)

• Not quite so many houses, hopefully it will attract facilities and there will be an interaction between the old village, Trinkeld

Page 269 and Cross-a-Moor Development. (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage Club – Dorothy Aldus) ACCESSIBILITY AND MOVEMENT General • A590 – the Highways Agency, along with SLDC in • At Land Allocations DPD stage, it was recent years have spent millions of pounds building new commented that whilst ..It is not appropriate roads in order to bypass towns and villages in South for an increase in vehicles using A590/Main Lakeland to keep residents safe e.g. High Newton, Rd Junction, due to safety concerns as raised Greenodd and Dalton in Furness. Why has there been a in a meeting with SLDC 7 th Feb. These issues change in strategy by the planners with regard to the and concerns and constraints were caveated Cross-a-Moor development which sits on the A590? by further comments, ‘however these issues Issue of human safety (Mrs Lamb) are not necessarily a barrier to development, and access arrangements, suitable to all • Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) money received by parties, will be sought, following liaison with SLDC should be for improving the staggered cross Cumbria County Highways. It may be more roads at Cross-a-Moor. suitable for access arrangements to be considered in terms of wider agency aspirations. (Highways Agency)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 17

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments • Any survey to be carried out should be done in peak hours (Pennington Parish Council)

• Difficult for the development brief to cover issues until detailed Transport Assessment undertaken. Where detailed survey work is required to address these issues, we recommend the Brief identifies the key issues and highlight the need for further detailed assessment at the planning application stage when detailed evidence is available. (Story Homes)

Page 270 • Permeable site for all with designated off- routes (Friends Of the Lake District)

• Use of permeable surfaces and green roofing to reduce runoff .(Friends of the Lake District)

Cumbria County Council comments: • Cumbria County Council has an important role as a service and infrastructure provider which means that the County Council must ensure they are not prejudiced by development that will take place on the Development Brief sites. It is therefore important that the Development Briefs take into account the following:

• Highways and Transport - Ensure that appropriate accesses for cars, pedestrians and cyclists are identified into and throughout the site; identify off-site highways contributions that may be sought where applicable/appropriate and identify the impact

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 18

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments and potential opportunities in relation bus and rail services (Cumbria County Council).

• From a Highways and Transport perspective it was agreed that instead of providing site specific comments to the Issues and Options consultation, the County Council will continue to work with SLDC to develop the Development Briefs. It has been agreed that a number of workshops will take place with County Council specialists prior to SLDC consulting on the draft Development Briefs which is intended to be in June/July. Through this engagement the County Council will

Page 271 ensure that appropriate accesses for cars, pedestrians and cyclists are identified into and throughout the site; identify off-site highways contributions that may be sought where applicable/appropriate and identify the impact and potential opportunities in relation bus and rail services.(Cumbria County Council) Cars – access GENERAL • Road links in to A590 (Mr Alex Holmes) • It would be feasible to provide an access to the site directly off Cross-a-Moor, though it HIGHWAY SAFETY AND CONGESTION CONCERNS - would be necessary to realign/remove a CROSS-A-MOOR, (PENNINGTON LANE) / AND MAIN section of dry stone wall for visibility. ROAD - STAGGERED JUNCTION WITH THE A590 (Highways Agency) • Junction with the A590 will need some form of traffic management (Mr Aldus, Mr Foster, Mrs Herman, • Alternative Access – it would be feasible to Mrs Lowe, Mrs Penny) provide an alternative access directly from the • An extra 320 cars at a difficult junction (Mrs SC site on to the A590, though the introduction of ogham) an additional junction is likely to be opposed • Added traffic to the A590 from the site to use Cross- by the HA. A potential solution would be to a-Moor junction, will add problems to an already divert Cross-a-Moor so it runs through the site

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 19

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments dangerous and periodically heavily congested to access the A590, however some access junction. (Mr Barrow, A Brocklebank) would still have to be retained in order to • School traffic already uses all of Cross-a-Moor Road serve the existing residential properties. to a point where two approaching cars can barely (Highways Agency) cross each other (Mr Barrow) • Pennington Road access would create safety issue • Access and parking are already issues, this (Mr & Mrs Caine) would be exacerbated by additional numbers • All right turn exits from Swarthmoor have impacted and we note the one access point planned vision and could be improved with input from would raise concern about access to/from highways department (Mrs Herman) A590 down to the school. (Pennington • Left turn from main road to A590 is blocked by traffic Primary School) turning right, easily remedied by a foot or so of green verge being removed at junction. (Mrs Herman) • Concern separate access in / off the site Page 272 directly on to A590 (Pennington Parish See also comments in the ‘traffic management’ category, Council) see below – relating to car access.

SITE ACCESS – COMMENTS - HIGHWAYS SOLUTIONS • Cross-a-Moor site access - development would need a crossroad from the lane between Cross-a- Moor and Pennington Nursery which could exit on to the A590 where the present field meets that road. Alternatively the development could have a ‘self- contained’ road entering and exiting the A590 in just one place, with a footpath to the Nursery and School. (drop in event comment – 1)

SUPPORT FOR BLOCKING VEHICULAR ACCESS VIA CROSS-A-MOOR JUNCTION • Vehicular access via the Cross-a-Moor Junction should be blocked (Mr Barrow)

CONCERNS – ROAD THROUGH THE SITE LINKING A590

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 20

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments WITH PENNINGTON LANE AND CROSS – A – MOOR/A590 JUNCTION • Opening a road from the A590 through the site will create a rat run for vehicles attempting to exit the Cross-a-Moor junction onto the A590 and vice versa (Mr Barrow)

Pedestrian – access GENERAL • A movement framework should be provided to • Accessible on foot (Mrs Scrogham) support and encourage walking and cycling within a connected neighbourhood PENNINGTON LANE FOOTPATH / PAVEMENTS (Brookhouse Group) • Pavement on both sides of Cross-a-Moor road (Mr Aldus) • There is the potential for a principal site

Page 273 • Any attempt to pavement along each side of the access on Pennington Lane, this would be Cross-a-Moor Road should not even be considered. suitable to service the entire site with sufficient (Mr Barrow) capacity to cater for the 161 dwellings, given that Pennington Lane is not an overly busy SUPPORT - WIDER PEDESTRAIN LINKS – TO / FROM road and wide enough to accommodate the UlVERSTON AND TO COUNTRYSIDE footway and the site access visibility splays • Pedestrian route in to Ulverston is dangerous due to within a single land ownership and adopted narrow pavements – overhanging foliage and heavy highway. (Brookhouse Group) traffic. In my opinion there should be an improved path from Swarthmoor to Ulverston for bikes and • Pedestrian links to Pennington Primary School pedestrians (Mrs Herman) and nursery will help the integration with the • Cycle and pedestrian access to the countryside and wider community. (Brookhouse Group) off road routes (Mrs Scrogham) • It may be desirable to provide a footway on SUPPORT – THROUGH SITE FOOTPATH the eastern site of Cross-a-Moor towards the • to use to get to Pennington Lane / the primary school A590 and the associated public transport (1 drop in event comment) network.(Highways Agency)

• Lights on pavement are needed and some means of reducing inevitable traffic problems

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 21

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments at the junction (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage Club – Dorothy Aldus) Public Transport – access • Site should be accessible by public transport (Mrs • Regular bus services needed (Friends of the Scrogham) Lake District).

• Site is within walking distance to public transport though it would be necessary to provide pedestrian links from the site to Ulverston Rd. (Highways Agency)

Cumbria County Council comments: • The adopted Core Strategy places a strong emphasis on the need to support and sustain Page 274 bus services across the District. The Area Strategy policies in the Adopted Core Strategy contain a number of aims, which seek to ensure bus services are supported and improved. The majority of bus services in Cumbria continue to be provided on a commercial basis, where fares collected (including rebate for accepting ENCTS passes for free travel) cover the costs of operation. Stagecoach in Cumbria is the main provider of commercial services in the County. (Cumbria County Council)

• Where services are not commercially sustainable, CCC has previously provided a subsidy to meet the gap between costs and revenue. However, that provision will not be available in the future, and support for some existing services is to be reduced. Therefore establishing services to new developments will normally require “pump priming”, through

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 22

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments developer contributions, in order to establish whether a service can be commercially viable in the long term. (Cumbria County Council)

• In addition to the bus services, a number of community transport schemes exist in the County that may be relevant to the Development Brief sites. These comprise: - Community minibuses which help groups and organisations to have accessible and affordable vehicles on a self-drive basis or with a driver supplied.(Cumbria County Council)

-‘Rural wheels’ a unique transport scheme that Page 275 helps address the lack of good public transport in some rural areas. It provides door- to-door transport for people when required at reasonable costs. Voluntary car schemes intended for those people who have no other means of transport. -Some similar schemes such as Carnforth Connect, which used to run through the South Lakeland part of the AONB have had to be scaled-back or have ceased operation due to funding issues. (Cumbria County Council) Cycle – access SUPPORT FOR CYCLE PATHS. PATHS SEPARATE • Walking and cycling need to be supported FROM VEHICLE TRAFFIC within a connected neighbourhood (Brookhouse group) • Cycle ways that are protected from the road rather than a painted strip on the road (Mr Foster) • Cyclists and pedestrians should be offered • Pedestrians and cyclists should have priority and be new off-road routes (Friends of the Lake completely apart (Mr and Mrs Lester ) District)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 23

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments • Maintenance of existing cycle lanes through Swarthmoor (Mr Alex Holmes) • Separate cycle way within development (drop in event comment – 1) • Cumbria Council seems to wish that cyclists would go away (Mr Reddy)

SUPPORT CYCLE / PEDESTRIAN PATH LINKS FROM SITE TO OPEN COUNTRYSIDE • Cycle access to the site and countryside (Mrs Scrogham) Others – access

Page 276 Materials and surfaces roads etc. Parking arrangements SUPPORT FOR ADEQUATE CAR PARKING • Adequate off-street parking should be • Adequate parking for 2 cars per household. (Mrs provided for each dwelling to be agreed by Scrogham and 1 drop in event comment) the developer (Brookhouse Group)

• Cross-a-Moor has serious parking problems especially at school times, along all tributary roads and even across the railway bridge (Pennington Parish Council) Existing rights of way • Housing allocations should avoid adverse impacts on National Trails and networks of Public Rights of Way (Natural England) Managing traffic GENERAL • Insist traffic survey done of Cross-a-Moor • The infrastructure does not exist to cope with 161 Junction /A590 during peak times houses and cars (Mrs Braithwaite) (Pennington Parish Council) • Swarthmoor is the only village on the A590 without a bypass, with a high accident rate (Mrs Braithwaite) • A590 / Main Road / Cross-a-Moor staggered • Ways to manage the traffic levels in the future Junction – difficult to turn right during day, should be considered (Mr Clark) impossible at peak times (Pennington Parish • Squaring off the village will create a High and Low Council)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 24

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments Swarthmoor which will lead to calls for a bypass in the future. This will ultimately lead to the loss of • Traffic / highways safety issue at Cross-a- more waking [? Unclear word] WORKING farmland Moor Junction with A590 already (Pennington (drop in event comment – 1). Parish Council)

SUPPORT FOR INDEPTH TRAFFIC SURVEYS PRIOR TO • Additional traffic from the Croftlands land DEVELOPMENT allocations, via Main Road to the A590 • Need in-depth traffic survey done and published staggered junction (Pennington Parish before development starts (drop in event comment Council) 1) • Traffic report partly? This word was not clearly • Need to take into account additional traffic on written] does not even cover school term as A590 from Barrow, a major centre of work th performed on 27/28 December (drop in event (Pennington Parish Council) comment – 1)

Page 277 • Perform a congestion survey when children are at • Highway safety – 2 fatal accidents on A590 school (Mrs Braithwaite) within Pennington Parish Council area in 2013 (Pennington Parish Council) SUPPORT FOR FURTHER PEDESTRIAN CROSSING(S) ON THE A590 • A pelican crossing and traffic lights needed (see map) (Mr and Mrs Caine) • 2nd pedestrian crossing needed at the further end of the village (drop in event comment – 1) • Improved pedestrian crossing facilities needed on other A590 Junctions; both High Carley and Seg Lane (both lane ends have junctions on to the A590) (drop in event comment - 1)

SUPPORT – FOR LOWERING SPEED LIMITS • Lower speed limit (Mr Aldus) • Lower speed limit off site - on A590 - 40mph ineffective and on/ off development site 5mph speed limit (drop in event comments - 2) SUPPORT FOR TRAFFIC CALMING

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 25

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments • Traffic calming measures needed (drop in event comment – 1)

CONCERNS - TRAFFIC LEVELS / HIGHWAY SAFETY ON A590 AND AT THE STAGGERED CROSS – A – MOOR JUNCTION. NEED EFFECTIVE HIGHWAY DESIGN SOLUTION. • Will create an accident black spot (drop in event comments – 3) • Cross-a-Moor Junction is very dangerous (Mrs Braithwaite, A Brocklebank)) • Junction with the A590 will need some form of traffic management (Mr Aldus, Mr Foster, Mrs Herman, Page 278 Mrs Lowe, Mrs Penny) • Avoid access Cross-a-Moor Junction, Cannot improve access without impairing traffic flow on A590. (drop in event comments 2) • A590 is too busy now, impassable, and already congested, difficult to access from houses due to traffic levels.(drop in event comments - 4 covering some or all of issues) • Leaving Cross-a-Moor junction to turn right to Lindal- in-Furness or left to Ulverston is at times a hazardous undertaking and an issue that requires careful consideration as part of the development plan (Mr Barrow, Mrs Braithwaite) • Cross-a-Moor / A590 Junction – capacity / safety, difficult right turn etc , needs redesigning – traffic lights or roundabout. (drop in event comments – 13 covering some / all of these issues) • Already the main road suffers heavy, speeding traffic and the area is not suitable for any more (Mrs Jones UTC)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 26

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments See also comments in the ‘car access’ category, see above, – relating to ‘traffic management’.

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT - HIGHWAY SOLUTIONS A590 • Traffic lights on Junction needed (Mr A. Holme and 1 drop in event comment) • Roundabout at junction / access via Pennington Lane (1 drop in event comment) • Cross-a-Moor site access - development would need a crossroad from the lane between Cross-a- Moor and Pennington Nursery which could exit on to the A590 where the present field meets that road. Alternatively the development could have a ‘self- contained’ road entering and exiting the A590 in just Page 279 one place, with a footpath to the Nursery and School. (drop in event comment – 1). Also entered into the site ‘access’ category as relevant.

CONCERNS - MAIN ROAD (SWARTHMOOR) IMPACT ON JUNCTION WITH A590 INC. OTHER LAND ALLOCATIONS TRAFFIC • Main Road - is impassable to Barrow now and difficult to get out of if turning right – need traffic lights. (drop in event comments - 2) • Cross-a-Moor Junction with A590 / Main Road Junction - increase traffic from housing at Croftlands and Urswick Road land allocations (drop in event comments - 2 )

CONCERNS - IMPACT - PENNINGTON SCHOOL TRAFFIC LEVELS, CAR PARKING AND SAFETY ON PENNINGTON LANE • Pennington School – impact on school and school

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 27

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments run – congestion along Pennington Lane, car parking, impact on junction with A590, children’s safety. Pennington School needs a dedicated parking area, could the site provide some parking for the school? (drop in event comments - 8 covering some / all of the above issues) • Pennington Lane – needs widening (drop in event comment – 1)

CONCERNS - A590 AND THE SEG LANE JUNCTION • Additional traffic using Seg Lane – issue at school times. widening (drop in event comment – 1)

Page 280 OTHER CONCERNS – JUNCTION SWARTMOOR HALL LANE AND URSWICK ROAD • Left turn from Swarthmoor Hall Lane on to Urswick Rd has poor vision due to dry stone wall being too far forward. (Mrs Herman)

OTHER CONCERNS – TRAFFIC LEVELS ON ‘CROFTLANDS’ ROADS. • Already, Urswick Road, Birkett Drive, Mountbarrow Road, Central Drive suffer heavy, speeding traffic and the area is not suitable for any more (Mrs Jones UTC) OPEN SPACE, LANDSCAPING AND BIODIVERSITY General • Green spaces within the site (Mr Aldus, Mr Clark) • The site is 3.5km from Morecambe Bay • Maintenance of current green space and village (Natural England) atmosphere (Mr Holme) • Plenty of green space and direct views/links to • Accessible natural green space should be surrounding countryside (Mr Alex Holmes) provided as an integral part of development • Encouragement of free flowing green structures, open (Natural England)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 28

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments green woodland, and hedgerows. Woodland to screen • Object to 50% net developable site area houses from noise and to encourage bird and bat roosts. assumption. These are arbitrary calculations Biodiversity should be maintained and the active badger not based on robust evidence but relate to setts should be given thought to (Mrs Scrogham) outdated assumption within the 2010 SLDC • Maximise views to Lindal / make feature of open space SHLAA. In addition policies LA1.3 or LA2.4 do (drop in event comment – 1) not support this requirement. In an area where land is scarce it is illogical to only utilise 50% of the site for residential, especially where there is no evidence suggesting other land uses require 50% of the site. (Story Homes)

• Green open spaces, spaces for people and wildlife. Green buffer along northern boundary (Friends of the Lake District)

Page 281 Type of open space SUPPORT – PLAY AREAS • The form and design of the green • Children’s play area within the site. (Mr Aldus) infrastructure should be carefully considered • Play areas in general and areas for toddlers through to maximise effectiveness and support to teenagers (drop in event comments 5 – covering delivery of the development. (Brookhouse one or more of these issues) Group)

SUPPORT - INFORMAL RECREATION AREA / OPEN • Site needs allotment space (South Lakes SPACE Action on Climate Change Friends of the Lake • Kick about / grassed areas for ball games (drop in District) event comment 1) • Dog walking area (drop in event comment – 1) • Informal open space - native trees, pond, wild flower meadow and paths (drop in event comments 2) • Include a pond (water run off attenuation and landscape) (drop in event comment 1) • Hard landscaping /paved areas – with places to sit. (drop in event comment 1) • Hedgerows and trees and trees along north

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 29

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments boundary (native species) (drop in event comments – 2)

SUPPORT – VILLAGE GREEN TYPE OPEN SPACE • Football pitch sized village green (trees and wild area) (drop in event comments – 2)

SUPPORT - ALLOTMENTS • Allotments for locals to grow their own veg (Mrs Scrogham)

Location of open space • Play area should be near the nursery and Memorial Hall (drop in event comment – 1) Page 282 Amount of open space GENERAL • Support an evidence-based approach to • Plenty of green space and direct views/links to determining appropriate level of open space surrounding countryside (Mr Alex Holmes) based upon accessibility of the site to existing • Sufficient open spaces to maintain the country village types of open space. (Story Homes) aspect that has existed up until present time (Mr and Mrs Lester) • As much as possible - as much of the village green space has already been taken with the recent estate (Mrs Lowe) • 10 – 15% site open space – two areas open space – at each end of the site (drop in event comment) Existing open spaces include name Landscaping – type, location SUPPORT FOR TREE PLANTING,HEDGEROWS, • Difficult for Development Brief to cover issue MINIMISING NON PERMEABLE SURFACES AND until detailed landscape and visual impact GRASSED AREAS assessment undertaken. Where detailed • Tree planting and green spaces to reflect the rural survey work is required to address these setting (Mr Barrow) issues, we recommend the brief identifies the • Minimise non - permeable surfaces (Mr Foster) key issues and highlight the need for further • All hedgerows to be maintained plus extra woodland to detailed assessment at the planning

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 30

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments be planted, or if hedgerows are removed, to plant 5x the application stage when detailed evidence is amount instead (Mr Reddy) available. (Story Homes)

• Amount of land for landscaping should be determined following detailed assessment and analysis. (Story Homes)

• New tree/hedgerow planting to create wildlife corridors (Friends of Lake District)

Cumbria County Council comments: • This site also lies in Cumbria Landscape Type 2d (see above). It is clearly visible from higher ground in the Pennington hills, to the

Page 283 northwest, from where its wider landscape setting can be appreciated. The site is also clearly visible from the A590. (Cumbria County Council)

• The characteristic flat/gently undulating landform results in much of this relatively large scale site being visible in wider views. Opportunities should be taken to mitigate this through the incorporation of planting to screen the development, and areas of open space including feature trees, in order to break up the overall massing of the development. (Cumbria County Council)

• The site boundary creates a new field boundary to the northwest, which should comprise characteristic hedgerow. Existing field boundaries should be retained and strengthened.(Cumbria County Council)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 31

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments Biodiversity/Wildlife • What will happen to the already diminishing wildlife due • Difficult for development brief to cover issue of to the over-development (Mrs Penny) ecology until detailed ecology survey undertaken. Where detailed survey work is • Biodiversity should be maintained and increased, required to address these issues, we woodland to be planted (Mr Reddy) recommend the brief identifies the key issues and highlight the need for further detailed • Encouragement of free flowing green structures, open assessment at the planning application stage green woodland, and hedgerows. Woodland to screen when detailed evidence is available. (Story houses from noise, and to encourage bird and bat Homes) roosts. Biodiversity should be maintained and the active badger set should be given thought to (Mrs Scrogham) • Green Roofs should be considered. Retention hedgerows and trees on the site. New planting to create wildlife / green corridors Page 284 (Friends of the Lake District) Views • Minimal visual impact (Mr Foster) • Open space - direct views/links to surrounding countryside (Mr Alex Holmes) • Use views out to Lindal (1 drop in event comment) Existing Natural features • Plenty of trees (Mr Foster) • Retention of hedgerows and trees (FOLD)

DESIGN AND LAYOUT PRINCIPLES General GENERAL • The development brief should not be over- • A fresh clean look should be the objective, with a mix of prescriptive in terms of housing layout, types several designs of houses and bungalows, which in a and mix so the developer has flexibility to few years’ time will not take on a tired, neglected adapt to market (Brookhouse Group) appearance. (Mr and Mrs Lester) • Part site slopes – existing bungalows on Ulverston Road • decent garden space (Swarthmoor Books & – back on to site – potential drainage issues (drop in Beverage Club – Dorothy Aldus) event comment – 1). • Roads should curve and have cul de sacs (drop in event comment – 1)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 32

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments SUPPORT – GOOD SIZED GARDENS • Decent garden spaces and can give open space if front gardens are low level (Drop in event comments – 3) Materials • No pebble dashing (drop in event comment – 1) • Promote local materials i.e. wood, limestone • Materials to match existing properties (drop in event and slate and also straw bales (Friends of the comment – 1) Lake District)

Size of buildings • Mostly single storey (Mrs Lowe) • One and two storeys (Mr & Mrs Caine) • 4 bedroomed houses (drop in event comment – 1) • Variety of sizes (drop in event comment – 1) • Not too many large detached (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage Club – Dorothy Aldus) Scale Massing Height • Maximum of 2 storeys for every structure. (Mr and Mrs Page 285 Lester) • Mostly single storey (Mrs Lowe) Style • Mixed and varied style (Mr and Mrs Lester & drop in event comment – 1) • Unobtrusive housing which, in design and density would be in keeping with existing structures and not detract from the surrounding areas. (Mr & Mrs Lester) • Sympathetic to existing adjacent buildings (Mrs Lowe and 1 drop in event comment) Density SUPPORT FOR LESS INTENSIVE DEVELOPMENT • Affordable housing requirement is subject to • Less intensive (Mrs Lowe) and 1 drop in event viability considerations. Note the open market comment. See also ‘scale’ category, above. housing demand for detached properties, • Spacious low rise housing with adequate parking for 2 bungalows and properties with four or more cars per household. (Mrs Scrogham) bedrooms. It is considered this type of • Don’t want overcrowded development. Need to give dwelling mix would result in a likely lower occupants quality and space (Mrs Penny, Mrs Scrogham density than the suggested 35 dwellings per and 1 drop in event comment). hectare and would require more than 50% of the site earmarked for residential development. (Story Homes)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 33

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments

• Not too crowded together (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage Club – Dorothy Aldus) Built and natural features STREET LIGHTING • Cross-a-Moor No street lighting (Mrs Scrogham) • Limit light pollution as much as possible as areas around have no street lighting(1 drop in event comment) • No street lights as it will ruin the rural feel (Mr Barrow) Layout – spaces • Include playground and trees and decent garden space (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage Club – Dorothy Aldus) Public Art

Page 286 Renewable Energy and SUPPORT FOR RENEWBLE ENERGY & • Suggest use of district heating system which Sustainability SUSTAINABLITY can be run off renewable energy sources, if • Low energy and conservation should be applied to not an option ground source heat pumps. utilities (Mrs Jones UTC) (Friends of Lake District) • Houses should be passive using minimal fuel / resources. Incorporate low energy and renewables into • Include grey water recycling systems (Friends development (A Brocklebank) of Lake District). • All modern methods of sustainability should be endorsed to reduce the impact of the development on the • Construct to highest insulation standards surrounding rural community. Use of ground source (Passivhaus) (Friends of Lake District) heating, solar panels, water sustainability, grey water collection. (Mrs Scrogham) & (drop in event comments • High standards of renewable energy efficiency – 4) should be incorporated (Friends of Lake • Roof gardens on selected houses (drop in event District) comment 1) • Orientate the site to maximise most of solar gain both passively and through installation of solar panels on all suitably aspected roofs. Large windows facing south. (Friends of the Lake District) TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT FOR HOUSING THAT IS SUSTAINBLE AND

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 34

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments USES RENEWABLE ENERGY • Affordable housing requirement is subject to • Built sustainably with solar panels etc (drop in viability considerations. Note the open market comments – 1) & see support in the Renewable Energy housing demand for detached properties, and Sustainability section, see above. bungalows and properties with four or more bedrooms. It is considered this type of SUPPORT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING dwelling mix would result in a likely lower • Low cost affordable housing (Mr Aldus) & (drop in density than the suggested 35 dwellings per comment –2) hectare and would require more than 50% of • 25% affordable housing and a local occupancy clause the site earmarked for residential across the whole site (Mr Barrow, Mr Clark) development. (Story Homes) • More affordable housing (Mr Anthony Holme) • 35% of affordables should be for Swarthmoor Cumbria County Council comments: residents.(drop in event comment – 1) • Cumbria County Council has an important role as a service and infrastructure provider

Page 287 SUPPORT FOR HOUSING MIX - INCLUDING which means that the County Council must BUNGALOWS AND HOUSES ensure they are not prejudiced by • Mix of bungalows and small semi-detached houses (Mr development that will take place on the Aldus) Development Brief sites. It is important that • Mix bungalows and houses (drop in event comments – the Development Briefs take into account the 2) following:

SUPPORT FOR SELF BUILD PLOTS • Extra Care Housing – Highlight if there is a • Provision for self- build plots need for extra care housing within the area and ensure that the impact of any proposed development has been assessed against the need. This will determine the likelihood of the Council seeking a contribution in relation to extra care housing. In some cases it might be that the design and layout of the proposal should reflect the needs of the area and could be considered as part of the quantum of affordable housing (Cumbria County Council).

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 35

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments • Social Care Provision - South Lakeland is home to an aging population with residents aged over 65 accounting for 25.5% of the district’s population; the highest proportion in the county and well above the national average (17%). The NPPF is clear about the need for housing that meets the needs of an aging population. Housing is a vital component of community care and the key to independent living. In order to support people to live as independently as possible there is a need for agencies to work collaboratively in planning and the use of resources. The Page 288 County Council’s Planning Obligation’s Policy seeks to ensure that new housing designs can be easily adapted to meet the requirements of occupants should their needs change over time.(Cumbria County Council)

• Should the requirements of an occupier change; homes that are designed to Lifetimes Homes standards or incorporate key elements of these standards are easier to adapt to enable people with disabilities to continue to live there. Adaptations to properties that are not designed with a view to accessibility often fall short of achieving their full impact. Poorly adapted properties can contribute to increased levels of dependence which impact on the wellbeing of the individual, their carers and families and ultimately require social care support.(Cumbria County Council)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 36

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments • The most frequently requested adaptations are stair lifts and level access showers, usually both facilities. Housing designs that incorporate a straight staircase and a room for level entry shower facilities adjacent to ground floor toilet facilities will significantly aid the provision of the most frequently requested adaptations in a most cost effective way. These design elements are very important because:

• Homes better meet the needs of residents as their requirements change.

Page 289 • They allow improved use of DFG funding by Council’s • They allow reduced demand for personal care support and care home services by promoting greater independence, safety and wellbeing in the home environment. (Cumbria County Council) AMENITY ISSUES • We value privacy, open aspect and access to boundary • Consider the possibility of a district heating wall at rear of existing properties (Mrs Lowe) system to be installed prior to the • Cross-a-Moor House – back kitchen window is in the development to be run from renewable field – what will be done (1 drop in event comment) energy sources.(Friends of the Lake District)

• Cross-a-Moor has no facilities, no street lights, and the existing houses have issues with sewage, We have concerns about the Sewer system were a development to progress Cross-a-Moor served by septic tanks.(Pennington Parish Council)

• A shop that is available to the whole village is

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 37

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments essential (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage Club – Dorothy Aldus) NOISE • Difficult for Development Brief to cover issue of noise until detailed noise assessment undertaken. Where detailed survey work is required to address these issues, we recommend the brief identifies the key issues and highlight the need for further detailed assessment at the planning application stage when detailed evidence is available. (Story Homes) INFRASTRUCTURE Education Education including developer Page 290 contributions break down by • Sufficient school spaces? (Mr & Mrs Caine, A • It is important that any requirements for infrastructure type. Brocklebank) community infrastructure and facilities are • What provision will be made? (Mrs Pat Jones UTC, A considered in terms of the overall phasing of Brocklebank) the development to ensure deliverability • Larger schools needed / can schools expand– (Pat (Brookhouse Group) Jones UTC & 1 drop in event comment) • UVHS already oversubscribed as is Croft Lands (Mrs • We are a small local school in full capacity in Pat Jones UTC) many of the classrooms and concerned at the • Pennington school is already full (Mrs Penny and 1 drop possibility of not being able to accommodate in event comment) the extra influx of children and more • Need space in schools for more children (1 drop in event importantly the impact this would have on the comment) children currently in the school. (Pennington • Infant and Primary School are full to capacity (Mrs Primary School) Scrogham) • • Pennington Nursery – how close will houses be? (1 drop Until CIL has been adopted, any contributions in event comment) for education need to be assessed on a site • Will there be funding to develop temporary nursery built by site basis based upon detailed information in 2005 ‘ish (1 drop in event comment) at the time the planning application is • Catchment school restricts long distance commuters (1 considered. (Story Homes) drop in event comment) • Pennington Primary is full to capacity, as is

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 38

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments the nursery. No room for expansion (Pennington Parish Council)

Cumbria County Council comments: • Cumbria County Council has an important role as a service and infrastructure provider which means that the County Council must ensure they are not prejudiced by development that will take place on the Development Brief sites. It is important that the Development Briefs take into account the following:

• Using the methodology set out in the

Page 291 County Council’s adopted Planning Obligation Policy Document, the likely pupil yield for both primary and secondary schools for the proposed housing sites should be identified along with the predicted capacity within local schools. This will determine the likelihood of the County Council seeking a contribution in relation to education. (Cumbria County Council)

• The County Council has assessed the potential impact of the proposed Development Briefs using the population model. This methodology is outlined in the County Council’s Planning Obligation Policy page 27 Figure 6. The projected yield using the population model is given in the site specific comments below. These figures are initial outline figures and

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 39

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments more detailed assessments, using a dwelling led model (which is also outlined in the County Council’s Planning Obligation Policy page 27 Figure 5) will need to be carried out when detailed housing plans as part of a planning application come forward. The County Council will continue to work with SLDC to fully assess the impact, which will assess if there is a need for additional capacity to ensure that the Development Briefs highlight any potential issue.(Cumbria County Council) Page 292 • Using the population model it is estimated that a development of 161 dwellings would yield 32 primary aged children and 23 secondary aged children.(Cumbria County Water Supply Council)

• Can this support further development (Mr Clark)

Community Infrastructure Community Infrastructure

CONCERN NO AMENITIES IN SWARTHMOOR • Updating the Memorial Hall as a community • No amenities in village 4 drop in event comments) hall. No shop, post office, only one public • Concern about the lack of Amenities in Swarthmoor house. (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage Club (Mrs Herman, A Brocklebank) – Dorothy Aldus) • Swarthmoor has not many facilities, its becoming a housing extension of Ulverston (Mrs Lowe) • Cross-a-Moor has no facilities, no street lights • Provision of local services needed for the village. (Pennington Parish Council) (Mrs Scrogham) • Post office closed now no shop (1 drop in event • A shop that is available to the whole village is comment) essential (Swarthmoor Books & Beverage

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 40

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments • Only 1 public house (Mrs Scrogham) Club – Dorothy Aldus)

CONCERN NO SHOP • Village needs a shop (Mr Aldus, Mr & Mrs Caine, Mrs Scrogham, A Brocklebank and 5 drop in event comments) • A shop and a bus stop needed (Mr Anthony Holme) • Local amenities with any new development (eg local shop) (Mr Alex Holmes) • Nearest corner shop – Urswick Road (1 drop in event comment)

COMMUNITY HALL / MEMORIAL HALL

Page 293 • A new community hall (Mr Barrow) • Rebuild the Memorial Hall – an incentive (1 drop in event comment)

• Will there be funding to develop a new community

hall? (potentially more users) – (1 drop in event

comment)

Electricity

• All cables should be underground and reduce Electricity amount of pylons (Mr Foster) • The electric supply is very poor this winter and re National Grid – No comment re affected electricity directed on to Pennington, Dalton electric (Mr transmission apparatus affected or in the vicinity / no Reddy) map supplied with response. (National Grid) The assessment solely relates to National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) AND National Grid Gas plc. (NGG) apparatus. Response does not include guidance about wayleaves or easements, gas service pipes and related apparatus and recently installed apparatus. Or apparatus owned by other

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 41

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments organisations – other gas distribution operators, local Gas elec. Companies, other Utilities etc. (National Grid)

Gas

National Grid GAS plc.’s apparatus – Affected apparatus – low or medium pressure (below 2 bar) gas pipes and associated equipment (as a result it is highly likely that there are gas services and associated apparatus in the vicinity). The assessment solely relates to National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) AND National Grid Gas plc (NGG) apparatus.Response does not include Page 294 guidance about wayleaves or easements, gas service pipes and related apparatus and recently installed apparatus. Or apparatus owned by other organisations – other gas distribution operators, local elec. Companies, other Utilities etc. (National Grid) Sewerage Sewerage DRAINAGE CONCERNS

• Any connection to the sewage should be provided by contractor (Mr & Mrs Caine) • Cross-a-Moor - the existing houses have • Ensure that an adequate drainage system is in place issues with sewage, We have concerns about before any building work commences (Mr and Mrs the Sewer system were a development to Lester, A Brocklebank) progress. Cross-a-Moor served by septic • Impact of drainage from sloping field. (Mrs Lowe) tanks (Pennington Parish Council) • Serious consideration of the impact of sewage must be investigated as reported in the letter from Pennington Parish Council 24/1/14. Existing houses in Cross-a-Moor served by septic tanks (Mrs Scrogham)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 42

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments Health • A clinic (Pat Jones UTC) Health

Cumbria County Council comment – Developer Contributions Social Care Provision

• Given the difficulty in adapting homes that do not provide these features, the County Council will require the provision of a financial contribution as appropriate mitigation, based on the number of homes that do not contain these features, given the increased challenges in delivering adaptations to them

Page 295 and the potential for increased support services in the home occurring. This is set out on the County Council’s Planning Obligations Policy. (Cumbria County Council)

• Any contribution would be calculated on the following basis: Contribution = (a) x (b) x (c) a = Dwellings that do not provide the required design mitigation. b = Prevalence of adult physically disabled Cumbria County Council Adult Social Care service users within Housing Market Area in 2010 c = Average cost of DFG adaptation at £7,562 (Cumbria County Council)

• An example of how this may work out is set out below: a) Of the 300 units proposed 150 do not contain straight and sufficiently wide staircases and sufficiently large entry

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 43

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments level WC facilities that can easily incorporate a level entry shower. b) In 2010 0.033 of adults within the Carlisle HMA use Cumbria Council care services. c) Average cost of DFG adaptation Based on this a contribution would be sought on the following basis: Contribution = (150) x (0.033) x (£7,562) = £37,431 contribution. (Cumbria County Council)

• Any contribution would be used to support Page 296 DFG funding in the locality, or support care packages which will include care at home and/or adaption and equipment in the locality. When details of the proposed housing designs are apparent, the County Council will clarify the level of requirement and should all homes meet the above referred “design mitigation”, this contribution would not be sought.(Cumbria

County Council) FLOODING/DRAINAGE CONCERNS - SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE • Difficult for Development Brief to cover issue of • Part site slopes – existing bungalows on Ulverston flooding until detailed flood risk assessment Road at lower level than site – potential drainage undertaken. Where detailed survey work is issues (drop in event comment – 1). required to address these issues, we • Cross-a-Moor House – soak - away is in the field – recommend the brief identifies the key issues what will be done (1 drop in event comment) and highlight the need for further detailed • Houses already subject to flooding. Development will assessment at the planning application stage worsen this (1 drop in event comment) when detailed evidence is available. (Story • Impact of drainage from sloping field. (Mrs Lowe) Homes)

• Effective SUDS should be incorporated to

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 44

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments reduce issue of runoff and further problems downstream, and it will reduce the infiltration capacity (Friends of the Lake District)

Cumbria County Council comments: • Cumbria County Council has an important role as a service and infrastructure provider which means that the County Council must ensure they are not prejudiced by development that will take place on the Development Brief sites. It is therefore important that the Development Briefs take into account the following:

• Surface Water Flooding – Highlight if there are

Page 297 any surface water flooding issues on the site, if there are issues the Development Briefs should begin to identify possible solutions. (Cumbria County Council)

• Measures such as sustainable drainage systems and the incorporation of green infrastructure into new developments will help mitigate and manage surface flood risk. Green infrastructure can also provide storage for flood waters whilst contributing health, amenity and biodiversity benefits. (Cumbria County Council)

• Surface water management and drainage measures would normally be paid for as part of the cost of development, whilst provision of on- site green infrastructure would normally be delivered through section 106 agreements. But beyond these arrangements, Flood & Coastal Risk Management Grant in Aid (FCRM GiA)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 45

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments funding from Defra seeks to promote schemes delivering a wide range of flood risk and environmental benefits. Where a number of organisations are identified as having interests in development proposals, partnership funding from them will increase the likelihood of FCRM GiA from Defra. This approach will be explored to maximise the opportunities for development whilst addressing issues of flood risk. It will be particularly useful when taking a strategic view of the impacts of flood risk arising from multiple developments in the same area. Introducing and improving green infrastructure strategically may Page 298 be more appropriately delivered through the use of the CIL.(Cumbria County Council) GROUND CONDITIONS, • Potential for undermining – needs to be checked • Need to consider the issue of potential CONTAMINATION (drop in event comment - 1) undermining – mine shafts in the area • Undermining (Mr Barrow) (Pennington Parish Council) ARCHAEOLOGY • Strongly advise we engage conservation, archaeology and urban design colleagues to ensure made aware of all relevant features of the historic environment. (English Heritage)

Cumbria County Council • There are no known archaeological remains on the site but remains are recorded very nearby and so it is considered that there is the potential for currently unknown remains to survive there. A Viking burial has been found close to the site and a number of prehistoric implements have been recovered from adjacent fields. (Cumbria County Council)

• It is recommended that, in line with paragraph

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 46

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments 128 of the National Planning Policy Framework, any forthcoming planning application for the site should include information on the presence/absence of any heritage assets located at the site and how their significance will be affected by the development proposals. As outlined in the NPPF, this information should be obtained by an archaeological desk-based assessment and evaluation, in this instance a geophysical survey. An informed judgement can be made as to whether any planning consent will need to include provisions for the recording and, more importantly, the preservation of very significant heritage assets in situ .(Cumbria

Page 299 County Council) HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT • When considering potential for and type of development to be accommodated on a site, there will need to be an evaluation of the impact which the development might have upon those elements that contribute to the significance of a heritage asset including their setting (English Heritage)

• Strongly advise we engage conservation, archaeology and urban design colleagues to ensure made aware of all relevant features of the historic environment. (English Heritage) PHASING • Is it going to end up being a permanent building site?! Only build enough at a time and sell.(1 drop in event comment) VIABILITY IMPLEMENTATION • CIL money received by SLDC should be for improving the staggered cross roads at Cross-a-Moor.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 47

Category B

Other issues raised –

• Lay off Swarthmoor, swamping the area and losing its unique identity (Mrs Jones UTC)

• Its fine as it is, leave site as a field (A Brocklebank)

• Properties must be owner occupied (A Brocklebank)

• Fertile productive land is to be turned in to a housing Estate (Mrs Scrogham)

• Intrusive on the countryside and not in agreement with use of greenfield sites (Mrs Lowe)

Page 300 • All the landscape, open space, green infrastructure, and biodiversity has been delivered as it currently exists (Mr Barrow)

• Do not like to see farm land going, needs to be put to good use (affordable housing) (Mr Anthony Holme)

• Utilise brownfield sites elsewhere rather than greenfield, this field is flat, green and good for arable farming (Mr Barrow)

• Is there a need for the 161 homes bearing in mind the 747 houses adjacent to Croftlands estate (Mr & Mrs Lester). The 161 residential development is on the large size (Mrs Penny, Mrs Scrogham and 3 drop in event comments).

• 4 drop in event comments objecting in principle to the site’s development.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 48

Category C

GENERAL COMMENTS NON - SITE SPECIFIC – PROPOSALS DOCUMENT

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments Purpose/Whole Concept • We support the draft version as stated in the proposals document provided due consideration is given to the key issues identified. (Brookhouse Group)

• Notwithstanding all comments, Story Homes wishes to fully engage with SLDC in relation to production of the development briefs and is happy to co-operate in any way that is of assistance with the Council either in terms of providing site

Page 301 specific information or participating in future meetings and discussions regarding the site (Story Homes)

• No comment (Marine Management Organisation)

• No comment (Coal Authority)

• Intention is welcomed and strongly supported. Key matters for consideration for all briefs are agreed (National Trust) Stakeholders Timetable • To avoid delays the Council should ensure there is a clear timescale for the consideration of the Development Briefs by Council / Cabinet and that they only consider the final version (Story Homes) Process • SLDC should support developers wishing to progress development briefs to speed up the process and should also support the consideration of planning applications during the

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 49

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments judicial review period (Story Homes) Objectives • Welcome a key objective which protects and enhances the built heritage in South Lakeland (English Heritage) Status Engagement - Consultation • Highways Authorities should have been at the • Developers should be able to apply a 4 week drop in event (2 drop in event comments) Regulation 12 consultation period. (Story Homes)

Cumbria County Council Comments – earlier engagement:

• The County Council has also provided advice at the ‘Issues and Options’ stage in relation to Page 302 the following areas:- • Ecology – Following a meeting with SLDC and the County Council’s ecologist as part of the consultation response, the County Council has provided some comments in relation to ecology and Green Infrastructure. • Archaeology – As part of the consultation response the County Council’s Historic Environment Officer has provided comments on each of the Phase 1 Development Briefs. • Landscape - As part of the consultation response the County Council’s Principal Planning Officer has provided comments on each of the Phase 1 Development Briefs.

• The current consultation stage is an ‘Issues and Options’ stage where SLDC are seeking views on what should be included. It is not intended that the County Council’s response to the consultation will go through Cabinet, as the ‘Issues and Options’ is an early informal

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 50

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments consultation stage. The County Council’s response to this consultation is an initial assessment on the Development Briefs. There will be a further consultation by SLDC on the content of the Development Briefs in June / July 2014. It is however important to note that the Development Briefs are Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD’s), and previously consultation on SPD’s has not been taken through CCC Cabinet. (Cumbria County Council)

• Throughout the preparation of the Development Briefs the County Council’s

Page 303 Spatial Planning Team will provide updates to its South Lakeland Local Committee in relation to the content, and the issues from a County Council perspective. The Local Committee will also have the opportunity to feed comments into each of the County Council’s consultation responses.(Cumbria County Council) Scope – Landscape, open • Issue of open space, green infrastructure and space and green landscaping should be assessed based on infrastructure guidance in NPPF and on up to date assessments rather than a generic percentage based upon no robust evidence or assessment. (Story Homes)

• If any of the sites have an existing or lapsed playing field or any other sports facility, impact would need to be assessed against paragraph 74 of NPPF. If any of the sites have an existing playing field or a disused playing field that has

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 51

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments been used at any time in the last 5 years impact will need to be assessed against Sport England’s Playing Fields Policy (Sport England).

• General advice provided by Natural England – sources of information in relation to biodiversity, geological conservation and landscape that should be used to inform preparation of development briefs.(Natural England)

• Note policies CS8.1, CS8.2 and CS8.3a could be expanded upon to form a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), this could be a Page 304 material planning consideration alongside the Development Briefs (Natural England)

Cumbria County Council comments:

• The conservation and enhancement of landscape and townscape character form a key consideration in the development of the major sites allocated in the South Lakeland Local Plan. The Development Briefs make suitable reference to these, drawing attention to relevant Local Plan Policies, and county wide landscape guidance, which is supported.(Cumbria County Council)

• In relation to ecology the County Council would like the following to be taken into account.

• Through the Development Briefs process, SLDC need to ensure that the updates that

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 52

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments have been done to the Cumbria Biodiversity Evidence Base, particularly in relation to the update of the Priority Habitats Inventory are taken into account. (Cumbria County Council)

• Habitats Regulations Assessments may be required for each Development Brief site. It is considered that reference should be made to the potential needs of European Protected Sites, in which case additional information may be required within the planning application. (Cumbria County Council)

• It is advised that mechanisms for

Page 305 management of green infrastructure and biodiversity mitigation, compensation and/or enhancement should be developed. It is not good practice (Cumbria County Council)

• It is advised that mechanisms for management of green infrastructure and biodiversity mitigation, compensation and/or enhancement should be developed. It is not good practice to have short term agreements that fail to continue to achieve the aims of the proposed green space/biodiversity. It is suggested that payments from the developers (commuted sum) and future householders/ employment land companies, as a small charge on the properties (used extensively in other parts of the UK) would assist here. Involving the local community would have added benefit. Each area would also need a biodiversity/ green infrastructure

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 53

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments establishment and management plan. Without this there would be an increasing burden on SLDC to manage these areas which could deter development. (Cumbria County Council)

• It is advised that detailed habitat and species surveys, as appropriate, will still be required for all sites at the planning application stage. It is suggested that the Development Briefs would benefit from, and should be informed by, a relatively high level ecological assessment, involving a walkover survey and presenting a mapped habitats, target notes Page 306 and advice. (Cumbria County Council)

• It is considered that most of the Development Brief sites offer significant habitat and species enhancements.(Cumbria County Council)

• In relation to the role of on-site water management and SUDS, consideration should be given to upstream and downstream implications, and that any potential measures should maximise the topography of the sites, and the future biodiversity value. (Cumbria County Council) Scope – Traffic and • Broadly agree and support inclusion of subject of movement framework accessibility and movement framework, but important to use existing evidence base used for examination. Appropriate to identify primary and secondary access points and set out a broad permeability framework including opportunities for pedestrian and cycle linkages, but detail should be dealt with at planning application stage

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 54

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments following the normal thorough assessment and survey work (Story Homes) • The Highways Agency welcomes that the development brief requires a travel plan and transport assessment (Highways Agency)

• The additional junction proposed by Sainsbury’s on the A590 was refused. Aside from access issues, it was identified by the development brief that facilities need to be provided on both sides of Cross-a-Moor including pedestrian access to existing public transport facilities on the A590. It also requires that the site maximises access by public transport, and provides safe cycle and

Page 307 pedestrian links to Swarthmoor and neighbouring areas (Highways Agency)

• Traffic calming measures, more than just speed humps ought to be included in these developments (Michael Roberts, Chairman, Middleton Parish Room) Scope – Type, general • Support discussion of these topics, urge caution location and phasing of land in overly detailed and restrictive guidance on uses these issues. Phasing and location of land uses can have significant viability implications (Story Homes) Scope – Guidance on the • Whilst would expect broad guidance, stress Type and Mix of housing impact these issues can have on overall viability of sites and delivery of affordable housing. Story Homes would like to be involved in discussions regarding mix and type of housing. Important not to be overly prescriptive in terms of mix and type to allow sufficient flexibility for detailed proposal to adapt to changing market conditions (Story

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 55

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments Homes)

Cumbria County Council comments: • Cumbria County Council has an important role as a service and infrastructure provider which means that the County Council must ensure they are not prejudiced by development that will take place on the Development Brief sites. It is important that the Development Briefs take into account the following:

• Extra Care Housing – Highlight if there is a need for extra care housing within the area and ensure Page 308 that the impact of any proposed development has been assessed against the need. This will determine the likelihood of the Council seeking a contribution in relation to extra care housing. In some cases it might be that the design and layout of the proposal should reflect the needs of the area and could be considered as part of the quantum of affordable housing. (Cumbria County Council)

• Extra care housing can include a range of housing types but a common principle is that it provides independent living accommodation with a level of support equivalent to that of a care home and plays an important role in helping to meet the requirements of all in the community. In this context, the County Council recognises the importance of different mixes of tenure of Extra Care and Sheltered Housing (both open market and affordable) in ensuring there is an available supply of this accommodation for people with

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 56

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments differing circumstances. (Cumbria County Council) • In relation to the Development Brief sites the County Council will continue to work with SLDC to consider where it might be appropriate to provide extra care affordable housing on site. It is considered that the Development Brief sites where this might be appropriate are South and East Milnthorpe and Croftlands Ulverston.(Cumbria County Council) Scope – Guidance on Building Design Scope – Community • Essential to have clear evidence justifying need Infrastructure and Facilities for any community infrastructure and facilities.

Page 309 The need must meet 2011 CIL Regulations. Where community facilities are required as part of proposed land mix, must be considered as part of the wider deliverability and viability of the site (Story Homes) Scope – Developer • Urge care in being overly detailed as they are Contributions normally derived from detailed discussions during the planning application process. Essential any developer contributions are fully and properly assessed against 2011 CIL regulations and are necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms (Story Homes).

• Neither SLDC or CCC can afford to add appropriate traffic measures, pedestrian crossings, traffic islands etc. (Michael Roberts, Chairman, Middleton Parish Room) Scope – Infrastructure and • The utilities serving the west side near Ulverston Rd • Development Brief should identify key utility and Utilities must be old, will these be used or a new system infrastructure issues that might require further installed? (Mrs Lowe) investigation through detailed application stage.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 57

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments • Find out more about the old mine workings past (Mr Any abnormal costs associated with the delivery Reddy) of the infrastructure and utilities need to be considered in relation to overall site viability (Story Homes) Scope – Renewable Energy • Acknowledge importance of these issues, and Sustainability Principles essential that requirements set out within development briefs accord with the NPPF and do set targets over above those required by national standards such as building regulations (Story Homes)

Scope – Layout • Also important to not be overly restrictive and ensure a degree of flexibility remains in relation to Page 310 the future development of the application planning layout. (Story Homes) Scope – matters not covered • No details on the layout and design make it difficult to • SLDC should commit to the requirement that the comment (Mr Barrow) preparation and scope of development briefs is proportionate to each site subject to the site characteristics.(Story Homes)

• Deliverability is a key issue and it should be a requirement that the requirements set out within the development brief should not render the site unviable (Story Homes)

• Would expect inclusion of historic environment as a main matter to be covered in the briefs (English Heritage)

• Accept that a brief should not seek to dictate a particular design idiom or external material, however, it is essential that suitable guidance in this area is provided. Concern if more detailed site assessment matters are not assessed prior to

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 58

Topic Area Member of public comments Organisation comments Development Briefs being prepared then there will need to be clear caveats encompassed regarding such considerations, including the possible need to re-visit the Brief in the light of any significant findings from such assessments (National Trust) Sustainability Appraisal • Confirm happy that an additional Sustainability Appraisal will not be required for the Development Briefs (English Heritage)

• Provided the Brief does not include anything over and above what has already been set out in the Land Allocations process then confirm Natural England agrees the approach. Development Briefs would not usually be subject to

Page 311 independent SA or HRA (Natural England) Evidence Base • Should be expanded to include reference to conservation area appraisals and management plans, the historic environment record and the National Heritage List for England as a minimum (English Heritage)

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 59

Category D

Appendix 3 Site Information sheets – general

Topic Issue Member of public comments Organisation c omments General • • Key issues that are not clearly identified are, phasing, viability and deliverability. The development brief should ensure that requirements for providing the right housing types and mix including affordable housing, green infrastructure/biodiversity, and renewable energy and community needs/facilities do not render the scheme unviable and frustrate delivery. Page 312 Consideration should be given to phased delivery of the development and associated infrastructure to ensure economic viability (Brookhouse Group) Proposed Use • Developable area assumptions

Category E

Appendix 3 Site Information sheets – Site Specific comments:

Topic Issue Member of public comments Organisation comments Site and Brief Information • The electric supply is very poor this winter and re • Consider the issue of potential undermining – directed on to Pennington, Dalton electricity supply (Mr mine shafts in the area.(Pennington Parish Reddy) Council)

• The brief should identify the principal vehicular access points to the site (Brookhouse Group)

C C

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 60

Category F Drop in Event comments. All responses submitted at the drop in event (25 th February 2014)

1.0 ACCESS AND MOVEMENT

• Required – improved pedestrian crossing facilities at junction of Carley Lane and Seg Lane at SW approach to proposed development site as residents of High Carley / Urswick (including school children / students) have to cross A590 at this point which is extremely busy and dangerous.

• Currently - traffic is already extremely busy; there are no traffic calming measures eg. speed cameras / humps etc; the road is not wide enough for cyclists. • So – consider: traffic calming that makes a difference; roundabout towards Lindal direction.

• All houses to be eco-friendly eg solar panels, under-floor heat source etc. • Affordable homes.

Page 313 • 161??? Too many.

• Junction Pennington impact on school

• Going to create another accident black spot on the A590!

• Pennington School is already full – where will children from development go?

• The junction at Cross-a-moor is already too busy especially at school drop-off times. There is a need for a roundabout.

• Parking and access to school chaos in morning and home time.

• This village does not need any more houses. The low cost homes that are for sale in this area are not selling. This is a thoughtless act based on SLDC gaining more Government funds. Don’t SLDC charge us enough without invading our village.

• How can you say that the site is lightly trafficked! You should be there early morning, mid afternoon and evening. Putting 300+ cars onto the second busiest road in Cumbria is an absolute joke!

• The 40mph speed limit through Swarthmoor is ineffective and not proactively enforced. Please consider this.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 61

• Traffic –ve turning to Barrow out of Pennington Lane. Already an issue esp. school and peak hrs. Will be an issue going to work (left or right) so NEED TO LOOK AT JN CROSS-A-MOOR.

• Separate cycle way within development.

• Accident waiting to happen.

• -ve Extra traffic using Seg Lane (single track road) already Big ISSUE at school times.

• Would like to see an in-depth traffic survey done and published before ANY development starts!

• Cross-a-moor not good for access (school run) nightmare already. Accidents waiting to happen. Children’s safety!

•

Page 314 A590 too busy already without more traffic coming out onto it.

• The Highway Department should have been at this meeting!

• Road from Cross-a-Moor to Pennington full of parked cars from 20m to 4pm already. What will happen in houses built?

• Road at Cross-a- Moor blocked at 8.30-9.15, 3.00-4. Main Road is impassable to Barrow Now. How is this going to make it any better?

• Avoid access at Cross-a-Moor junction.

• Highways Department should have been here to answer questions

• Roundabout at Cross-a-Moor. Access via Pennington Lane. • Catchment area of school restricts “long distance” commuters. • Footpath through site for walking to school.

• 5 mile an hour limit on/off the site. This will be much safer for young families.

• The cross-a-moor junction is already lethal at all times of the day. This needs to be moved or an alternative design proposed.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 62

• Almost impossible to turn right from main road onto A590 at peak times. Traffic report partly[? This word was not clearly written] does not even cover school term as performed on 27/28 th December

• It takes a long time now getting out the drives of houses on the A590 – impossible to get onto the other lane – have to turn right and go through village – more cars it will be a nightmare.

• Rubbish • no consideration • Traffic • School full

• The Cross-a-Moor Junction onto the A590 is already congested and if the only access onto the new development is here it will become a nightmare.

• Access cannot be improved without impairing the A590.

Page 315 • Access Road to School and Pennington would need widening and dedicated parking area for the school is needed to keep road clear. Roundabout needed at A590 end of road already.

• Too much traffic already at Cross-a-Moor junction. Need better facilities.

• Traffic control at Cross-a-Moor junction needs to be controlled either by traffic lights or roundabout.

• The staggered road junction at Cross-a-Moor is at present difficult when Pennington School is open to pupils. It can also be dangerous. This new development would need a crossroad from the lane between Cross-a-Moor and Pennington Nursery which could exit on to the A590 where the present field meets that road. Alternatively the development could have a ‘self-contained’ road entering and exiting the a590 in just one place, with a footpath to the Nursery and School.

• Light pollution should be limited as much as possible as the areas around have no street lights.

• Could the properties be built sustainably with solar panels etc? There should also be a goodly proportion available to purchase by local people on the housing list.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 63

2.0 LAYOUT AND DESIGN PRINCIPLES

• Variety of sizes is already in the brief

• Style should be appropriate to the area NOT LEGOLAND!

• Roads should curve and have cul-de-sacs. (This is normal these days)

• Gardens give open space, particularly if front gardens have to be “low level”.

• Cross-a-Moor House our back kitchen window and soak-away is in the field. What will be done?

• +ve Will there be extra funding to develop Memorial Hall (potentially more users).

Page 316 • No amenities in village. Why would young people that you want to attract live there: no pub, no shop. Can the school expand? Needs more amenities to attract young people.

• How much is a ‘low cost’ house in this area? 583588

• Houses and Bungalows!!! Variety low cost housing!!!

• Need consideration to bungalows – some of which are below slope of field and this slope also has drainage issues.

• There is nothing positive about this scheme!

• Housing built environment friendly – of type need v little fuel to heat (Negative impact).

• Houses to match existing properties in use of materials eg. pictures 9 & 14.

• Will there be ground source heating or solar panels? For all houses especially affordable to reduce on-going costs?

• No shop now in Swarthmoor since PO closed. Nearest corner shop Urswick Road. New development should include a shop – convenient for school children too.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 64

• Will there be funding to develop the “temporary” nursery built in 2005(ish)?

• Pennington nursery How close houses to them (play area)?

• Any help with space to accommodate extra children!!!

• Increase in housing at Mountbarrow Roaad / Urswick Road / Meeting House/ Croftlands will result in more traffic using the Cross-a- Moor junction.

• Rebuild the memorial Hall as a carrot! – an incentive

• What about shops etc. Nothing at Swarthmoor.

• None of the pictures of houses will be in keeping with RURAL area.

Page 317 • Local houses. Does the area have enough 4 bedroom houses?

• There is an overwhelming objection to these plans – please listen to the community because they know the area.

• IF we have to have these houses I hope they are nothing like the ones out a Newby Bridge!

• Houses already subject to flooding. This will worsen with development.

• Amenities!! Not even a shop planned for 800 homes.

• Access to A590 at Cross-a-Moor key issue. Ideally roundabout. At very least traffic lights.

• 35% affordable homes should be for Swarthmoor residents not people off the village.

• Would have liked to see pictures of “affordable” housing, not luxury detached! How many of each?

• 2nd Pedestrian Crossing at the further end of the village.

• Very difficult to get out of Main Road (impossibly if turning right). Need traffic lights.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 65

• Squaring off the village wil create a High and Low Swarthmoor which will lead to calls for a bypass in the future. This will ultimately lead to the loss of more waking [? Unclear word] WORKING farmland.

• I like pictures 1, 5 and 15. The feel is better than the rest. It is more welcoming.

• No pebble dashing please – it looks scruffy very quickly!

• Is it going to end up being a permanent building site?! Only build enough at a time and sell.

• Increased impact on the A590 from the houses allocated to Mountbarrow Road, Croftlands etc. Traffic from those houses will use the Cross-a-Moor Junction.

• Provision for self-build plots

Page 318 • Provision for outdoor play areas that suit babies/toddlers and teenage children.

• Play area for children. • Dog walking area. • Village Green area with trees and plants.

• Adequate parking.

• Mixed style development is essential.

• 161?!! Are you proposing shoe box living that results in family breakdown?

• Families need adequate gardens.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 66

3.0 OPEN SPACE, BIODIVERSITY AND LANDSCAPING

• Has anybody checked for mine shafts?

• The hedges on the site will obviously go. They should be replaced along the north boundary.

• The play area should be near the nursery and memorial hall.

• Don’t overcrowd development.

• Children’s Play area. Hedgerow and trees in keeping with the area.

• Maximise views to Lindal. Make a feature of it.

• Water run-off pond? Landscaped area to make a feature.

Page 319 • Paved areas for play and people to meet/talk.

• Kids’ play – somewhere to kick a ball about without being told off!

• Stream, trees and wild flower meadow. Paths.

• New play areas.

• I like pictures 1 and 3 (Landscaping). They have a good feel.

• 10-15% of the site open space. Let’s say 2 areas of open space at each end of the site.

• Football pitch-sized Village Green with Sub [? Couldn’t make out writing] and trees. Wild area.

• Roof gardens on selected houses.

• Small tree area – willow, silver birch.

Draft Development Brief Cross-a-Moor Consultation Statement 67

This page is intentionally left blank

Page 320 Appendix 3

EIA Title: Draft Development Briefs – July 2014

1.0 The public sector equality duty (2011) covers the following eight protected characteristics :

Age, disability, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity. The duty also covers marriage and civil partnership, but only relating to the elimination of unlawful discrimination (see below, 2.0).

1.1 SLDC includes “rurality” as an additional category in its equality impact assessments.

2.0 The General Equality Duty. SLDC, in the exercise of its functions, should: a. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act. b. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. c. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

1 Page 321 Step 1

Summarise the subject and expected outcomes of this EIA. This EIA will demonstrate how the techniques used by the Council to engage with the main stakeholders in the production of the Draft Development Briefs have been tailored in order to attract all groups to make their views known. This EIA will demonstrate how the engagement undertaken in preparing the proposals for the Draft Development Briefs and their contents are not likely to have an adverse effect on any protected group as described by the Equality Act.

Who are your main stakeholders and list any engagement undertaken (include surveys, feedback forms, complaints, statistics etc). Informal engagement/dialogue with key stakeholders:

The Council undertook an informal round of discussion and dialogue with key bodies listed in the ‘Phase 1 Development Briefs Proposals Document’ in December 2013/January 2014. This engagement enabled these bodies to respond to matters relating to the below:

 key issues that need to be considered in the brief;  identification of key local stakeholders;  stakeholders’ roles in the process;  nature of the type of future community engagement exercises;  identification of relevant information particularly infrastructure provision (for example utilities provision).

Issues and Options Consultation:

The Council has used the Local Plan consultee database to ensure a wide range of stakeholders have been consulted prior to the preparation of the Draft Development Brief, in order to hear their views and use these where appropriate to inform its preparation. The table below sets out who the Council has engaged with at the Issues and Options Consultation undertaken in February-March 2014.

Who we have engaged with

Specific Consultation Bodies  Statutory bodies: Natural England, Environment Agency and English Heritage.  Duty to Cooperate bodies  Neighbouring Town / Parish Councils and Local Planning Authorities. General Consultation Bodies  Members of the public  Local and County Council Elected Members (Councillors)  Groups representing voluntary, racial/ethnic, national, religious, disability and business interests.  Specific groups representing certain interests who may cove r for example environmental, health, education, transport, leisure, economic development and community needs or equalities issues. 2 Page 322 This included all individuals who, at the time of consultation, were identified on the Local Plan consultee database and had indicated to us that they had an interest in the Cross- a-Moor Development Brief; residents at all addresses within an identified area close to the development brief sites and all community groups, businesses and other organisations registered on our consultation database.

The Council has a Statement of Community Involvement which sets out how the Council will engage in the production of Local Plan documents. Based on these requirements the Council prior to the Issues and Options Consultation undertook the following:  Wrote (by email or letter) to individuals who, at the time, were identified on the Local Plan consultee database and had indicated to us that they had an interest in the Development Briefs;  Placed all relevant documents on the Council’s website , with links from the homepage;  Made all relevant documents available at Council Offices and at Local libraries ;  Briefed all relevant District Councillors and County Councillors by email/letter on the proposals and consultation process;  Briefed Town and Parish Councils by email/letter on the proposals and consultation process;  Issued a press release to the local media , which generated coverage in the local press and radio;  Placed formal press notices in the local Westmorland Gazette and Evening Mail newspapers prior to the start of the consultation;  Placed informal adverts in the local Westmorland Gazette and Evening Mail newspapers prior to the start of the consultation;  Used Facebook & Twitter to promote awareness of the development briefs process.

During the Consultation  Placed an article in South Lakeland News (Feb. 2014 issue), a free newspaper that is distributed to all households in the District;  Enabled responses to be submitted online, by email, by post or by hand ;  Held interactive drop-in open day event for each of the sites subject to a development brief (from 11am-7pm);  Sent postcards to all addresses within an identified area close to each of the Development Brief sites informing residents about the drop-in exhibition and participation event held specifically relating to that site;  Put up ‘site notices’ at key locations around the periphery of the Sites;  Used Facebook & Twitter to provide reminders about the drop-in events;  Included information in/on Parish/Community newsletters and websites where possible and relevant;  Held a stand at a Local Area Partnership conference (4 th March 2014) to promote awareness of the development briefs process.

Drop-in events

Between 150-200 people attended each of the drop-in consultation events.

At the events, display boards were used to set out background information and maps

3 Page 323 and aerial photographs showing the sites and photographs/sketches illustrating examples of different design and layout, access or green infrastructure features.

Very large maps (showing key site features, constraints, opportunities) were laid out on three tables, each focusing on a different theme (open space/green infrastructure, access/transport and design/layout) along with a range of other information to help people understand the context of the sites and existing information held about the sites and what we were asking them to think about.

Using the maps and flip-charts, people could use pens/pencils or post-it notes to record their thoughts. They could also use smaller copies of the maps to draw their ideas on and submit as part of their response if they wished. Response forms and other documentation were available to view and take away.

A ‘House of ideas’ activity for children was used, which involved different sections of a house representing different aspects for consideration such as green spaces or design and stickers being used to enable children to select which aspects they felt were most important.

Kendal College

In addition an event was held on 24 th April 2014 at Kendal College, specifically to help enhance engagement with young people. These sessions looked at Kendal Parks, Kirkby Lonsdale, Scroggs Wood, South East Milnthorpe and Croftlands sites only as these were the sites most familiar to the students involved.

Comments received

All comments received can be viewed on the Council website http://tinyurl.com/kb8c3az .

Evidence of how the comments received have been used to inform the Draft Development Briefs is shown in the Consultation Statement.

Step 2

Equality Action Plan

In providing this Mitigating actions (to avoid Lead Complete service will there be negative impact): Officer & Y/N any negative impacts When on the following people? 1. Age (young and old) 2. Black and Minority Ethnic 3. Disabled 4. Faith/Belief 5. Sexual Orientation 6. Gender 7. Gender reassignment 8. Pregnancy and maternity

4 Page 324 9. Marriage and Civil Partnership 10. People in rural areas

(See glossary below for definitions) ENGAGEMENT

 Monitoring consultation Development To do as part ALL GROUPS responses in order to provide Plans of next evidence of the type of person Manager consultation who has responded, this will be Alastair Aug/Sept done through the use of a McNeill 2014 monitoring form.

 Using the equality groups’ own Development To do as part publicity material such as Plans of next newsletters to publicise Manager consultation consultation on the draft Alastair Aug/Sept development briefs. McNeill 2014

AGE  Identify additional techniques to Development To do as part engage younger people ; this Plans of next could include holding events at Manager consultation schools and other education Alastair Aug/Sept establishments, making McNeill 2014 documentation and publicity material appealing to younger people. Issues raised – consultation events

ALL GROUPS Support for range of Draft proposals include support for a Development To do as part house types and sizes to range of mix and type of housing (tenure Plans of next help accommodate needs and type including affordable housing) to Manager consultation and demands of all ages ensure there are opportunities for people Alastair Aug/Sept of all ages to access new housing. McNeill 2014

AGE

Homes to be built to Ongoing Government review of housing Development To be accommodate needs of standards will have implications for Plans included in internal housing design and how this Manager draft briefs ageing population responds positively to the needs of older Alastair July/August people, helping to ensure that new McNeill 2014 housing accommodates their needs.

Ensuring the design Draft proposals include design principles Development To be and layout of and traffic/movement frameworks and Plans included in development responds green infrastructure frameworks which Manager draft briefs positively to the respond positively to the interests of all Alastair July/August interests of all age age groups – particularly with regard to McNeill 2014 groups ensuring safe user friendly access through the site and to surrounding areas. Ensuring the developments include Draft proposals include provision of new Development To be 5 Page 325 recreational space of green space with recreational and Plans included in value to all ages amenity benefits for all ages e.g. ensuring Manager draft briefs play areas consider the play needs of Alastair July/August babies and toddlers right through to McNeill 2014 teenagers.

DISABLED PEOPLE

Ensuring the design and Draft proposals include design principles Development To be and traffic/movement frameworks and Plans included in layout of development green infrastructure frameworks which Manager draft briefs responds to the interests respond positively to the interests of Alastair July/August of disabled people disabled people– particularly with regard McNeill 2014 to ensuring safe user friendly access through the site and to surrounding areas with consideration given to the need for improvements to existing footpaths/road access to make sites easy to access.

Ongoing Government review of housing Development To be standards will have implications for Plans included in internal housing design and how this Manager draft briefs responds positively to the needs of older Alastair July/August people, helping to ensure that new McNeill 2014 housing accommodates their needs.

PREGNANCY AND MATERNITY Draft proposals include design principles Development To be and traffic/movement frameworks and Plans included in green infrastructure frameworks which Manager draft briefs respond positively to the interests of Alastair July/August pregnant mothers and parents of young McNeill 2014 children, particularly with regard to ensuring safe user friendly access through the site and to surrounding areas with consideration given to the need for improvements to existing footpaths/road access to make sites easy to access.

Step 3

Examples of good equality practice you have put in place (For example, all venues used are accessible for people with mobility, hearing and sight impairments)

Methods of engagement used:

 Translation/ other formats available on all documents.  Improved provision of disabled adaptation  Venues for drop in days are accessible for those in wheelchairs and open into the evenings (11:00- 19.00).  Large print versions of the planning maps are made available and staff are on hand to explain.  Specific activities for children  Specific event for young adults/students

6 Page 326 Date: June 2014 EIA Author(s): Damian Law Assistant Director: Michael Keane Document version number: 1 Date for Review: EIA forwarded to Policy Officer Yes

Glossary

Age: This refers to a person having a particular age (for example, 32 year-olds) or being within an age group (for example, 18-30 year-olds).

Civil partnership: Legal recognition of a same-sex couple’s relationship. Civil partners must be treated the same as married couples on a range of legal matters.

Disability: A person has a disability if s/he has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. Includes: Physical/sensory disability: Mental Health: Learning disability.

Gender reassignment: This is the process of transitioning from one sex to another, considered a personal process rather than a medical one and it does not require someone to undergo medical treatment in order to be protected.

Maternity: The period after giving birth. It is linked to maternity leave in the employment context. In the non-work context, protection against maternity discrimination is for 26 weeks after giving birth, including as a result of breastfeeding.

Race: It refers to a group of people defined by their colour, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origins. Includes, Asian, Black and White minority ethnic groups inc. Eastern Europeans, Irish people and Gypsy Travellers.

Religion or belief: “Religion” means any religion, including a reference to a lack of religion. “Belief” includes religious and philosophical beliefs including lack of belief (for example, Atheism). The category includes, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and non religious beliefs such as Humanism.

Sexual orientation: This is whether a person's sexual attraction is towards their own sex, the opposite sex or to both sexes.

7 Page 327 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 328 Item No.17

South Lakeland District Council Cabinet 23 rd July 2014 Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 - Annual Review

PORTFOLIO: Councillor Sue Sanderson - Environment and People Portfolio Holder

REPORT FROM: Debbie Storr - Director of Policy and Resources (Monitoring Officer)

REPORT AUTHOR: Matthew Neal - Solicitor to the Council

WARDS: N/a

KEY DECISION NO: N/a

1.0 EXPECTED OUTCOME 1.1 That the operation of the Council’s surveillance policies and practices under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (“RIPA”) are reviewed 2.0 RECOMMENDATION 2.1 That Cabinet review the operation of the Council’s policies and procedures as regards RIPA for the year 2013/14 and agree that no changes are required to the Council’s current policies. 3.0 BACKGROUND AND PROPOSALS 3.1 RIPA regulates covert investigations by a number of bodies, including local authorities. It was introduced to ensure that individuals’ rights are protected while also ensuring that public authorities have the powers they need to do the job effectively. The Council is included within the RIPA framework with regard to the authorisation of both Directed Surveillance and of the use of Covert Human Intelligence Sources and has adopted a Surveillance Policy. 3.2 RIPA requires that when the Council undertakes Covert Surveillance for the purposes of a specific investigation in a manner that is likely to lead to the obtaining of private information about a person, a specific internal authorisation is required from a designated council officer. The surveillance contemplated in these circumstances is defined as Directed Surveillance.

Page 329

3.3 RIPA requires that when the Council arranges for a person to form a relationship with a person for the covert purpose of obtaining and disclosing information about that person, a specific internal authorisation is required from a designated council officer. The surveillance contemplated in these circumstances is defined as use of a Covert Human Intelligence Source. 3.4 Since 1 November 2012 the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 has additionally required that authorisations for both Directed Surveillance and Covert Human Intelligence Sources need be approved by the Magistrates Court before they take effect. In order to give such approval the Magistrates have to be satisfied that: • There were reasonable grounds for the Authorising Officer approving the application to believe that the Directed Surveillance or deployment of a Covert Human Intelligence Source was necessary and proportionate and that there remain reasonable grounds for believing so; and • The Authorising Officer was of the correct seniority; and • The granting of the authorisation was for the prescribed purpose that is preventing or detecting crime. 3.5 This report is presented, amongst other matters, to enable an annual review of the operation of the Council’s policies for the period between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2014. During that period there have been no applications for an authorisation for Directed Surveillance or use of Covert Human Intelligence Source. At the date of this report there are no live authorisations. 3.6 The Office of Surveillance Commissioners advises that authorities should provide levels of training appropriate to the needs of users. On 17 April 2012 training was provided on RIPA by James Button and Co Solicitors. 21 officers attended of whom one was an Authorising Officer and the other was the Senior Responsible Officer (the Director of Policy and Resources (Monitoring Officer)). The training dealt, amongst other matters, with the prospective changes to the law as set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. In the circumstances and given the fact that only one authorisation was required in the previous year, in July 2013 Cabinet agreed that training should be on a bi-annual basis, and arrangements are being made for further training to be provided in 2014/15 by Act Now Training. The Council’s procedures are available on the website and the Solicitor to the Council is available to provide advice to officers on compliance with RIPA. Therefore it is considered that this frequency of training will be sufficient.

3.7 The Office of Surveillance Commissioners is required to carry out periodic reviews of all the Council’s regulated surveillance activities. The Assistant Surveillance Commissioner inspected the Council’s Surveillance Policy (and associated practices) in October 2011 and the policy that was extant at that time was considered by him to be of good quality.

3.8 A further inspection by an Inspector appointed by the Officer of Surveillance Commissioner of the Council’s Surveillance Policy, and associated practices, will take place on 16 September 2014.

Page 330

3.9 The current Council Surveillance policy was last significantly amended with effect from 1 November 2012. The policy is attached to this report as Appendix 1. No changes to this document are proposed.

4.0 CONSULTATION 4.1 As from 1 November 2012 in addition to the requirement for approval to be sought from the Magistrates Court there have also been regulations made under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. These impose further restrictions on the use of Surveillance. From that date an authorisation cannot be granted unless it is for the purpose of preventing or detecting a criminal offence and the criminal offence which is sought to be prevented or detected is punishable, by a maximum term of at least six months’ imprisonment. There is an exception to this in relation to offences involving the sale of tobacco and alcohol to underage children. Such offences can still be the subject of an authorisation even if the offence does not lead to a maximum of 6 months imprisonment. Also Surveillance for the purposes of tackling anti-social behaviour can no longer be authorised, unless the behaviour constitutes a criminal offence carrying a maximum prison term of six months or more. 4.2 As of 1 November 2012 in accordance with delegated authority given by Cabinet on 29 August 2012 the Council’s policy was amended to take into account the new Act, associated regulations and guidance. It was also placed on the Council’s intranet and web site.

4.3 The Portfolio Holder has been consulted and is content with the proposals set out in this report. 5.0 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 5.1 No changes have been suggested to the current Surveillance Policy. 5.2 Members could suggest changes to the policy. Save for minor textual changes any significant changes would need to be considered against the legal and policy background. 6.0 LINKS TO COUNCIL PRIORITIES 6.1 The proposals links into the Council Plan values of Excellence, Openness and Transparency 7.0 IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Financial and Resources 7.1.1 There are no significant financial implications 7.2 Human Resources 7.2.1 There are no human resources implications save for the need to ensure that appropriate staff are given sufficient training in this area of law and practice 7.3 Legal 7.3.1 The legal implications are as set out in the report.

Page 331

7.4 Social, Economic and Environmental 7.4.1 A sustainability impact assessment not been carried out. This proposal is considered to have a neutral impact on sustainability. 7.5 Equality and Diversity 7.5.1 An equality and diversity impact assessment has not been carried out. Obtaining authorisation protects the Council and its officers from complaints of interference with the rights protected by Article 8(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights. Provided activities undertaken are reasonable and proportionate they will not be in contravention of Human Rights legislation. The satisfaction of such tests should ensure no breach of the Equality Act 2010. 7.6 Risk Risk Consequence Controls required Failure to comply Criminal enforcement Compliance with the Act, with the terms of action by the Council training and regular the legislation. would be at risk of failure reviews. due to challenges to the evidence.

CONTACT OFFICERS Solicitor to the Council Tel: 01539 793305 email – [email protected] APPENDICES ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT Appendix No. 1 Current Council Surveillance Policy

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE N/a TRACKING INFORMATION Assistant Portfolio Solicitor to the SMT Scrutiny Director Holder Council Committee 10 June 2014 16 June 2014 Report author 12 June 2014 N/a Executive Committee Council Section 151 Monitoring (Cabinet) Officer Officer 23 July 2014 N/a 10 June 2014 10 June 2014 Human Leader Ward Resource Councillor(s) Services Manager N/a

Page 332

APPENDIX 1

PURPOSE OF APPENDIX The purpose of this Appendix is to provide additional information by setting out the current Council policy on Surveillance pursuant to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Page 333

SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

GUIDANCE ON SURVEILLANCE UNDER THE REGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS ACT 2000

Page 334

November 2012

CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Directed Surveillance 3. Covert use of Human Intelligence Source (CHIS) 4. Authorisation, Renewals, Duration and Cancellation 5. CCTV 6. Central Register of Authorisations 7. Codes of Practice 8. Benefits of Obtaining Authorisation under the 2000 Act 9. Scrutiny and Tribunal Appendix 1-Procedure for Applying for Authorisations Appendix 2 Standard Forms and associated Index

Page 335

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Regulation of Investigatory Power Act 2000 (the 2000 Act) regulates covert investigations by a number of bodies, including local authorities. It was introduced to ensure that individuals’ rights are protected while also ensuring that law enforcement and security agencies have the powers they need to do job their effectively.

1.2 South Lakeland District Council (“the Council”) is therefore included within the 2000 Act framework with regard to the authorisation of both Directed Surveillance and of the use of Covert Human Intelligence Sources.

1.3 The purpose of this guidance is to explain the scope of the 2000 Act and the circumstances where it applies and provide guidance on the authorisation procedures to be followed.

1.4 The Council has had regard to the Codes of Practice produced by the Home Office in preparing this guidance and Legal Services have copies to which staff can refer. The relevant codes of practice and associated guidance that relate to authorised Council activity are: (a) Home Office Code of Practice – Covert Surveillance; (b) Home Office Code of Practice – Covert Human Intelligence Sources (c) Guidance from the Office of Surveillance Commissioners (d) Protection of Freedoms Act 2012-changes to provisions under the Regulation of Investigatory Power Act 2000 Home Office Guidance for Magistrates’ Courts in England and Wales for a local authority application seeking an order approving the grant or renewal of a RIPA authorisation or notice

1.5 In summary the 2000 Act requires that when the Council undertakes directed surveillance or uses “covert human intelligence source” these activities must only be authorised by an officer with delegated powers when the relevant criteria are satisfied. The 2000 Act states that if authorisation confers entitlement to engage in a certain conduct and the conduct is in accordance with the authorisation, then it should be “lawful for all purposes”. The Council has nominated officers who can grant authorisations. They are as follows:

The Chief Executive, the Director People and Places, and all Assistant Directors.

1.6 Chapter 2 of Part 2 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“the 2012 Act”) amends the 2000 Act so as to require the Council to obtain judicial approval for the use of covert investigatory techniques available to them under the 2000 Act. Prior to the 2012 Act authorisations for the use of these techniques were granted internally by an Authorised Officer and were not subject to any independent approval mechanism.

1.7 Part 2 of the 2012 Act specifies the grounds for which authorisations can be granted for carrying out both Directed Surveillance and of the use of Covert Human Intelligence Sources. Furthermore the 2012 Act provides that use of

Page 336

the 2000 Act to authorise directed surveillance will have to be confined to cases where the offence under investigation carries a maximum custodial sentence of 6 months or more, save in cases in relation to the sale of alcohol and tobacco to minors where the new threshold would not apply. 1.8 The Council will have to apply to the magistrates’ court for an order under approving the use of the authorisation. 1.9 Subject to the need for approval from the Magistrates Court as referred to above, authorisation under the 2000 Act gives lawful authority to carry out surveillance and the use of a source. Obtaining authorisation helps to protect the council and its officers from complaints of interference with the rights protected by Article 8(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights, which is now enshrined in English law through the Human Rights Act 1998. This is because the interference with the private life of citizens will be “in accordance with the law”, provided activities undertaken are also “reasonable and proportionate” they will not be in contravention of Human Rights legislation.

1.10 There are two types of surveillance:

Directed Surveillance – This is surveillance undertaken for the purpose of a specific operation and in a manner which is likely to result in the obtaining of private information about a person (whether or not that person is the target of the investigation or operation); and is carried out in a planned manner and not by way of an immediate response; and

Intrusive Surveillance – This is surveillance that takes place on residential premises or any private vehicle and involves the presence of an individual on the premises or in the car, or by the use of a surveillance device that although not in the car/premises, provides data as though it was.

1.11 In no circumstances does the 2000 Act authorise the carrying out of any form of intrusive surveillance by local authorities. It should be noted that the Council cannot authorise “Intrusive Surveillance”.

1.12 Deciding when an authorisation is required involves making a judgment. For example, environmental health officers might covertly observe and then visit a shop as part of their enforcement functions. Such observations may involve the use of equipment to merely reinforce normal sensory perception, such as binoculars, or the use of cameras. Where this does not involve systematic surveillance of an individual, it forms a part of the everyday functions of law enforcement authorities or other public bodies. This low-level activity will not usually be regulated under the provisions of the 2000 Act.

1.13 Conversely where systematic covert surveillance is undertaken then an authorisation will be required. Neither the provisions of the 2000 Act or of the Codes of Practice cover the use of overt CCTV surveillance systems. Members of the public are aware that such systems are in use around the town centre and car parks in order to prevent crime. However use of CCTV cameras to target a person, his/her property or a building would require an Authorisation and this is dealt with in Section 5 of the document. If you are in

Page 337

doubt, seek the advice of an Authorising Officer, if they are in doubt they will seek advice from the Legal Services Section.

2. DIRECTED SURVEILLANCE

2.1 Surveillance is ‘Directed’ for the purposes of the 2000 Act if it is covert, but not intrusive and is undertaken:

(a) for the purposes of a specific investigation or a specific operation;

(b) in such a manner as is likely to result in the obtaining of private information about a person (whether or not one is specifically identified for the purposes of the investigation or operation); and

(c) otherwise than by way of an immediate response to events or circumstances the nature of which is such that it would not be reasonably practicable for an authorisation to be sought for the carrying out of the surveillance. 2.2 Before any officer of the Council undertakes any surveillance of any individual or individuals they need to assess whether the activity comes within the 2000 Act. In order to do this the following key questions need to be asked:

(a) Is the surveillance covert? Covert surveillance is that carried out in a manner calculated to ensure that subjects of it are unaware it is or may be taking place. If activities are open and not hidden from the subjects of an investigation, the 2000 Act framework does not apply;

(b) Is it for the purposes of a specific investigation or a specific operation e.g. are town centre and car park CCTV cameras which are readily visible to anyone walking around the area covered? The answer is not if their usage is to monitor the general activities of what is happening in the vicinity. If that usage, however, changes, the 2000 Act may apply. If the CCTV cameras are targeting a particular known individual, and are being used in monitoring his activities, that has turned into a specific operation which will require authorisation.

(c) Is it in such a manner that is likely to result in the obtaining of private information about a person e.g. if part of an investigation is to observe a person’s home to determine their comings and goings then that would be covered. If it is likely that observations will not result in the obtaining of private information about a person, then it is outside the 2000 Act framework. However, the use of ‘test purchasers’ may involve the use of covert human intelligence sources. If in doubt, it is safer to get authorisation;

(d) Is it by way of an immediate response to events or circumstances? The Home Office gives the example of anything happening as an immediate response to something occurring during the course of an observer’s work which is unforeseeable. If so it is likely that an authorisation is not required. However, if as a result of an immediate

Page 338

response, a specific investigation subsequently takes place, that brings it within the 2000 Act framework.

3. COVERT USE OF HUMAN INTELLIGENCE SOURCE

3.1 A person is a Covert Human Intelligence Source (“a CHIS”) if he/she establishes or maintains a personal or other relationship with a person for the covert purpose of using such a relationship either to obtain information or provide access to information about another person. A relationship is covert, if it is conducted in a manner that is calculated to ensure that one of the parties to the relationship is unaware of that purpose.

3.2 The above clearly covers the use of professional witnesses to obtain information and evidence. It can also cover “entrapment” cases.

3.3 Special safeguards apply to the granting of authorisations where the CHIS would be a juvenile (under 18 years of age). Authorisations cannot be granted unless the provisions within The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Juveniles) Order 2000 are satisfied. Only the Chief Executive (or in his absence, the Corporate Director People and Places) can authorise the use of a juvenile CHIS. If any Council officer intends to use juvenile CHIS, advice and guidance should be sought from Legal Services before any steps are taken.

4. AUTHORISATIONS, RENEWALS, DURATION AND CANCELLATION

4.1 For directed surveillance no officer shall grant an authorisation for the carrying out of directed surveillance unless he/she believes that an authorisation is necessary and proportionate to what is sought to be achieved by carrying it out. 4.2 The 2012 Act provides that an authorisation is necessary only if it is for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime. The onus is therefore on the person authorising such surveillance to satisfy themselves it fulfils this criteria.

4.3 In order to ensure that authorising officers have sufficient information in order to make an informed decision and so that a sound case is presented when seeking the approval of the Magistrates Court, it is important that detailed records are maintained. As such the standard forms in the Appendix 2 are to be completed where relevant. It is also sensible to make any authorisation sufficiently wide enough to cover all the means required as well as being able to prove effective monitoring of what is done against that is authorised.

4.4 For urgent grants or renewal, oral authorisations are acceptable. In all other cases, authorisations must be in writing using the appropriate standard form RIPA 1 (Directed Surveillance) or RIPA 5 (CHIS). Appendix 2 to this guidance contains copies of all the standard forms which are to be used by all Council Directorates.

Page 339

4.5 Although it is possible to combine two authorisations in one , the Council’s practice is for separate forms to be completed to maintain the distinction between Directed Surveillance and the use of a CHIS.

4.6 Authorisations lapse, if not renewed (a) within 72 hours if either granted or renewed orally, (or by a person whose authorisation was confirmed to urgent cases) beginning with the time of the last grant or renewal; or (b) 12 months, if in writing/non-urgent , from date of last renewal if it is for the conduct of use of a covert human intelligence source; or (c) in the case of Directed Surveillance 3 months from the date of their grant or latest renewal.

4.7 Furthermore, as is the case with an Authorisation, renewal needs the approval of the Magistrates Court.

4.8 Forms RIPA 2 (Directed Surveillance) and RIPA 7 (CHIS) must be used for all renewals. The following should also be noted:-

(a) All authorisations must be reviewed every 4 weeks and Forms RIPA 3 (Directed Surveillance) or RIPA 7 (CHIS) completed;

(b) When an authorisation is cancelled a Form RIPA 4 (Directed Surveillance) or RIPA 8 (CHIS) must be completed.

4.9 An authorisation can be renewed using the Renewal Form RIPA 2 (directed surveillance) or RIPA 6 (CHIS) at any time before it ceases to have effect by any person entitled to grant a new authorisation in the same terms. In the case of a CHIS, a person should not renew (using form RIPA 6) unless a review has been carried out (using form RIPA 7) and that person has considered the results of the review when deciding to renew or not. A review must cover what use has been made of the CHIS, the tasks given to them and information obtained.

4.10 Authorising Officers are responsible for ensuring that authorisations undergo timely reviews for which a RIPA 3 (Directed Surveillance) or RIPA 7 (CHIS) form must be completed. Also that they are cancelled promptly if the Directed Surveillance activity (using form RIPA 4) or use of a CHIS (using form RIPA 8) is no longer necessary.

4.11 Cancellation of the authorisation and completion of Form RIPA 4 (Directed Surveillance) or RIPA 8 (CHIS) must be carried out in all cases as soon as the actual surveillance activity for which authorisation was specifically granted ceases. Authorisations must not be allowed to continue in force until they reach the stated expiry date without cancellation if the surveillance activity or use of a source is no longer in operation. However should this occur formal cancellation must be carried out and evidenced by the completion of Form RIPA 4 (Directed Surveillance) or RIPA 8 (CHIS) as soon as this is detected even though this will result in a cancellation date after the expiry date.

Page 340

4.12 Cancellation should wherever possible be carried out by the same person that granted the original request or renewal. If that person is no longer available to do this then it should be completed by the person appointed to replace them or by one of the other authorised officers.

4.13 A copy of the Form RIPA 4 (Directed Surveillance) or RIPA 8 (CHIS) completed to evidence the cancellation must be sent to the Legal Services Section to be recorded on the central register and the original held securely within the originating unit.

4.14 Any person giving an authorisation should give particular consideration to collateral intrusion i.e. interference with the privacy of persons other than the subject(s) of surveillance. Such collateral intrusion or interference would be a matter of greater concern in cases where there are special sensitivities, for example in cases of premises used by lawyers or for any form of medical or professional counselling or therapy.

4.15 An application for an authorisation should include an assessment of the risk of any collateral intrusion or interference. This will be taken into account by the authorising officer, particularly when considering the proportionality of the surveillance.

4.16 Those carrying out the covert surveillance should inform the authorising officer if the operation/investigation unexpectedly interferes with the privacy of individuals who are not the original subjects of the investigation or covered by the authorisation in some other way. In some cases the original authorisation may not be sufficient and consideration should be given to whether a separate authorisation is required.

4.17 Any person giving an authorisation will also need to be aware of particular sensitivities in the local community where the surveillance is taking place or of similar activities being undertaken by other public authorities which could impact on the development of the surveillance.

4.18 No operations will be undertaken in circumstances where investigators believe that surveillance will lead to them to intrude on spiritual counselling between a Minister and a member of his/her faith. In this respect, spiritual counselling is defined as conversations with a Minister of Religion acting in his/her official capacity where the person being counselled is seeking or the Minister is imparting forgiveness, or absolution of conscience.

4.19 The 2000 Act refers to ‘confidential material’ namely:

(a) matters subject to legal privilege;

(b) confidential personal information; or

(c) confidential journalistic material.

Page 341

4.20 The Act does not provide any special protection for ‘confidential material’. Nevertheless, such material is particularly sensitive, and is subject to additional safeguards under this code. In cases where the likely consequence of the conduct of a source would be for any person to acquire knowledge of confidential material, the deployment of the source should be subject to special authorisation. In such circumstances only the Chief Executive, or in his absence the Director–People and Places can grant an authorisation.

4.21 In general, any application for an authorisation which is likely to result in the acquisition of confidential material should include an assessment of how likely it is that confidential material will be acquired. Special care should be taken where the target of the investigation is likely to be involved in handling confidential material. Such applications should only be considered in exceptional and compelling circumstances with full regard to the proportionality issues this raises.

4.22 The following general principles apply to the acquisition of confidential material:

(a) Confidential material should not be retained or copied unless it is necessary for a specified purpose;

(b) Confidential material should be disseminated only where an appropriate officer is satisfied that it is necessary for a specific purpose;

(c) The retention or dissemination of such information should be accompanied by a clear warning of its confidential nature; and appropriate safeguards as to its security must be implemented;

(d) Confidential material should be destroyed as soon as it is no longer necessary to retain it for a specified purpose.

4.23 In cases of joint working, for example, with other agencies on the same operation only one authorisation is required. Duplication of authorisations does not affect the lawfulness of the activities to be conducted, but may create an unnecessary administrative burden on the agencies.

4.24 Applications for Directed Surveillance or the use of a source are to be retained by the Authorised Officer, for a period of 5 years. Where it is believed that the records could be relevant to pending or future criminal proceedings, they should be retained for a suitable further period commensurate to any subsequent review.

4.25 Authorising Officers must ensure compliance with the appropriate data protection requirements and the relevant codes of practice in the handling and storage of material. Where material is obtained by surveillance, which is wholly unrelated to a criminal or other investigation not to any person who is the subject of the investigation, and there is no reason to believe it will be relevant to future civil or criminal proceedings, it should be destroyed immediately.

Page 342

Consideration of whether or not unrelated material should be destroyed is the responsibility of the Authorising Officer.

4.26 There is nothing in the 2000 Act that prevents material obtained through the proper use of the authorisation procedures from being used in other investigations. However, the use outside the authority that authorised surveillance, of any material obtained by means of covert surveillance and, other than in pursuance of the grounds on which it was obtained, should be authorised only in the most exceptional circumstances.

4.27 The Council will not use an external or professional source for the purpose of obtaining information. It is not the Council’s general practice to seek, cultivate or develop a relationship with a potential external or professional source. It is possible, though highly unlikely, that the role of a Council employee may be that of a source, for example in ‘entrapment cases’

4.28 The Authorising Officer must consider the safety and welfare of an employee acting as a source, and the foreseeable consequences to others of the tasks they are asked to carry out. A risk assessment should be carried out before authorisation is given. Consideration from the start for the safety and welfare of the employee, even after cancellation of the authorisation, should also be considered.

4.29 The Council’s practice is not to use an employee acting as a source to infiltrate existing criminal activity, or to be a party to the commission of criminal offences, even where this is within the limits recognised by law.

4.30 Further details about the Council’s Procedures for seeking authorisations are set out in Appendix 1.

5. CCTV

5.1 Use of the Council owned or operated CCTV cameras to target a person, his/her property or a building would be directed surveillance. Before an officer of the Council undertakes such activity, an Authorisation is required in accordance with the procedures set out in this document. The only exception that applies is where an emergency situation applies and there are good reasons why an urgent application could not be made. The reasons for the operation and its emergency nature should be noted by the CCTV operator and a RIPA application made as soon as possible.

5.2 When there is use of the Council owned or operated CCTV cameras by an external organisation to target a person, his/her property or a building it is for that organisation to obtain their own RIPA authorisation. A copy of this Authorisation must be passed to the appropriate responsible Council officer before such activity can be carried out. If in the judgement of the CCTV operator the request is urgent they can authorise the use of the Council’s CCTV cameras but only upon receiving a written assurance from an officer of the organisations that authorisation will be obtained. Details of the request should

Page 343

be then be recorded by the operator and a copy of the authorisation sought as soon as is reasonably practicable.

6. CENTRAL REGISTER OF AUTHORISATIONS

6.1 The 2000 Act requires a central register of all authorisations to be maintained. The Solicitor to the Council maintains this register.

6.2 Whenever an authorisation is granted the Authorising Officer must arrange for a copy of the authorisation to be forwarded to the Legal Services Section. In addition copies of any other forms completed, as listed in Appendix 2, must also be so forwarded. Copies of the orders of the Magistrates Court approving or refusing the grant or renewal of an authorisation will also be placed on the Central Register of Authorisations.

6.3 It is the responsibility of each Directorate to arrange for the secure retention of all authorisations that are generated by them. Authorisation should only be held for as long as it is necessary. Once the investigation is closed (bearing in mind cases may be lodged some time after the initial work) the records held by the Directorate should be disposed of in an appropriate manner (e.g. shredded).

7. CODES OF PRACTICE

7.1 There are Home Office Codes of Practice referred to in paragraph 1.4 above, that expand on this guidance. The codes do not have the force of statute, but are admissible in evidence in any criminal and civil proceedings.

8. BENEFITS OF OBTAINING AUTHORISATION UNDER THE 2000 ACT

8.1 The Home Office Codes of Practice say councils should appoint a Senior Responsible Officer. This person is responsible for the integrity of the surveillance process, ensuring the Council complies with RIPA and relevant legislation, and also engaging with the Inspectors when they conduct their inspections. The Council’s Senior Responsible Officer is the Director of Policy and Resources (Monitoring Officer)

8.2 The Codes of Practice also say elected members should review the Council’s use of the 2000 Act and set the policy once a year. In addition to this, internal quarterly reports on the use of the 2000 Act should be considered to ensure that the consistency and compliance with Policy. These quarterly reports are submitted to the Cabinet Member for Central Services. Consideration should also be given to appropriate liaison with the Local Magistrates Court with a view to reviewing consistency of approach and any training needs of the court clerks and magistrates.

9. SCRUTINY AND TRIBUNAL

9.1 To effectively “police” RIPA Commissioners have been appointed to regulate conduct carried out under the 2000 Act. The Chief Surveillance Commissioner

Page 344

will keep under review, among others, the exercise and performance by the persons on whom are conferred or imposed, the powers and duties under the Act. This includes authorising directed surveillance and the use of covert human intelligence sources.

9.2 A tribunal has been established to consider and determine complaints made under the 2000 Act. Complaints can be made by persons aggrieved by surveillance. The forum hears application on a judicial review basis. Claims should be brought within one year unless it is just and equitable to extend that.

9.3 The tribunal can order, among other things, the quashing or cancellation of any warrant or authorisation and can order destruction of any records or information obtained by using a warrant or authorisation, and records of information held by any public authority in relation to any person.

Page 345

APPENDIX 1-PROCEDURE FOR APPLYING FOR AUTHORISATIONS

Applications 1. Except in urgent circumstances, applications for authorisation to carry out directed surveillance must be made in writing and should describe any conduct to be authorised and the purpose of the investigation or operation. The application should also include:-

• The reasons why the authorisation is necessary in the particular case and on the relevant ground-this is for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime or of preventing disorder;

• The reasons why the surveillance is considered proportionate to what it seeks to achieve;

• The nature of the surveillance;

• The identities where known, of those to be the subject of the surveillance;

• An explanation of the information which it is desired to obtain as a result of the surveillance;

• The details of any potential collateral intrusion and why the intrusion is justified;

• The details of any confidential information that is likely to be obtained as a consequence of the surveillance;

• The level of authority required (or recommended where that is different) for the surveillance; and

• A subsequent record of whether authority was given or refused, by whom and the time and date

Urgent Cases 2. In urgent cases the authorisation should record (as may be):-

• The reasons why the authorising officer or the officer entitled to act in urgent cases considered the case so urgent that an oral instead of a written authorisation was given; and/or

• The reasons why it was not reasonably practicable for the application to be considered by the authorising officer.

3. Where the authorisation is oral, the detail referred to above should be recorded in writing by the applicant as soon as reasonably practicable.

Renewals

Page 346

4. Applications for renewal should record the above information together with details of:-

• Whether this is the first renewal or every occasion on which the authorisation has been renewed previously;

• Any significant changes to the information previously provided;

• The reason why it is necessary to continue with the directed surveillance;

• The content and value to the investigation or operation of the information so far obtained by the surveillance;

• The result of regular reviews of the investigation or operation.

Covert Human Intelligence Source Records 5. The following information is included in records relating to each covert human intelligence source:- (a) the identify of the source; (b) the identify, where known, used by the source; (c ) any relevant investigating authority other than the authority maintaining the records; (d) the means by which the source is referred to within each relevant investigating authority; (e) any other significant information connected with the security and welfare of the source; (f) any confirmation made by a person granting or renewing an authorisation for the conduct or use of a source that the information in paragraph (d) has been considered and that any identified risks to the security and welfare of the source have where appropriate been properly explained to and understood by the source; (g) the date when, and the circumstances, in which the source was recruited; (h) the identities of all persons who, in relation to the source, are discharging or have discharged the functions mentioned in section 29(5)(a) to (c) or in any order made by the Secretary of Sate; (i) the periods during which those persons have discharged those responsibilities; (j) the tasks given to the source and the demands made of him in relation to his activities as a source; (k) all contacts or communication between the source and a person acting on behalf of any relevant investigating authority; (l) the information obtained by each relevant investigatory authority by the conduct or use of the source; (m) any dissemination by that authority of information obtained in that way; and (n) in the case of a source who is not an undercover operative, every payment, benefit or reward and every offer of a payment, benefit or reward that is made or provided by or on behalf of any relevant

Page 347

investigating authority in respect of the source’s activities for the benefit of that or any other relevant investigating authority.

Covert Human Intelligence Source Applications 6. Applications for authorisation for the use or conduct of a source should be in writing and record the information laid down within the relevant code of practice. Applications for renewal of covert human intelligence sources should record:-

• whether this is the first renewal or every occasion on which the authorisation has been renewed previously; • any significant changes to the information previously provided;

• the reasons why it is necessary to continue the use of the source;

• the use made of the source in the period since the grant, or, as the case may be, latest renewal of the authorisation;

• the tasks give to the source during that period and the information obtained from the conduct or use of the source;

• the result of regular reviews of the use of the source

Duration and Cancellation of Authorisations

7. For Direct surveillance the written authorisation will cease to have effect (unless renewed) at the end of a period of three months beginning with the day on which it took effect. Urgent Oral authorisations will, unless renewed cease to have effect after 72 hours beginning with the time when the grant or renewal was approved by the Magistrates Court..

8. In a case in which the authorisation is for the conduct of a covert human intelligence source, the authorisation shall cease to have effect after the period of 12 months beginning with the day on which the grant takes effect.

9. A person shall not renew an authorisation for a covert human intelligence source unless a review has been carried out as to the use made of the source, and tasks given during that period, and considered the same.

10. Authorisations should be cancelled if the criteria for the authorisation is no longer met. A separate authorisation is required for each investigation.

11. Reviews should be undertaken following any significant occurrence and the results of a review should be recorded on the central register of authorisations.

Magistrates Court

Page 348

12. No authorisation or renewal relating to Directed Surveillance or CHIS can be acted upon unless approval is given by the Magistrates Court. An application for such approval will be made by a representative of Legal Service accompanied by the Authorising Officer and the applicant.

Page 349

APPENDIX 2

Standard forms to be used in connection with applications to authorise surveillance under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

The standard forms are also published on the Intranet.

1 Form RIPA 1 Authorisation Directed Surveillance

2 Form RIPA 2 Renewal of a Directed Surveillance authorisation

3 Form RIPA 3 Review of a Directed Surveillance authorisation

5 Form RIPA 4 Cancellation of a Directed Surveillance authorisation

6 Form RIPA 5 Application for authorisation of the conduct or use of a Covert Human Intelligence Source (CHIS)

7 Form RIPA 6 Application for renewal of a Covert Human Intelligence Source (CHIS) Authorisation

8 Form RIPA 7 Review of a Covert Human Intelligence Source (CHIS) Authorisation

9 Form RIPA 8 Cancellation of authorisation for the use or conduct of a Covert Human Intelligence Source (CHIS)

Page 350