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, 10 February 2010, at 10.00 a.m. in the Georgian Room at the Town Hall, Kendal

Membership

Councillors

Brenda Gray (Housing and Development Portfolio Holder) Brendan Jameson (Leader and Promoting South Lakeland Portfolio Holder) Andy Shine (Deputy Leader and Policy, Performance and Resources Portfolio Holder) Hilary Stephenson (Central Services Portfolio Holder) Peter Thornton (Communities and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder) Graham Vincent (Economic Prosperity and Transport Portfolio Holder) Brenda Woof (Environment and Sustainability Portfolio Holder)

2 February 2010

Debbie Storr, Corporate Director (Monitoring Officer)

For all enquiries, please contact:- Committee Administrator: Mrs Inge Booth Telephone: 01539 733333 Ext.7434 e-mail: [email protected]

1

2 AGENDA Page Nos. PART I Standing Items/Monitoring Reports 1. APOLOGIES To receive apologies for absence, if any. 2. EXECUTIVE DECISION NOTICES 7 - 20 To authorise the Chairman to sign, as a correct record, the executive decisions made during the weeks ending 22 and 29 January 2010 (copies attached). 3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST To receive declarations by Members of personal and prejudicial interests in respect of items on this Agenda. 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. 4. LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – EXCLUDED ITEMS To consider whether the items, if any, in Part II of the Agenda should be considered in the presence of the press and public. 5. 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 Member Services Manager on 01539 717440. (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. 6. ANNUAL AUDIT LETTER (DECEMBER 2009) 21 - 38 To consider the District Auditor’s Annual Audit Letter 2008/09. 7. CORPORATE PLAN 2010 – 2013 (Referral to Council) 39 - 51 To consider the updated 2010-2013 Corporate Plan. 8. CORPORATE FINANCIAL MONITORING (OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2009) 53 - 65 To consider the Corporate Monitoring Report for the third quarter of the financial year 2009/10. 9. CONCESSIONARY FARES 2010/2011 67 - 72 To consider continuation of the existing Concessionary Travel Scheme for a further 12 months and to note recently announced changes to the operation and funding of the scheme.

3

10. 2010/11 GENERAL FUND SERVICES REVENUE BUDGET PROPOSALS 73 - 91 (Referral to Council) To consider the 2010/11 budget proposals. 11. 2010/11 REVENUE BUDGET: HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT 93 - 102 (KD10/007/H&D) To consider and agree the Housing Revenue Account budget and associated Fees and Charges for 2010/11. 12. FEES AND CHARGES 2010/11– COMMUNITY INVESTMENT AND 103 - 109 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT To consider the proposed approach to 2010/11 Fees and Charges for services provided through the Community Investment and Development Department. 13. 2010/11 PROPOSED FIVE YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAMME (Referral to 111 - 120 Council) To consider the draft Five Year Capital Programme. 14. SECOND HOMES FUNDING – PARISH HOUSING NEED SURVEYS 121 - 129 (KD10/006/H&D) To consider re-allocation of Second Homes Funds to pay for a number of parish housing need surveys within the District. 15. OLD HAWKSHEAD ROAD, CONISTON – AFFORDABLE HOUSING 131 - 135 To consider funding a shortfall to enable Eden Housing Association to proceed with the development of 11 new affordable homes at Old Hawkshead Road, Coniston. 16. NEW ALLOTMENTS FOR WINDERMERE TOWN COUNCIL 137 - 147 To consider a request from Windermere Town Council that three plots of land in the Windermere/Bowness area be made available for community use, two for allotment purposes and one as a community orchard. 17. LOCAL AREA PARTNERSHIPS 149 - 163 To consider an update on progress, a framework of roles and responsibilities and the potential for increasing Local Area Partnership influence on service delivery. 18. DRAFT NATIONAL POLICY STATEMENTS– RESPONSE TO PUBLIC 165 - 175 CONSULTATION (KD10/003/H&D) To consider a proposed response from the District Council to the seven draft National Policy Statements published by Government for public consultation in November 2009. 19. REGIONAL STRATEGY FOR ENGLAND’S NORTHWEST RS2010 PART 1 – 177 - 194 RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION To consider an update on the latest progress with the Regional Strategy for England’s Northwest (RS2010) and to seek approval of the response to draft RS2010 Part 1 which is currently out for consultation. 20. CONSULTATION ON DRAFT STATUTORY GUIDANCE ON THE DUTY TO 195 - 197 RESPOND TO PETITIONS To consider responses to the Consultation document on the Duty to Respond to Petitions.

4

21. CORPORATE ADMINISTRATION TASK GROUP REPORT (Overview and 199 - 206 Scrutiny Referral to Cabinet) To consider the report from the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee arising from the final report of the Corporate Administration Task and Finish Group. 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) 22. 27 PRINCES STREET, ULVERSTON 207 - 211 - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). (Paragraph 3) To consider the current situation in respect of the Council’s approach. 23. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR GROUNDS MAINTENANCE SERVICES, 2010- 213 - 221 2017 (2024) (KD09/036/Sev) - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). (Paragraph 3) To consider the award of the contract for grounds maintenance services.

5

6 Item No.2(1) 299 w.e. 22.1.2010 Executive Decisions

EXECUTIVE DECISION NOTICE

DELEGATED DECISIONS

A record of delegated decisions made by officers week ending Friday, 22 January 2010.

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 Member Services Manager, South Lakeland House, Kendal. EX/237 APPLICATION TO MODIFY A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON LAND AT 4 STONECROFT, AMBLESIDE

(CORPORATE DIRECTOR (MONITORING OFFICER))

Summary

Consideration was given to the modification of a restrictive covenant in order for land to be developed.

Decision

The principle and provisionally negotiated terms and conditions for the modification of a restrictive covenant, as outlined within the report, be approved, thereby allowing land at 4 Stonecroft, Ambleside, previously owned by the Council, to be developed on an affordable housing for locals basis.

Reasons for Decision

• To assist in the delivery of the Council’s Corporate Plan - 1.6 Housing Needs in South Lakeland are addressed. Contribution to the target of 280 private-funded affordable homes between 2006 and 2011.

• The decision also links to South Lakeland Strategic Partnership’s “South Lakeland Sustainable Community Strategy” – “Housing to Meet Local Need” is one of eight priority issues.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

• To lift the covenant unconditionally. This would not be in accordance with the statutory requirement to obtain best consideration in land transactions.

• To take cash instead of permanent price reductions. This would not contribute to the delivery of affordable housing.

• To attempt to impose more stringent conditions, which may not be considered reasonable in the event of an appeal.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

7 300 w.e. 22.1.2010 Executive Decisions

EX/238 KENDAL PUBLIC REALM FRAMEWORK – APPOINTMENT OF CONSULTANTS

(CORPORATE DIRECTOR (COMMUNITIES))

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

Summary

Consideration was given to the award of the contract for the Kendal Public Realm Framework. The funding for this contract had been wholly obtained from the North West Development Agency (NWDA) and the appraisal technique used was an NWDA methodology. Companies tendering for the contract had been made aware of the evaluation criteria.

The top four ranked companies had been invited for interview, during which the Interview Panel had sought to assess commitment to the project, ability to create the best outcome for Kendal, creativity, completeness of understanding of the methodology outlined in the brief and the ability to deliver on time and value for money. The Panel had also taken into account the number of work days that each consultancy team would give to the project.

The Panel had made its selection based on the company’s comprehensive submission, its price and its understanding of the brief as demonstrated in its staffing of the commission and its performance at the interview.

Decision

The Kendal Public Realm Framework contract be awarded to Taylor Young.

Reasons for Decision

• To assist in the delivery of the Council’s Corporate Plan – delivery of key regeneration schemes in Kendal.

• In addition, the decision links to the following:-

o Cultural Strategy for South Lakeland, Issue 6: Quality of and access to public realm.

o Kendal Economic Regeneration Action Plan: Investing in Town Centre.

o NWDA Regional Economic Strategy:-

Marketing the Region - Improve the image of the region to businesses and visitors by countering outdated negative perceptions (RES 95, 98, 99).

Improve the Physical Environment - Invest in quality public realm – key rural service centres (RES 119).

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Tenders received as detailed with the report.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

8 301 w.e. 22.1.2010 Executive Decisions

EX/239 COUNCIL HOUSING STOCK OPTIONS – APPOINTMENT OF PROJECT MANAGER

(CORPORATE DIRECTOR (COMMUNITIES))

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

Summary

Consideration was given to the appointment of a Project Manager for the Council Housing Stock Options project.

Decision

John Sykes be appointed as Project Manager for the Council Housing Stock Options project.

Reasons for Decision

• A key project of the Council’s Corporate Plan is to optimise the use and sustainability of the Council’s housing stock and estates in partnership with South Lakes Housing. The appointment of a Project Manager is critical to that process.

• In addition, the decision links to the South Lakes Housing Business Plan 2007- 11 – Complete a strategic options review in consultation with tenants and other key stakeholders.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

• Proposals received as detailed with the report.

• Do not employ a Project Manager – this is not recommended as the skills and experience required for this task are not available from within the Council’s existing staffing resources.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/240 RANSOM OVER LAND AT THE REAR OF 106-107 OWLETT ASH FIELDS, ACKENTHWAITE, MILNTHORPE

(CORPORATE DIRECTOR (COMMUNITIES))

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

Summary

Consideration was given to the principle of the sale of land and associated rights at the rear of 106-107 Owlett Ash Fields, Ackenthwaite, to a developer, and to the potential benefit to be derived from alternative disposal terms.

9 302 w.e. 22.1.2010 Executive Decisions

Decision

The offer to purchase the land at the rear of 106-107 Owlett Ash Fields, Ackenthwaite, Milnthorpe, be acknowledged, but no further negotiations be conducted until the Local Development Framework process has been substantially concluded, having considered land in this area.

Reasons for Decision

To allow the Local Development Framework process to be substantially concluded.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

To accept the offer made – this would be inappropriate before the Local Development Framework process has determined the suitability of the location for development.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/241 LAND TO THE REAR OF 49 AND 50 BURLINGTON CLOSE, KIRKBY-IN- FURNESS (CORPORATE DIRECTOR (MONITORING OFFICER)) - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). (Paragraph 3) Summary Further to EX/165 (2009/10) when “in principle” approval for sale was given, consideration was given to provisionally agreed terms for sale of the land. Decision The detailed terms of the sale of land to the rear of 49 and 50 Burlington Close, Kirkby-in-Furness, as outlined within the report, be approved. Reasons for Decision To assist in the delivery of the Corporate Property Strategy – Action Plan – Recommendation 7 – Continue to apply tests to potentially surplus properties to determine relevance and need in relation to Service Provision. Alternative Options Considered and Rejected That the land remains in Council ownership. * * * * * * * * * * * * EX/242 APPLICATION FOR RATE RELIEF (FLOODING PART OCCUPATION) – REF.50311061 (ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (RESOURCES)/SECTION 151 OFFICER) - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). (Paragraph 3) Summary Consideration was given to an application for rate relief (flooding part occupation).

10 303 w.e. 22.1.2010 Executive Decisions

Decision

In respect of Case Ref.50311061:-

(1) Application be made to the Valuation Officer for a certificate under Section 44A of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 showing the rateable values attributable to the occupied and unoccupied parts of the complex for the period 20 November 2009 to 31 March 2010.

(2) Revised applications be made upon any of the vacant parts becoming re-occupied before 31 March 2010.

Reasons for Decision

In line with Council Policy.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

To refuse the application, but this would not be in accordance with Council guidelines and could be unfair to the company concerned which has suffered in the aftermath of the recent flooding.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/243 APPLICATION FOR DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF – REF.51210571/520015x1 (ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (RESOURCES)/SECTION 151 OFFICER) - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). (Paragraph 3) Summary Consideration was given to an application for discretionary rate relief. Decision In respect of Case Ref.51210571/520015X1, the application for discretionary rate relief be refused for the following reasons:- (1) Raising of funds indirectly through charity shops to support a charitable organisation is not considered to be exceptional. (2) There are many other charity shops in the District, that raise funds to support charities and awarding relief in this case could create a precedent that may have to be extended to other organisations to such an extent that it would not be affordable to the Council. Reasons for Decision In line with Council Policy. Alternative Options Considered and Rejected To award up to 20% relief, but this may not be in accordance with policy guidelines and would result in disparity between similar applications and may create a precedent that would have to be extended to other organisations. * * * * * * * * * * * *

11

12 Item No.2(2) 305 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

EXECUTIVE DECISION NOTICE

CABINET

A record of the decisions made at the meeting of the Cabinet held on Wednesday, 27 January 2010, at 10.00 a.m.

Present

Councillors

Brendan Jameson (Leader and Promoting South Lakeland Portfolio Holder) (Chairman)

Brenda Gray Housing and Development Portfolio Holder Andy Shine Deputy Leader and Policy, Performance and Resources Portfolio Holder Hilary Stephenson Central Services Portfolio Holder Peter Thornton Communities and Well Being Portfolio Holder Graham Vincent Economic Prosperity and Transport Portfolio Holder

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Brenda Woof (Environment and Sustainability Portfolio Holder).

Also in attendance at the meeting were Shadow Executive Members James Airey (Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Environment and Sustainability Portfolio), Roger Bingham (Housing and Development Portfolio), Brian Cooper (Central Services Portfolio), Tom Harvey (Policy, Performance and Resources Portfolio), Colin Hodgson (Leader of the Opposition and Promoting South Lakeland Portfolio), Janette Jenkinson (Economic Prosperity and Transport Portfolio) and David Williams (Communities and Well Being Portfolio).

Officers

Lawrence Conway Corporate Director (Communities) Phillipa Cook Corporate Director (Vision and Strategy) Sue Hill Corporate Finance Manager Michael Keane Assistant Director (Social Enterprise) Shelagh McGregor Assistant Director (Resources) and Section 151 Officer Peter Ridgway Chief Executive Debbie Storr Corporate Director (Monitoring Officer) David Sykes Assistant Director (Community Investment and Development) Chris Woods Democratic Services Manager

STANDING ITEMS/MONITORING REPORTS

EX/244 EXECUTIVE DECISION NOTICES

RESOLVED – That the Chairman be authorised to sign, as a correct record, the Executive Decisions made during the week ending 8 January 2010.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

13 306 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

EX/245 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

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

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/246 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – EXCLUDED ITEMS

RESOLVED – That the items in Part II of the Agenda be dealt with following the exclusion of the press and public.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/247 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

RESOLVED – That it be noted that no questions, representations, deputations or petitions had been received.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/248 PROGRESS REPORT

Consideration was given to a report detailing progress in relation to Executive Decisions as at 19 January 2010. It was suggested that the Progress Report could be reviewed so that clearer information would be included about when reports were to be presented to Cabinet, as well as update information being provided at meetings.

RESOLVED – That

(1) the Executive Decisions progress report as at 19 January 2010 be received; and

(2) a briefing be provided to Members on the concerns raised at the meeting.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/249 PROPERTY ADVISORY GROUP

Some discussion took place about the heating in the Town Hall.

RESOLVED – That

(1) the notes of the meeting of the Property Advisory Group held on 11 November 2009 be received; and

(2) NPS be asked to carry out an investigation into the heating situation within the Town Hall.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/250 FORWARD PLAN

Consideration was given to the contents of the Forward Plan covering the period 1 February to 31 May 2010.

14 307 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

RESOLVED – That the contents of the Forward Plan covering the period 1 February to 31 May 2010 be noted.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

REFERRALS TO COUNCIL

EX/251 LOAN PROPOSAL – TROUTBECK BRIDGE SWIMMING POOL, LAKELAND INITIATIVE FOR FITNESS EXCELLENCE (LIFE)

Summary

Approval was being sought for the Council to agree to a six year, £50,000 loan to Lakeland Initiative for Fitness Excellence (LIFE) to enable them to securely manage their monthly cash flow. The proposed loan would be repayable, with monthly repayments of the principal sum commencing from month 13 of the loan, with complete repayment by month 72. LIFE would pay interest on the principal sum outstanding at a rate 1% above the bank base rate, which was equivalent to the interest the Council would earn on the money in its own account.

Note – Additional information was provided in a Part II report which was excluded from inspection by members of the public in accordance with Section 100(B) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, and, in all the circumstances of the case, it was considered that the public interest in maintaining the exception outweighed the public interest in disclosing it. Copies of the report were excluded, as it contained information as described in Schedule 12A of the Act as follows:-

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

Decision

RESOLVED – That Council be recommended to approve the following:-

(1) the issue of a loan of £50,000 to LIFE on the following principal terms:-

(a) the loan to be repayable over a period of 72 months, with re- payments of the principal sum deferred for the first 12 months; and

(b) interest to be paid monthly on the loan sum outstanding, charged at 1% above the bank base rate; and

(2) the Assistant Director (Resources) be authorised to negotiate and conclude the agreement.

Reasons for Decision

To assist in the delivery of the Council’s Corporate Plan:-

1.1 – People’s essential needs are addressed through effective public services in South Lakeland.

1.2 – Older People in South Lakeland are active, independent and healthy for longer

15 308 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

1.3 - Physical and mental health and wellbeing is improved for people in South Lakeland.

1.4 - Rural communities have improved access to services and facilities they need.

1.5 - The Council demonstrates value for money as a provider, commissioner and enabler of services.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not to offer a loan.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

GENERAL EXECUTIVE MATTERS

EX/252 2009/10 REVISED AND 2010/11 REVENUE BUDGET: GENERAL FUND SERVICES - LATEST DRAFT ESTIMATES

Summary

Members were provided with details on the latest budgetary position arising from the work carried out to date on the Service Budgets. The initial draft estimates had been considered by Management Team and measures had been taken to balance the budget for 2010/11 and consider future years’ requirements. The latest draft of the 2010/11 budget showed a surplus of £6,000 with the Council Tax level set at 3%.

As the Council moved towards a needs-led approach, it needed to ensure the District’s budgets remained fit for purpose – the budget process was guided not only by the Corporate Plan but also the Medium Term Financial Plan.

Members were advised that this update would be considered at the joint meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees due to be held on 2 February 2010 whose comments would be forwarded to Cabinet on 10 February. The draft budgets presented to Cabinet on 10 February would incorporate all known adjustments and recharges and, subject to approval at that meeting, would be forwarded to Council on 23 February 2010.

Decision

RESOLVED – That the following be noted:-

(1) the latest draft estimates and the changes which have been made since last reported to achieve a balanced budget;

(2) the savings exercise undertaken and now incorporated into the latest draft budget;

(3) the savings achieved through the restructure; and

(4) the additional items now included in the growth requests at Appendix C to the report and the principles set out at Section 3 of the report with regard to 2010/11 Service Development (Growth) proposals.

16 309 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

Reasons for Decision

The Council is required to balance its Budget and the report was to be noted.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

The report provided a factual summary of the draft estimates. Alternative solutions would be explored.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/253 FIVE YEAR CAPITAL PROGRAMME

Summary

The Council’s Capital Programme was used to finance the purchase or improvement of assets that enabled the delivery of the Council’s priorities and outcomes as set out in its Corporate Plan and that had a long-term benefit to the District. As the Council moved towards a needs-led approach, it needed to ensure the District’s assets remained fit for purpose – this process was guided not only by the Corporate Plan, but also by the Medium Term Financial Plan and Capital Strategy. The required expenditure was balanced against the limited resources available.

Council had agreed the existing Capital Programme in September 2009. That Programme needed to be revisited in the light of changes in financing, the need for new schemes and the implications on the 2010/11 Revenue Budget and the proposed Five Year Programme to 2013/14.

The schemes put forward by Members and Officers totalled £9.6m over the five-year period up to 2013/14. As this significantly exceeded the level of resources currently available, the Capital Prioritisation Group, using criteria agreed within the Capital Strategy approved by Council in March 2009, had undertaken a prioritisation exercise.

At present the draft Programme proposed that £7.7m of the bids put forward were included in the Programme, leaving the remainder on a reserve list.

Attention was drawn to the proposal to include a Community Allocation within the Capital Programme, with a total yearly allocation of £100,000. Provisionally, a number of bids already prioritised had been earmarked for funding from this allocation, and were shown in the draft Programme at Appendix D to the report.

Members were advised that consideration was due to be given to the report at the joint meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees on 2 February 2010 whose comments would be forwarded to Cabinet on 10 February. Subject to approval by Cabinet on 10 February, the draft Programme would be included in the Budget to be considered by Council on 23 February 2010.

Decision

RESOLVED – That the report be noted and further consideration be given to the Capital Programme at the Cabinet meeting due to be held on 10 February 2010.

17 310 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

Reasons for Decision

The prioritisation exercise offers a rational approach to the production of a balanced Capital Programme that reflects corporate priorities. The proposed inclusion of the Community Allocation makes it possible to reflect the Council’s needs-led approach to service delivery.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Differing approaches can be taken to the funding of a realistic level of capital investment.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/254 FEES AND CHARGES 2010 – 2011, TOURIST INFORMATION CENTRES, PUBLIC HALLS, RECREATION GROUNDS AND MARKETS

Summary

Consideration was given to proposed fees and charges for Council services provided by Social Enterprise for the year commencing 1 April 2010. The fees and charges proposed were aimed at meeting the objectives of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan.

Decision

RESOLVED – That the fees and charges for 2010-2011 for Tourist Information Centres, Public Halls, Recreation Grounds and Markets, as attached to the report, be approved.

Reasons for Decision

These services contribute to the Council’s Corporate Priorities of Health and Well- being and Prosperous Communities.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

To reduce the fees and charges – not recommended at this time.

Not to increase the fees and charges – not recommended at this time.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/255 BERNERS CLOSE REGENERATION SITE – GRANGE-OVER-SANDS - PROGRESS REPORT AND CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE TO AN ELEMENT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Summary

The Cabinet was provided with an update on progress with negotiations regarding a developer agreement with the Berners Vision Partnership (BVP). Members were asked to consider a change to one element of the scheme as originally proposed by BVP and that one of the Partners be permitted to introduce a ‘sub-developer’ to deliver the proposed element of change.

18 311 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

It was suggested that, as the change affected that part of the scheme which had been led by public consultation, consideration of the item should be deferred to allow a dialogue on the proposed changes to be undertaken

Note – Additional information was provided in a Part II appendix which was excluded from inspection by members of the public in accordance with Section 100(B) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, and, in all the circumstances of the case, it was considered that the public interest in maintaining the exception outweighed the public interest in disclosing it. Copies of the appendix were excluded, as it contained information as described in Schedule 12A of the Act as follows:-

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

Decision

RESOLVED – That consideration of this item be deferred until the next scheduled Cabinet meeting in March.

Reasons for Decision

To enable the views of the public in and around the Grange Community to be considered on the proposed change to the scheme.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

None.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

EX/256 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.

* * * * * * * * * * * * GENERAL EXECUTIVE MATTERS

EX/257 PARTNERING CONTRACT FOR RATING REVALUATION 2010

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

Summary

Consideration was given to renewing the partnering contract for the Rating Revaluation 2010.

19 312 w.e. 29.1.2010 Executive Decisions

Decision

RESOLVED – That

(1) the Procurement Procedure Rules at Part 4, Appendix 1, of the Council’s Constitution be waived in view of the special circumstances outlined within the report; and

(2) the partnering contract with King Sturge be renewed on identical terms to the 2005 contract.

Reasons for Decision

To assist in the delivery of the Council’s Corporate Plan – 1.11 The Council demonstrates value for money as a provider, commissioner and enabler of services.

The 2010 Rating List for the next five years will soon be published and appeals will be invited again.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

These were identified and considered within the report,

* * * * * * * * * * * *

The meeting ended at 10.54 a.m.

20 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Councillor Andy Shine: Policy, Performance & Resources Portfolio Report From: Phillipa Cook: Corporate Director Agenda 6 Report Author: Gillian Llewellyn: Performance Officer Item No: Report Title: Annual Audit Letter (December 2009)

Summary The Annual Audit Letter was received by the Council December 2009. This report summarises the findings from our 2008/09 audit. It includes messages arising from the audit of our financial statements and the results of the work undertaken by the Audit Commission to assess our arrangements to secure value for money in our use of resources.

Recommendations That Members note the Annual Audit Letter Report 1. The Council received its Annual Audit Letter from the Audit Commission December 2009 (Appendix 1). The report provides an overall assessment of the Council, drawing on its findings and conclusions from the audit, inspection and performance assessment of the Council for 2008/9. The findings lead to the Council organisational assessment score level 2, already reported to Cabinet January 2010. 2. The annual audit letter summaries the key findings as follows; a. Audit Opinion and Financial Statements - Audit Commission gave an unqualified opinion on the Council's accounts on 30 September 2009 however the report does state “the financial statements submitted for audit contained a significant number of errors in both the primary statements and the disclosure notes”. b. Value for money – Audit Commission gave a qualified value for money conclusion, stating that although the Council had adequate arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources “the Council did not have adequate arrangements to plan, organise and develop its workforce effectively to support the achievement of strategic priorities”. The report does recognize that there are plans to develop a workforce plan for 2009 –10. c. Use of Resources - The Council scored level 2 overall in its Use of Resources assessment for 2008 – 09 as depicted in Table 1 below. The Council however has scored level 1 for the managing resources theme because the “Council has not identified what staff it will need in the medium to longer term and cannot therefore determine what impact this will have on service plans and financial plans”.

21

3. Looking Forward the Audit Commission notes: a. The economic downturn and banking crisis is having a very significant impact on public finances and the bodies that manage them. The impact on treasury management strategies has been immediate, but there are wider and more fundamental impacts on the ability of public sector bodies to fund service delivery and capital programmes, and there are likely to be significant pressures on public finances in the coming years.

b. The Council faces a significant challenge in delivering its priorities and ambitious improvement plans, whilst meeting challenging savings targets. The Council needs to proactively manage its finances and other resources to deal with these pressures, particularly where costs and demands for services are increasing.

c. During 2009 the Council has been implementing a Transformation Programme to improve its ability to deliver the services people want. It has restructured the management team and is now restructuring the remaining workforce. The Council is also developing an overall plan for its workforce. It is important that the Council completes this restructure effectively whilst maintaining focus on the delivery of services and improving outcomes for local people.

4. The Audit Commission published five reports underpinning the specifics of their findings as follows; i. Use of Resources Action Plan ii. Final Accounts Memorandum Action Plan iii. Annual Governance Action Plan (report submitted to Accounts & Audit Committee 24 September 2009) iv. Review of internal control Action Plan v. Partnership Risk Management Action Plan All the actions will be monitored via our performance management software, covalent and reviewed by the Audit Committee and Management Team. The Letter provides a useful check and balance for the Council in delivering its ambitious plans for South Lakeland and has taken the matters identified in hand in the delivery of its priorities. The letter has been posted on the Council’s intranet and website.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 22 Alternative Options Not to respond to the Annual Audit Letter. This is not recommended as the Council is statutorily bound. Key Decision This report does not relate to a Key Decision. Material Considerations Finance The issues within the Letter do not have any additional financial implications for the Council and improvements can be accommodated within existing budgets. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Continuous improvement not Improvement and efficiency Senior Management Team on target targets not achieved. ensure that the issues raised Reputational harm from public are managed as part of the and peers. Generating service plan actions for lowering of staff morale and improvement general reduction in performance

Staffing There are no immediate staffing issues highlighted as a result of our response to this Letter. Links to Corporate Plan • People’s essential needs are addressed through effective public services in South Lakeland. (1.1) • Physical and mental health and well-being is improved for people in South Lakeland. (1.3) • The Council demonstrates value for money as a provider, commissioner and enabler of services (1.11) • Contributes to all of our core values of Valuing people, Excellence and Openness. Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) Links to delivering the Community Strategy for South Lakeland. Equalities & Diversity Equality issues are contained within the framework of the Letter and the Council has mechanisms and resources in place to address these. Community Safety Links to the delivery of community safety activities through the Local Startegic Partnership and Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership.

Background Documents Document: Appendix 1: Annual Audit Letter Contact: Phillipa Cook ext 7202 Gillian Llewellyn ext 7109

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 23

24 Annual Audit Letter

South Lakeland District Council Audit 2008/09 December 2009

25

Contents

Key messages 3

Financial statements 5

Value for money and use of resources 6

Looking forward 11

Closing remarks 12

Status of our reports The Statement of Responsibilities of Auditors and Audited Bodies issued by the Audit Commission explains the respective responsibilities of auditors and of the audited body. Reports prepared by appointed auditors are addressed to non-executive directors/ members or officers. They are prepared for the sole use of the audited body. Auditors accept no responsibility to: • any director/member or officer in their individual capacity; or • any third party.

26 Key messages

Key messages This report summarises the findings from our 2008/09 audit. It includes messages arising from the audit of your financial statements and the results of the work I have undertaken to assess your arrangements to secure value for money in your use of resources.

Audit Opinion and Financial Statements 1 I issued an unqualified opinion on the Council's accounts on 30 September 2009. At the Audit Committee on 24 September 2009 I presented my Annual Governance Report which set out the detailed findings from my 2008/09 audit. 2 The financial statements submitted for audit contained a significant number of errors in both the primary statements and the disclosure notes. These errors included a material error on the Group Income and Expenditure account, a significant error on the Balance Sheet and a significant number of errors and inconsistencies in the notes to the accounts. These errors did not impact on the bottom line of the Income and Expenditure Account. Management agreed to amend the financial statements for most of the issues I raised. 3 I saw some evidence of improvements in the Council’s arrangements to prepare the accounts for 2008/09. However, there is more still to be done to ensure that the Council is able to prepare its accounts and supporting working papers to a good standard. My Annual Governance Report includes a number of recommendations to assist the Council in improving its arrangements for 2009/10.

Value for money 4 I assessed your arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in your use of resources against criteria specified by the Audit Commission. This is known as my VFM conclusion. 5 I issued a qualified value for money conclusion, stating that the Council had adequate arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources, except that the Council did not have adequate arrangements to plan, organise and develop its workforce effectively to support the achievement of strategic priorities.

Use of Resources 6 I have completed my work on the Use of Resources assessment for 2008/09. Use of Resources is a scored judgement which determines how well the Council manages and uses its resources. 7 I have issued a detailed report to the Council setting out my use of resources assessment and scored judgements. The Council's use of resources theme scores are shown in Table 1 below.

3 South Lakeland District Council 27

Key messages

Table 1 Use of resources theme scores

Use of resources theme Scored judgement Managing finances Level 2 - performs adequately Governing the business Level 2 - performs adequately Managing resources Level 1 - performs poorly

8 The Council has scored level 1 for the managing resources theme because the Council has not identified what staff it will need in the medium to longer term and cannot therefore determine what impact this will have on service plans and financial plans. The Council is undertaking a workforce restructuring process. It does not have a workforce plan but plans to develop one during 2009/10. Service areas have been asked to consider staffing levels during 2009/10 planning, but this is not yet linked to workforce planning. It is important that the Council develops a workforce plan and ensures that workforce planning is an integral part of service and financial planning.

South Lakeland District Council28 4

Financial statements

Financial statements The Council's financial statements and annual governance statement are an important means by which the authority accounts for its stewardship of public funds.

Significant issues arising from the audit 9 I issued an unqualified opinion on the Council's accounts on 30 September 2009. 10 The financial statements submitted for audit contained a significant number of errors in both the primary statements and disclosure notes. There was a lack of robust quality assurance of the accounts prior to authorisation which could have identified some of the errors. 11 I have seen some evidence of improvements in the Council’s arrangements to prepare the accounts for 2008/09. However, there is more to be done to ensure that the Council is able to prepare its accounts and supporting working papers. 12 I have commented in previous years about the arrangements for the preparation of the accounts and the over-reliance on a single officer to undertake all of the work. I understood that action was to be taken to ensure that other members of the finance team were to be involved in the closedown and accounts preparation process. In 2008/09 this did not happen and the accounts have continued to be largely the responsibility of a single member of the finance team. 13 My Annual Governance Report contained a number of recommendations to assist the Council improving its arrangements for 2009/10.

Material weaknesses in internal control 14 I considered the key internal controls operating within the Council's financial systems. My review identified that controls over the payment of invoices for concessionary fares need to be improved and that the Council needs to ensure that all bank accounts are correctly reflected in the financial statements. I raised three recommendations in my Annual Governance Report relating to these issues.

Accounting Practice and financial reporting 15 I consider the qualitative aspects of the Council's accounting practice and financial reporting. My findings were reported in my Annual Governance Report. The areas where improvements are required are as follows. • Compliance with all Financial Reporting Standards. • Improving the Group Accounts consolidation process. • Producing the Whole of Government Accounts return on a timely basis.

5 South Lakeland District Council 29

Value for money and use of resources

Value for money and use of resources

I considered how well the Council is managing and using its resources to deliver value for money and better and sustainable outcomes for local people, and gave a scored use of resources judgement. I also assessed whether the Council put in place adequate corporate arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources. This is known as the value for money (VFM) conclusion.

Use of resources judgements 16 In forming my scored use of resources judgements, I have used the methodology set out in the use of resources framework. Judgements have been made for each key line of enquiry (KLOE) using the Audit Commission’s current four point scale from 1 to 4, with 4 being the highest. Level 1 represents a failure to meet the minimum requirements at level 2. 17 The Council's use of resources theme scores are shown in Table 2 below. The key findings and conclusions for the three themes are then summarised in the sections that follow.

Table 2 Use of resources theme scores

Use of resources theme Scored judgement Managing finances Level 2 - performs adequately Governing the business Level 2 - performs adequately Managing resources Level 1 - performs poorly

Managing Finances 18 The Council is meeting minimum requirements in managing finances in most areas. However, weaknesses remain in arrangements to produce annual accounts and financial planning processes require further development.

South Lakeland District Council30 6

Value for money and use of resources

19 South Lakeland District Council's financial planning and monitoring is led by the Corporate Management Team and Cabinet, and the Council has historically performed within budgets, maintaining target levels of balances and reserves. The Council has considered the impact of the banking crisis on its treasury management and is considering the implications as part of its medium term financial planning. I have also reviewed the Council's treasury management arrangements and found them to be prudent. 20 The Council has identified future budget shortfalls through the medium term financial planning process. However links between service planning, workforce planning and financial planning within the Council are not well developed and integrated. Service planning has historically covered a short-term (one year) horizon and this limits the Council's ability to identify financial pressure areas early and to plan for efficiencies and savings in individual services over time. 21 It is not clear how the Council is using information from engagement with local people to inform the development of financial plans on a consistent and ongoing basis. Internal and external stakeholders should have more involvement in the financial and service planning processes. The Council needs to be able to demonstrate that it is considering the needs of diverse communities as part of routine decision making. 22 The Council has used cost and performance information in the service planning process to identify efficiencies and costing information informs decisions, however unit costing and benchmarking is not comprehensive. Whilst there are examples for specific services, the Council does not have a good understanding of costs across all parts of the council nor does it have a systematic analysis of cost drivers. 23 Financial reporting and forecasting information is produced regularly throughout the year and reports to members are summarised and include narrative to aid interpretation. Performance information is considered by the same group. The monitoring reports need further development. Financial and performance reporting is not integrated and financial reports do not include information on finance and performance related factors such as unit costs or activity costs and trends. 24 It is not clear how the Council has analysed and considered local needs when deciding how to publish reports on the organisation’s performance. The Council should be seeking the views of stakeholders on a regular basis about what information is required in external reporting. External reporting needs to be developed and improved to include environmental and social information with an analysis of the Council’s environmental footprint.

Governing the Business 25 The Council is meeting minimum requirements but is not yet able to demonstrate positive outcomes. It needs to improve arrangements in some areas to aid delivery of better outcomes.

7 South Lakeland District Council 31

Value for money and use of resources

26 South Lakeland District Council has been performing well in commissioning and procurement. However the strategic framework is out of date and needs to be refreshed. The Council has been involving staff, local people, suppliers and potential suppliers when commissioning services and procuring supplies. The Council’s procurement compliance monitoring arrangements are not yet well developed. The Council’s procurement strategy does not yet take sufficient account of the concept of sustainable procurement and is not up to date in terms of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act, 2007, the global economic downturn or the council’s move towards becoming a needs-led organisation. 27 The Council is clear about the outcomes it intends to deliver for local people and has embarked on an organisational transformation programme to identify efficient and alternative ways of commissioning services. It has established a strategy to act as a commissioner/enabler of services, facilitating delivery rather than managing direct provision. As such the Authority is still in a phase of working through the structures and strategies to help transform the organisation to work in this way. 28 The Council’s track record on data quality is mixed. The Council is not yet working closely with partners maximise data sharing and to ensure data shared is reliable and fit-for- purpose. Information to aid decision making is not well developed and there is no evidence that the council is using performance information to identify gaps in service provision, long-term performance trends, and to forecast and model future developments. The Council has recognised the need to ensure that performance management is embedded within the culture and the systems of the organisation. Significant work has commenced to make improvements to the performance framework and performance measures. 29 The Council promotes and demonstrates the principles and values of good governance. The corporate plan sets out clearly the outcomes the Council is working towards and members are provided with a wide range of training, development and support to assist them in their roles. Ethical policies and procedures are reviewed regularly by the Audit Committee and Standards Committee and the Chair of the Standards Committee is proactive in raising the profile of the Committee. The Council undertook an ethical health check in 2007/08 and implemented recommendations including an ethical governance champion in the Cabinet, improved officer training, and arrangements for regular discussions between Committee chairs on ethical issues. 30 The Council recognises that governance of partnerships requires further development. The Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) undertook a peer review in 2008 and is implementing improvements to performance management and communications in response to this. The Council takes a lead role in the LSP although governance arrangements for the Cumbria Strategic Partnership (CSP) require further development. The Council does not have comprehensive mechanisms in place to monitor and demonstrate that partnerships are delivering effective outcomes and value for money.

South Lakeland District Council32 8

Value for money and use of resources

31 The Council has well establish risk management arrangements including a clear risk management strategy and policy, and regular review of risk registers clearly linked to the corporate planning process. Partnership governance and risk management for key partnerships (including the CSP, LSP and Local Area Partnerships) needs further development. Partnership governance and risk management is being developed and the Council is working with Zurich Municipal to identify where risk management arrangements could be improved within partnerships.

Managing Resources 32 The Managing Resources theme consists of three Keys Line of Enquiry (KLOE), of which only one KLOE, workforce planning, was assessed in 2008/09. 33 The Council's approach to planning, organising and developing its workforce effectively to support the achievement of strategic priorities does not meet minimum requirements. This is because the Council has not identified what staff it will need in the medium to longer term. 34 Skill gaps are identified and addressed for individuals through the appraisals process and subsequent training, which took place in most departments in 2008/09. Skill development programmes are in place in some service areas, and a structured analysis of skills gaps across the whole organisation is planned for 2009. The Council monitors accidents and sickness absence, in line with the sickness absence management policy, and can provide evidence of managing sickness absence for individuals. 35 The Council does not have a workforce plan or workforce plans in service areas. Workforce planning is not therefore integrated with service planning or financial planning. The Council has not identified what staff are needed over the next three to five years and how they intend to get there. The Council is undertaking a workforce restructuring process. It does not have a workforce plan but plans to develop one during 2009. Service areas have been asked to consider staffing levels during 2009/10 planning, but this is not yet linked to workforce planning. The Council has analysed agency and contractor costs and is committed to reducing them. The Council needs to review staff costs in high spending areas by benchmarking against other organisations, or by using business process improvement approaches to identify potential areas for efficiency savings and increased productivity. 36 The Council communicates with staff in a variety of ways including team meetings, briefings and discussions. These allow for two way discussions but the Council accepts that it needs to improve in this area. The Council conducted staff surveys in 2007 and 2008 and is acting on the results. Staff are supported through a mediation service, stress audits, occupational health, counselling and a 'Dignity at Work' programme on harassment and bullying. The Council has a Joint Consultative Panel where unions, members and directors discuss HR issues and has involved the unions in establishing and utilising a Learning Resource Centre since April 2008. Diversity and equality training has been provided to all managers and is being rolled out to all staff. The Council has achieved Level 2 of the Equality Standard and plans are in place to achieve Level 3 by March 2010.

9 South Lakeland District Council 33

Value for money and use of resources

37 It is not clear how the Council maintains or improves staff satisfaction and morale through the periods of change. No training has been provided for line managers to deal with change management issues and to develop specialist change management skills. A post implementation review should be considered for the corporate restructuring which should include monitoring and evaluation of the impact of change on staff.

VFM Conclusion 38 I assessed your arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in your use of resources against criteria specified by the Audit Commission. From 2008/09, the Audit Commission will specify each year, which of the use of resources KLOE are the relevant criteria for the VFM conclusion at each type of audited body. 39 I issued a qualified value for money conclusion, stating that the Council had adequate arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources, except that the Council did not have adequate arrangements to plan, organise and develop its workforce effectively to support the achievement of strategic priorities.

South Lakeland District Council34 10

Looking forward

Looking forward

Organisational Assessment and Comprehensive Area Assessment 40 In December 2009 the Audit Commission will publish findings from the review of the Council's Organisational Assessment which forms part of the Comprehensive Area Assessment for Cumbria as a whole. These assessments draw on our findings from our work on the Council's use of resources but are separate judgements made by the Audit Commission's Comprehensive Area Assessment Lead (CAAL).

Use of Resources Assessment for 2009/10 41 The key lines of enquiry (KLOE) specified for the assessment are set out in the Audit Commission's work programme and scales of fees 2009/10. My work on use of resources informs my 2009/10 value for money conclusion. In 2009/10, KLOE 3.3 on workforce planning will not be assessed for the scored use of resources judgement, but I will undertake some work to assess the Council's progress in this area as this will inform my VFM conclusion. KLOE 3.1 on natural resources will apply to district councils in 2009/10 and as we have not assessed the Council's performance in this area before we plan to commence our work early in 2010.

Future plans 42 The economic downturn and banking crisis is having a very significant impact on public finances and the bodies that manage them. The impact on treasury management strategies has been immediate, but there are wider and more fundamental impacts on the ability of public sector bodies to fund service delivery and capital programmes, and there are likely to be significant pressures on public finances in the coming years. 43 The Council faces a significant challenge in delivering its priorities and ambitious improvement plans, whilst meeting challenging savings targets. The Council needs to proactively manage its finances and other resources to deal with these pressures, particularly where costs and demands for services are increasing. 44 During 2009 the Council has been implementing a Transformation Programme to improve its ability to deliver the services people want. It has restructured the management team and is now restructuring the remaining workforce. The Council is also developing an overall plan for its workforce. It is important that the Council completes this restructure effectively whilst maintaining focus on the delivery of services and improving outcomes for local people.

11 South Lakeland District Council 35

Closing remarks

Closing remarks 45 I have agreed this letter with the Chief Executive and Assistant Director, Resources. I will provide copies to all Council Members in December 2009 and I will present this letter at the Audit Committee on 28 January 2010. 46 Further detailed findings, conclusions and recommendations in the areas covered by our audit are included in the reports issued to the Council during the year.

Table 3

Report Date issued Audit Plan June 2008 Partnership Risk Management - Cumbria Local Strategic August 2009 Partnership (Presentation) Supplementary opinion audit plan June 2009 Annual Governance Report September 2009 Review of Internal Audit October 2009 Partnership Risk Management - Cumbria Local Strategic November 2009 Partnership Use of Resources December 2009

47 The audit fee has increased since my original plan to reflect the cost of additional work required to audit the 2008/09 accounts.

Table 4 Audit fees

Actual Proposed Variance Financial statements and annual £110,996 £99,652 £11,344 governance statement Value for money and Use of £28,610 £28,610 £0 Resources Total audit fees £139,606 £128,262 £11,344

South Lakeland District Council36 12

Closing remarks

Independence 48 I can confirm that the audit has been carried out in accordance with the Audit Commission’s policies on integrity, objectivity and independence.

Acknowledgements 49 The Council has taken a positive and constructive approach to our audit. I wish to thank the Council's staff for their support and co-operation during the audit.

Karen Murray District Auditor December 2009

13 South Lakeland District Council 37

The Audit Commission The Audit Commission is an independent watchdog, driving economy, efficiency and effectiveness in local public services to deliver better outcomes for everyone. Our work across local government, health, housing, community safety and fire and rescue services means that we have a unique perspective. We promote value for money for taxpayers, auditing the £200 billion spent by 11,000 local public bodies. As a force for improvement, we work in partnership to assess local public services and make practical recommendations for promoting a better quality of life for local people.

Copies of this report If you require further copies of this report, or a copy in large print, in Braille, on tape, or in a language other than English, please call 0844 798 7070.

© Audit Commission 2009 For further information on the work of the Commission please contact: Audit Commission, 1st Floor, Millbank Tower, Millbank, London SW1P 4HQ Tel: 0844 798 1212 Fax: 0844 798 2945 Textphone (minicom): 0844 798 2946 www.audit-commission.gov.uk

38

CSOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Councillor Brendan Jameson Report From: Director of Corporate Vision Agenda 7 Report Author: Andrew Ostle, Business Services Mgr Item No: Report Title: Corporate Plan 2010 - 2013

Summary The Corporate Plan has been examined and updated as a result of a comprehensive review to ensure the plan is relevant, measurable and fit for purpose. The updated 2010- 2013 plan is submitted for approval. The plan has been updated following a review of the supporting evidence, progress, and engagement with key stakeholders. It has been developed alongside the budget process and will inform council delivery through the implementation of supporting Service Plans and officer Job consultations.

Recommendations It is recommended that, subject to any suggested amendments, the Corporate Plan 2010-2013 be approved for submission to Full Council (23 February 2010).

Report 1. The Corporate Plan sets out SLDC priorities for the next three years. It is produced following a comprehensive corporate planning process and details the key objectives, targets, and projects that will contribute to achieving those priorities. 2. The plan is now well embedded in the Council’s day-to-day business processes and within the new performance management culture of SLDC. It is used as the key driver for all work undertaken, informing more detailed financial planning and service planning to enable delivery. 3. The Council has made significant steps in implementing a needs-led approach to prioritisation so that it can design services around the needs of citizens and communities. The new Local Area Partnerships (LAP) and soon to be launched timely information project are two initiatives that demonstrate the Council’s commitment to this approach. 4. The annual review of the Corporate Plan is also important to make sure that SLDC is moving in the right direction, and that the priorities, objectives, targets and projects are the right ones, especially where a need-led approach is being adopted. 5. A significant overhaul of the Corporate Plan was undertaken in 2008/09 and the new look 2009-2012 Corporate Plan was adopted by the Council in February 2009. The

39

plan submitted with this report (Appendix 1) represents an update to that plan, following further consultation and engagement. 6. The process to update the plan was initiated with a review of the underlying information and assumptions, such as the results of the Place Survey, to challenge whether the stated priorities and outcomes were still valid, which proved to be the case. Establishing progress-to-date was also an important consideration. 7. Engagement and consultation were an important element of the review, with relevant managers, Assistant Directors, Management Team, Scrutiny and all Members given the opportunity to contribute to the review process. The arising LAP priorities were also used to inform the updated plan. 8. At the outset of the review the assumption made was that the high level priorities and outcomes would not change, but that the associated targets and projects would be refined. This was supported by the findings of the review and therefore the most significant changes have been made to the projects identified, with associated targets being refined as appropriate. Appendix 2 summarises the changes made to the Corporate Plan and includes comment on the action taken in response to consultation. 9. In addition to updating the content of the plan, some work has been undertaken to improve the language and presentation of the content. The project section has also been restructured to aid usability, while the part of the plan seen as internal to the Council, i.e. organisational improvement priorities have been brought out into a section in its own right, so that it can clearly be identified as such. 10. The Corporate Plan has been reviewed in line with the budget setting process to ensure all budget prioritisation can be linked back to the Corporate Plan and the needs of South Lakeland Communities. Presentation of the agreed the plan will be developed in the coming weeks to ensure that staff, members, residents, businesses and other stakeholders can all easily access the plan and the targets set.

Alternative Options The alternative option is not to approve the Corporate Plan 2010–2013. This is not recommended, as the priorities, outcomes, targets and projects in the plan have not changed significantly from those identified in the Corporate Plan 2009-2012, which was adopted by the Council in February 2009, i.e. this plan is submitted as an update to last year’s plan.

Key Decisions This report does not relate to any key decisions.

Material Considerations Finance The budgeting process has been running alongside the refresh of the Corporate Plan and while the plan represents the key pieces of work to be undertaken by the Council, the medium-term financial plan details the Council’s financial position.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: 1.00 Amended by: Andrew Ostle 2 40

The two plans are inherently linked and this has been recognised by the financial summary provided in the plan. Further more, the detail will be provided in the descriptive elements that support the plan, to be developed over the coming weeks. Within the Five-Year Medium Term Financial Plan (2010/11 to 2014/15), resources have been allocated to services areas and capital projects that will enable the Council’s priorities and outcomes to be delivered. The way the Council’s departments are organised has been reviewed and a structure that better meets the needs of the community has been implemented. The changes made have taken account of the likely medium term economic climate, coupled with the likelihood of reducing central government funding. The significant level of savings required to balance the 2010/11 position have been incorporated to the review of services, while opportunities for ensuring efficiencies and better value for money have been considered and included. The opportunities around shared services continue to be developed to provide further efficiencies and service improvement from within the likely revenue and capital resources available. The draft revenue and capital budgetary implications (and assumptions) are being considered by the 30 March Council and will be incorporated as approved at that meeting. 2010/11 Budget By Corporate Plan Theme (Subject to change and Council approval 23 Feb) Revenue Capital Theme Proposed Budget Proposed Budget 2011/12 to 2013/14 2010/11 £000 2010/11 £000 £000 Live 10,183.5 6,647.2 14,451.8 Work 382.8 615.0 400.0 Visit 2,099.9 4,671.5 2,541.5 Regulatory 4,061.2 305.7 187.5 Other Services 1,020.8 Total 17,748.2 12,239.4 17,580.8

Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required The Corporate Not adopting the plan would compromise There has been significant Plan is not service planning and performance engagement and consultation adopted by the management arrangements and leave the throughout the review process and Council Council with a plan that is outdated and the update follows consideration of out of sync with the financial plan. all the input and comments received. The Corporate The plan is not understood and used by There has been significant Plan is difficult Members and officers in delivering the feedback on the format of the to understand vision of the Council. Key partners and Corporate Plan during the review and the public could lose confidence in the process and this will be taken into communication Council’s ability to deliver what is needed. account when the plan is formatted of the plan is for different audiences. The format inadequate. of the plan submitted has already been changed. Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: 1.00 Amended by: Andrew Ostle 3 41

Staffing There are no direct staffing implications. However, the plan will be used to inform more detailed Service Plans and therefore provides a focus for where resource needs to be allocated.

Links to Corporate Plan There is a direct link in that the 2010-2013 Corporate Plan represents an update to the existing 2009-2012 Corporate Plan.

Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) The Corporate Plan has clear links to the Community Strategy and Medium-Term Financial Plan, and drives the internal Service Planning process. There are also strong links to the Transformation Programme and external assessments, such as Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) Use of Resources and Performance Management.

Equality & Diversity The plan has been updated following a review of the Equality Impact Assessment undertaken in 2009. A high profile equality statement has been added to the plan to demonstrate the Council’s commitment, and within the plan a key project is identified as continuing our Equality / Access to Services work.

Community Safety There are clear outcomes, targets and projects in the plan relating to Community Safety.

Background Documents Document: Appendix 1: Contact: Phillipa Cook Corporate Plan 2010-2013 v0.5 Andrew Ostle

Appendix 2: Summary of Changes Made

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: 1.00 Amended by: Andrew Ostle 4 42

South Lakeland District Council Corporate Plan 2010-2013

Corporate Vision “By involving people and creating opportunities we will make South Lakeland the best place to live, work and visit”

To achieve this vision we will understand your needs and be really clear on how we will work with you to address them. We will champion your needs not only with other local organisations but nationally too. Our role is to own the issues that matter most in South Lakeland, whether that is through delivering services efficiently or working with organisations differently. We will always strive to make decisions based on the best information and in times of crisis we will rise to the challenge and respond quickly.

Our Values

The delivery of this plan is influenced by our three key values. These are:

- Valuing People

- Excellence

- Openness

Finance and Resources

The Five-Year Medium Term Financial Plan (2010/11 to 2014/15) has been developed alongside the Corporate Plan, with resources allocated to services areas and capital projects that will enable the Council’s priorities and outcomes to be delivered.

The way the Council’s departments are organised has been reviewed and a structure that better meets the needs of the community has been implemented. The changes made have taken account of the likely medium term economic climate coupled with the likelihood of reducing central government funding.

The significant level of savings required to balance the 2010/11 position have been incorporated to the review of services, while opportunities for ensuring efficiencies and better value for money have been considered and included. The opportunities around shared services continue to be developed to provide further efficiencies and service improvement from within the likely revenue and capital resources available.

The draft revenue and capital budgetary implications (and assumptions) are being considered by the 30 March Council and will be incorporated as approved at that meeting.

2010/11 Draft Budget By Corporate Plan Theme (Subject to change and Council approval 23 February)

Revenue Capital

Theme Proposed Budget Proposed Budget 2011/12 to 2013/14 2010/11 £000 2010/11 £000 £000

Live 10,183.5 6,647.2 14,451.8

Work 382.8 615.0 400.0

Visit 2,099.9 4,671.5 2,541.5

Regulatory 4,061.2 305.7 187.5

Other Services 1,020.8

Total 17,748.2 12,239.4 17,580.8

Equality Statement

South Lakeland District Council, as an employer and service provider, is committed to ensuring equality of opportunity in all of its activities.

Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 V1.0 Page 1 of 5 43 Theme LIVE Priorities We will deliver services that meet the essential needs of residents - homes, warmth, a clean and safe environment, and financial assistance where appropriate.

We will work with partners to ensure that everyone has opportunities to participate in culture and the arts, and stay safe, healthy and active.

We will protect South Lakeland’s outstanding natural and built environment whilst encouraging sustainable development.

Outcomes 1.1 People’s essential needs are addressed through effective public services. 1.2 People in South Lakeland feel more in control of their own lives. 1.3 People in South Lakeland feel safe. 1.4 Older people in South Lakeland are active, independent and healthy for longer. 1.5 Physical and mental health & well-being is improved for people in South Lakeland. 1.6 Housing Needs in South Lakeland are addressed. 1.7 South Lakeland's development is balanced against protecting the area's natural and built environment. 1.8 Rural communities have improved access to the services and facilities they need. 1.9 Specific issues of deprivation are understood and addressed. 1.10 Young people are safeguarded and their needs understood and addressed.

Targets Targets for Outcome 1.1 • NI3 Increase civic participation in the local area to 23% March 2011 • NI140 Increase the number of people who feel they have been treated fairly by local services to 79.2% by March 2011 • NI 195 (LAA) Improve street and environmental cleanliness by reducing litter to 7%, Detritus to 15%, graffiti to 1% and fly posting to 0% by March 2011 • NI181 Ensure new benefits claims and changes are processed within 10 days • NI187 Reduce % of people claiming benefits who are living in low energy efficient housing to 11.1% by March 2011

Targets for Outcome 1.2 • NI2 Increase the number of people who feel they belong to their neighbourhood to 75.5% by March 2011 • NI 4 (LAA) Increase the % of people who feel they can influence decisions in their locality to 33% by March 2011 • NI5 (LAA) Improve overall satisfaction with local area as a place to live to 94.3% by March 2011

Targets for Outcome 1.3 • NI1 (LAA) Increase the % of people who believe people from different backgrounds get on well in their local area to 85% by March 2011 • NI 17 Reduce perceptions of anti-social behaviour as a problem to 9% by March 2011 • NI21 Increase % people who feel the local council and police are dealing with local concerns regarding anti-social behaviour and crime to 33.6% by March 2011 • NI 27 Increase % people that feel the local council and police understand their concerns about anti-social behaviour to 33.6% by March 2011 • NI41 Reduce the % of people who believe drunk or rowdy behaviour is a problem to 17% by March 2011

Targets for Outcome 1.4 • NI138 Increase satisfaction of people over 65 with both home and neighbourhood to 95% by March 2011 • NI139 Increase number of older people who feel they are getting the support they need to live independently at home to 52.2% by March 2011 • Local: Provide 50 new general needs affordable homes for older people and other vulnerable people by March 2011.

Targets for Outcome 1.5 • NI8 Increase adult participation in sports and active recreation to 26.2% by March 2011 • NI119 Increase the self reported measure of people’s health & well-being to 80% by March 2011 • NI11 Increase the adult population in South Lakeland that have engaged in the arts at least three times in the past 12 months to 48.7%

Targets for Outcome 1.6 • Local: Encourage the provision of 94 new local occupancy homes per annum • NI154 Increase the net additional homes provided to 400 by March 2011 • NI 155 (LAA) Enable 710 new public and privately provided affordable homes by March 2011 (5-Year Target from April 2006) • NI 159 Increase the supply of ready to develop housing sites to 100% by June 2011 • NI 156 Ensure the Number of Households living in temporary accommodation is 30 or less per annum

Targets for Outcome 1.7 • Local: Consult upon and adopt the Local Development Framework by May 2010 • NI197 (LAA) Increase the proportion of Local Sites where positive conservation management has been or is being implemented to 39% by March 2011 • NI192 Increase the % of household waste sent for re-use, recycling or composting to over 45% by March 2011 • NI191 (LAA) Reduce residual household waste to 538 kg per household by March 2011 • NI186 Reduce per capita CO2 emissions to 11.13% by March 2011 • NI188 Aim to achieve level 1 by March 2011

Targets for Outcome 1.8 • NI5 Increase the % of people satisfied with their local area from 90.5% to 94.3% March 2011 • NI175 (LAA-County) Access to Services and facilities by public transport, walking and cycling improved for rural households

Targets for Outcome 1.10 • Local: Train all SLDC staff with responsibility for/ involved with children in safeguarding procedures by June 2010.

Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 V1.0 Page 2 of 5 44 Projects 1 Street Scene We will work with our partners to: • Improve streetcare services. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.8, 2.3, 3.1) • Deliver a programme of work to reduce anti-social behaviour. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.3)

2 Recreation, Leisure and Well-Being We will work with partners to: • Actively manage and monitor our partner leisure agreement to enhance facilities, activities and opportunities. (Links to Outcomes 1.1, 1.5, 1.10, 3.2) • Co-ordinate local recreation and leisure facility development as a legacy of the 2012 Olympics. (Link to Outcomes 1.5, 1.8, 1.10, 3.2) • Help reduce diet-related disease and prevalence of smoking in South Lakeland. (Link to Outcomes 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 1.10)

3 Housing To deliver housing that meets the needs of South Lakeland we will: • Deliver a programme of new affordable housing. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.6) • Enable provision of new housing to meet the general needs of the local housing market. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.6) • Develop initiatives to prevent and reduce homelessness. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.6) • Ensure the best use of the council housing stock and estate in partnership with South Lakes Housing. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.6) • Provide grants and assistance to adapt homes. (Link to Outcomes 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.5, 1.9) • Deliver the Affordable Warmth Strategy to support warmer, more energy efficient homes. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.9)

4 Development We will develop and deliver the Local Development Framework: • Implement a new development strategy for South Lakeland. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.5, 1.7) • Identify specific sites for development for a whole range of land uses. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.5, 1.7) • Support coordinated and complementary development within the Kendal Canal Head area. (Link to Outcomes 1.7) • Conserve areas previously developed to a high quality. (Link to Outcomes 1.7)

5 Regeneration and Sustainability We will work with partners to: • Deliver a project to better understand issues of deprivation and regeneration in South Lakeland. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 1.8, 1.9) • Deliver regeneration schemes for: (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.9, 2.3, 3.1) ⇒ Waterhead (Windermere Water Front Programme) ⇒ Bowness/Glebe (Windermere Water Front Programme) ⇒ Kendal (Projects within the Kendal Economic Regeneration Action Plan) ⇒ Grange (Berners Close, Car Park and Promenade) ⇒ Ulverston (Ulverston Community Partnership) • Deliver the Cumbria Climate Change Strategy. (Link to Outcomes 1.7) • Deliver the Council’s Carbon Reduction Plan to help reduce its carbon footprint. (Link to Outcomes 1.7)

6 Arts, Events and Culture We will work with partners to deliver key arts projects, cultural initiatives and events: • Coordinate the delivery of the Arts Strategy focusing on engagement in the arts for young people, older people and rural communities. (Link to Outcomes 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.9, 2.3) • Act as the lead local authority partner for Kendal Arts International on the North West We Play Legacy trust project for London 2012. (Link to Outcomes 1.5, 1.8, 1.11, 2.3, 3.2) • Develop a local legacy programme for London 2012. (Link to Outcomes 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.11, 2.3, 3.2) • Ensure a complimentary offering of events for both residents and visitors. (Link to Outcomes 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.10, 3.2)

7 Local Communities We will work with local communities to improve local services: • Support Local Area Partnerships to deliver agreed priorities and more tailored services at the neighbourhood level. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.8, 1.11) • Examine the issues of rurality and its impact on local service delivery. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.8) • Work with partners to address the concerns of anti-social behaviour in local communities. (Link to Outcomes 1.2, 1.3)

8 Older and Disabled People To support independent living for older and disabled people we will: • Lead a partnership project to address the needs of older people. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, 1.11) • Provide concessionary travel to over-60s and disabled people. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8)

9 Young People To deliver more effective services to Young People we will: • Work with partners to understand and address the needs of young people. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5 1.10) • Deliver safeguarding training to adults with responsibility for / involved with children. (Link to Outcomes 1.3, 1.5, 1.10, 1.11)

10 Access to Services To improve access to our services for everyone, we will: • Undertake customer profiling to better understand how people need our services to be delivered. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.11) • Work with our partners to implement one-stop shops in key service centres. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.8, 1.11, 2.3) • Improve our online service delivery and information provision by enhancing the council website. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.11) • Utilise the Contact Centre to deliver more services and information over the telephone. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.11) • Continue our equality and diversity work to comply with the Level 3 “Achieving” status. (Link to Outcomes 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, 3.2) • Examine opportunities for engagement through social media.

Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 V1.0 Page 3 of 5 45

Theme WORK

Priorities We will work with partners to understand, sustain and grow South Lakeland’s economy and tackle the economic challenges in the area.

Outcomes 2.1 Public sector investment is prioritised to support balanced and sustainable economic growth, enabling the delivery of key economic, social and environmental activity.

2.2 South Lakeland has balanced and sustainable economic growth with well paid jobs in both established and new inward investing businesses.

2.3 Distinctive key service centres focus and drive economic activity.

Targets Targets for Outcome 2.1 • NI171 (LAA) Increase number of new business start-ups. • NI152 Reduce working age people on out of work benefits. • Local: Increase the % of knowledge based businesses in South Lakeland by March 2012. • Local: Understand and improve transport links to key employment sites.

Targets for Outcome 2.2 • Local: Raise the average earned income (in the District) by more than the rate of inflation, calculated on a baseline of £19,500 • NI172 Increase the % of small businesses showing employment growth.

Targets for Outcome 2.3 • Local: Achieve milestones in 2010/11 for Windermere Waterfronts Programme, Kendal Economic Regeneration Master Plan, Grange Berners Close.

Projects 11 Business We will work with partners to develop the workforce of the district, enabling business growth and an increase in the average earnings in the district: • Support business start-up and growth by providing grant funding and enabling support to businesses through Business Advice and Development services. (Link to Outcomes 2.2) • Develop stronger relationships with local universities and further education establishments. (Link to Outcomes 2.1, 2.2, 1.10) • Work as part of the Eden and South Lakeland Delivery Board to raise skills and the proportion of higher paid jobs. (Link to Outcomes 2.2)

12 Investment We will work with partners to deliver investment and growth in the Key Service Centres: • Investment in public infrastructure to be co-ordinated with economic development priorities. (Link to Outcomes 2.1, 2.2, 1.7) • Employments sites identified and brought forward with business leaders through the Local Development Framework. (Link to Outcomes 2.1, 2.2, 2.3) • Work as part of the Eden and South Lakeland Delivery Board to stimulate investment. (Link to Outcomes 2.1, 2.3)

13 Economy We will work with partners to develop and implement an economic strategy for South Lakeland: • Develop a shared knowledge base and understanding of issues facing the local economy to inform joint economic development planning. (Link to Outcomes 2.1, 2.2) • Deliver an agreed approach to developing growth economies around creative, environmental, knowledge based and manufacturing sectors. (Link to Outcomes 2.1, 2.2, 2.3) • Create an action plan to tackle economic challenges via the Eden and South Lakeland Delivery Board. (Link to Outcomes 2.1, 2.2, 2.3)

Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 V1.0 Page 4 of 5 46

Theme VISIT

Priorities We will work with partners to sustain South Lakeland as unique place to visit and enjoy for local people and visitors alike.

Outcomes 3.1 The public realm in South Lakeland is upgraded, protecting and enhancing its special character.

3.2 The visitor industry is sustainable and meets the needs of both local people and visitors.

Targets Targets for Outcome 3.1 • Local: Increase visitor satisfaction with facilities (car parks, toilets, signage etc) in key market towns to at least 4 1/2 out of 5 by March 2011 (Cumbria Tourism figures)

Targets for Outcome 3.2 • Local: Agreed and co-ordinated Lake District brand by March 2011 • Local: Council to work alongside Cumbria Tourism to maintain the 2007 level of tourism revenue / days / employment during economic downturn (as measured by STEAM)

Projects 14 Public Realm We will work with partners to invest in the renewal and management of the district’s public realm: • Invest in and develop our public assets. (Link to Outcomes 3.1, 3.2) • Review opportunities for income generation. (Link to Outcomes 3.2, 1.11) • Review provision, management and improvement of public markets. (Link to Outcomes 3.1, 3.2) • Examine opportunities to improve public parking facilities across the region. (Link to Outcomes 3.1, 3.2, 1.1) • Ongoing review public toilet facilities. (Link to Outcomes 3.1, 3.2, 1.1)

15 Visitor Services We will work with partners to deliver key services for the visitor: • Agree a co-ordinated and need-led visitor product for the district with key stakeholders. (Link to Outcomes 3.2) • Ensure effective handover of TIC facilities to ensure ongoing provision of visitor information. (Link to Outcomes 3.2) • Seek opportunities for visitor services within South Lakeland to benefit from London 2012. (Link to Outcomes 3.1, 3.2)

Theme ORGANISATION Priorities This theme supports all of the priorities for Live, Work and Visit Outcomes 4.1 The Council demonstrates value for money as a provider, commissioner and enabler of services

Targets Targets for Outcome 4.1 • Local – achieve level 2 (Performs adequately) by March 2010 and Level 3 by March 2011 (Performs well) for our CAA Organisational Assessment • NI 179 Increase value for money and cash releasing gains to £2,332,000 by March 2011 • NI14 Reduce avoidable contact by 25% by March 2010 then by 5 % each year • Local: Increase overall satisfaction with the Council to 44.3% by March 2011

Projects 16 Organisational Support and Development To improve how South Lakeland District Council operates in order to deliver excellent support services we will: • Deliver an ongoing service review programme to ensure best use of resources. (Link to Outcome 4.1) • Examine delivery of shared services with partners. (Link to Outcome 4.1) • Deliver a plan to develop the workforce. (Link to Outcome 4.1) • Deliver a Member Development Programme. (Link to Outcome 4.1) • Continue to manage key risks and challenges to the organisation. (Link to Outcome 4.1) • Embed corporate planning and performance management arrangements. (Link to Outcome 4.1) • Ensure continuity of business through effective planning for emergencies and disaster recovery. (Link to Outcome 4.1)

Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 V1.0 Page 5 of 5 47

48 Cabinet - Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 Appendix 2 (Summary of Changes)

Corporate Plan Refresh – Summary of Changes Made

This document summarises the most significant changes made to the 2009- 2012 Corporate Plan, as contained in Version 1.0.

Introduction • Finance and Resources summary section added • Equality and Diversity statement added

Themes • Live, Work, Visit themes remain unchanged • New theme added, entitled “Organisation” to cover internal/organisational issues.

Outcomes • Outcome 1.11 moved to be new Outcome 4.1 under “Organisation”. This deals with internal organisational work in support of all the other themes and outcomes. • Outcome 2.1 reworded to improve scope, clarity and readability. • Outcome 2.2 reworded to improve scope, clarity and readability. • Outcomes 2.3 reworded to improve scope, clarity and readability. • Outcome 4.1 new under “Organisation”. This deals with internal organisational work in support of all the other themes and outcomes.

Targets • All targets reviewed and dates/targets adjusted as appropriate. • Targets for 1.9 removed, as a local target it was too specific and difficult to benchmark/measure.

Key Projects • All – new headings added for each section to indicate area of work. • Most sections reworded – see next page.

49 10 February 2010 Page 1 of 3 Cabinet - Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 Appendix 2 (Summary of Changes)

Changes to the 2009 – 2012 Corporate Plan Key Projects

Old Section What’s Happened New Section 1A Reworded 1 2A Reworded 2 2B Reworded 2 3A Reworded 2 3B Removed - 3C Reworded 2 3D Removed - 4 (Title) Reworded / Demoted 1 4A Removed - 5A Reworded 8 5B Moved 3 5C Removed - 5D Moved 8 6 (Title) Reworded / Demoted 3 7A Reworded 3 7B Moved 3 7C Reworded 3 7D Reworded 3 8 (Title) Reworded / Demoted 5 8A Removed - 9A Reworded 9 9B Moved 9 10A Reworded 4 10B Reworded 4 11A Reworded 5 12 (Title) Reworded / Demoted 5 12A Reworded 5 12B Removed - 12C Reworded 5 12D Reworded 5 13A Moved 6 13B Reworded 6 13C Moved 6 14 (Title) Reworded / Demoted 5 15A Moved 7 16A Reworded 7 16B Removed - 17A Removed - 17B Reworded 7 17C Removed - 18A Reworded 10 18B Removed - 18C Reworded 10 19A Removed - 19B Removed - 19C Removed - 20A Removed - 20B Reworded 16 20C Moved 16 20D Reworded 16 20E Reworded 16 21A Moved 13 21B Reworded 13 21C Reworded 11 21D Removed - 22A Moved 12 22B Moved 12 22C Removed - 22D Removed - 22E Reworded 11 23A Removed - 23B Removed - 23C Reworded 11 23D Removed - 23E Reworded 12 24A Reworded 14 24B Reworded 14 25A Reworded 15 25B Moved 6 26A Moved 15 26B Reworded 14

50 10 February 2010 Page 2 of 3 Cabinet - Corporate Plan 2010 – 2013 Appendix 2 (Summary of Changes)

Summary of Comments/Actions from Engagement Sessions

Consultation sessions were undertaken in December 2009 where key stakeholders were given the opportunity to provide input into the refresh process. Individuals identified points around each of the key themes, which have been considered as part of the refresh.

The table below summarises the points made by identifying emerging themes, and describes the action taken.

Section Comment Action Taken General Difficult to follow Entire section rearranged, duplicates removed. General Language could be improved Entire section reworded. 1 No themes N/A 2 Does it only apply to Kendal? Specific reference to Kendal removed 2 Is it appropriate to include Kendal Sports Village? Reference to Kendal Sports Village removed 3 What is Prescription Initiative? Section removed 4 Reword Sections 4 and 5 have been moved, reworded and some projects removed. 5 Reword Sections 4 and 5 have been moved, reworded and some projects removed. 5 Make more reference to partners Partners referenced where appropriate 6 Explain Affordable Warmth Strategy Not necessary at this level 7 No themes N/A 8 Ulverston East too specific Moved to be part of a different section 8 Reword Entire section on regeneration combined and reworded 9 Do more for Young People Need to establish what Young People need, which is reflected in the plan. 9 Involve Young People more Need to establish what Young People need, which is reflected in the plan. 10 Clarity needed around LDF in the plan Sections referring to LDF have been reworded. 10 Improve reference to partners Reference to partners not made as the plan focuses on what SLDC will do. 11 Merge 11 and 12 Merged 12 Specify partner working Specific reference made to partners 12 Could be under Visit Regeneration not referenced in Visit to avoid duplication but benefit to visitors mentioned. 13 Include Events in title Events has been included 13 Specify partners Too many partners to list concisely 13 Include Sports Sports included in different section 14 Wording needs to be improved Reworded and more detail will be provided in the Service Plan 14 Not appropriate on its own Now included within another section 15 Importance of LAPs Corporate Plan continues to refer to LAPS 15 Community priorities Covered by reference to LAPs and section on Local Communities 16 Needs strengthening Reworded and included in section on Local Communities 17 No themes N/A 18 One Stops Shops important One Stop Shops still included 18 What is Access Channel Development Removed 19 Possibly remove Removed as duplication 20 Section could be removed from Live section to New section created to deal with organisational elements. stand alone 21 Not just universities Expanded to include other higher education establishments 21 Big overlap between 21,22 &23 Sections 21, 22 & 23 redrafted and overlaps removed 21 Improve language Section reworded 22 Wording needs improved Section reworded 22 Lack of clarity Section reworded 22 Better reference partners Clear reference now made to working with partners 23 Not clear Section reworded 23 Too much jargon Section reworded 23 Big overlap with 21,22 & 23 Sections 21, 22 & 23 redrafted and overlaps removed 24 Wording needs improved Section reworded 25 Is this SLDC responsibility Role of SLDC made more clear in rewording 25 Concern over TICs Rewording of section to reflect this 25 Expand section Section 24, 25 & 26 reworded 26 Not just LDNP Reference to general partners working now made 26 Improve language Section reworded

51 10 February 2010 Page 3 of 3

52

Item No.8

Management Team 21st January, 2010 CSPG 27th January, 2010 Cabinet 10th February, 2010 Council 23rd February, 2010

Corporate Financial Monitoring October – December 2009

Report of the Corporate Finance Manager

53 1 CORPORATE FINANCIAL MONITORING October 2009 – December 2009

1. INTRODUCTION

This is the third quarterly corporate financial monitoring report for 2009/10 and sets out an indicative corporate picture of the Council’s financial performance during the period ending December 2009.

The report summarises budget variances in excess of £10,000 against the latest revised budget, with explanations provided by Budget Managers in conjunction with their Accountants. In addition, there are specific sections for salary monitoring, grants, capital expenditure and financing, investments and borrowing, reserves, Housing Revenue Account, revenue collection performance, and Insurance and Risk Management.

The structure of the Finance team has been reviewed under the restructure and the team will be moving within the current office space so that the whole finance team is located together. The move is scheduled for completion by the end of February to ensure the team is settled before the end of the financial year.

Budget preparation work has taken a high priority during the third quarter and reports on the latest revenue and capital budgets have been produced for Management Team, Cabinet and Overview and Scrutiny Committees. The changes brought about by the restructure are being built into the budget preparation process and this has inevitably entailed additional work during this budget round. The actual expenditure to date has been considered in the setting of the 2009/10 revised and future years budgets.

The staff team in the finance department continues to work towards improving the service we provide. We have recently introduced Internet banking which will be far more efficient once the usual teething problems have been resolved. Major areas of note include: • Re-installation and upgrade of the Integra financial systems • Member training sessions have commenced with a schedule for training for the 2009/10 year • Preparation work for the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) • Preparation and training for the closedown of the 2009/10 accounts

2. GENERAL FUND REVENUE MONITORING

2.1 General Fund Summary Position

The current overall General Fund summary position shows that at the end of December there is a net overspending of £183k against the current profiled budget. Projections to the year-end have been included in this report at Appendix A and a £91k underspend is currently projected to the end of March 2010. An analysis of underspends against profiles by Assistant Director area is included in section 2.2. A full analysis of the variations, with commentary where available, is shown in Appendix A.

2.2 Major Budget Variances

Appendix A details variances of +/- £10K in value (or 10%) and covers salary costs, premises, transport, supplies and services and general income. An overspend against variance is shown as a ‘+’ and an underspend as a ‘-‘ figure.

Full details of the summary variances (actuals against profiled budget) shown in the table are provided at Appendix A.

54 2

Projected Current Current over/ SUMMARY BY SERVICE Variance variance (under) £000 % £000 REPORTED VARIANCES : Community Investment & Development -9 0% 0 Community Services -95 -2% -76 Corporate Vision +23 +4% -60 Customer Focus +3 0% 0 Resources +195 +7% -3 Social Enterprise +62 +17% +48 Management Team +4 1% 0

TOTAL NET VARIANCE +183 +7% -91

Previous Qtr 2009/10 position +162 +7% -30

2.3 General Fund Salary Monitoring

Salary monitoring has been included in the variances reported at Appendix A, however more detail has been included in this section of the report. The salary budgets are net of the allowance of 2.5% for vacancy savings and have been revised to allow for a pay award of 1%, which was paid within this current quarter. There is an overall underspending on salaries of £22k as at the end of December 2009, which is negligible against the £12.8 million budget.

SERVICE Budget Profile Actual Diff. £000 £000 £000 £000 Community Investment & 2,311 1,736 1,730 -6 Development Community Services 3,888 2,904 2,842 -62 Corporate Vision 465 350 359 +9 Customer Focus 1,930 1,447 1,473 +26 Resources 1,742 1,309 1,313 +4 Social Enterprise 2,020 1,518 1,516 -2 Management Team 416 312 321 +9 Total 12,772 9,575 9,553 -22 Previous Qtr position 13,439 6,741 6,547 -194

2.4 Grants Received and Paid

The full year revised budget for grants receivable is £2,838k (not including NNDR, Rent Rebate, Local Housing Allowance and Discretionary Housing Benefits Rent Allowance grants); grants actually received up to and including December 2009 totalled £2,442k (86% of the full year budget) and are summarised in the table below:

Source of Grant Budget Actuals to 2009/10 30.12.09 £000 £000 Other Government Grants – various 204.8 558.8 Other Government Grants – RSG 1,290.4 742.1 Other Government Grants - Storms 219.6 219.6 Disabled Facilities Grants 174.0 174.0 Lottery Funding 0 14.7 Concessionary Fares 875.3 659.5 Area Based Grant 35.8 35.8 LABGI Grant 37.9 37.9 TOTAL 2,837.8 2,442.4

55 3 Revenue grants paid to other organisations totalled £208.3k by the end of December 2009 against a full year budget of £272k.

Grant description Budget Actuals to 2009/10 30.9.09 £000 £000 Grants to Organisations 14.2 14.2 Contributions to Organisations 105.9 104.5 Subscriptions to Organisations 45.4 31.6 Regular Funded Organisations 106.5 58.0 TOTAL 272.0 208.3

Capital Grants paid totalled £907k against a full year budget of £1,636k (included within the figures at section 3.1, Capital Expenditure & Financing).

3 General Fund Capital Programme

3.1 Capital Expenditure & Financing

Capital Expenditure (General Fund)

Table 1 below shows the latest approved capital programme (approved September 2009) and expenditure (excluding commitments) to the end of December 2009. Table 2 shows budgets, expenditure and balance of the budget to spend split out across the Assistant Director areas.

To date £3,301k (33%) has been spent leaving a total of £6,669k (67%) still to be spent from the approved capital programme, after allowing for programmed slippage.

A meeting of the Capital Monitoring Working Group has been organized to investigate the project variances in more detail and to forecast a year-end position.

A capital prioritisation exercise has been completed to ensure that the Capital programme fits closely with the Council’s corporate priorities and a revised draft of the Capital Programme for 2010/11 onwards is being taken to the 27th January Cabinet meeting.

Table 1 £000 Current Programme 10,120 Less programmed slippage -150 TOTAL PROGRAMME 9,970 Spend to Date 3,301 Balance to spend 6,669 Table 2 Budget for Spent Balance of year To 30.9.09 full year budget £’000 £’000 £’000 Community Investment & 6,991.9 1,836.1 5,155.8 Development Community Services 1,734.4 1,127.2 607.2 Corporate Vision 700.7 150.6 550.1 Customer Focus 14.5 32.4 -17.9 Resources 199.5 56.7 142.8 Social Enterprise 479.2 97.5 381.7 Sub-total 10,120.2 3,300.5 6,819.7 Programmed slippage -150.0 -150.0 Totals 9,970.2 3,300.5 6,669.7

There are a number of projects within Community Investment and Development with large amounts in the approved programme where current year spend is very low. Notably, these include Affordable Housing Grants (approval £665k, no spend); Site Assembly Fund for Affordable Housing (approval £733k, £309k spent); New Build Fund for Affordable Housing (approval £641k, negligible spend); Buy Back Scheme: RTB homes (approval 720k, negligible spend). The approvals for these projects total £2,759k with spend showing as £311k (11% of approval). Historically, these projects do tend to spend

56 4 during the final months of the financial year. Work is underway to finalise the year-end projections, feeding into the capital programme for future years.

Additionally, there are likely to be a number of projects within the programme for 2009/10, which are unlikely to commence during the year.

Capital Receipts (General Fund)

The Capital Programme approved in September 2009 assumes that the Council will generate £187k of usable capital receipts from asset sales in the 2009/10 year. For the first nine months of the year, capital receipts have totalled £171k. There were three Right to Buy sales in the first three quarters of the year with net receipts of £74k after payment of 75% to the Housing Capital Receipts pool.

At this point, the target for the year of 187k has almost been achieved, with a £16k target receipt for the final quarter of the year.

4 INVESTMENTS AND BORROWING

4.1 Core Investments

The Council’s fund managed by Investec Asset management had a market value of £14,460k at the 1st April 2009. The fund has risen in value to £14,633k at 31st December 2009, an increase in value of £173k. This represents a performance indicator of 1.14% compared with the 7 day LIBID rate of 0.33%

4.2 Temporary Investments

Temporary Investments in the period October to December 2009 realised interest of £13k, compared with £133.7k for the same period in 2008 when the bank base rate stood at 5%. The base rate dropped to 0.50% on 5th March 2009. The average interest achieved during October to December 2009 has been 0.55%. The Council’s priority is always security of investment before yield. The economic forecast did not predict any rise in base rate until the end of 2009; at the time of writing this report, no rise has yet been announced.

4.3 Borrowing

The Treasury Management Strategy for 2009/10 anticipates borrowing £1m to fund non HRA capital expenditure; it is now anticipated that this borrowing will not be required and it has been removed from the latest drafts of the revenue and capital budgets. The current total loan borrowed from PWLB to fund the Decency programme stands at £20.5m, incurring an average interest rate of 4.33%. These borrowing costs are met by Government subsidy.

4.4 Prudential Indicators

Passive monitoring of the indicators shows that they are all within their limits. Most importantly, the outstanding borrowing of £21m is comfortably below the £31m operational and £47m authorised limits.

5 RESERVES

Closure of the 2008/09 accounts left the Council with total reserves of £8.0m, a reduction of £0.9m from the previous year, mainly due to increased support from reserves to the capital programme. The General Reserve stands at £3.7m and will be used to mitigate the potential risk of increased expenditure in future years and to fund one-off implementation costs of the management re-structure. The LABGI Reserve was set up at the end of 2007/08 and is being used to fund corporate initiatives, with a preference for economic regeneration, the latest revenue estimates allow for the receipt of only £18.6k LABGI funding for the 2010/11 year.

6 PLANNED MAINTENANCE

The monitoring information in the table below relates to the Planned Maintenance budgets, excludes extra work and was provided by NPS. At the end of December, expenditure and commitments were ahead of profiled budget by £29k or 5%, this is a work scheduling matter and does not indicate a potential overspend at the year-end.

57 5 Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 TOTAL £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Budget Profile 151 369 545 545 Expenditure 45 208 352 352 Commitments 131 146 223 223 Total 175 354 575 575 Variance +25 -15 +29 +29 Variance (%) 16% -4% 5% 5%

7 HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT (HRA) MONITORING

7.1 HRA Revenue Position

At the end of December 2009, the Housing Revenue Account is running in line with revised budget predictions. Within the individual budget headings, miscellaneous income and special services expenditure are both slightly below target.

Council House Sales are now at three with an overall amount received of £297k; 75% (£223k) of these receipts are sent to the Government under the usual Capital Receipts to Pool rule.

7.2 Council House Rent Collection

Net rents collected to the end of December 2009 (week 37) were £8.5m, in line with the revised estimate for the year to date.

7.3 Council Housing Capital Programme

This section analyses actual spend against the Council Housing elements of the Capital Programme for the period ended 30th December 2009. The spend figures do not include commitments as at the period end date. A total of 51% of the approved expenditure (72% of profiled expenditure) has been expended by the end of December 2009.

South Lakes Housing provides information on the progress of projects and monitoring is effected via the Capital Monitoring Working Group.

Latest Latest Profiled Spend to Approved Budget Date programme £000 £000 (includes c/fs) £000 SLH Projects (HRA General) 56.8 5.0 0

Aids & Adaptations 294.4 177.0 87.4

Other Major repairs/Play areas 809.2 510.0 320.8 Decency Improvement Works 796.9 796.9 549.2 SLH Supervision 256.0 192.0 175.1

Sustainability 690.4 394.0 364.7

Admin & Technical Support 56.8 0 0

TOTALS 2,960.5 2,074.9 1,497.2

8 REVENUE COLLECTION PERFORMANCE

8.1 Council Tax, Business Rates & Collection Fund

This section analyses the Council Tax and Business Rate collection statistics for the current financial year compared to the previous year.

The Collection figures at 30th December 2009 for Council Tax are almost identical to those achieved at this point in the previous financial year. The Business Rates figure is marginally down but this is still encouraging in view of the current recession.

58 6 The actual surplus/deficit on collection fund at 15th January 2010 shows a deficit of £119k of which the Council’s share will be £15,200. This figure will be taken into account during the budget and Council Tax setting process.

Percentage Collected 2008/09 2009/10 at 30th December % %

Council Tax 87.62 87.59

Business Rates 87.86 88.15

8.2 Sundry Debts

This section sets out the latest position on the level of outstanding sundry debts. The overall level of sundry debts has increased by £85k since the end of September 2009, the main increase being in the ‘outstanding for 1 to 6 months’ category, which is mainly due to the Trade Refuse invoices raised in October that remain outstanding at the period end date. This trend compares with the same period last year, although the overall level of outstanding debt is lower.

Net write-offs for the period April to December 2009 amounted to £1.4k.

As at 31st December 2009 Less than 30 1 to 6 months 6 to 12 1 to 2 years Over 2 years Total days months No: £ No: £ No: £ No: £ No: £ £ Social Enterprise 21 6k 76 45.8k 11 1.5k 5 0.5k 4 2.7k 56.4k Finance 1 0.2k 38 8.1k 93 3.8k 37 3.5k 47 13.2k 28.8k Human Resources 4 0.3k 3 0.6k ------0.9k Legal, Democratic 209 280k 177 36.4k 1 0.3k 1 7.5k 6 3.1k 327.4k & Members Community 86 65.6k 436 113.3k 14 1.5k 19 4.4k 5 0.1k 185k Services Community Investment & 58 22k 67 46.6k 31 12.9k 59 31k 11 2.6k 115.6k Development Revenues & - - 12 3.4k 1 0.1k 5 0.8k 73 56.5k 60.7k Benefits TOTALS 379 374.1k 809 254.2k 151 20.1k 126 47.7k 146 78.2k 774.8k Previous Qtr 356 437.0k 344 107.3k 63 17.6k 108 45.7k 150 82.3k 689.9k Position

9.1 Insurance Monitoring

The general insurance policies were renewed on 1st October 2009 with a total premium of £343,000, compared to £345,000 for the previous year.

The insurance year started well with no motor claims in the first 41 days – a record. Since then, however, the adverse weather conditions have taken their toll. Flooding to property has caused the worst damage, with insurance claim estimates at £235,000. Other claims put the total insurance cost for the three months at £288,000.

The estimated cost of all outstanding claims currently stands at £466,282

9.2 Risk Management

Risk management is an essential element of internal control and contributes to best value public services. Risks are identified, managed where necessary and monitored in terms of implementing mitigating controls. The Strategic Risk Register, which contains many risks of a financial nature, is updated on an annual basis. All strategic risks are reviewed in line with the Corporate Planning process to assist the achievement of Corporate Plan objectives. Strategic financial risks include; achieving efficiency savings; achieving a balanced and sustainable budget; reduced Revenue Support Grant etc. The progress made with the control of strategic risks is reported to Corporate Strategy and Performance Group.

Assistant Directors, Managers and Officers identify operational risks within each Service Unit. Many operational risks, particularly those managed by Finance have a financial element. All operational risks 59 7 are reviewed in line with the Service Planning process to ensure the achievement of Service Unit objectives.

This report has been compiled by the Corporate Finance Manager based on information received from a large number of officers throughout the Council. I would like to thank everyone for his or her contributions and assistance in the production of this report.

60 8 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Revenue Budget Monitoring to end December 2009 (Quarter 3, 2009/10) Appendix A

Variance Variance Full Year Revised to date Over / Actual against Budget Budget (Budget to (Under)spend Explanation of Variances to Date Budget to (Revised) to date date -v- projected date Actual) £ £ £ £ % £ Community Investment & Development CID)

GBC Building Control Disputed scanning invoice. DS in correspondence 286,280 -353,632 -328,897 24,735 7% 0 with company, hopes to agree settlement.

GEV Events Timing differences on events income/expenditure. Not David Sykes 118,250 -24,559 -8,910 15,649 64% 0 possible to profile. GGV Grants To Voluntary Orgs Late submission of accounts from Brewery / Grizedale. 324,120 241,426 216,728 -24,698 -10% 0 All funds committed. COMMUNITIES EUR Regeneration Housing Housing Salaries/contract staff overspend £11k. 0 1,963,740 1,973,491 9,751 0% 0 Other service savings contributing. 2,952,804 -13,205 -49,724 -36,519 Total CID 3,681,454 1,913,940 1,904,589 -9,351 0% 0

61

1 22/01/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Revenue Budget Monitoring to end December 2009 (Quarter 3, 2009/10) Appendix A

Variance Variance Full Year Revised to date Over / Actual against Budget Budget (Budget to (Under)spend Explanation of Variances to Date Budget to (Revised) to date date -v- projected date Actual) £ £ £ £ % £

Community Services GCM Cemeteries More burials than average at quarter end. Scheduling 183,840 73,676 40,428 -33,248 -45% -10,000 of NPS invoices (£12K)

£9.6K to come from emergency flooding funds / £10k from other govt grants. Drop in income from Housing GHM Homelessness Benefit, increase in B&B costs and various small credit 274,900 45,492 63,863 18,371 40% 0 amounts. Year end position difficult to predict due to nature of service but looks in line with revised estimate to date

Endeavour to avoid overtime, need to offset cost of Commercial Waste. Vacancy held for Commercial GWK Kerbside Collect of staff. Reduction in cost of leaf fall due to adverse 1,331,640 752,983 758,920 5,937 1% -43,000 Recyclables weather. Full effect of weather on recycling rate not known until normal collections resume, so best Simon estimate to year end. Rowley GLE Leisure Centres 1,185,550 899,721 852,586 -47,135 -5% 0 Scheduling of NPS work across the authority GPK Parks 930,390 602,381 586,964 -15,417 -3% 0 Scheduling of NPS work across the authority GPL Planned Maintenance -18,250 -13,688 2,289 15,977 117% 0 Scheduling of NPS work across the authority

COMMUNITIES GWR Waste Recycling 275,160 111,992 119,223 7,231 6% 1,000 Projected overspend GTG Street Cleansing Need to offset cost of Commercial Waste so work 1,062,450 692,643 687,086 -5,557 -1% -8,000 postponed to reduce costs. There is a projected year end overspend of £10k. This is reflected in the Street Care Budgets PTS Transport 3 25,139 38,361 13,222 53% 0 (GTG/GWK/GWC), as majority of o/spend will be recharged here.The main areas of overspend repairs/maintenance and tyres. Endeavour to avoid overtime, need to offset cost of GWC Waste Collection 2,093,640 881,152 890,007 8,855 1% -16,000 Commercial Waste. Vacancy held for Commercial Waste staff. 3,472,000 1,324,470 1,261,251 -63,219 Total Community Services 10,791,323 5,395,961 5,300,978 -94,983 -2% -76,000

TOTAL COMMUNITIES 14,472,777 7,309,901 7,205,567 -104,334 -2% -76,000

62

2 22/01/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Revenue Budget Monitoring to end December 2009 (Quarter 3, 2009/10) Appendix A

Variance Variance Full Year Revised to date Over / Actual against Budget Budget (Budget to (Under)spend Explanation of Variances to Date Budget to (Revised) to date date -v- projected date Actual) £ £ £ £ % £

Corporate Vision

CIEP 2010/11 expenditure not yet reimbursed. J Dyer GCD Community Development 236,630 8,241 23,247 15,006 182% -60,000 Vacant to request carry forward of core Comm Devt budget 418,652 506,042 513,830 7,788 Total Corporate Vision 655,282 514,283 537,077 22,794 4% -60,000

Customer Focus GBN Council Tax Benefits 35,280 -4,245,628 -4,231,049 14,579 0% 0 Year end adjustment GCY Concessionary Fares 780,640 509,299 421,787 -87,512 -17% 0 Late payment of November claim ERI Information Services Mobile phone credit to be offset against future 0 901,879 887,487 -14,392 -2% 0 purchase of handsets

Simon GRA Rent Allowances 77,680 -53,059 91,595 144,654 273% 0 Year end adjustment required - profile now amended CUSTOMERS McVey ERB Revenues and Benefits 0 1,149,168 1,176,162 26,994 2% 0 Miscoding of corporate telephone now amended

GHX Rent Rebates 108,430 -4,382,074 -4,465,475 -83,401 -2% 0 Year end adjustment required - profile now amended 718,950 79,597 81,740 2,143 Total Customer Focus 1,720,980 -6,040,818 -6,037,753 3,065 0% 0

TOTAL CUSTOMERS 2,376,262 -5,526,535 -5,500,676 25,859 0% -60,000

63

3 22/01/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Revenue Budget Monitoring to end December 2009 (Quarter 3, 2009/10) Appendix A

Variance Variance Full Year Revised to date Over / Actual against Budget Budget (Budget to (Under)spend Explanation of Variances to Date Budget to (Revised) to date date -v- projected date Actual) £ £ £ £ % £

Monitoring Officer

Resources GER Electoral Registration Underspend on postages & printing, projection diffcult 135,140 37,800 25,095 -12,705 -34% 0 to quantify due to staff sickness GEL Elections £10k underspend on overtime, projection difficult to 98,320 5,940 -6,464 -12,404 -209% 0 quantify due to staff sickness Adjustment to draft revised budget required re salaries ECL Legal Democratic Memb 0 560,836 576,413 15,577 3% 9,000 Shelagh for head of legal dept McGregor ECH Human Resources 0 362,249 356,244 -6,005 -2% 0 Training underspending, delayed by restructure GMM Members 603,880 252,271 240,425 -11,846 -5% -12,000 Underspends car allowances & scrutiny GTH Other Items Some emergency flood expenditure, adjustment to 2,238,860 415,000 431,317 16,317 4% draft revised budget required GFS Unapportionable 393,135 268,237 470,499 202,262 75% 0 Miscoding corrected in January 999,465 772,171 776,355 4,184 Total Resources 4,468,800 2,674,504 2,869,884 195,380 7% -3,000

Social Enterprise GCK Car Parks Adjustment to draft revised budget required, drop in -1,999,780 -2,174,544 -1,961,129 213,415 -10% 50,000 income due to flooding & snow ECC Commercial Technical Ser £53k charge from NPS re 08/09 not accrued at year 0 443,279 526,912 83,633 19% 53,000 end paid in 09/10 GCN Conveniences Maintenance of £40k not yet invoiced

MONITORING OFFICER MONITORING 875,580 427,578 405,327 -22,251 -5% 0 GGK Decriminalised Parking 255,490 21,611 -3,295 -24,906 -115% -15,000 Increase in penalty notices issued Michael GUL Industrial Units Landlord 31,580 -22,515 -34,290 -11,775 52% 0 Invoice re rent due not yet paid Keane GLW Lake Windermere -416,010 -582,546 -590,950 -8,404 -1% -12,000 Increase in encroachment rents income GMK Markets 9,890 -32,233 -89,868 -57,635 -179% 0 Scheduling of NPS work across the authority GPH Public Halls 457,790 253,136 235,193 -17,943 -7% -18,000 Gas bill not received and unlikely to be cleared by year end GPX Public Offices 0 328,931 265,167 -63,764 -19% 0 Maintenance invoices not received GSY Sundry Properties 251,210 -21,148 -51,096 -29,948 -142% -10,000 Mainly Castle Dairy rates rebate 444,237 207,263 209,114 1,851 Total Social Enterprise -90,013 -1,151,188 -1,088,915 62,273 5% 48,000 TOTAL MONITORING 4,378,787 1,523,316 1,780,969 257,653 17% 45,000

64

4 22/01/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Revenue Budget Monitoring to end December 2009 (Quarter 3, 2009/10) Appendix A

Variance Variance Full Year Revised to date Over / Actual against Budget Budget (Budget to (Under)spend Explanation of Variances to Date Budget to (Revised) to date date -v- projected date Actual) £ £ £ £ % £

Management Team

TOTAL MANAGEMENT TEAM 0 332,899 336,657 3,758 1% MANAGEMENT TEAM

TOTAL REVENUE 21,227,826 3,639,581 3,822,517 182,936 7% -91,000

65

5 22/01/2010

66 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL Cabinet Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Cllr A Shine Report From: Phillipa Cook (Corporate Director – Agenda 9 Strategy and Vision) Item No: Report Author: Simon McVey (Assistant Director Customer Focus) Report Title: Concessionary Fares 2010/2011

Summary In January 2009 Cabinet confirmed that the Statutory Minimum Concessionary Travel Scheme be retained for the year 2009-10 and that the Concessionary Travel Scheme be revisited after one further year’s operation. This report recommends that the existing scheme be continued for a further 12 months and advises of recently announced changes to the operation and funding of the scheme. Recommendations Cabinet is recommended to: 1. Confirm that the Statutory Minimum Concessionary Travel Scheme be retained for the year 2010-11, and 2. Note recently announced changes to the scheme following national consultation. Report Existing Scheme 1. In the 2006 Budget, the Chancellor announced that there would be an English National Concession from 1 April 2008. This became enshrined in the Concessionary Bus Travel Act 2007.

2. A fundamental difference between the revised scheme and the previous one is that it is not the issuing authority that reimburses the bus operators for lost income but the authority in whose area the bus trip begins. This new scheme, therefore, impacts heavily on councils with tourist areas within their boundaries.

3. The scheme introduced from 1 April 2008 (statutory minimum) was:

Free local bus travel between the hours of 9:30am and 11pm and all day on Saturdays, Sundays and Bank Holidays for eligible people, anywhere in England.

The only addition to the minimum scheme above was the provision of “Companion” (or Carer) NoWcards to certain people with disabilities.

4. Local Authorities are given discretion to add elements to the scheme such as travel prior to 9:30am and other forms of transport but South Lakeland has only ever been able to fund the stautory minimum. This position has not changed and it is therefore being recommended that the Statutory Minimum Concessionary Travel Scheme be retained for the year 2010-11.

67 Future Changes 5. A package of reforms to concessionary bus travel in England was announced as part of the 2009 Pre-Budget Report. The package includes proposed changes to responsibilities for administering the concession following a consultation on this issue last year. Also announced were plans to re-establish the link between the age of eligibility for free England-wide local bus travel and the state pension age as part of a wider package of changes.

Shifting Responsibility – Shire Districts to County Councils 6. Over 200 responses were received to the consultation on administrative reform of concessionary travel and Ministers have concluded that shifting responsibility for administering the statutory minimum concession from shire district councils to county councils will deliver “real benefits” and will help ensure the long term sustainability of the concession. It is intended that this change to administrative responsibilities will come into force from 1 April 2011. An order under section 9 of the Concessionary Bus Travel Act 2007 will be presented to Parliament for scrutiny in due course. 7. A further report will be presented to Cabinet outlining the full financial implications when these become known but in the medium term financial plan it has been assumed that these changes will be cost neutral to the Authority.

Equalisation of State Pension Ages 8. Also announced were plans to change the age of eligibility for concessionary bus travel in line with the changes that are being made to the state pension age from April 2010. For the purposes of concessionary travel this means tying the age of eligibility for the bus pass to the pensionable age for women. So, as the pensionable age for women gradually increases from 60 to 65 over the ten-year period from 2010 to 2020 so too will the age of eligibility for the concessionary bus pass increase for both men and women. 9. Currently both men and women become eligible for a free bus pass at 60. These plans mean that by 2020 the age of eligibility will increase to 65. Until pensionable age is equalised between the sexes in 2020, men will continue to become eligible for a concessionary bus pass when they reach the pensionable age of a woman born on the same day. 10. The changes to the age of eligibility will not impact on anyone already in possession of a bus pass. The changes will only affect those due to turn 60 on or after 6 April 2010 and will bring eligibility for the national bus concession into line with changes to other entitlements that have already been announced by the Department for Work and Pensions.

Special Grant Funding Allocation 2010/2011 11. In November 2009 the Department for transport commenced an 8 week consultation on the current distribution of the concessionary travel grant funding. Under the proposals South Lakeland were provisionally allocated an additional £30k but Cumbria as a whole stood to lose £380k in grant with Barrow, Copeland and Eden being the biggest losers. South Lakeland supported county wide opposition to the proposals and a copy of the joint response can be found at Appendix 1. 12. The Department for Transport has recently announced the final figures for 2010/2011 and the position has worsened for Cumbria with the districts now facing an overall grant reduction of £440,000. The additional £30k for South Lakeland has remained unchanged and already incorporated into the 2010/2011 budget. Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 68

Alternative Options Adopt a more generous scheme than the statutory minimum – rejected due to the high costs. Key Decision This report does not relate to a Key Decision.

Material Considerations Finance The 2009/10 budget is being monitored on a monthly basis on the grounds that it is completely demand led and it is looking likely that expenditure will be £157,000 less than the budgeted figure. The revised estimate has been adjusted accordingly. The additional grant of £30k makes a revised grant total of £933k which offsets the cost of the scheme which in 2010/2011 is estimated to be £1.675m. The budget book will therefore show a net cost to the Council of £742k albeit a significant element is funded by Revenue Support Grant.

Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required The “tourism” effects of the The Concessionary Travel Continue with the statutory scheme continue or grow. Scheme is under-funded. minimum scheme and continue to monitor expenditure monthly. Loss in Revenue Support Adverse pressure on SLDC Understand exact costs of Grant will be more than SLDC budgets. scheme and lobby central spend when responsibility government if and when transfers to County Council. necessary

Staffing This report has no effect on staffing. Links to Corporate Plan N/A Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) Statutory duty. Equalities & Diversity The scheme will be available to all persons over 60 and those people with disabilities listed in the Transport Act 2000. Community Safety Not applicable. Background Documents Document: Concessionary Travel Files. Contact: Simon McVey

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 69

70 Appendix 1

Chief Executive The Courts English Street Carlisle Cumbria CA3 8NA

Tel 01228 226301

11 December 2009

Sadiq Khan MP Minister of State for Transport 3/11 Great Minster House Department for Transport 76 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DR Copy Dear Mr Khan

LOCAL AUTHORITY SPECIAL GRANT FUNDING IN 2010/11 FOR THE NATIONAL BUS CONCESSION IN ENGLAND

On behalf of the 6 District Councils of Cumbria and Cumbria County Council, we wish to express our collective opposition to your proposal to redistribute the national bus concession special grant as detailed in your consultation document

The collective impact of the changes you are proposing will have serious implications for the District Councils in Cumbria to deliver essential services at a time of great financial challenge for much of the County. Overall your proposals represent a net reduction of £380,000 in District Council resources in Cumbria for 2010/11.

The District Councils in Cumbria have enough difficulty adjusting and arranging the budgetary impacts of real changes in the economy and environment, without having to cope with last minute changes to existing funding agreements. It does not appear to us, sensible to alter the final year of a 3 year settlement at this late stage. No predictive funding arrangement will ever reflect perfectly the demands on any given service and we believe it is better to operate with the certainty of the medium term funding award with appropriate adjustments made in the following settlement period.

We respectfully submit that any change of such magnitude should be given with sufficient notice to allow meaningful and responsible budgeting. We urge you to abandon your current proposals and allow for appropriate consideration be given to any adjustments to grant levels for the period 2011/14. These should be based on the experience of the first 3 years of the national scheme and agreed projections on demographic change and anticipated travel patterns.

The concessionary fare scheme has been extremely valuable in helping older people in Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 4 71 Cumbria take advantage of public transport opportunities to make journeys. The increase in patronage on bus services has been of assistance to the County Council who are required in many of our rural areas to subsidise bus services.

In addition it assists the wider objectives of the Council in encouraging carbon reduction and therefore more sustainable travel.

Yours sincerely

Jill Stannard Chief Executive

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 5 72 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: Cabinet – 10 February 2010 Portfolio Holder: Andy Shine Agenda 10 Report From: Assistant Director (Resources) Item No: Report Author: Sue Hill, Corporate Finance Manager Report Title: 2009/10 Revised & 2010/11 Revenue Budget: General Fund Services – Proposed Draft Estimates

Summary This report sets out the latest budgetary position arising from the work carried out to date on the Service Budgets. The initial draft estimates have been considered by Management Team and measures have been taken to balance the budget for 2010/11 and consider future years’ requirements. This final proposed draft of the 2010/11 budget shows a balanced budget with the Council Tax level set at 3%. This report provides an update on the changes since the last reported position and incorporates changes to the taxbase for 2010/11. As the Council moves towards a needs-led approach, it needs to ensure the District’s budgets remain fit for purpose – the budget process is guided not only by the Corporate Plan but also the Medium Term Financial Plan. Recommendations Members are requested to: • Consider the final proposed draft estimates and note the changes which have been made to achieve a balanced budget; • Note the savings achieved through the restructure; • Recommend that Council approves the draft revised 2009/10 and 2010/11 Revenue Budget for General Fund services

Report 1. Background The first draft of the revised 2009/10 and 2010/11 General Fund revenue service budgets were reported to Cabinet at the meeting of 6th January, 2010. A further update was reported to Cabinet on 27th January and to Joint Overview & Scrutiny on 2nd February 2010.

73 2. Final Proposed Draft Revenue Estimates 2010/11 Appendix A provides the final draft of the Revenue Estimates 2010/11 General Fund Summary and includes provision for only statutory service development (growth) items (£150k). A budgeted Council Tax increase of 3% currently balances the budget and produces a General Fund working balance of £1,200k at 31st March, 2011. A summary of the first page of Appendix A is set out below: Variance 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 2009/10 Original Revised Final Draft Notes original -v- Budget Budget Budget 2010/11 £k £k £k £k SERVICE EXPENDITURE 18,740.1 21,135.7 17,854.7 -885.4 1 Net Interest Payable 375.3 607.9 567.3 192.0 2 Effect of Accounting Practices -3,540.0 -3,591.6 -3,600.6 -60.6 3 SLDC EXPENDITURE 15,575.4 18,152.0 14,821.4 -754.0 Support to Capital Programme 1,828.3 1,257.3 300.0 -1,528.3 4 Net (use of)/addition to General -725.0 -659.4 91.1 816.1 5 Fund Working balance Net contributions to/(from) Reserves -1,928.7 -3,939.9 -101.2 1,827.5 6 Area Based / LABGI Grant 0.0 -60.0 -47.4 -47.4 7 FORECAST EXPENDITURE 14,750.0 14,750.0 15,063.9 313.9 Surplus / (Shortfall) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SLDC Budget (3% Council Tax 14,750.0 14,750.0 15,063.9 313.9 8 increase 2010/11)

Note 1 – overall reduction in budgeted service expenditure (broken down by service and Assistant Director in Appendix B) Note 2 – increase in net interest payable reflects the reduced income from interest on investments, due to reduced rates of interest available to the Council Note 3 – mainly shows the reversal of capital charges shown within the service revenue budgets. Also reversal of interest charged to the Housing Revenue Account (shown in more detail within Table 1a, Appendix A) Note 4 – planned use of the Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes within the five- year Capital Programme (Table 1a, Appendix A) Note 5 – reduction in planned use of General Fund Working balance to realise a balance of £1.2m by 31st March 2011 (page 1, Appendix A) Note 6 – planned net contribution from reserves for 2010/11 (Table 1b, Appendix A shows more detail of planned contributions to reserves, Table 1c planned contributions from reserves) Note 7 – no original 2009/10 budgets; £28.8k Area Based Grant and £18.6k Local Area Business Growth Initiative Grant expected 2010/11 Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: 2 Amended by: Sue Hill 2 74 Note 8 – the Council Tax increase for 2009/10 was 2.9% The final draft of the revised 2009/10 service budgets is provided in Appendix B. The additional contribution from Reserves has been adjusted by £200k to reflect the underspend on Phase 1 of the restructure. The revised budget now incorporates all known adjustments, including the flood expenditure of £60k. Appendix B provides detailed variances for the latest draft of the 2010/11 service budgets against the 2009/10 original budgets with explanations for the major variances. Salary figures included are based on the new structures agreed through the restructure. Target savings of circa £1m from Phase 2 of the restructure have been met and the effect of the conflicting budget pressures have been addressed during the exercise undertaken to balance the budget and significant savings have been identified (see section 3 and Appendix D). Statutory Service Development (growth) items are included in the final draft figures (see section 3 and Appendix C for full list of proposed growth items). Other items of growth shown in Appendix C going forward will depend on further savings being identified elsewhere. This is a final proposed draft of both the revised current year and next year’s budgets to be presented for approval by Council. 3. Savings Members will recall the first draft of the 2010/11 budget showed a shortfall of £412k. Appendix D details the workings and adjustments agreed which total £472k and have now been incorporated and balance the budget. Further work is ongoing with regard to the Medium Term Financial plan and balancing the budget position over the forthcoming five-year period. A number of additional savings have been identified for this period and will be presented as part of the Medium Term Financial Plan 4. Fees and Charges The proposals in the budget assume that fees and charges will be approved as presented to Committees. Changes to fees and charges arising from decisions taken by Committees may, therefore, change the figures within this report. 5. Conclusion and Next Steps Joint Community and Resources Overview & Scrutiny considered the first draft estimate report on 6th January 2010. An update was considered by Cabinet on 27th January and by Joint Overview & Scrutiny on 2nd February 2010. This final proposed draft budget incorporates all known adjustments and recharges. Council will be asked to approve the budget on 23rd February 2010. Alternative Options The report provides a factual summary of the latest draft estimates.

Key Decision This report contributes to Key Decision PD09/003/Sev, which appears in the current Forward Plan.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: 2 Amended by: Sue Hill 3 75

Material Considerations Finance Included within the main body of the report. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Council is unable to balance its Financially imprudent and Management Team and budget. potentially unlawful. Assistant Directors to work with Cabinet Members to produce a Damage to CAA and Use of range of corrective measures. Resources Judgement and Council’s reputation.

Staffing The budgets have been prepared to reflect the estimated cost of the establishment required from 2010/11 onwards. Links to Corporate Plan The budget process allocates resources in line with the Corporate Plan and the service development proposals were scored against the corporate priorities in the current Corporate Plan. Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) The Council is in the process of updating and reviewing its Corporate Plan and the strategies that support this in parallel. The Medium Term Financial Plan, Capital Strategy, Asset Management Plan and Workforce Plan are being developed to enable the Council’s priorities to be effectively delivered. This budget presents a change in the way resources are being allocated, which will be reflected in the updated strategies.

Equalities & Diversity The budget proposals set out in this report will be equality assessed. Community Safety The budget proposals include consideration of Community safety issues. Background Documents Document: Budget Working Papers Contact: Sue Hill Service Development bids

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: 2 Amended by: Sue Hill 4 76 REVENUE ESTIMATES 2010/11 APPENDIX A

2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Amended Revised Final Draft Budget Budget Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000

GENERAL FUND SUMMARY

2,958.6 Community Investment & Development 3,358.0 3,731.2 3,391.7 11,575.7 Community Services 10,843.4 10,795.0 10,553.1 607.6 Corporate Vision 827.4 659.5 611.7 1,948.2 Customer Focus 1,927.4 1,737.0 1,675.5 2,234.8 Resources 2,313.3 4,342.2 2,319.0 (437.3) Social Enterprise (174.3) (129.2) (442.3) (147.5) Management Team (16.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Corporate Adjustments 0.0 0.0 0.0 Corporate Savings (254.0) 18,740.1 Service Expenditure 19,079.2 21,135.7 17,854.7

Financing Entries (Table 1a): 919.8 Interest Payable 919.8 919.8 919.8 (544.5) Interest & Investment Income (544.5) (311.9) (352.5) (3,540.0) Effect of Statutory and Proper Accounting Practices (3,540.0) (3,591.6) (3,600.6)

15,575.4 SLDC Expenditure 15,914.5 18,152.0 14,821.4

1,828.3 Support to Capital Programme 1,828.3 1,257.3 300.0 0.0 Phased increase in General Fund Working Balance 0.0 0.0 50.0 (725.0) (Use of)/Addition to General Fund Working Balance (618.3) (659.4) 41.1 308.1 Contributions to Reserves (Tables 1b & 1c) 308.1 307.2 427.0 (2,236.8) Contributions from Reserves (Tables 1b & 1c) (2,682.6) (4,247.1) (528.2) 0.0 Area Based Grant 0.0 (22.8) (28.8) 0.0 LABGI Grant 0.0 (37.2) (18.6)

14,750.0 Forecast Expenditure 14,750.0 14,750.0 15,063.9

0.0 Surplus / (Shortfall) 0.0 0.0 0.0

14,750.0 SLDC Budget 3% Council Tax increase 14,750.0 14,750.0 15,063.9

£000 £000 £000 £000

1,895.0 General Fund Working Balance at 1 April 1,895.0 1,768.3 1,108.9 0.0 Phased increase in General Fund Working Balance 0.0 0.0 50.0 (725.0) Contribution to / (Deduction from) Working Balance (618.3) (659.4) 41.1 1,170.0 General Fund Working Balance at 31 March 1,276.7 1,108.9 1,200.0

Notes Income from Council tax incorporates changes to taxbase for 2010/11 3% Council tax increase assumed in MTFP for planning purposes based on CLG notification Expenditure for statutory growth (£150k) is included for 2010/11 2010/11 contributions to reserves includes £50,000 to IT replacement fund 2010/11 working balance of £1.2m is in line with current MTFP policy of increasing working balance to £1.25m by £50k pa

77

budsum 0910 revised & 1011 original Cabinet 100210 1 02/02/2010 REVENUE ESTIMATES 2010/11 APPENDIX A

2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Amended Revised Final Draft Budget Budget Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000

FINANCING ENTRIES Table 1a

INTEREST PAYABLE

908.4 Interest payable on Decent Homes expenditure 908.4 908.4 908.4 9.4 Interest payable on finance leases 9.4 9.4 9.4 2.0 Interest payable on temporary borrowing 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Interest payable on new capital investment 0.0 0.0 0.0

919.8 Net expenditure 919.8 919.8 919.8

INTEREST & INVESTMENT INCOME

(444.0) Investment Fund returns (444.0) (230.0) (286.9) (100.0) Interest receivable on temporary investments (100.0) (81.4) (65.1) (0.5) Interest received on car loans (0.5) (0.5) (0.5)

(544.5) Net expenditure (544.5) (311.9) (352.5)

EFFECT OF STATUTORY & PROPER ACCOUNTING PRACTICES

(2,920.6) Reversal of charges for capital expenditure written (2,920.6) (2,920.6) (2,920.6) 1,094.0 off to General Fund services and departments 1,094.0 1,094.0 1,094.0 (REFCUS) 178.1 Reversal of Impairment of Fixed Assets 178.1 178.1 178.1 (55.4) Capital grants written off to General Fund budgets (55.4) (55.4) (55.4) Reversal of charges for intangible assets written 40.0 off to General Fund services and departments 40.0 4.0 4.0 (1,617.0) Reversal of Depreciation on General Fund assets (1,617.0) (1,617.0) (1,617.0) (Capital Charges) 13.9 Minimum Revenue Provision 13.9 13.9 13.3 (273.0) Interest charged to Housing Revenue Account (273.0) (288.6) (297.0)

(3,540.0) (3,540.0) (3,591.6) (3,600.6)

SUPPORT TO CAPITAL PROGRAMME:

Capital Expenditure met by transfers from: 1,828.3 - Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes 1,828.3 702.6 100.0 0.0 - IT Replacement Reserve 0.0 60.0 60.0 0.0 - General Fund Major Repairs Reserve 0.0 0.0 140.0 0.0 - Second Homes Income Reserve 0.0 494.7 0.0

1,828.3 1,828.3 1,257.3 300.0

78 budsum 0910 revised & 1011 original Cabinet 100210 2 02/02/2010 REVENUE ESTIMATES 2010/11 APPENDIX A

2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Amended Revised Final Draft Budget Budget Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000

CONTRIBUTIONS TO RESERVES Table 1b

General Reserve: 80.0 Available for subsequent allocation to priority growth items 80.0 80.0 158.4

LABGI Reserve: 0.0 Distribution of additional 2007/08 entitlement of grant 37.2 18.6

Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes: 50.0 Support to Capital Programme 50.0 50.0 100.0

0.0 Economic Development Fund Contribution 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 Second Homes Reserve 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.0 Vehicle & Plant Replacement Fund 0.0 0.0

100.0 General Fund Properties Major Repairs Reserve 100.0 100.0 100.0

40.0 IT Replacement Reserve 40.0 40.0 50.0

Building Control Fee Income Reserve 38.1 Transfer of in-year surplus 38.1 0.0 0.0

308.1 308.1 307.2 427.0

CONTRIBUTIONS FROM RESERVES: Table 1c

General Reserve: (5.0) Club/Coach Development Project (5.0) (5.0) (5.0) Used to meet Early Retirement/Voluntary Redundancy (74.0) (74.0) Payments (2,031.2) 0.0 2008/09 Non-recurring growth items (25.0) Replacement of obsolete handheld parking computers (25.0) 0.0 0.0 (25.0) Private water suppliesnew private water regulations. (25.0) 0.0 0.0 (5.0) Digitising historic paper files (5.0) 0.0 0.0 (27.0) Used to meet Armitstead Windfarm Public Inquiry Costs (27.0) (27.0) 0.0 0.0 Transformation Agenda (part) (61.2) (61.2) 0.0 0.0 Non-recurring growth - Flooding November 2009 0.0 (60.0) 0.0 0.0 Slippage from 2008/09 (384.6) (345.9) (38.7)

Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes: (1,828.3) Support to Capital Programme (1,828.3) (702.6) (100.0)

Second Homes Income Reserve: 0.0 Support to Capital Programme 0.0 (494.7) 0.0

LABGI Reserve: 0.0 South Lakes Development Trust funding 0.0 (10.0) 0.0 (15.0) Great North Swim (15.0) (15.0) (15.0) (27.1) Fixed term Project Officer, Culture & Economy (27.1) (27.1) (27.1) Used to meet Waste Collection & Street Cleansing Tender (50.0) (50.0) preparation costs (50.0) 0.0 (50.0) Cultural Olympiad (50.0) (50.0) (50.0) 0.0 Business Start-up 0.0 (20.0) 0.0 0.0 Eden & South Lakes Delivery Board 0.0 (10.0) 0.0 0.0 World Heritage Site Project 0.0 (9.0) 0.0 0.0 Still Waters Project 0.0 (2.0) 0.0 79 budsum 0910 revised & 1011 original Cabinet 100210 3 02/02/2010 REVENUE ESTIMATES 2010/11 APPENDIX A

2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Amended Revised Final Draft Budget Budget Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000 0.0 Common Land New Road 0.0 (5.0) 0.0 0.0 Castle Dairy 0.0 (10.0) 0.0 0.0 Kendal Signage 0.0 (25.0) 0.0

Economic Development Fund: (46.4) Kendal Economic Regeneration Plan Project Officer (46.4) (46.4) (27.4)

General Fund Properties Major Repairs Reserve: 0.0 2008/09 Non-recurring growth items 0.0 0.0 0.0 (16.0) South Lakeland House chiller system (16.0) (16.0) 0.0 0.0 Castle Dairy essential repairs 0.0 0.0 (140.0)

IT Replacement Reserve: 2008/09 Non-recurring growth items (Provision of remote (25.0) working IT equipment) (25.0) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Replacement of IT equipment & software 0.0 (60.0) (60.0)

Building Control Fee Income Reserve: 2008/09 Non-recurring growth items (IT Systems (18.0) management and development) (18.0) Offset deficit on fee income (120.0) (20.0)

Kendal Employment Development Fund: 0.0 To meet revenue grants 0.0 (7.0) 0.0 0.0 Kendal Business Start Up 0.0 (15.0) (20.0) 0.0 Shop Fronts 0.0 (15.0) (15.0) 0.0 Cultural Trail 0.0 (7.0) (2.0) 0.0 BIDS 0.0 0.0 (8.0)

(2,236.8) (2,682.6) (4,247.1) (528.2)

80 budsum 0910 revised & 1011 original Cabinet 100210 4 02/02/2010 REVENUE ESTIMATES 2010/11 APPENDIX A

2009/10 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Amended Revised Final Draft Budget Budget Budget Budget £000 £000 £000 £000

Calculation of Income:

1,074.4 Add: Parish Precepts and Special Expenses 1,074.4 1,074.4 1,094.3 (5,590.7)Less:Redistributed Business Rates (5,590.7) (5,590.7) (6,038.6) (1,290.4) Revenue Support Grant (1,290.4) (1,290.4) (876.9) (36.4) Special Expenses chargeable to relevant Parishes (36.4) (36.4) (36.7) 11.5 (Surplus)/Deficit on Collection Fund 11.5 11.5 15.2 (8,918.4) Council Tax income (8,918.4) (8,918.4) (9,221.2) (14,750.0) (14,750.0) (14,750.0) (15,063.9)

81 budsum 0910 revised & 1011 original Cabinet 100210 5 02/02/2010

82 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Analysis of 2010/11 Budget (Final Draft as at 1st February 2010) Appendix B

Latest Draft Variance Original Original Budget Revised Budget Budget 2009/10 -v- Latest Explanation of major variances 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11(as at Draft 2010/11 1/2/10) Community Invest and Dev ECI Asst Dir Comm Inv Dev 0 0 0 0 EUR Regeneration Housing -48,150 0 0 48,150 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero Reduction in income (no impact on General GBC Building Control 128,010 292,510 209,070 81,060 Fund, funded through Building Control Reserve) GCB Citizens Advice Bureaux 73,900 73,900 73,900 0 GCV Conservation Environment 82,730 81,470 79,550 -3,180 GDC Development Control 452,670 475,920 363,270 -89,400 Change due to windfarm enquiry funding GDS Dangerous Structures 35,410 34,750 33,740 -1,670 Funded from Reserves (no impact on General GED Economic Development 372,940 444,860 442,680 69,740 Fund) GEN Enabling Role 280,370 261,730 239,690 -40,680 2009/10 growth item drops out 2010/11 GEV Events 171,250 119,130 115,880 -55,370 Budget moved to Grants code below GGV Grants To Voluntary Orgs 275,570 324,540 322,960 47,390 Budget moved from Events code above GHW Response Resiliance Grp 0 0 0 0 GLC Local Land Charges 21,040 -4,450 -9,770 -30,810 Increased income budget GLP Local Plans 474,670 465,010 454,970 -19,700 GMI Market Towns Initiative 60,230 79,750 68,310 8,080 GMP Market Towns Projects 22,180 24,534 21,100 -1,080 GMU Museum 464,630 480,500 470,130 5,500 GPB Publications Promotions 85,790 84,400 82,570 -3,220 GPJ Town Centre Projects 44,190 42,950 41,780 -2,410 GRM Kendal regeneration Manager 40,440 41,460 40,620 180 GRP Kendal Regeneration 250 30,250 240 -10 Based on calculation from Cumbria CC (offset GSH Second Home Discounts 202,500 258,870 237,700 35,200 by Housing Renewal Grants below) GTM Town Centre Management 24,850 35,420 33,010 8,160 GTN Transport Policy Planning 16,870 16,550 15,960 -910 GTP Tourism Promotion 57,780 56,140 54,340 -3,440 GWH Heritage Development 0 11,000 0 0 Budget moved to reflect staff movement 2009/10 Budget movements re restructure -381,498 381,498 implemented during the restructure Total Community Invest and Dev 2,958,622 3,731,194 3,391,700 433,078

83

1 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Analysis of 2010/11 Budget (Final Draft as at 1st February 2010) Appendix B

Latest Draft Variance Original Original Budget Revised Budget Budget 2009/10 -v- Latest Explanation of major variances 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11(as at Draft 2010/11 1/2/10)

Community Services ECS Asst Dir Community Service 0 0 0 0 EUN Neighbourhood Services -44,630 0 0 44,630 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero GCL Community Leisure 65,860 64,410 63,740 -2,120 GCM Cemeteries 180,610 184,370 167,360 -13,250 GCP Coast Protection 21,130 20,820 20,350 -780 GCZ Contaminated Land 43,780 42,980 41,740 -2,040 GDY SLDC Depots 0 -490 0 0 GFD Food Safety 337,740 331,410 321,730 -16,010 GFW Flood Warning 36,600 34,950 31,040 -5,560 GHG Gen Fund Contrib to HRA 235,200 238,810 259,810 24,610 GHL Town View Fields Hostel 89,160 96,330 79,060 -10,100 GHM Homelessness 279,450 276,390 260,450 -19,000 GHN Housing Renewal Grants 1,511,780 1,462,220 1,458,950 -52,830 GHP Housing Pollution 330,860 331,930 322,460 -8,400 GHS Health Safety 126,900 124,460 120,720 -6,180 GHT Housing Standards 98,240 97,920 65,900 -32,340 2009/10 growth item drops out 2010/11 GHV Housing Advice 27,530 27,010 26,200 -1,330 GLD Land Drainage 91,370 90,140 89,355 -2,015 Difference in budgeting for NPS maintenance GLE Leisure Centres 1,096,640 1,186,050 1,157,340 60,700 costs between years GLT Lighting 7,370 7,230 7,010 -360 GMA Hackney Carriage Licences -3,000 -2,890 -4,270 -1,270 GMB Entertainment Licensing 0 0 0 0 GMC Miscellaneous Licences 31,230 30,470 29,470 -1,760 GMD Licensing Act -51,860 -47,390 -51,260 600 GME Gambling Licensing 12,750 10,690 9,820 -2,930 GOT Environmental Health Other 12,850 20,140 15,500 2,650 Savings anticipated on letting of Grounds GPK Parks 877,510 931,570 755,385 -122,125 Maintenance contract Difference in budgeting for NPS maintenance GPL Planned Maintenance 288,000 -18,250 7,000 -281,000 costs between years GRG Recreation Grounds 226,410 249,290 242,230 15,820 GSN Street Furniture 38,650 33,370 32,430 -6,220 84

2 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Analysis of 2010/11 Budget (Final Draft as at 1st February 2010) Appendix B

Latest Draft Variance Original Original Budget Revised Budget Budget 2009/10 -v- Latest Explanation of major variances 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11(as at Draft 2010/11 1/2/10) GTF Town Centre Facilities 104,490 106,500 105,880 1,390 Services to be delivered as part of Waste GTG Street Cleansing 1,096,330 1,063,910 269,968 -826,362 contract Services to be delivered as part of Waste GWC Waste Collection 1,913,990 2,087,970 731,633 -1,182,357 contract GWF Dog Control 66,570 50,760 58,155 -8,415 Services to be delivered as part of Waste GWK Kerbside Collect of Recycl 1,453,940 1,319,320 -632,575 -2,086,515 contract Services to be delivered as part of Waste GWR Waste Recycling 266,260 276,510 245,170 -21,090 contract GWS Water Supply and Pollution 79,830 64,960 81,370 1,540 PTS Transport 0 1,093 0 0 Waste Contract 4,164,007 4,164,007 New contract from 1st April 2010 2009/10 Budget movements re restructure 626,184 -626,184 Total Community Services 11,575,724 10,794,963 10,553,128 -1,022,596

Corporate Vision ECV Asst Dir Corporate Vision 0 0 0 0 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero EXS Strategy Performance -420 0 0 420 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero EXT Transformation and Change -66,260 0 0 66,260 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero GCD Community Development 240,960 237,900 213,220 -27,740 GCX Corporate Management 46,920 46,010 44,630 -2,290 GEM Emergency Planning 108,040 105,100 104,100 -3,940 GMG Local Government Reorg 0 0 0 0 GMY Community Safety 75,530 87,752 71,850 -3,680 GPR Performance Review 172,950 169,850 165,110 -7,840 GVR Chairmn Allow Civic Hosp 14,490 12,890 12,740 -1,750 2009/10 Budget movements re restructure 15,363 -15,363 Total Corporate Vision 607,573 659,502 611,650 19,440

Customer Focus ECF Asst Dir Customer Focus 0 0 0 0

85

3 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Analysis of 2010/11 Budget (Final Draft as at 1st February 2010) Appendix B

Latest Draft Variance Original Original Budget Revised Budget Budget 2009/10 -v- Latest Explanation of major variances 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11(as at Draft 2010/11 1/2/10) ERB Revenues and Benefits -730 0 0 730 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero ERI Information Services -155,520 0 0 155,520 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero GBN Council Tax Benefits 58,980 38,000 49,780 -9,200 GBT Housing Bens Local Scheme 25,260 17,250 15,890 -9,370 GCC Corporate Communications 206,980 211,930 197,990 -8,990 GCY Concessionary Fares 925,290 780,920 774,760 -150,530 Predicted reduction in take up of scheme GFN NNDR Cost of Collection 300 -4,000 -12,700 -13,000 GFT Council Tax Cost Collect 433,130 439,130 423,550 -9,580 GHX Rent Rebates 133,020 110,220 111,530 -21,490 GRA Rent Allowances 168,880 80,550 49,900 -118,980 GRB Discretionary Housing Bens 2,750 2,690 2,620 -130 GRD Discretionary Rate Relief 58,240 60,320 62,150 3,910 2009/10 Budget movements re restructure 91,635 -91,635 Total Customer Focus 1,948,215 1,737,010 1,675,470 -181,110

Resources ECH Human Resources -57,000 0 0 57,000 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero ECL Legal Democratic Memb 21,870 -30 0 -21,870 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero ERA Internal Audit 2,300 0 0 -2,300 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero ERE Asst Dir Resources 0 0 0 0 ERF Finance -102,300 0 0 102,300 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero Reduction in corporate recharges from GCA Corporate Administration 624,490 608,090 569,450 -55,040 restructure savings GEL Elections 89,620 98,980 152,760 63,140 General Election costs built in for 2010/11 GER Electoral Registration 137,630 135,820 133,300 -4,330 GFC Contingency Provision 130,000 0 130,000 0 GFI Corporate Finance 62,120 60,980 59,240 -2,880 GFS Unapportionable PensionAdj 411,380 393,135 288,860 -122,520 Payments completed in 2009/10 GGT Subscriptions Grants 23,600 23,600 23,600 0 GMM Members 631,870 606,110 593,030 -38,840 Savings identified from training budgets GSE District Special Expenses 46,730 44,280 44,240 -2,490 GTH Other Items 22,500 2,102,470 22,500 0 GTV Bank Charges 82,080 87,130 125,300 43,220 GTW Audit and Inspection 186,420 181,645 176,805 -9,615 86

4 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL - Analysis of 2010/11 Budget (Final Draft as at 1st February 2010) Appendix B

Latest Draft Variance Original Original Budget Revised Budget Budget 2009/10 -v- Latest Explanation of major variances 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11(as at Draft 2010/11 1/2/10) 2009/10 Budget movements re restructure -78,492 78,492 Total Resources 2,234,818 4,342,210 2,319,085 5,775

Social Enterprise ECC Commercial Technical Ser -35,290 0 0 35,290 2009/10 original budget not cleared to zero ESE Asst Dir Social Enterprise 0 0 0 0 GCK Car Parks -1,940,750 -1,995,860 -2,204,209 -263,459 Additional income from fees & charges GCN Conveniences 724,980 877,230 707,230 -17,750 GCS Caravan Site -93,440 -91,200 -92,060 1,380 GGK Decriminalised Parking Enf 276,200 213,360 279,591 3,391 GLW Lake Windermere -413,130 -414,430 -378,630 34,500 GMK Markets -69,390 10,210 -73,130 -3,740 GPH Public Halls 435,930 458,880 461,130 25,200 GPX Public Offices 1,000 0 0 -1,000 GSY Sundry Properties 241,430 243,350 242,350 920 GTC Tourist Info Centres 515,330 529,417 578,930 63,600 2009/10 savings target removed, unrealistic GUL Industrial Units Landlord 36,860 32,130 30,420 -6,440 GUT Indust Units Tenants 10,000 7,720 6,030 -3,970 2009/10 Budget movements re restructure -127,002 127,002 Total Social Enterprise -437,272 -129,193 -442,348 -132,078

Management Team EXC Management Team -16,000 0 0 16,000 2009/10 Budget movements re restructure -131,593 131,593 Total Management Team -147,593 0 0 16,000

TOTALS 18,740,087 21,135,686 18,108,685 Other CorporateSavings -254,000 TOTALS 17,854,685 -885,402

87

5 02/02/2010

88 APPENDIX C

2010/11 GENERAL FUND BUDGET: PROPOSALS FOR REVENUE DEVELOPMENTS (per proposal form)

Statutory / Links to Corporate 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Total 3 year Ongoing Ref Score Budget Proposal Legislative or Plan (priority Comments from Prioritisation exercise Cost Cost Cost cost Cost pa Unavoidable outcomes)

£ £ £ £ £ UNAVOIDABLE / STATUTORY Increased Audit Commission costs for IFRS 1 RE/1 240 Audit & Inspection Yes - 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 work South Lakes Survey work for Infrastructure repairs on 1.1, 1.2, 1.8,, 1.11, 2 CID/2 220 Yes 25,000 12,500 0 37,500 0 50% HRA, 50% GF (total £75k) Housing HRA assets 3.1 In future, elections costs will be built into 3 Elections Additional costs of Elections 2010/11 Yes 35,000 0 0 35,000 multi-year budgets Revenues & Reduction in Housing Benefit/Council Tax 4 Yes 80,000 0 0 80,000 Benefits Benefit Subsidy TOTAL UNAVOIDABLE / STATUTORY 150,000 FUNDED FROM RESERVES Development Critical to understand housing needs - could 5 CID/4 210 District-wide housing needs survey Yes 1.6 40,000 0 0 40,000 0 Strategy be funded from HPDG monies £20k Out of date, should be re-done every 5 Development District-wide private sector house condition years, is there scope for County wide project 6 CID/3 200 Yes 1.3, 1.6, 1.11 45,000 0 0 45,000 0 Strategy survey to reduce costs? Used to justify grants & funding bids TOTAL FUNDED FROM RESERVES 85,000 SELF-FUNDING New private water regulations awaited, 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, outsourced sampling, start date 10/1/10, 7 CS/2 260 Water Private Water Supply Officer Yes 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.10, 24,600 26,300 28,100 79,000 2500 properties on private water, can 3.2 charge householders for testing but don't know new income - should self finance TOTAL SELF-FUNDING 24,600 DE-MINIMIS (FUND FROM REVENUE) Duty to classify areas of marine waters for collection of shellfish - contracted out: if Maintenance sampling for shellfish bed 8 CS/1 246 Food Safety Yes 2.1 3,500 3,900 4,200 11,600 4,200 beds are reopened there will be increase in classifications sampling - looking at increase from 3 beds to 8 beds TOTAL DE-MINIMIS 3,500

89 1 18/01/2010 APPENDIX C

2010/11 GENERAL FUND BUDGET: PROPOSALS FOR REVENUE DEVELOPMENTS (per proposal form)

Statutory / Links to Corporate 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Total 3 year Ongoing Ref Score Budget Proposal Legislative or Plan (priority Comments from Prioritisation exercise Cost Cost Cost cost Cost pa Unavoidable outcomes)

£ £ £ £ £ NON_STATUTORY Started, is it statutory because it has it's own 9 SE/1 260 Lake Windermere Register title for lake bed No - 20,000 0 0 20,000 0 act? Committed and will return more income than will cost 10 RE/4 245 Training Training for restructure implications 25,000 20,000 15,000 60,000 10,000 Made commitment in restructure Will generate savings - but savings will appear in each individual service - cost should be halved year-on-year but savings 11 RE/2 220 Finance Procurement Team No 1.11, 2.1, 2.2 30,000 31,000 32,000 93,000 32,000 will be shown elsewhere, must find way of offsetting savings. Need to add to growth bid for HR & legal support Need further work with Dave Pogson, Planned Additional funding for Planned Maintenance 12 NPS 200 552,750 not provided not provided 552,750 not provided Michael Keane, Finance to review what is Maintenance (base budget £288k) essential 13 CF/1 166 Communications 3rd edition of South Lakeland News No 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.8 8,500 8,500 8,500 25,500 8,500 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 14 CV/1 166 Vision & Strategy Local Area Partnership Co-ordinator No 1.6, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 35,500 37,000 38,100 110,600 38,100 Is there a redeployment? No 1.11, 2.3, 3.1 Was full time post, reduced to half post, Development 15 CID/5 160 Affordable Housing Officer No 1.6 13,100 13,900 14,200 41,200 14,200 member desire to see full post restored; Strategy working with communities to identify sites South Lakes Council contributions to estate improvement 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 16 CID/6 45 No 10,000 10,000 12,000 32,000 12,000 Operational benefits in estate management Housing projects 1.8, 1.10, 1.11, 3.1 Project part of transformation programme, Additional funding for Committee 17 RE/3 0 Members 15,000 0 0 15,000 0 put pressure to find within transformation Management System programme Not National Cycle Tour (inclusion agreed by 18 17,500 7,500 0 25,000 0 scored Cabinet 6/1/10) TOTAL NON_STATUTORY 727,350

TOTALS 990,450 180,600 162,100 1,333,150 129,000

90 2 18/01/2010 APPENDIX D

Recurring Savings Proposals from Senior Management Team 2010/11 Budget January 2010

Service Area Savings Comment £000 CID Building Control 12 Continue with one less building control surveyor - vacant post. Second Homes 30 Review to identify additional costs CS Grounds maintenance 100 Target savings from contract renewal. Contribution to HRA 26 Grounds maintenance costs to be reduced Cross Cutting Procurement Savings 80 Various to be identified - dependent on Growth Bid - will impact various service budgets Contribution to IT Replacement Fund 50 Reduced annual contribution to the IT replacement Fund.

Overtime Budgets 30 To reflect the reduction of the number of employees from restructure and contract changes. To be managed within £30k less than 2009/10 budgets. Climate change savings 84 The capital bid incorporates significant savings over three years (£666k savings over 3 years). This is to be reviewed and firmed up savings figures put in the base budgets. This is a provisional figure for now being incorporated.

Total 412

Additional Savings Car Users Allowance 30 To be managed withing £30k less than 2009/10 budgets & review undertaken. Travel and Subsistence 30 To be managed within £30k less of 2009/10 budgets. Total 60

Total Savings 2010/11 472

Summary of Savings Savings in Service budgets 168 Incorporated in Service Budget figures shown in Appendix A Corporate savings 194 Need to be applied across service budgets, shown separately in Appendix A Adjustments to reserve contributions 50 Reduction in contribution to IT Reserve, included in reserve movements in Appendix A Additional Corporate savings 60 Need to be applied across service budgets, yet to be built in Total Savings 2010/11 472

91

92 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Joint Overview and Scrutiny / Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 2nd February / 10th February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Councillor Brenda Gray Report From: Corporate Director (Communities) Agenda 11 Report Author: David Sykes - Assistant Director – Item No: (Community Investment & Development) Report Title: 2010/11 Revenue Budget: Housing Revenue Account

Summary The Housing Revenue Account (item 8) & Draft Housing Revenue Account Subsidy Determinations for 2010/11 allows for an average guideline rent increase of 3.1%; which will bring an average rent increase of 2% when applied in line with the Government’s rent restructuring formula. The rise follows the same Government consideration as in 2009/10 when average rents were reduced, mid year, from 6.4% to 3.1%. All other aspects of the 2010/11 draft budget figures are based on the 2009/10 revised budget allocation. An increase in Management & Maintenance allowances will allow a small amount of growth in 2010/11; being mindful of the volatility of this fund and the recommended minimum working balance. Recommendation Joint Overview and Scrutiny are requested to consider the 2010/11 Housing Revenue Account and recommendations being made to Cabinet and identify matters they would wish Cabinet to take into account when considering the report. Cabinet are recommended, subject to consideration of comments raised by the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee, to: (a) consider and approve the 2009/10 Revised Budget and 2010/11 Original Estimates (Annex A); • approve a target for the HRA working balance at 31 March 2011 of £600,000; • approve a target for the HRA contingency provision of £50,000; (b) consider growth items as listed in Appendix B and approve the recommended growth to be funded by the HRA as indicated in Appendix B; (c) approve that weekly Council house rents be increased from Monday 6 April 2010 in line with the rent-restructuring formula with four rent-free weeks in the year; (d) agree the process for the following (with effect from Monday 5 April 2010 unless stated otherwise): i) Energy charges be adjusted to recover estimated energy costs, with the same number of charge-free weeks in the year as house rents; ii) Sheltered housing amenity charges to be calculated to recover 100% of unpooled scheme costs; individual charges are capped by the rent restructuring limit of RPI+1/2%+£2 per week;

93 iii) The other fees and charges be increased by no more than 3.1% (e) Approve the transfer of full management control of the MRA (Major Repairs Allowance) fund to South Lakes Housing from the 1 April 2010 (f) Consider and approve the request for appropriate professional fees to be capitalised. Report 1. This report presents the revised HRA budget for 2009/10 and draft 2010/11(Annex A). 2. The Housing Revenue Account (item 8) & Draft Housing Revenue Account Subsidy Determinations for 2010/11 allows for an average guideline rent increase of 3.1%; which will bring an average rent increase of 2% when applied in line with the Government’s rent restructuring formula. The rise follows the same Government consideration as in 2009/10 when average rents were reduced, mid year, from 6.4% to 3.1%. The total annual rental payable will be collected through 48 weekly payments. 3. Draft budget figures from South Lakes Housing have been incorporated into the HRA budget calculations where available. The report requests that for amenity, energy and fees, the process for calculating the costs are agreed. A preliminary review of the Amenity service is presently being undertaken by South Lakes Housing. 4. South Lakes Housing have examined their proposed budgets for 2010/11 and identified movement on the Revenue Repairs allocation to allow priority/contractual work to be completed. Growth bids have been received and scored by Management Team / SMT in priority order (Appendix B). Note the General Fund list item 6, ref CID/2 which requests 50% of the funding to for Item 1 on the HRA list. In maintaining a working balance of £600,000 and including a budgeted contingency sum of £50,000 for 2010/11, there is capacity in the budget to fund £191,000 of growth. One percent salary increase, in line with SLDC, and contractual increases have been incorporated into the base Management Fee. 5. South Lakes Housing presently administer the Major Repairs Allowance (MRA) fund but, with effect from 1 April 2010 (2010/11 Budget), it is proposed they take full control of the funds to allow better project planning and expenditure information within their own accounting system. Detailed guidelines on reporting to the Council have been discussed initially and will be implemented if approval is given for the transfer. South Lakes Housing request that the proportion of South Lakes Housing’s professional fees directly incurred in the delivery of MRA funded capital schemes are capitalised and charged to the MRA. For 2010/11, it is proposed that up to £60,000 of professional fees are budgeted as a charge to the MRA. 6. Other aspects to highlight are: Interest on balances is based on the medium term financial plan with calculations showing a decrease from £23,000 (2009/10) to £14,000 (2010/11). Options survey incorporates the £21,400, £29,700 and £8,900 allocated from the working balance 2008/09, 2008/09 in year balance and contingency. Initially an amount of £90,000 had been allocated – this now brings the total approved to £150,000 within the 2009/10 budget. The proportion of the £150,000 budget remaining uncommitted at March 31s 2010, will be carried forward into the 2010/11 budget.. Negative housing subsidy, due to be paid to the Government, takes account of housing debt, management, maintenance & MRA allowances, debt management and rent increases.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 94 Alternative Options The law governing the HRA requires it should never fall into deficit. It is therefore compulsory to find ways of balancing the HRA. Key Decision This report relates to Key Decision KD10/007/H&D. It appears in the Forward Plan for the period 1st February – April 30th 2010. Material Considerations Finance Contained within the report. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required There is a risk that the Housing Criticism from Audit Controls over spending to Revenue Account goes into Commission, poor Use of prevent budgets being deficit – this is not permitted by Resources and Housing exceeded; sufficient legislation Inspection scores contingency provision; working balance to reflect risks of overspends

Staffing Not applicable Links to Corporate Plan Housing to Meet Local Need Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) Housing Strategy Equalities & Diversity Not applicable Community Safety Not applicable

Background Documents Document: HRA Budget Working Papers Contact: Joyce Sedgwick

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 95

96 South Lakeland District Council Appendix A Housing Revenue Account 2010/11 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Revised Original Budget Budget Budget (excl growth) £000 £000 £000

EXPENDITURE

130.3 134.6 Sheltered Housing 130.2 Supervision & Management 2,838.3 2,949.2 - General 2,834.0 14.4 43.1 - Right to Buy Sales 42.2 325.2 330.2 - Special 361.9 311.3 311.3 - Capital Charges 311.3 3,619.5 3,768.4 3,679.6

4,365.5 4,359.8 Repairs & Maintenance 4,407.4 0.0 0.0 Rents & Taxes 0.0 3,527.0 3,269.0 Housing Subsidy 3,395.5 11,512.0 11,397.2 11,482.5

50.0 0.0 Contingency 50.0

11,562.0 11,397.2 TOTAL EXPENDITURE 11,532.5

INCOME

11,019.0 10,990.0 Gross Rents 11,169.1 General Fund Contribuiton 234.4 238.0 - Open Spaces etc 260.0 Interest 0.0 0.0 - Mortages 0.0 27.1 22.7 - Balances 14.3 129.8 122.0 Other Income 122.0 11,410.3 11,372.7 11,565.4

151.7 24.5 Use of/ (Addition to) Balances (32.9) 11,562.0 11,397.2 TOTAL INCOME 11,532.5

BALANCES

753.2 782.9 Opening Balance 1 April 758.4

(151.7) (24.5) Addition to/(Withdrawal from) Balance 32.9

601.5 758.4 CLOSING BALANCE 31 MARCH 791.3

600.0 600.0 Minimum Working Balance 600.0

97 South Lakeland District Council Appendix A Housing Revenue Account 2010/11 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Revised Original Budget Budget Budget (excl growth) £000 £000 £000

SHELTERED HOUSING

Expenditure 0.0 0.0 Recharged Employees 0.0 0.8 0.8 Other Expenditure 0.8 127.8 132.1 ALMO additional management costs for Sheltered 127.9 0.0 0.0 Additional costs of energy not met from charges 0.0 713.5 678.1 Payment to ALMO (income) 689.9 1.7 1.7 Departmental Recharges 1.5 843.8 812.7 Total Expenditure 820.1 Income 713.5 678.1 Other Income 689.9 713.5 678.1 Total Income 689.9 130.3 134.6 Net Expenditure 130.2

SUPERVISION & MANAGEMENT GENERAL (including Repairs Admin)

Expenditure 56.7 56.7 Employees 54.2 69.8 67.9 Recharged Employee Costs 64.1 109.9 127.9 Premises 127.9 14.0 31.6 Supplies and Services 28.6 90.0 150.0 HRA Options Study 0.0 40.0 40.0 Investment & Loan Mgmt Expenses 40.0 217.0 204.9 Other Council Committees 217.0 128.9 125.3 Departmental Recharges 118.3 2,327.0 2,359.9 Payment to ALMO (Management Fee) 2,218.9 3,053.3 3,164.2 Total Expenditure 2,869.0 Income 35.0 35.0 Other Income 35.0 180.0 180.0 Management Fee to Decency Project 0.0 215.0 215.0 Total Income 35.0 2,838.3 2,949.2 Net Expenditure 2,834.0

SUPERVISION & MANAGEMENT (SPECIAL) Expenditure 0.0 0.0 Employees 0.0 0.0 0.0 Recharged Employee Costs 0.0 12.1 11.8 Departmental Recharges 11.1 1.2 1.2 Premises 1.2 311.9 317.2 Maintenance of Grounds & Play Areas 349.6 0.0 0.0 Careline 0.0 325.2 330.2 Total Expenditure 361.9 Income 234.4 238.0 Associated GF contribution to HRA 260.0 234.4 238.0 Total Income 260.0 90.8 92.2 Net Expenditure 101.9

98 South Lakeland District Council Appendix A Housing Revenue Account 2010/11 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Revised Original Budget Budget Budget (excl growth) £000 £000 £000

REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE Expenditure 20.0 20.0 Housing Play Areas 20.0 1,064.0 1,064.0 Planned Maintenance (incl DHP/Admin SLDC) 27.7 25.0 60.0 Major Voids - Response & Relets 0.0 90.0 110.0 Batched Boiler Replacement & Renewal 200.0 45.0 45.0 Alarms 0.0 0.0 40.0 Edgecombe Court lift, fire panels, door entry system 0.0 26.0 35.0 Edgecombe Court patio doors 0.0 0.0 0.0 Edgecombe Court windows 120.4 10.0 30.0 Fire Risk Assessments 290.0 0.0 10.0 Ramp - Binfold Croft 0.0 58.0 0.0 Garage Refurbishments 0.0 37.0 5.0 Pathways & Pavements 0.0 7.0 5.0 Sandylands car park resurface 0.0 8.0 8.0 Septic tank Finsthwaite 0.0 5.0 10.0 Helm Close surface water 0.0 5.0 5.0 Digital switchover 0.0 100.0 70.0 Drainage 0.0 0.0 57.0 Fire door upgrades 0.0 0.0 12.0 Electric Door openers 0.0 0.0 0.0 Beech Drive, Ulverston (£30k recoverable from Ins.) 0.0 0.0 50.0 Yewbarrow Lodge - retaining wall 0.0 0.0 50.0 Cliff Stabilisation - Arnside 0.0 0.0 105.0 Anchorite Fields 80.0 0.0 0.0 Heating System / Fires 55.0 0.0 0.0 Air source heat pump 150.0 0.0 0.0 Tyson Square - porches 35.6 0.0 0.0 Ulswater close - door entry system 5.3 0.0 0.0 Fell Close common room - windows & doors 7.0 0.0 0.0 Adhoc elements - (Decent homes elements) 226.1 0.0 0.0 Infrastructure & Structural works 250.0 0.0 0.0 School Knott 75.0 323.4 56.7 Unallocated refurbishments 263.2 290.0 290.0 Aids and Adaptations for the Disabled 290.0 0.0 0.0 Contingency 90.0 2,113.4 2,137.7 Funded from MRA 2,185.3

1,078.6 1,060.1 Response Maintenance 1,060.1 464.9 453.4 Relets (incl clearance & rubbish removal) 453.4 0.0 0.0 Batched Imp Works (Response & Relets) 0.0 13.3 13.3 Abnormal Maintenance 13.3 250.0 250.0 External Decoration (Listed Repairs) 250.0 18.5 18.5 Garage refurbishments 18.5 20.0 20.0 Tenant Participation - Estate Works 20.0 0.0 0.0 Supervision 0.0 406.8 406.8 Specialist Maintenance 406.8 4,365.5 4,359.8 Total Expenditure 4,407.4

99 South Lakeland District Council Appendix A Housing Revenue Account 2010/11 2009/10 2009/10 2010/11 Original Revised Original Budget Budget Budget (excl growth) £000 £000 £000

ADMINISTRATION OF RIGHT TO BUY (RTB) SCHEME Expenditure 3.4 3.3 Recharged Employees 3.1 13.0 12.7 Departmental Recharges 12.0 0.0 28.1 Payment to ALMO 28.1 1.9 2.9 Other Expenditure 2.9 18.3 47.0 Total Expenditure 46.1 Income 3.9 3.9 Charge to Capital Receipts 3.9 3.9 3.9 Total Income 3.9 14.4 43.1 Net Expenditure 42.2

100 Appendix B

2010/11 HRA BUDGET: PROPOSALS FOR REVENUE DEVELOPMENTS (per proposal form) Links to Statutory / Corporate Plan 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Total 3 year Ongoing Cumulative Ref Score Budget Proposal Legislative or Comments from Prioritisation exercise (priority Cost Cost Cost cost Cost pa cost 2010/11 Unavoidable outcomes) £££££ Survey work for Infrastructure repairs on 1.1, 1.2, 1.8,, Represents 50% of growth requested. Now 1 CID/2 220 HRA Yes 25,000 12,500 0 37,500 0 25,000 HRA assets 1.11, 3.1 treated as 50% HRA, 50% GF (total £75k) Bid for funding for STATUS Tenants' 2 SLH/1 200 HRA Yes 1.6 10,000 0 10,000 20,000 0 35,000 satisfaction survey 2010 (every 2 years) Council Houses - Asbestos Survey, data 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 3 CID/1 200 HRA Yes 0 150,000 0 150,000 0 Proposed to commence study in 2011/12 35,000 management and management plan 1.11 Though decency funding is ceasing, a significant reduction in fee will impact on SLH ability to manage housing stock. Additional management fee (To maintain Maintains the capacity to deliver repairs - 4 SLH/2 180 HRA service level as Decency funding ceases No 1.6 120,000 60,000 0 180,000 0 155,000 request for £180k 2010/11 and 2009/10) 2011/12,consider £120k for 2010/11 and £60k for 2011/12, reducing to nil following year?

155,000 210,000 10,000 350,000 0

1 10102/02/2010 APPENDIX B

2010/11 GENERAL FUND BUDGET: PROPOSALS FOR REVENUE DEVELOPMENTS (per proposal form)

Statutory / Links to Corporate 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Total 3 year Ongoing Ref Score Budget Proposal Legislative or Plan (priority Comments from Prioritisation exercise Cost Cost Cost cost Cost pa Unavoidable outcomes)

£££££ Started, is it statutory because it has it's own 1 SE/1 260 Lake Windermere Register title for lake bed No - 20,000 0 0 20,000 0 act? Committed and will return more income than will cost New private water regulations awaited, 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, outsourced sampling, start date 10/1/10, 2 CS/2 260 Water Private Water Supply Officer Yes 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.10, 24,600 26,300 28,100 79,000 2500 properties on private water, can charge 3.2 householders for testing but don't know new income - should self finance Duty to classify areas of marine waters for collection of shellfish - contracted out: if Maintenance sampling for shellfish bed 3 CS/1 246 Food Safety Yes 2.1 3,500 3,900 4,200 11,600 4,200 beds are reopened there will be increase in classifications sampling - looking at increase from 3 beds to 8 beds 4 RE/4 245 Training Training for restructure implications 25,000 20,000 15,000 60,000 10,000 Made commitment Increased Audit Commission costs for IFRS 5 RE/1 240 Audit & Inspection Yes - 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 work South Lakes Survey work for Infrastructure repairs on HRA 1.1, 1.2, 1.8,, 1.11, 6 CID/2 220 Yes 25,000 12,500 0 37,500 0 50% HRA, 50% GF (total £75k) Housing assets 3.1 Will generate savings - but savings will appear in each individual service - cost should be halved year-on-year but savings 7 RE/2 220 Finance Procurement Team No 1.11, 2.1, 2.2 30,000 31,000 32,000 93,000 32,000 will be shown elsewhere, must find way of offsetting savings. Need to add to growth bid for HR & legal support Development Critical to understand housing needs - could 8 CID/4 210 District-wide housing needs survey Yes 1.6 40,000 0 0 40,000 0 Strategy be funded from HPDG monies £20k Out of date, should be re-done every 5 Development District-wide private sector house condition years, is there scope for County wide project 9 CID/3 200 Yes 1.3, 1.6, 1.11 45,000 0 0 45,000 0 Strategy survey to reduce costs? Used to justify grants & funding bids Need further work with Dave Pogson, Planned Additional funding for Planned Maintenance 10 NPS 200 552,750 not provided not provided 552,750 not provided Michael Keane, Finance to review what is Maintenance (base budget £288k) essential 11 CF/1 166 Communications 3rd edition of South Lakeland News No 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.8 8,500 8,500 8,500 25,500 8,500 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 12 CV/1 166 Vision & Strategy Local Area Partnership Co-ordinator No 1.6, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 35,500 37,000 38,100 110,600 38,100 Is there a redeployment? No 1.11, 2.3, 3.1 Was full time post, reduced to half post, Development 13 CID/5 160 Affordable Housing Officer No 1.6 13,100 13,900 14,200 41,200 14,200 member desire to see full post restored; Strategy working with communities to identify sites South Lakes Council contributions to estate improvement 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 14 CID/6 45 No 10,000 10,000 12,000 32,000 12,000 Operational benefits in estate management Housing projects 1.8, 1.10, 1.11, 3.1 Project part of transformation programme, Additional funding for Committee 15 RE/3 0 Members 15,000 0 0 15,000 0 put pressure to find within transformation Management System programme

857,950 173,100 162,100 1,173,150 129,000

102 1 02/02/2010 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

110 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Cllr Andy Shine Report From: Assistant Director (Resources) & S151 Agenda 13 Report Author: Shelagh McGregor Item No: Report Title: 2010/11 Proposed Five Year Capital Programme

Summary The Council’s Capital Programme is spending on the purchase or improvement of assets that enables the delivery of the Council’s priorities and outcomes as set out in its Corporate Plan and that have a long-term benefit to the District. As the Council moves towards a needs-led approach it needs to ensure the District’s assets remain fit for purpose – this process is guided not only by the Corporate Plan but also the Medium Term Financial Plan and Capital Strategy. The required expenditure is balanced against the limited resources available. This report provides an update of the proposed Capital Programme which was considered by Cabinet and Joint Overview and Scrutiny on the 27 January and the 2 February consecutively. Council agreed the existing Capital Programme in September 2009. That programme needs to be revisited in the light of changes in financing, the need for new schemes and the implications on the 2010/11 Revenue Budget and the proposed five year programme to 2013/14. As reported previously the Capital Prioritisation Group prioritised the projects coming forward using the criteria agreed in the Capital Strategy approved by Council in March 2009. At present the draft Programme proposes that £7.7m of the £9.6m bids put forward are included in the programme leaving the remainder on a reserve list. The draft Programme will be included in the Budget to be approved by Council on 23 February 2010. Recommendations Cabinet is recommended to: a) Consider and approve the draft Capital Programme as a baseline for capital investment and calculation of prudential indicators; b) Note the proposed creation of the Community Allocation and a suitable level of funding for this; c) Note the allocation of budget reductions in 2009/10 to a provision for flood works; d) Recommend to Council that it approves the draft Capital Programme. Report Changes since the last report 1. The majority of the proposed programme remains the same as reported to Cabinet on the 27 January 2010. The change is with regard to the outcome of the exercise in clarifying the likely current year end position. The knowledge gained from the monitoring work during the year has been used to develop both the revenue and capital budget proposals.

111 2. The quarter three monitoring report considered earlier on this agenda reports the underspend to date on the 2009/10 capital programme. This is partially due to slippage which is now included in the programme for 2010/11, and partially due to savings against the original budget approved. These changes are included in the draft programme set out in Appendix A and are summarised below. 3. Changes to the draft 2009/10 Revised and 2010/11 Original Capital Programme 2009/10 Revised £000 2010/11 Original £000 27 January draft programme 9537.4 12239.4 Carry Forwards -2219.2 2219.2 10 February draft programme 7318.2 14458.6

The projected underspends which are not required for the original programme for 2009/10 as approved in February 2009 which currently totals circa £300k are being finalised but it is proposed that these be kept in the programme to fund the work outstanding arising from the flood.

Community Allocation 4. The prioritisation scheme strongly reflects the Corporate Plan but consultation with members and officers suggests that it requires improvement to more effectively reflect the needs-led approach being developed by the authority. 5. Community schemes tend to attract few points within the prioritisation scheme and are unlikely to be included in the capital programme. To address this issue it is proposed that a Community Allocation be included within the capital programme. The funds in this Community Allocation would be top-sliced from the main capital programme and would be available to provide match funding of community schemes. 6. It is suggested that a total yearly allocation of £100k be established, which equates to approximately £2k per Councillor. In future years, when the Local Area Partnerships (LAPs) are further developed, sums could be allocated to each LAP for Councillors to agree the application of funds to schemes within their area. For 2010/11 the LAPs are still relatively undeveloped so it is suggested that the funds are allocated by Cabinet & Council, following consultation with Scrutiny Committee. Provisionally a number of bids already prioritised have been earmarked for funding from the Community Allocation and are shown in the draft Capital Programme at Appendix A. 7. If this proposal is approved, detailed criteria for the operation of the Community Allocation will be prepared (one of which is likely to involve the principle of match funding and the carry forward of unspent amounts year on year). If the allocation of the resources via this method proves successful in delivering the outcomes specified, the value of the Community Allocation should be reviewed regularly to ensure an appropriate balance is found to adequately reflect Corporate priorities alongside Community needs. Funding the Capital Programme 8. The general resources available to the Council have declined significantly over the last 5 years. Capital receipts, particularly from the Right to Buy sales of Council Houses, have reduced significantly. In the current economic climate it is unrealistic to expect significant capital receipts from the sale of assets. Previous Capital Programmes have relied on the use of the Fund of Revenue Monies for Capital Purposes but this fund has been largely used.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 112 9. Over the last few years, there has been relatively high levels of slippage of capital spend compared against the capital programme: Approved Actual Capital Capital Over/(under) spend Programme Spend £000 £000 £000 % 2008/09 14,168.4 11,841.9 (2,326.4) -16% 2007/08 14,700.7 13,149.5 (1,551.2) -11% 2006/07 17,666.5 15,141.6 (2,524.9) -14% 2005/06 10,800.8 8,989.6 (1,811.2) -17%

The current capital programme & MTFP assumes we borrow £1m this year to fund spending. However, if spending this year matches the pattern of previous years it is most unlikely that any of this borrowing will be required this year, and possibly not in 2010/11 either. Proposed changes to this are set out below. 10. The Capital Programme approved in September 2009 continued to assume borrowing would be used as a major source of funding, with £1m to be borrowed each year from 2009/10 to 2013/14. In addition, costs of £1million for new capital investment was introduced into the Capital Programme for 2010/11. 11. Work on the Revenue Budgets for 2010/11 onwards and the Medium Term Financial Plan suggest that this level of borrowing will be both unnecessary and unaffordable. Changes to regulations require the Council to set aside monies within the Revenue Budget to fund borrowing based on the life of assets funded through borrowing. This will significantly increase the revenue costs of borrowing, particularly on shorter-life assets such as vehicles. It is therefore proposed that no borrowing is used for 2009/10 and the borrowing for 2010/11 be reduced from £2.3m to £1m. Beyond 2011/12, the low levels of capital receipts and other resources will make borrowing unavoidable. 12. It is acknowledged that there will always be some slippage in the programme due to circumstances beyond the Council’s control but it is suggested that a limit of 5% be set for an acceptable level of slippage across the programme. Consideration of the way to deal with underachievement of projects and the associated underspends is being undertaken as part of the MTFP/Capital Strategy. 13. Further work is being undertaken to assess the requirements for expenditure on Vehicles and Plant. The implications of this will be included in the report to Cabinet on the 10 February 2010.

Draft Capital Programme 14. The draft Capital Programme at Appendix A reflects the changes detailed above and the following assumptions: a) a continuation of current trends for capital receipts, with reduced Right to Buy sales; b) slippage, revised costings and phasing of expenditure on existing approved schemes; c) no adjustments to Housing Single Capital Pot funded schemes as no indication of the grant entitlement has been received; d) no adjustments to Disabled Facility Grant funded schemes as no indication of the grant entitlement has been received; Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 113 e) the Council will receive one-third of Cumbria County Council’s income from second homes, for use on Homes to Meet Needs; f) the receipt of £45,900 in respect of a claim for Ulverston Tennis Centre, earmarked for remedial works; g) the Decent Homes Programme to conclude in 2009/10.

Once approved within the Capital Programme, no project should proceed until a Project Initiation Document (PID) has been approved by Strategic Management Team, details of expenditure have been confirmed as meeting the definition of capital expenditure and an Equality Impact Assessment is produced. Alternative Options The prioritisation exercise offers a rational approach to production of a balanced Capital Programme that reflects corporate priorities. The inclusion of the Community Allocation makes it possible to reflect the Council’s needs-led approach to service delivery. Differing approaches can be taken to the funding of a realistic level of capital investment. Key Decision This report contributes to Key Decision PD09/003/Sev, which appears in the current Forward Plan. Material Considerations Finance Financial implications are indicated in the report. Prudential indicators will be revised to reflect the Programme. Risk Management All projections of capital income and expenditure involve a degree of uncertainty. These can be managed over the life of the Programme. Risk Consequence Controls required Use of prioritisation criteria that Inappropriate investment that Adherence to agreed are insufficiently robust does not reflect corporate prioritisation criteria. priorities with consequent

inability to progress priority schemes. Poor use of resources Capital receipts from asset Resources are not available to Cautious assumptions on sales are over-estimated deliver the full Programme receipts. Regular revision and monitoring. Expenditure assumptions are Resources are not available to Accurate estimation and under-estimated deliver the full Programme monitoring of capital projects. External funding is not Resources are not available to Avoidance of over-commitment available to the extent deliver the full Programme of expenditure assumed in the Programme Programmed slippage does not Potential overspending of Close monitoring and ability to occur Programme slow down progress on schemes.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 4 114 Staffing Officers will play an important role in delivering or enabling the outcomes of the programme to be achieved. Links to Corporate Plan The projects within the prioritisation exercise have been scored against the corporate priorities in the current Corporate Plan. Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) The Council is in the process of updating and reviewing its Corporate Plan and the strategies that support this in parallel. The Medium Term Financial Plan, Capital Strategy, Asset Management Plan and Workforce Plan are being developed to enable the Council’s priorities to be effectively delivered. This proposed programme presents a change in the way resources are being allocated which will be reflected in the updated strategies. Equalities & Diversity The Capital Programme has not been Equality Impact Assessed but each project within the Capital Programme has had an Equality Impact Assessment. Community Safety Considered as part of the schemes proposed. Background Documents Document: Working File A0901 Contact: Helen Smith, Head of Finance Resources Department Sue Hill, Corporate Finance Manager

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 5 115

116 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL Appendix A Draft Capital Programme (February 2010)

Programmed Expenditure

GL Code Bid Ref (Oct 09) Project Title 2009/10 £000's 2010/11 £000's 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total Sources of Funding £000's £000's £000's £000's JD Completes 2009/10, no DECENCY PROJECT - IMPROVEMENT WORKS 796.9 796.9 HRA borrowing bid required MRA Decent Homes JDW Completes 2009/10, no DECENCY PROJECT - SLH SUPERVISION (incl NPS) 256.0 256.0 MRA Decent Homes bid required JDX Completes 2009/10, no DECENCY PROJECT - SUSTAINABILITY 690.4 690.4 MRA Decent Homes bid required JNI30 Already underway, SOUTH LAKES HOUSING, CHOICE BASED LETTING 26.3 26.3 General resources funding for 2010/11 SYSTEM £15.6k JNI33 Completes 2009/10, no SOUTH LAKES HOUSING, ASSET MANAGEMENT 46.8 46.8 General resources bid required JNI40 Completes 2009/10, no SOUTH LAKES HOUSING, DDA ACCESS ULVERSTON 10.0 10.0 General resources bid required TOWN HALL JNM50050 Committed SEPTIC TANK SUMMERLANDS ENDMOOR 10.5 10.5 MRA KGS42 Second homes funded, LAKELAND HOUSING TRUST 39.6 39.6 Second Homes no bid requested

COMMUTED SUM K VILLAGE 176.8 176.8 Commuted Sum K Village KGT21 NEW-BUILD FUND FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING 640.8 640.8 Single Capital Pot KGT25 BUY BACK SCHEME: RTB HOMES 720.0 720.0 Single Capital Pot KPE11 ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERSHIPS 77.5 77.5 General resources KPE16 Mostly complete - no GREENSIDE LIMEKILN, KENDAL, RENOVATION 65.6 65.6 Heritage Lottery Fund bid required KPG03 2010/11 moved to DISABLED ACCESS GRANTS 6.3 6.3 General resources Community Pot KRE99 Committed BLUEBIRD PROJECT, CONISTON 20.0 20.0 LABGI Committed KIRKBY LONSDALE RUGBY CLUB 7.5 7.5 General resources Completes 2009/10, no CANAL HEAD, KENDAL AREA ACTION PLAN EXTENSION 32.0 32.0 General resources bid required Committed LAKES LEISURE LOAN 135.0 135.0 Debtor Completes 2009/10, no KENDAL SIGNAGE PROJECT 25.0 25.0 LABGI bid required JNM50070 No bid received HOUSING PLAY AREAS 40.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 120.0 MRA KGS01 Second homes funded, AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANTS (AHRG) 665.4 465.4 365.4 365.4 365.4 2,227.0 Second Homes

Community Investment & Development Investment Community no bid requested

KGT20 3 SITE ASSEMBLY FUND FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING 776.4 282.0 282.0 282.0 332.0 1,954.4 Single Capital Pot JNA90 4 COUNCIL HOUSES - AIDS & ADAPTATIONS 294.4 290.0 290.0 290.0 290.0 1,454.4 MRA JNM50060 5 COUNCIL HOUSES - OTHER MAJOR REPAIRS 769.2 1,799.2 1,799.2 1,799.2 1,799.2 7,966.0 MRA KRE04 21 GRANGE REGENERATION PROGRAMME 40.0 30.0 70.0 General resources 22A NEW ROAD COMMON - DESIGN 70.0 70.0 General resources KDE03 23 LOW MILL BUSINESS PARK PHASE II 10.0 10.0 General resources 24 KENDAL MUSEUM IMPROVEMENTS 302.0 300.0 602.0 Other grants General resources 25 EMPLOYMENT LAND IN SOUTH LAKELAND 100.0 100.0 General resources 27 KENDAL "QUALITY GATEWAY TO THE LAKES" PUBLIC 200.0 400.0 135.0 735.0 NWDA REALM PROG Other grants LABGI KPG01 28 HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT SUPPORT PROGRAMME 18.4 20.0 20.0 20.0 78.4 General resources 117 -D1 - 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL Appendix A Draft Capital Programme (February 2010)

Programmed Expenditure

GL Code Bid Ref (Oct 09) Project Title 2009/10 £000's 2010/11 £000's 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total Sources of Funding £000's £000's £000's £000's 37 WATERHEAD (AMBLESIDE) SCHEME 2,900.0 100.0 3,000.0 General resources Other grants

Totals Community Investment & Development 6,570.5 6,604.9 3,411.6 2,776.6 2,806.6 22,170.2

KEG33 Committed, no bid STOCKBECK DRAINAGE Land & Construction 17.0 17.0 Stockbeck Drainage Grant required KGX17 TOWN VIEW FIELDS HOSTEL IMPROVEMENTS 69.0 69.0 Single Capital Pot KLR31 NOBLES REST PARK, KENDAL, IMPROVEMENTS 79.6 79.6 General resources KLR50 PLAY SOUTH LAKELAND (BIG LOTTERY) 150.9 150.9 Big Lottery KLR51 CASTLE ESTATE, KENDAL, PLAY AREA IMPROVEMENT 11.9 11.9 Big Lottery

KLS21100 ULVERSTON TENNIS CENTRE REMEDIAL WORKS 45.9 45.9 General resources KMR01 GRANGE RAILWAY BRIDGES 147.3 91.0 238.3 General resources KRE99 11 LIGHTBURN PARK, ULVERSTON, SKATEBOARD 20.0 20.0 General resources FACILITY KGT22 ENERGY EFFICIENCY 185.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 585.8 Single Capital Pot KGT23 DISABLED ADAPTATIONS 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 500.0 Single Capital Pot - VEHICLE & PLANT PROGRAMME 0.0 2,692.5 1,497.5 290.0 1,245.0 5,725.0 Leasing KGD21 1 DISABLED FACILITIES GRANTS 353.8 459.0 459.0 459.0 459.0 2,189.8 DFG Single Capital Pot

Community Services Community General resources KGP11 2 PRIVATE SECTOR RENEWAL GRANTS 523.3 400.0 400.0 400.0 400.0 2,123.3 General resources 8 THE TRAM FOOTPATH, KENDAL HEIGHTS 12.0 12.0 General resources 9 ROTHAY PARK, AMBLESIDE 82.0 82.0 General resources - PUBLIC CONVENIENCES (UPGRADE AND HAND OVER) 250.0 750.0 350.0 1,350.0 General resources

Totals Community Services 1,704.5 4,186.5 3,306.5 1,699.0 2,304.0 13,200.5

KIT18 REVENUES & BENEFITS SYSTEM 14.5 14.5 General resources 12 REPLACEMENT REVENUES & BENEFITS SYSTEM 140.0 210.0 350.0 General resources 13 ONE STOP SHOPS 75.0 75.0 150.0 General resources Focus

Customer Customer Totals Customer Focus 154.5 285.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 514.5

KXF50 TRANSFORMATION AGENDA 384.0 35.3 419.3 General resources KXW21 30 CARBON REDUCTION PROGRAMME 114.0 114.0 57.0 57.0 0.0 342.0 General resources

Vision Totals Corporate Vision 498.0 149.3 57.0 57.0 0.0 761.3 Corporate Corporate

118 -D2 - 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL Appendix A Draft Capital Programme (February 2010)

Programmed Expenditure

GL Code Bid Ref (Oct 09) Project Title 2009/10 £000's 2010/11 £000's 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total Sources of Funding £000's £000's £000's £000's JTR01 ADMIN & TECHNICAL SUPPORT MET BY MRA 23.6 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.0 135.6 MRA HRA ADMIN SUPPORT 33.2 33.2 66.4 General resources KXR51 ADMINISTRATIVE & TECHNICAL SUPPORT 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 172.5 General resources KIT25 UPGRADE FINANCIAL SYSTEMS 85.0 85.0 General resources KPG05 STRICKLANDGATE HOUSE REFURBISHMENT 20.0 20.0 General resources DESIGN FEES 80.0 80.0 General resources

Resources Totals Resources 276.3 95.7 62.5 62.5 62.5 559.5

KLL15 FERRY NAB TRACTOR REPLACEMENT 18.7 18.7 General resources KLL16 RAYRIGG MEADOW PUBLIC JETTIES 50.0 50.0 General resources KPY22 MAIN STREET, GRANGE CAR PARK, COMPLETE 251.9 251.9 General resources REFURBISHMENT 31 DISABLED TOILET 1ST FLOOR KENDAL TOWN HALL 13.0 13.0 GFMRR 34 BUXTON PLACE CAR PARK IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN 40.0 40.0 General resources

35 WESTMORLAND SHOPING CENTRE CAR PARK 400.0 400.0 200.0 1,000.0 General resources REFURBISHMENT NOT PRIORITISED SOUTH LAKELAND HOUSE HEAT/CHILLER UNIT 340.0 340.0 Social Enterprise

Totals Social Enterprise 333.6 780.0 400.0 200.0 0.0 1,713.6

UNALLOCATED TO SCHEMES 5.5 70.0 70.0 75.0 220.5 General resources 20 DISABLED ACCESS GRANTS (MATCH FUNDING FOR 5.0 5.0 5.0 15.0 General resources COMMUNITY BUILDINGS SUCH AS VILLAGE HALLS) 7 BEEZON FIELDS SKATEPARK 42.0 42.0 General resources 38.0 Other grants and contributions 16 ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERSHIPS FUND 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 100.0 General resources 10 QUEEN'S PARK WINDERMERE 10.0 10.0 General resources NOT PRIORITISED CCTV KENDAL 12.5 12.5 General resources Community Allocation Community Totals Community Allocation 0.0 138.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 438.0

PROGRAMME TOTALS 9,537.4 12,239.4 7,412.6 4,895.1 5,273.1 39,357.6

Changes since 27/01/2010 Cabinet Carry Forwards to 2010/11 -2,219.2 -2,219.2 119 -D3 - 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL Appendix A Draft Capital Programme (February 2010)

Programmed Expenditure

GL Code Bid Ref (Oct 09) Project Title 2009/10 £000's 2010/11 £000's 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total Sources of Funding £000's £000's £000's £000's Brought Forwards from 2009/10 2,219.2 2,219.2

PROGRAMME TOTALS 7,318.2 14,458.6 7,412.6 4,895.1 5,273.1 39,357.6

120 -D4 - 02/02/2010 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Councillor Brenda Gray Report From: Corporate Director (Communities) Agenda 14 Report Author: Tony Whittaker, Principal Strategy Item No: Officer Report Title: Second Homes Funding – Parish Housing Need Surveys

Summary To consider re-allocation of Second Homes Funds to pay for a number of parish housing need surveys within the District. This will improve the lives of local residents by providing supporting evidence to help enable much needed rural affordable housing for households in housing need and thereby contributing to the Council’s corporate affordable housing targets. Recommendations 1. That the Cabinet accepts the Lake District National Park Authority’s offer to share the costs of parish surveys in the Lake District National Park and to enter into a tri partite contract with them and the Cumbria Rural Housing Trust to undertake a programme of surveys over the next 2 years (2010/11 and 2011/12) as shown in Appendix 1. 2. That the Council’s financial contribution of £41,753.49 to the programme of surveys is paid from the sources shown in the Finance section of the report. 3. That Cabinet recommends to Full Council the transfer of £39,600 from the Capital Programme (KGS42) to the General Fund (Second Homes Fund). Report 1. The Council has a long-standing policy of commissioning parish housing need surveys in rural areas to identify the need for affordable housing at local levels, however it has been limited in the number of parish surveys that could be undertaken by the availability of financial resources. The surveys are needed to enable the Council’s housing and planning policies to support the delivery of new affordable housing in rural areas. In particular the surveys will provide evidence to implement Local Development Framework housing policies. A list of all parishes showing where surveys have been undertaken or due to be undertaken is shown at Appendix 2. The Audit Commission has just published revised Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE) for Strategic Housing (January 2010) in which it advises councils in rural areas to undertake a rolling parish survey to identify emerging housing needs. 2. The Council commissions such surveys from the Cumbria Rural Housing Trust (a not-for- profit organisation) who has provided a schedule of prices for each parish within South Lakeland. The priority is to survey those parishes whose current surveys are due to expire within the next two years. There are also a number of smaller parishes that have not been surveyed in recent years (if ever). Ideally all these parishes should be surveyed, however the number of surveys to be commissioned will be limited by the funding available. Hence it is proposed that parishes with over 100 households are given priority

121 as these are the parishes where development of affordable housing is most likely. 3. Both the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National Park Authorities (LDNPA and YDNPA respectively) have been approached to ask if they would be willing to share the costs of parish surveys within their respective national parks in order to commission as many surveys as possible. The LDNPA has agreed to provide £16,793.34 over the next two financial years to share the costs of parish surveys in their area. The YDNPA has stated that it is unable to provide any funding and intends to use the evidence from the 2006 District-wide housing needs survey to support site allocations within their Local Development Framework. 4. There is currently an allocation of £39,600 in the Second Homes Fund for the Lakeland Housing Trust to acquire an existing house on the open market in order to let this to local people at an affordable rent. The acquisition was originally due to complete by 31 March 2009 but the Trust sought an extension, which was duly granted until 31 December 2009. However, the Trust has now advised the Council that it is unable to proceed with the acquisition due to other commitments and wishes to give up the allocation. Hence it is recommended that the funding be re-allocated to pay for the programme of parish housing need surveys. The Second Homes Fund has been used in the past for this purpose. Hence the additional one new affordable home previously planned will not be delivered, however even if the funding was not re-allocated the Lakeland Housing Trust are not able to deliver this. 5. On the basis of the above funds a total of 21 parish surveys can be commissioned over the next two years (see Appendix 1). Along with existing surveys this would give comprehensive survey coverage for all parishes with over 100 households in the District by April 2012 with the exception of Sedbergh and Garsdale. Kendal, Grange and Ulverston will be surveyed separately, due to their urban nature, in 2010/11 subject to a successful General Fund growth bid. 6. The South Lakeland Strategic Partnership needs to give their approval for to all Second Homes funding hence they have been asked to do this at their meeting on 4 February 2010. This will be verbally reported to the Cabinet meeting. The LSP Affordable Housing Task Group gave its support to the proposal at its meeting on 8 January 2010. Alternative Options To not re-allocate the funding. This is not recommended as the programme of parish housing need surveys would not be undertaken, this could mean that proposed new affordable housing schemes may not be delivered due to lack of supporting evidence. Key Decision This report relates to Key Decision (Ref. No. KD10/006/H&D). It appears in the Forward Plan for the period 1 February 2010 to 31 July 2010. Material Considerations Finance Recommendation 2 will cost the Council £41,753.49 in total and can be funded by a combination of the following funds: Source Amount £ Budget Year Second Homes Fund 39,600 2009/10 Enabling Role – Other 2,153.49 2009/10 Services Total 41,753.49

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 122 The £41,753.49 will be added to the LDNPA contribution of £16,793.34 to provide a total of £58,546.83, this being the total cost of undertaking 21 parish surveys. The £39,600 within the Second Homes Fund is currently set within the Capital Programme and will require approval from Full Council to transfer this to the General Fund (Second Homes Fund). The Council has the discretion to be able to do this for the ring-fenced Second Homes Fund. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Lack of supporting evidence to Affordable housing targets may Delivery of programme of support new affordable not be met. parish housing need surveys housing schemes. as proposed.

Staffing N/A Links to Corporate Plan Priority 1.6 – Housing Needs in South Lakeland are addressed. Corporate target to deliver 710 affordable homes in the period 2006-2011. Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) Community Strategy: affordable housing priority. Target as above. Equalities & Diversity N/A Community Safety N/A Background Documents Document: Strategic Approach to Housing Contact: Tony Whittaker KLOE (January 2010)

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 123 APPENDIX 1 Parishes to be prioritised for Surveys

South Lakeland Planning Lake District National Park Area Kirkby Ireleth Haverthwaite Preston Patrick Witherslack, Meathop and Ulpha Stainton Coniston Casterton Torver Barbon Ambleside* New Hutton Grasmere* Old Hutton Satterthwaite Skelsmergh Colton Milnthorpe Crook Kirkby Lonsdale Rydal & Loughrigg* Langdale*

* Part of Lakes Parish

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 4 124 APPENDIX 2

Local Housing Need Surveys (South Lakeland)

Parish Main LAP Last Survey Number Plans for Settlements survey expires of homes new needed survey Aldingham Baycliffe, Ulverston Nov’08 Oct’13 7 Scales & Low Furness Allithwaite Upper Lindale Grange & Oct’08 8 Cartmel Sep’13 Arnside Arnside Kent Sep’04 Aug’09 12 2009/10 Estuary Barbon Barbon Sedbergh & Kirkby Lonsdale Beetham Beetham, Kent Oct’07 Sep’12 20 Storth/Sandside Estuary Blawith & Blawith High 2009/10 Subberthwaite Furness Broughton East Hampsfield Grange & Cartmel Burneside Burneside Upper 2008/9 Kent (delayed to 2009/10) Burton in Kendal Burton in Kent Apr’04 Mar’09 12 2008/9 Kendal Estuary (delayed to 2009/10) Casterton Casterton Sedbergh & Kirkby Lonsdale Claife Far Sawrey, High Apr’08 Mar’13 15 Near Sawrey Furness Colton Spark Bridge High Mar’07 Feb’12 17 Furness Coniston Coniston High Mar’06 Feb’11 66 Furness Crook Crook Kent Apr’07 Mar’12 10 Estuary Crosthwaite & Crosthwaite Kent Nov’08 13 Lyth Estuary Oct’13 Dent Dent Sedbergh Mar’05 Feb’10 13 2009/10 & Kirkby Lonsdale Docker Docker Upper Kent

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 5 125

Parish Main LAP Last Survey Number Plans for Settlements survey expires of homes new needed survey

Duddon Broughton in High 2009/10 Furness, Furness Seathwaite Egton, Newland, Greenodd, High Oct’07 Sep’12 10 Mansriggs & Penny Bridge Furness Osmotherley Fawcett Forest Upper Kent Firbank Sedbergh & Kirkby Lonsdale Garsdale Garsdale Sedbergh Mar’07 Feb’12 2 & Kirkby Lonsdale

Grange over Grange over Grange & Jun’06 – May’11 75 Sands Sands Cartmel (district survey) Grayrigg Grayrigg Upper 2009/10 Kent Haverthwaite Backbarrow, Grange & Dec’05 Nov’10 13 Haverthwaite Cartmel Hawkshead Hawkshead High Jun’08 May’13 28 Furness Helsington Brigsteer, Kent Apr’08 Mar’13 17 Helsington Estuary Heversham Heversham Kent Oct’07 Sep’12 5 Estuary Hincaster Hincaster Kent Estuary Holme Holme Kent Apr’04 Mar’09 16 2008/9 Estuary (delayed to 2009/10) Hutton Roof Hutton Roof Kent Estuary Kendal Kendal, Kendal Jun’06 – May’11 455 Oxenholme (district survey) Kentmere Kentmere Upper Kent

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 6 126

Parish Main LAP Last Survey Number Plans for Settlements survey expires of homes new needed survey

Killington Sedbergh & Kirkby Lonsdale Kirkby Ireleth Kirkby in High Feb’07 Jan’12 40 Furness Furness Kirkby Lonsdale Kirkby Lonsdale Sedbergh Jun’06 – May’11 70 (ward) & Kirkby (district Lonsdale survey) Lakes Ambleside, Lakes Jun’06 May’11 38 (Ambleside) Troutbeck Lakes (Grasmere) Grasmere Lakes Oct’06 Sep’11 40 Lakes (Langdale) Chapel Stile, Lakes Nov’06 Oct’11 11 Elterwater Lakes (Rydal and Rydal, Lakes Oct’06 Sep’11 6 Under Loughrigg) Clappersgate Lakes (Troutbeck) Troutbeck Lakes Jun’03 May’08 8 2009/10 Lambrigg Upper Kent Levens Levens Kent Apr’08 Mar’13 12 Estuary Longsleddale Sadgill Upper Kent Lower Allithwaite Allithwaite, Grange & Dec’08 Nov’13 23 Cartmel Cartmel Lower Holker Cark, Grange & Oct’08 Sept’13 20 Flookburgh Cartmel Lowick Lowick, Lowick High 2009/10 Green Furness

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 7 127

Parish Main LAP Last Survey Number Plans for Settlements survey expires of homes new needed survey Lupton Lupton Kent Estuary Mansergh Sedbergh & Kirkby Lonsdale Middleton Sedbergh & Kirkby Lonsdale Milnthorpe Milnthorpe, Kent Jun’06 – May’11 55 Ackenthwaite Estuary (district survey) Natland Natland Kent Jul’07 Jun’12 2 Estuary New Hutton New Hutton Upper Kent Old Hutton & Old Hutton Upper Holmescales Kent Pennington Pennington, Ulverston Oct’07 Sep’12 10 Swarthmoor & Low Furness Preston Patrick Kent Estuary Preston Richard Endmoor, Kent Oct’07 Sep’12 10 Summerlands, Estuary Crooklands Satterthwaite Satterthwaite Kent Nov’06 Oct’11 12 Estuary Sedbergh Sedbergh Sedbergh Feb’07 Jan’12 37 & Kirkby Lonsdale Sedgwick Sedgwick Kent Oct’08 Sep’13 2 Estuary Skelsmergh & Upper Scalthwaiterigg Kent Skelwith Skelwith Fold Lakes 2009/10 Stainton Kent Estuary Staveley in Newby Bridge Grange & 2009/10 Cartmel Cartmel Staveley with Ings Staveley in Upper Jul’08 Jun’13 18 Westmorland, Kent Ings Torver Torver High Mar’06 Feb’11 7 Furness

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 8 128

Parish Main LAP Last Survey Number Plans for Settlements survey expires of homes new needed survey

Ulverston (ward) Ulverston Ulverston Jun’06 – May’11 300 & Low (district Furness survey) Underbarrow & Underbarrow Kent Jul’06 Jun’11 7 Updated Bradleyfield Estuary 2009 Urswick Great Urswick, Ulverston Nov’07 Oct’12 16 Little Urswick & Low Furness Whinfell Upper Kent Whitwell & Selside Upper Kent

Windermere Windermere, Lakes Jun’08 May’13 156 Bowness, Troutbeck Bridge Witherslack Witherslack Kent Jul’05 Jun’10 23 Estuary

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 9 129

130 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Brenda Gray Report From: Corporate Director (Communities) Agenda 15 Report Author: Tony Whittaker, Principal Strategy Item No: Officer Report Title: Old Hawkshead Road, Coniston – Affordable Housing

Summary To consider funding a shortfall to enable Eden Housing Association to proceed with development of 11 new affordable homes at Old Hawkshead Road, Coniston. This will improve the lives of local residents by providing much needed affordable housing for households in housing need. Recommendations That funding within the Council’s Site Assembly Fund are arranged as follows: 1. Funds of £50,000 and £20,000 currently allocated in the 2009/10 programme to the Old Furness Road, Coniston and Broughton Road, Torver schemes are re-allocated to the Old Hawkshead Road, Coniston scheme. 2. A further £40,000 from within the uncommitted fund is allocated to the Old Hawkshead, Coniston scheme should the Homes and Communities Agency decide that it is unable to provide the remaining £40,000 shortfall. Report 1. The Council has been working very closely with Coniston Parish Council, the Lake District National Park Authority, the Diocese of Carlisle and various housing associations over the past three years in order to progress development of new affordable housing in the Parish. 2. The Old Hawkshead Road site is owned by the Diocese of Carlisle who is willing to sell it to Eden Housing Association (Eden) (having taken over the scheme from Mitre Housing Association) to develop new affordable housing. To this end planning permission and funding from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) was obtained in late 2007 to develop 14 affordable homes. However, the Diocese later decided that it wished to retain part of the site for future burials hence the scheme was reduced to 11 homes and new planning consent obtained. The Diocese agreed to accept a reduced amount for the acquisition of the land. 3. Eden undertake development and management of homes on behalf of Mitre and were due to start development of the scheme in October 2009. However upon reviewing the scheme viability Eden discovered that the total scheme cost per unit was significantly higher than the original estimate on which the HCA bid was made, due to additional costs in meeting Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes (the energy efficiency benchmark that is a requirement of HCA funding). Combined with the reduction in the number of homes, reducing Eden’s borrowing capacity, this has resulted in a higher grant requirement per unit than previously. The Mitre Board decided that due to its own financial position it did not wish to progress the scheme and Eden decided to take over

131 the scheme. 4. The HCA work on the basis of grant per unit, hence they advised Eden that they are only prepared to fund the original grant per unit. This leaves a shortfall of £110,000. The urgency comes from the HCA requirement a start on site by the end of March 2010 to retain the funding. The Council’s contribution, if agreed, would be payable upon start on site in March 2010. Eden has asked the Council for this funding to bridge the funding gap and has agreed to provide the Council with nomination rights of 100% of initial lettings and 75% of future lettings in return for the financial contribution. 5. Eden has attempted to further renegotiate the land acquisition cost with the Diocese, however the Diocese decided, at its meeting on 28 January 2010, that it was not prepared to reduce the cost any further. 6. This scheme is a flagship of the Council‘s work in developing a ‘bottom-up’ approach in terms of working with local communities to progress development of affordable housing. It is also a scheme of significant size. A very significant amount of project development work by all parties has been invested over the past 3 years to get to this point. Hence it is vital that this scheme is built. A letter of support from the Coniston Housing Group is shown at Appendix 1. 7. The Solicitor to the Council has considered the powers to provide the recommended funding and has indicated that the council has power in respect of the whole of any part of its area under section 2(1) of the Local Government Act 2000 to do anything which they consider is likely to achieve any one or more of the following objects— (a) the promotion or improvement of the economic well-being of their area, (b) the promotion or improvement of the social well-being of their area, and (c) the promotion or improvement of the environmental well-being of their area. It is suggested that the recommended council financial support would be likely to achieve the promotion of improvement of the economic and social well being of its area and therefore the council has power to incur the proposed expenditure.

Alternative Options To not fund the shortfall. This is not recommended as the new affordable homes would not be built and investment of £1.5m (the combination of the HCA grant and Eden’s borrowing) would be lost. Key Decision This report relates to a Key Decision as it relates to expenditure in excess of £60,000 on a particular project. Material Considerations Finance The Council’s Site Assembly Fund (KGT20) was established to cover expenses that would otherwise result in affordable housing schemes not being developed; hence it is legitimate to use these funds for this purpose. There is currently £200,000 unallocated in the Fund, however funding from Government is expected to be significantly reduced from 2010/11 hence some of this money needs to be carried over to next year to support new schemes. In the 2009/10 programme there is currently £50,000 and £20,000 allocated to possible schemes at Old Furness Road, Coniston and Broughton Road, Torver respectively. However these schemes are unlikely to be developed in the near future, and certainly not in 2009/10, due to various difficulties and no other funding has been secured for these schemes hence it is recommended that the sum of £70,000 is re-allocated to the Old Hawkshead Road scheme. It will be possible to consider funding the Old Furness Road and Broughton Road schemes from the 2010/11

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 132 programme if progress can be made. Correspondence has been sent to Coniston and Torver parish councils to advise them of this. Following negotiation between the Council and the HCA Investment Manager, the HCA will formally consider, at its meeting on 8 February 2010, a request to provide additional funding of £40,000 (the outcome will be verbally reported at the Cabinet meeting). It is recommended that £40,000 be provided from the current unallocated £200,000 as stated above should the HCA reject the request for additional funding. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Funding cannot be obtained to The affordable housing Allocate funding as meet the identified shortfall. scheme will not be developed recommended. resulting in the loss of £1.5m investment. This will also impact upon the Council’s corporate affordable housing targets.

Staffing N/A Links to Corporate Plan Priority 1.6 – Housing Needs in South Lakeland are addressed. Corporate target to deliver 430 affordable homes through public funding in the period 2006-2011. Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) Community Strategy: affordable housing priority. Target as above. Equalities & Diversity N/A Community Safety N/A Background Documents Document: Cabinet report dated 27 June Contact: Tony Whittaker 2007 (establishing the Site Assembly Fund)

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 133

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 4 134 135

136 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Cllr Brenda Gray (Housing & Development Portfolio) Cllr Peter Thornton (Communities & Well-being) Report From: Lawrence Conway (Corporate Director) Agenda 16 Report Author: David Sykes, Assistant Director Item No: Community Investment & Development Report Title: New allotments for Windermere Town Council

Summary To consider a request from Windermere Town Council that three plots of land in the Windermere/Bowness area be made available for community use, 2 for allotment purposes and 1 as a community orchard. Recommendations That: (i) The land at Longlands Road, Bowness be offered to let for a community orchard on terms and conditions to be agreed under delegation and (ii) the land off Orrest Drive Flats, Windermere be offered to let for allotments on terms and conditions to be agreed under delegation and (iii) the land at the rear of Victoria Road North, Windermere be retained as open space pending future consideration for affordable housing potential. Report 1. Windermere Town Council through South Lakeland Development Trust has asked if the District Council can make land available for allotments use and a community orchard. The various land parcels are shown on the attached plans and are described in more detail below. All are within the District Council’s ownership. There is a high national demand for allotments, as evidenced by recent similar requests from Grange and Kendal Town Councils, and very few suitable parcels are available for such use. Windermere Town Council has over 70 residents on its waiting list for allotments. 2. It is important to understand that, under the LDNPA Local Plan, once any land is used for allotment purposes, even as non-statutory allotments, that it will be extremely difficult to obtain planning permission for alternative development (including affordable housing) unless an equivalent, easily accessible alternative site is provided elsewhere. Since allotment sites are in such short supply it seems likely that if Council land is offered for allotments use, even on a temporary basis, it is likely that such land cannot easily be considered for affordable housing or other forms of alternative development in the future. Therefore any decision made in respect of the Town Council requests should bear this in mind.

137 3. The LDNPA Planning Officer has informally advised that all three sites would have the potential or could be considered for future housing developments. However the advice also points out that there may be issues related to accessibility, deliverability or environmental constraints that have not been considered in that informal advice. The LDNPA also supported the general concept of allotments in Windermere on appropriate sites. The LDNPA suggested that the Longlands Road site should not be developed but that allotment use would be appropriate. None of the sites would have potential for employment use. . 4. Longlands Road, Bowness 4.1 This is an area of open space containing a play area adjoining Bowness Bowling Club (see Appendix A). The Parks Manager advises that the play equipment is elderly and in need of replacement and that he has no funds to achieve that. This land is held on Trust and contains covenants that restrict its use, prevent building and, in particular, that require the land be kept accessible to the public. 4.2 The Principal Solicitor advises that allotment use is effectively ruled out on that basis, as would affordable housing development. 4.3 SLDT has outlined its proposals to upgrade the play area and create a community orchard around it which will be open to the public (see Appendix B). The Principal Solicitor advises that this use is acceptable within the covenants. 5. Victoria Road, Windermere 5.1 This is a part of a larger area of open space to the rear of residences (see Appendix C). The land is held within the Housing portfolio and has no restrictive covenants in the title. 5.2 South Lakes Housing advises that it is not impossible to develop and should be retained for future consideration following the conclusion of the ‘housing options process.’ 5.3 The Principal Strategy Officer advises that this land should be retained for the possibility of a future affordable housing development. 6. Orrest Drive, Windermere 6.1 This is open space to the rear of Orrest Drive flats (see Appendix D). The land is held within the Housing portfolio and has no restrictive covenants in the title. 6.2 South Lakes Housing advised that it may be possible to develop the site and should be retained for future consideration following the conclusion of the ‘housing options process.’ However, following this advice the Principal Strategy Officer commissioned a feasibility study to assess its development potential. That study by the NPS Architect advises that the land does not offer realistic development potential either in isolation or in the context of a larger redevelopment. 7. The Ward Members have been consulted in respect of all sites and both support the allotments proposals in principle. Alternative Options To refuse all the requests – this would not help the Town Council to meet the demand for allotments To grant all the requests – this would effectively sterilise potential affordable housing development sites. Key Decision This report does not relate to a Key Decision.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 138 Material Considerations Finance None of the land parcels currently produces any income so there will be no revenue loss from agreeing to the requests. Conversely, letting will produce a small income from the allotments use whilst WTC meets all the management expenses. Letting will result in a small saving in respect of grounds maintenance of the land parcels and will upgrade the play area at Longlands Road at no expense to the Council. Any letting that sterilises potential development for affordable housing could also result in the loss of future but relatively small capital receipts from the sale of that same land. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Development of Opposition to the Ask WTC to justify the existing allotments may provoke proposed use and allotment need opposition from within the adverse publicity Give preference to locals when immediate locality letting Ensure letting terms include enforceable management conditions.

Staffing NA Links to Corporate Plan 1.5 Physical and mental health and well-being is improved for people in South Lakeland. NI8 Increase adult participation in sport and active recreation by October 2010. 1.6 Housing needs in South Lakeland are addressed. Potential contribution to future affordable housing targets. Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) South Lakeland Strategic Partnership’s ‘South Lakeland sustainable Community Strategy’ – Housing to meet local need’ is one of eight priority issues. Corporate Property Strategy – Action 7 – continue to apply tests to potentially surplus assets to determine relevance and need in relation to Service Provision. Equalities & Diversity NA Community Safety NA

Background Documents Document: NPS file WIN/LA/73 Contact: Dave Pogson, Property Services Manager, NPS Group Tel: 01539 797437

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 139

140 141

142 Appendix B Community Orchard, Longlands, Bowness-on-Windermere

Longlands play area in Bowness is sandwiched between the rugby club on one side and the bowling club on the other. The site comprises a sloping area with smaller items of play equipment, and a flat area occupied by a large, mainly wooden climbing frame. On a site visit with SLDC’s playgrounds manager Peter Clarke, we were advised the climbing frame is 15-20 years old and nearing the end of its useful life.

SLDC members and officers support our aspirations to create new allotment sites. We have kept councillors at town, district and county level informed of progress on potential sites and councillors have not raised any concerns about the three SLDC sites we have been pursuing (including Longlands Play Area).

As a result of investigations by SLDC Legal Services, it has become clear that covenant restrictions on Longlands Play area mean that the creation of individual allotments at that site may not be appropriate. In the circumstances, the Windermere and Bowness Allotment Steering Group feel that the creation of a Community Orchard might be an attractive alternative at some future time.

Our long-term aim is not to remove the play equipment from this site, but to upgrade and complement the play area’s usefulness to the community by creating a community orchard there. We wish to remove the end-of-life climbing frame, refurbish the remaining equipment and add to it with some more items better suited to the younger children who are the main users of the site.

We believe this arrangement will create a particularly user-friendly arrangement for parents of young children – they can tend the orchard while their children learn about growing food, and when attention wanders the children can play in safety nearby. It will also guard against anti-social behaviour by increasing natural surveillance on-site.

Works required/desired at Longlands Play Area:

Upgrading and reorganising play area: Removal of climbing frame (wooden components and woodchip surfacing to remain on-site for re-use as mulch?) Repainting of remaining equipment being retained Purchase and installation of (number? 3 or 4?) items of new play equipment for younger age group

This process would release land for the potential creation of a small community orchard. At this stage we wish to gain your support in principle for such a use.

A community orchard could bring many benefits: Build local connectivity to food production Sustain local fruit varieties Increase local wildlife and biodiversity Reduce food miles Either, modest income generation from sales of apple juice/cider/damsons/etc (any income could be reinvested in allotments or other local growing initiatives) Or, free produce distribution within local community Education – where does our food come from? And much more

We believe the prospects for winning funding to assist in the start-up of such a project are good.

143

144 145

146 147 Appendix B

148

SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Leader of the Council Report From: Director of Vision and Strategy Agenda 17 Report Author: John Dyer (Partnerships and Item No: Performance Manager) Report Title: Local Area Partnerships

Summary Following an inclusive process of consultation and development eight Local Area Partnerships (LAPs) have been established in South Lakeland. This report provides an update on progress, suggests a framework of roles and responsibilities and identifies the potential for increasing LAP influence on service delivery. Recommendations Cabinet are asked to: 1) Note the progress report on the introduction of LAPs 2) Approve the framework of roles and responsibilities: and 3) Approve the schedule of services for use in greater devolution to localities Report 1. Progress Report The Council, the County Council and other key partners have committed to facilitate and support the introduction and development of eight Local Area Partnerships (LAPs) covering the whole of South Lakeland. The LAPs are based on clusters of parishes with similar interests. The Partnerships will enable greater influence over decision-making on services delivered in an area. Following the detailed consultation process the development of LAPs has progressed as follows:- • A programme of facilitated workshops have been held for first round of LAP meetings between Sept – Dec 2009 • These workshops have been facilitated by ACT (Action with Communities in Cumbria) based on two main activities o Identification of initial priorities o Determining an approach to governance • All LAPs have produced a list of priorities some areas with two or three earmarked for early progress. A summary is at Appendix 1 to this report. • A model Terms of Reference has been drafted which will include each LAPs preferences for how it operates to be considered at the next round of meetings • All LAPs have agreed to meet again in Jan-March – some have said they want to review the value of LAPs in 12 months

149 • In “South Westmorland” LAP a cluster of parishes described as the “Two Valleys” have decided to reserve their position and observe the process for the time being • Each LAP has a senior Management representative from SLDC allocated • Interim arrangements for the allocation of LAP co-ordinators are in place as follows; o Kendal – Judith Quigley (SLDC) o Upper Kent Judith Quigley (SLDC) o Sedbergh & Kirkby Lonsdale – Angie Rawlinson (Police) o South Westmorland - Angie Rawlinson (Police) o Grange – Kelly Alty (CCC) o High Furness – Kelly Alty (CCC) o Lakes – Debbie Binch (CCC) o Ulverston & Low Furness – Kelly Alty (CCC) • Adminstrative support will be identified by each LAP using SLDC funding • CCC and SLDC have both identified Project funding of £5k (ie £10k for each LAP) to support new initiatives. This sum is annually in respect of SLDC • SLDC have also earmarked, subject to approval, a sum in the Capital Programme for community/locality projects • The second round of meetings are being partly facilitated by ACT and partly formally as required by each LAP. Agendas are addressing governance, action planning and priority issues. 2. Framework of Roles and Responsibilities The “Strong and Prosperous Communities” White Paper, published in October 2006 and subsequent legislation and guidance, talks about strong local Councillors, representing their communities, at the heart of democracy and strong, visible leadership. Government also wants to see more support for the role of non-executive councillors as democratic champions for their local area, able to speak out on local issues and have real influence over local services. Elected Members will provide democratic leadership in their communities as members of the LAP. The LAP Co-ordinators will provide a link and support for all representatives of each LAP. These working arrangements will be monitored and evaluated to establish future needs. The key governance structures for locality working are: o South Lakeland Strategic Partnership - Partners o Principal Authorities - Member, Cabinet and Portfolio roles o Local Area Partnerships - Chairs o Ward/Parishes – Councillors LAPs will help provide much clearer accountability of the partnership structures to the local communities we serve. In developing our approach to governance we need clarity about the different roles and “responsibilities” of Members and Managers, Partner organisations and staff in implementing locality management.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 150 However there is a need for clarity on the roles and responsibilities and consequently governance, purpose and functions need to be better understood to avoid duplication and wasted effort. Suggested Member and Officer governance structures for locality working are set out in Appendix 2. The people of South Lakeland are both customers of services and citizens of the district and our processes of engagement and consultation, particularly at the local level, need to be improved. This engagement is crucial to working better in communities; ensuring resources are targeted to needs and to shaping services to meet local requirements. Appendix 3 suggests methods of engagement and highlights strategic issues that need to be taken into account. In short, our engagement and consultation needs to be properly structured and feedback into policy and budgets through the Local Area Partnerships. 3. Greater Involvement in Services Government policy over recent years has encouraged local authorities to engage with and empower their communities. In large part this is so that local people gain more of a say in the way services that affect them are designed and delivered. Among the recent policies promoted by government are:- • Giving Parish/Town Councils the power to spend on things which will improve their communities well-being • Placing a formal duty on principal authorities to involve communities in decisions (the Duty to Involve) • Encouraging the transfer of asset ownership to the local community level.

Local Area Partnerships

LAPs will ensure the needs and aspirations of communities will be better understood by service delivery organisations and across communities. Those communities will be able to more effectively recognise that they can influence service delivery and strategic planning. Improved partnership working in local areas will help improve services and where possible reduce costs.

The LAPs will help provide improved and shared information, better communication and consultation. Communities will then be able to choose to be more involved in delivering devolved services locally.

The first meetings of the LAPs are identifying their initial priorities. These priorities can be assessed as to the level of involvement that might apply

Levels of Involvement The available powers may not always be desirable, appropriate or practicable. There are various levels of involvement that may need to be considered when communities in an area determine how services are dealt with at a locality. Good practice in community engagement uses a tool described as the “Ladder of Involvement”. Although there are many versions of this approach there are five main levels of involvement. These levels are a convenient hierarchy for considering the potential level of involvement that a community at a Local Area Partnership may consider in service delivery.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 151 INFORMING CONSULTING INVOLVING COLLABORATING EMPOWERING - - - - - Information Seeking a Community Cooperative Delegation/ sharing community input into decision making Devolution of response decision and responsibility making implementation and delivery

Central to all Ask for views Involving Working closely Service levels of and opinions people in the together in delegated or engagement on key local decision- partnership – asset issues or making sharing rewards transferred for

decide on a process and and responsibility local course of deciding management

action together

For example, For example, For example, For example, public a participatory For example, share consultations, budgeting ‘bending’ mainstream Service delivered information planning exercise resources to deliver locally with about a local decisions locally agreed plans income service

Figure 1 - The Ladder of Involvement

The Statutory Basis for Delegation/Devolution The Council must operate within the statutory framework established. Legislation and regulations permit the Council to allow Parish/Town Councils to discharge certain functions (services) on their behalf. Relevant powers are to be found in LA Regulations 2000 and Section 101 of the LG Act 1972. The Council needs to assure itself that the power to delegate is appropriate in specific cases.

Parish/Town Councils have a wide range of existing powers to deliver services and in the majority of cases there is no legal bar to them taking on services or managing assets. They and principal authorities often have concurrent powers where both can provide a service, so delegation from one to the other is possible. Those Parishes with Quality status have slightly enhanced powers. However it must be stressed that parish/town councils are under no obligation to take on a delegation.

The Context for Delegation There are a number of potential advantages and risks that need to be taken into account by all parties involved in any potential delegation as outlined below in Figure 2 which summarises the types of service activity that would apply at each level;

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 4 152

LIKELY ADVANTAGES POTENTIAL RISKS

Services more responsive to local Those outside the area For Communities needs involved may see better standards elsewhere as

unfair Opportunities for local employment The Parish/Town Councils fail to live up to the expectations of delegation Service standards usually improve with delegation For Parish and Town Opportunity to act on issues raised May not have the necessary Councils (LAPs) in parish plans capacity or skills Enhances role of local Service delivery may cost representatives with public more Better monitoring of service delivery Concerns about taking on quality extra responsibilities and accountability For the local authorities More local satisfaction with services Service delivery becomes more fragmented in area

Encourages engagement with Overhead costs may not communities reduce as delegations happen Greater pride in the area Harder to collect consistent monitoring information

Better flow of local intelligence from communities

Figure 2 – Delegation - Advantages and Risks

In considering what might be possible in the future as LAPs develop there are some options for delegation. One parish council can hold a delegation contract with a principal authority. This could be for the benefit of the parish or for a cluster of parishes (a LAP). Alternatively delegations can be made to each parish in a cluster or to the cluster itself (the LAP). These options for broadening the responsibility help to address the risks involved and also help achieve some efficiencies of scale as well as drawing on shared resources, skills and capacity.

Basket of Services The consultation process for developing LAPs identified a “Basket of Services” that LAPs might be interested in exercising greater influence. These services closely resemble a list of services most frequently delegated. The list is as follows:-

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 5 153

• Markets • Street Lighting

• Maintenanance of highway verges and • Car Parks footways • Maintenance of cemeteries • Road Safety measures

• Street Cleansing (including litter picking) • Issue of bus and rail passes • Public convenience • Licences

• Street naming • Some local planning decisions

• Management of playing fields, play • Recycling provisions areas

In practice some services will be more readily considered for delegation than others. Probably the most acceptable are those covering the services which maintain the local environment, such as verge cutting and looking after footpaths. Responsibility for some services are not possible to delegate by the principal authorities due to their statutory nature. These include in particular the county council services of children’s education and social services.

Types of devolution/delegation Delegation can take different forms and be of varying degrees. Selection may be as a result of the aspirations, capacity and skills of the locality. Delegations covering all or some of the “basket of services” could be set up. The Lengthsman scheme effectively delegates services such as maintaining verges and clearing ditches. Alternatively the LAPs may make proposals for delegations on services of their choosing. This allows for local circumstances. Nevertheless it needs to be established which services can (and by default which cannot) be delegated. The types of delegation could include:- 1. Delegation of operational tasks This gives a contract management role, advising the authority on performance and how it could be employed. The authority retains overall responsibility. This option may be a stepping stone to more responsibility

2. Delegation of service delivery This requires a delivery role and effectively sets up a local contract to provide a service to an agreed frequency and standard. There would some form of contract with an agreed sum being paid to meet the agreement. The authority still retains ultimate responsibility.

3. Delegation of service responsibility Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 6 154 This is service devolution. The authority ceases to have responsibility and accountability. The service together with any related buildings or assets transfer across. This can only happen where the authority has a high degree of discretion

4. Augmenting service delivery This requires a delegation to take place with funding from the authority that will meet existing standards. However the community can then choose to augment that funding (from precept?) to improve service quality

Criteria for Delegations

It is important that any potential delegation of services is considered on its merits. This consideration may need to be based on how it is assessed against a set of agreed criteria such as:-

Quality – it will sustain or improve service standards

Views – it has local community support

Cost – will be the same or less than current

Practical – no knock-on impacts for the principal authority

Capacity – the management skills and resources are available

Summary

This report seeks to begin a process to develop a framework for assessing the level of involvement of the LAPs in service delivery. The Appendix shows how applying the Ladder of Involvement to firstly the generic “basket of services” and secondly by using the example of the emerging Grange & Cartmel LAP Action Plan an understanding of the level of service governance can be determined. Within the delegation level there are further options that might be considered. This information will support the Council’s needs led approach and can be used to assess the implications for service delivery to inform staff training, to identify cross-departmental project based initiatives and to provide a focus for engaging with other providers such as those in the third sector.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 7 155

Alternative Options The Council has identified LAPs as a priority. The report provides information to help develop LAPs and to address the organisational implications for service delivery Key Decision This report does not relate to a Key Decision. Material Considerations Finance There are no direct financial implications of this report. The implementation of suggested options for involving LAPs in service delivery may have resource implications in due course Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Raises expectations the Disillusioned LAP members Common approach through Council and its partners cannot partnership/ team working, meet and unable to resolve consultation and training different needs of communities

Staffing The schedule of services and the roles and responsibilities information in the report can be used to develop the understanding of staff of the introduction of LAPs and the different ways of working that will be required Links to Corporate Plan LAPs are a priority in the Corporate Plan Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) Locality Working is a priority in the Community Strategy Equalities & Diversity LAPs will be required to take account of the needs of their communities including those groups with particular requirements Community Safety LAPs will be able to consider issues in their area

Background Documents Document: Contact: John Dyer

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 8 156

Appendix 1 Local Area Partnership Update Jan 2010 - Summary

LAP Date next Co-ordinator Emerging Issues meeting

Grange & tba Kelly Alty Road and Wayside Maintenance Cartmel Employment Young People: Facilities & Access Housing

Upper Kent Jan 21st Judith Quigley Road and Wayside Maintenance 7pm Emergency vehicle size Service Provision: keeping public toilets and post offices open. Affordable Housing Planning Representation of Young People

Kendal Jan 14th Judith Quigley Developing Community Plan 7pm Community Engagement Activities for Teenagers

Ulverston & Low tba Kelly Alty Devolved budget Furness Highways Flooding Car Parking esp. at schools

Lakes tba Debbie Binch Communication between tiers Housing: Affordable & Homelessness Services for Young People Community Engagement

High Furness tba Kelly Alty Road and Wayside Maintenance Services: Monitoring & delivery Housing: Affordable & 2nd Homes Young People: Funding & participation

Sedbergh & tba Angela Highways Kirby Lonsdale Rawlinson Activities for Children and Young People Affordable Housing

South tba Angela Highways: Traffic management & drain Westmorland Rawlinson maintenance Planning Policing: reduction in antisocial behaviour through development of new youth activities

Full details of the meetings and Action Plans for each LAP available at:- www.southlakelandlsp.org.uk/local%20area%20partnerships.aspx

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 9 157

LOCALITY WORKING – MANAGING PARTNERSHIPS FOR COMMUNITY BENEFIT Appendix 2

OFFICER GOVERNANCE/ MEMBER GOVERNANCE/ PURPOSE PURPOSE STRUCTURES STRUCTURES

• Conribute to implementation of Local • LSP Exec • LSP Exec • Set partnership priorities Area Agreement • Themed Task Groups LOCAL STRATEGIC • Themed Task Groups • Approve Community Strategy • Implement Sustainable Community PARTNERSHIP Strategy • Cabinet/Council • Endorse Local Area Agreement • Respond to priority need and localities consultation

• Translate priorities for area working • SMT • Council/Corporate Plan • Approve/endorse CS and LAA into service plans and spending PRINCIPAL AUTHORITIES priorities at a locality level • Statements of Accountability • Cabinet • Develop and approve policy in localities • Changing ways of working to ‘fix’ • Service Plans • Portfolio Decisions • Resource allocation to localities problems and respond to local needs SOUTHLAKELAND DISTRICT • Officer Delegated Decisions COUNCIL and CUMBRIA • Overview & Scrutiny • Overview of locality management/service • Right first time service delivery, • Joint Service Arrangements COUNTY COUNCIL • Casework/Surgeries • Delivery Resolve constituent complaints and sensitive to local needs. Problem resolution • Shared Service points • Inform tasking issues. • Service outlets – one stop shops

• Joint working to improve services/ • Area Management “Teams • Local Area Partnerships • Governance outcomes at neighbourhood level • Partner agencies LOCAL AREA PARTNERSHIPS • Ward Councillors • Policy development • ‘Problem solving’ of complex inter- (8 Areas) agency service issues • County Councillors • Action Planning • Support to Area Partnerships • Parish Councillors • Consultation/Engagement • LAP Plan to impact on localities • Member Portfolio Leads • Value for Money • Advocate for local needs and priorities • Prioritisation • Engagement and consultation with local people. Feedback

• Parish/Community Planning • Operational • Parish Councillors • Approve community plans • Local Planning applications • Partner agencies PARISHES • Resolve local issues • Deliver delegated services

158

LOCALITY WORKING – ENGAGING PARTNERS AND COMMUNITY Appendix 3 KEY STRATEGIC ISSUES ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION

• Where is the real voice of communities in decision making • Communities and Local Area Partnerships (Planning and feedback) • How will Strategy be developed – single county Strategy. LSP

• Our approach is currently too ‘top down’ – the voice of the customer and • Customer Research/Data sharing localities needs to influence policy and plans. DISTRICT - WIDE (PARTNERS) • Place Surveys (bi-annually) • Our resource allocation does not relate to need. • Citizens Panel • Service delivery is too centralised – we need to devolve to areas on a systematic basis. • Communities of Interest Consultation • Our frontline staff have local knowledge we don’t use. • Festivals and Events – “Have your say” opportunities • We don’t learn as organisations from local problems. • User surveys • Our frontline staff need to understand our locality management • Frontline staff knowledge objectives. • Complaints learning • Councillors Casework

• Area working is more to do with better coordination than engagement. • Stakeholders eg Tenants & Residents Associations AREA WORKING • Different skills needed for direct delivery/influencing and coordination. • One Stop Shops • Shared aims and trust can overcome ‘silo’ structures. • Streetsafe (1 per annum) • Need to blend devolved delivery/commissioning with better coordination • Action events and partnership working. • Councillor Surgeries/Cafes • Young People • Area Events

• If tackling issues allocate resources based on need. • Councillor Surgeries • The ‘voice’ of parishes is not heard – Community Plans not delivered. PARISHES • Local Events – “Have your say” opportunities. • Support to community newspapers. • Local Group Feedback

159

DELEGATION OF SERVICES – SCHEDULE Appendix 4 SERVICE/ INFORMING CONSULTING INVOLVING COLLABORATING DELEGATION DECISIONS Examples Publicity/ Promotion Formal Response Participatory Shared Planning and Different levels of Budgeting Activity delegation using Surveys LAP debate Contract/Agreement 1. BASKET OF SERVICES – WHATS POSSIBLE Street Cleaning 1. Informed about 1. Place Survey 1. Examine budget 1. Joint work with Not applicable budgets and and service CCC/SLDC on

changes to Streetcare Project 2. Consider changes services to service Litter 1. Informed about 1. Place Survey 1. Examine budget 1. Facilitate 1. Management of budgets and and service Community Litter litter bins (location

changes to Picks to enhance and new provision) 2. Consider changes services service to service 2. Undertake local 2. Included in enforcement using awareness suitable authorised campaigns local employees Dog Fouling 1. Informed about 1. Consulted on 1. Examine proposals 1. Assist in 1. Undertake local budgets and options and areas for implementation implementation of enforcement using

changes to for Dog Control of Dog Control Dog Control suitable authorised services Orders Orders through Orders through local employees enforcement enforcement

Public Conveniences Not applicable 1. Public consultation 1. Public consultation 1. Community Toilet 1. Transfer of facility eg Talk Toilets eg Talk Toilets Schemes for management

campaign 2010 campaign 2010 and maintenance 2. Cleaning toilets of some facilities Car Parks 1. Informed about 1. Transfer car park budgets and and budget to

changes to relevant parish services

160 SERVICE/ INFORMING CONSULTING INVOLVING COLLABORATING DELEGATION DECISIONS Cemeteries 1. Web based 1. On potential 1. See consulting 1. See Delegation 1. Transfer of information only extensions or new management,

sites maintenance and

operation Community Planning 1. Provide information 1. Process of 1. Consider 1. Work with 2. Deliver actions in to support the engaging implications of agencies to deliver Plans process communities individual parish actions in Plans plans for LAP Local Development 1. Awareness raising 1. 1. Engaged in Not applicable Framework promotion and development of publicity supplementary

planning

documents (eg village design statements) Development 1. Website based 1. Major applications 1. Co-ordinate local 1. Monitor national Management information on all affecting area concerns and progress on planning responses to major potential to

applications planning consider minor applications applications? 2. Review trends in planning decisions to influence policy reviews Grounds Maintenance 1. Informed about 1. New play areas or 1. Examine budget 1. Work with agencies 1. Transfer of New budgets and open spaces from and service in Green Flag sites from

changes to new developments designated areas (eg developers 2. Consider changes services Grange) to service to 2. Agreement to run address local and maintain Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 13 161 SERVICE/ INFORMING CONSULTING INVOLVING COLLABORATING DELEGATION DECISIONS priorities based on local priorities Running local facilities, 1. Transfer of Assets buildings and land 2. Agreement to run and maintain

Highway, footpath and 1. Informed about 1. Examine budget 1. Highway Stewards verge maintenance budgets and and service 2. Local delivery changes to 2. Consider changes through contract services to service

Housing Policy and 1. Awareness raising 1. Specific policies 1. Work with LAPs on 1. Housing targets Strategy and strategies issues for their included in the LAP area Plan Housing Needs 1. Informed on 1. Co-ordinate Parish existing data Surveys

Housing Sites 1. Awareness 1. with parishes on 1. Role for LAPs in 1. Work together to raising/publicity identified sites looking for sites deliver schemes 2. Work with others

Locality Information (to 1. Locality Profile inform decisions) data 2. Timely Information data

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 14 162 SERVICE/ INFORMING CONSULTING INVOLVING COLLABORATING DELEGATION DECISIONS 2. GRANGE AND CARTMEL LAP PRIORITY ACTION PLAN (as an example) Road Safety • Reports on traffic • Agree a rota for made available locating the speed quarterly warning signs Housing • Identify sites • Help co-ordinate /Scrutinise LDF/ efforts of Promote self-build/ SLDC/LDNPA Local suppliers Young People • Establish whats • Consult with young • Bridge Access • Joint planning to available from LAs people on projects Road Safety meet needs (eg transport) Campaign Employment • Better engagement • Work with SLDC with strategic on promoting authority to support support available development of including a local allocated sites event Litter and Grounds • Prevention of • Shared community Maintenance littering awareness Litter picks publicity Road & Wayside • Provide info on • Lengthsmen, Maintenance road and wayside Stewards and work to LAP SLDC team to work together Dog Fouling • Co-ordinated Enforcement Action involving communities

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 15 163

164 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: Wednesday 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Brenda Gray, Housing and Development Report From: Lawrence Conway, Corporate Director Agenda 18 (Communities) Item No: Report Author: Alastair McNeill, Principal Development Plans Officer Report Title: Draft National Policy Statements (NPSs) – Response to Public Consultation

Summary This report sets out a proposed response from the District Council to the 7 draft National Policy Statements (NPSs) published by Government for public consultation in November 2009. The NPSs form the primary guidance to the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) in deciding on ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’ under the new planning regime (2008 Planning Act). The consultation is geared towards assessing whether the NPSs provide sufficient guidance to the IPC. The NPSs are likely to have most relevance to South Lakeland in regard to the proposed location of new nuclear power stations in West Cumbria and the requirement to substantially upgrade the electricity grid network around Cumbria, which is likely to traverse parts of South Lakeland. NPS 6 sets out 10 locations supported in principle for nuclear power stations - of these, three are in West Cumbria, and a further one at Heysham. Recommendations It is recommended that Cabinet 1. consider and confirm the response to the draft National Policy Statements set out in Appendix A, in order for a formal representation to be made prior to the deadline of 22 February 2010. 2. note the need for member training, ideally with other Cumbrian authorities, regarding the background and implications of likely proposals for upgrading the electricity grid network in South Lakeland .

Report 1 Introduction 1.1 The purpose of this report is to consider the draft National Policy Statements published in November 2009 by Government for public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny. It considers the NPSs’ likely relevance to South Lakeland, and sets out a proposed response (Appendix A). 1.2 The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is consulting on draft NPSs relating to energy until 22 February 2010:

165 EN-1 Overarching NPS for Energy EN-2 Fossil Fuel Generating Infrastructure EN-3 Renewable Energy Infrastructure EN-4 Gas Infrastructure and Gas and Oil Pipelines EN-5 Electricity Networks Infrastructure EN-6 Nuclear Power Generation The Department for Transport (DfT) is consulting on its draft NPS for Ports until 15 February. Further NPSs to be published later in 2010 will deal with Transport (road and rail networks), Waste Water, Water Supply, and Hazardous Waste. An NPS on Aviation will follow in 2011. After public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny, the NPSs are expected to be finalised and designated later in 2010. 2 Planning Act 2008 and Role of NPSs 2.1 The 2008 Planning Act 2008 introduces a new ‘single consent’ regime for considering and approving ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’. The new system aims for greater fairness and efficiency and can approve other project-related matters such as compulsory purchase. The Act establishes the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) as the decision-making body for such large projects. The IPC was set up on 1 October 2009 and will begin accepting applications from 1 April 2010. 2.2 The Act also provides for the production of National Policy Statements. These are at the heart of the new system and form the primary consideration for the IPC in making decisions. They set out the principles, criteria and likely impacts which the IPC needs to take into account. The NPSs also make clear Government policy on the need for new ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’ so that the issues of national ‘need’ does not have to be considered at public inquiries. All of the NPSs have been subject to an appraisal of sustainability, covering their economic, social and environmental impacts. 2.3 The current consultation provides opportunity to influence these key documents. The Council will have further opportunity to comment on any large energy proposals affecting South Lakeland because: • the IPC, when considering applications, must have regard to Local Impact Reports submitted by relevant local authorities, which may raise any matters they consider to be relevant. • scheme promoters are required by the Act to consult with affected parties, communities and local authorities before submitting applications to the IPC. 2.4 Local Planning Authorities must also have regard to NPSs when preparing the Local Development Framework, or consider any steps needed to address any issues in an early plan review. Where Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) have not been updated to take account of NPSs, the NPS is likely to be a material consideration to take into account in determining planning applications. The policies in a draft NPS may also be relevant to planning applications for below-threshold infrastructure or any appeals made under the Town and Country Planning Act. 3 Potential Projects in Cumbria and South Lakeland – and likely relevance of NPSs 3.1 ‘Nationally significant infrastructure projects’ include: • Electricity generation (fossil fuel, nuclear or renewable) over 50 Megawatts (MW) – or 100MW for offshore renewable schemes. • Electricity lines of 132KV and above - and large ports, gas storage facilities, and Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 166 cross country oil or gas pipelines The Nuclear Power NPS proposes 3 sites in West Cumbria, which would require upgrading the 132KV electricity grid ring around Cumbria to 400KV - and which is likely to cross significant parts of South Lakeland. NPSs 5 and 6 are therefore of particularly relevance. Large pipelines already cross the district and future proposals are at least possible. Most onshore wind schemes in South Lakeland are unlikely to exceed 50MW, so most are likely to continue to be dealt with by the Council as Local Planning Authority. Proposals for large fossil fuel stations in or near South Lakeland seem unlikely; while the nearest large port to South Lakeland is Liverpool. NPS EN2 and the NPS for Ports are therefore unlikely to be relevant, and are not considered further below. 3.2 The ‘Britain’s Energy Coast’ Master Plan aims to promote low carbon and renewable energy (including nuclear power) in Cumbria, and also to promote economic development and jobs. Over the last year it’s promoters have met informally with planning officers in Cumbria to consider the implications of upgrading the grid ring network to 400KV. This will require larger pylons (50m+ instead of the current 35m) and, depending on the preferred routes, may raise significant issues regarding landscape, biodiversity and proximity to local communities. The National Grid has already made ‘in principle’ offers to the promoters of the 3 nuclear sites in West Cumbria and now plans to commence work on route corridor studies, environmental impact assessment, consultation with the public and statutory bodies, and detailed design of the route and structures, with a view to submitting an application to the IPC by 2013. While planning officers have already had some opportunity to raise issues informally (as noted above) the National Grid is expected to undertake formal consultations with statutory consultees and Local Planning Authorities in July/August 2010, including briefings for Councillors, followed by wider public consultation between October and December 2010. If approved, construction could begin in 2015 and a connection made to the grid in 2021. The 2008 Act’s requirements for substantial pre application consultation will also apply to the promoters of the proposed nuclear power stations.

4 National Policy Statements - Summary 4.1 The remainder of the report provides a summary of each relevant NPS and discusses key issues arising. Appendix A sets out the proposed response from the District Council. EN1 - Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy 4.2 NPS EN-1 sets out policy and guidance on the ‘generic impacts’ of large energy projects. It therefore needs to be taken in conjunction with relevant topic-specific NPSs. It sets out the Government’s overall policy objectives on energy including; to reduce greenhouse gases by 80% by 2050; to ensure security of energy supply; and to ensure that investment delivers an electricity grid with greater capacity. It indicates an urgent need for 43GW of additional power by 2020 rising to 60GW by 2025 – required in part due to planned power stations closures but also to help move towards a low carbon economy. It therefore sets out the need for new energy supplies from a mix of sources comprising: • renewable energy (30% of total by 2020, with potential for 35GW by 2025) • new nuclear provision (meeting as much as possible of the 25GW required from non- renewable sources by 2025) • possibly new fossil fuel stations fitted with carbon capture technology - when available.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 3 167 4.3 The NPS also sets out principles for the consideration of major energy projects, which in summary state that • in view of the level of need for energy infrastructure, the IPC should operate on the basis that consent should be given if the proposals are in accordance with the relevant NPSs and wider legal requirements; • but if adverse impacts (environmental, social and economic) are considered to outweigh the benefits (national, regional and local) after consideration of mitigation measures, then consent should be refused. The NPS then provides more detailed guidance on a wide ranging list of matters and ‘generic impacts’ which the IPC is required to take account of in considering major infrastructure projects. It covers the need for an Environmental Statement, an assessment under Habitat Regulations and to take account of adaptations needed for climate change. It also offers guidance in relation to issues including good design, climate change adaptation, biodiversity, landscape and visual impacts, flood risk, the historic environment, transport issues and waste management. A list of the factors considered is set out in Appendix B. The NPS notes that this list may be helpful to local authorities in preparing local impact reports. EN3 – NPS for Renewable Energy Infrastructure 4.5 This NPS deals with proposals for electricity generation from biomass and waste combustion, and onshore wind above 50MW; and also with offshore wind proposals above 100MW. The Marine Management Organisation rather than the IPC deals with offshore wind applications. As with each technology-specific NPS, EN3 provides further guidance that the IPC should take into account, alongside guidance on the generic impacts of energy schemes in NPS EN1. It considers factors such as residue management in relation to biomass schemes and a range of marine issues of relevance to offshore wind proposals. It also addresses specific aspects of onshore wind farms dealing for example with landscape, noise, shadow flicker and transport. EN4 – NPS for Gas Supply Infrastructure and Gas and Oil Pipelines 4.8 This NPS deals with large gas storage projects above specified thresholds, and oil and gas pipelines above specified capacities and lengths. It deals with the technology-specific impacts of such projects, such as soil geology, water quality, noise, vibration and dredging. EN5 – NPS for Electricity Networks Infrastructure 4.10 This NPS deals with electricity lines of 132KV and above, as well as smaller lines and other electricity infrastructure (eg substations) associated with nationally significant infrastructure projects. It deals with the technology-specific impacts of such projects, including landscape and visual impact, noise and electric and field and addresses associated questions relating to health. Paragraph 3.2 above explains the informal dialogue that has taken place with Local Planning Authorities in Cumbria over the past 12 months and the prospect for formal consultation commencing later in 2010. EN6 – NPS for Nuclear Power Generation 4.12 This NPS sets out Government policy that new nuclear power stations be free to contribute as much as possible towards meeting the need for 25GW of new non-renewable capacity by 2025 –and ideally constructed significantly earlier than 2025 to contribute to displacing CO2 as soon as possible. EN6 is the only site specific NPS (so far) and of 11 sites assessed by Government at a strategic level, the draft NPS indicates 10 named sites considered suitable in principle and states that all are needed. The 3 sites in West Cumbria are Sellafield, Braystones (just north of Sellafield) and Kirksanton near Millom – each with a capacity from Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 4 168 1.2 or 1.6 GW up to 3.2 or 3.6 GW. [By comparison Drax, Britain’s largest station, has a capacity of about 4GW (4,000MW) and supplies 7% of national electricity.] 4.13 The NPS sets out technology-specific impacts that the IPC must consider in addition to those set out in EN1. These factors include flood risk, water quality and resources, coastal change, bio- and geodiversity, landscape and visual impact, socio-economic impact, and human health and well-being. Government took these into account at strategic level in selecting the 10 proposed sites, but it also ‘flags’ additional considerations that are to be considered at the application stage. These relate to proximity to aircraft movements, access to the grid network, impact on significant infrastructure, emergency planning and demographics (ie proximity to population). 4.14 In relation to the issue of radioactive waste management the draft NPS also sets out the basis on which the Government concludes that • the geological disposal of higher activity radioactive waste, including waste from nuclear power stations, is technically achievable; • that it will be possible to identify a suitable site • that safe, secure and environmentally acceptable interim storage is available until a geological disposal facility is available. 4.15 The draft NPS also acknowledges that for the proposed nuclear sites, adverse effects on Natura 2000 sites (of international nature conservation importance) cannot be ruled out. It notes that the Government carefully considered, therefore, whether it was appropriate to include each site, but concluded that for each there is an ‘Imperative Reason of Overriding Public Interest’ (IROPI) that favours the inclusion of the sites - set out in NPS at Annex A. 5 Implications and Key Issues 5.1 Need: The draft NPSs set out Government policy on the ‘need’ at a national level for a range of types of ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’. Of these, the strengthening of electricity networks to proposed nuclear power stations in West Cumbria is likely to be the most significant in South Lakeland; and possibly onshore wind farms and other renewable energy proposals, if greater than 50MW. When confirmed in the NPSs, the level of national need for the various types of infrastructure will not be considered further by the IPC when assessing individual projects. In terms of Government objectives to ensure security of supply and reduce carbon emissions, the overall level of energy required, the mix of contribution from nuclear, renewable and other sources, and the consequential need to upgrade electricity networks seems reasonable. When confirmed in the final designated NPSs, there will be no subsequent opportunity to challenge the overall need for these major aspects of energy infrastructure. However in response to specific projects consultations/applications, the Council will be able (through a Local lmpact Report) to raise more detailed matters for the IPC to take into account in weighing whether likely significant adverse impacts outweighed the local, regional and national benefits. Overall it is recommended that members note and accept the national need for the various types of energy infrastructure, including nuclear power, but in so doing, recognise and highlight to Government its significant overall concerns about the likely impact of upgraded electricity networks (depending on the route chosen) in South Lakeland – in terms of landscape, biodiversity and potentially on local communities. The detailed comments in Appendix A in relation to EN seek to ensure adequate weight is given to these factors by the IPC in assessing applications 5.2 Proposed Nuclear Sites EN-6 proposes 10 sites, of which 3 are in West Cumbria. If all 10 were developed their combined capacity could significantly exceed the 25GW required from nuclear power. Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 5 169 However there is arguably a case for identifying more than a minimum number, should some sites not come forward for any reason. While none of the sites are located in South Lakeland, the cumulative impact of up to 3 sites is a matter of potential significant concern in relation to the required upgrading of the grid network. Just one new nuclear station would require a new 400KV grid ring with 50m+ pylons around Cumbria, including parts of South Lakeland, but the prospect of up to 3 stations may require larger or additional lines, which would have additional impacts on landscape, biodiversity and communities. It recommended that the District Council’s response raise this concern. The Lake District National Park Authority’s report of 20 January 2010 also raised concerns about the cumulative impact of the 3 nuclear sites in West Cumbria sites. The report recommended not supporting the Braystones and Kirksanton sites in view of their adverse impacts on the setting of the National Park and on ecological sites of national and internationals and other factors. It does however recommend support for the Sellafield site, noting its importance for job opportunities and the ‘relatively minor’ additional adverse effects, in the context of the existing Sellafield nuclear site. 5.3 Consultation The 2008 Planning Act places a strong emphasis on scheme promoters consulting with communities and stakeholders (including local authorities) prior to submitting applications to the IPC. Later, when considering applications, the IPC must take account of a Local Impact Report by relevant local authorities. While welcoming these opportunities to comment on individual proposals and subsequent applications to the IPC, it is recommended that the response: • raises concerns on resource implications for the Council in responding to consultations and preparing local impact reports, particularly if these require expertise not readily available within the Council; • requests clarification that ‘relevant’ local authorities who may prepare Local Impact Reports, include those affected by projects which lie outside their area of jurisdiction; 5.4 Policy Guidance and Impacts in NPSs: Subject to detailed comments in Appendix A, it is considered that the NPSs set out adequate policy guidance and relevant impacts for the IPC to take into account in assessing nationally significant infrastructure projects. With regard to biodiversity, EN1 states the general principle that (subject to other specific policies) development should aim to avoid significant harm to such interests - including through mitigation – and where such harm cannot be avoided, then appropriate compensation measures should be sought. With specific reference to SSSIs it notes that where an adverse effect is likely, consent should not normally be granted; and an exception only made where the benefits of the development (including need) clearly outweigh the impact on the special interests of the site and the broader impacts on the national network of SSSIs. The Habitats Regulations provide statutory protection for sites of international importance. Overall these policy provisions in the draft NPS seem to provide adequate guidance to the IPC on biodiversity, but it is recommended that concerns are raised on the likely adverse impacts of the nuclear power stations on international wildlife sites, including the impact of the proposed site at Kirksanton on the Duddon Estuary SAC. In relation to landscape and visual impact, EN1 notes that the conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape in nationally designated landscapes (National Parks and AONBs should be given great weight but indicates that exceptionally the IPC may grant consent in these areas if the development is in the public interest. It sets out factors to be taken into account in assessing public interest. It also provides advice on projects close to National Parks and AONBs, as well as in other areas, noting that local landscape designations should not be used in themselves to refuse consent; and also advising more generally that the IPC should judge whether any adverse impacts would be so damaging that it is not offset by the benefits (including need) of the project. While these policy provisions seem to Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 6 170 provide adequate guidance to the IPC overall, in relation to electricity networks it is considered they should be strengthened as set out in Appendix A in relation to EN-5, in particular in respect of the need to consider the opportunity to place upgraded electricity networks underground or (preferably) off shore, and to take account of emerging technology and good practice – including overseas. 5.5 Planning Gain The development of large nuclear power stations in West Cumbria, will have significant cross boundary implications, both positive and negative, which may provide opportunities for example to improve the sub regional transport. It will be important that the District Council’s concerns and aspirations in relation to transport and other matters form part of the consideration of proposals with other local authorities in Cumbria.

5.6 Member Training: Paragraph 3.2 above summarises the pending programme of pre application consultation by the National Grid during 2010 on electricity network upgrading, with key stakeholders, local authorities and the public. While National Grid intends to brief Councillors, it is also recommended that Cabinet consider the need for Member training on this matter, ideally in conjunction with Councillors from other authorities including Cumbria County Council and the Lake District National Park Authority.

Alternative Options Members may suggest different or alternative comments on the draft National Policy Statements to those proposed in the report. For example, Cabinet could challenge the level of energy need, the mix of sources of proposed supply (nuclear, renewable, etc) and could object to the location of one or more of the nuclear power stations proposed in West Cumbria, taking account of the likely impacts, including the likely landscape impacts of an upgraded grid route network through parts of South Lakeland. However there is no readily available evidence to challenge overall energy policy and the selection of preferred nuclear sites has already been made after an assessment of alternatives by Government. Key Decision This report relates to Key Decision Ref. No. KD10/003/H&D It appears in the Forward Plan for the period 1 January 2010 to 30 April 2010. Material Considerations Finance The preparation of local impact reports in response to applications for nationally significant infrastructure projects in or affecting the district may require procuring some professional evidence on matters not available within the Council.

Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Range of risks associated with Adverse impacts on landscape The Council will have the nationally significant and biodiversity, with some opportunity to assess risks and infrastructure projects within or consequential impact on the comment on individual adjoining the district. Examples tourism economy and quality of schemes in pre application include risks to landscape, life of residents. consultation and through the biodiversity, and visual impact submission of Local Impact arising from upgraded Reports. The IPC would have Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 7 171 electricity network. Nuclear opportunity to take account of power stations in West likely risks in weighing up the Cumbria, while not in South overall adverse effects and Lakeland present wider risks in benefits of schemes and in terms of transport, services, requiring mitigating or and possibly to human health. improvement measures.

Staffing Responding to future consultation on major infrastructure projects will place significant additional demand on staff resources. See also under finance above. Links to Corporate Plan • Making South Lakeland the best place to live • Making South Lakeland the best place to work • Making South Lakeland the best place to visit

Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) • South Lakeland Community Strategy • Cumbria Local Area Agreement • Cumbria Housing Strategy • Cumbria Economic Plan • Regional Spatial Strategy

Equalities & Diversity Not applicable Community Safety Not applicable Background Documents Document: Draft National Policy Statements Contact: Alastair McNeill, https://www.energynpsconsultation.decc.gov.uk/ x 7352 http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/open/portsnps/ Copies and extracts also in Members Room

APPENDIX A Proposed Comments on Draft National Policy Statements from South Lakeland District Council General Comments on all Energy NPSs • The Council accepts the national need for the various types of energy infrastructure, including nuclear power, set out in the energy National Policy Statements, but highlights its main overall concern that new nuclear power stations in West Cumbria will require major upgrading of electricity networks through parts of South Lakeland, which is likely to have significant adverse impacts on the district’s landscape, biodiversity and (potentially) local communities. As noted in the detailed comments below, the Council therefore considers that greater weight should be given to considering the case for undergrounding and (preferably) sub-sea offshore routeing of upgraded grid lines, particularly where the Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 8 172 overland, above-ground route options are likely to have significant adverse effects on onshore landscape, biodiversity and other interests. • The Council also has concerns regarding the resource implications for the Council in responding to consultations and preparing local impact reports, particularly if these require expertise not readily available within the Council which needs to be procured; • For the avoidance of doubt it is proposed that the introductions to each NPS clarify: o that the IPC will also have regard to existing national, regional and local planning policy, including Local Development Documents; and in particular have regard to o the spatial strategy and policies set out in Core Strategies; o development site allocations in (emerging) Allocations of Land documents o that ‘relevant’ local authorities who may prepare Local Impact Reports, include those affected by projects which lie outside their area of jurisdiction; • each NPS should contain a glossary of terms and abbreviations used EN1 - Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy • Overall, the assessment of national need for energy and the key principles for assessing applications for energy infrastructure is clear and accepted; • Para 4.2 welcome the encouragement to provide information on likely significant social and economic effects of proposals within the framework of Environmental Statements; • Para 4.1.3 relating to biodiversity, should be improved by noting that applicants should consult local authorities and local nature conservation bodies, as well as national and statutory bodies. EN3 – NPS for Renewable Energy Infrastructure • The NPS currently refers to regional strategies and plans being taken into account by the IPC. The NPS should be strengthened to also reflect the role of sub regional strategies and studies in IPC decision making. For example, in Cumbria, the Cumbria Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Document provides guidance on the capacity for landscapes to accommodate onshore wind energy development. It has been developed in line with RSS and local planning policy and has been adopted by the Local Planning Authorities. In addition to this studies have been carried out on the capacity for renewable energy across the county. Sub regional evidence, such as adopted SPD and other evidence base information, should be taken into account by the IPC and be reflected in the NPS. • Paragraph 2.5.33 should be amended to reflect the need for development to apply the sequential test and for the IPC to take this issue into consideration. This applied to other major development and ensures previously developed land is considered over green field sites • Paragraph 2.6.69 should be amended to reflect the fact that Natura 2000 sites comprise international nature conservation designations such as Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation and Ramsar sites. The IPC needs to consider the effects of any cabling or other infrastructure crossing these areas. • Paragraph 2.7.13 should be amended to include a reference to the need for the Environmental Impact Assessment to consider the effects of road improvements on the character of the landscape and locality. EN5 – NPS for Electricity Networks Infrastructure • Paragraph 2.7.6: In weighing the cost and benefits of undergrounding power lines, the IPC should give weight to the landscape, biodiversity, the historic environment and impacts on local communities, and give particular weight to these factors in considering Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 9 173 the benefits of undergrounding in and near areas of nationally designated landscapes and in other areas where these issues are of significant local concern; • It is also considered that the NPS be amended so that o Applicants are required to show they have considered the option of off shore, sub- sea routeing, where the on-shore route options are likely to have significant adverse effects on onshore landscape, biodiversity, historic environment and local communities. o The IPC is required to give weight to landscape, biodiversity, the historic environment and impacts on local communities, in considering the benefits of offshore routeing of grid lines; and give particular weight to these factors in considering the benefits of undergrounding in and near areas of nationally designated landscapes, and in other areas where these issues are of significant local concern • The Council is aware of rapid development in technology and good practice in Europe (eg Denmark) in relation, for example, to the design of pylons; undergrounding techniques which can reduce costs significantly; and also in relation to the technology, cost and viability of sub-sea cabling. It is therefore considered that the NPS should be amended to require the applicant to show they have considered alternative technologies and good practice in preparing design options - including that available internationally – where on- shore route options are likely to have significant adverse effects on landscape, biodiversity, the historic environment and local communities, particularly within or near nationally designated landscapes, and in other areas where these issues are of significant local concern. • It is considered that the potential impact of electricity networks on biodiversity and geodiversity (particularly on sites of international importance) merit further advice to the IPC in addition to that provided in EN1. • See also related comments under the EN-6 below and general comments above. EN6 – NPS for Nuclear Power Generation • Paragraph 4.6.8: The need for the IPC to note the potential for regional cumulative landscape effects in North West England, is welcomed, and also the need for the IPC to consider the capacity of these areas to accommodate the cumulative impact of landscape effects. • The District Council has particular concern about the cumulative impact of up to 3 nuclear stations in West Cumbria, as the electricity network requirements for all 3 sites are likely to have significantly greater impacts on landscape, biodiversity and communities, in South Lakeland compared to fewer sites. • Section 4.7: The need to take account of the potential negative impacts in Cumbria if a number of sites are developed in a similar time frame is welcomed. The District Council however has concerns over the likely adverse impacts of the nuclear power stations on international wildlife sites, in particular the impact of the proposed site at Kirksanton on the Duddon Estuary SAC.

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 10 174 APPENDIX B Principles and Generic Impacts addressed in the Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (EN-1) • Environmental Statement • Habitats Regulation Assessment • Alternatives • Criteria for Good Design • Consideration of Combined Heat and Power • Consideration of Carbon Capture and Storage • Climate Change Adaptation • Grid Connection • Pollution Control and Environmental Consenting Regimes • Safety • Hazardous Substances • Health • Common Law Nuisance and Statutory Nuisance • Security Considerations • Air Emissions • Biodiversity and Geological Conservation • Civil and Military Aviation and Defence Interests • Coastal Change • Dust, Odour, Artificial Light, Smoke, Steam and Insect Infestation • Flood Risk • Historic Environment • Landscape and Visual Impacts • Land Use including Open Space, Green Infrastructure and Green Belt • Noise • Socio- Economic • Traffic and Transport • Waste Management • Water Quality and Resources

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 11 175

176 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Councillor Brenda Gray, Housing and Development Portfolio Holder Report From: Lawrence Conway, Corporate Director Agenda 19 (Communities) Item No: Report Author: Damian Law, Principal Development Plans Officer Report Title: RS2010 Part 1 – Response to Consultation

Summary This is a report to Cabinet to provide an update on the latest progress with the Regional Strategy for England’s Northwest (RS2010) and to seek approval of the response to draft RS2010 Part 1 currently out on consultation. RS2010 will set out a long-term strategic framework for the region to promote sustainable economic growth and contribute to sustainable development for the next 20 years. Approval of the response will result in the response being submitted as South Lakeland District Council’s formal response to RS2010 Part 1.

The Regional Strategy is of vital importance to the community of the Northwest as it seeks to address the issues, opportunities and challenges facing the region over the next twenty years. The Strategy must provide the right framework for addressing existing and future community needs in South Lakeland and shared interests with surrounding areas as well as the whole region at large.

As evidenced in our draft response to the Consultation Document, we have a area of concern regarding the Strategy i.e. it needs to reflect and address more explicitly issues, challenges and opportunities of the more rural parts of the region that are of particular relevance to the community of South Lakeland. It is considered the Strategy does not recognise enough the distinctiveness of the regions different rural communities and how they can contribute to the social, economic and environmental prosperity of the region. It is also important the Strategy provides the right context on which to base sub-regional and local planning policy and strategy and that it is flexible enough to adapt to change.

Recommendations It is recommended that Members 1. Note the content of this report relating to progress with the Regional Strategy for England’s Northwest (RS2010) 2. It is recommended that Cabinet consider and approve the draft response to RS2010 Part 1 Consultation Document.

177 Report

1 Introduction – What is the Regional Strategy and what is it likely to consist of? 1.1 The purpose of this report is to update members on progress in relation to RS2010 and seek approval for submission of a response to the draft RS2010 Part 1. Once finalised, the

Regional Strategy for the North West (RS2010) will set out a long-term strategic framework for the region to promote sustainable economic growth and contribute to sustainable development for the next 20 years. It will form part of the statutory development plan for every local authority in the Northwest. Therefore, Local Development Documents (LDDs) such as the South Lakeland Core Strategy will have to be in general conformity with the finalised Strategy. 1.2 The Regional Strategy will set the overall policy context to the delivery of sub-regional planning, housing, transport, skills training, investment and intervention priorities alongside economic development strategies and plans in Cumbria as well as the other sub-regions of the Northwest. The strategy is being jointly led on behalf of the region by 4NW – the name for the Regional Leaders Forum in the North West - and the North West Development Agency (NWDA). 1.3 The Regional Strategy is a deliberate attempt to integrate spatial and economic planning and to broaden the scope of the regional strategy to look at all aspects of sustainable development. It will build on and replace the existing Regional Economic Strategy (RES), and Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and the Regional Housing Strategy (RHS); and develops and embeds a new Skills Strategy for the region. It has been developed as part of a national framework and reflects national policy on areas such as nuclear, aviation, rail, housing and environmental limits. 1.4 The North West has started progressing work on a Regional Strategy over the past couple of years, in advance of legislation. As the first step in a process of strategy development, a Principles and Issues Paper was prepared in February 2009. SLDC Officers prepared a response to this Paper, which was endorsed by Councillor Brenda Gray, Housing and Development Portfolio Holder and Councillor Graham Vincent, Economic Prosperity and Transport Portfolio Holder. A full copy of the Principles and Issues Paper and SLDC’s response to the Paper is available to view in the Member’s Room and can be provided on request. 1.5 Following on from consultation on the Principles and Issues Paper, work commenced on the development of a draft Regional Strategy 2010 Consultation Document. RS2010 is to be split

into two parts. This report focuses on Part 1 the recently published Regional Strategy 2010 Part 1 Consultation Document, which is out for consultation for 8 weeks until the 26th February 2010. A copy of the executive summary of RS2010 Part 1 Consultation Document

is shown in Appendix 1 of this report. A full copy of the Consultation Document is available to view in the Member’s Room and can be provided on request. There has been wide engagement in the region on its development. It has been informed by the development of a

comprehensive evidence base, a summary of which is being published alongside the consultation document. Use of the evidence base and Consultation on the Principles and Issues Paper led to agreement on the key outcomes and values the region wishes to achieve. It provides an overarching vision and proposes strategic priorities which will maximise opportunities and address challenges. 1.6 Cumbria County Council (CCC) will also be providing a response to the Consultation Document, taking this to CCC Cabinet later in February. Our views will be reflected in the CCC response. 1.7 A draft Part 2 and draft Implementation Plan will be produced for consultation in Summer 2010. This will set out the detailed policies and actions to help deliver the Strategy. Part 2 is

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 2 178 likely to reflect on requirements laid down in legislation and central government guidance, such as the inclusion of district level employment land allocations and housing numbers distributed to district and housing market areas.

2 Summary of Part 1 Consultation Document – Its Contents 2.1 The consultation document begins by providing a summary of the Strategy. The document is split into four sections as follows:

Section A: Context for the Strategy: This sets out the context in which RS2010 is being prepared and includes a vision for the twenty year Strategy: ‘The quality of life for the people of the Northwest will be excellent and the region will become more prosperous, more equitable and produce less carbon; by 2030 it will be a better place to live, learn, work, visit and invest’.

Section B: The proposed Strategy: This sets out the proposed Strategy, which is based on the four strands below (these are not in priority order): 1 - Capitalise on the opportunities of moving to a low-carbon economy and address climate change; 2 -Build on our sources of international competitive advantage and regional distinctiveness; 3 - Release the potential of our people and tackle poverty and 4 - Ensure the right housing and infrastructure for sustainable growth

Section C: Spatial Implications of the Strategy: This looks at the spatial implications of the Strategy, both sub-regionally and cross-regionally (the North West and neighbouring regions). It identifies Cumbria as a sub-region in itself.

Section D: Strategic Options: This identifies four strategic options to test the thematic and spatial implications of putting the emphasis in differing ways on economic, environmental and social outcomes respectively in order to deliver the strategic priorities. These include: Option 1: Current position (‘business as usual’) Option 2: Focus on economic opportunity Option 3: Focus on protecting environmental resources and taking full advantage of

environmental opportunities Option 4: Focus on regeneration and development to tackle social deprivation and inclusion. There is also an Appendix attached to the document which includes the following:

Appendix 1 sets out the statutory background and geographic coverage of RS2010 and explains more clearly the Regional Strategy process. It also refers to the ongoing sustainability appraisal process.

Appendix 2 focuses on the key points from the evidence base used to inform the development of the Consultation Document. It also includes a brief summary of each of the sub-regions in the context of Sub-Regional Forecasting Work (relevant data regarding the socio-economic make up of the sub-regions). Appendix 3 sets out an indicative list of topics for which detailed policies may be set out in Part 2.

3 Summary of Draft SLDC Response to RS2010 Part 1 3.1 The Draft Response to R2010 Part 1 is shown in Appendix 2 of this report. The response includes references to questions posed throughout the Consultation Document; these are

illustrated in brackets for example (Q1). It is considered that there is much within the Strategy as currently drafted, that responds to the challenges and issues facing the region in the next twenty years, however, it is considered that the Strategy needs to recognise more fully the needs and challenges affecting more rural areas. The draft comments reflect this matter, in

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 3 179 summary they state that it is important that the Strategy: • Seeks the right balance in responding to the need to ensure economic growth across the region whilst ensuring the protection of the environment and the creation of sustainable communities in all parts of the region. • Provides the right context on which to base sub-regional and local planning policy and strategy. • Can recognise and respond to new changing circumstances i.e. that it is flexible enough to adapt to change and therefore not overly prescriptive. • Supports the sustainable economic and social development of the more rural areas of the region including South Lakeland as a whole, recognising the distinctiveness of the regions different rural communities and how they can contribute to the social, economic and environmental prosperity of the region. 4 Next Steps 4.1 Following consideration of this report by Cabinet, the finalised consultation response will be sent to 4NW and NWDA before the deadline on the 26th February 2010.

All comments will then be considered in the preparation of a revised Part 1, to be signed off

by the 4NW and NWDA Boards in Spring 2010.

It is intended that the revised Part 1, together with a draft Part 2 and draft Implementation Framework, will be issued for a formal twelve-week statutory consultation in Summer 2010. The Council is likely to have more detailed comments once draft Part 2 and the Implementation Framework are made available for comment.

Alternative Options Cabinet could reject the draft response, or propose amendments to the draft response. Failure to make a response to the consultation could result in a missed opportunity to influence the development of RS2010.

Key Decision This report does not relate to a key decision in the forward plan.

Material Considerations

Finance There are no additional financial requirements due to the course of action proposed by this report.

Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Adoption of a Regional Increased difficulty for the Continued engagement and Strategy which does not reflect authority to address its key input into the preparation of the key issues and concerns of issues and concerns, as RS2010 to ensure that our the authority currently expressed in the concerns are given due emerging Core Strategy and influence in the drafting of the other documentation such as strategy the Sustainable Community Strategy

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 4 180

Staffing None Links to Corporate Plan • Making South Lakeland the best place to live • Making South Lakeland the best place to work • Making South Lakeland the best place to visit

Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) • South Lakeland Community Strategy • Regional Housing Strategy for the North West • Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West • Regional Economic Strategy for the North West • South Lakeland Submission Core Strategy

Equalities & Diversity Not applicable Community Safety Not applicable

Background Documents

Document: RS2010 Regional Strategy for Contact: Damian Law England’s Northwest Principles Ext 7352 and Issues Paper SLDC Response to RS2010 As above Regional Strategy for England’s Northwest Principles and Issues Paper RS2010 Part 1 Consultation As above Document January 2010

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 5 181 Appendix 1

Executive Summary of RS2010 Regional Strategy for England’s Northwest Part 1 The High Level Strategic Framework January 2010

See attached PDF document.

Strategy Appendix 2

Draft South Lakeland District Council Response to RS2010 Regional Strategy for England’s Northwest – Part 1 The High Level Strategic Framework

Thank you for this opportunity to make comments on the above document. Enclosed within this letter is South Lakeland District Council’s (SLDC) response to the document.

General Comments:

Many of the comments we raised to the Principles and Issues Paper Consultation Document published earlier last year need to be reiterated to ensure that the strategy fully reflects the key issues affecting South Lakeland. We acknowledge that the prime focus of the strategy is to address issues at a regional level, however, it is considered that the strategy, as currently drafted, in some areas does not adequately appear to reflect sub-regional and local issues pertaining to our authority (and more generally as it relates to Cumbria). We are concerned that it does not, as currently drafted, provide the necessary platform on which to build relevant sub-regional and local strategies and policies.

A key observation is that the strategy does not go far enough in recognising the need to ensure sustainable growth within the different distinctive rural areas of the region. The Strategy is considered to be overly focused on economic development and regeneration and concentrates primarily on the urban areas of the region. It is considered the Strategy needs to address more effectively the diverse social, economic and environmental issues affecting the different parts of the region to ensure it has the right balance of focus.

It is also considered that the document in Section A does not offer the necessary clarification with regard to the role and status of the Regional Strategy. On this particular point, we wish to make some specific comments as follows:

• It needs to be made more explicit in Section A that the Regional Strategy will form part of the statutory development plan. This is mentioned in Appendix 1 but needs to be referenced at the beginning of the document. • How will the Regional Strategy replace existing Regional Spatial Strategy policies including saved Structure Plan policies? Will there be a mechanism for saving policies within the current RSS? If so, how long can such policies be saved for? • The Regional Strategy will cover twenty years. A key question is what will be the start and end date of the Regional Strategy once adopted? Given that the Strategy will have been based on time-specific evidence it is very important that there is a clear monitoring and review framework put in place in order to ensure it can respond positively and quickly to new circumstances and change. In this context will there be an alternative strategy on which to draw from if in the future there is a need to respond to new challenges and circumstances? (i.e. is it future proofed) • There is reference in the document to the development of Part 2 of the Strategy later this year and that this will set out detailed policies and actions, both thematic and spatial, to help deliver the Strategy. Appendix 3 of the document sets out an indicative list of topics for Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 6 182 which detailed policies may be set out in Part 2. It is important that local authorities are provided with certainty in regard to what the Regional Strategy is likely to cover in its detailed policies. It would appear that requirements set out in National Planning Policy Statements relevant to regional policy making are to be covered. However, it is considered that this needs to be made clearer and that a comprehensive list is inserted cross- referencing requirements in National Planning Policy Statement and looking at how these will be addressed in the Regional Strategy. It is noted that the Strategy could set District level employment land allocations and housing numbers to each district and to the housing market area geographies, but this is not definite. It is vital that the Regional Strategy provides the necessary hooks on which necessary local and sub-regional policy can draw from. • It is also noted that Part 2 of the Strategy will explore in more detail the development of a regional policy relating to infrastructure. It is considered that this policy will need to be supported by an Implementation Framework that can be tailored to the different needs of different parts of the region. The framework should consider the range of different delivery mechanisms (for example developer contributions) that Local Planning Authorities may choose to use to help implement the policy and deliver the required infrastructure.

Specific Comments about the Strategy:

The Strategy in Summary Page 4-7:

In relation to whether the identified four strands should provide the basis for the Regional Strategy (Q1), we broadly agree that the Regional Strategy is focused on the relevant strands. Whilst it is noted that the strands are not prioritised, the document states that the biggest challenges facing the world over the next 20 years and beyond relate to responding to climate change (strand 1). This could infer that priority should be given to strand 1 above the others.

With regard to whether the identified key spatial issues should provide the basis for the Regional Strategy and whether there are any priorities that have been missed (Q1 and Q2), we feel there are two important issues that are missing as follows: • Recognition of the role of other outstanding natural assets such as the regions coast in contributing to the region’s image and profile. • Recognition of the role of other outstanding assets associated with the region’s diverse and distinctive smaller communities in contributing to the region’s image and profile. In respect to whether the Strategy has identified the right issues and challenges (categorised as Spatial and Thematic questions) facing the region (Q3), it is noted that the Strategy recognises the need to place a greater emphasis on localism, such as stronger clustering of activities, increased home or local working/production (energy and food, for example) and increased focus on local communities. This is welcome as such emphasis would help to support the sustainable development of more rural areas of the region including South Lakeland.

In relation to Spatial question (F) which asks how can we best ensure sustainable growth in Cumbria, it is considered this question also needs to recognise assets such as the agricultural sector and the emerging renewable energy and knowledge based industry sectors and their role in contributing to the economic growth of Cumbria, rather than just assets in nuclear and tourism sectors.

Thematic question (H) asks what the balance should be between creating jobs for all (employment focus) or creating higher skilled jobs (productivity focus). This is an important question as it has a direct relationship with questions on how to improve access to affordable and high quality housing. There is a direct link between ensuring that we aim to offer higher paid and more diverse employment opportunities across all parts of the region (an issue pertinent to South Lakeland) and how this will help to improve access to affordable housing and other types of housing. In South Lakeland, given relatively full employment, we wish to see a focus on creating higher skilled jobs. Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 7 183 Thematic question (L) asks how to plan for the effects caused by an increasingly non-working age population as a percentage of the total population. This is an important question, particularly for an area such as South Lakeland where the problem is acute. It ties into the need to ensure that we achieve mixed balanced communities across the whole region.

It is noted that these issues are picked up more clearly in Section A and more fully in Section B of the document, however, it is considered that they need to be more explicitly referenced in the summary. It is suggested that an additional thematic should be included which asks how we can ensure the different housing issues affecting the different sub regions are addressed. This question is missing from the Strategy. It is considered the Strategy should be asking a question about how we can support the strengthening of rural communities through provision of new housing and employment development. The future viability and prosperity of rural communities rests largely on whether local employment and housing need is met alongside delivery of new economic and social opportunities.

Section A: Context for the Strategy

In respect to the section on page 8 describing what RS2010 is about, this includes reference to the Strategy building on the existing Regional Economic Strategy (RES) and Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS), but not the existing Regional Housing Strategy (RHS). It is our understanding that the Strategy will also be building on the existing RHS, it is therefore unclear whether reference to the RHS has intentionally been omitted or not.

Part 2 of Section A (page 11) states some assumptions relating to certain trends which are likely to continue in the next twenty years. It is important to make clear that these assumptions could change in the next twenty years based on new circumstances and challenges. A Regional Strategy needs to be flexible and responsive to changing circumstances and new challenges and therefore very careful consideration needs to be given to basing policy on current assumptions. Change may also only affect one part of the region and again in developing policies relating to sub-regions it is important that flexibility is built within in order to ensure the Strategy can respond positively to change and new assumptions at both the regional and sub regional scales.

It is noted that the assumptions do not make any reference to the potential Lake District National Park and Yorkshire Dales National Park boundary changes. Although such change would only affect a certain part of the region (South Lakeland and Eden areas of Cumbria), it is important that the implications such change may have for these parts of the region is considered in the development of policies (for example housing numbers distributed to districts).

With regard to the assets and opportunities that are identified in Part 2 of Section A (‘The Building Blocks’) it is noted that the potential of brownfield land to enable growth with minimal environmental impact is identified as one of the region’s current and potential strengths. The principle of prioritising the use of brownfield land is supported, however, it is considered that this particular strength is perhaps more evident in urban areas of the region than the rural areas. The Strategy needs to recognise that in order to ensure that growth in all the regions key service centres is assured; there may well be a case for the release of greenfield land where minimal environmental impact can be achieved. South Lakeland for instance contains a number of Key Service Centres which are to be subjected to modest/high levels of growth, relative to previous levels, and in order to achieve this given the lack of high levels of available brownfield land, greenfield land will need to be released. This issue should be reflected within any proposed indicators and targets relating to brownfield land.

In respect to whether we agree with the vision and if not, how can it be improved (Q4), it is considered in the main the vision is focused on the key principles and issues affecting the region, however, it could be more locally distinctive and place specific.

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 8 184 The final bullet point in the Vision is welcomed i.e. reference to socially and economically sustainable rural communities. Social and economic sustainability in our rural communities will only be realised if we achieve a better balance in their demographic make-up. The loss of young people from our rural areas and the increasingly older population residing within our rural areas are challenges to ensure that we deliver socially and economically sustainable rural communities. It is noted that this issue is referenced later in the document (in Section B) under the action points relating to demographic change and also in Appendix 2 in the summary of places and sub-regional forecasting work relating to Cumbria. Notwithstanding these references it is considered the issue needs to be embedded more fully into the Strategy in order to ensure that it is addressing needs associated with delivering sustainable rural communities (see comments relating to question 24 below).

Section B The Strategy

With respect to whether we agree with the potential areas for action relating to housing and if not, what changes would we suggest and why (Q18), we welcome the inclusion of ensuring new housing addresses needs associated with affordable housing in sustainable mixed and vibrant communities in urban and rural areas. This is perhaps the prime key issue facing South Lakeland.

Section C: Spatial Implications of the Strategy

As a general comment the Council welcomes the inclusion of spatial implications of the strategic priorities set out in Section B, focussing on the five sub-regions and then on intra and cross- regional opportunities.

With regard to whether the Strategy has identified the key assets, opportunities and challenges, and what needs to be done in the Cumbria sub-region (Q24), the following comments are made:

Opportunities

Natural and Built assets

• In overview it is considered that the Strategy does not fully recognise all the assets and opportunities attributable to Cumbria. The county contains a wealth of natural assets including Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and European Designations including Morecambe Bay, these assets need to be recognised. Equally local natural assets that do not have any specific protection should be recognised for their value. There appears to be singular reference to the Lake District as being the only natural asset on which opportunities can be built. It is considered that there should be greater emphasis placed on the opportunities, which the remainder of Cumbria provides in terms of its natural assets. This is something that needs to be incorporated into the Strategy more fully. Support should not just be given to the protection and enhancement of the Lake District National Park but to all of the regions natural assets. With respect to what are considered to be the key built assets in Cumbria, one such asset that needs to be recognised more fully is the strong, diverse and distinctive communities of Cumbria and what they can offer in terms of developing the rural economy (including tourism). • The spatial implications of the Strategy for Cumbria in relation to the successful regeneration of the Furness and West Cumbria area depends partly on addressing the locational marginality of these areas. The Strategy needs to consider the role that adjacent parts of Cumbria can play in supporting enhanced physical and commercial connectivity of these areas to the rest of the region. It is considered South Lakeland and in particular Kendal and Ulverston have a strategic role to play in this context and this should be identified as an opportunity. • The Strategy should recognise the potential economic and social “spin offs” that the Energy Coast initiative may provide to the different parts of Cumbria. These “spin offs” could result Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 9 185 in new economic (employment) and social (housing) opportunities for areas such as South Lakeland. When considering the needs and opportunities associated with the Initiative, it is vital the Strategy therefore recognises the role of South Lakeland in this context. • The Strategy should also recognise the different issues affecting different parts of the Cumbria sub-region. For instance much of South and East Cumbria share similar issues such as need to provide affordable housing and also offer similar opportunities in terms of the supporting role and function that the key service centres of Penrith and Kendal can provide to each other and the surrounding East and South Cumbria areas. South Lakeland shares similar interests with North Lancashire and Barrow-in-Furness in terms of the opportunities relating to the natural asset of Morecambe Bay. On-going work regarding the concept of a Morecambe Bay Regional Park or Bay Programme should be recognised in the Strategy. • Other projects such as the restoration of the Lancaster – Kendal Canal should also be recognised.

Challenges • With regard to the challenges facing Cumbria, we reiterate that a major challenge for much of the rural area of Cumbria is the high house prices compared to average salary levels and a lack of affordable housing which is having a negative impact on the sustainability of many towns and villages and is forcing many younger people to move out of the area. An ageing population presents challenges to health and support services and a linked challenge is poor access to high quality well paid jobs. A further major challenge is the need to secure a sustainable level and pattern of development that creates balanced communities and meets needs whilst causing minimal environmental impact. In this context it is considered that the final bullet point under the title ‘challenges’ should include the additional text (underlined below) – “The challenge to secure a sustainable level and pattern of development that creates balanced communities and meets needs whilst causing minimal environmental impact, including the need for jobs throughout Cumbria”.

• Another challenge that should be included is the need to improve physical access to services and facilities in Cumbria especially in the more rural areas. Improvements are required with respect to the delivery of sustainable transport provision; however, this is a challenge given the geography of the area and other constraints associated with social and economic viability.

Intra and cross-regional opportunities • With respect to whether the most significant intra and cross-regional opportunities have been identified (Q28), it is important to recognise the linkages between South Cumbria and North Lancashire with parts of North Yorkshire. For instance parts of the Western Yorkshire Dales area looks towards Kendal and Lancaster in terms of service provision and job opportunities.

Section D Strategic Options

The development of strategic options to help shape the range of choices contained within the final strategic framework is supported. However, it is unclear what weight will be given to the results of the sustainability appraisal, consultation responses and other available evidence in formulating the final strategy.

With respect to the process of making the right choices for the framework, we expect any final decision to clearly show it has taken into consideration the priorities and needs of all parts of the region. For South Lakeland this means addressing the following key issues as contained within the South Lakeland Submission Core Strategy:

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 10 186 • Support the growth of local economies – support for diversifying the rural economy and introducing new local business development opportunities that will deliver a widening of the existing types of employment opportunities currently on offer. • Delivery of local housing markets that address issues such as affordability in rural areas and the needs of an increasingly ageing population. • Managing of natural resources prudently. • Equitable access to service through delivering improvements to accessibility by sustainable transport modes across the district especially in the more rural areas and improved linking of all parts of the district to the rest of the region. • Supporting the health and wellbeing of all residents, recognising their different needs, for example the need to support young people who are increasingly leaving the area due to lack of employment and higher education opportunities and also housing costs and choice of available housing resulting in imbalanced communities.

It is considered that different elements of each of the four options support the priorities and needs of South Lakeland identified above. The main differences between the options would appear to lie in the extent to which they would provide the right choices for rural areas. For example, Option 1 (current position i.e. business as usual) may not necessarily deliver the outcome of sustainable rural communities as it is considered that it would appear to prioritise the needs of more urban areas of the region. Choosing elements of Option 2 (focus on economic opportunity) above those contained within the other options may result in the needs relating to protection of the environment and other elements associated with the delivery of sustainable communities being neglected. Also, the option again would appear to largely prioritise growth in the more urban parts of the region which would not fulfil the needs of South Lakeland, particularly the role of Local Service Centres in providing access to new economic opportunities.

Option 3 (focus on protecting environmental resources and taking full advantage of environmental opportunities) contains elements that are supported for example it would support sustainable patterns of providing new living and working accommodation in dispersed locations in rural areas and diversification of food production in rural areas. These are elements, which appear to be missing from the other three options. It is noted that Option 3 acknowledges that there are likely to be some implications in terms of safeguard of greenfield land in adopting this option however, by stating that greenfield land would only be released to allow sustainable urban extensions, it is not clear what scale of development would be supported and what constitutes a sustainable urban extension. For instance would this only relate to larger strategic sites, or could smaller scale development fall under this category especially if it is providing for exceptional local needs under the use of the exceptions site policy. The Strategy needs to become explicit on this point, describing more fully the criteria for the release of greenfield land and how sub regional variations in need will be addressed. It is considered that this option could be too restrictive in enabling the delivery of required social and economic growth in the rural areas of the region.

There are elements of Option 4 (focus on regeneration and development to tackle social deprivation and inclusion) that seem to favour a very urban led regeneration focused approach option and if adopted would not necessarily give due respect to issues and challenges facing more rural parts of the region.

Conclusion We very much support the intentions of Draft RS2010 Part 1 on combining the different strands of the current Regional Strategy. However, it is considered that the Strategy as currently drafted in some areas may not necessarily provide the strategic framework for the region as a whole, particularly with respect to local issues pertaining to our authority (and more generally as it relates to Cumbria). We feel it is important that the comments raised are taken into consideration in the development of the finalised RS2010 Part 1 and used to inform the development of Draft RS2010

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 11 187 Part 2 Consultation Document in order for the final Regional Strategy to fully reflect the strategic needs and aspirations of each and every part of the region.

Date: 29/01/10 Version No: Amended by: 12 188 RS2010 A5 Summary leaflet:Layout 1 13/1/10 12:57 Page 3

Part 1: The High Level Strategic Framework Summary Document – January 2010

189 RS2010 A5 Summary leaflet:Layout 1 13/1/10 12:57 Page 4

Summary Version of RS2010 Part 1 Introduction

The Northwest is the first region to prepare an integrated Regional Strategy (RS2010). It represents a new approach. For the first time, the issues of environmental, social and economic development will be combined in one strategy, which will replace the current regional economic, housing and spatial strategies.

It presents the opportunity to agree a single regional vision, objectives, policies and actions behind which private, public and third sectors can unite, to drive investment and development in the Northwest over the next 20 years.

The overarching vision for RS2010 is to ensure that: “The quality of life for the people of the Northwest will be excellent and the region will become more prosperous, more equitable and produce less carbon: by 2030 it will be a better place to live, learn, work, visit and invest”

RS2010 is being prepared in two parts:

NW Regional Strategy

Regional Strategy Part 1 – High level strategic framework Tested via Examination Together in Public forms Regional Strategy process Single Regional Part 2 – Detailed supporting policies Strategy

Implementation Framework (Actions implementing Regional Strategy)

A draft Part 1 consultation document has been prepared by 4NW and NWDA, in collaboration with partners from the private, public and third sectors, and is a vital step in realising that ambition. It proposes high-level strategic priorities where working together we can maximise opportunities and address challenges.

Part 1 will be followed later in 2010 by Part 2 and an accompanying Implementation Framework setting out the detailed policies and actions to make things happen. Taken together, these will provide the blueprint for guiding investment and development in the region over the next 20 years, an absolutely key reference point not just for us in the region but also central government departments.

Part 1 has been informed by the development of a substantial evidence base, as well as the Principles and Issues consultation in 2009 which agreed the headline vision, outcomes and values on which RS2010 should be based.

This leaflet summarises the key elements of the consultation document.

190 RS2010 A5 Summary leaflet:Layout 1 13/1/10 12:57 Page 5

The Strategy

Rather than writing a strategy for “any region”, we have sought to focus on how we can use the Northwest’s major assets and opportunities to drive mutually reinforcing sustainable economic growth across all parts of the region. That is economic growth that can be sustained and is within environmental limits but also enhances the environment and social welfare, and which does not pursue growth in one part of the region at the expense of another part.

The four strands The consultation document proposes that the Strategy is based on four strands. Please note that these strands are not in priority order and all are important to the successful delivery of the Strategy. Responding to climate change is probably the biggest single challenge facing the world over the next twenty years and more. The first strand therefore sets the overall context in which we will be operating and highlights some specific opportunities and challenges.

Capitalise on the opportunities of moving to a Release the potential of our people and tackle low carbon economy and address climate poverty by: change by: a. increasing the potential of the workforce by a. positioning the region to take full advantage of improving employment opportunities, enterprise the opportunities from low carbon energy and and skills; technologies; b. building on our strong tradition of social b. ensuring that the region understands and enterprise; adapts to the implications of unavoidable c. regenerating areas with deep-seated climate change; economic and social challenges and building c. ensuring that all sectors, including housing, strong communities; transport and industry, are considering the d. tackling the serious challenges raised by social challenges and opportunities presented by exclusion, deprivation, ill health and inequality; climate change and developing low carbon, resource efficient solutions and alternatives. e. addressing the implications of demographic change for our workforce and services.

Within the overall context of climate change, the Ensure the right housing and infrastructure for next three strands set out the region’s Strategy for sustainable growth by: economic, environmental and social success. a. securing high quality housing in locations which support sustainable economic growth; Build on our sources of international b. ensuring high quality digital connectivity to competitive advantage and regional stimulate enterprise, improve service delivery distinctiveness by: and reduce the need to travel; a. developing our strengths in internationally c. improving internal connectivity through a competitive sectors in nuclear, advanced sustainable transport infrastructure which better manufacturing, biomedical, digital & creative, connects opportunity and need; chemicals and automotive; d. developing the critical infrastructure the region b. strengthening our concentration of knowledge- needs to support sustainable economic growth; based assets driven by our universities and e. developing the region’s green infrastructure to science and innovation base; provide economic, environmental and social c. improving our international connectivity through benefits. the Liverpool Superport, including John Lennon Airport, and Manchester Airport; d. developing our world class sporting/culture/quality of place offer and the attraction of Manchester, Liverpool, Chester and the Lake District as international destinations. 191 RS2010 A5 Summary leaflet:Layout 1 13/1/10 12:57 Page 6

Spatial issues Option 1 - Current position (‘Business as usual’). An integrated strategy will need to make Option 2 - Focus on economic opportunity. judgements about the balance between Option 3 - Focus on protecting environmental economic, environmental and social elements, resources and taking full advantage which in turn will influence delivery against the of environmental opportunities. agreed outcomes as well as determine the spatial implications. Option 4 - Focus on regeneration and development to tackle social In moving forward, we therefore need to consider deprivation and inclusion. the role of places and the relationship between The final Strategic Framework of RS2010 may be them. Based on the evidence, the key spatial a combination of different elements of one or issues for the region to address in RS2010 are more options. seen as: • the world class cities of Liverpool and Outstanding questions Manchester, as the economic cores of substantial city regions, and the international We believe the proposed Strategy will set us on a potential of the Liverpool-Manchester corridor clear course to developing a more sustainable through the Atlantic Gateway concept; economy based on growth within environmental • Preston’s role as a driver of regional growth; limits whilst achieving social goals. However, we need to ensure we understand the full • Crewe, Chester, Warrington, Lancaster and implications of the choices we have to make Carlisle’s role as key sub-regional hubs (and where there are potential conflicts within the in the case of Chester and Carlisle, the Strategy, as well as the spatial and distribution substantial links with Wales and Scotland issues which arise. We have therefore identified a respectively); number of outstanding cross-cutting questions • the role of the Lake District and other which need to be addressed in taking the outstanding natural and built assets in Strategy forward. These are: contributing to the region’s image and profile; Spatial • those parts of Pennine Lancashire, Blackpool, Barrow and West Cumbria, as well as areas a. How can we deliver the scale of new critical within the Manchester and Liverpool City infrastructure (particularly electricity, water and Regions, which face substantial social and waste) that would be needed to drive growth economic regeneration challenges; in the regional centres of Liverpool and Manchester? • physical and digital connectivity between (i) Manchester and Liverpool City Regions, b. What is the role of north Cheshire? To what (ii) North Cheshire and the City Regions of extent should it focus on supporting the Liverpool and Manchester, (iii) Pennine Manchester and Liverpool city regions? Lancashire and Preston and the Manchester City Region, (iv) Preston and the city regions c. What is the role of Preston as a driver of of Liverpool and Manchester, and (v) rural regional growth? areas and regional, sub-regional and local d. What is the role of Pennine Lancashire? centres. What should be the balance between developing the local economy and linking it Strategic options better to growth opportunities in Manchester and Preston? We are also consulting on four strategic options we have developed to test the thematic and e. What is the future role of Blackpool and other spatial implications of putting the emphasis in coastal resorts? differing ways on economic, environmental and social outcomes respectively in order to deliver f. Given its assets in the nuclear and tourism the strategic priorities identified. These are: sectors, how can we best ensure sustainable growth in Cumbria? 192 RS2010 A5 Summary leaflet:Layout 1 13/1/10 12:57 Page 1

Summary Version of RS2010 Part 1

Thematic supporting struggling companies as opposed g. How can we ensure that growth in priority to investing in areas of opportunity and sectors and increased trade via Manchester supporting growth companies? Airport and Liverpool Superport (which l. Given that over the next 20 years: includes Liverpool John Lennon Airport) is consistent with the sustainable use of • sea levels and temperatures are likely to rise, resources and moving to a low carbon with more extreme weather events, flooding economy? and loss of land becoming more common; h. What should be the balance between • the working age population as a percentage creating jobs for all (employment focus) or of the total population will fall; creating higher skilled jobs (productivity • public expenditure will fall substantially in the focus)? first part of this period; i. What should be the balance between how do we plan for these, all of which will put indigenous skills development and attracting pressures on our use of resources? and retaining new talent and skills to the region? j. How can we best tackle the underlying Sustainability Appraisal causes of worklessness which has blighted the region for the last 20 years? Should we be The emerging Strategy is being subject to a full pursuing a strategy of creating jobs in local Sustainability Appraisal. It includes Strategic communities or allowing jobs to be created Environmental, Habitats Regulation, Health anywhere in the region and linking Impact, Equality Impact and Rural assessments. unemployed people to those jobs? It aims to identify the likely significant effects and any mitigation measures required to ensure the k. To what extent should we be investing to effectiveness of RS2010 in meeting economic, tackle areas of need/deprivation and environmental and social goals.

How can I get involved?

We hope this leaflet has whet your appetite to find out more about RS2010 and become involved.

The consultation document is available via the RS2010 website: http:/consult.nwregionalstrategy.com/portal You can respond via the website (which we would encourage wherever possible) or in writing, by Friday 26 February 2010.

If you have any questions or need any further information please contact: Brenda Buckley, Regional Strategy Development Officer, NWDA [email protected] Telephone: 01925 400279

193 RS2010 A5 Summary leaflet:Layout 1 13/1/10 12:57 Page 2

The Northwest Regional Development Agency Renaissance House Centre Park Warrington WA1 1QN Tel: +44 (0)1925 400 100 Fax: +44 (0)1925 400 400

www.nwda.co.uk www.enw.co.uk/visit www.enw.co.uk/invest www.nwregionalstrategy.com

4NW Wigan Investment Centre Waterside Drive Wigan WN3 5BA Tel: +44 (0)1942 737928 www.4nw.org.uk 4NW is the Regional Leaders Board for England's Northwest

This document is available in large print, braille, audio tape and the following languages; Bengali, Chinese, Gujarati, Somali, Urdu and Hindi. Please contact the NWDA Marketing Department on 01925 400100

194 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Not applicable Report From: Corporate Director (Monitoring Officer) Agenda 20 Report Author: Chris Woods (Democratic Services Item No: Manager) Report Title: Consultation on Draft Statutory Guidance on the Duty to Respond to Petitions

Summary To consider responses to the Consultation document on the Duty to Respond to Petitions. Recommendations Cabinet is recommended to consider and respond to the questions posed by the consultation document as set out in the Appendix to this report. Report 1. The Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 requires all principal local authorities to establish a scheme for handling petitions made to the authority. The petitions duty, when brought into force, will oblige local authorities to draw up a petitions scheme which will give local people a right to a public response if they sign a petition. In addition, petitions with a significant level of support will trigger a debate of Full Council and, in some cases, will be able to call for a senior member of council staff to attend an Overview and Scrutiny meeting to answer questions about how they are delivering public services. 2. Petition organisers will have the right to ask Overview and Scrutiny Committees to review the Council’s response to their petition if they feel the response is inadequate. There will also be a requirement to provide a facility for e-petitions. 3. The scheme – • Must be approved by a meeting of the Full Council before it comes into force • Must be published on the Council’s website and by any other appropriate means for bringing it to the attention of those who live, work or study in its area • Can be revised at any time, subject to the approval and publication requirements listed above • The Council must comply with its petition scheme 4. The Act sets down some minimum entitlements which all citizens can expect but beyond these, local authorities have a high level of flexibility to determine how the petition scheme is carried out. 5. Draft statutory guidance has been published which sets out the key principles and key requirements of the petitions duty, a framework for local authorities to use when designing and complying with their petitions scheme while allowing for significant local determination.

195 This document is quite lengthy and has been sent electronically to Members. However, hard copies are available in the Members’ Room or can be requested from Members’ Services. 6. The consultation document poses a number of questions to consultees (reproduced as an Appendix for ease of reference). The proposals will impact on a number of areas within the Council. The Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committees meeting held on 2 February has considered responses to the consultation document and Cabinet will be updated with these at the meeting. 7. Members are asked to consider responses to the questions posed by the consultation document, taking into account feedback from Overview and Scrutiny and provide any additional comment as appropriate. Alternative Options Not to submit responses to the consultation document. Key Decision This report does not relate to a Key Decision. Material Considerations Finance There are no financial considerations connected to responding to the consultation document, although there will be some financial implications in implementing a Petitions Scheme e.g. publication costs, cost of implementing e-petitions, etc – as yet not quantified. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Not to submit comments as Council misses opportunity to Submit appropriate comments appropriate influence outcome of consultation Staffing None. Links to Corporate Plan None. Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) None. Equalities & Diversity The purpose of the report is to provide comment on the draft consultation document. When a procedure is put forward for approval by Council an Equality Impact Assessment will be carried out. Community Safety Not applicable. Background Documents Document: Letter from Communities and Local Government dated 8 Contact: Chris January regarding Consultation document on Statutory Woods Guidance on the duty to respond to petitions

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 196 Appendix

CONSULTATION QUESTIONS

1. Does the guidance clearly set out the key principles and requirements of the petitions duty? 2. Are there any existing areas in the guidance which require further clarification? 3. Are there any additional areas which you feel this statutory guidance should cover? If so, please state what they are and why you feel they should be included. 4. Are there any additional areas, which, while not appropriate for statutory guidance, you would like to see covered by the expert practitioners in their sector-led guidance? 5. Are there any areas covered in this statutory guidance which you feel would be more appropriately covered by the expert practitioners in their sector-led guidance? If so, please state what they are and why you feel they should be addressed in this way. 6. Do you think the model scheme is clearly expressed and easy for people to use? Please explain your reasons. 7. Do you think the standards set out in the model scheme are achievable and appropriate to citizens’ expectations? 8. Do you think there is anything that should be added to the model scheme? 9. Do you agree with the categories excluded from the Draft Order? If you do not agree with the categories please explain why you do not think they should be excluded. 10. Do you think there should be additional categories excluded in the Draft Order? If so, please state what they are and why you feel they should be excluded. 11. Following on from the consultation, what do you consider the most appropriate timescale for bringing the petitions duty into force? Please explain your reasons. 12. Initial discussions with both the local government and technology sector indicate that it would be wise to stagger the implementation of the e-petition element of the duty, bringing the e-petition requirements into force 12 months after the other elements of the duty are commenced. Do you agree? Please explain your reasons.

197

198 SOUTH LAKELAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

Cabinet

Date of Meeting: 10 February 2010 Part I Portfolio Holder: Councillor Hilary Stephenson (Central Services) Report From: Corporate Director (Monitoring Officer) Agenda 21 Report Author: Emma Ludlam (Scrutiny Officer) Item No: Report Title: Corporate Administration Task Group Report

Summary To consider the report from the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee arising from the final report of the Corporate Administration Task and Finish Group. Recommendations That Cabinet consider the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Corporate Administration Task and Finish Group’s report and the recommendations contained therein. Report Attached. Alternative Options To not agree some or all of the recommendations. Key Decision N/A Material Considerations Finance The recommendations within the report have to some extent been devised with financial savings in mind. Risk Management Risk Consequence Controls required Failure to agree and A perceived lack of Agree and implement the implement the uniformity and recommendations set out recommendations set out understanding across the in the task group report. in the task group report. Authority with regard to corporate administration.

Staffing N/A

199 Links to Corporate Plan Increasing efficiencies across the Authority in relation to both Corporate Administration and recharging in general are conducive with the aims of the Corporate Plan.

Links to Other Strategic Plan(s) N/A Equalities & Diversity N/A Community Safety N/A

Background Documents Document: Questionnaire to 2nd Tier Contact: Emma Ludlam (Scrutiny Officer) Managers on Corporate Administration

Date: 02/02/2010 Version No: Amended by: 2 200

Corporate Administration Task and Finish Group Report

For the attention of Cabinet

January 2010

1201 Contents

1 Chairman’s Foreword

2 Background and Context

3 Research and Evidence Gathered

4 Findings and Recommendations

2202 Chairman’s Foreword

Corporate Administration is essentially all of the efforts that go into preparing papers and meetings to support the democratic process.

In learning about this topic we have come to realise that whilst being a high spend area, more efficient Corporate Administration would free up time for Officers to work on other duties. Our investigations revealed that cost allocation to Corporate Administration needs better understanding and training to ensure our records are a true reflection. It was encouraging to learn that our spending is generally comparable with or less than other Cumbrian authorities.

Members and Committee Chairs can also play their part in the way that meetings run to ensure that Officers time is used wisely. This could be achieved by scheduling Officer involvement early on agendas or getting them in and out for specific topics.

Councillor Stephen Coleman

Background and Context

The Task Group was established by the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting of 16 June 2009, as a service review focused on corporate administration within the Council. Members chose this subject for review after it was included on a list of service reviews suggested by the Chief Executive the previous year, and because it was a high spend service costing in the region of £1 million annually.

During the review, the Task Group met with both officers of the Council and the relevant Portfolio Holder, Councillor Stephenson. A questionnaire was devised and sent out to all second tier managers within the authority in order to assess the level of uniformity in recharging and to pinpoint any specific issues associated with corporate administration.

As with all Overview and Scrutiny Task Groups, membership was open to every non- Executive Member within the authority, and given the subject of the review it seemed particularly appropriate to have members of the Audit Committee included. The membership of the Task Group was made up as follows:

Councillor Chris Hogg Councillor Pru Jupe Councillor Stephen Coleman Councillor Colin Davies Co-optee John Short

At its first meeting on 13 August 2009 it was decided that Cllr Coleman would be the Task Group Chairman.

The Group decided that its remit was to attempt to demystify the subject of corporate administration and, as a result, determine where any efficiencies might be made. This was to entail a specific focus on recharges made to corporate administration, and the effect that these had on the budget.

3203

Research and Evidence Gathered

The Task Group held a total of three meetings – a relatively short review – and the proceedings of each of these is outlined in the table below.

Meeting Date Issues Considered Witnesses Members Present

13 August 2009 Scoping/ Timeframe Shelagh McGregor, CH, PJ, SC, CD, JS Cllr Hillary Stephenson 17 September 2009 Figures on Shelagh McGregor CH, PJ, SC, CD, JS budget/recharges considered 16 November 2009 Questionnaire Helen Smith PJ, SC, CD, JS results – potential recommendations arising

Evidence was kindly provided to the Task Group by Shelagh McGregor (Assistant Director - Resources and s151 Officer) and Helen Smith (Head of Finance), as well as the Portfolio Holder for Central Services, Councillor Hillary Stephenson.

The Group felt that it was crucial to determine how both corporate administration and recharging were defined in order to review how both were carried out in this authority.

In the Budget Book, the corporate administration service is described as follows:

“covers the provision of committee services to the Council, the preparation of reports for Members together with all officer time spent supporting and advising Councillors. Preparing reports for attending and advising at all meetings of the Council.”

Recharging, in its simplest form, is given as a percentage by each department based on the time and staff they dedicate to another department, for instance Legal might spend 10% of their time on Planning Department issues, which converts to a 10% recharge to Planning and is set out as such within the relevant departmental budget. As described by Shelagh McGregor at a Task Group meeting, it is ‘the cost of democracy’.

Cllr Stephenson made the point when giving evidence that a saving could be made simply by reducing the number of committee meetings. An increase in delegated decision-making would facilitate this. There was an acknowledgement that a change in the mindset of both officers and Members could improve the corporate administration budget. The use of officer time in particular was an area to which attention was drawn. Members made reference to what were often unnecessarily longwinded reports and the apparently excessive amount of time spent by some senior officers at meetings when their time could be better spent elsewhere. Increasing efficiency in this manner would presumably have a direct impact on the amount recharged to corporate administration.

The Task Group spent some time looking at figures provided by witnesses, and comparing corporate administration budgets from the last few years. These included money spent on room hire, equipment, catering supply and so on, in addition to the recharges between departments.

Furthermore, the Group considered figures obtained from comparator authorities such as Cotswold, Hambleton and Craven, as well as from the other Cumbrian authorities.

4204 The immediate impression given by the statistics was that South Lakeland compared very favourably in terms of the corporate administration cost. However, Members agreed that it was almost impossible to make a direct comparison with other councils as each authority has a slightly different method and process.

Corporate Population Cost per and Est. June Head of Democratic 2007 pop. Core

CUMBRIA £ £ E0934 Copeland 1,274,000 70,400 18 E0932 Barrow-in-Furness 1,377,000 71,800 19 E0936 South Lakeland 1,628,000 104,900 16 E0935 Eden 1,708,000 51,900 33 E0931 Allerdale 2,317,000 94,500 25 E0933 Carlisle 3,266,000 103,500 32

The Task Group soon resolved that in order to fit in with the Council’s budgetary timetable, it would be necessary to keep the review relatively short and concise. To this end, it was agreed that a questionnaire would be a useful means of gathering a relatively wide amount of evidence in a short period of time. Questions on the review topic were devised and a questionnaire was sent out to all 2nd tier managers across the authority, so that a solid comparison could be made of each officer’s views and experiences.

Responses to the questionnaire proved very enlightening. A copy of the questions and responses is available for Members to view as a background document. The Task Group wishes to extend its thanks to those officers who took the time to respond to the questionnaire.

Recurring themes which came out of the questionnaire responses included a lack of officer training and a lack of standardisation or uniformity with regard to recharging guidance. Some officers did appear to be quite happy with the system as it currently stands, but the majority who responded did outline some issues and areas in which they felt improvements could be made. Of course, this questionnaire did not take account of senior management views as it was only distributed to 2nd tier managers in the first instance, and time did not allow for a second round of distribution before the review deadline.

Based on the evidence considered in the time available, the Group would like to make the recommendations outlined below. It is hoped that, should these recommendations be implemented, some value will be added to the recharging process at the Council and officer time might be spent more efficiently.

5205 Findings and Recommendations

The Task Group asks that the Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee refer the following recommendations to Cabinet for its consideration. In formulating these recommendations the Group has tried to maintain an awareness of the budgetary constraints within which the Council operates.

1. That work be carried out to ensure more standardised recharging guidelines are produced and distributed to each department to enable a level of uniformity throughout the authority.

2. That more training be made available for officers who require it, with a particular focus on corporate administration.

3. That Members’ finance training should include a focus on recharging and the nature of the relationship between this and how officer time is spent (for example in report writing and meeting attendance) in order to increase awareness of the process. By learning more we hope that Members can influence sparing use of officer time in meetings.

4. That committee agendas contain a disclaimer that the Chairman may change the order of items on the agenda.

6206