Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Tuesday 22Nd July 2008 at 6.30 Pm, at the Town Hall

Home , Abbey Village, Cliviger, Goodshaw, Great Harwood, Little Hoole, Ormskirk School

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District

Tuesday 22nd July 2008 at 6.30 pm, at the Town Hall, Lancaster (Banqueting Room).

Agenda

Part 1 (Open to Press and Public)

No. Item

1. Disclosure of Personal and Prejudicial Interests

Members are asked to consider any Personal/Prejudicial Interests they may have to disclose to the meeting in relation to matters under consideration on the Agenda.

2. Minutes of the Meeting held on the 17th June 2008 (Copy enclosed)

Discharge of delegated powers

3. Local Safety Scheme Ref No 1.210 (Report attached) B5273 Oxcliffe Road, Morecambe, Lancaster City

4. Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund (Report attached) Approval of Projects to Support Climate Change in Lancashire

5. Lancashire Local Grant Applications (Report attached)

Other issues for consideration

6. Update Report on Local Grants Spend 2007/08 and (Report attached) 2008/09

7. Primary Capital Programme (Report attached)

8. Lancashire County Developments Ltd (Report attached)

9. Traffic Issues at Skerton Bridge, Lancaster (Report attached)

10. Proposed Hest Bank to Morecambe Cycle Route: (Report attached) Trial Opening of Gate onto Rushley Drive, Hest Bank onto the Canal

11. Permanent Traffic Regulation Orders (Report attached)

12. Forward Business Plan 2008/09 (Report attached)

13. Use of the Urgent Business Procedure (Report attached)

- 2 -

14. Urgent Business

An item of urgent business may only be considered under this heading where, by reason of special circumstances to be recorded in the Minutes, the Chair of the meeting is of the opinion that the item should be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency. Wherever possible, the Secretary should be given advance warning of any Member’s intention to raise a matter under this heading

15. Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting of the Committee will be held on Tuesday 2nd September 2008 at 6.30 pm at the Rainbow Centre, Morecambe.

I M Fisher County Secretary and Solicitor

County Hall Preston

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District

Meeting held at 1.30 pm on Tuesday 17th June, 2008, at The Midland Hotel, Morecambe

Minutes

Present:-

County Councillor Liz Scott (Chair)

Lancashire County Council

County Councillor Susie Charles County Councillor C B Coates County Councillor Sarah Fishwick County Councillor A P Jones County Councillor Niki Penney County Councillor A Thornton County Councillor Jean Yates

Lancaster City Council

Councillor Eileen Blamire Councillor A Johnson Councillor Andrew Kay Councillor David Kerr Councillor Stuart Landhorn Councillor Bob Roe Councillor R Sherlock Councillor Malcolm Thomas Councillor John Whitelegg

Apologies were presented on behalf of County Councillors Peter Elliott and Janice Hanson.

The following Parish Councils were represented:-

Carnforth Town Council Silverdale Parish Council

Appointment of Chair

1. Resolved:- That County Councillor Liz Scott be appointed Chair of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District for the municipal Year 2008/09.

1 Appointment of Deputy Chair

2. Resolved:- That Councillor Malcolm Thomas be appointed Deputy Chair of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District for the Municipal Year 2008/09.

Membership and Constitution

3. Resolved:- That the Membership and Constitution of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District be noted.

Public Participation

The Chair explained that whilst Lancashire Local meetings were not public meetings, but business meetings to jointly deal with the business of the County Council in a public setting, it was the practice to facilitate public involvement before the transaction of formal business by the Members of the Lancashire Local by inviting comments/question on matters included on the agenda. A thirty minute period was set aside for this, with no person being allowed to speak for more than three minutes.

The Chair then invited contributions from the floor.

The following indicated their wish to speak on Item No 6 (Emesgate Lane Area, Silverdale – Proposed 20 mph Zone):-

Heather Bakewell John Holland Peter Roberts Graham Pollard Dorothy Kitson Roger Hissey Paul Linton

Carnforth Parish Councillor Pat Woofe indicated her wish to speak in relation to Item No 7 (Highways Services Budget 2008/09)

The speakers on the issue of Emesgate Lane, Silverdale all objected to the proposal to introduce the 20mph Zone in the Emesgate Lane Area of the village. It was felt inappropriate for the village, would increase congestion, be bad for local businesses and that the proposed road humps would cause difficulty for agricultural vehicles and for those touring the area (which was an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) in motor homes and towing caravans. Residents felt that consultation had been poor and not wide enough and were critical of a lack of representatives from the County Council at the Village Meeting held to discuss the proposal. It was stated that 95% of the Village population opposed the scheme.

Representatives of Silverdale Parish Council confirmed that the Council firmly opposed the proposal.

2 It was suggested that the County Council consider erecting 20 mph signs at each end of the Village.

Councillor Pat Woofe (Carnforth Parish Council) spoke and requested that consideration be given to the provision of information/direction signs to Carnforth Railway Station Visitor Centre. The Carnforth Railway Trust had been seeking to have brown information signs erected for a number of years, but had been unsuccessful. It was hoped that the Lancashire Local might help with this.

Disclosure of Personal and Prejudicial Interests

County Councillor Sarah Fishwick declared a personal interest in Item No 6 (Emesgate Lane Area, Silverdale – Proposed 20mph Zone) as a resident of Emesgate Lane. County Councillor Nikki Penney declared a personal interest in Item No 13 (Lancashire County Developments Ltd) as the Chair of LCDL. County Councillor Chris Coates declared a personal interest in Item No 10 (Young People not in Education, Employment or Training) as he was involved with project working with NEET. County Councillor Tony Jones declared a personal interest in Item No 8 (Local Safety Schemes Programme 2008/09) in relation to Scheme 1.211 A683 from Hornby to Greta Bridge) as a resident of Hornby. Councillor David Kerr declared a personal interest in Item 9 (Lancashire Local Grant Applications as the City Council Cabinet member with responsibility for awarding grants.

Minutes of the Meeting held on 6th May 2008

4. Resolved:- That with the inclusion of the apologies submitted for the meeting by Councillors Malcolm Thomas and John Whitelegg and the correction to the names of persons participating in the Public Participation segment of the meeting, the Minutes of the meeting of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District held on 6th May 2008 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Emesgate Lane Area, Silverdale – Proposed 20 mph Zone

A report was presented on a proposal to establish a 20 mph zone in the Emesgate area of Silverdale in order to educe vehicle speeds and, as a Local Safety Scheme, to reduce the potential for injury accidents. Details of the Scheme were attached as Appendix A to the report. The report followed public consultation which had resulted in a number of objections and details of these, together with the response of the Executive Director, Environment were presented in Appendix B to the report.

This was deemed to be a Key Decision and had been included in the County Council’s Forward Plan.

It was moved and seconded that, having considered the proposal to establish a 20 mph zone in the Emesgate Area of Silverdale as described in Appendix A to the report, together with the objections received to it, the comments on

3 the objections prepared by the County Council’s Executive Director of Environment and the representations made at the meeting by the Parish Council and local residents, the proposal not be approved and no further action taken in relation to its implementation.

On being put to the vote the Motion was carried, one Member abstaining and it was:-

5. Resolved:- That, having considered the proposal to establish a 20 mph zone in the Emesgate Area of Silverdale as described in Appendix A to the report, together with the objections received to it, the comments on the objections prepared by the County Council’s Executive Director of Environment and the representations made at the meeting by the Parish Council and local residents, the proposal not be approved and no further action taken in relation to its implementation.

Highways Services Budget 2008/09

It was reported that under delegated powers, the Lancashire Local had discretion in allocating expenditure under two budget heads, namely the Standard Allocation Budget to be spent on areas of work within the highway which under normal criteria would of be of insufficient priority to attract funding, and the Additional Highway Budget which was intended for repairs or other maintenance to carriageways and footways. For 2008/09 the allocations for the Lancaster District were £27,773 and £35,861 respectively.

The Lancashire Local was asked to consider proposals which fell under each of the budget heads and identified in Appendix A to the report (a revised Appendix A was circulated at the meeting and a copy is set out in the Minute Book). It was noted that the “bids” listed in the Appendix did not take up the entire allocations.

In addition to the schemes listed in Appendix A the following suggestions were put forward:-

Signage for Carnforth Railway Station Visitor Centre (if numbers of visitors criteria met).

A scheme to reduce the risk of collisions on Skerton Bridge, Lancaster where traffic merges (it was noted that signage and traffic merge markings had been improved and it was agreed that a report on this specific issue would be brought to the next meeting).

Provision of Fair Trade District signs.

Extension of white line markings at the bridge in Wray to prevent vehicles parking and reduce congestion.

Junction safety in Tatham

4 Gully cleaning on rural roads where blockages were caused by roadside verges collapsing into the gullies.

A scheme to prevent HGVs using the route through Hest Bank and damaging the canal bridge walls.

The Area Manager (North) undertook to take the suggestions forward and report back to the Lancashire Local on the feasibility.

6. Resolved:- That, having noted suggestions for highways schemes for inclusion in the programme to be funded from the Standard Allocation Budget and the Additional Highways Maintenance Budget, the Area Manager (North) be requested to evaluate the suggestions and report further to the Lancashire Local at its next meeting in July on a suggested programme of works, to include, for further consideration, those schemes included in the revised Appendix A to the present report circulated at the meeting.

Local Safety Schemes Programme 2008/09

A report was presented outlining details of the criteria for schemes to be included in the Local Safety Schemes Programme for 2008/09 and a recommended priority order for implementation. Six schemes were suggested and set out in Appendix A to the report, with a total value of £315,000 based on three categories, namely:-

Category 1 – Schemes carried over from 2007/08 with design work and public consultation already well advanced. These schemes were therefore ongoing and likely to be constructed during 2008/09.

Category 2 – Schemes that did not require extensive design and consultation and could potentially be constructed later in 2008/09 or in 2009/10.

Category 3 – New schemes that require substantial design and consultation work that could be started, but could not be constructed before 2009/10 at the earliest.

The Lancashire Local was asked to consider and approve the schemes to proceed.

7. Resolved:- That the Local Safety Schemes Programme for the financial year 2008/09 as set out in Appendix A to the report now presented be approved in the recommended priority order shown.

Lancashire Local Grant Applications

A report was presented in relation to six applications totalling £2,714.84 under the Local Grants Scheme. The applications had been submitted by County Councillors Janice Hanson (two applications), Tony Jones, Chris Coates (two applications) and Sarah Fishwick.

5 8. Resolved:- That approval be given to:-

(a) a grant of £332.42 to St Barnabas Housebound Group, Heysham to fund special transport to enable members of the Group to be taken on days out – application submitted by County Councillor Janice Hanson;

(b) a grant of £332.42 to Sefton Road United Reformed Church, Heysham, to help establish a handbell ringing group for children to help develop their physical and mental abilities – application submitted by County Councillor Janice Hanson;

(c) a grant of £400 to the Coffee Stop, Yealand Redmayne to be used as a contribution to the village newsletter and overheads and marketing of Coffee Stop – application submitted by County Councillor Sarah Fishwick;

(d) a grant of £1,000 to Poulton Residents’ Association, Morecambe to be used towards the building of two raised beds for planting to enhance the environment – application submitted by County Councillor Tony Jones;

(e) a grant of £300 to Glasson Festival Committee to fund activities and events (storytelling and workshops) for the Glasson Festival weekend – application submitted by County Councillor Chris Coates;

(f) a grant of £350 to The Fairfield Association to provide a marquee, table and chairs for the Fairfield Association fun day in July 2008 – application submitted by County Councillor Chris Coates.

Young People Not in Education, Employment or Training

(County councillor Sarah Fishwick declared a personal interest in this item as Chair of FSB)

A report was presented providing an update on the level of young people aged 16-18 who were not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET) in Lancaster and Morecambe and the actions being taken to reduce this.

The Operations Manager for Young People’s Services, in presenting the report, provided updated figures o n the numbers of young people falling into NEET and it was agreed that the figures should be provided to the District Partnership Officer for forwarding to members of the Lancashire Local. At Members’ request, the information would also indicate the numbers of young people in foster care falling into NEET also.

Members were anxious that young people were getting the necessary help to equip them for working life. It was confirmed that a range of skills training was available. County Councillor Nikki Penney, who was the Chair of Lancashire County Developments Ltd, commented that the Company had

6 undertaken a great deal of work with young people and had been very successful in matching the young people with employers.

9. Resolved:- That the report be received.

Engagement of Young People in Lancashire Locals

A report was presented on developing a method of Lancashire local engagement with young people. Whilst the Lancashire Local was already engaging with young people in the allocation of grants to small voluntary organisations and project grants to young people, there was currently no general engagement on issues of concern to them. It was suggested that a working group comprising two members of the Lancashire Local and young people be established to develop proposals for report to the Lancashire Local on the 14th October, the date falling in Local Democracy Week.

In discussion, Members were of the view that the views of young people should be canvassed on the way forward and suggested that local schools be approached and the young people asked for their suggestions with a view to a further report being presented to the Lancashire Local.

10. Resolved:- That consultation take place with local schools on how young people might wish to engage with Lancashire Local – Lancaster District and that a further report be brought to the Lancashire Local.

Childcare Sufficiency Assessments in Lancashire: Sub Authority Area Report – Lancaster

A report was presented which analysed the supply of childcare available in the Lancaster district, demand from parents and potential gaps in childcare provision as a first step in developing a strategy for securing sufficient childcare places. This would be done by working with local providers and tailoring services to the particular needs of children and families. This exercise was being carried out in each if the twelve districts in Lancashire, for which purpose each District has been divided into two or three Sub Local Authority Areas. The Lancaster District had been divided into three such areas – Lancaster, Lancaster Rural and Morecambe. Comprehensive reports were provided in respect of each area in Appendices A, B and C.

The key issues arising from the report were:

• work with Jobcentre Plus to ensure sufficient childcare was available for lone parents moving from Income Support to Job Seekers Allowance, initially for the 11-14year age group; • work with providers to meet the needs of disabled children and their families.

11. Resolved:- That the report be received.

7 Lancashire County Developments Ltd

A report was presented which provided background about Lancashire County Developments Ltd (LCDL) and highlighted some of the work being undertaken by the Company in the Lancaster district.

Of particular interest to the Lancashire Local were the activities being undertaken with regard to the following:-

Opportunities at the Storey Gallery; “A View for Eric”; Centenary House Sports and Arts diversionary activities for young people; Transformational opportunities within Morecambe.

It was proposed and seconded, that a report be requested to the next meeting of the Lancashire Local giving a detailed position statement on each of the five activities identified in the present report with which LCDL were involved. On being put to the vote the Motion was carried and it was –

12. Resolved:- That a report be requested to the next meeting of the Lancashire Local giving a detailed position statement on each of the five activities identified in the present report with which Lancashire County .Developments Ltd was involved.

Revised Municipal Waste Management Strategy for Lancashire: Consultation Document

It was reported that Lancashire’s Municipal Waste Management Strategy ‘A Greener Strategy for a Greener Future’, adopted by the Lancashire Waste Partnership (LWP) in 2001 was to be reviewed and rolled forward.

To inform this review, a consultation paper had been produced setting out a number of proposed new targets and actions for municipal waste management in Lancashire. Importantly, this paper gave the opportunity for the public and other stakeholders to rate their satisfaction with the targets and offer other comments to guide the preparation of the revised strategy.

The formal consultation period had begun on the 1 May 2008 and would run to the 31 July 2008, which is the deadline by which the Cabinet Member must submit a formal response to the Lancashire Waste Partnership taking into account the feedback from consultees. The Lancashire Local was invited to consider the issues and submit views for consideration by the County Council’s Cabinet Member for Resources and Performance.

Initial comments by Members of the Lancashire Local were as follows:-

• the target in the new draft Strategy of the planting of 2 million trees throughout Lancashire and Blackpool was welcomed and it was

8 suggested that re-forestation of areas of the Forest of Bowland should be part of that strategy;

• concern was expressed that proposals for the separate collection of food waste on a fortnightly basis could result in unpleasantness associated with smells and flies;

• concern was expressed about access and egress at the land fill site at Salt Ayre and the current traffic management arrangements at this busy site.

13. Resolved:- That the report be welcomed and that the views expressed at the meeting, together with any further views submitted by Members of the Lancashire Local by the closing date of 11th July, be drawn to the attention of the County Council’s Cabinet Member for Resources and Performance for consideration.

The Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty: Management Plan Review

It was reported that the statutory management plan for the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty was being reviewed to produce a new plan for the area for the period 2009/2014. The new plan would directly affect the landscape and rural communities of the area by influencing the policy, actions and priorities of partner organisations.

It was proposed to revise the management plan under five principal themes as follows:-

Natural and Cultural Landscape Working in Partnership Enjoyment, health and well-being Economy Community

As a connection with the previous report considered by the Lancashire Local on the Municipal Waste Strategy, tree planting was an integral part of the management of the Forest of Bowland resources and it was confirmed that the Countryside Service would be happy to work with Waste Management Services in identifying suitable sites for re-forestation.

17. Resolved:- That the report be received.

Permanent Traffic Regulation Orders (Update)

A report was presented, as one of a series of regular reports, detailing the current stage and progress of pending permanent Traffic Regulation Orders for the Lancaster District. A full list of the Orders being processed was provided in Appendix A to the report.

9 18. Resolved:- That the report be received

Forward Business Plan 2008/09

A report was presented setting out, at the Appendix, a schedule of main agenda items identified for consideration at future meetings of the Lancashire Local as an aid to planning agendas for these meetings.

The Business Plan would be supplemented by the addition of items requested by Members of the Lancashire Local and report brought forward from time to time requiring the attention of the Lancashire Local. There would also be items for decision under delegated powers, which could not at this stage be foreseen.

19. Resolved:- That the Forward Business Plan as now presented be agreed, subject to appropriate amendment to reflect any requests for reports to future meetings from this meeting.

Urgent Business

No Urgent Business had been reported.

Date of Next Meeting

It was noted that the next meeting of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District would be held on Tuesday, 22nd July, 2008 at 6.30 pm at the Town Hall, Lancaster.

I M Fisher County Secretary and Solicitor

County Hall, Preston

10 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 July 2008

Part I - Item No. 3

Electoral Division affected: Morecambe South Heysham

Local Safety Scheme Ref No 1.210 B5273 Oxcliffe Road, Morecambe, Lancaster City Improvements to Signs and Road Markings

Contact for further information: Mark Hornby, 01772 534698, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate, [email protected]

Executive Summary

Report on the public consultation undertaken for the above Local Safety Scheme.

This is deemed a Key Decision and is included on the Forward Plan.

Decision Required

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is asked to consider the proposal in the light of the information contained in this report.

Background

The public consultation on the scheme has now been completed. The scheme provides improved warning signs and road markings along the B5273 Oxcliffe Road in Morecambe as shown on the attached plans. The scheme is designed to address the poor record of injury collisions on this length of road.

One objection to the scheme was received from a representative of the CTC. Whilst generally in favour of the principle of the scheme, they felt that the speed limit along part of Oxcliffe Road of 40mph was inappropriate for a road of this type. Bearing in mind a review of all speed limits on A and B roads is currently underway, they felt that this would be likely to recommend a reduction to 30mph in due course and render much of the scheme’s signage obsolete. They were also of the opinion that the centre-hatched road markings would leave running lane widths less than is desirable for traffic to safely pass cycles as specified in the Lancashire Cycle Guidelines. They also commented that several chevron signs placed on bends were situated such that they presented an edge towards cyclists coming from the opposite direction and could be hazardous should a cyclist be forced off the road.

- 2 -

In response, it is considered that the speed limit review is most likely to recommend that the speed limit on Oxcliffe Road remains at 40mph and therefore the signage provided as part of the scheme would be entirely appropriate. The width of the running lanes after provision of a 1 metre wide strip on centre-hatching would still be a minimum of 4 metres in each direction which is considered perfectly adequate for the traffic levels and nature of the road. The Lancashire Cycle Guidelines recommendation for running lanes of 5.05 metres width where significant numbers of HGVs are present would clearly not be possible on this road as its overall width varies at present between 9 and 9.5 metres. There is clearly a balance to be struck between the safety benefits of keeping opposing traffic flows apart and restricting speeds using the centre-hatched markings and allowing sufficient width for the safe overtaking of cycles. In this case it is felt that running lanes of 4 metres are the best compromise. The chevron signs will be located on site to minimise the chance of being struck by cyclists whilst still maintaining their impact warning oncoming drivers of a bend.

The Traffic Police have indicated their support for the proposals in the interests of road safety.

It is therefore recommended that the scheme as shown on plan HC15452/01 sheets 1 and 2 be approved for implementation.

Consultations

Lancaster City Council Heaton with Oxcliffe Parish Council Local Members Traffic Police Local Cycling Representatives

Advice

As per the recommendations set out in the report now presented.

Alternative options to be considered

N/A.

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

Financial

The scheme is to be funded from the allocation for Local Safety Schemes contained in the Transport Capital Programme for 2008/09. The estimated cost of the scheme is £22,000.

- 3 -

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

Nil.

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

Nil.

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A.

3 3 3

3 8 S S C

A 8

6 8 A A L L E E

1 1 : : O 5 1 O R O O - R W 0 R R - 0 - W 1 W - W T P 0 2 3 0 A R O 4 P x O B c

l W E

r i a

rd V

i f Bd

d f y e R g 0 I e R D o a E

d C

R 2 0 P m S u t m a t p i o i n n g

P 3 S u t a m t i p o

i W n n ar g d B dy CR P l M a P 1 y

. i

5 n g

F i e l d W S L P I P R N I T A O E H C V S

E 2 I D T O m D O E

R 1

5 H

D 4 - m

4 A - 1 I 2 T A A T N O

C G W B E P B E V M H . u X A A W E 1

n T 7 I T R g . N 0 R h R 0 a e 0 U 0 S T l N m L G o 4 w R L A I

N O 5 E Y

G C W 2 F

R E L

X E L I E X S T

T A T I S N E

R G P O I E N S l H d R o G L F u a O s D n e O n C W E H y T N P F F o N a a o t T E n R t u E a r W

m s n g A R X e y O W O e I I E T L T

V 5

R D U S H O I

' . A D

- 5 R L T T R '

O E m E C D - W F

R B - L

1 1 E L M E X a H F s T F t o a A a T u n r n m s S y E e

R P H L I o E N u y n R s e G

D O E N T

A R O I E O L O W D R O A h R O i

O t O R - t

X a R -

C W m

L R I - W

F R O FE H - W o - W 1 -

R u W 1

O R s W A 1 5 e

D 4 1 - 3 1

W 1

2 6 1

4 9

L d y B O O R R O P B P - - E A R N T R R R O

S D 2 M V D H - I A T 2 E D E r R o T E E u g A K T h G I I

N 3 L A A O S G T D M S S E O O J I O H W A T A O R R O S C A R H R

- 5 W -

B E Y W W - A

- . W N

N 6 M W T 5

6 4 T C

O O 8 B m T H R O I X N -

W C J G 8

U 4

7 L M

1 N 4

6 I A C

F * R T

F I K O

E S N

R 7

a W L

E L E X T

A T S E S

R P E I N R G C D

O E N T

A R A O I E O L W O

R D a A rd R R B - dy - L W

- W

W C

R 4 1 1 7 1 5

E E 4

3 l S u b

1 B ta

: 6 1

9 5 O 0 R - O 0 W R 1 - 7 W 1 8 T P

A R B P O E V R T N O I D E E V E X W E

T 2 R

U S 0 L m R L A

O O X E Y

C W F

LI E F L

F X E E L I E X R S T

O T A

A T

D I S N E G R P I E N S R L G

O D O W E N T W

A R I I E L T D H ' A

1 7

GR 9

E 0 EN LA N E (T r ac k) O R E R - R H W O E E C I 1 R V G T 9 - I W K O S H E R 2 Y I W 0 O - T T A D N A K E - N 3 Y S D O S L W S O J

0 N A E N P S L S B 1 B I O I I O G E G G

. N 3 B T N P G A S L

0 H N 7 N T L E E R T D R 5 A 5 W D M M I X N R W O O 2 O . O R D T G 0 U U V O 7

U S N C N G 7 I N E 3 D O T R T R L E E L O E , N E S U D T D O M W F O O H I G V N L N N

X E L

I N E C X R G T

G S L A T r O a I S E E & F h

R P N a F N

" p C U © H w " m E I M L B N E E r O r n e i a o R M o t a C a r h G H A n s R w s R

u r R e M c D a o t e n t O A R c h - a E r h w a d E O W d u e s N E c o j K L n e o T h t i o i r p N n A s n i o i A p c 2 R I r s e g t P N e n y e o y r O 1 I D E n L T m r p ' o d L C s i r * G B D g y , r d A i r A A o r S s . h e n v c i M E s S u g t t i p a N v a i n n h L a o r n

i t g t o t O i l n i n L y . c D o D p d . d e , r n S C o M r u R I

o e H R C m f S c o S i o r c t S E E t u . u a y h r i E e A o r t P C n y e u C e O v C n e n 0 c d T n d l e C N g e f i A i f O l i y F n . c n a i o 1 c L H , a f 1 g d n m M R r e m i r A F c s i t m n . C t t a r . e . o o 5 " g B I o p O G . n l e 1 C l p c e E s i 4 e C 5 . e r n r E E

o g a F 4 a N . r 5 f , a o M n 5 F v . t a . 2 2

L 0 I

e n . E t A C H P / 1 . 2 a T 0 N 0 r . k 0 ,

1 M T 2

3 8 . 6 C 3

. 2 M C 0

. "

3 S 8 t u d

I . M . C

D . T M 1

, . N 0 T . 2 / H t E

D . e I 0 2 2 . t

D F 5 n M

A , 5 .

O a 4 F E

R E r

e . 5 4 E

E C 1

5 F . G O o I B

F 5

I . 2 4 t C

L 0 F A m

3 C R M 1 , H W

X . 2 c - O A

O g N n T R 0 e n C C C P A E r . O E E o i S C R H I R M , S r . D D L i O

E g

N L n

A N M S

L E v . A A

W , B G

A L

H n D

S N P I g I

L A L n N i L

E K E d

M O r E R A a R R A H

M E E M m

N F

a N l

h 7 F

1 & E

9 I a O r L

0 S G G

0 R

3 C N I X V G I H O T S N , e R 3 g E N 7 a r 7 O 0 a 0 O . 2 G 0 D W 5 5 R 0 6 0 B A G 1 - N . : B 1 D N 1 A 0 T

J O - L S R

S O Y

2 5 A N e r e O

I m

e Y A

1 d S R

E H

K S e C I V I R G V I E H

9 R

5 ck Tra 5 A H - D T L E I I D

9 R A T W

- T N E W " R O 0 D O O 2

L G E R 3

N S N 3 I E A

2 L

P R N N G N 0

W O O 0 E M N S

A 0 I

0 D U D T k

9 A H 1 L n T E E

2 T S a

I T O T A T S X L I E N L N C

L L E U . U

X E D G o L O O

M R N f E I N W F M M A o g T T L Y E r N N n e O H i L S s e c G A G G p l L R O I I O e I l n L p B S L S P g " S o U o . e a r t . n R t N i s c T i e r n 6 m d g E W f X L W c o a i n n V y f i i l E R E e i O C f e l d - c

O N T n D v O e e y n r o R e E i h y a u u t t r c K o c O S f e m o

A u r C o n Y e d d p T o c . y E n i n l t o i t t n r o a K h i v n a a p i t t g s u i n e c h s S r r o i 4 d r y g

4 r i s C

8 o ' p d r 2 m T

2 O r y o e y e t n C e s r c p i i W n s o E p r i o - t h o e n j o c s R u e R d a w h c a E h t n e t o c e M r u O s w s n h r a a t C o a i o e n r r B L " w © C " H U p 0 9 1 - 1 - 0 3 5 D 3 D R T W T - - W - - - R R R R R O O O O O

2 e

r c a D n T e 10 E

e 4 1 r H

1 R G 08 1 C G - U I I T S D L S A H T A E - . G L I T M R

P N H

O O

0 O

1 1 E 0 1 M M T H R T ,

E A W

3 1 m k 1 r E H B H m a ' T R T 0 P

. T P n L D 1 .

a I E E E v K H a C D R A r C C A I a U E T T F C H O R A 0 R T E 0 P 1 U P

U 6 T m D T V S D V X m O A N D S E 6 H A A - P T E t 4 f S X D S o ' r N N I A I C E 0 A Y

e 4 R B M M M B ' h T 9 2 W - R 4 8 2 - 7 O R 2 - D T R - O R O r e m p 9 p . o 4 H 7 G 3 - B N R I d - D

L r I T a T D R S A S - Y T I E X L T O X p R H E R E E a C L E r G U I D O I D c F T S L S N O E R

6 A 2 S H T

U 4 R E N

A E

3 .

O T 1

L I

E T U P

G C

A M

I R

R e

T d R N

t P H T

' i m N

H n r S O S J

T h N X E S u a O 0 E A

D L F O W E 4 E C R M A M T H

T E A

E O T

R , E J

R C T

' W E A D D m

E I D A A E H . E A * F H m V A ' F E

F T R

K R I T 0 8

L . O R P T C Y A P 2

C D H L 1 I D N R U E

A 0

X I E E

4 T L E E H I I P O S L R W 3 O H C D R T - A R A

C W A U T E T R T N F m O E R A W 0 R O O E m 0 P D 1 U P O 6 U 6 - T G T L D V R S D 4 V X

S N O A ' E I N S D E H A

2 P A G R W * P T

2 E

E S N X O 7 S D S I N N T I A I L 2 A E 8 A Y T

3 T S R B M M M B ' 3 S X E W I - E L X

L R E F W O Y E O A L R L S U

R T E W X V E E O N T

8 5 E 2 T 4 5 t A o 7 * G S 1 3 R O 2 I R

P 1

W 4

- 1

R O

T R R U O C Y E L M U R T O

1 1

4 9

2 F

8 I 1

L 6

X 3

D 0

R 8

U 5

1 5

2 4

C N I

o 0 r

g y

a l f

P 28 e 5

D 2

8 3

2 SD - 4

E R

O O

I 6

1 Z

A 1 2 R

B 7

1 i 5 G w l B A

I L D I T T E S A S 8 I X L 1 H T R X 3 E C E E U G I L E I D D S T F L N O A E S H R T U E

A . R E N

G E L I O T . T U P

M G

V )

I I

P H R N T

R K S

X E

D O 0

E E V I R D R E T S N I M O A C E 4 E C I R

M M T T E H A E 6 H

E L

4 T , R J

C T 2 A T D D A W E m

I D R

A A E

D E H V A m F E H m

E R * T R

0 O R P 4 H T m Y 2 .

- T T N R U E P 6 A 4 A D 1 2

4 -

D C

P O S L R 2 E E 7 E 4 H W T ( C D R a

- -

t C A S

U E L R T R b F u O E R A 0 S O O R

0 l P 1 U P D E

6 U T N T V S D V X U O A N S S E D A O H A L P T E I R

X 1 D S ' A N N I A I E 0 A Y

1 T 1 3 R B M M M B ' E * D

2 G

E S O L C S L L E W N W I - K R R O

Y 1

2 5 A M

W D E N

T 8 A G A I O S G R

4 A 2 W E T m r A a F

d Y u N t L A S G I A W S C E

I C T DIRECTION APPROACH D P A Y G T

D C

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meting to be held on 22nd July 2008

Part I - Item No. 4

Electoral Division affected: All

Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund Approval of Projects to support Climate Change in Lancashire (Appendices ‘A’ and ‘B’ refer)

Contact for further information: Lucia Marquart, 01772 534813, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate, [email protected]

Executive Summary

The Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund seeks to support community projects on climate change. These projects can either be aimed at ‘reducing greenhouse gas emissions’, or help communities to ‘cope with the impacts of climate change’. Grants will normally be in the range of £500 - £15,000. The fund is shared across all 12 Lancashire Locals.

The Fund has three application deadlines during 2008/09: 30th May 2008 and 31st October 2008, 31st January 2009.

6 applications have been received for the 30th May 2008 deadline, requesting a total of £40,384.

Lancashire Local Lancaster District has a Climate Change Fund of £19,017.12 for 2008/09.

To help select between the applications the Committee may wish to consider that the fund guidance stated that priority would be given to projects that: • Are innovative or demonstrate best practice, capable of replication elsewhere in Lancashire • Involve young people and/or local community groups. • Have explored other complementary grant/funding sources to give added value to the Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund.

- 2 -

In order to deal with earlier applications for grant from the Climate Change Fund the Lancashire Local referred consideration and decision to a small Sub-Committee.

The Lancashire Local may wish to repeat this in the case of the present applications, in which case it is suggested that as before, a Sub-Committee, with power to act, be established comprising four County Councillors and four City Councillors to consider and make decisions on behalf of the Lancashire Local in respect of the applications described in this report.

Decision Required

The Local is requested to establish a Sub-Committee, with power to act, comprising four County Councillors and four City Councillors to consider and make decisions on behalf of the Lancashire Local in respect of the applications described in this report.

Background

The Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund seeks to support community projects on climate change. These projects can either be aimed at ‘reducing greenhouse gas emissions’, or help communities to ‘cope with the impacts of climate change’. Grants will normally be in the range of £500-£15,000. The fund totalling £250,000 per year for three years (2007-2010) is shared across all 12 Lancashire Locals and uncommitted funds will be carried over to the following year.

The Local is asked, from funds made available by the County Council, to consider for approval projects submitted by community and voluntary groups, or Parish Councils, to support local climate change in accordance with the criteria laid down by the County Council. On the last occasion, the Lancashire Local established a Sub- Committee of 8 Members (4 each from the County Council and the City Council) with power to act to consider and determine the applications submitted under the first round. It is suggested that the same process might be adopted for the current round of applications.

The fund operates with 3 application deadlines each year. The application round deadlines in 2008/09 are:

30th May 2008, 31st October 2008 and 31st January 2009.

Lancashire Local Lancaster District received 6 applications to the Lancashire Local Climate Fund by the application deadline on 30th May 2008. Brief details of the applications and appraisal recommendations are contained in the table below:

Applicant Project Funding Appraisal Criteria Requested Met (Yes / No) The Rainbow Loft Insulation £2,000 Yes Centre, Morecambe

- 3 -

Lancaster District Lancaster District £4,304 Yes Food Forum Local Food ‘Dining Out’ guide

The Recycling A Waste £5,580 Yes Forum for the Minimisation Lancaster District Booklet for Lancaster District RSPB Leighton 60k Wood-chip £9,000 Yes Moss boiler for the visitor centre at Leighton Moss LESS(Local & 25 Energy Audits £4,500 Yes Effective for Community Sustainable Buildings Solutions) Renewable £15,000 No (premature YMCA technology application) (element of the wider refurbishment plans for the main building at Fleet Square)

Appraisal of Applications to the Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund

Each application is appraised using a standard set of criteria. This includes questions such as:

• is the applicant from an eligible group (eg voluntary group)? • does the project help to reduce carbon emissions? • will the project benefit the wider community? • has the applicant provided a breakdown of costs? • do the costs seem reasonable? • does the project lever in funds from elsewhere? • are other permissions needed (eg. planning)?

The above criteria represent a small sample of the range of appraisal criteria used and full details are set out at Appendices ‘A’ and ‘B’.

Consultations

N/A.

Advice

As set out in the report now presented.

- 4 -

Appraisal recommendations

Applications to the Fund have been appraised by an officer from the County Council with the following recommendations:

• 5 applications to the Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund are recommended for approval by Lancashire Local Lancaster District (Appendix ‘A’ refers).

- Funding requested for these applications totals £25,384. - Lancashire Local Lancaster District currently has £19,017.12 available from the Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund for 2008/09 to allocate.

• 1 application has not been recommended for approval by Lancashire Local - Lancaster District (Appendix ‘B’ refers). The applicants will be contacted by an officer from the County Council and requested to provide further details to re-submit for the next application round.

Should the Committee decide to approve only a proportion of the funding requested by an applicant, this may affect the viability of a project, bringing into question whether the project proceeds.

To help select between the applications the committee may wish to consider that the fund guidance stated that priority would be given to projects that: • Are innovative or demonstrate best practice, capable of replication elsewhere in Lancashire • Involve young people and/or local community groups. • Have explored other complementary grant/funding sources to give added value to the Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund.

Alternative options to be considered

N/A.

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

Financial

Lancashire Local Lancaster District currently has £19,017.12 available from the Lancashire Locals Climate Change Fund for 2008/09 to allocate to climate change projects. Funding requested for applications appraised and recommended for approval totals £25,384.

- 5 -

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A.

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

Report to Lancashire Local 18th March 2008 Stuart Benson/Lancashire Lancaster District County Council/01772 534022

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A.

Appendix ‘A’ LANCASHIRE LOCALS CLIMATE CHANGE FUND APPRAISAL FORM

The Rainbow Centre Loft Insulation

Note: *Essential Fund Criteria

Applicant (see Q2) *Is the applicant eligible for the LLCCF (i.e. a voluntary organisation, community group, Yes parish/town council)?

Community Group

Has the applicant supplied a copy of rules, constitution or similar? Yes

Project Location (see Q4) Where will the project be delivered (District, town, village, street)?

Claredence Street, Morecambe

Project Activity and Outcomes (see sustainable development checklist and below for question references) What will the project do and what are the project outcomes? (see Q5&6)

Loft Insulation – the Rainbow Centre is a community centre providing facilities in the community for all people over 55 with 400 members.

*Do these outcomes make a meaningful contribution to addressing the issue of climate Yes change? (see Q5&6)

The insulation will increase energy efficiency of the building, therefore reducing carbon emission

Does the project contribute to reducing carbon emissions? Yes How? Does it seek to quantify these reductions? (see Q5&6)

See above

Does the project help communities to cope with the impacts of climate change? No How? Who are the principal beneficiaries of this adaptation? (see Q5&6)

Does the project seek to educate and raise awareness of the need for action on climate Yes change? How and with whom? (see Q8)

Members will be kept informed about the project through the monthly newsletter. The group is also investigating the installation of renewable technology (solar power) with the aim to economise and reduce carbon emission.

*Does the project involve/benefit the wider community? (see Q8,9&19) Yes

The community centre and all its members will benefit, and will to some extend be involved in the activity.

Has the applicant carried out any local community consultation? (see Q8,9&19) No What type of consultation? (e.g. questionnaire, public meeting, community appraisal)

Does the project seek to install and use renewable energy technology? No What justification has the applicant provided for their choice of technology? (see Q11)

Does the project seek to protect or conserve important habitats and species? No How does this activity contribute to addressing climate change? (see Q5&12)

Financial Information (see Q15) *Has the applicant provided breakdown of project costs? Yes *Do these costs seem reasonable? Yes

Have any quotes/estimates been provided, where appropriate? Yes Do the total project costs equal total project funding? Yes How much grant has been requested from LL Climate Change Fund?

£2,000

What is the percentage of project costs, is the grant requested? (Guideline: up to 75% for voluntary organisations and parish/town councils, up to 90% for community groups)

86%

Has the applicant detailed any match-funding? Yes Is this cash or in-kind? Has it been confirmed?

Cash and in kind £330 (total budget £2,330)

Timescale (see Q17) Does the project seem realistic and achievable within the given timescale? Yes

Can be completed any time (subject to funding)

Permissions (see Q18) Does the project require any permissions (e.g. planning, building regulations.)? No If these have not been given, is the application process for permission likely to delay the project being delivered?

Evaluation (see Q7) Has the applicant outlined how they believe they can measure the success of the project? Yes

Monitoring of fuel bills and energy use

Exit Strategy (see Q20) Has the applicant outlined a sustainable exit strategy? N/A Do they foresee applying to grant-making bodies for additional funding in the future?

N/A

Appraiser’s Comments

The project meets the LLCCF criteria.

Principal Project / Fund Publicity Opportunities Grant Award/Project Inception/During Project Activities or Events/Project Completion

Recommendation Approve Conditions of Grant

LANCASHIRE LOCALS CLIMATE CHANGE FUND APPRAISAL FORM Lancaster District Food Forum Lancaster District Local Food “Dining Out” guide

Note: *Essential Fund Criteria

Applicant (see Q2) *Is the applicant eligible for the LLCCF (i.e. a voluntary organisation, community group, Yes parish/town council)?

Community Group

Has the applicant supplied a copy of rules, constitution or similar? Yes

Project Location (see Q4) Where will the project be delivered (District, town, village, street)?

District wide

Project Activity and Outcomes (see sustainable development checklist and below for question references) What will the project do and what are the project outcomes? (see Q5&6)

Research, compile and publish a free Local Food “Dining Out” guide for the Lancaster District, both on paper and via the “Eat Local” website.

Strengthen trading connections and promote local business that use a high proportion of local ingredients in their kitchen, and will list pubs that sell beer from local breweries.

*Do these outcomes make a meaningful contribution to addressing the issue of climate Yes change? (see Q5&6)

Through the promotion of local food/local products (food and drink currently contribute around 19% of UK greenhouse gas emissions).

Does the project contribute to reducing carbon emissions? No How? Does it seek to quantify these reductions? (see Q5&6)

Only indirectly through influencing consumer behaviour and promoting a more sustainable practice.

Does the project help communities to cope with the impacts of climate change? No How? Who are the principal beneficiaries of this adaptation? (see Q5&6)

Does the project seek to educate and raise awareness of the need for action on climate Yes change? How and with whom? (see Q8)

The guide will include a section (5 pages) devoted to information on carbon footprint of foodstuffs, localisation agenda/ seasonal products etc.

*Does the project involve/benefit the wider community? (see Q8,9&19) Yes

The guide will be available to the public/ will promote local businesses.

Has the applicant carried out any local community consultation? (see Q8,9&19) No What type of consultation? (e.g. questionnaire, public meeting, community appraisal)

N/A

Does the project seek to install and use renewable energy technology? No What justification has the applicant provided for their choice of technology? (see Q11)

Does the project seek to protect or conserve important habitats and species? No How does this activity contribute to addressing climate change? (see Q5&12)

Financial Information (see Q15) *Has the applicant provided breakdown of project costs? Yes *Do these costs seem reasonable? Yes

Total project costs £6,304

Have any quotes/estimates been provided, where appropriate? No Do the total project costs equal total project funding? Yes How much grant has been requested from LL Climate Change Fund?

£4,304

What is the percentage of project costs, is the grant requested? (Guideline: up to 75% for voluntary organisations and parish/town councils, up to 90% for community groups)

68%

Has the applicant detailed any match-funding? Yes Is this cash or in-kind? Has it been confirmed?

£937.50 volunteer time £2000.00 application to Arnside/Silverdale AONB, Lancashire & Blackpool Tourist Baord, sponsorship

(total budget £6,304)

Timescale (see Q17) Does the project seem realistic and achievable within the given timescale? Yes

October – December 2008

Evaluation (see Q7) Has the applicant outlined how they believe they can measure the success of the project? Yes

Directory published and distributed, website completed and maintained Active involvement of local food businesses Hits on website

Exit Strategy (see Q20) Has the applicant outlined a sustainable exit strategy? No Do they foresee applying to grant-making bodies for additional funding in the future?

N/A

Appraiser’s Comments

The project meets the LLCCF criteria.

Principal Project / Fund Publicity Opportunities Grant Award/Project Inception/During Project Activities or Events/Project Completion

Recommendation Approve Conditions of Grant

On condition that the outstanding funding will be secured by Jan 2009/ the project completed by June 2009.

LANCASHIRE LOCALS CLIMATE CHANGE FUND APPRAISAL FORM

The Recycling Forum for the Lancaster District “Not Just a Load of Old Rubbish” – A Waste Minimisation Booklet for Lancaster District

Note: *Essential Fund Criteria

Applicant (see Q2) *Is the applicant eligible for the LLCCF (i.e. a voluntary organisation, community group, Yes parish/town council)?

The Recycling Forum for the Lancaster District is a Community Group

Has the applicant supplied a copy of rules, constitution or similar? No

Project Location (see Q4) Where will the project be delivered (District, town, village, street)?

The directory will be available at key venues across the Lancaster District (also available via the Forum’s website).

Project Activity and Outcomes (see sustainable development checklist and below for question references) What will the project do and what are the project outcomes? (see Q5&6)

The directory will provide a free source of information on all the recycling and reuse options available to residents and community groups in the area.

10,000 paper copies will be printed and distributed. There will also be a web version.

*Do these outcomes make a meaningful contribution to addressing the issue of climate Yes change? (see Q5&6)

The project will encourage residents towards resource efficiency, therefore reducing their overall environmental impact and reliance on fossil fuels and manufacturing.

It promotes community groups and enterprises, therefore promoting a local and sustainable agenda.

Does the project contribute to reducing carbon emissions? No How? Does it seek to quantify these reductions? (see Q5&6)

Not directly, but indirectly through influencing consumer behaviour and promoting a local agenda.

Does the project help communities to cope with the impacts of climate change? No How? Who are the principal beneficiaries of this adaptation? (see Q5&6)

See above.

Does the project seek to educate and raise awareness of the need for action on climate Yes change? How and with whom? (see Q8)

The directory will have an editorial section focusing on information, education & awareness rising to challenge and change attitudes and behaviour with regards to climate change.

*Does the project involve/benefit the wider community? (see Q8,9&19) Yes The Recycling Forum is made up of a wide range of individuals, representatives from voluntary sector groups and social enterprises to public and private sector businesses.

10,000+ households will benefit from the free printed resource. In addition the information will be available on the internet.

Has the applicant carried out any local community consultation? (see Q8,9&19) No What type of consultation? (e.g. questionnaire, public meeting, community appraisal)

This is the third edition of a successful and well received publication, each edition building on and expanding on earlier editions and feedback/ comments received.

Does the project seek to install and use renewable energy technology? No What justification has the applicant provided for their choice of technology? (see Q11)

N/A

Does the project seek to protect or conserve important habitats and species? No How does this activity contribute to addressing climate change? (see Q5&12)

N/A

Financial Information (see Q15) *Has the applicant provided breakdown of project costs? Yes *Do these costs seem reasonable? Yes

Have any quotes/estimates been provided, where appropriate? No Do the total project costs equal total project funding? Yes How much grant has been requested from LL Climate Change Fund?

£5,580

What is the percentage of project costs, is the grant requested? (Guideline: up to 75% for voluntary organisations and parish/town councils, up to 90% for community groups) 56%

Has the applicant detailed any match-funding? Yes Is this cash or in-kind? Has it been confirmed? In kind £1,960 Cash £2,500

(total project budget £10,040) Timescale (see Q17) Does the project seem realistic and achievable within the given timescale? Yes

Evaluation (see Q7) Has the applicant outlined how they believe they can measure the success of the project? Yes

10,000 copies printed and distributed, hits on website, feedback form, customer survey work in Lancaster and Morecambe shopping centre.

Exit Strategy (see Q20) Has the applicant outlined a sustainable exit strategy? N/A Do they foresee applying to grant-making bodies for additional funding in the future?

Appraiser’s Comments

The project complies with the grant criteria.

Principal Project / Fund Publicity Opportunities Grant Award/Project Inception/During Project Activities or Events/Project Completion

Recommendation Approve Conditions of Grant

No conditions required.

LANCASHIRE LOCALS CLIMATE CHANGE FUND APPRAISAL FORM RSPB Wood fuel boiler for Leighton Moss RSPB Nature Reserve Visitor Centre Note: *Essential Fund Criteria

Applicant (see Q2) *Is the applicant eligible for the LLCCF (i.e. a voluntary organisation, community group, Yes parish/town council)?

Voluntary organisation

Has the applicant supplied a copy of rules, constitution or similar? Yes

Project Location (see Q4) Where will the project be delivered (District, town, village, street)?

Leighton Moss Nature Reserve, Silverdale

Project Activity and Outcomes (see sustainable development checklist and below for question references) What will the project do and what are the project outcomes? (see Q5&6)

Install a 60kW fully automatic woodchip boiler to supply the RSPB’s Leighton Moss nature reserve with a sustainable, affordable and energy efficient heat source.

A feasibility study has been carried out, describing the project as “economically sensible and practical”.

The boiler would directly reduce carbon emission by 23 tons a year and save around £3000 a year in fuel costs. Wood chips will be sourced and produced within 10 miles from the reserve, therefore reducing transport related fuel costs and emissions.

*Do these outcomes make a meaningful contribution to addressing the issue of climate Yes change? (see Q5&6) See above.

Does the project contribute to reducing carbon emissions? Yes How? Does it seek to quantify these reductions? (see Q5&6) See above

Does the project help communities to cope with the impacts of climate change? No How? Who are the principal beneficiaries of this adaptation? (see Q5&6)

Does the project seek to educate and raise awareness of the need for action on climate Yes change? How and with whom? (see Q8)

The project will be used as a demonstrative tool to raise awareness and educate 10,000 visitors and 4,880 school children that annually visit the reserve.

*Does the project involve/benefit the wider community? (see Q8,9&19) Yes

RSPB is a charity managing reserves that are for people and wildlife. The project will contribute to the financial and environmental sustainability of the reserve and reduce the impact on the natural environment. The visitor centre has great potential to demonstrate the technology.

Has the applicant carried out any local community consultation? (see Q8,9&19) N/A What type of consultation? (e.g. questionnaire, public meeting, community appraisal)

Does the project seek to install and use renewable energy technology? Yes What justification has the applicant provided for their choice of technology? (see Q11)

Feasibility study has been produced by North Energy Associated limited, detailing the overall scheme concept and design specifications.

Does the project seek to protect or conserve important habitats and species? No How does this activity contribute to addressing climate change? (see Q5&12)

Financial Information (see Q15) *Has the applicant provided breakdown of project costs? Yes *Do these costs seem reasonable? Yes

Have any quotes/estimates been provided, where appropriate? No Do the total project costs equal total project funding? Yes How much grant has been requested from LL Climate Change Fund?

£9.000

What is the percentage of project costs, is the grant requested? (Guideline: up to 75% for voluntary organisations and parish/town councils, up to 90% for community groups)

14%

Has the applicant detailed any match-funding? Yes Is this cash or in-kind? Has it been confirmed?

£14,662 Low Carbon Building Programme secured £24,400 Scottish Power Green Energy Trust secured £12,500 AONB Arnside & Silverdale application pending £ 3,000 RSPB contribution

(total budget £63,414)

Timescale (see Q17) Does the project seem realistic and achievable within the given timescale? Yes

July 2008 – September 2008 – the time scale is realistic only if the full amount requested from LLCCF will be granted.

Evaluation (see Q7) Has the applicant outlined how they believe they can measure the success of the project? Yes

Reduction in carbon emission/ fuel consumption.

Exit Strategy (see Q20) Has the applicant outlined a sustainable exit strategy? Yes/No Do they foresee applying to grant-making bodies for additional funding in the future?

The applicant will apply to the Big Lottery Renewable Funding stream if a funding shortfall remains (this would affect the delivery time scale).

Appraiser’s Comments

The project meets the LLCCF criteria.

Principal Project / Fund Publicity Opportunities Grant Award/Project Inception/During Project Activities or Events/Project Completion

Recommendation Approve Conditions of Grant

Review if outstanding funding has not been found/ project has not been delivered within 15 months from grant approval.

LANCASHIRE LOCALS CLIMATE CHANGE FUND APPRAISAL FORM LESS Local & Effective Sustainable Solutions Energy Audits for Community Buildings

Note: *Essential Fund Criteria

Applicant (see Q2) *Is the applicant eligible for the LLCCF (i.e. a voluntary organisation, community group, Yes parish/town council)?

Voluntary organisation

Has the applicant supplied a copy of rules, constitution or similar? Yes

Project Location (see Q4) Where will the project be delivered (District, town, village, street)? Lancaster District

Project Activity and Outcomes (see sustainable development checklist and below for question references) What will the project do and what are the project outcomes? (see Q5&6)

25 Energy Audits of Community buildings in the Lancaster District over a period of 9 months. This will include:

• Identify and evaluate opportunities for energy saving measures • Identify and evaluate options for renewable technologies • Identify funding opportunities

*Do these outcomes make a meaningful contribution to addressing the issue of climate Yes change? (see Q5&6)

The project will identify the most cost and practically effective means for community groups to reduce carbon emissions and improve energy efficiency of their buildings (based on emerging practice in energy Auditing).

Does the project contribute to reducing carbon emissions? Yes How? Does it seek to quantify these reductions? (see Q5&6)

Though indirectly as it provides support to community group aiming to improve energy efficiency and consider renewable technology for their buildings.

Does the project help communities to cope with the impacts of climate change? No How? Who are the principal beneficiaries of this adaptation? (see Q5&6)

Does the project seek to educate and raise awareness of the need for action on climate Yes change? How and with whom? (see Q8)

The project will raise awareness among management committees and community centre users on energy use and climate change issues/ learn about the carbon footprint of community buildings and how it can be reduced.

*Does the project involve/benefit the wider community? (see Q8,9&19) Yes

25 community centres and their users will benefit from the project.

Has the applicant carried out any local community consultation? (see Q8,9&19) No What type of consultation? (e.g. questionnaire, public meeting, community appraisal)

Does the project seek to install and use renewable energy technology? No What justification has the applicant provided for their choice of technology? (see Q11)

Does the project seek to protect or conserve important habitats and species? No How does this activity contribute to addressing climate change? (see Q5&12)

Financial Information (see Q15) *Has the applicant provided breakdown of project costs? Yes *Do these costs seem reasonable? Yes

Total project cost £6,000.00

Have any quotes/estimates been provided, where appropriate? No Do the total project costs equal total project funding? Yes How much grant has been requested from LL Climate Change Fund?

£4,500

What is the percentage of project costs, is the grant requested? (Guideline: up to 75% for voluntary organisations and parish/town councils, up to 90% for community groups)

75%

Has the applicant detailed any match-funding? Yes Is this cash or in-kind? Has it been confirmed?

£1,500 sliding scale fee from Community organisations (total budget £6,000)

Timescale (see Q17) Does the project seem realistic and achievable within the given timescale? Yes

Sept 08 – June 09

Evaluation (see Q7) Has the applicant outlined how they believe they can measure the success of the project? Yes

By following up to see if the recommendations have been taken up and recording the impacts of any works undertaken.

Exit Strategy (see Q20) Has the applicant outlined a sustainable exit strategy? N/A Do they foresee applying to grant-making bodies for additional funding in the future?

Appraiser’s Comments

The project meets the LLCCF criteria.

Principal Project / Fund Publicity Opportunities Grant Award/Project Inception/During Project Activities or Events/Project Completion

Recommendation Approve Conditions of Grant

Appendix ‘B’ LANCASHIRE LOCALS CLIMATE CHANGE FUND APPRAISAL FORM YMCA Heart of the City

Note: *Essential Fund Criteria

Applicant (see Q2) *Is the applicant eligible for the LLCCF (i.e. a voluntary organisation, community group, Yes parish/town council)?

Voluntary organisation

Has the applicant supplied a copy of rules, constitution or similar? No

Project Location (see Q4) Where will the project be delivered (District, town, village, street)?

Lancaster Fleet Street

Project Activity and Outcomes (see sustainable development checklist and below for question references) What will the project do and what are the project outcomes? (see Q5&6)

The project concerns one renewable technology aspect of a large building development/refurbishment which will incorporate other renewable technologies and sustainability features.

The application is specifically to install solar panelling and ancillary equipment (batteries, inverter etc) of the redeveloped building.

YMCA seeks to renovate and develop their building to expand their facilities and programmes.

*Do these outcomes make a meaningful contribution to addressing the issue of climate Yes change? (see Q5&6)

Renewable technology will reduce energy consumption and therefore carbon emission.

Does the project contribute to reducing carbon emissions? Yes How? Does it seek to quantify these reductions? (see Q5&6)

See above.

Does the project help communities to cope with the impacts of climate change? No How? Who are the principal beneficiaries of this adaptation? (see Q5&6)

Does the project seek to educate and raise awareness of the need for action on climate Yes change? How and with whom? (see Q8)

The features will be highly visible (building in the centre of town) and will demonstrate and promote the use of renewable technology.

*Does the project involve/benefit the wider community? (see Q8,9&19) Yes

The building will be redeveloped in consultation with residents and current service users and partner agencies. All service users will be beneficiaries as the project will contribute towards the financial sustainability of the YMCA.

Has the applicant carried out any local community consultation? (see Q8,9&19) No What type of consultation? (e.g. questionnaire, public meeting, community appraisal)

Does the project seek to install and use renewable energy technology? Yes What justification has the applicant provided for their choice of technology? (see Q11)

Solar (or photovoltaic?) Panelling

Does the project seek to protect or conserve important habitats and species? No How does this activity contribute to addressing climate change? (see Q5&12)

Financial Information (see Q15) *Has the applicant provided breakdown of project costs? No *Do these costs seem reasonable?

Have any quotes/estimates been provided, where appropriate? No Do the total project costs equal total project funding? No How much grant has been requested from LL Climate Change Fund?

£15,000

What is the percentage of project costs, is the grant requested? (Guideline: up to 75% for voluntary organisations and parish/town councils, up to 90% for community groups)

Has the applicant detailed any match-funding? Yes Is this cash or in-kind? Has it been confirmed?

£1,498,000 Places for Change confirmed (joint application with City Council), total budget £2,000,000.

Timescale (see Q17) Does the project seem realistic and achievable within the given timescale? No

Initial time scale for the building work October 2008 – May 2009. A more realistic time scale will be resubmission for the October or even January deadline.

Permissions (see Q18) Does the project require any permissions (e.g. planning, building regulations.)? Yes If these have not been given, is the application process for permission likely to delay the project being delivered?

The project is not yet at this stage, though the building work will require planning permission.

Evaluation (see Q7) Has the applicant outlined how they believe they can measure the success of the project? No

Exit Strategy (see Q20) Has the applicant outlined a sustainable exit strategy? No Do they foresee applying to grant-making bodies for additional funding in the future?

Appraiser’s Comments

The project is not sufficiently developed to be recommended for approval at this stage. Further work has to be done on the building design and specifications, and a funding strategy has to be produced before the project can be considered for appraisal.

Principal Project / Fund Publicity Opportunities Grant Award/Project Inception/During Project Activities or Events/Project Completion

Recommendation Resubmit at a later stage Conditions of Grant

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 July 2008

Part I - Item No. 5

Electoral Division affected: Lancaster Rural North, Lancaster Central, Heysham, Lancaster Rural East

Lancashire Local Grant Applications (Appendix ‘A and B’ refer)

Contact for further information: Misbah Bhatti, 01772 530818, Lancashire County Council, Office of the Chief Executive, [email protected]

Executive Summary

This report presents 6 applications from local organisations totalling £1,658 to the Local Grants Scheme for Lancashire Local – Lancaster District. Applications have been submitted by County Councillors Sarah Fishwick, Chris Coates, Jean Yates and Susie Charles (x3). Appendix B contains details of each application.

Decision Required

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is asked to consider the applications set out in Appendix B in light of the information presented.

Background

Local grants are made under Section 2 of the Local Government Act 2000, which states that “Every local authority are to have power to do anything which they consider is likely to achieve any one or more of the following objects:

• the promotion or improvement of the economic well-being of their area, • the promotion or improvement of the social well-being of their area, and • the promotion or improvement of the environmental well-being of their area.

Lancashire County Council is committed to ensuring that the distinctive needs and interests of small groups are taken into account as their needs may differ from those of other larger voluntary organisations. Lancashire County Council’s Local Grants Scheme enables each County Councillor to put forward proposals for expenditure in their electoral division. Each County Councillor will have a specific budget which they can spend to enhance the well-being of people who live in their area (division). For the financial year 2008/09 each County Councillor has a budget of £1,250. A maximum of £250 can be carried forward from the 2007/08 allocations to 2008/09 on

- 2 -

the basis that it is committed to projects (via the normal approval process) by the end of the 2008/09 financial year.

In recommending applications for grants, regard must be had to the Lancashire Partnership’s Sustainable Community Strategy, ‘Ambition Lancashire’, and County Councillors should ensure that approved grants contribute towards the achievement/advancement/promotion of one or more of Ambition Lancashire’s principles Narrowing the gap and Active and Involved Citizens and Communities. Consideration should also be given to the key priorities and themes in Ambition Lancashire.

Consultations

These applications will be presented to and considered by Lancashire Local – Lancaster District.

Advice

The applications presented meet the criteria of the Local Grants Scheme.

Alternative options to be considered

N/A

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following financial implications:

The requested amounts can be met from the respective County Councillor’s individual local grants budget. (See Appendix A)

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

N/A

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A

Appendix A Lancashire Local Lancaster District– County Councillor’s Current Budgets 2008/2009

County Councillor Application Requested Budget remaining Budget for Remaining Budget Amount from 2007/08 2008/2009 after application is approved Carnforth Rail Station £200 Zero £750 £550 Sarah Fishwick Trust The Friendship Centre £328 Zero £645 £317 Chris Coates

Heysham Blue Star £500 Zero £1,250 £750 Jean Yates Young Peoples Football & Sports Association Galgate Senior Citizens £150 Club Galgate Gaslight & £180 £30 £1,250 £650 Susie Charles Horticultural Society Galgate Bowling Club £300

Appendix B

Applications to be considered for Local Grants, Lancashire Local – Lancaster

Application for The Friendship Centre

County Councillor: Chris Coates

Electoral Division: Lancaster Central

Name of Organisation: The Friendship Centre

Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes

How many people work in the organisation: No details available

What geographical area does the project cover: Lancaster Central (also benefits other areas)

Project start and finish date: August 2008 – August 2008

How much funding will the applicant require: £328

What is the total cost of the project: £328

Is anyone else contributing towards the funding of this activity? No

Has the organisation previously received funding from the local grants scheme: No

Will the activity involve significant contact with children or vulnerable adults: No

Please provide information indicating what the money would be used for:

The money will be used to purchase a bench on the Lancaster Canal at Aldcliffe Road.

How will this benefit the local community?

Many old people use the canal towpath for walks – but they need to sit down and rest. A bench in this position has been requested by several residents.

Appendix B

Application for Carnforth Rly Station Trust

County Councillor: Sarah Fishwick

Electoral Division: Lancaster Rural North

Name of Organisation: Carnforth Railway Station Trust

Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes

How many people are in the organisation: 1 fulltime, 2 part time and Friends of Carnforth Station

What geographical area does the project cover: Lancaster Rural North

Project start and finish date: 4 August 2008 for a period of one month

How much funding will the applicant require: £200

Total Cost of Project: Not known

Is anyone else funding the activity: Yes

If so please give details:

Name of organisation providing funding: Various Rly Companies Amount: unknown How long is the funding for: Short term

Has the organisation previously received funding from the local grants scheme: No

Will the activity involve significant contact with children or vulnerable adults: Yes

If you answered yes to the above question, does your organisation have adequate children/vulnerable protection policies in place: Yes

Are the appropriate individuals cleared by the Criminal Records Bureau? Yes

Please provide information indicating what the money would be used for:

The money will be used towards celebrating 40 years of the end of steam exhibition. The exhibition will run for a month and the money will be used to assist with costs for brochures and advertising.

How will this project benefit the community?

The project will benefit the community by providing learning about local history.

Appendix B

Breakdown of costs: None provided.

Appendix B

Application for Heysham Blue Star Young Peoples Football & Sports Association

County Councillor: Jean Yates

Electoral Division: Heysham

Name of Organisation: Heysham Blue Star Young Peoples Football & Sports Association

Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes

How many people are in the organisation: Over 50 volunteers

What geographical area does the project cover: Heysham specifically but group open to children from all Lancaster districts

Project start and finish date: As soon as funds are approved

How much funding will the applicant require: £500

Total Cost of Project: £2,000 + (training & transport costs)

Is anyone else funding the activity: Yes

If so please give details:

Name of organisation providing funding: Fund Raising Amount: Group of local organisations How long is the funding for: Permanent

Has the organisation previously received funding from the local grants scheme: No

Will the activity involve significant contact with children or vulnerable adults: Yes

If you answered yes to the above question, does your organisation have adequate children/vulnerable protection policies in place: Yes

Are the appropriate individuals cleared by the Criminal Records Bureau? Yes

Please provide information indicating what the money would be used for:

The money will be used towards the costs of a shelter which will be used for training.

How will this project benefit the community?

Appendix B

A large number of local young people belong to this group and it provides sport and leisure facilities in an area where there is little provision for young people.

Breakdown of costs

The figures quoted are just for the shelter. Storage will be provided and the transport of the shelters is being arranged by the Team organisers.

Appendix B

Application for Galgate Senior Citizens’ Club

County Councillor: Susie Charles

Electoral Division: Lancaster Rural East

Name of Organisation: Galgate Senior Citizens’ Club

Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes (set of rules)

How many people are in the organisation: 69

What geographical area does the project cover: Lancaster Rural East

Project start and finish date: 1 September 2008 – December 2008

How much funding will the applicant require: £150

Total Cost of Project: £540

Is anyone else funding the activity: Yes

If so please give details:

Name of organisation providing funding: Members contributing towards catering costs Amount: Any shortfall in funds

Has the organisation previously received funding from the local grants scheme: No

Will the activity involve significant contact with children or vulnerable adults: No

Please provide information indicating what the money would be used for:

The grant will be used towards Dolphinholme Village Hall rental for the Christmas party and for the hire of 2 “Dial-a-Buses”.

How will this project benefit the community?

Christmas party for the senior citizens.

Breakdown of costs

Hire of hall for 8 hours (to set up and for food preparation) Hire of 2 “Dial-a-Buses”

Appendix B

Application for Galgate Gaslight & Horticultural Society

County Councillor: Susie Charles

Electoral Division: Lancaster Rural East

Name of Organisation: Galgate Gaslight & Horticultural Society

Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes (set of rules)

How many people are in the organisation: 15 (approx)

What geographical area does the project cover: Lancaster Rural East

Project start and finish date: 1 August 2008 – 16 August 2008

How much funding will the applicant require: £180

Total Cost of Project: £700

Is anyone else funding the activity: Yes

If so please give details:

Name of organisation providing funding: Local Parish Council Amount: Any shortfall in funds

Has the organisation previously received funding from the local grants scheme: No

Will the activity involve significant contact with children or vulnerable adults: No

Please provide information indicating what the money would be used for:

The money will be used for the payment of the public liability insurance premium which is necessary for the viability of this horticultural show which has been in existence for about 100 years.

How will this project benefit the community?

Inhabitants of the village and surrounding communities take part in the show.

Breakdown of costs

£180 will fully fund the insurance premium necessary.

Appendix B

Application for Galgate Bowling Club

County Councillor: Susie Charles

Electoral Division: Lancaster Rural East

Name of Organisation: Galgate Bowling Club

Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes

How many people are in the organisation: 18 (approx)

What geographical area does the project cover: Lancaster Rural East

Project start and finish date: 1 July 2008 - ongoing

How much funding will the applicant require: £300

Total Cost of Project: £4,000

Is anyone else funding the activity: Yes

If so please give details:

Name of organisation providing funding: Lease for Life Amount: £300 How long is funding for: One off payment

Has the organisation previously received funding from the local grants scheme: No

Will the activity involve significant contact with children or vulnerable adults: No

Please provide information indicating what the money would be used for:

There are quite a number of improvements that the Club needs; however, the money would go towards (a) provision of new wooden slats for the benches, and (b) making the steps shallower as the majority of the bowlers are elderly and they have difficulty with the steep steps.

How will this project benefit the community?

See above.

Breakdown of costs

This money will go towards the total cost of the project.

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 July 2008

Part I - Item No. 6

Electoral Division affected: None

Update Report on Local Grants Spend 2007/08 and 2008/09 (Appendix A refers)

Contact for further information: Misbah Bhatti, (01772) 530818, Lancashire County Council, Office of the Chief Executive, [email protected]

Executive Summary

This report presents an update on spend from the Local Grants Budget for the financial year 2007/08 and 2008/09 for Lancashire Local – Lancaster District.

Decision Required

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is asked to note the update in the report.

Background

The Lancashire County Council Local Grants Scheme has been in operation since April 2006. Lancashire County Council’s Local Grants Scheme enables each County Councillor to put forward proposals for expenditure in their electoral division. Each County Councillor will have a specific budget which they can spend to enhance the well-being of people who live in their area (division).

For the financial year 2007/08 and for 2008/09 each County Councillor has a budget of £1,250. The maximum carryover from the last financial year is £250. Any applications that were submitted prior to the 1 April 2008 could be taken out from the 2007/08 budget allowance. Following the 1 April 2008 any individual Councillor budget which exceeded the maximum carryover of £250 lost those additional monies.

Consultations

N/A

Advice

N/A

Alternative options to be considered

- 2 -

N/A

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following financial implications:

The total amount County Councillors from Lancashire Local – Lancaster had for the financial years 2007/08 and 2008/09 is £25,000. Out of this, £16,385.88 has been spent, £1,658.00 is pending approval and £6,956.12 is available for allocations. Detailed breakdown can be seen in Appendix A.

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

N/A

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A

Appendix A

Update report on Local Grants Spend, Lancashire Local – Lancaster District

Spend for Lancashire Local – Lancaster District for the financial years 2007/08 and 2008/09

Total available for 2007/08 and 2008/09 £25,000

Funds spent £16,385.88

Funds pending £1,658.00

Funds remaining £6,956.12

Funds lost in carry over £0.00

Number of applications received 44

Number of applications approved 38

Number of applications pending decision 6

1 Appendix A

Breakdown of spend per County Councillor

County Councillor Susie Charles

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 06-Jul-07 Lancaster & District Coach hire to Dalton Wildlife Park Approved £420.00 Foster Carers and entrance fees for 30 foster Association children 03-Aug-07 Over Kellet Village Part purchase of a laptop Approved £400.00 Magazine Management Board 08-Oct-07 Halton Pre-School Towards the costs of play Approved £400.00 Playgroup equipment 10-Jul-08 Galgate Senior Towards costs of renting Pending £30 Citizens Club Dolphinholme village hall and hiring Decision (£150) 2 'dial-a-ride' buses Total Funds Spent £1,220.00 Total funds pending decision £30.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 10-Jul-08 Galgate Senior Towards costs of renting Pending £120 Citizens Club Dolphinholme village hall and Decision (£150) hiring 2 'dial-a-ride' buses 10-Jul-08 Galgate Gaslight & Contribution towards the Pending £180.00 Horticultural Society payment of the public liability Decision insurance to allow the society to continue

10-Jul-08 Galgate Bowling Club Towards improving the club i.e. Pending £300.00 new wooden slats for benches Decision and the shallowing of steps Total Funds Spent £0.00 Total funds pending decision £600.00 Total budget remaining £650.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £650.00

2 Appendix A

County Councillor Chris Coates

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted

Marsh Community Provision of cost of coach hire for £170 13-Jul-07 Centre trip to Camelot for 57 people Approved (£370) Friends of Greaves Costs of a launch party for a new 31-Oct-07 Park play area in Greaves Park Approved £115.00 Costs of publicity material for 19-Nov-07 NCBI Lancashire Holocaust memorial celebration Approved £300.00 Blackburn Diocese Board for Social Approved 05-Dec-07 Responsibility Carers' Relaxation Workshop (UB) £220.00 Cockerham Pre School Toys and activity equipment for 18-Jan-08 Playgroup children of the playgroup Approved £200.00

Cockerham Bowling Improve path and access to 18-Jan-08 Club bowling green, mainly a new gate Approved £200.00 28-May-08 Glasson Dock Festival Costs of workshops for the Approved £45 Committee festival (£300) Total funds spent £1,250.00 Total Funds Pending Decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 28-May-08 Glasson Dock Festival Costs of workshops for the festival Approved £255 Committee (£300) 28-May-08 The Fairfield Provision of a marquee, table and Approved £350.00 Association chairs for the association fun day

12-Jun-08 The Friendship Centre Towards the provision of a bench Pending £328.00 on the canal at Aldcliffe Road Decision Total funds spent £605.00 Total Funds Pending Decision £328.00 Total budget remaining £317.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £317.00

3 Appendix A

County Councillor Peter Elliott

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 29-Feb-08 8th Lancaster (Hala) Towards funding of an outdoor Approved £200 Guides activity day at Go ape, Grizedale (£1200) Forest 12-Mar-08 Barton Road Towards costs of providing three Approved £1,000 Community events one of which to celebrate Association the 20th anniversary of the centre

Total Funds Spent £1,200.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £50.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted

Total Funds Spent £0.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £1,250.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £1,300.00

4 Appendix A

County Councillor Sarah Fishwick

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 11-Jul-07 Produce a booklet and drama Approved £50 (£300) production to raise awareness of 701 Club the dangers of Morecambe Bay

13-Dec-07 Provision of new equipment for Approved £500 indoor bowls Cragbank Indoor Bowling Club 13-Dec-07 Provision of equipment towards Approved £500 refurbishment of the halls new Bolton-Le-Sands kitchen Village Hall 31-Mar-08 The provision of a drop shredder Approved £200 used to apply fertiliser) (£300) Silverdale Bowling Club Total Funds Spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 31-Mar-08 The provision of a drop shredder Approved £100 Silverdale Bowling used to apply fertiliser) (£300) Club 03-Jun-08 Contribution to village newsletter Approved £400.00 and marketing for the group Coffee Stop 06-Jun-08 Carnforth Rail Towards the costs of the end of the Pending £200 Station Trust steam exhibition Decision Total Funds Spent £500.00 Total funds pending decision £200.00 Total budget remaining £550.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £550.00

5 Appendix A

County Councillor Janice Hanson

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 27-Feb-07 Morecambe in Aid costs of moving and Approved £500 Bloom maintaining large planters 08-Aug-07 United Reformed Towards Fencing Approved £750 Church (Sefton (£850) Road) Total funds spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decisions £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 11-Apr-08 Lancaster & Provision of three crash mats to Approved £585.15 Morecambe surround the trampolines Trampoline Club 09-May-08 St Barnabas Towards costs of transport for days Approved £332.42 Housebound Group out 09-May-08 Sefton Road United Towards costs of setting up a Approved £332.43 Reformed Church handbell ringing group for children (Morecambe) aged 5-16 yrs Total funds spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decisions £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £0.00

6 Appendix A

County Councillor Anthony Jones

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 31-Jan-08 Scout & Guide hut Provision of a mess tent for use Approved £1,000 Management by scouts and guides Committee 14-Feb-08 Morecambe & Provision of track and Approved £250 Heysham Model accessories for 'o' and 'n' gauge (pooled) Railway Club layouts Total Funds Spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 20-Feb-08 Slyne with Hest over To provide transport and meal for Approved £250.00 60's the group and any excess to be used for future trips

16-May-08 Poulton Residents Towards the building of two raised Approved £1,000.00 Association flower beds to enhance local environment

Total Funds Spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £0.00

7 Appendix A

County Councillor Niki Penney

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 20-Feb-08 A.O.K Club Provision of toys and equipment for Approved £250.00 the children to use at the club

23-Jan-08 Skerton Community Provision of lunch for approx 100 Approved £175.00 Association people to encourage/promote healthy eating 12-Mar-08 Mum2Mum Provision of breast pumps and Approved £335.88 breast pads as part of the service provided by the centre 27-Mar-08 Lancaster & District To aid clients who can not afford Approved £489.12 Women's Aid court fee's by holding a pot of (£750) money Total Funds Spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 27-Mar-08 Lancaster & District To aid clients who can not afford Approved £260.88 Women's Aid court fee's by holding a pot of (£750) money Total Funds Spent £260.88 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £989.12

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £989.12

8 Appendix A

County Councillor Liz Scott

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 27-Mar-08 Lancaster & Towards the costs of rental, tutors Approved £300.00 Morecambe Bay and stationary to teach Chinese Chinese Community and English students Mandarin Association

27-Mar-08 YMCA To take a number of children of day Approved £300.00 trips to Blackburn Ice Rink and Blackpool Leisure Park 27-Mar-08 23rd Lancaster To purchase patrol tents for regular Approved £400.00 Christ Church Scout camps at the scout camp sites group 27-Mar-08 Lancaster & Towards the costs of celebrations Approved £250 Morecambe Hindu for the Divali festival (£350) Society Total funds spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 27-Mar-08 Lancaster & Towards the costs of celebrations Approved £100 Morecambe Hindu for the Diwali festival (£350) Society Total funds spent £100.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £1,150.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £1,150.00

9 Appendix A

County Councillor Albert Thornton

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 15-Oct-07 Branksome Construction of a fence to create a Approved £750 Neighbourhood secure traffic free area for children Association 14-Feb-08 Morecambe & Provision of track and accessories Approved £500 Heysham Model for 'o' and 'n' gaugue layouts (pooled) Railway Club Total Funds Spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted

Total Funds Spent £0.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £1,250.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £1,250.00

10 Appendix A

County Councillor Jean Yates

2007/08

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted Heysham Provision of a specialist map Approved £550 Neighbourhood Council 01-May-07 Sunderland Point Toward project costs to improve Approved £500 Community flood resilience, combat coastal Association erosion and improve leisure and tourism in the area 22-Feb-08 Heysham Copshop Towards renting a new venue for Approved £200 local youths to get involved in activities and meet new people

26-Feb-08 Total funds spent £1,250.00 Total funds pending decision £0.00 Total budget remaining £0.00

2008/09

Date App Applicant Project Details Decision Amount Submitted 02-Jul-08 Heysham Blue Star Towards shelter to be used for Pending £500 Young Peoples training Decision Football & Sports Association Total funds spent £0.00 Total funds pending decision £500.00 Total budget remaining £750.00

Total funds remaining for financial year 2008/09 £750.00

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 July 2008

Part I - Item No. 7

Electoral Division affected: All

Primary Capital Programme (Appendices 'A' and 'B' refer)

Contact for further information: Ian Glaister, (01772) 532402, Lancashire County Council, Directorate for Children and Young People, [email protected]

Executive Summary

Appendix 'A' contains the Strategy for Change which is to be submitted to the Department for Children, Schools and Families as required by the national guidelines issued in relation to the Primary Capital Programme. Appendix 'B' contains the outline prioritisation for investment which is to be submitted along with the Strategy for Change as required by the guidelines.

Decision Required

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is requested to note the contents of the Strategy for Change and the prioritisation programme and offer any comments that would be taken into consideration as part of the on-going process of review of the programme's aims, objectives and priorities.

Background

In the autumn of 2007 all the Lancashire Locals received a report on the principles that would underpin the Primary Capital Programme in Lancashire. In addition, the report contained information on the objective criteria and weightings that would be used to assist the process of prioritising areas for investment under the programme. The final strategy and prioritisation programme follows the principles and objective criteria set out in the autumn reports, taking into account the responses to the consultation, including those from all the Lancashire Locals.

Consultations

The Strategy for Change and the identification of the areas that will be included in the first four years of the programme have been compiled after an extensive consultation process involving headteachers, governors, dioceses and church authorities and an advisory board comprising headteachers, senior officers, diocesan

- 2 -

officers and elected members. The programme will be reviewed and amended as necessary on an annual basis. Further consultations will take place relating to the details of any investment in particular areas.

Advice

N/A

Alternative options to be considered

N/A

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

N/A

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

Report to Lancashire Local 4 December 2007 Ian Glaister, Lancashire – Lancaster District County Council, 01772 532402

Report to the Cabinet 27 May 2008 Ian Glaister, Lancashire Member for Schools County Council, 01772 532402

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A

w:\cssg\democraticservices\general\pdf conversion kit 2\lancashire locals\agendas\lancaster district\22 july 2008\item 7.doc Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX 'A' 22 July 2008

PRIMARY CAPITAL PROGRAMME

DRAFT STRATEGY FOR CHANGE

2008

w:\cssg\democraticservices\general\pdf conversion kit 2\lancashire locals\agendas\lancaster district\22 july 2008\item 7 appendix a.doc

The Local Perspective

Lancashire’s vision for children and young people is to:

• Ensure, by working with partners, that excellent services are available where people live, which are tailored to local needs and designed to allow children to maximise their talents; enhance their sense of themselves; and develop their relationship with the wider world. • Ensure that all schools are equipped for 21st century learning and at the heart of their communities with children’s services within reach of every family

In the context of primary school provision the following key outcomes underpin the vision:

• Raised achievement for all and especially narrowing the gap in attainment between children and young people from the most and least advantaged backgrounds and improved levels of achievement from those vulnerable groups identified as not achieving their potential • Greater pupil engagement and confidence in learning • A reduction in the inequalities faced by children from disadvantaged families • Enhanced life chances for pupils including the adoption of healthy lifestyles • Greater educational opportunities including more creative approaches to personalised learning and curriculum design to meet changes in society • Better access to learning resources, including ICT, for pupils and the community • Better access to services that meet the needs of the community and help to secure health and well being • Improved transition throughout the different phases of education so that as children enter a new setting they are ready to succeed • Improve community cohesion between and within communities while ensuring that provision is diverse and responsive to parental choice • Improved confidence and expertise amongst the children’s services workforce • More efficient and effective use of resources including greater collaboration between schools

Baseline analysis

(A glossary of terms is attached as Appendix 10)

Overview

Lancashire is a large, diverse LA made up of twelve district councils. Each district has its own unique demography and geography, including both urban areas and sparsely populated rural areas. The county has boundaries with a total of 13 other local authorities.

At January 2007, there were 85 maintained secondary schools (15 with sixth forms); 1 sixth form college; 486 maintained primary schools (83 with maintained nursery units); 32 special schools (Massey Hall School closed on 31st August 2007 so only the current 31 schools are included in Appendix 9); 14 Pupil Referral Units; and 25 nursery schools in Lancashire.

Primary schools currently range in size from just 10 pupils to 565 and there are many schools which serve very rural areas. Of the 153 primary schools designated by the

DCSF as rural schools, 17 are over 2 miles from their nearest neighbour and another 43 are over 2 miles away from their nearest school of the same denomination/type.

There are also many schools which serve areas of high deprivation. Lancashire is ranked 87th on the 2004 Index of Multiple Deprivation. However, the individual districts are ranked between 46th most deprived in the country (Burnley) to 283rd (Ribble Valley).

Of the 755 super output areas in Lancashire, 60 rank in the top 10% worst nationally on child deprivation. Over 24,000 children, or 10.5% of our pupil population, live in these areas. In addition, approximately 13% of Lancashire’s pupils are entitled to a free school meal (this compares with a national average of 13.6% and a North West average of 18.7%).

A particularly strong feature of school provision in the county is the number of Church schools. Nine Diocesan/ Church Authorities are important partners in the provision of schools in Lancashire. Whilst 38% of primary schools are community schools, 51% are Voluntary Aided; 10% are Voluntary Controlled; and there are 2 foundation schools.

Just over 12% of the pupil population is of minority ethnic heritage although the level varies significantly between individual districts.

Falling rolls, nationally and locally, have led to a large number of surplus places in Lancashire primary schools over recent years (currently just under 15%), which is an inefficient use of the County’s resources. There are also schools which are consistently over-subscribed but do not have the additional capacity to take more children. We need to take steps to redress this balance whilst maintaining (and, where possible increasing) diversity of provision.

Demographics

The population profile in Lancashire at the time of the 2001 census is given at Appendix 1, together with the mid-year estimate at 2005 and projection to 2009.

The table shows that the proportion of people over 65 in the County is increasing, in accordance with national trends. Lancashire’s age profile also differs between districts. For example, Fylde and Wyre have a significantly higher proportion of elderly residents than other districts, whilst Hyndburn has the highest proportion of school-aged children.

Birth rates in Lancashire had been falling in the years prior to 2001/02, in accordance with the national trend. However, there has been a year on year increase in the last 3 years and this pattern has been reflected across each of the districts. The ONS live birth figures for 2004/05 stood at 13166, an increase of 1304 (11%) in 4 years, bringing them up to 1996/97 levels.

The rate of change in the population profile has become increasingly dynamic. There are significant differences between the districts in the level of in year migration, numbers of minority ethnic heritage, and level of economic migration. However, the differences between super output areas, schools, and even individual school year groups within a school are often marked.

There has also been a small increase in the overall annual net migration into the County, with an increase of 0.3% in 2004-2005.

These factors together have led to a slowdown in the decline in pupil population figures. (The 2003 School Organisation Plan predicted a 7.2% fall in the school population by January 2008 but recent forecasts show that this will be nearer to 5.6%). However, the effects of the falling birth rate in the period between 1995/6 and 2001/02 are still working through schools, so total numbers on roll in primary schools will stabilise before starting to rise slightly in the next few years and the falling rolls are starting to impact more on the secondary schools.

Lancashire also has a number of large sites which have been identified for redevelopment in the past few years, resulting from the vacation of NHS interests and also from the Royal Ordnance Factory closure. These sites are expected to yield significant numbers of children in the next few years, which the LA will factor into its forecasts. As many pupils tend to move within the county however, the developments may simply lead to some redistribution of existing children around the county in the longer term.

The county is also working with the district councils to regenerate some of the more deprived areas of the county and a major driver in this work has been the Building Schools for the Future programme which is currently focussed on the east of the county in Burnley and Pendle.

Lancashire has a multi cultural population with 12.64% of statutory age pupils of minority ethnic heritage in 2007/08. However, this level of diversity varies greatly between districts, ranging from 2.92% to 31.93%. This can vary between schools and even individual year groups.

The vast majority of communities within the county are served by more than one school, which offers parents a choice between faith and non-faith schools. However, there are a small number of rural exceptions to this, as stated earlier.

The LA liaises with 9 different dioceses or church authorities, including various representatives of CE, Catholic, Methodist and United Reformed churches.

Lancashire’s Schools

Details on each of the individual schools within each district are given at Appendix 2.

In January 2007, there were the following pupils in these schools:

Nursery Schools: 2109 P/T, 6 F/T Primary: 88396 Nursery aged pupils in primary school maintained nurseries: 1501 Secondary: 73254 (including 6th forms) Special: 2193 (including P/T & residential)

In addition, there are many more children in voluntary or private nursery and childcare provision in the county.

Forecasted numbers on roll for the various district areas are given at Appendix 3.

Lancashire primary schools have currently just under 15% surplus places, due to the effects of falling rolls over recent years. Whilst just 3% of primary schools are more than 10% overcrowded, there are also many schools which are consistently over- subscribed but do not have the additional capacity to take more children.

Lancashire has an exceptionally high proportion of small schools (26% with less than 120 pupils). This is partly due to the number of schools serving rural communities.

Small schools can face a number of challenges, including staff retention and attraction of new staff; ability to deliver a broad and balanced curriculum, and restricted financial resources.

Challenges relating to raising attainment can be exacerbated if the school has a high proportion of pupils from deprived backgrounds; with SEN or with English as an additional language.

Primary school sizes at January 2007 are as follows:

2 FE and above (420 + pupils) 2% 210-419 pupils 29% 180-209 pupils 19% 150- 179 pupils 13% 120 – 149 pupils 11% Less than 120 pupils 26%

A breakdown of the size of schools in each district is given at Appendix 4.

The birth rate has increased in the last three years in every district of the county. However, the rate of increase for individual districts varies between 4% and 15%.

The net effect of the rising birth rate; rising migration rates; and a number of new housing developments* on previously undeveloped sites will be to reduce the level of surplus places across the county’s primary schools to 10% by 2012. In some areas of the county, consultation is taking place on the provision of additional basic need places, whilst, in others, significant surplus place removal is required.

Lancashire’s level of primary school surplus places has fallen from 16.28% in 2005 to 14.8% in 2007. The number of schools with surplus places has also fallen by 70. However, the number of schools with over 25% surplus has increased, together with the actual number of surplus places.

Lancashire recognises the need to monitor the level of surplus at individual schools and take action to reduce the number of schools which have over 25% surplus places, wherever practicable. Of the schools with more than 25% and more than 30 surplus places, over a quarter are rural schools.

*(Lancashire calculates the maximum yield of new housing development on the basis of 0.35 primary school children and 0.25 secondary children, per household.)

School Premises

There are more than 650 educational establishments ranging from 17th Century to modern buildings.

A breakdown of the types of school buildings is given at Appendix 5.

The holistic approach taken by the Authority to improve the quality of accommodation and meet the objectives that all schools should be fit for purpose and well-maintained is informed by the Asset Management Plan, which is regularly updated.

Examples of Capital Strategy achievements for 2006/08 financial year are included at Appendix 6.

Condition

Despite significant investment in Lancashire’s school buildings, the backlog of condition repairs in primary schools totals approximately £181.5 million at June 2007, with £148 million of this priority 1, 2 and 3 work and £11.5 million under priority 1 alone.

A breakdown of the backlog, by district and priority, is given at Appendix 7.

Building stock varies across the County and priorities vary from district to district and school to school. For example, whilst the Lancaster and Chorley areas make up 7 and 10% of overall backlog, their share of priority 1 items is greater, at 11 and 14% respectively. Conversely, Burnley has 10% of the overall backlog but their priority 1 items make up just 7% of the total.

Extended services

The DfES Prospectus ‘Extended Schools: Access to Services and Opportunities for All’ set out the core offer of extended services that all schools must provide access to by 2010. Lancashire currently has 185 (38%) of it’s primary schools which meet the core offer, exceeding our target of 175 schools to meet the core offer by September 2007. All schools have to provide access to the core offer by 2010 and the process of identifying the schools with the potential to deliver by September 2008 is underway.

Lancashire has been working towards provision of Children’s Centres across the county and now has 61 centres distributed across all districts. All were designated ahead of the 31 March 2008 deadline. A list of the Children’s Centres is given at Appendix 8. A further 18 children’s centres will provide universal access to services by March 2010.

TfC have commented that Lancashire is progressing well with its plans to deliver Phase 2 children's centres. Lancashire is considered a low risk authority by the DCSF's technical advisors regarding delivery of the children's centre capital programme.

The Authority is also keen to improve access to a range of services on school sites and will be co-locating childcare; nursery; primary; and sixth form provision on the Burnley Barden campus as part of the first wave of Lancashire’s BSF Programme. There will also be a public library; faith centre; cafe; and community use sports and performance facilities on site.

Finally, LCC has been successful in its Playbuilder Capital Funding bid to develop play areas across the county. This will be complemented by the provision of play facilities as part of the Primary Capital Programme.

Every Child Matters

Standards

Performance at KS2 in Lancashire has been maintained at higher than the national average in recent years.

Lancashire is working to narrow the gap in pupil attainment where some groups’ performance is below average. This includes some pupils from the following groups:

• Pupils eligible for free school meals • Pupils of Pakistani heritage • Pupils in socially deprived areas of the county, including those not served by an Excellence Cluster or supported by Neighbourhood Renewal • Pupils of Bangladeshi heritage • Looked after children • Traveller children • Children with Learning Difficulties and Disabilities

Inclusion (SEN)

In 2003 Lancashire County Council published the Inclusion Strategy for Special Educational Needs and Behaviour. It is now in its third phase 2006-2008. This, in turn, is underpinned by the ICAP, which defines how the strategy is to be delivered.

There are currently around 2200 pupils with SEN and behavioural needs being taught in Lancashire special schools, and they represent approximately 1.3% of the school population (From PLASC January 2007). There are also around 620 pupils being taught in out of county settings in independent, maintained and non-maintained special schools, and independent and other authority mainstream schools. The pupils taught out of county have a variety of needs and many are residential placements.

The 31 special schools in Lancashire mainly cater for GLD, BESD, MLD and SLD. There are three low incidence special schools for Autistic Spectrum Disorder, Hearing Impairment and Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties.

Special schools provide the expertise for those pupils whose needs are not currently met in mainstream schools. However this expertise should be shared to support greater inclusion in mainstream settings. Existing provision is being reorganised so that the majority of the special schools will cater for Generic Learning Difficulties and will be age phased and co-located with mainstream schools. This will require resourcing through both BSF and the PCP

Around 100 pupils are taught in 14 SERFs which are attached to schools and specialise in one particular category of special need. The needs mainly embrace Speech, Language and Communication, Hearing Impairment. One SERF caters for a small number of pupils with Severe Learning Difficulties.

Under the ongoing review of SEN provision, Lancashire is looking to replace the SERFs with extra capacity through the development of up to 28 new ARM schools, which will provide fully inclusive access for pupils with low incidence needs in the areas of Speech, Language and Communication Needs, Autistic Spectrum Disorders, Hearing Impairment, Visual Impairment and Specific Learning Difficulties. Decisions on the location of these will, to a certain extent, be co-dependent on the phasing of the Primary Capital Programme and analysis of local need.

Approximately 550 pupils attend 14 short stay schools (Pupil Referral Units). The majority of these placements are short term exclusions from school and the pupils should return to mainstream. The short stay schools strategy will be further developed so that provision is linked to the major schools investment programmes. It

6 is envisaged that less suitable buildings will be closed and short stay provision will more often be co-located with a mainstream school.

Deprivation

Of the 755 super output areas which make up Lancashire, 60 rank in the worst 10% nationally on child deprivation. Over 24,000 children live in these areas, which are spread across 10 of Lancashire’s 12 districts.

In addition, as highlighted earlier in this document, 13% of children in Lancashire schools are eligible for free school meals (in comparison with a national average of 13.6%).

In terms of the new Tax Credit Deprivation Indicator, Lancashire has a comparative indicator of 61.32% (when compared with most deprived LA scoring 100% and the least deprived 28.42%) 25.26% of families are in receipt of both Working Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit in comparison with a national average of 20.92%.

ICT

Whilst there is significant variation in ICT equipment and technology adoption levels across schools, they all have access to a fast and reliable broadband internet connection, as well as a range of added value services such as a learning platform; video conferencing; remote access; email; and content filtering etc., via the Lancashire Grid for Learning and CLEO.

These services provide a strong core that will help facilitate a transformation in teaching and learning.

Many schools already take advantage of existing opportunities for administrative/ curriculum network support provided in the form of a managed service. This allows them to manage their staff and systems effectively and respond to the issues raised by the Workforce Reform agenda.

Healthy Schools

Currently, 89% of Lancashire’s schools have achieved NHSS. This is well above the national average of approximately 55% and, as a result, Lancashire has received Beacon Council Status this year for the work.

In relation to Emotional Health and Well Being, many schools are now employing Learning Mentors and running nurture groups. To facilitate this further the creation of spaces within schools for group activities and quiet chilling out areas would have a huge benefit to this work in many schools. The creation of outdoor classrooms would also support this work. Wherever possible, the authority will explore the opportunity within its primary schools to work with the local ‘Place2B’ team to provide support and facilities for vulnerable children.

Healthy Eating

To support the Healthy Eating criteria of NHSS, Lancashire Healthy Schools has rolled out an extensive training package to support primary schools to incorporate more practical food work into the curriculum and out of school hours’ programme. More than 50% of our schools have received this training and been inspired to develop the area further. However, many schools would benefit from having dedicated areas and equipment to remove some of the barriers to increasing the amount of practical food work possible.

We recognise the value of pupils having ready access to drinking water and this is an area for development, particularly through the provision of plumbed chilled water dispensers. We will also address issues arising from the location of some water dispensers as we know that some students do not drink during the day as they do not wish to use the toilet facilities where some dispensers are housed. Where appropriate we will address the need to renovate toilet facilities.

One of the criteria for allocating Capital Funding is the extent to which a scheme helps a school meet the National Standards for School Lunches and other School Food. For example, projects can be aimed at improving the catering and dining facilities so that meals:

• can be cooked on the premises in kitchens which are equipped to modern day standards and are ‘fit for purpose’; and • can be served in an appropriate setting students can dine in surroundings which are pleasant and attractive and so encourage their participation in a healthier meal service.

Sport and Exercise

Lancashire is working within the PESSCL and has a Sporting infrastructure made up of Specialist Sports Colleges and 12 School Sport Partnerships (families of schools working together.) All Lancashire primary, secondary and special schools are part of a SSP. In Lancashire, joined up working ensures that a coherent message is presented to schools around health and physical activity and SSPs are integral to ensuring that the Physical Activity quality standard is achieved. The LA PE team works in partnership with SSPs and Specialist Colleges to ensure that developments in PE and sport happen in a planned and strategic way.

In the 2006/07 PESSCL Survey, Lancashire results demonstrate an upward trend:

• 82% of young people in our schools are currently accessing 2 hours of high quality PE in a typical week • 29% of young people in our schools are involved in community clubs • 10% of young people in our schools are involved in leadership and volunteering activities • 33% of young people in our schools are involved in inter-school competitions.

A number of schools face challenges in meeting the goals of the strategy because of a lack of facilities such as playgrounds or hall space. This makes the ambition of achieving the 2010 ambition of a ‘5 hour offer’ difficult to achieve when many struggle to deliver the 2 hours high quality provision due to unsuitable space to provide physical activity . Curriculum entitlement in PE will also be addressed via better school facilities for PE which will help more schools offer the statutory broad and balanced PE curriculum.

The 5 hour offer is also about linking up with extended services and providing a pathway to lifelong participation in physical activity.

It is felt that staff involvement in more physical activity in school (as targeted in the NHSS) might also be assisted by provision of staff changing/shower facilities, where possible.

Travel to school

Despite the large numbers of schools and the close proximity of the majority of pupils to their local school, in 2005, 49% of primary school pupils travelled to school by car. This is something which we are addressing via the School Travel Plans. This is a slight improvement on the 2002 figure of 53%.

These plans encourage healthy, active travel for the school journey, fitting exercise into the daily routine and can attract Capital Funding. The Healthy Schools team, through the Development Control process of new or refurbished schools, influence where possible the layout and infrastructure on or around the site to enhance safety and encourage sustainable travel. Young people from the School Council can work on School Travel Plans to address real environmental issues and influence change.

When carrying out school reorganisation reviews, the location of any new schools at the heart of the communities they serve should discourage some parents from using a car to take their children to school.

Long Term Aims

Every Child Matters

Overview

Primary school provision in Lancashire is generally of high quality with the majority of schools achieving results in Key Stage 2 tests which are above the national average. However as with all authorities Lancashire faces a number of challenges in achieving its vision for a county where people can:

• Feel safe • Lead healthy lives • Get help if they need it • Learn and develop • Work and prosper • Enjoy a high quality environment • Travel easily and safely.

Lancashire’s corporate objectives outlined above have been in place since 2005 but still fit well with the strategic objectives set out in the Children’s Plan and, in particular, the drive to close the attainment gap. These accord with the five outcomes of the Every Child Matters agenda:

• Be Healthy

• Stay safe • Enjoy and achieve • Make a positive contribution • Achieve economic well- being

The Primary Capital Strategy provides a way to significantly improve the future prospects of all Lancashire children and build on the work being done to raise the achievement of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of children through innovative approaches to teaching and learning and enhanced facilities. There is a chance to sustain and develop a robust infrastructure of primary schools that are educationally strong and financially viable whilst maintaining diversity and choice and recognising the importance of schools in rural communities. It also provides a unique opportunity to provide safe, exciting learning environments where children and their families can have real ambition; a chance to realise their aspirations, potential; and improve their chances of a happy, healthy and prosperous future.

Standards

All children will benefit from the investment opportunities provided by the PCP through the creation of more suitable teaching spaces, better facilities for personalised learning, and enhanced facilities for learning, play and enrichment activities. Rural schools will have greater scope to link and collaborate with other schools through a robust and reliable ICT infrastructure.

The investment provides a particular opportunity to improve the outcomes for low attaining and disadvantaged groups and pupils with special educational needs through personalisation. Lancashire has identified a number of groups of children where attainment is low. The schools catering for these groups will be targeted for the allocation of the capital needed to improve buildings to meet pupils’ needs through personalised learning.

The drive to promote inclusion will also inform the Programme. For example, the third phase of the ICAP sets out the following priority areas for investment:

• The implementation of ARMs. It is planned that 4 ARM schools will cover HI and 4 will cover SLCN. There will be new provision to cover ASD (up to 10 in primary phase), SpLD (3 ARM schools) and VI (1 ARM school). These numbers reflect anticipated growth in certain need areas as well as an intention to reduce “out of county” placements and enable children and young people to access specialist provision and support within their local area. • Modernising and reorganising the Special Schools. There are currently 31 Special Schools. It is planned to have 7 BESD Special Schools, plus one each for ASD, HI and PMLD/MSI. The remainder are being reorganised to cover GLD, rather than separate need groups, and they are already being age-phased to align with mainstream schools. The ICAP programme plans to co-locate Special Schools with mainstream schools wherever possible . The programme is ambitious, covering up to 87 projects which may range from moderate refurbishments to new builds on new sites. Projects will be integrated with the waves of BSF and PCP within districts wherever possible. The programme will be rolled out progressively from 2008-2020.

Schools which are consistently achieving lower levels than established baselines in tests at KS2 will be subject to a rigorous investigation as part of the overall review of

10 provision. We will assess whether or not standards could be improved through collaboration or more radical approaches including amalgamation, federation, and closure, possibly linked to the enlargement of a neighbouring higher performing school. We will also explore possible changes of governance arrangements that could for example involve a change of category.

Utilising BSF along with investment in primary schools Lancashire has developed a programme of co-locating schools where this improves outcomes for children and communities. The approach to special needs in the county is to provide for as many children as possible within their local school while retaining a strong network of special schools and schools with additional resources to meet specific needs. A programme is underway whereby a number of all age special schools catering for children with a range of learning difficulties are being re-organised into primary and secondary age phased schools co-located on site with a mainstream school where appropriate.

The primary strategy linked with BSF and other funding streams will enable the programme of co- location to continue and will also provide other opportunities to link primary and secondary schools, particularly utilising ICT facilities. This programme along with workforce development and admission arrangements will reduce the difficulties some children face when they move settings and will ensure they reach each phase of their education ready to succeed.

Lancashire intend to harness the transformational potential of ICT to enhance, extend and enrich learning and empower learners by providing appropriate ICT resources, systems and training to support anytime, anywhere learning. These systems would include the provision of an authority wide integrated learning and management system.

Extended Services through Schools

At 30 September 2007, there were 185 schools meeting the full core offer and the process of identifying those schools with the potential to meet the full core offer by September 2008 is underway. So far 302 schools have been identified and will be supported by the Extended Services Officers to provide access to the full core offer by that date.

Results from consultation with children and young people, their families and the wider community will feed into a county wide and district level mapping exercise in order to identify existing extended services and providers and to identify future potential providers. Other data such as deprivation indices and pupil attainment will be included once the provider data is available. This will help to highlight gaps in provision and enable measures to be put in place to address those gaps. The development of needs based provision, together with a partnership/multi-agency approach will help to avoid duplication and have a positive impact on the future sustainability of services.

Diversity, Choice and Responsiveness to Parents

Lancashire already has a diverse mix of schools with only 38% of primary schools being community schools. Parental views have always been a major part of any reorganisation considerations and the county has introduced the following further measures in accordance with the requirements of the Education and Inspections Act 2006:

• Key local indicators of parental satisfaction are to be developed using existing statistical and contextual data and reviewed alongside any guidance from the DCSF and/ or Schools Commissioner.

• Opportunities for Parental Representations under the Act are recognised in school organisation and school admission processes. Parents are advised of their right in this respect in admission and reorganisation literature and publications.

• The Executive Director for Children and Young People, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools arranges for responses to parental representations that have been made under the new right.

• An annual report on ‘School Places and Lancashire’s Response to Diversity and Choice’ is to be introduced and it will include information about any parental representations that have been received during the year.

As with most areas the county has experienced a significant fall in pupil numbers in the primary sector in recent years leading to a situation whereby surplus places are just under 15%. However as birth rates have risen this number will reduce to under 10% by 2012. Lancashire has a high proportion of small schools and a high number of designated rural schools. The two are not unconnected.

The major infrastructure issues facing the county are the number of surplus places in urban areas; the poor condition and suitability of some buildings; a lack of affordable alternative sites in some areas; and the need to maintain a network of small rural schools with 21st century learning opportunities. The county will address these issues in the following ways:

• With partners reviewing and rationalising provision in urban areas where there are significant surplus places and/or schools that are persistently achieving low KS2 results. A major part of these reviews will be any representations made by parents in terms of type, location and governance of schools in the area.

• By guaranteeing a certain level of investment in each district to ensure that the needs of children in rural areas are also met.

• Working with existing and future partners and listening to parents to consider opportunities for improving the effective and efficient use of resources in rural areas while still maintaining primary school provision within reasonable access for the community.

Buildings and ICT

Modern ICT facilities need to be designed in such a way as to allow flexible usage to include the needs of all in the school and the community. In order to equip schools for the 21st century, consideration will be given to:-

Community access: • out of hours use • location of facilities to minimise security risks • furniture design

Buildings/space • sufficient space for a server room requirements • sufficient space in each classroom for teacher ICT

device and 2/3 pupil ICT Devices • facilities which enable whole class teaching/special needs requirements, use of video conferencing and community use • Storage and charging areas for portable equipment such as laptops and trolleys

Buildings/management • Security cameras • Security of offices in order to protect data stored on site • Building access systems • Building management systems • Large screen in the school hall with data projection and sound system appropriate for whole-school events

Curriculum • ICT and video conferencing facilities which enable whole class access • Facilities which enable provision to all • 2/3 pupil ICT devices in each classroom • Teacher ICT device linked to data projection, projection surface or interactive whiteboard and appropriate speaker system • Sufficient network points for teacher equipment, pupil equipment, printer and telephone • Wireless connectivity to allow flexibility where appropriate Infrastructure • Fibre optic cable backbone throughout the building • Minimum 10Mb broadband connection • Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) • Appropriate network points/wireless access for offices and public areas such as school hall, staffroom, work areas, Library/resource area • Building security system (access, cameras) • Attendance system • Curriculum/Admin network link to allow class teachers to access pupil data • Remote backup service to ensure secure storage of Management Administration System (MIS) backup • Flexibility of systems to enable sharing of appropriate data with approved partners to avoid duplication, and link with Contact Point initiative

Lancashire intends to offer an affordable managed service solution with appropriate Service Level Agreements for ongoing ICT maintenance. This will need to achieve a minimum standard to ensure that transformational work can be maintained and Workforce Reform guidelines are met.

Lancashire will ensure that ICT strategy employs joined up use of funding streams. These might include social deprivation and Harnessing Technology grants.

Achieving the Vision- Approach to Change

Capacity Building and Change Management

The authority is already in a strong position to deliver the vision and the implementation programme that it requires. There is an established network of collaboration with District Councils through the Lancashire Locals Committee structure and the commitment to enhanced two tier working. Lancashire also achieved Beacon status for its approach to workforce reform and healthy schools.

Since the announcement of the PCP the authority has kept schools, dioceses and other partners fully informed of national and local developments. This has taken the form of a series of road shows across the county in early 2007, reports through the Lancashire Locals network, the use of the schools portal; and a dedicated Primary Capital website along with regular meetings with representatives from all the dioceses. In addition, as part of the planning, monitoring and evaluation process, the authority has established a Primary Capital Advisory Board consisting of head teachers, officers, members and diocesan representatives.

Members of the Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership are linked to School Councils of Primary Schools which will give them an opportunity to gather the views of young people. In addition, a Pupil Attitude Questionnaire is provided for schools annually to gather the views of pupils aged 9, 11, 14 and 16 years of age and the results are analysed for Lancashire.

Lancashire is also committed to building a sustainable workforce. Under BSF, the LEP is building a ‘Skills Legacy’ via an apprenticeship programme, helping local school leavers find work within the BSF supply chain. Lancashire’s capacity building extends to its central services, via apprenticeships and its graduate management trainee scheme, both established in 2004.

Planning Monitoring and Evaluation

As commissioner of services the authority will ensure that the Primary Capital Strategy for Change delivers the intended outcomes of the Children’s Plan. As stated earlier in the document the County’s strategic objectives accord directly with those of the Children’s Plan and the capital strategy will provide resources for those objectives to be achieved.

In order to plan for, deliver, monitor and evaluate the success of the capital strategy the authority has put in place a number of structures, processes and tools. The overall strategic direction of the programme rests with the Cabinet Committee for Schools. This committee, made up of senior members, commended this initial submission prior to its formal approval by the Cabinet Member for Schools. The Cabinet Committee will also oversee any proposed amendments to the strategy as circumstances change over the life span of the programme. Decisions on individual projects and area reviews will be made by the Cabinet Member for Schools.

To assist the Cabinet Committee and Cabinet Member for Schools in the decision making process the authority has set up a Primary Capital Advisory Board which comprises elected members from all parties, head teachers, senior officers and a representative from each of the diocesan/church authorities present in Lancashire. This group has overseen the development of this strategy including extensive consultation with schools and District Councils and recommended it to the Cabinet Committee. It will continue in place to advise on the delivery of the programme and will undertake an advisory role in any organisational reviews undertaken as part of the programme. It is also intended to set up working groups involving head teachers,

14 members, officers and diocesan/church authority representatives to plan and monitor individual school organisation reviews.

In producing the strategy, the authority set out a number of principles and an overall vision that were the subject of extensive consultation. In addition, it developed an objective matrix of need to assist the prioritisation of areas for investment. The matrix is made up of a number of key indicators as set out below;

• Key stage 2 results as measured against county and national averages • Condition and suitability of school buildings • Surplus places • Deprivation as measured by a combination of the number of children from the most deprived small super output areas and numbers eligible for free school meals. • Popular schools as measured by oversubscription for places.

The matrix identifies the areas of greatest need. The areas are natural groupings of schools that cover particular travel to school areas and are therefore of different sizes and smaller than a whole district. This is then used along with other relevant factors such as known future housing and/or regeneration plans to prioritise areas for investment. The matrix will be updated annually and used to review the programme and assess future priorities for investment.

In addition to using the matrix to evaluate and amend the programme other key indicators will be used to assess progress in raising standards. As part of the work involved in narrowing the attainment gap we will measure the progress of pupils in the identified groups using;

• The proportion of pupils attaining 6+ points in CLLD and PSED at the end of the Foundation Stage • The proportion of pupils attaining an aggregate of 78 points at the end of the Foundation Stage • The gap between the attainment of the highest and lowest attaining pupils • The proportion of pupils attaining L1+, L2+, L2B+ and L3+ in reading, writing and maths at the end of KS1 • The proportion of pupils attaining L4+ in both English and Maths at the end of KS2 for each group • The proportion of pupils attaining L4+ in English at the end of KS2 • The proportion of pupils attaining L4+ in Maths at the end of KS2 • The proportion of pupils making two levels of progress in English from KS1 to KS2 • The proportion of pupils making two levels of progress in Maths from KS1 to KS2 • The proportion of pupils attaining L3+ in English at the end of KS2 • The proportion of pupils attaining L3+ in Maths at the end of KS2

Each year progress will be monitored through;

• The work of School Improvement Partners in reviewing progress towards targets with individual schools • The review of progress towards targets for specific vulnerable groups e.g. minority ethnic groups, Looked After Children • The review of attainment trends in specific areas of disadvantage against targets

• Comparisons between District, authority , National and Statistical Neighbour attainment data • The review of the quality of provision through the work of School Improvement Partners and Ofsted Inspections • The review of related data such as attendance and exclusion data

The results of the monitoring and subsequent analysis will be used to identify any necessary changes to the investment programme.

Consultation

The authority has already consulted widely on what should drive and be delivered by the Primary Capital Strategy. All heads, chairs of governors, county and local elected members, diocesan/church authority representatives, Local Strategic Partners and other stakeholders were invited to a series of road shows across the county in early 2007. The views expressed at those road shows were used to influence the vision, the principles and the processes that make up the strategy. Further consultation with schools, local District councils and the diocesan/church authorities has taken place as the strategy has developed with no dissenting responses. A dedicated web site has been set up to keep all partners informed of progress and the development of the strategy is advised by the Primary Capital Advisory Board. General consultation will continue as the programme develops along with more specific local consultation as priority areas enter the programme.

Achieving educational transformation

Lancashire will ensure that ICT supports the overall aims for teaching and learning and institutional development by including the following as minimum requirements for delivery:

• ICT and video conferencing facilities which enable whole class access • Facilities which enable provision to all • 2/3 pupil ICT devices in each classroom • Teacher ICT device linked to data projection, projection surface or interactive whiteboard and appropriate speaker system • Sufficient network points for teacher equipment, pupil equipment, printer and telephone • Wireless connectivity to allow flexibility where appropriate • Flexible MIS which integrates seamlessly with the VLE.

Funding

The authority has set out its statement of priorities within the capital strategy for schools; has established a single capital pot for the funding of these priorities and embedded the principle of joined up funding streams through its financial partnership arrangements with schools who are required to contribute their DFC and other funding towards the resulting programmes of work. It is through this process that National, local and individual school priorities are captured within the same process.

Through this strategy the authority will utilise its other schools formulaic capital allocations together with prudential borrowing and capital receipts (where applicable) to supplement the delivery of the primary capital programme, in addition to exploring opportunities for extended school provision with other children’s services providers and external partners, the authority will also seek to draw in any external grant funding where projects meet the requisite criteria.

In working closely with its nine Diocesan/Church Authority partners the authority has secured agreement to the use of the primary school element of the LCVAP allocations towards delivery of the Primary Strategy for Change. This will improve and accelerate the pace of change across Lancashire. Several of the Diocesan boards operate schemes to assist their school governors in raising their 10% contribution to schemes. The strategy enables the authority to plan in partnership with the various Dioceses to help governing bodies with their 10% contribution. It will do this through the judicial use of prudential borrowing where this assists the key aims and objectives of the programme through eradicating underutilisation and freeing resources to support teaching and learning.

The authority has established a business case procedure for securing the reinvestment of capital receipts and revenue savings back into capital projects where this secures value for money and reflects corporate and local priorities. The principle of securing prudential borrowing against savings generated through rationalisation has been established through the Schools Forum.

The LA monitors projects initiated by schools to ensure that assets are maintained effectively and also uses the Opportunity Fund element of the capital strategy (similar to the former Seed Challenge fund) to encourage schools to undertake match funded projects aimed at achieving the objectives of PCP and ECM and sustainability outcomes.

Procurement

The authority has a good track record in using a diverse range of procurement vehicles to enable it to achieve value for money.

The authority’s in-house Property Group are the main procurement vehicle for capital projects outside of BSF. They have won 21 Design Awards over a 10 year period and are members of the National Best Value Benchmarking club operated by COPROP. Having been in the top quartile over the previous two years, in June 2007 they achieved the accolade of being the number one performing property service in the country. The Property Group is a multi disciplinary practice consisting of some 180 construction related building professionals. They have established a wide range of framework delivery partners together with a further partnering framework to commission external design consultants, thereby creating very significant design and delivery capacity within the organisation.

The authority has also established a LEP to assist in the delivery of its wave 1 BSF PFI project and is able to extend the scope of the LEP outside of BSF if it considers it prudent to do so.

Approximately half of Lancashire’s primary schools are voluntary aided, therefore the procurement route for these schools will dependant on size and scope of the scheme be agreed with the relevant Diocesan Board and school governors.

Property Group, together with the cleaning and catering DSO provide a ‘not for profit’ traded facilities management services to the vast majority of schools in Lancashire* and some neighbouring authorities. A number of the Diocesan authorities also offer a property based FM arrangement to their schools. The LEP will provide facilities management to the wave 1 BSF schools. The Authority will make it a condition of the investment that schools have robust arrangements in place to maintain the condition of the improved assets.

*In 2007/08 93% of Primary schools bought into the property management arrangement offered by Property Group

The authority commissions its capital projects through a strategic partnering agreement which is adapted for use with both the LEP and the in-house Property Team giving the authority capacity to deliver on its large and varied capital programmes and enabling it to choose the best procurement option to deliver value for money for the people of Lancashire.

In 2006 the authority developed a project management framework procedure for the delivery of the schools capital programme. This project management process is based on PRINCE 2 methodology and tailored to align with and support the authority’s existing procurement, contractual and Quality Assurance procedures In light of the broader children’s services requirements and in preparation for readiness to deliver the PCP the current project management procedure is under review. The revised project management procedure will include a number of key outcomes which will include:

- adjustments required as a consequence of the new relationship resulting from the strategic partnership arrangement between the Directorate for Children and Young People and Property Group - an ICT based methodology and communication solution - improved version control of documentation - improved highlighting, exception and change management reporting - built in prompts concerning changing guidance or legislative requirements in respect of construction, planning, consultation and environmental procedures - identification and involvement of key stakeholders, including young people as part of the project development process

Design

The authority completed one of the first education PFI schemes at Fleetwood High School. The design of the school has been architecturally commended. More recently, in developing the Burnley Barden campus as part of its Wave 1 BSF project the authority has adopted a radical approach to integrating primary and special school provision. The campus design is a single building that accommodates in a wholly integrated way a primary school and a primary special school along with a nursery school, children’s centre, sixth form centre, faith centre; and public library. The nursery primary and special schools will share foundation stage accommodation while having access to specialist accommodation appropriate to the needs of the children on the roll of each school and being able to share a range of other facilities on the site.

The authority has already delivered several other ‘exemplar’ model designs for its new primary schools to suit various needs and has established a primary school design working group consisting of primary, SEN and extended schools advisers, primary/ primary special and nursery school head teachers, Diocese representatives, Architects and other property and asset management professionals. The working group’s remit is to continue to improve and refine primary school design for the 21st century, which provide sustainability and efficiency together with the flexibility to meet new and emerging teaching and learning needs.

The authority has also developed a ‘design festival approach’ to engaging children and staff in the design of their schools and carries out design and access consultations with schools and their communities for new build and large extension projects.

An integrated approach to design will be achieved by close partnership working between key stakeholders, its Schools Development teams and the multi disciplinary Design Teams. The working group’s remit to identify school building layout requirements and room and space relationships which support teaching and learning, as well as sustaining wider community needs will be used as a benchmark in informing design solution outcomes for new and refurbished and remodelled schools delivered through the PCP in Lancashire.

All projects are run with the aim of minimising carbon emissions and a current arts centre conversion project has just been designed to be rather better than carbon neutral. For BREEAM in schools, processes are in place to achieve better than 60% carbon reduction (from a 2002 base) and at least a ‘Very Good’ rating by early establishment of the three essential gateways needed for a successful outcome - Public Consultation, Ecological Surveys and the Site Energy Assessment. Where appropriate, specialist external consultants are often commissioned to support this work. In addition to the third party BREEAM assessor, the authority employs DQI consultants, Design Champions from leading private practices, ecologists, newt, bat, flora, flood, contamination, geotechnical, archaeological, acoustic, transport, waste, thermal imaging and energy specialists.

The authority has developed its own design expertise on environmental issues, having low carbon consultants and a team of energy efficiency engineers supporting the design teams to reduce the carbon impact of projects in regard to both embodied energy and energy consumption in use. This has included woodchip boiler systems, ground source heat pumps, solar panels, micro generation of electricity etc., as well as passive and active energy control measures for schools developed and installed over many years to support both BREEAM and a wider sustainable agenda for all their projects. They have been instrumental in establishing the ‘forests to fuel’ biomass boiler programme for the authority’s BSF schools programme.

19 Appendix 1

Lancashire Population Breakdown

Age 2001 census % 2005 2009 Forecast Group Mid Yr

0-4 65309 6% 5% 5% 63900 5-19 225601 20% 19% 18% 215700 20-29 129982 11% 12% 12% 145200 30-39 165782 15% 13% 12% 138500 40-49 152018 13% 14% 15% 175300 50-59 149154 13% 13% 13% 150000 60-69 111458 10% 10% 12% 139400 70+ 135672 12% 12% 13% 147400 1134976 1175400

Appendix 2 Primary Schools

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN Lancaster 01001 2017 Bowerham Community 283 249 -34 -13.65 56 01002 2019 Dallas Road Community 420 413 -7 -1.69 60 01003 2024 Willow Lane Community 129 210 81 38.57 30 01004 2022 Skerton Community 119 210 91 43.33 30 01005 3530 Christ Church CE 215 240 25 10.42 35 01006 3531 St Paul's CE 254 237 -17 -7.17 38 01008 3705 St Joseph's Catholic 202 205 3 1.46 30 01009 3533 St Luke's CE 193 209 16 7.66 30 01010 3706 The Cathedral Catholic 129 210 81 38.57 30 01011 2020 Lancaster Ridge Primary 152 210 58 27.62 34 01012 2021 Lancaster Ryelands 349 384 35 9.11 60 01013 3520 Arkholme CE Primary 81 90 9 10.00 14 01014 3521 Caton St Paul's CE 133 150 17 11.33 30 01015 2370 Moorside Primary 443 447 4 0.89 70 01016 3527 St Wilfred's CE 228 240 12 5.00 35 01017 3528 St Margaret's CE 51 90 39 43.33 15 01018 2031 Nether Kellet Primary 68 105 37 35.24 15 01019 3670 Wilson's Endowed CE 107 105 -2 -1.90 15 01020 3534 St Peter's CE 34 56 22 39.29 8 01021 3535 Melling St Wilfrid's CE 38 56 18 32.14 8 01022 3082 Quermore CE 106 105 -1 -0.95 15 01023 3084 Tatham Fells CE 31 60 29 48.33 10 01024 3607 St Bernadette's Catholic 144 180 36 20.00 30 01025 2653 Caton Community 96 119 23 19.33 17 01027 3017 Wray with Botton (End) 51 52 1 1.92 7 01028 3519 Cfth Christ Church CE 104 210 106 50.48 30 01029 3543 Slyne St Luke's CE 230 245 15 6.12 35 01030 3518 Bolton-le-Sands CE 296 315 19 6.03 45 01031 3703 Our Lady Of Lourdes 95 112 17 15.18 15 01032 3168 Archbishop Hutton's CE 151 177 26 14.69 26 01034 3551 Yealand CE 40 42 2 4.76 6 01035 3542 Silverdale St John's CE 92 82 -10 -12.20 15 01036 3546 Thurnam Glasson CE 34 42 8 19.05 6 01038 3522 Cockerham Parochial CE 72 82 10 12.20 13 01039 3524 Dolphinholme CE 52 90 38 42.22 14 01041 3525 Ellel St John's CE 183 210 27 12.86 30 01042 3539 Cawthorne's Endowed 31 42 11 26.19 6 01044 2014 North Road Primary 136 210 74 35.24 30 01046 3538 St Helen's CE 170 175 5 2.86 25 01049 2576 Great Wood Primary 332 330 -2 -0.61 50 01050 2425 Torrisholme Primary 416 418 2 0.48 60 01051 2025 Morecambe Bay Community 282 420 138 32.86 60 01052 2029 West End Primary 174 280 106 37.86 40 01053 2028 Sandylands Community 412 415 3 0.72 60 01054 2027 Lancaster Road Primary 422 470 48 10.21 60 01055 3537 Poulton-le-Sands CE 187 210 23 10.95 30 01056 3536 Heysham St Peter's CE 240 239 -1 -0.42 35 01057 3707 St Mary's Catholic 202 210 8 3.81 30 01058 2368 Trumacar Primary 254 270 16 5.93 40 01059 3605 St Patrick's Catholic 179 210 31 14.76 30

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN 01060 2827 Westgate Primary 483 474 -9 -1.90 70 01061 2831 Grosvenor Park Primary 258 315 57 18.10 45 01062 2832 Mossgate Primary 183 209 26 12.44 30 Lancaster Totals 9766 11136 1370 12.30 1658

NET LCC No DfES NOR CAP Surplus No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan-07 XP/SP % PAN Wyre 02001 2396 Carr Head Primary 246 240 -6 -2.50 35 02002 2541 The Breck Primary 232 240 8 3.33 35 02003 2622 Carleton Green Community 268 315 47 14.92 45 02005 3570 St Chad's CE 235 240 5 2.08 35 02006 3719 St John's Catholic 208 210 2 0.95 30 02007 3571 St Hilda's CE 197 210 13 6.19 30 02008 2822 Chaucer Community 261 416 155 37.26 60 02009 3709 St Mary's Catholic 168 175 7 4.00 25 02013 2527 Larkholme Primary 260 420 160 38.10 60 02014 2404 Charles Saer Community 257 420 163 38.81 60 02016 2821 Shakespeare Primary 398 408 10 2.45 60 St Wulstan's & St Edmund's 02017 3711 Cath 265 258 -7 -2.71 50 02018 2836 Flakefleet Primary 412 490 78 15.92 70 02019 3126 Carter's Charity Primary 172 210 38 18.10 35 02020 3572 Fleetwood Charity CE 132 175 43 24.57 25 02021 3567 Out Rawcliffe CE 52 69 17 24.64 10 02022 3568 Pilling St John's CE 67 105 38 36.19 15 02023 3718 St Williams' Catholic 49 88 39 44.32 15 02024 3554 Great Eccleston Copp CE 161 205 44 21.46 30 02025 3712 St Mary's Catholic 27 56 29 51.79 11 02026 2040 Hambleton Primary 157 177 20 11.30 30 02027 2045 Stalmine Primary 75 105 30 28.57 15 02030 2517 Stanah Primary 400 420 20 4.76 60 02031 2492 Northfold Community 189 240 51 21.25 35 02032 3720 Sacred Heart Catholic 147 210 63 30.00 30 02033 3125 Baines Endowed 237 231 -6 -2.60 33 02035 2047 Burn Naze Primary 139 262 123 46.95 30 02036 2048 Royles Brook Primary 283 315 32 10.16 45 02037 3016 St Helen's CE 120 150 30 20.00 20 02038 2030 Nateby Primary 73 90 17 18.89 13 02039 2016 Forton Primary 88 105 17 16.19 15 02040 3548 St Michael's-on-Wyre CE 103 120 17 14.17 18 02041 3517 Bleasdale CE 30 57 27 47.37 10 02042 3704 St Mary's Catholic 31 52 21 40.38 7 02043 3516 Bilsborrow CE 34 90 56 62.22 15 02044 3515 St John's CE 22 60 38 63.33 10 02045 3529 Inskip St Peter's CE 53 90 37 41.11 15 02046 3526 Garstang St Thomas CE 167 210 43 20.48 30 02047 3550 Winmarleigh CE 10 30 20 66.67 8 02048 3668 Scorton CE 32 56 24 42.86 8 02049 2530 Garstang Community 243 240 -3 -1.25 35 02050 3702 SS Mary & Michael Catholic 115 203 88 43.35 29 02051 3075 Staining CE 234 236 2 0.85 35 02052 2826 Manor Beach Primary 363 420 57 13.57 60 Wyre Totals 7412 9119 1707 18.72 1342

NET LCC No DfES NOR CAP Surplus No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan-07 XP/SP % PAN Fylde 04029 3575 Weeton St Michael's CE 40 60 20 33.33 9 04030 3573 Ribby with Wrea Endowed CE 143 157 14 8.92 21 04031 3552 St Paul's CE 206 210 4 1.90 30 04032 3553 Freckleton CE 153 210 57 27.14 30 04033 3574 Singleton CE 96 101 5 4.95 14 04034 5200 Newton Bluecoat CE 220 240 20 8.33 40 04035 3616 Holy Family Catholic 100 119 19 15.97 17 04036 2446 Strike Lane Primary 147 180 33 18.33 30 04037 3557 Kirkham St Michael's CE 225 240 15 6.25 35 04038 3713 The Willows Catholic 173 175 2 1.14 25 04039 2041 Kirkham & Wesham Primary 185 226 41 18.14 35 04040 3717 St Joseph's Catholic 66 105 39 37.14 15 04041 3565 Medlar-with-Wesham CE 187 200 13 6.50 30 04042 3976 Treales CE 33 55 22 40.00 9 04043 2406 Weeton Primary 103 210 107 50.95 35 04044 2426 Mayfield Primary School 304 420 116 27.62 60 04045 2497 Clifton Primary School 224 240 16 6.67 35 04046 2042 Ansdell Primary School 261 240 -21 -8.75 35 04047 3814 Heyhouses Endowed CE 467 471 4 0.85 70 04048 3715 Our Lady Star of the Sea 238 280 42 15.00 40 04049 3562 Lytham CE Primary 206 245 39 15.92 35 04050 3716 St Peter's Catholic 209 210 1 0.48 30 04051 3564 St Thomas' CE 231 240 9 3.75 35 04052 2615 Lytham Hall Park 247 240 -7 -2.92 35 Fylde Totals 4464 5074 610 12.02 750

NET LCC No DfES NOR CAP Surplus No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan-07 XP/SP % PAN Preston 06001 3638 Blessed Sacrament Catholic 352 420 68 16.19 60 06002 2185 Brookfield Community 131 150 19 12.67 30 06004 2186 Deepdale Junior 322 348 26 7.47 90 06005 2188 Eldon Primary 166 280 114 40.71 40 06007 3639 English Martyrs Catholic 190 240 50 20.83 35 06008 2189 Brockholes Wood Primary 173 245 72 29.39 35 06009 2190 Frenchwood Primary 244 268 24 8.96 45 06010 2191 Grange Primary School 89 175 86 49.14 25 06011 2192 Greenlands Community 159 210 51 24.29 30 06012 2193 Holme Slack Community 179 252 73 28.97 36 06013 3653 Holy Family Catholic 119 189 70 37.04 25 06014 2200 Ingol Community 82 245 163 66.53 35 06016 2196 Moor Nook Community 138 206 68 33.01 45 06019 2195 Ribbleton Ave Infant 154 216 62 28.70 70 06020 3001 Ribbleton Ave Junior 250 240 -10 -4.17 70 06021 2197 The Roebuck 356 448 92 20.54 65 06022 3642 Sacred Heart Catholic 121 194 73 37.63 30 06023 3634 St Andrew's CE 416 420 4 0.95 60 06024 3643 St Augustine's Catholic 212 266 54 20.30 38 06025 3352 St Bernard's Catholic 156 210 54 25.71 30 06026 3646 St Gregory's Catholic 201 207 6 2.90 30 06027 3647 St Ignatius Catholic 163 189 26 13.76 27 06028 3322 St Joseph's Catholic 294 276 -18 -6.52 45 06029 3645 St Maria Goretti Catholic 189 210 21 10.00 60 06030 3636 St Matthew's Catholic 377 406 29 7.14 58 06031 3009 St Stephen's CE 247 315 68 21.59 45 06033 2198 Ashton Primary 184 218 34 15.60 40 06035 2704 Fishwick Primary 53 140 87 62.14 12 06036 3954 St Teresa's Primary 122 180 58 32.22 25 06037 2054 Lea Community Primary 175 280 105 37.50 40 06038 3582 Lea Neeld's Endowed CE 105 119 14 11.76 20 06039 3726 Lea St Mary's Catholic 94 98 4 4.08 14 06040 2062 Catforth Primary 50 70 20 28.57 7 06041 2818 Sherwood Primary 369 385 16 4.16 50 06042 2838 Cottam Primary 261 299 38 12.71 45 06043 3597 St Anne's CE 100 105 5 4.76 15 06044 3578 Broughton CE Primary 240 240 0 0.00 35 06046 3577 St Lawrence CE 51 147 96 65.31 21 06047 3339 St Mary & St Andrew's CE 113 112 -1 -0.89 16 06048 3579 Oliverson's CE Primary 153 210 57 27.14 30 06049 3725 St Francis Catholic 88 105 17 16.19 15 06050 2053 Goosnargh Whitechapel 70 88 18 20.45 15 06051 3580 Grimsargh St Michael's CE 198 210 12 5.71 30 Our Lady & St Edward's 06052 3601 Catholic 208 210 2 0.95 30 06053 3949 St Anthony's Catholic 286 300 14 4.67 45 06054 3611 St Clare's Catholic 251 252 1 0.40 36 06055 2052 Kennington Primary 223 233 10 4.29 35 5

06056 3301 St Peter's CE 229 227 -2 -0.88 35 06057 2050 Fulwood & Cadley Primary 294 312 18 5.77 45 06058 2051 Harris Primary 202 210 8 3.81 30 06060 2509 Queen's Drive Primary 398 420 22 5.24 60 06062 2703 Pool House Community 85 175 90 51.43 25 06071 2833 Longsands Community 207 210 3 1.43 30 06604 2187 Deepdale Infants 242 279 37 13.26 90 Preston Totals 10531 12659 2128 16.81 2050 (without R V Schools)

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN South Ribble 07001 2842 Cuerden Church School 169 210 41 19.52 30 07004 3736 Our Lady & St Gerard's RC 267 350 83 23.71 50 07005 3127 Higher Walton CE 83 119 36 30.25 17 07006 3738 St Patrick's RC 199 198 -1 -0.51 30 07007 3085 St Aidan's CE 156 158 2 1.27 24 07008 3596 St Leonard's CE 246 239 -7 -2.93 35 07009 2060 Lostock Hall Community 399 420 21 5.00 60 07012 2437 Walton-le-Dale Community 361 420 59 14.05 60 07013 2637 Coupe Green Primary 112 120 8 6.67 20 07014 3981 St Mary & St Benedict's RC 231 420 189 45.00 60 07015 3025 St Andrew's CE 188 210 22 10.48 70 07016 3141 Leyland Methodist Junior 271 240 -31 -12.92 70 07017 3411 Leyland St James CE 209 209 0 0.00 30 07018 3793 St Mary's RC 271 364 93 25.55 52 07019 2150 Woodlea Junior 255 227 -28 -12.33 65 07020 2554 Lever House Primary 247 240 -7 -2.92 37 07021 3608 St Catherine's Catholic 228 231 3 1.30 33 07022 3600 St Anne's Catholic 208 266 58 21.80 38 07024 2375 Northbrook Primary 166 240 74 30.83 40 07025 2427 Seven Stars Primary 156 360 204 56.67 55 07026 2814 Moss Side Primary 249 259 10 3.86 37 07028 3666 Farington St Paul's CE 167 150 -17 -11.33 30 07029 2049 Farington Primary 137 206 69 33.50 30 07030 2830 Longton Primary 250 315 65 20.63 45 07032 3729 St Oswald's Catholic 217 227 10 4.41 35 07033 3585 All Saints CE 192 206 14 6.80 30 07036 3586 Hoole St Michael's CE 113 119 6 5.04 17 07037 2055 Little Hoole Primary 220 210 -10 -4.76 30 07039 3018 Cop Lane CE 180 210 30 14.29 30 07040 3089 Middleforth CE 202 204 2 0.98 30 07041 3019 Howick CE 105 105 0 0.00 15 07042 3730 St Mary Magdalen's Catholic 171 210 39 18.57 30 07043 2058 Penwortham Primary 202 210 8 3.81 30 07044 2514 Whitefield Primary 378 420 42 10.00 60 07045 3953 St Teresa's Catholic 268 266 -2 -0.75 38 07046 2405 Kingsfold Primary 106 210 104 49.52 30 07047 2815 Broad Oak Primary 184 210 26 12.38 30 07051 3590 Salmesbury CE 54 56 2 3.57 8 07616 3143 Leyland Methodist Infant 209 213 4 1.88 70 South Ribble Totals 8026 9247 1221 13.20 1501

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN

West Lancs 08001 3078 St John's CE Primary 193 203 10 4.93 30 08002 3146 Burscough Bridge Methodist 50 105 55 52.38 15 08003 3800 St John's Catholic 137 120 -17 -14.17 25 08004 3029 Lathom Park CE 47 28 -19 -67.86 10 08005 3426 Newburgh CE 103 119 16 13.45 17 08006 3080 Lathom St James CE 70 58 -12 -20.69 10 08007 3424 Lordsgate Township CE 211 205 -6 -2.93 30 08009 2597 Asmall Primary 93 140 47 33.57 20 08011 3031 Ormskirk CE 333 560 227 40.54 80 08012 3801 St Anne's Catholic 463 479 16 3.34 60 08014 2415 West End Primary 168 210 42 20.00 30 08016 2695 Burscough Village 145 182 37 20.33 30 08018 3087 Bickerstaffe CE 65 90 25 27.78 15 08019 2443 Aughton Town Green 322 350 28 8.00 50 08020 3026 Christ Church CE 182 210 28 13.33 30 08021 3108 Aughton St Michael's CE 187 209 22 10.53 30 08022 5206 Rufford CE 123 144 21 14.58 20 08023 3147 Holmeswood Methodist 23 52 29 55.77 6 08024 3185 Richard Durnings Endowed 84 84 0 0.00 12 08025 3419 Haskayne CE 32 42 10 23.81 6 08026 3420 St Cuthbert's CE 120 120 0 0.00 30 08027 3191 Scarisbrick St Mark's CE 83 100 17 17.00 15 08028 3803 St Mary's Catholic 85 105 20 19.05 15 08029 2156 Pinfold Primary 20 51 31 60.78 10 08031 3804 St Richard's Catholic 200 210 10 4.76 30 08033 2656 Holland Moor Primary 316 291 -25 -8.59 40 08034 2696 Cobbs Brow School 266 270 4 1.48 40 08036 3614 St James' Catholic 167 207 40 19.32 30 08038 3179 Trinity CE / Methodist 234 210 -24 -11.43 35 08040 2705 Crow Orchard Primary 165 182 17 9.34 26 08042 2551 Moorside Primary 166 175 9 5.14 25 08043 2525 Little Digmoor 110 180 70 38.89 25 08045 3677 Bishop Martin CE 264 350 86 24.57 50 08046 2526 Hillside Community 190 210 20 9.52 50 08050 3618 St Edmund's Catholic 125 140 15 10.71 20 St John's Catholic, 08051 3610 Skelmersdale 198 243 45 18.52 30 08054 2552 Delph Side Community 152 210 58 27.62 30 08060 3833 St Teresa's Catholic 201 210 9 4.29 30 08061 3459 Upholland Roby Mill CE 43 49 6 12.24 8 08062 3457 St Thomas The Martyr CE 154 210 56 26.67 30 08063 2183 Crawford Village Primary 39 47 8 17.02 10 08064 2184 Wrightington Mossy Lea 49 51 2 3.92 10 08066 3461 Appley Bridge All Saints CE 153 200 47 23.50 30 St Joseph's Catholic, 08067 3834 Wrightington 126 140 14 10.00 20 08068 3451 Parbold Douglas CE 207 210 3 1.43 35 08069 3831 Our Lady & All Saints Catholic 88 119 31 26.05 17 08070 3448 Dalton St Michael's CE 58 70 12 17.14 10 08071 2059 Tarleton Community 296 330 34 10.30 60

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN 08072 3592 Tarleton Mere Brow CE 65 90 25 27.78 15 08073 3591 Tarleton Holy Trinity CE 198 210 12 5.71 30 08074 3581 Hesketh All Saints CE 189 197 8 4.06 30 08076 3169 Banks Methodist Primary 36 70 34 48.57 10 08077 3098 Banks St Stephen's CE 202 230 28 12.17 30 08078 3995 Brookfield Park Primary 213 315 102 32.38 45 08079 3996 Woodland Community 295 351 56 15.95 50 08080 3998 St Francis Of Assisi 278 330 52 15.76 60 West Lancashire Totals 8782 10273 1491 14.51 1557 Chorley 09001 3389 Chorley All Saints CE 137 210 73 34.76 30 09002 2835 Duke Street Primary 276 420 144 34.29 60 09003 2145 Highfield Primary 215 280 65 23.21 45 09005 3390 St Laurence CE 213 210 -3 -1.43 30 09006 3783 Sacred Heart Catholic, Chorley 172 205 33 16.10 30 09007 3393 St George's CE 240 237 -3 -1.27 35 09008 3397 St James' CE Primary 170 180 10 5.56 26 09009 3785 St Joseph's Catholic, Chorley 155 180 25 13.89 30 09010 2679 Gillibrand Primary 165 210 45 21.43 30 09011 3786 St Mary's CE, Chorley 212 210 -2 -0.95 30 09012 5201 St Peter's CE 273 315 42 13.33 45 09014 3789 St Gregory's Catholic 190 210 20 9.52 30 09015 2146 Buckshaw Primary 167 297 130 43.77 30 09019 3481 Rivington Primary 108 105 -3 -2.86 15 09021 3384 St Paul's CE 177 197 20 10.15 30 09022 2698 Adlington Primary 94 120 26 21.67 20 09023 3796 St Joseph's Catholic, Withnell 42 84 42 50.00 12 09024 2684 Lancaster Lane Community 146 210 64 30.48 30 09025 2636 Manor Road Primary 241 240 -1 -0.42 35 09026 2817 Westwood Primary 166 210 44 20.95 30 09027 3781 Anderton St Joseph's Catholic 144 175 31 17.71 25 09028 2140 Anderton Primary 183 205 22 10.73 35 09029 3386 Bretherton Endowed CE 105 105 0 0.00 15 09030 3387 Brindle St James' CE 74 70 -4 -5.71 10 09031 2142 Gregson Lane Primary 206 210 4 1.90 30 09032 3782 St Joseph's Catholic, Brindle 88 150 62 41.33 21 09033 3388 Charnock Richard CE 140 175 35 20.00 25 09034 3790 St Bede's RC Primary 211 259 48 18.53 37 09035 3401 Clayton-le-Woods CE 219 240 21 8.75 35 09036 3402 Coppull St John's CE 107 112 5 4.46 20 09037 3403 Coppull Parish CE 190 210 20 9.52 30 09038 3791 St Oswald's Catholic 122 140 18 12.86 20 09039 2147 Coppull Primary 192 267 75 28.09 45 09040 3343 Trinity & St Michael's CE / Meth 202 207 5 2.42 30 09042 3406 Eccleston St Mary's CE 188 210 22 10.48 30 09043 3407 Euxton CE Primary 199 210 11 5.24 30 09044 3792 Euxton St Mary's Catholic 204 210 6 2.86 30 09045 2572 Primrose Hill Primary 156 192 36 18.75 30 09046 3409 Pemberton's CE Primary 85 105 20 19.05 15 09048 3412 St Peter's CE Primary 88 89 1 1.12 15 09049 3794 SS Peter & Paul's Catholic 72 90 18 20.00 15 09050 2577 Balshaw Lane Community 265 254 -11 -4.33 40 09052 2574 Eccleston Primary 159 236 77 32.63 35 9

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN 09053 2702 Clayton Brook Primary 177 270 93 34.44 40 09054 3795 St Chad's Catholic 129 140 11 7.86 20 09055 3414 Whittle -le-Woods CE 232 239 7 2.93 35 09060 3997 St John's CE / Methodist 195 210 15 7.14 30 09062 2565 Abbey Village Primary 84 119 35 29.41 17 09063 2564 Withnell Fold Primary 86 68 -18 -26.47 14 Chorley Totals 8061 9497 1436 15.12 1397

Hyndburn 11001 3334 Baxenden St John's CE 220 233 13 5.58 35 11002 3336 Benjamin Hargreaves CE 160 161 1 0.62 23 11003 3337 Green Haworth CE 61 84 23 27.38 12 11004 2096 Huncoat Primary School 134 210 76 36.19 30 11005 2097 Hyndburn Park Primary 419 490 71 14.49 70 11006 2099 Peel Park Primary 570 570 0 0.00 85 11008 3762 St Anne & St Joseph's RC 284 330 46 13.94 50 11010 3340 St John with St Augustine CE 199 207 8 3.86 30 11011 3342 St Mary Magdalen's CE 126 205 79 38.54 30 11012 3763 St Oswald's RC Primary 117 119 2 1.68 17 11013 3105 Acc St Peter's CE Primary 194 210 16 7.62 30 11014 2101 Spring Hill Primary 363 420 57 13.57 60 11015 2820 Woodnook Primary School 251 280 29 10.36 40 11018 3134 Hippings Methodist 211 210 -1 -0.48 30 11020 3195 St Andrew's CE 168 209 41 19.62 30 11021 3353 Knuzden St Oswald's CE 206 207 1 0.48 30 11023 3766 St Mary's RC, Oswaldtwistle 236 270 34 12.59 40 11024 2108 West End Primary 207 205 -2 -0.98 30 11025 2107 Moor End Primary 184 231 47 20.35 40 11026 3355 St Paul's CE 151 182 31 17.03 26 11027 3348 All Saints CE 279 270 -9 -3.33 40 11029 2105 Mount Pleasant Primary 299 351 52 14.81 60 11030 3765 St Mary's RC, Clayton-le-Moors 99 157 58 36.94 22 11031 3347 St Nicholas' CE 198 210 12 5.71 30 11033 3764 Sacred Heart RC 166 173 7 4.05 28 11034 5205 Belthorn Primary 148 175 27 15.43 25 11036 3599 Altham St James' CE 58 60 2 3.33 9 11038 3307 St Bartholomew's CE 184 199 15 7.54 30 11039 3308 Gt Harwood St John's CE 158 171 13 7.60 25 11040 3746 Our Lady & St Hubert's Catholic 142 150 8 5.33 23 11041 3747 St Wulstan's RC 141 175 34 19.43 25 11042 2067 Great Harwood Primary 263 315 52 16.51 45 11045 3130 Rishton Methodist 200 261 61 23.37 35 11046 3316 St Peter's & St Paul's CE 207 210 3 1.43 30 11047 3752 St Charles' RC 184 210 26 12.38 30

Hyndburn 7187 8120 933 11.49 1195 (Hyndburn only)

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN Burnley 12001 2076 Briercliffe Primary 295 359 64 17.83 50 12002 2095 Worsthorne Primary 188 210 22 10.48 30 12003 3324 St John's CE, Cliviger 189 210 21 10.00 30 12005 3021 Padiham Green CE 179 203 24 11.82 30 12006 2071 Padiham Primary 302 411 109 26.52 60 St John the Baptist RC, 12007 3749 Padiham 207 210 3 1.43 30 12008 3313 St Leonard's CE 143 180 37 20.56 30 12011 3181 Hapton CE / Meth 86 105 19 18.10 15 12012 2228 Barden Junior School 199 243 44 18.11 60 12013 2164 Brunshaw Primary 396 360 -36 -10.00 60 12015 3434 Christ The King RC 206 210 4 1.90 30 12020 2230 Heasandford Primary 550 630 80 12.70 90 12021 3431 Holy Trinity CE 227 240 13 5.42 35 12022 2237 Ightenhill Primary 324 420 96 22.86 60 12023 2162 Lowerhouse Junior 194 180 -14 -7.78 60 12025 2226 Rosegrove Infant 132 150 18 12.00 50 12028 3438 St Augustine of Canterbury RC 149 209 60 28.71 30 12029 3433 St James Lanehead CE 267 256 -11 -4.30 40 12031 3980 St Mary's RC 288 402 114 28.36 57 12032 3435 St Mary Magdalen's RC 196 204 8 3.92 30 12033 3430 St Peter's CE 133 146 13 8.90 25 12034 3432 St Stephen's CE 175 210 35 16.67 30 12035 2224 Stoneyholme Community 353 420 67 15.95 60 12037 2235 Whittlefield Primary 183 210 27 12.86 30 12039 2166 Casterton Primary 278 280 2 0.71 40 12040 3440 Wellfield Methodist 207 208 1 0.48 30 12041 2839 Rosewood Primary 315 420 105 25.00 60 12042 2840 Cherry Fold Primary 263 428 165 38.55 60 12043 2841 Springfield Community 157 270 113 41.85 50 12044 2015 St John the Baptist RC 276 367 91 24.80 49 12612 2165 Barden Infant School 160 180 20 11.11 60 Burnley Totals 7217 8531 1314 15.40 1371 Pendle 13001 2087 Bradley Primary School 354 383 29 7.57 55 13003 3328 Gt Marsden St John's CE 198 180 -18 -10.00 30 13004 3757 Holy Saviour Catholic 203 210 7 3.33 30 13005 3330 St Philip's CE 132 149 17 11.41 20 13006 3331 St Paul's CE 205 210 5 2.38 30 13007 2090 Lomeshaye Junior School 195 240 45 18.75 60 13009 3759 St John Southworth RC 196 210 14 6.67 30 13010 2092 Walverden Primary School 371 420 49 11.67 60 13011 2093 Whitefield Infant School 173 175 2 1.14 60 13012 2089 Marsden Community 403 413 10 2.42 60 13013 2414 Catercliffe Community 273 315 42 13.33 45 13014 3323 St Thomas CE 116 119 3 2.52 17 13016 2074 Barrowford School 263 280 17 6.07 45 13017 3754 Holy Trinity RC 102 105 3 2.86 15 13018 2077 Walter Street Primary 373 420 47 11.19 60 13019 2075 Blacko Primary 92 94 2 2.13 12 13020 3327 St Mary's CE, Newchurch 39 30 -9 -30.00 8 13022 3979 Wheatley Lane Methodist 202 210 8 3.81 30 11

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN 13023 3094 Roughlee CE 20 27 7 25.93 7 13024 3107 St John's CE, Higham 130 140 10 7.14 20 13027 3325 Colne Christ Church CE 167 159 -8 -5.03 25 13028 2079 Laneshawbridge Primary 144 140 -4 -2.86 20 13029 2080 Lord Street School 377 447 70 15.66 60 13030 2082 Park Primary School 267 411 144 35.04 60 13031 2083 Primet Primary School 178 210 32 15.24 30 13032 3755 Sacred Heart RC, Colne 216 210 -6 -2.86 30 13033 2085 West Street Primary 140 216 76 35.19 35 13034 2094 Trawden Forest Primary 163 182 19 10.44 26 13035 3326 St Michael & All Angel's CE 195 210 15 7.14 30 13036 2646 Reedley Primary 269 315 46 14.60 45 13040 3011 Barnoldswick CE 194 189 -5 -2.65 30 13041 2812 Coates Lane Primary 190 200 10 5.00 30 13042 2238 Gisburn Road Community 278 337 59 17.51 60 13044 3805 St Joseph's Catholic 138 126 -12 -9.52 18 13046 2214 Kelbrook Primary 117 138 21 15.22 20 13048 2240 Salterforth Primary 91 119 28 23.53 17 13049 2215 Springfield Primary 181 210 29 13.81 30 Pendle Totals 7345 8149 804 9.87 1260 Ribble Valley 06064 3129 Brabins Endowed 55 70 15 21.43 10 06065 3743 St Mary's RC 35 54 19 35.19 10 06066 3727 Alston Lane Catholic 184 175 -9 -5.14 28 06067 3583 Longridge CE 198 238 40 16.81 30 06068 5203 Barnacre Road Primary 193 210 17 8.10 35 06069 3728 St Wilfrid's RC 119 210 91 43.33 30 06070 3589 Ribchester St Wilfrid's CE 85 112 27 24.11 16 11048 3741 St Joseph's RC 50 56 6 10.71 10 11050 3302 Langho St Leonard's CE 241 270 29 10.74 40 11051 3742 St Mary's RC, Langho 261 270 9 3.33 40 11052 3809 Bolton By Bowland CE 35 52 17 32.69 7 11053 3810 Thorneyholme RC 52 70 18 25.71 8 11054 3303 Chatburn CE 107 115 8 6.96 17 11055 2651 Brookside CE 210 229 19 8.30 35 11056 2391 Edisford Primary 198 210 12 5.71 30 11057 2064 Clitheroe Pendle Primary 302 350 48 13.71 50 11058 3304 St James' CE, Clitheroe 314 357 43 12.04 60 11059 3744 St Michael & St John's RC 205 210 5 2.38 30 11060 3319 Simonstone St Peter's CE 120 119 -1 -0.84 18 11061 2266 Gisburn Primary 112 115 3 2.61 20 11063 3807 Grindleton CE 39 56 17 30.36 8 11064 3111 Read St John's CE 183 210 27 12.86 30 11065 2073 Sabden Primary 82 90 8 8.89 15 11066 3753 St Mary's RC, Sabden 61 84 23 27.38 12 11067 3408 Brennand's Endowed 36 70 34 48.57 8 Waddington & West Bradford 11068 3808 CE 144 174 30 17.24 25 11069 3321 Whalley CE Primary 272 280 8 2.86 40 11070 3131 Barrow School 122 119 -3 -2.52 17 11071 3300 Balderstone St Leonard's CE 100 105 5 4.76 15 11072 3312 Mellor St Mary's CE 137 140 3 2.14 20 11073 3748 St Mary's RC, Osbalderston 80 70 -10 -14.29 10 12

NET DfES NOR CAP LCC No No School Name (short) Jan '07 Jan '07 XP/SP Surplus % PAN 11074 5202 Salesbury CE 271 294 23 7.82 42 Ribble Valley Totals 4603 5184 581 11.21 766 Rossendale 14003 2111 Northern Primary 171 203 32 15.76 30 14005 2113 Sharneyford Primary 53 59 6 10.17 10 14006 3768 St Joseph's RC, Bacup 72 192 120 62.50 30 14007 3769 Bacup St Mary's RC 128 210 82 39.05 30 14008 2112 St Saviour's Community 104 112 8 7.14 16 14011 3196 Stacksteads CE 229 240 11 4.58 35 14015 3022 Constable Lee CE 261 270 9 3.33 40 14016 3776 St James The Less RC 186 206 20 9.71 29 14018 3023 St Mary's Rawtenstall CE 184 203 19 9.36 30 14019 2595 Crawshawbooth Primary 318 315 -3 -0.95 45 14020 2124 Rawtenstall Cloughfold 61 120 59 49.17 25 14022 2129 Waterfoot Primary 296 292 -4 -1.37 45 14023 3775 St Peter's RC, Newchurch 87 120 33 27.50 21 14024 3113 St Nicholas CE 164 210 46 21.90 30 14025 3366 St Annes Edgeside CE 101 105 4 3.81 15 14026 2409 Balladen Community 154 210 56 26.67 30 14027 2128 Water Primary School 74 115 41 35.65 20 14028 3357 St James CE 156 210 54 25.71 30 14029 2117 Haslingden Primary 436 560 124 22.14 80 14030 2687 Broadway Primary School 192 210 18 8.57 30 14031 2118 Helmshore Primary 336 350 14 4.00 50 14032 3771 St Mary's RC, Haslingden 81 150 69 46.00 25 14033 3359 St John's Stonefold CE 131 140 9 6.43 20 14034 3615 St Veronica's RC 146 157 11 7.01 25 14038 3099 Edenfield CE 124 140 16 11.43 20 14039 2121 Stubbins Primary 194 210 16 7.62 30 14040 3058 St Bartholomew's CE 138 210 72 34.29 30 14042 2272 Tonacliffe Primary 206 315 109 34.60 45 14044 3889 Our Lady & St Anselm's RC 120 142 22 15.49 25 14045 3811 St John with St Michael's CE 99 119 20 16.81 17 Rossendale Totals 5002 6095 1093 17.93 908

LANCASHIRE TOTALS 88396 103084 14688 14.25

Secondary Schools

LCC DfES NOR Net Cap No No School Name (Short) Jan-07 Jan-07 XP/SP Surplus % MIN MAX IAN PAN 01101 5401 Lancaster Royal Grammar 1008 1165 157 13.48 1165 1295 158 142 01102 5402 Lancaster Girls Grammar 880 941 61 6.48 895 995 112 112 01103 4005 Skerton Community High 255 498 243 48.80 448 498 99 120 01104 4689 Ripley St Thomas CE 1548 1371 -177 -12.91 1233 1371 241 243 01108 4006 Heysham High 1180 1322 142 10.74 1189 1322 237 245 01109 4302 Morecambe High 1418 1405 -13 -0.93 1264 1405 244 260 01110 4167 Carnforth High School 542 680 138 20.29 676 752 136 120 01111 4170 Hornby High School 176 250 74 29.60 249 277 50 50 01112 4717 Our Lady's Catholic College 1017 1128 111 9.84 1015 1128 193 200 01113 4405 Central Lancaster High 642 731 89 12.18 731 813 146 130 Lancaster Totals 8666 9491 825

02101 4011 Millfield High 721 1025 304 29.66 1013 1126 205 205 02102 4010 Hodgson High School 1155 1125 -30 -2.67 1012 1125 225 227 02103 5404 Baines School 1071 1017 -54 -5.31 945 1051 162 162 02104 4628 St Aidan's CE High 824 840 16 1.90 795 884 168 168 02105 4408 Fleetwood Sports College 1206 1260 54 4.29 1243 1382 240 240 02106 4718 Cardinal Allen Catholic 811 796 -15 -1.88 796 885 159 150 02109 4160 Garstang High 760 850 90 10.59 850 945 170 168 Wyre Totals 6548 6913 365

04114 4137 St Annes High 1728 1715 -13 -0.76 1627 1808 283 283 04115 4155 Carr Hill High 1316 1306 -10 -0.77 1232 1369 234 234 04116 4627 St Bede's RC High 727 663 -64 -9.65 596 663 132 135 Fylde Totals 3771 3684 -87

06101 4146 Fulwood High School 961 1040 79 7.60 1040 1156 208 200 06103 4232 Broughton High 888 880 -8 -0.91 850 945 176 176 06104 4000 Ashton High School 803 818 15 1.83 818 909 163 160 06105 4410 Moor Park High 511 520 9 1.73 508 565 104 104 06106 4004 City of Preston High 420 750 330 44.00 742 825 150 150 06111 4049 Tulketh High School 297 669 372 55.61 669 744 133 138

LCC DfES NOR Net Cap No No School Name (Short) Jan-07 Jan-07 XP/SP Surplus % MIN MAX IAN PAN 06112 5405 Archbishop Temple CE 774 750 -24 -3.20 676 752 150 150 06115 4168 Longridge High 746 760 14 1.84 739 822 152 152 06116 4721 St Cecilia's RC 448 450 2 0.44 442 492 85 90 06117 4610 Christ The King Catholic 450 615 165 26.83 560 623 123 120 06118 4606 Our Lady's Catholic 907 900 -7 -0.78 885 984 180 180 06121 4609 Corpus Christi Catholic 814 850 36 4.24 846 941 170 170 Preston Totals 8019 9002 983

07101 4500 Balshaw's CE High 921 925 4 0.43 881 979 185 185 07102 5407 St Mary's Catholic 779 871 92 10.56 871 968 174 166 07103 4140 Worden Sports College 519 610 91 14.92 610 678 122 118 07104 4036 Wellfield High 435 834 399 47.84 834 927 166 166 07105 4623 Brownedge St Mary's RC 741 886 145 16.37 797 886 177 180 07106 4741 All Hallow's Catholic 894 890 -4 -0.45 860 956 178 178 07107 4150 Walton-le-Dale High 602 785 183 23.31 780 867 157 157 07108 4193 Lostock Hall High 810 801 -9 -1.12 801 890 160 160 07109 4685 Hutton CE Grammar 804 846 42 4.96 774 861 128 128 07110 4135 Priory Tech College 946 1000 54 5.40 996 1107 200 200 07111 4332 Penwortham Girls High 754 722 -32 -4.43 649 722 144 155 South Ribble Totals 8205 9170 965

08103 4631 St Bede's Catholic 692 650 -42 -6.46 616 685 130 130 08104 4159 Burscough Priory 717 819 102 12.45 819 911 163 150 08105 4173 Up Holland High 917 887 -30 -3.38 798 887 177 191 08106 4200 Glenburn Sports college 828 1045 217 20.77 1045 1162 209 187 08112 4178 Tarleton High 877 774 -103 -13.31 696 774 154 156 08113 4411 Lathom High 635 901 266 29.52 901 1002 180 153 08114 4621 Queen of the Peace Catholic 799 834 35 4.20 834 927 166 165 08115 4412 Ormskirk School 1444 1601 157 9.81 1601 1779 263 240 West Lancashire Totals 6909 7511 602

09101 4131 Southlands High 1008 1050 42 4.00 948 1054 210 210 09102 4311 Parklands High 1117 1102 -15 -1.36 991 1102 220 228 09103 4742 Holy Cross Catholic 805 825 20 2.42 794 883 165 165

LCC DfES NOR Net Cap No No School Name (Short) Jan-07 Jan-07 XP/SP Surplus % MIN MAX IAN PAN 09104 4686 St Michael's CE High 1120 1003 -117 -11.67 902 1003 200 225 09105 4403 Albany Science College 623 915 292 31.91 907 1008 183 183 09106 4626 Bishop Rawsthorne CE High 929 900 -29 -3.22 891 990 180 180 Chorley Totals 5602 5795 193

11101 4015 Norden High School 703 753 50 6.64 753 837 150 150 11102 4195 The Hollins Tech College 750 824 74 8.98 824 916 164 152 11103 4797 Mt Carmel RC High 790 810 20 2.47 791 879 162 162 11105 4026 Ryddings High 1052 1124 72 6.41 1124 1249 224 226 11106 4630 St Christopher's CE High 951 925 -26 -2.81 925 1028 185 168 11108 4238 Moorhead High 944 1015 71 7.00 976 1085 203 203 11109 4725 St Augustine's RC High 1028 1025 -3 -0.29 933 1037 205 205 11110 4041 Bowland High 494 512 18 3.52 512 569 102 93 11111 5403 Clitheroe Royal Grammar 1249 1272 23 1.81 1210 1302 120 120 11113 4013 Ribblesdale High 1305 1278 -27 -2.11 1150 1278 255 260 Hyndburn / Ribble Valley Totals 9266 9538 272

12110 4801 Shuttleworth College 737 815 78 9.57 733 815 163 12111 4802 Hameldon Community College 1556 1775 219 12.34 1775 1973 355 12112 4806 Unity College 869 1050 181 17.24 971 1079 210 12113 4803 Sir John Thursby 876 1050 174 16.57 1039 1155 210 12114 4804 Blessed Trinity RC College 1439 1580 141 8.92 1580 1756 316 12115 4805 Burnley Schools' Sixth Form 279 584 305 52.23 525 584

Burnley Totals 5756 6854 1098

13101 4019 Primet High 775 950 175 18.42 920 1023 190 190 13103 4040 West Craven High 748 842 94 11.16 842 936 168 165 13107 4018 Colne Park High 916 930 14 1.51 861 957 186 186 13108 4624 SS J Fisher & T More RC High 746 681 -65 -9.54 612 681 136 150 13110 4800 Marsden Heights 1139 1730 591 34.16 1730 1923 346 13111 4799 Pendle Vale 816 876 60 6.85 788 876 175

LCC DfES NOR Net Cap No No School Name (Short) Jan-07 Jan-07 XP/SP Surplus % MIN MAX IAN PAN Pendle Totals 5140 6009 869

14101 4030 Alder Grange High 659 675 16 2.37 675 750 135 126 14103 5400 Bacup & Rawtenstall Grammar 1288 1071 -217 -20.26 963 1071 112 150 14105 4709 All Saints Catholic High 494 580 86 14.83 540 601 116 120 14107 4184 Whitworth High 557 709 152 21.44 709 788 141 118 14108 4158 Fearns High 889 1058 169 15.97 1058 1176 211 210 14109 4402 Haslingden High 1485 1492 7 0.47 1342 1492 252 256 Rossendale Totals 5372 5585 213

LANCS TOTALS 73254 79552 6298 7.92

4 Appendix 3

Projected Primary School Pupils (With Housing/ migration)

District Jan-07 Jan-08 Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 net +/- (Actual) Lancaster 9761 9789 9737 98359900 10056 3% Wyre 7410 7384 7363 74257514 7607 2.60% The Fylde 4458 4437 4393 4453 4497 4598 3.10% Preston 10530 10526 10478 1056710744 10975 4.20% South Ribble 8023 8007 8059 8200 8289 8292 3.30% West Lancashire 8776 8721 8679 8761 8881 9064 3.30% Chorley 8059 8068 8321 85048761 8973 1.30% Hyndburn 7307 7287 7327 74057496 7600 4% Ribble Valley 4481 4491 4522 4561 4599 4655 3.80% Burnley 7216 7178 7133 7180 7208 7369 2.10% Pendle 7339 7341 7417 75707724 7905 7.70% Rossendale 5338 5361 5318 54175482 5581 4.50% 88698 88590 88747 89878 91095 92675 4.48%

Appendix 4

Size of Schools 2007

District 420+ 210-419 180-209 150-179 120-149 <120 total Lancaster 4 14 6 5 5 19 53 Wyre 0163 5 41644 Fylde 2 8 4 2 2 6 24 Preston 0 20 8 9 4 13 54 Sth Ribble 0 16 10 6 1 6 39 Hyndburn 1 10 10 5 6 4 36 Ribble Valley 0 7 6 0 3 15 31 West Lancs 1 11 11 7 6 20 56 Chorley 0 11 10 10 6 12 49 Burnley 11294 4131 Pendle 0 11 10 4 5 7 37 Rossendale 1 5 6 4 7 9 32 10 141 93 61 53 128 486 % 2 29 19 13 1126

Appendix 5

Lancashire School Buildings

Pre 1919 347 430

Inter war

1945 - 1966

1967 - 1976 178

Post 1976 419

Temporary (date not known)

467

Appendix 6

The Children and Young People's

Capital Strategy Achievements in 2006/7

Our achievements in implementing the Capital Strategy for 2006/7 vary from substantial change through Building Schools for the Future (BSF) in Burnley and part of Pendle to smaller projects that are benefiting many children and young people across the county through the ongoing development and improvement of their built environment.

These are some examples of the improvements that are being made.

• Work is well underway on rebuilding the first three new secondary schools within the BSF programme. Shuttleworth College will be a 1050 place high school incorporating a Learning Support Centre. Pendle Vale College will be a 1050 high school that will be located with Pendle Community High School for children with generic learning difficulties. Burnley School’s sixth form, primary and early years campus will provide a 600 place 16-19 centre, a 420 place primary school co-located with a 50 place primary facility for pupils with special education needs, a 60 place nursery, a 52 full day care Children’s Centre, a public library and a faith centre.

• Approximately £3m of capital decanting work was carried out, ie 11 schools became 8 schools in Pendle and Burnley as part of the Building Schools for the Future project.

• Work has also commenced on two years of improvements to a further 20 schools within Lancashire Schools Modernisation Programme. This is costing approx £18.5m. Some of this money has been spent on Duke Street Primary School in Chorley to enable the whole school to be accommodated in one building leading to a better way of working for both staff and pupils.

• The Locally Co-ordinated Voluntary Aided Programme has resulted in 112 building improvement projects to voluntary added schools with 58 still ongoing. The estimated cost of this work is £7m.

• We are now in round 2 of the Children’s Centre and 29 projects are planned. Four have commenced building work on site with most of the remaining 25 starting over the summer holiday.

• The final allocations of the General Sure Start Grant Capital Other funding have been awarded and £5,280,000 will be used in 209 early years settings. For example, Goodshaw Kindergarten in Rossendale was awarded £20,000 to modify a bathroom and disabled WCs, put in DDA ramps and a sensory room.

• Drainage and pitch improvements were carried out, resulting in improved sports facilities for schools and communities through the Playing Field Capital Programme at a cost of £995,500 with additional contributions from the schools resulting in over a million pounds being invested. These improvements will allow schools to benefit from using their playing fields throughout the year.

• 37 projects were carried out to provide access improvements for disabled pupils in Lancashire at a cost of £592,290. For example, Haslingden High School has been awarded a grant of £20,160 towards the construction of a lift and sound field system in the hall

• The Opportunity Fund Programme will provide £1.5m which attracted a further £3m match funding for improving facilities aimed at improving primary enrichment, science, healthy eating and community engagement. Fearns Community Sports College has received a £100,000 grant towards their project to extend dining facilities which will provide healthy meals for all pupils on site.

2 Appendix 7 Condition Backlog in Lancashire Primary Schools by District

District Priority 1 % Priority 2 % Priority 3 % Priority 4 % Total % Lancaster 1,279,118 11.14% 6,447,264 8.64% 3,349,293 5.31% 1,956,759 5.85% 13,032,434 7.14%

Wyre 435,927 3.80%3,781,801 5.07% 2,769,024 4.39% 2,231,390 6.68% 9,218,142 5.05%

The Fylde 128,348 1.12% 1,893,674 2.54% 1,401,144 2.22% 1,033,111 3.09% 4,456,277 2.44%

Preston 1,494,062 13.02%9,531,994 12.77% 9,173,630 14.55% 3,468,591 10.38% 23,668,277 12.96%

South Ribble 1,399,591 12.19% 8,659,280 11.60% 4,533,642 7.19% 423,166 1.27% 15,015,679 8.22%

West Lancs 1,816,449 15.82% 13,672,172 18.32% 7,293,550 11.57% 993,470 2.97% 23,775,641 13.02%

Chorley 1,620,584 14.12%8,583,583 11.50% 6,350,679 10.07% 1,755,242 5.25% 18,310,088 10.03%

Hyndburn 833,499 7.26%5,069,260 6.79% 6,837,451 10.85% 5,944,540 17.78% 18,684,750 10.23%

Ribble Valley 433,690 3.78% 3,161,872 4.24% 3,585,850 5.69% 2,720,698 8.14% 9,902,110 5.42%

Burnley 828,630 7.22%7,092,281 9.50% 5,787,740 9.18% 5,035,001 15.06% 18,743,652 10.27%

Pendle 934,635 8.14%3,661,151 4.90% 7,808,826 12.39% 3,647,480 10.91% 16,052,092 8.79%

Rossendale 274,011 2.39% 3,091,954 4.14% 4,152,544 6.59% 4,215,110 12.61% 11,733,619 6.43% 11,478,544 74,646,286 63,043,373 33,424,558 182,592,764

Appendix 8

Children's Centres in Lancashire 2007

District Phase Children's Address 1 Post code Centre*

Burnley 1 Chai Centre Chai Centre, Hurtley BB10 1BY

St, Burnley Burnley 1 Sure Start Duke 33 Brunswick Street, BB11 3NY Bar - Burnley Burnley Wood Burnley 1 Sure Start South 21 Tay Street, Burnley BB11 4BU West Burnley Children's Centre Burnley 1 Whitegate Victoria Road, BB12 8TG Children’s Centre Padiham, Burnley Chorley 1 Highfield Nursery Wright Street, Chorley PR6 0SL School and Early Years Centre Hyndburn 1 Fairfield Children’s Fairfield Street, BB5 0LD Centre Accrington Hyndburn 1 Sure Start The Park Child and BB5 4RY Hyndburn Family Centre, Norfolk

Grove, Church, Accrington Lancaster 1 Carnforth Use Lune Park CC Children's Centre contact details Lancaster 1 Firbank Children’s Firbank Road, LA1 3HL Centre Lancaster Lancaster 1 Lune Park Ryelands Park, LA1 2LN Children’s Centre Lancaster Lancaster 1 Poulton Children’s Clarke Street, LA4 5HR Centre Morecambe Pendle 1 Beacon Children’s Maurice Street, Nelson BB9 7HS Centre Pendle 1 Colne Children’s Walton Street, Colne BB8 0EB Centre Pendle 1 Family Tree Centre Tunstill Square, BB9 5GZ Brierfield Pendle 1 Walton Lane Walton Lane, Nelson BB9 8BP

Children’s Centre Preston 1 Preston East Brookfield Primary Sch PR2 6TU Children’s Centre Site, Watling Street

Road, Ribbleton, Preston

District Phase Children's Address 1 Post code Centre* Preston 1 Stoneygate Stoneygate Walk, PR1 3XU Children’s Centre Preston Preston 1 Sunshine Brant Road, Preston PR1 5TU Children’s Centre Preston 1 Sure Start Preston Ashton Primary School PR2 1TU West Children’s Site, Ainsdale Drive, Centre Ashton, Preston Preston 1 Sure Start Ribbleton Hall Drive, PR2 6EE Ribbleton Ribbleton, Preston Children’s Centre Preston 1 Sure Start Brieryfield Road, PR1 8SR Riverbank Preston Children’s Centre Ribble 1 Ribblesdale Queens Road, BB7 1EL Valley Children’s Centre Clitheroe Rossendale 1 Haslingden Bury Road, Haslingden BB4 5PG Community Link & Children’s Centre Rossendale 1 Staghills Children’s Top Barn Lane, BB4 7UE Centre Newchurch, Rossendale Rossendale 1 The Maden Rochdale Road, Bacup OL13 9NZ Community and Children’s Centre South 1 Wade Hall 75 Royal Avenue, PR25 1BX Ribble Children’s Centre Leyland West Lancs 1 First Steps First Steps Tanhouse, WN8 6BA Children’s Centre Sure Start Children’s Centre, Eavesdale, Tanhouse, Skelmersdale West Lancs 1 Park Children’s Barnes Road, WN8 8HN Centre Skelmersdale West Lancs 1 St. John’s St John’s Catholic WN8 6PF Children’s Centre Primary School,

and Extended Flamstead, Birch School Green, Skelmersdale Wyre 1 Fleetwood 1 – 9 Kemp Street, FY7 6JX Children’s Centre Fleetwood Wyre 1 Wyre Rural St Thomas CE Primary PR3 1PB Children’s Centre School, Kepple Lane, Garstang, Preston Burnley 2 Barden Lane Barden Lane, BB10 1HY Nursery School Burnley

District Phase Children's Address 1 Post code Centre* Burnley 2 Ightenhill Primary Alder Street, BB12 6ED School Burnley Chorley 2 Buckshaw Primary Chancery Road, Astley PR7 1XP School Village, Chorley Chorley 2 Clayton Brook Great Greens Lane, PR5 8HL Primary School Clayton Brook, Bamber Bridge Chorley 2 Coppull Primary Park Road, Coppull, PR7 5AH

School Chorley Chorley 2 Duke Street Duke Street, Chorley PR7 3DU Nursery School Fylde 2 Freckleton Strike Strike Lane, PR4 1HR Lane Primary Freckleton, Preston School Fylde 2 Pear Tree Kirkham, Preston PR4 2HA Children's Centre

Fylde 2 Supporting Fylde Fylde Family Support FY8 1TR Families Centre, Sydney Street, St Annes Hyndburn 2 Copperhouse 7 Station Road, BB1 4HF Children’s Centre Rishton, Blackburn Hyndburn 2 Great Harwood Rushton Street, Great BB6 7JQ Primary School Harwood, Blackburn Hyndburn 2 Huncoat Primary Lynwood Road, BB5 6LR School Huncoat, Accrington Hyndburn 2 Mount Pleasant Earl Street, Clayton le BB5 5HT Primary School Moors, Accrington Lancaster 2 Appletree Nursery Milking Stile Lane, LA1 5QB School Lancaster Lancaster 2 Heysham Use Poulton CC Children's Centre address Lancaster 2 Sandylands Hampton Road, LA3 1EJ Primary School Heysham, Morecambe

Lancaster 2 Westgate Primary Langridge Way, LA4 4XF School Westgate, Morecambe Pendle 2 Gisburn Road Gisburn Road, BB18 6UD Primary School Barnoldswick Preston 2 Sharoe Green 8 Sharoe Green Lane, PR2 8ED Library Fulwood, Preston

District Phase Children's Address 1 Post code Centre* Ribble 2 Longridge Longridge Civic Hall, PR3 3HJ Valley Children's Centre Calder Avenue, Longridge Rossendale 2 Balladen Primary Linden Lea, BB4 5HL School Rawtenstall, Rossendale Rossendale 2 St Bartholomew's Hall Street, Whitworth, OL12 8SS CE Primary School Rochdale South 2 Kingsfold Primary Martinfield Road, PR1 9HJ Ribble School Penwortham, Preston South 2 Walton le Dale Brindle Road, Bamber PR5 6RN Ribble High School Bridge, Preston South 2 Wellfield Business Yewlands Drive, PR25 2TP Ribble and Enterprise Leyland College West Lancs 2 Moorgate Nursery Moorgate, L39 4RY School Ormskirk West Lancs 2 The Grove Youth Burscough and Community Centre Wyre 2 Thornton Primary Heys Street, Thornton FY5 5HY School (formerly Cleveleys Burn Naze) Wyre 2 Wyre Family Rothwell Drive, FY7 8FF Support Resource Fleetwood* Centre

Appendix 9

As at Jan 07 Lancs No School Name Type Part Time Full Time Total Morecambe and Heysham Morecambe 01130 Road School SA 2 148 150 01131 The Loyne School Lancaster SA 1 74 75 Total 225 02130 Great Arley School SA 1 86 87 02131 Brookfield School. Poulton-le-Fylde SLD 0 26 26 02132 Thornton Cleveleys Red Marsh School SA 1 54 55 Total 168 04133 Kirkham Pear Tree School SA 5 65 70 Total 70 06130 Elms School SA 4 55 59 06131 Moorbrook School SLD 0 37 37 06132 Moorfield School SA 7 56 63 06133 Sherburn School SA 0 88 88 Total 247 07130 Lostock Hall Moor Hey School SA 0 85 85 07131 Walton-le-Dale. The Coppice School SA 4 58 62 Total 147 08135 Beacon School SA 0 66 66 08136 Kingsbury Primary School SPD 5 24 29 West Lancashire Community High 08137 School SLD 0 88 88 Total 183 09130 Chorley Astley Park School SA 0 111 111 09131 Mayfield School SA 2 71 73 Total 184 11130 Oswaldtwistle White Ash School SA 0 44 44 11131 Broadfield Specialist School SA 0 114 114 11132 Great Harwood North Cliffe School SA 56 56 Total 214 12134 The Rose School SLD 0 39 39 12135 Holly Grove School SPD 2 70 72 12136 Ridgewood Community High School SLD 0 155 155 Total 266 13133 Pendle View Primary School SPD 0 55 55 13134 Pendle Community High School SLD 0 110 110 Total 165 14130 Tor View Community Special School SA 0 120 120 Rawtenstall Cribden House 14132 Community Special School SPD 0 37 37 Total 157 133 Bleasdale House SA 0 22 22 131 Wennington Hall SLD 0 70 70 134 Royal Cross Primary School SPD 0 30 30 139 Hillside SA 2 60 62 Total 184 Overall Total 2210 SLD Severe Learning Difficulties SPD Special Physically Disabled SA Special Autistic

Glossary of Terms (Appendix 10)

ARM Additionally Resourced Mainstream Schools ASD Autistic Spectrum Disorder BESD Behavioural, Emotional Social Difficulties BREEAM BRE Environmental Assessment Method BSF Building Schools for the Future CLEO Cumbria and Lancashire Education On-Line COPROP Association Chief Corporate Property Officers in Local Government DFC Devolved Formula Capital DCSF Department for Children school and families DFES Department for Education and Skills DQI Design Quality Indicator DSO Direct Service Organisation ECM Every Child Matters F/T Full Time School Places GLD Generic Learning Difficulty (includes PMLD, SLD, MLD, and PD) HI Hearing Impairment ICAP Inclusion Continuum Action Plan KS2 Key Stage Two LA Local Authority LCC Lancashire County Council LCVAP LA co-ordinated voluntary aided programme (VA funding stream) LEP Local Educational Partnership MIS Management Information Software MLD Moderate Learning Difficulties MSI Multi Sensory Impairment NHS National Health Service NHSS National Healthy Schools Status ONS Office of National Statistics PCP Primary Capital Programme PESSCL Physical Education Sports Strategy PFI Private Finance Initiative PLASC Pupil Level Annual School Census PMLD Profound & Multiple Learning Difficulty PRINCE 2 Public Sector Project Management System P/T Part Time School Places SEN Special Educational Needs SERFs Special Educational Resourced Facilities SLCN Speech Language Communication Needs SLD Severe Learning Difficulty SpLD Specific Learning Difficulty SSP School Sport Partnership TFC Together for Children VI Visual Impairment VLE Virtual Learning Environment VOIP Voice over Internet Protocol

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX 'B' 22 July 2008

Initial Priorities for Investment

In addition to the Strategy for Change, the national guidance on the Primary Capital Programme issued by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) in December 2007 requires authorities to submit details of their proposed investment plans for the first four years of the programme. This covers the financial years 2009/10 to 2013/14. The DCSF will issue a template at the end of April 2008 which will set out how the information is to be presented.

In determining the prioritisation for initial investment, the Advisory Board recommended the use of the objective matrix of need as set out in the Strategy for Change document. The matrix was based on a number of key indicators as set out below:

− Condition and suitability of primary school buildings − Deprivation using a multiple index of deprivation and free school meals as an amalgam of measures − Sufficiency of school buildings, ie level of surplus places or overcrowding − Test results at Key Stage 2 − Popularity of schools as measured by oversubscription.

The information was collected in relation to all primary schools and collated at a sub district level designed to capture clusters of schools that largely served particular communities. The matrix involved a scoring system and sub districts were then ranked according to the scores. The components of the matrix and the scoring system were the subject of extensive consultation with schools, Lancashire Locals and the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for Children and Young People. The matrix was designed to assist the prioritisation process not to be the sole determinant as other judgements are needed to set the best time for investment in a particular area.

Surplus Places

One of the aims of the PCP is to reduce surplus places. In some cases this can be done by removing or changing the use of surplus accommodation but in other cases it requires a detailed review of the existing school infrastructure. These reviews must follow national guidelines and if reorganisation is required can take many months to reach a decision and many more months to implement. The Strategy for Change and associated prioritisation of investment will not be approved by the DCSF if it includes proposals to invest in schools in urban areas with a high proportion of surplus places without a commitment to reduce surplus places.

Reviews and reorganisation create disruption and a revised school infrastructure can take time to settle down to a point were future needs can be properly assessed. There is also the need to consider the impact of increasing pupil numbers and the effect of major regeneration programmes on demand for school places.

Recommended Prioritisation Programme

Taking into account existing commitments and the issues outlined above, the Advisory Board considered a possible approach to investment during the first four years of the PCP. This involved looking at the 15 sub districts that scored highest using the matrix and considering other factors such as recent reorganisation, the need for reorganisation reviews before investment could be justified, commitments to existing projects and future regeneration programmes and putting together a programme based on retaining those projects already approved within a prioritisation approach at a sub district level.

The recommended approach involves:

1. Retention of major projects already committed to which are:

− Padiham Primary School consolidation on a single site − Lostock Hall Primary School Consolidation on a single site − Morecambe Bay Primary School replacement of existing building − New primary school in Buckshaw Village − Possible additional primary school places in Nelson − Co-location of primary special school in Pendle − There may be other major Aided School projects to be added.

2. One or possibly two major reviews of primary school organisation in urban areas with a high proportion of surplus places. The first review would involve the schools in East Preston with schools in West Preston as the possible second review.

3. Maintaining close monitoring of those areas that continue to have relatively high levels of surplus places following relatively recent major reviews and reorganisations. If the situation regarding surplus places deteriorates to the point where one or more schools become vulnerable then the area may need to be brought in to the PCP earlier. The sub districts involved are:

Burnley Central Bacup Skelmersdale Rawtenstall.

4. Undertaking a number of investment projects in those areas that scored highest on the matrix where no significant reorganisation of schools is likely to be needed. The sub districts involved are:

Accrington Central Chorley Fleetwood Nelson Oswaldtwistle Padiham

5. Maintain ongoing monitoring and identifying those areas that could be included in the first four years if circumstances allow and identify those areas that are likely to be in the second wave of the PCP as soon as possible but no later than September 2009. The areas/issues to be given particular scrutiny are:

Scarisbrick Clayton le Moors to possibly run alongside Accrington and Oswaldtwistle Haslingden Individual projects including possible Aided School reorganisations An ICT improvements/infrastructure programme particularly for rural schools.

The recommended approach to prioritisation involves all five of the above factors and the overall programme of prioritisation will be formally reviewed each year as part of the capital planning process.

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 July 2008

Part I - Item No. 8

Electoral Division affected:

All

Lancashire County Developments Ltd.

Contact for further information: Andrew Leeming (Senior Regeneration Officer), 01772 536600, Lancashire County Developments Ltd., [email protected]

Executive Summary

Lancashire County Developments Limited (LCDL) is Lancashire County Council’s economic development company and provides the economic development services for the authority. This report highlights some of the work it is involved with in the Lancaster District, namely, Storey House, A view from Eric, Centenary House, Sports and arts diversionary activities and a pre-feasibility looking at the transformational opportunities for Morecambe.

Decision Required

The Lancashire Local is asked to note this report, make any observations and consider whether it would wish to explore in more detail the projects presented.

Background

Lancashire County Developments Limited (LCDL) is Lancashire County Council’s economic development company and provides the economic development services for the authority. LCDL is committed to making Lancashire a place where everybody matters with the aim of boosting investment in businesses and people across Lancashire, making a difference to individual’s lives. This means helping businesses, citizens and local communities however and whenever we can through loans, grants and practical advice and assistance. This is done directly, working with other County Council Directorates and with partners.

At the last meeting of the Lancashire Local requested a further report providing a summary position statement on five pieces of work that LCDL were currently scoping out, this report provides this detailed summary. It should be noted that whilst this report is comprehensive, some of the initiatives explored and some of the details have not yet been provided or discussed by the LCDL Board.

- 2 -

Storey House

The Storey Creative Industry Centre (SCIC) was first presented to the LCDL Board in September 2003. The project, with potential for a much wider strategic programme of work, envisaged the conversion and adaptation of the Storey Institute, a Grade II listed building close to the centre of Lancaster, to provide high quality workspace and gallery space for the creative industries. In early 2007, Lancaster City Council took the decision to hand over this building to a trust to run and manage the building.

To date LCDL has provided the following support to the project:

• £20K to support the creative industry action research study • £15K towards the secondment of a Lancaster City Council officer to the project • £60K towards project development costs and final project appraisals • LCDL has also been a key partner in the project development that has taken place, providing officer input alongside the financial support.

LCDL will continue to provide appropriate support to the Trust and the City Council, and as such, are still currently working with officers and Trust members to understand how LCDL, and other partners may be able support the continuing development of the building, and the services within this. As with most big projects, costs have been tight, the Trust and the City recognise that there is currently a funding deficit of between £100 and £180K. It is up to all partners to seek to help secure the necessary funds to bring the project into completion, and LCDL are involved in these discussions that may inform a future report to the LCDL Board.

A View for Eric

‘A View for Eric’ is proposed to keep the momentum of the previous THI going, in 2004 the LCDL board approved £150K support to this project in order that businesses in the area could fully benefit from this heritage scheme. LCDL’s money added value to the scheme by way of providing business support to those businesses that received a THI grant. Only £50K of this money was ever released to the scheme, due to the limited number of businesses taking up the offer. In October 2007 the City Council was awarded a Stage One pass for the new proposal, allocating £25,000 towards developing the proposal further and ring-fencing the full £923,000 requested for the project. The proposal is now being developed through engaging professional advice (eg. architectural designs, property valuations and structural advice) in order to submit a Stage Two bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) in October 2008. It may then be considered appropriate to present a further report to the LCDL Board regarding the balance of the original budget approved. Should the LCDL Board approve a re-allocation to the new scheme then this would enable business support to be provided to those businesses benefiting from this new scheme. We will also be making available LCDL’s rosebud product to further enable businesses, with a sustainable business offer, to help find (if necessary) the private sector match funding required to finance their share of the improvements. The new THI will target a smaller area than the first, covering for the western part of the existing Morecambe Conservation Area at the historic heart of the resort town.

- 3 -

The new THI area takes in the Midland Hotel and Central Promenade Area but the focus of the THI will be landward of Marine Road Central on those buildings fronting out to the sea and just behind. The most notable of these streets are Marine Road Central, Victoria Street and the interlinking routes between these, such as Skipton Street. The THI Area is dominated by commercial and mixed-use properties, but there are a number of residential properties on Graham Street, Skipton Street and Victoria Street. LCDL’s contribution, if approved by the Board, will only be available for the commercial properties. In 2002 the HLF awarded the City Council £1.565m towards the conservation-led regeneration of the town. The main focus of the five year scheme was the renovation of the vacant grade II* listed Midland Hotel, which opened in June 2008. This has already created 48 new jobs for the town (more anticipated), not including the labour force employed by property developers Urban Splash to drive the three year restoration programme. Alongside this, almost seventy properties have received grants to renovate their properties to a high conservation standard, but the majority of these grants have been for residential properties in the heart of Poulton. Whilst some commercial properties in the town centre have been very successfully renovated and there is some renewed confidence in the town’s prospects, it is important that this is followed up with investment into such properties which have either been neglected or have suffered from inappropriate alterations over the years. In complete contrast to the views out to sea, buildings and streets have for long presented an unfortunate appearance when viewed from the Promenade. Unsympathetic modern interventions such as UPVC windows, doors and shopfronts together with harsh and unwelcoming security measures, create a bland and uninspiring street scene. Beside and behind such properties there are however many notable buildings which could be transformed to return them to their former glory, or given a new, but sympathetic, lease of life.

The new THI ‘ A View for Eric’ is about uncovering and revitalising Morecambe’s hidden gems and uplifting faded buildings so that together they positively contribute to the resort’s historic townscape: a colourful, vibrant and classic, seaside town.

Lancaster City Council will be the accountable body for the scheme with all relevant stakeholders, such as the HLF, NWDA, Lancashire County Council and Urban Splash taking a partnership role. The local community will also be represented, including Poulton Neighbourhood Management and the Morecambe Town Chamber of Commerce.

Lancaster City Council will be the administrators of the scheme, and therefore responsible for the scheme set-up, the appraisal process, assessing eligibility (which is largely governed by conditions set by the Heritage Lottery Fund) and undertaking all management and administration functions, including full responsibility for the marketing of the scheme. Officers are currently working on exploring ideas and this may inform a future report to the LCDL Board.

Centenary House

- 4 -

The Co-operative Store in the West End of Morecambe was built in 1927 and extended in1960. It has a gross internal floor space of approximately 25,000 square feet over three floors plus an attic and half-landings. Approximately half the ground floor is currently occupied by a Late Shop. The rest of the store closed in the mid- 1980s and has stood empty ever since.

A Business Plan Framework has been developed by Lancaster City Council to form a basis for the development of a jointly owned concept between the key partners and funding agencies. Within this plan it is assumed that the completed building has clear linkage to the local business support services acting as grow-on space and potentially incubation space as part of an economic development strategy for the West End and the wider Morecambe area.

Clearly fundamental discussion is still to be had around the core role of the Centenary House. Is it for:

• New businesses/incubation, • Grow-on business, • Social Enterprises • An asset base for development of other economic development initiatives • An asset base for wider community development/exit strategy arrangements for “Winning Back the West End” • Training/employment/skills functions – “training as well as trading” • Base for meeting mature company needs (income generation) • A mix of all of the above

LCDL are engaged in talks with the city to explore joint working and we have been aware of this build for some time now, and all parties seem keen to see it brought back into appropriate use.

The Co-Op Building is almost unique in the area in that it provides a large unencumbered space that lends itself to flexible sub-division and has existing access facilities to all three floors. The location on Regent Road, a major access corridor into the West End, means that this scheme will also assist place making and environmental improvement strategies that under pin proposals to revitalise the local economy. How the Co-op Building develops and the type of support provided needs to be ascertained, but it is a wonderful opportunity to engage in some creative thinking and innovative end use’s.

Sports & arts diversionary activities

This pilot idea is very much on the edge of LCDL responsibility and seeks to deliver a 2 year programme of Sports and Arts Diversionary Activities. It will target up to 300 hard to reach and marginalised young people, who are known to the authorities (Police Service / Fire Service / LCC Youth Offending Team) in key problem areas. It is not just about giving “naughty kids” something to do, this is about proactive and stimulating engagement, it’s an opportunity to give young people the best second, third and forth chance to better engage with those that can support them in transition from child to young adult, providing opportunities to re-engage with education and employment. Through the targeted and positive engagement of key individuals the

- 5 -

project aims to reduce / prevent re-offending and criminal records, both of which form major barriers to employment and future prosperity. This will be considered by the LCDL Board however approval is far from certain.

Beneficiaries / Referral Process – Young people aged 11-19 years would be targeted (not an open programme) and identified by the Police, Youth Offending Team, Youth Workers and referred by schools. The police and youth workers will identify young people in the weeks leading up to the first sessions via outreach work and whilst the police are on the beat. Young people can also be referred by local Prevent & Deter Group or via Multi Agency Problem Solving Group (MAPS)

Positive Activities / Timescales - The project will be delivered over a 2 year period, commencing Sep 08. During the 2 years the young people will attend a variety of arts & sports activities running every Friday evening for 90 minutes for 2 years (100 weeks in total). Activities would include; drama and dance workshops, DJ workshops, music sessions, film and graffiti art along with a whole host of sports activities at various venues. Sessions would be delivered in 5 specific areas of the District, identified as hotspots by the Police. For the first year the selected areas are West End of Morecambe, Poulton, Skerton, Ridge and Marsh. Each area will establish a planning / delivery team consisting of all partners who are going to deliver project in that area. The project will be reviewed on an on-going basis and activities / delivery changed to reflect feedback from the young people / partners.

Partners – The project will be a partnership between Lancaster City Council (lead) and a number of partners including Youth and Community Services, Voluntary Youth Sectors, Police Service, Fire Service, Youth Offending Team and Local Sports and Arts Providers. Further funding partners include; Sport England, Community Safety, West End Partnership, Kick project. The partners have the local knowledge and expertise in this area of work, to target young people and provide the activities which will engage them.

Skills – AQA qualifications in sport and art that young people can put into any records of achievement will be delivered. In some cases the AQA approach will re- engage some young people back into education in an area that interests them. The development of the skills component is an important addition and this has assisted LCDL to consider the pilot.

Added Valued - This project is in addition to what each of the above organisations deliver, and will therefore add value and additionality to Services. This project would not be possible without the collation of partners, who are prepared to share experience, skills and resources in order to deliver this innovative project, which meets their joint objectives. Youth and Community Services have made the following statement in support of the proposal. “The project will add value to what the Young People’s Service, and voluntary youth services are trying to do in Lancaster in providing a wide range of positive opportunities for young people, particularly at times when they are not occupied in school, college or other employment. The bid would significantly enrich the local ‘Youth Offer’, particularly for those young people who may not currently engage in such provision, and, by bringing the providers together to discuss the

- 6 -

range of provision we can make, we are able to ensure there is no unnecessary duplication and that each partner’s contribution will add value to the project.”

Evaluation / Forward Strategy –The project is a fixed 2 year intervention with clear aims and objectives. The young people will all be given support following their attendance on the project to progress them onto further provision, higher education and employment. All beneficiaries will be required to complete documentation during their duration on the project in order to assess the impact the project has made to their lives and identify positive progression routes for the future. This project through evaluations undertaken during and post project will help to shape provision and inform thinking in development of future projects / intervention.

This project is going to the next LCDL Board on the 18th July, the direction of the Board is being sought regarding possible funding of £60K towards a total package of £125K. However this pilot is at the edge of LCDL activities and may not secure Board approval for funding at this level.

Pre-feasibility looking at transformational opportunities for Morecambe

There have been recent discussions at Lancaster Vision Board and numerous ideas about different visitor attractions that would contribute to the revitalisation of Morecambe Promenade. After having meetings with the Visitor Economy sub-group and Officers of Lancaster City Council, it has been agreed that LCDL should explore the possibility of providing funding for and seeking match funding to conduct a flexible pre-feasibility study into a matrix of different major visitor attractions and possibilities for Morecambe which will re-evaluate its new role as a seaside town.

As such, it is suggested that there are a number of potential flagship visitor attractions for Morecambe, and in order to consider which ones could be pursued and that would make a positive contribution to the economic development and regeneration of Morecambe, it is necessary to subject them to a staged evaluation to determine which of these should progress to more detailed development work.

Aim

The primary aim of this project is to establish the most effective, efficient and viable options for investment in Morecambe to achieve the greatest effect upon the economy by unlocking a range of public and private sector investment to develop the infrastructure.

The Visitor Economy Working Group already have a ‘portfolio’ of ideas that can be scrutinised as above, for example;

The Beachcomber concept (as put forward by its project developer Ian Hughes). The Beachcomber project is inspired by a local person and his passion to see Morecambe realise its ambition and help it out of the spiral of decline it has found itself in. To date this local person has networked his idea to all manner of people (mostly influential), however he has also had considerable help in taking some of the ideas forward; for example he is

- 7 -

working with two Universities (Lancaster and Sheffield), and has won a design award for the idea from BURA. Performance pontoon /stage, Water sports / water sports centre, Events, A more generic visitor centre, The winter gardens (we appreciate this is subject to a separate piece of work but it would be inappropriate to omit it from this list), A new performance venue, Pedestrianisation of a section of promenade, The Regional Park/Bay Life Centre, Complementary Creative Industries, Other ideas which emerge during the study, for example green tourism/extreme sports.

However, it is intended that the study will include and help generate other potential projects.

Objectives

The objectives of the project are, therefore, to;

Commission relevant specialist and technical advice to update baseline data on the Morecambe visitor economy Give guidance on the potential opportunities for public/private investment in destination and/or visitor projects that should be made to:

o Build on the regeneration investment made to date in Morecambe, o Take advantage of potential transformational effects of future planned projects such as the proposed M6 link and Central Promenade development .

In simple terms the work should address:

How the visitor asset base of the area can be improved, Seek guidance on potential visitor growth areas which Morecambe can specialise and target, Outline current and future deliverable private/public sector investment potential in specific projects/developments, Recommend the type and scale of investment needed to achieve a transformational increase in visitors/spend to the area, Evaluate the feasibility and economic impact expected within the economy of such investment.

This project will provide Lancaster’s Vision Board and the Council with a tested set of preferred projects into which the NWDA and other external funds may invest. The study will establish which projects will achieve the maximum benefit to the visitor economy in Morecambe area.

- 8 -

At the request of City Council colleagues, we have put this request to the LCDL Board on hold whilst they under-go a root and branch review of their activity. It is hoped that we may seek Board consideration of this opportunity later in the year.

Consultations

N/A

Advice

N/A

Alternative options to be considered

N/A

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

N/A

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No Andrew Leemimg/ Report to Lancashire Local 17th June 2008 Lancashire County – Lancaster District: Developments Ltd/ “Lancashire County 01772 536600 Developments Ltd”

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22nd July 2008

Part I - Item No. 9

Electoral Division affected: Lancaster East, Skerton

Traffic Issues at Skerton Bridge, Lancaster

Contact for further information: Jim Robson, 01524 753340, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate, [email protected]

Executive Summary

Members requested a report on traffic issues around Skerton Bridge, Lancaster, arising from concern following road traffic collisions.

Decision Required

That the report be noted.

Background

Skerton bridge carries about 26500 vehicles per day comprising 16000 vehicles from A683 Morecambe Road and 10500 vehicles from A6 Owen Road. Approximately one third of the traffic uses the approach to the bridge and the bridge itself to weave from one lane to another in order to be in the correct lane for leaving the bridge at its southern end towards the city centre or M6 J34.

In the period 1st March 2003 to 29th February 2008, between Owen Road/Morecambe Road junction and Kingsway/Parliament Street junction, there have been 15 recorded road traffic collisions which resulted in injury; all the recorded injuries were slight. There was a further collision on 20th May 2008, but the details have not yet been included in the data. There have also been reports of other collisions which have not resulted in injury and have therefore not been recorded.

4 of the recorded collisions appeared to occur as a result of a driver failing to take proper account of other vehicles while weaving from one lane to another. A further 5 of the recorded collisions appeared to result from a driver failing to take proper account of a vehicle which had stopped in the lane ahead resulting in a shunt. The remaining recorded collisions had a range of contributory factors.

A particular concern is that collisions occurring on the bridge may result in vehicles impacting upon the bridge parapet. These impacts have occurred at an average rate

- 2 - of more than 1 a year, resulting in significant damage to the parapet and on one occasion in 2005 resulting in a vehicle leaving the bridge and dropping into the river below. On that occasion, the driver was very fortunate to receive only very minor injuries. This is the only parapet impact accident recorded in the collisions data as non-injury accidents are not recorded.

Skerton Bridge has Grade II listed status and is a scheduled Ancient Monument. This means that all repairs to the bridge are subject to a management agreement with English Heritage. The parapet is ashlar masonry comprising solid panels and groups of 6 balusters, all topped by a coping. The parapet masonry is largely unreinforced and it does not comply with current standards in terms of structural performance. It relies on its self weight for stability and offers limited resistance to vehicle impact. The open nature of much of the parapet also significantly reduces its ability to deflect errant vehicles. However, in practice, the parapet has generally provided sufficient energy absorption to keep errant vehicles on the bridge, often at the expense of the parapet masonry.

The 4 recorded collisions arising from weaving manoeuvres occurred in the period 2004-2006. At the junction of A6 Owen Road/A683 Morecambe Road, the weaving length was increased by removing a central reserve and signing was improved in spring 2007. Since that time there have been no recorded collisions arising from weaving manoeuvres and no further impacts upon the bridge parapets.

The improved signing may prove to be effective in reducing the number of collisions arising from weaving manoeuvres in the longer term, but the risks arising from impacts upon the parapets still need to be addressed. The County Council Bridges Division has just completed a report on how these risks may be addressed and this is summarised below.

The options fall into 3 categories:

1. Improve the management of traffic to reduce the risk of collisions. 2. Prevent vehicles from reaching the parapet. 3. Reinforce the parapet.

1. Improve the management of traffic to reduce the risk of collisions:

The junction between the A6 Owen Road and A683 Morecambe Road is approximately 100m north of the bridge. Weaving takes place immediately after the junction with collisions and parapet impacts occurring primarily at the north end of the bridge.

Possible options to be considered may include:

a) Reduce Bridge to One Lane:

Reducing the bridge to one lane should eliminate parapet impacts but would significantly reduce the capacity of the road and would result in additional congestion, which is likely to be unacceptable. The position could be reviewed

- 3 -

following the planned construction of the Heysham/M6 link when traffic flows across the bridge should be reduced.

b) Increase traffic control at A6 Owen Road/A683 Morecambe Road junction:

At the present time, traffic control at the junction comprises pedestrian/cyclist crossings and a bus gate to assist buses from Morecambe to gain access to the bus stop adjacent to the Skerton Hotel. Increasing traffic control by, for example, allowing HGVs to use the bus gate or fully signalising the junction would reduce or eliminate the risks arising from the weaving manoeuvres but would result in additional congestion, which is likely to be unacceptable.

c) Further Improve Signing:

The improved signing that was installed in the spring of 2007 appears to have reduced the incidence of collisions. There may be scope for further improvements to signing which may further reduce the risk of collisions.

It should be noted that the options described above do not address the issue that the existing bridge parapets do not comply with current national standards for vehicle restraint.

2. Prevent vehicles reaching the parapet:

At present the 2 lane, 7.4m wide carriageway is separated from the parapets by 1.5m (downstream) and 1.2m (upstream) wide footways with 100mm high kerbs. There is little to prevent a vehicle from impacting the parapet, which, while a problem for the structure, has not resulted in any serious injuries. A raised kerb or metal parapet would prevent a vehicle from reaching the pavement and keep the car on the carriageway. This may result in a worse outcome in terms of injuries than the current situation.

There is adequate depth to anchor some form of barrier between the carriageway and the parapet. Possible options to be considered may include:

a) Vehicle Barriers on edge of existing carriageway:

The existing parapets are only a little over 1.1m high so footways cannot be raised without reducing the height of the parapet and increasing the risk of pedestrians falling over the parapet. Raising the kerb but not the footway, or erecting a metal parapet behind the kerb would reduce the footway width, impeding pedestrian movement and possibly resulting in pedestrians walking in the carriageway.

b) Move the carriageway to widen one footway:

Moving the carriageway to one side of the bridge and closing one footpath while widening the other, would create a usable footway but would reduce the effectiveness of the barrier on the reduced width side. Any work to install

- 4 -

raised kerbs, metal parapets or move the carriageway would be very disruptive, involving lengthy lane closures on the bridge.

3. Strengthen the Parapet:

The parapet could be strengthened to reduce the likelihood of impact damage resulting in a vehicle leaving the bridge. Possible options for consideration may include:

a) Reinforce the existing parapet:

The existing parapet could be reinforced by drilling and resin bonding steel bars to tie the masonry components together. To provide adequate resistance, the masonry supporting the parapet would also require reinforcement and tying to the main body of the structure. Whilst this would have little visual impact on the bridge it would be a major change to the fabric of the listed structure. It would also result in increased damage to the masonry in the event of serious parapet impact and will significantly increase the difficulty of carrying out repairs. This option would require the consent of English Heritage and is likely to be disruptive and expensive to install and maintain.

b) Provide a barrier Immediately in front of the parapet:

A tensioned vehicle barrier, such as a steel or wire rope safety fence, could be installed immediately in front of the parapet. This would reduce the footway width slightly and be visually intrusive but would provide additional impact resistance. It is usual practice to install a vehicle barrier some distance in front of the object being protected to allow for the barrier deflection under load. Whilst a barrier immediately in front of the parapet would not prevent damage to the parapet, it is likely to offer significant improvement in the ability of the parapet to prevent errant vehicles leaving the bridge. This option would require the consent of English Heritage but may be acceptable if a suitable barrier is chosen. Installation should only be moderately disruptive and repairs will be slightly more difficult than at present.

Consultations

The report prepared by Bridges Division will be the subject of consultation between County officers and other interested parties before a proposed course of action is confirmed.

Advice

That the report be noted.

Alternative options to be considered

Options outlined in the report.

- 5 -

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

Any proposed action resulting from consideration of the options described in the report will be funded from established budgets.

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A.

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

N/A.

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22nd July 2008

Part I - Item No. 9

Electoral Division affected: Lancaster East, Skerton

Traffic Issues at Skerton Bridge, Lancaster

Contact for further information: Jim Robson, 01524 753340, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate, [email protected]

Executive Summary

Members requested a report on traffic issues around Skerton Bridge, Lancaster, arising from concern following road traffic collisions.

Decision Required

That the report be noted.

Background

A particular concern is that collisions occurring on the bridge may result in vehicles impacting upon the bridge parapet. These impacts have occurred at an average rate

The options fall into 3 categories:

1. Improve the management of traffic to reduce the risk of collisions. 2. Prevent vehicles from reaching the parapet. 3. Reinforce the parapet.

1. Improve the management of traffic to reduce the risk of collisions:

Possible options to be considered may include:

a) Reduce Bridge to One Lane:

- 3 -

following the planned construction of the Heysham/M6 link when traffic flows across the bridge should be reduced.

b) Increase traffic control at A6 Owen Road/A683 Morecambe Road junction:

c) Further Improve Signing:

It should be noted that the options described above do not address the issue that the existing bridge parapets do not comply with current national standards for vehicle restraint.

2. Prevent vehicles reaching the parapet:

There is adequate depth to anchor some form of barrier between the carriageway and the parapet. Possible options to be considered may include:

a) Vehicle Barriers on edge of existing carriageway:

b) Move the carriageway to widen one footway:

- 4 -

raised kerbs, metal parapets or move the carriageway would be very disruptive, involving lengthy lane closures on the bridge.

3. Strengthen the Parapet:

The parapet could be strengthened to reduce the likelihood of impact damage resulting in a vehicle leaving the bridge. Possible options for consideration may include:

a) Reinforce the existing parapet:

b) Provide a barrier Immediately in front of the parapet:

Consultations

The report prepared by Bridges Division will be the subject of consultation between County officers and other interested parties before a proposed course of action is confirmed.

Advice

That the report be noted.

Alternative options to be considered

Options outlined in the report.

- 5 -

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

Any proposed action resulting from consideration of the options described in the report will be funded from established budgets.

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A.

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

N/A.

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 July 2008

Part I - Item No. 10

Electoral Division affected: Morecambe North Morecambe South Morecambe West

Proposed Hest Bank to Morecambe Cycle Route: Trial Opening of Gate onto Rushley Drive, Hest Bank onto the Canal

Contact for further information: Alasdair Simpson, 01772 534609, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate, [email protected]

Executive Summary

This report outlines the result of the trial opening of a locked gate onto Rushley Drive from the canal as part of a proposed cycle route linking the canal at Hest Bank with Morecambe Promenade.

Decision Required

The views of Lancashire Local - Lancaster District are sought on making the trial permanent.

Background

As a result of concerns by residents that the opening of a locked gate from Rushley Drive, Hest Bank onto the canal towpath would lead to canal users parking on the street, it was agreed by the Local at their meeting in January 2008 that the gate onto the canal would be opened on a three month trial basis. The trial was extended to the May Day Bank Holiday due to poor weather at Easter.

The opening of the gate enables cyclists using the canal towpath to access a proposed shared cycle footpath along the A5105 linking Rushley Drive with Morecambe Promenade. The opening of the gate also benefits pedestrians wishing to access the canal.

Parking surveys were carried out on Rushley Drive during the period of the trial. The table below outlines the result of these surveys.

- 2 -

Date and Time of Survey Cars Parked in Rushley Drive Saturday 29 March 1215 7 Sunday 6 April 1720 16 Monday 7 April 1155 10 Tuesday 15 April 0910 12 (school holidays) 1105 10 1400 12 Friday 18 April 1105 14 Thursday 1 May 1455 8 Saturday 3 May 1505 10 Sunday 4 May 1320 11 Monday 5 May 1410 7

The same car was recorded as being parked in all eleven surveys. A further six cars were recorded as being parked in at least six of the eleven surveys, suggesting that at least some of the on-street parking is by residents or their visitors.

In a survey prior to the opening of the gate, eleven vehicles were observed as parked on Rushley Drive at 9am on a Sunday and eight vehicles at 9am on a weekday.

Consultations

Letters have been sent to all households on the road asking for their views on the outcome of the trial. Comments have been received from three households.

One resident said that he is pleased that the trial has gone well and cyclists are using the link. However, he also thinks that there has been an increase in narrow boat owners using the road for long term parking and that this might increase over time as more boat owners become aware of the road. Though the moorings on the canal are short term moorings, he thinks some people are using them on a more permanent basis. Another resident said that a boat owner parked outside their house for three or four days at a time.

A further resident said that, though he was in favour of the link, the trial should be extended for a year.

Slyne with Hest Parish Council have confirmed that they are happy with the outcome of the trial and have given their support to the scheme.

Advice

The views of Lancashire Local - Lancaster District are sought on making the trial opening of the gate onto the canal from Rushley Drive, Hest Bank permanent.

Alternative options to be considered

N/A.

- 3 -

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

Financial

The proposed cycle route along the A5105 from Hest Bank to Morecambe Promenade would be funded from the Lancaster and Morecambe Cycle Demonstration Project. The January Lancashire Local - Lancaster also agreed to provide funding to upgrade a refuge by WV Health Club at the end of Morecambe Promenade to a toucan crossing if the scheme went ahead.

Economic

By completing an attractive triangular off-road cycle route linking Lancaster, Morecambe and Hest Bank, the proposed scheme would benefit tourism in the area.

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A.

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

N/A.

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A.

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22nd July 2008

Part I - Item No. 11

Electoral Divisions affected: All

Permanent Traffic Regulation Orders (Update) (Appendix ‘A’ refers)

Contact for further information: Jim Robson, 01524 753330, Lancashire County Council, Environment Directorate, [email protected]

Executive Summary

This report details the current stage of progress of pending permanent Traffic Regulation Orders for the Lancaster District.

Decision Required

The Lancashire Local is asked to note the report.

Background

It has been agreed that progress reports on the processing of Traffic Regulation Orders will be submitted to each meeting of the Lancashire Local Committee. To this end, the status of the Orders currently being processed and their stage of progress is attached at Appendix ‘A’.

The abbreviations used at Appendix ‘A’ to describe the type of Order in place are as follows:

DPP Disabled Parking Place PoW Prohibition of Waiting RoW Restriction of Waiting PWR Permanent Weight Restriction MWAAT No Waiting At Any Time Prb Un/Loading Prohibition of Loading and Unloading Prb Loading Prohibition of Loading Rev Revocation

Consultations

Lancashire Constabulary, the County Council’s Network Management group and Lancaster City Council have been fully consulted on the proposals. Local residents

- 2 - will also be consulted on the proposals through the use of site notices and advertisements in the local press, and in the event that objections are received, the individual proposals will be considered by the Lancashire Local Committee. Those proposals not receiving objections will be considered by the Executive Director of Environment.

Advice

That the report be noted.

Alternative options to be considered

N/A.

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

This item has the following implications:

Financial Implications

There will be cost implications for introducing the Traffic Regulation Orders, although this would be funded via existing Ordinary Maintenance Budgets.

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A.

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

N/A.

Appendix A PERMANENT TROS - LANCASTER Date published: 11-Jul-08 OBJECTIONS

YES - NO - Key REPORT Lancs Decision CONSULT DECISION WORKS DATE INTO LOCATION COMMENTS TYPE AD DATE TO Locals by Exec. END TAKEN COMPLETE OPERATION ENGINEER Meeting Dir. Of TRO/1/..

REF NO. TS/ NO. TS/ REF Date Env. OBJECTION (Y/N) Loading Market Street, Bay/Prb of 12 Carnforth ON HOLD Un/Loading 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 0 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Rev Dolphinholme Bridge, 17T(TRO/1/2) 13 Dolphinholme 0 & PWR 18T 09-Feb-07 09-Mar-07 N 14-Mar-07 00-Jan-00 02-May-07 Approved - 00-Jan-00

Eastgate, Middlegate, Northgate, 21 Morecambe ON HOLD PoW & RoW 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 0 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00

26 Bulk Road, Lancaster 0 Various 19-Oct-07 16-Nov-07 N 19-Nov-07 00-Jan-00 14-Jan-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Yealand Road Canal Bridge, Tarn Lane, Rev 17T & 27 Yealand Redmayne 0 PWR 18T 28-Mar-08 25-May-08 N 28-Apr-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Westbourne Road, 28 Lancaster 0 Rev & PoW 07-Sep-07 05-Oct-07 N 08-Oct-07 00-Jan-00 18-Dec-07 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Main Street, Mainway, Pinfold Lane, 29 Lancaster 0 PoW 07-Sep-07 05-Oct-07 N 09-Oct-07 00-Jan-00 18-Dec-07 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Work Alexandra Road, Ordered 30 Carnforth 0 PoW 14-Sep-07 12-Oct-07 N 24-Oct-07 00-Jan-00 18-Dec-07 Approved 21/01/08 00-Jan-00 Braddon Close, 31 Morecambe 0 PoW 21-Sep-07 19-Oct-07 N 26-Oct-07 00-Jan-00 14-Jan-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Exeter Avenue, Cork Lesser Road, Canterbury restriction 33 Avenue, Lancaster 0 PoW 05-Oct-07 02-Nov-07 Y 07-Nov-07 22-Jan-08 00-Jan-00 approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Revocation Lancaster City Centre, and Prb of 34 Pedestrian Zone ON HOLD Driving 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 0 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Brook Street, PoW & 36 Lancaster 0 Amendment 08-Feb-08 07-Mar-08 Y 10-Mar-08 06-May-08 00-Jan-00 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 38 Stoney Lane, Ellel 0 PoW 18-Jan-08 15-Feb-08 Y 18-Feb-08 00-Jan-00 04-Apr-08 Approved 16-Jun-08 07-Jul-08

39 Salford Road Galgate 0 Rev & PoW 13-Jun-08 11-Jul-08 Y 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Appendix A PERMANENT TROS - LANCASTER Date published: 11-Jul-08 OBJECTIONS

YES - NO - Key REPORT Lancs Decision CONSULT DECISION WORKS DATE INTO LOCATION COMMENTS TYPE AD DATE TO Locals by Exec. END TAKEN COMPLETE OPERATION ENGINEER Meeting Dir. Of TRO/1/..

REF NO. TS/ NO. TS/ REF Date Env. OBJECTION (Y/N) Middle Street, 40 Lancaster 0 Prb of Loading 01-Feb-08 29-Feb-08 Y 04-Mar-08 06-May-08 00-Jan-00 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 86 Sandylands Promenade, 41 Morecambe 0 DPP 06-Feb-08 05-Mar-08 N 07-Mar-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 58 Sandylands Promenade, 42 Morecambe 0 DPP 06-Feb-08 05-Mar-08 N 07-Mar-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Rosebery Avenue, 43 Morecambe 0 DPP 20-Feb-08 19-Mar-08 N 31-Mar-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Lake Avenue, 44 Morecambe 0 DPP 06-Feb-08 05-Mar-08 N 07-Mar-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Willow Lane, 45 Lancaster 0 DPP 22-Feb-08 25-Mar-08 N 25-Mar-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Torrisholme Square, 46 Torrisholme 0 NWAAT 22-Feb-08 21-Mar-08 Y 08-Apr-08 06-May-08 00-Jan-00 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00

Hyde Road / Holbeck 47 Ave, Morecambe 0 NWAAT 20-Feb-08 19-Mar-08 Y 01-Apr-08 06-May-08 00-Jan-00 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00

Dale Street / Back 48 Dale Street Lancaster 0 NWAAT 29-Feb-08 02-Apr-08 N 14-Apr-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Marine Road West 49 Morecambe 0 NWAAT 27-Feb-08 26-Mar-08 N 08-Apr-08 00-Jan-00 12-May-08 Approved 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Prb of Lancaster City Centre, Waiting/variou 50 Pedestrian Zone ON HOLD s 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 0 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00

51 Slyne Road, Lancaster 0 NWAAT 23-May-08 20-Jun-08 Y 02-Jul-08 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 PoW (See Newton Area, Road Humps 52 Lancaster 0 & 20MPH 30-May-08 27-Jun-08 N 04-Jul-08 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 00-Jan-00 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22nd July 2008

Part I - Item No. 12

Electoral Division affected: None

Forward Business Plan 2008/09 (Appendix A refers)

Contact for further information: Wendy Thompson, 01524 585273, District Partnership Officer, Lancashire County Council, [email protected]

Executive Summary

The report sets out the agenda items proposed for future meetings of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District as far as they are known at the present time, as an aid to planning future agenda.

Decision Required

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is invited to note the forward plan, as it is known at the present time, and to suggest other issues which they would like to have included on the agenda of future meetings.

Background

The Forward Business Plan has been produced based on forthcoming items for decisions and issues identified as areas of interest by Members at previous meetings. This is a standard agenda item at each meeting of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District.

Consultations

N/A

Advice

N/A

Alternative options to be considered

N/A

- 2 -

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

N/A

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

N/A

Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate

N/A

Lancashire Local - Lancaster District Appendix A Proposed Forward Plan 2006/7

02-Sep-08 14-Oct-08 02-Dec-08 20-Jan-09 10-Mar-09

6.30pm 1.30pm 1.30pm 6.30pm 6.30pm

Rainbow Heysham C Bleasdale Centre, Centre House, Morecambe Silverdale

Environment Directorate Review of multi- Review of use paths in speed limits on Lancaster A&B roads District Possible City Council report - ENCAMS

TRO summary TRO summary TRO summary TRO summary TRO summary

Adult & Community Services Moor Platt - Update

Children & Young People Children's Trust Engaging CAMHS - report report back Children & on baseline Young People - stats - tentative feedback date School Learners Out of admission School figures

Other Budget Commercial proposals Group - Overview

Grants Grants Grants Grants Grants Lancs Local - Lancs Local - Lancs Local - Lancs Local - Lancs Local - Forward Forward Forward Forward Forward Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Local Democracy Week

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 July 2008

Item No. 13

Electoral Division affected: All

Use of the Urgent Business Procedure

Contact for further information: Elizabeth Smallwood, 01772 533619, Office of the Chief Executive, Lancashire County Council, [email protected]

Executive Summary

Change in the way urgent business is processed for Lancashire Locals

Decision Required

Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is asked to note the report

Background

Meetings of Lancashire Locals take place usually at intervals of about 6 weeks so that decisions can normally be taken in the normal way by councillors present at the formal meeting.

Occasionally a matter arises between meetings which is so urgent that it cannot wait until the next meeting takes place. Most typically, in the case of Lancashire Locals, this has arisen in connection with a request for a small grant from a councillor’s allocation, where the money is needed at short notice, before the next meeting of the Local.

Local Government law at present provides that decisions cannot be taken by a single member unless it is an executive member taking an executive decision. (Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, there may be situations where a single member can take a decision in relation to their locality, but those provisions are not yet in force.) Because of this, if an urgent decision has to be taken other than by the Local itself, it must be taken by an officer. The Urgent Business procedure for other committees of the County Council provides that such decisions are taken by the Chief Executive. However, in the case of the Locals, it was felt that it was not practicable for such decisions to be taken by the Chief Executive personally, and the constitutions of the Locals provide that urgent business decisions are taken by the Secretary of the Local. Case law provides that the decision must in reality be in the discretion of the officer concerned. Having

- 2 - made his or her decision, it is in order for him or her to consult the Chair and/or deputy, but it remains the officer’s decision, not that of those members.

It is obviously less than ideal that decisions are taken in this way, which is why use of this procedure is avoided if at all possible.

When the procedure is used, the present practice used in relation to the Locals, (but not in relation to other committees), of circulating all members by e-mail in advance of the decision being taken, is not helpful to the integrity of the decision-making process, as it gives rise to the appearance that the decision is not truly that of the Secretary. It does not on the other hand, serve the purpose of obtaining an overall view from the membership since members may or may not respond to the e-mail and there is no means of debating differing views. It is therefore proposed to cease this practice.

The practice for urgent business items in the future will therefore be as follows:

1. Any councillor or officer who would like an issue dealt with as a matter of urgency will contact the secretary who will advise whether or not the urgency is such that it warrants the use of this procedure 2. In the case of decisions in relation to small grants, they would contact the Policy Unit in the normal way 3. If the Secretary decides that use of the Urgent Business procedure is in order, he or she will prepare a report detailing the decision proposed and the reason for urgency. 4. They will then consult the Chair and/or Deputy on the proposed decision. 5. The secretary, Chair and/or Deputy will then sign the report 6. The decision will be actioned 7. The decision will be reported to the next meeting of the Local.

This report is being presented to all Lancashire Locals

Consultations

N/A

Advice

N/A

Alternative options to be considered

N/A

Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other

- 3 -

This item has the following implications:

N/A

Any representations made to the Directorate prior to the issue being considered in accordance with the Public Notice of Forward Plans

Name: Organisation: Comments:

N/A

Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers

Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No

Nil