Lancashire Local – Lancashire Local – Lancaster District
Tuesday, 22nd January 2008 at 6.30 pm, in the Banqueting Room, Town Hall, Lancaster
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 Special Meeting held on the 26th (Copy enclosed) November 2007
3. Minutes of the Meeting held on the 4th December 2007 (Copy enclosed)
Discharge of delegated powers
4. The Lancashire County Council (Exeter Avenue, Cork (Report attached) Road, Canterbury Avenue, Lancaster, Lancaster City) (Prohibition of Waiting) Order 200*
5. Lancashire Local Grants Scheme (Report attached)
Other issues for consideration
6. Hest Bank to Morecambe Promenade Cycle Track (Report attached)
7. A589 Morecambe Road (Report attached) Overturning Vehicles at Asda Roundabout
8. Pedestrian Road Safety Awareness Training (Report attached)
9. Emergency Planning – Responding to Civil Presentation by Emergencies Bernard Kershaw, Principal Emergency Planning Officer, Lancashire County Council
10. Directorate for Children and Young People – (Report attached) Redesign of Children’s Integrated Services
- 2 -
11. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (Report attached) (CAHMS)
12. Children Looked After – Local Statistics and (Report attached) Approaches)
13. Children Missing from Care (Report attached)
14. Programme of Meetings for 2008/09 (Report attached)
15. Forward Business Plan 2007/08 (Report attached)
16. 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
17. Date of Next Meeting
The next meeting of the Committee will be held on Tuesday, 18th March 2008 at 6.30 pm at Morecambe Town Hall.
I M Fisher County Secretary and Solicitor
County Hall Preston
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District
Special Meeting held at 4.00 pm on Monday 26th November 2007 at the Victoria Institute, Caton, Lancaster.
Minutes
Present:-
Councillor Janice Hanson (Chair)
Lancashire County Council
County Councillor Susie Charles County Councillor C B Coates County Councillor Peter Elliott County Councillor Sarah Fishwick County Councillor County Councillor Niki Penney
Lancaster City Council
Councillor John Barnes Councillor Eileen Blamire Councillor Tony Johnson Councillor Andrew Kay Councillor David Kerr Councillor R Sherlock Councillor Malcolm Thomas
Apologies were presented on behalf of County Councillor Liz Scott and from Councillor Eve Archer.
Disclosure of Personal and Prejudicial Interests
No disclosures were made.
Discharge of delegated Powers
There were no items under this heading.
Review of the Future of Skerton High School, Hornby High School and Central Lancaster High School
A report was presented detailing the background to the decision of the County Council to consult widely on the future of Skerton, Hornby and Central Lancaster High Schools. This report provided information for the Lancashire Local on the new duties under the Education and Inspections Act 2006 to promote diversity and choice, set out the main features of the Academies programme and included, at Appendix “A”, a copy of the consultation
1 document inviting views on the possible closure of Skerton High School and Hornby High School from the 1st September, 2008. It was proposed that Central Lancaster High School would be enlarged for an initial period from the 1st September, 2008 to include the use of the Skerton and Hornby sites. The consultation document explained the proposals and also provided information on Academies and why an Academy might be an appropriate option in Lancaster in the future. Responses were invited by the 31st December and the County Council’s Cabinet Member for Schools would consider the results of the consultation on the 21st January 2008.and decide whether to publish Statutory Notices. There would then be a period for representations to be made on the Statutory Notices and the proposals would be considered further by the Cabinet Member on the 1st April.
Mr Stephen Mercer, the County Council’s acting Deputy Director of Childrens’ Strategy and Resources, presented the report and responded to questions and comments from members of the Lancashire Local.
Information was presented on each of the high schools under consideration as follows:-
Skerton High School - The school served a very disadvantaged population with over 40% of pupils being eligible for free school meals. Contextual value added a measure of the progress pupils make in a school) was the third highest in Lancashire in 2006, when 26% of pupils achieved 5 or more grades A*-C at GCSE (although only about 6% of pupils achieved 5 or more A*-C grades including Maths and English). Provisional GCSE results for 2007 indicated that pupils’ performance at Skerton High School had continued to improve, with 70% of pupils achieving 5 or more grades A*-C at GCSE and over 21% of pupils achieving 5 or more A*-C grades including Maths and English. The school did not have specialist status. The site was also shared with a primary school, nursery class, and other users, including the Adult College, the Traveller Education Service and Lancashire Education Medical Service. Skerton was ranked the 6th most deprived (out of 85) secondary school in Lancashire using the Index of Multiple Deprivation.
Hornby High School – The School was located in the Lune Valley to the north east of Lancaster. Very few local pupils attended the school. Most of the pupils travelled from Lancaster, Morecambe and Heysham, where there may be increasing availability of places in other schools as pupil numbers declined. 23 pupils were admitted to Hornby in September 2006, and 24 first preference applications were received for admission in September 2007. Hornby High School's results improved in 2006, with 31% of pupils achieving 5 or more A*- C grades at GCSE, all of these including English and Maths. Provisional GCSE results for 2007 indicated that pupils’ performance at Hornby High School was broadly similar to 2006, with 33% of pupils achieving 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE and 29% achieving 5 or more A*-C grades including Maths and English. The recent increases in bus fares/withdrawal of subsidised routes had not appeared to have had a major impact on the school. Hornby had a total roll of 174 at January 2007, with 24 pupils in Year 7 and 40 in Year 8. Because of falling pupil numbers in the Lancaster district,
2 the future need for the places at Hornby High School was in doubt. The school catered for a high proportion of pupils with special educational needs. The school does not have specialist status. Hornby was ranked the 27th most deprived (out of 85) secondary school in Lancashire using the Index of Multiple Deprivation.
Central Lancaster High School - The school was located to the south of the River Lune. In 2006 the school was judged by Ofsted to be outstanding. The school performed well relative to its intake. Contextual value added was the highest in Lancashire in 2006. Over 52% of pupils achieved 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE, and 31% achieved 5 or more A*-C grades including English and Maths. Provisional GCSE results for 2007 indicated that 55% of pupils achieved 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE and 24% of pupils achieved 5 or more A*-C including English and Maths. In 2006/07 the school had 642 pupils on roll. The school was popular, with some upward pressure on pupil numbers. The school was oversubscribed for admissions to Year 7 and from September 2008 the County Council had agreed to a request from the Governing Body to increase the admission number from 130 to 150. The school was in quite poor accommodation and was likely to be a priority for significant capital investment under the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme. If Skerton High School and Hornby High School were to close from 31st August, 2008, it would not be possible, from the 1st September 2008, to accommodate all the pupils at the Central Lancaster High School site. It would be necessary to use the sites at Skerton and Hornby for an initial period to cater for the enlarged Central Lancaster High School. Central Lancaster High School would receive additional funding as a split site school. If Skerton and Hornby High Schools closed, some parents in future might send their children to other local schools. As a result, it was likely that Central Lancaster High School would be consolidated on its current site following the initial transition period, with about 150 pupils admitted each year.
Comments expressed by Members of the Lancashire Local following Mr Mercer’s presentation were:-
• It was noted that the City Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee was undertaking a review of the County Council’s proposals following a decision by the County Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee’s decision not to accede to a request from the Lancashire Local to establish a Joint Task Group to examine secondary education in Lancaster. The City Council’s Committee had yet to report, but this did not preclude the Lancashire Local from registering views of its own for forwarding to the County Council.
• When Greaves High School closed some years ago the transitional arrangements made for pupils were similar to those described should Skerton and Hornby High Schools close and appeared to work satisfactorily. At that time transport was provided for those pupils transferred to other schools – it was hoped that similar arrangements would be put in place should Skerton and Hornby schools close.
3 • The structural condition of Central Lancaster High School was not good and access was problematical whilst Skerton High School had better access, better accommodation and scope for expansion. It was known that the Governing Body had submitted a proposal to the County Council for development of the School as an 18 year school.
• In environmental impact terms, the closure of Skerton and Hornby High Schools would generate increased car use and also require the provision of bus transport which would be problematical in some areas where estate roads were not suitable for coaches.
• Continuity of education would be essential for year 10 children currently attending Hornby High School during the transitional period – it was hoped that existing staff would spend part of the week at the High School to avoid he need for pupils to travel to other Schools.
• Whilst it had been stated that results at Central Lancaster High School were very good, the position of Skerton High School should be reviewed – the school had worked extremely hard to develop its pupils to present levels and offered specialist support to disadvantaged children. The County Council had, in fact, strongly supported the school when it was in special measures some years ago. The school had much improved in recent years and was serving a much deprived area well. It was also felt capable of expansion given a good development scheme. Should Skerton and Hornby High Schools close, there would be no high schools north of the River Lune.
• Both Skerton and Hornby High Schools supported pupils with special needs which prevented them flourishing in larger schools. Members were not convinced that such children’s needs could be adequately provided for at a larger school.
• The linkages between the availability of Building Better Schools for the Future (BSF) funding, substantial capital funding for schools in Lancaster and the Academy option was regretted. Without consideration of an Academy option, BSF funding would not be made available by the Department for Children, Schools and Families before 2018.
Resolved:- That Mr Mercer be thanked for his presentation of the report and very full responses to questions and comments from Members and that :-
(a) the views and comments expressed and set out above be endorsed for submission to the County Council’s Cabinet Member for Schools as the formal response of the Lancashire Local to consultation on the future of Skerton, Hornby and Central Lancaster High Schools; and
(b) that the attention of the Cabinet Member be particularly drawn to the view of the Lancashire Local that Skerton High School should remain
4 open for the reasons described and that he give careful consideration to the implications for the locality of closure.
I M Fisher
County Secretary and Solicitor
County Hall Preston
5
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District
Meeting held at 6.30 pm on Tuesday 4th December 2007 at Melling Institute, Lancaster.
Minutes
Present:-
County Councillor Janice Hanson (Chair)
Lancashire County Council
County Councillor Susie Charles County Councillor C B Coates County Councillor Peter Elliott County Councillor Sarah Fishwick County Councillor Tony Jones County Councillor County Councillor Niki Penney
Lancaster City Council
Councillor Tony Johnson Councillor Andrew Kay Councillor R Sherlock Councillor Malcolm Thomas Councillor John Whitelegg
Apologies were presented on behalf of County Councillors Peter Elliott, Liz Scott, Albert Thornton and Jean Yates and from Councillors Eileen Blamire Eve Archer, John Barnes and David Kerr.
Disclosure of Personal and Prejudicial Interests
A personal interest was declared by County Councillor Chris Coates in relation to Item No 7 (Local Grants Scheme) as the supporter of one of the grant applications to be considered at the meeting..
Minutes of the Meeting Held on 16th October 2007
45. Resolved: That, the Minutes of the meeting held on the 4th September 2007 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
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
1 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 Chairman of Melling with Wrayton Parish Council referred to the limited footpath provision in Melling village. It was stated that within the village there existed only 50 yards of pavement, yet the road through the village had a 50 mph speed limit. There had been incidents of excessive speeding, accidents and damage to property. The location of a school in the area created serious road safety issues in his view. The Parish Plan contained options for traffic management, a cornerstone of which was the creation of a 20 mph zone through the village, coupled with traffic calming measures. The Parish Council had asked when the County Council would address this problem.
The Area Manager (North) referred to an exchange of correspondence with the Parish Council on the issue and was proposing two safety schemes for the road in question (the A683) on which the Parish Council would be consulted. The County Council would be reviewing speed limits on all “A” and “B” roads as a consequence of new Guidance from the Department of Transport and a report would be prepared for the County Council’s Cabinet following the completion of the review.
It was agreed that a report should also be presented to the Lancashire Local on local issues arising from the review.
Councillor Michael Helm (Ellel Parish Council) referred to Item No 5 on the agenda (Proposed Construction of a Footway – Chapel Lane, Galgate) and spoke in support of the proposal. He also referred to the importance of a 20 mph speed restriction being enforced on the road adjacent to the local primary school. The Chair drew attention to a report considered by the Lancashire Local at its meeting in September on the evaluation of a pilot school safety zones project when it had been concluded that 20 mph zones outside schools had not successfully addressed vehicle speeds.
There being no further contributions from the floor, the Chair closed the public participation session.
Heysham to Lancaster University Quality Bus Routes 2/2A Phase 4 Bus Stop Improvements Proposed Provision of a Bus Shelter
The report seeks approval for the proposed provision of a new bus shelter at bus stop 30h outside numbers 172 & 174, Scotforth Road, Lancaster, as shown on the attached plan.
It was reported that the Heysham to Lancaster University Quality Bus Route 2/2A was included in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) 2006/07 – 10/11 and included for improvements to over 80 bus stops.
2
Previously, 81 bus stops, comprising Phases 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the scheme had received Cabinet Member approval. Two stops (31h and 35u) hade been omitted from reports pending possible highway improvements/realignment.
At Bus Stop 30h, which received Cabinet Member Approval in Phase 4 on 3 August 2006, there was insufficient usage at the consultation stage to warrant a shelter. However, since then, usage had increased beyond the threshold at which a shelter is recommended, and a request had been received that a shelter be provided. During the consultation process, occupiers of houses numbered 172 and 174 Scotforth Road had objected to the provision of the shelter. Details of the representations which had been made, together with the comments of the Executive Director, Environment, were provided in Appendix A to the report.
This was deemed a Key Decision and was included in the County Council’s Forward Plan.
46. Resolved:- That having considered the objections and comments received to the proposed location of a bus shelter at bus stop 30h outside houses numbered 172 and 174 Scotforth Road, Lancaster and the Executive Director Environment’s comments on them, the location of the bus shelter be approved as proposed.
Abbeystead Road, Dolphinholme, Lancaster Proposed Construction of a Footway
A report was presented outlining possible measures to improve pedestrian facilities by providing a footway within the existing verge on Abbeystead Road, Dolphinholme. This proposal had been included in the Pedestrian Priority Programme 2007 – 2008, which had been approved by the Cabinet Member for Sustainable Development on the 8th February 2007. A plan showing the detailed location of the proposed footway was provided as Appendix A. The estimated cost of the proposal was £17,000.
The proposal was deemed to be a Key Decision and had been included in the County Council’s Forward Plan
Consultation on the proposal had resulted in three objections/representations being received from frontagers. Details were set out in the report together with the comments of the Executive Director, Environment on them.
47. Resolved:- That, having considered the three objections to a proposal to build a footway on Abbeystead Road, Dolphinholme, Lancaster together with the comments of the Executive Director Environment, the proposed footway construction, as shown on the plan attached as Appendix A to the report now presented, be approved.
3 Chapel Lane, Galgate, Lancaster Proposed Construction of a Footway
A report was presented outlinig possible measures to improve pedestrian facilities by providing a footway within the existing carriageway on Chapel Lane, Galgate. The detailed location of the proposed footway was shown on a plan attached to the report as Appendix A. The estimated cost of the proposal was £4,500.
This was deemed a Key Decision and had been included in the County Council’s Forward Plan.
The proposal to build a footway on Chapel Lane, Galgate, was included in the Pedestrian Priority Programme 2007 – 2008, which had approved by the Cabinet Member for Sustainable Development on the 8th February 2007.
Consultation on the proposal had resulted in one objection/representation being received from a frontager. Details were set out in the report together with the comments of the Executive Director, Environment on them.
48. Resolved:- That, having considered the objection to a proposal to build a footway on Chapel Lane, Galgate, Lancaster together with the comments of the Executive Director Environment, the proposed footway construction, as shown on the plan attached as Appendix A to the report now presented, be approved.
Expenditure of On-Street Parking Income
It was reported that under its Constitution, Lancashire Local – Lancaster District had the delegated responsibility for determining the priority of measures to be funded from the surplus income arising from on-street parking in Lancaster.
Iin July 2007, the Lancashire Local had agreed that the priority list of six 20mph schemes should be funded from the existing cumulative surplus of £296,181. The estimated cost of these schemes was £189,000 leaving a balance of £107,181 to be committed in 2007/08. At the July meeting, two possible options were proposed. The options were to extend the Lune Valley shared path and to improve the traffic signals at the junction of A6/Market Street/Kellet Road, Carnforth. Further information on these options was presented.
49. Resolved:- That, having considered the advice contained in the report on options identified by the Lancashire Local at its July meeting which might be financed from the balance of the on-street car parking surplus available in 2007/08 (£107,181), the following priorities be approved:-
(a) that £50,000 be allocated to fund the extension of the Lune Valley Shared Path from Bull Beck to Wray; and
4 (b) that a small scale pedestrian safety scheme be developed for the junction of the A6/Market Street/Kellet Road, Carnforth to improve the existing pedestrian facilities for crossing the A6.
Grants to Small Voluntary Organisations and Project Grants to Young People
A report was presented outlining the work of the Lancaster Youth Council and Youth Bank in respect of their recommendations concerning the awarding of grant monies to local organisations working with young people in Lancaster who are registered with Lancaster Youth and Community Service. The sub group was established by Lancashire Local – Lancaster District as the mechanism by which it could involve young people in the democratic process of allocating project grants.
A sum of money was made available annually for registered Voluntary Youth Groups and Project Grants to Young People:
• to support individual groups or units not supported financially in other ways by the County Council • and to support development projects for individual young people.
In 2007/08 Lancaster had been allocated £13,965.00 for distribution.
The sub group had met on the 23 October 2007 to consider the allocation of these funds and its recommendations were set out in Appendix A (Registered Voluntary Youth Groups) and Appendix B (Project Grants to Young People).
50. Resolved:- That the recommendations of the sub group of Members, Lancaster Youth Council and the Youth Bank, established to consider and make recommendations on applications for Small Grants to registered Voluntary Organisations and Project Grants to Young People, as set out in Appendices A and B to the report now presented be endorsed.
Lancashire Local Grant Applications
A report was presented in relation to three grant applications totalling £1,450 under the Local Grants Scheme. The applications had been submitted by County Councillors Susie Charles, Chris Coates and Albert Thornton. The applications, details of which were presented in Appendix A to the report were from the Branksome Neighbourhood Association (£750), NCBI Lancashire (£300) and Halton Pre-School Play Group (£400).
51. Resolved:- That approval be given to:-
(a) a grant of £750 to the Branksome Neighbourhood Association to be used for the construction of a fence and enclosed play area within the estates village green create a secure traffic-free area for children – application submitted by County Councillor Albert Thornton;
5
(b) a grant of £300 to NCBI Lancashire to be used to fund publicity for the commemoration of Holocaust Memorial Day and contribute to the co- ordination of work with young people to the event and associated expenses – application submitted by County Councillor Chris Coates;
(c) a grant of £400 to the Halton Playgroup to be used towards the provision of play equipment - application submitted by County Councillor Susie Charles.
Lancashire County Council’s Cabinet Budget Proposals for 2008/09
(County Councillor Tom Burns was present for this item in his capacity as Cabinet Member for Organisational Development)
It was reported that the County Council’s budget forecast for 2008/09 showed that, in order to continue to deliver the same level of quality and services, spending would need to increase by more than could be afforded. After taking into account the efficiency savings of £8.6m and reductions in costs of £6.9m identified over the summer months, the County Council’s budget gap in 2008/09 was £1.4m.
It was also reported that the Cabinet was proposing budget reductions for 2008/09 of £1.590m; this would produce a council tax increase of 4.89% with no increase in Government grant.
The Cabinet had asked that each Lancashire Local consider the £1.59m of proposals for service reductions, and return any comments on the proposals that the Local wished to make. Responses were sought by the 11th January.
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District was asked to consider any comments it wished to make to the Cabinet of Lancashire County Council on the Cabinet’s budget proposals set out in this Report. The Lancashire Local was informed that any comments would then be considered by the Cabinet as part of the process for finalising the Cabinet’s budget proposals. The Cabinet would make its 2008/09 budget recommendations at the end of January, 2008; the proposals would then be considered by the full County Council meeting on the 14th February, 2008, which would then set the budget for 2008/09.
Comments expressed by members of the Lancashire Local are summarised as follows;-
• Adult and Community Services – has the County Council considered the option of the recruitment of foster carers? Fostering services are routinely bought in from the private sector because the Authority is unable to recruit foster carers, the reason for which was believed to be because foster carers were paid only at the basic rate. It was suggested that if this were to be reviewed, recruitment would be improved and, ultimately, costs reduced overall through less dependence on the private sector.
6
• Adult and Community Services – the comment was made that the major proportion of the proposed saving of £1.2m in 2008/09 would be achieved by limiting the inflationary uplifts in fees to independent care providers. Historically, the County Council had a large portfolio of care homes and now had very few – should the independent care sector become destabilised by having to reduce its costs as a consequence of the County Council’s budget strategy and care homes were to close, very little alternative local authority provision would exist to address the situation. County Councillor Burns responded by stating that the County Council recognised the risks involved, but there was a need to engage with independent providers sensibly and encourage them to achieve efficiency savings in their operations and at the same time maintain quality of provision. County Councillor Burns commented on the success now being achieved in developing partnership working with the Health Service.
• Environment Directorate – Bus services – it was recognised that the County Council was subsidising bus services to a high degree and the Lancashire Local would wish to examine future proposals for rationalisation of services to assess the impact for the Lancaster District. County Councillor Burns commented that County Council subsidy was not intended to support uneconomic services long term, but was designed to provide short term support until they were capable of generating sufficient income to be viable – Park and Ride services were an example. The County Council was keen to explore options with operators such as the scope for unprofitable, but important, routes to be supported by income from profitable services. Concern was expressed by Members about support for the rural community in terms of public transport, which was vital for the community, yet by its nature least likely to yield a profitable bus service. It was suggested that a strategy for extending dial-a-ride services throughout the rural areas of the Lancaster District should be examined. It was commented that the proposal to withdraw subsidies for public transport appeared to run counter to the County Council’s community cohesion and environmental policies.
• The City Council would achieve budget savings through reduction in staff numbers – was the County Council achieving similar savings? County Councillor Burns referred to actions which had and were being taken in the rationalisation of staffing through restructures of the Human Resources organisation and the current restructure of the County Council’s Direct Services Organisation which would see the separate Direct Services Organisations being brought together. Year on year, over the last three years there had been significant cost saving achieved through efficiency savings and the County Council had exceeded its targets in this area.
52. Resolved:- That the comments recorded above be drawn to the attention of the County Council’s Cabinet as the formal response of
7 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District on the County Council’s draft Budget proposals for 2008/09 and that the Cabinet be requested to consider the initiation of a strategy for extending dial-a-ride services throughout the rural areas of the Lancaster District in the absence of a regular and effective bus network in the interests of social inclusion for the less advantaged rural community.
Overview and Scrutiny Task Group – Strategic Review of the County Library and Information Service
It was reported that in summer 2006, a Scrutiny Task Group of Lancashire County Council's Communities and Partnerships Overview and Scrutiny Committee undertook a review of the County Library and Information Service. As part of that review, the Scrutiny Task Group consulted with all of the Lancashire Locals and made a commitment that it would return to each Lancashire Local when the Scrutiny Task Group had made its final report.
The Scrutiny Task Group reported in September 2006, and had also conducted its first six monthly review of its recommendations. The report presented outlined its key findings and recommendations. A number of key developments and issues relevant to the Lancaster District were set out at Appendix 'A' to the report and the Lancashire Local was asked to comment on the key issues identified as appropriate.
Particular reference was made to recommendation 31 (Develop an ongoing programme of refurbishments) when it was reported that a £1.4m bid to the Big Lottery Community Libraries Fund had been successful and that as a result over the next three years three libraries at Lancaster, Haslingden and Colne would be completely remodelled to provide flexible space based on community need. £700,000 had been made available to redevelop Lancaster Library. Refurbishment work had begun at Carnforth library and rebuilding of Heysham Library was scheduled to begin in May 2008, with completion in February 2009. During the rebuilding of Heysham Library, temporary facilities would be provided using a trailer library parked in the vicinity of the Library site. All three schemes had followed extensive consultation with the local community. Members welcomed this success and the developments which were taking place.
53. Resolved:- That the report be received.
Special Educational Needs (SEN) Statistics and Approaches
A report was presented which summarised the County Council’s policy to promote the inclusion of children and young people with special educational needs and behavioural difficulties and describing the Inclusion Strategy for SEN and Behaviour which embraced the changes required through the Every Child Matters agenda and the next phase of the Inclusive Continuum Action Plan (ICAP) for SEN and Behaviour 2006-08. The report included information on the incidence of children and young people with special educational needs and behavioural difficulties residing in Lancaster district.
8
Specific developments in provision in Lancaster through the Inclusive Continuum Action Plan (ICAP) were described as follows:-
(a) Special schools for pupils with learning difficulties located in the Lancaster district - there were currently two all age day special schools for children and young people with learning difficulties; Loyne School for pupils aged 2-19 with severe and profound multiple learning difficulties and Morecambe Road School for pupils aged 4-16 with moderate learning difficulties. The Loyne School had specialist special school status for cognition and learning.
In Lancaster, subject to statutory consultation procedures and the availability of capital resources, the implementation of the ICAP could lead to a new primary GLD special school for pupils aged 2 to 11 and a new secondary GLD special school for young people aged 11 to 19 years. The term ‘generic learning difficulties (GLD)’ encompassed the range of needs covering profound and multiple learning difficulties (PMLD), severe learning difficulties (SLD), moderate learning difficulties (MLD) and physical difficulties (PD). Further consideration would also be given to co-locating the new special schools on the same site as partner mainstream primary and secondary schools to promote and facilitate inclusion.
The proposed age-phasing of the special schools was part of a longer term strategy linked to the Building Schools for the Future Programme (BSF) in the secondary phase and the Primary Capital Programme (PCP) in the primary phase. Both these programmes offered the opportunity to locate special schools on the same site as mainstream schools. This was known as ‘co- location’ which was being increasingly promoted by the Department for Children Schools and Families and Ofsted as an effective way of increasing capacity for inclusion for children and young people with special educational needs whilst promoting and maintaining a vibrant special school sector.
(b) County Special schools - There were two other special schools located in the Lancaster district but serving all parts of the county; Bleasdale House School, located in Silverdale providing 30 day and residential places for children and young people aged 3-19 years with profound and multiple learning difficulties, multi-sensory impairments and associated complex medical conditions and Wennington Hall School, located in the Lune Valley providing 70 day and residential places for young people aged 11-16 with Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties (BESD). Both schools were acknowledged as providers of high quality education, care and welfare for their pupils.
(c) Development of Additionally Resourced Mainstream (ARM) schools - in order to address another key decision from 2003 to increase capacity for inclusion in mainstream schools, the Authority was currently seeking approval to develop Additionally Resourced Mainstream (ARM) schools for low incidence needs across the county some of which could be located in the Lancaster district but serving a wider community including Wyre and Fylde. The low incidence needs included Speech, Language and Communication
9 Needs (SCLN), Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Specific Learning Difficulties (SpLD).
If approval was gained, schools would be invited to submit expressions of interest to become additionally resourced for a particular specialism.
(d) Mainstream primary and secondary schools – all Lancashire mainstream primary and secondary schools had responsibilities to meet the needs of children and young people with special educational needs and the vast majority of pupils’ needs were successfully being met in the mainstream sector.
54. Resolved:- That the report be received and that arrangements be made through the District partnership Office for members of the Lancashire Local to visit Wennington Hall and Bleasdale schools to obtain first hand information on the activities of the schools.
Lancashire Local Lancaster District Strategy to Guide the Investment of Capital Funds in Primary Schools – Principles and Objective Criteria
It was reported that as part of the statement on the latest Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) the Chancellor had confirmed the first two years' funding for the Every Child Matters: Primary Capital Programme. The proposed programme had first been announced in 2006 and was due to commence on a national basis in 2009.
In January 2007, the County Council’s Cabinet had agreed to a revised decision making structure for school organisation changes as a response to legislative changes under the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and the development of major capital investment programmes such as Building Schools for the Future and Primary Capital. One of the elements in the governance and decision making framework agreed by the Cabinet was the establishment of an advisory board to bring together representatives of the major stakeholders to offer advice as to how the investment in primary schools should be taken forward. The advisory board contained elected members, head teachers, diocesan officers and authority officers.
The advisory board had put forward a set of principles that it proposed should be incorporated into an overall strategy used to drive the investment. In addition, it had put forward a set of objective criteria with an associated scoring mechanism that it proposed should be used to assist decision makers in prioritising the investment. It was intended that the criteria would be used to assist decision makers in prioritising investment at an area level not at an individual school level. Appendix 'A' to the report outlined the principles and Appendix 'B' contained details of the criteria and scoring methodology.
It was noted that the key issues were that all Districts in Lancashire would benefit from the Strategy at some point. It was the objective of the Government that 50% of all primary schools would be rebuilt, refurbished or modernised over the fifteen year life of the Programme.
10 It was confirmed that at this stage the County Council was dealing with an overall strategy, but the next stage of consultation would focus on specific district schools. At this point detailed reports would be submitted to the Lancashire Locals.
55. Resolved:- That the report be received.
Hest Bank to Morecambe Promenade
It was reported that at its meeting on the 24th July, a report was presented to the Lancashire Local on proposals to provide a cycle link between Hest Bank and Morecambe Promenade by converting the footway on the A5105 to joint use. Although there was support for the concept of a link between the promenade and the canal at Hest Bank, Members had concerns about the specific scheme proposed, as follows.
a) The A5105 was a busy road with a poor safety record. 30mph was felt to be a more appropriate speed limit for the road than the current 40mph limit. Members were keen to explore whether there might be options to change the layout of the road to slow traffic and improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians. b) There were concerns about the safety of the refuge crossing, given its proposed position and the high speed of approaching traffic. c) There was a desire to explore the feasibility of a route along the coast from Hest Bank level crossing to the promenade.
Members also indicated that they would consider contributing revenue from on-street parking income to help fund improvements to the scheme. The report set out alternative proposals for consideration.
It was also reported that the Parish Council had not yet had the opportunity to comment on the proposals which were being developed to meet the concerns expressed by the Lancashire Local and had requested that consideration of the report be deferred until the next meeting to allow time for the Parish Council to make its comments.
56. Resolved:- That consideration of the report be deferred until the January meeting of the Lancashire Local to allow time for the Parish Council to consider and comment on the proposals and that it be requested that a location plan be provided to assist Members in considering the report.
A589 Morecambe Roundabout
It was reported that the roundabout at the junction of the A589 Morecambe Road and B5273 Ovangle Road (known locally as the Asda roundabout) had been constructed around 1990 as part of a Section 278 agreement to serve the adjacent Grosvenor Park housing development. Since 2001, 5 heavy goods vehicles had overturned whilst travelling through the roundabout. The
11 cause of overturning appeared to be inappropriate speed associated with incorrect alignment of the vehicles involved.
Signs and markings aimed at reducing vehicle speed and changing vehicle paths round the roundabout were introduced early in 2007 and whilst it was still early, and the situation was being monitored, there had been no overturning incidents since their introduction.
57. Resolved:- That consideration of the report be deferred to the next meeting of the Lancashire Local in January 2008.
Local Grants Application: Hindu Society Lancaster and Morecambe Action Taken Under the Urgent Business Procedure
A report was presented reporting action taken following consultation with the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Lancashire Local in approving, under the Urgent Business Procedure, an application submitted by County Councillor Elizabeth Scott on behalf of the Hindu Society Lancaster and Morecambe under the Local Grants Scheme. The funding of £400 was required by the organisation towards the costs of Diwali celebrations on 1 November 2007 which was prior to the Lancashire Local – Lancaster District meeting in December. Details of the application were set out in Appendix “A” to the report.
58. Resolved:- That the action taken under the Urgent Business procedure in approving the application by the Hindu Society Lancaster and Morecambe submitted under the Local Grants Scheme be noted.
Constitution of the Lancashire Locals
It was reported that, in February, 2006, the County Council’s Full Council, in approving the Constitution for the Lancashire Local’s, had authorised the Leader of the County Council to make adjustments, as necessary, to the Constitution, in order to give more clarity, or improve its operation in the light of experience.
It was reported that, on the 30th October, 2007, the County Council’s Urgency Committee had approved several amendments, as set out in the report, and the purpose of the report was to bring those to Members’ attention.
59. Resolved: That the amendments to the Constitution, as set out in the report now presented be noted.
Local Gateway Grants
It was reported that, during the past 12 months, the County Council’s Voluntary, Community and Faith Sector (VCFS) Cabinet Working Group had considered the principles for allocating a portion of the VCFS Central Gateway Grants Budget to Lancashire Locals for distribution, which would
12 create a middle tier of grants for community groups and would also devolve more responsibilities to the Lancashire Locals.
At its meeting on the 13th September, 2007, the County Council’s Cabinet had endorsed the principles of the scheme and the proposed budget allocations to each of the Lancashire Locals for implementing Local Gateway Grants.
The report presented set out the detail and process for the approval of Local Gateway Grants, from resources allocated to the Local, together with detail of the financial allocations for 2008/09, which in the case of the Lancaster District, was £30,975.
The report indicated that the timetable for the consideration of applications for the Lancaster District would require the Lancashire Local to consider applications at its meeting on the 18th March 2008. The closing date for the receipt of applications was 21st December 2007. Should the grants not be entirely allocated in March, the Lancashire Local would have the opportunity to consider further applications in August/ September.
60. Resolved:- That the report be received.
Forward Business Plan 2007/08
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.
61. Resolved:- That the Forward Business Plan as now presented be agreed, subject to appropriate amendment to reflect requests for reports to future meetings from this meeting.
Urgent Business
The Chair reported on the possible necessity for the Lancashire Local to meet prior to the next scheduled meeting for the purposes of considering any objections which might be received to a proposed “No Waiting at Any Time and Limited Waiting Restrictions Order” on Yorkshire Street West, Morecambe. The matter was deemed to be urgent because it related to a re- generation project which was time limited and required to start by mid- January.
62. Resolved:- That arrangements be provisionally made for a Special Meeting of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District to be held on Monday, 7th January in the event that objections were received to a proposed “No Waiting
13 at Any Time and Limited Waiting Restrictions Order” on Yorkshire Street West, Morecambe.
Date of Next Meeting
It was noted that the next scheduled meeting of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District would be held on Tuesday, 22nd January, 2008 at 6.30 p.m. at the Town Hall, Lancaster.
I M Fisher County Secretary and Solicitor
County Hall, Preston
14 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008
Part I - Item No. 4
Electoral Division affected: Lancaster South East
The Lancashire County Council (Exeter Avenue, Cork Road, Canterbury Avenue Lancaster, Lancaster City) (Prohibition of Waiting) Order 200* (Appendices ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, ‘D’ and ‘E’ refer)
Contact for further information: John Foster, 01524 772068, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate
Executive Summary
Consideration of objections to a proposal to introduce ‘No Waiting At Any Time’ restrictions in Exeter Avenue, Cork Road and Canterbury Avenue, Lancaster.
This is deemed a Key Decision and is included in 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
Officers at the County Council’s Area North office had received requests from the Police and local residents for waiting restrictions to be introduced in the Exeter Avenue area of Lancaster, which would prevent parked vehicles obstructing the carriageway, footway and private drives. The Police said that numerous fixed penalty tickets had been issued to offenders, but this had not solved the problem. Public advertisement of the proposal to introduce ‘No Waiting At Any Time’ restrictions was carried out by the County Council in accordance with legal requirements, and the statutory consultees, together with over 20 other organisations, were formally consulted. The advertised proposals are shown at Appendices ‘A’ and ‘B’. In response to this, 7 letters of objection (2 of which came from one objector) and 2 petitions objecting to the proposal have been received. In addition, 1 letter of support and 1 petition supporting the proposal were received. The objections and comments received are set out and responded to at Appendix ‘C’.
- 2 -
Consultations
Statutory Consultees Other interested parties Members of the Public via Issue of Public Notice and advertisement in Local Press
Advice
There is no record of traffic-related injuries in the area where the restrictions are proposed. The proposal was drafted with the intention of ensuring that no private drives would be obstructed by parked vehicles and the Police would not be called out again to deal with vehicles parked in unsuitable locations. The majority of local residents have stated that they wish to allow some parking near their drives and the local Police Community Beat Manager has agreed with the proposed amendment to the order. There appears to be a consensus amongst the majority of the objectors that parking restrictions are appropriate at the road junctions. Some residents have signed a petition in support of the proposals, but some of those who signed this have also signed a petition objecting to the proposals. This has been taken to indicate that a number of objectors would have no objection to a proposal that reduces the length of the proposed waiting restriction. In consideration of the above, it is advised that the lengths of road subject to waiting restriction be reduced to that shown at Appendices ‘D’ and ‘E’. It is therefore recommended that the length of waiting restriction proposed in the Traffic Regulation Order be reduced and the Order be made.
Alternative options to be considered
1. That any proposal to prohibit waiting be abandoned.
2. That the Order be introduced as originally advertised.
Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other
This item has the following implications:
Financial
The proposed work will be funded from the Traffic and Safety Signs and Lines Budget (PL 8C).
- 3 -
Human Rights
Objectors may argue that the proposal infringes their right to quiet enjoyment of property under the first Protocol of Article 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights as enshrined in the Human Rights Act 1998.
The Convention/Act provides that such infringements should not occur : “except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law” The Convention goes on to state that this right : “shall not…in any way impair the right of a state to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest…..”
On balance, given the benefits that the revised proposal would produce for the community as a whole and the relatively minor nature of the inconvenience which could be suffered, it is felt that the potential advantages to the wider community should prevail and that the proposal is entirely proportionate to the aims it seeks to achieve.
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.
Lancashire Local-Lancaster – 22 January, 2008 Appendix ‘B’
Original Proposals
No Waiting At Any Time
Exeter Avenue, north westerly side From a point 2 metres north east of its junction with the centre line of Cork Road to a point 2 metres north east of the centre line of Canterbury Avenue.
Exeter Avenue, south easterly side From a point 2 metres north east of its junction with the centre line of Cork Road to a point 8 metres north east of the centre line of Canterbury Avenue.
Cork Road, north easterly side From a point 1 metre south east of its junction with the centre line of Ulster Road to a point 33 metres south east of the centre line of Exeter Avenue.
Canterbury Avenue, both sides From a point 2 metres south east of its junction with the centre line of Exeter Avenue for a distance of 18 metres in a south easterly direction.
Lancashire Local-Lancaster – 22 January, 2008 Appendix ‘C’
Organisations consulted by Lancashire County Council when the Traffic Regulation Order was advertised
1. Road Policing Co-ordinator, Lancashire Constabulary
2. Lancashire Ambulance Service NHS Trust
3 . National Grid, New Roads and Street Works Act (NRSWA) Section
4. BT Incoming Notice Reception
5. United Utilities Ltd, Planning Liaison 6. United Utilities (Electricity)
7. Royal Mail 8. Navigation Technologies Ltd
9. Telewest Broadband 10. Freight Transport Association
11. Road Haulage Association, Northern Region 12. Agricultural Industries Confederation
13. NRSWA Co-ordinator, Atkins Telecoms 14. Innogy plc, Property
15. Council for the Protection of Rural England
16. National Farmers Union North West Region
17. Area Representative GLASS, Green Lanes Association
18. Abnormal Loads Officer, County Council (HEM) Bridges Section
19. National Grid Gas Distribution 20. Scotland Gas Networks
21. Morecambe Bay Hospitals NHS Trust 22. Lancaster Chamber of Commerce
23. Right to Ride Representative 24. Lancashire Fire & Rescue Service
25. Lancaster & Morecambe Dial-a-Bus Service
26. Passenger Transport Unit – Consults Stagecoach etc.
27. Lancaster City Council plus County Divisional Councillor
Lancashire Local-Lancaster – 22 January, 2008 Appendix ‘C’
The Following Objections To The Traffic Regulation Order Were Received:-
Objector 1 This person wrote 2 letters – in his first he stated that: • he agreed to waiting restrictions at the Cork Road/Exeter Avenue junction, but objected to those along both sides of Exeter Avenue, • the reduction of parking space on the road, which would result in difficulties for local residents and their visitors, • some properties in Exeter Avenue have no off-street parking areas and to have them constructed would be expensive, • there is a garden allotment area at the end of Exeter Avenue and the effect of introducing waiting restrictions would be that the allotments close down, and • he suggested that the restrictions be introduced only at the Cork Road junction and possibly on the southerly side of Exeter Avenue. In his second letter he stated that: • the general consensus of local residents is that the problems could be solved by the University of Cumbria and this organisation should have free parking for its students. Environment Director’s Response • it is noted that this person agrees with the introduction of restrictions at the Cork Rd/Exeter Avenue junction and possibly on the southerly side of Exeter Avenue, however some restrictions are also required at the Cambridge Avenue/Exeter Avenue junction to prevent parked vehicles causing obstruction there. • Whilst it is accepted that the provision of drives and/or private off-street parking areas costs money, it is feasible that this could be done. The majority of the properties in the roads contained in the traffic regulation order have off-street parking areas. • The public highway is not a car park and its primary purpose is to enable vehicles to pass along it. Notwithstanding this, it is not appropriate to remove on-street parking places without good reason. • The University of Cumbria’s decision to charge for car parking is unlikely to be changed in the near future if ever. Even if it was, it is thought that the demand for parking space would expand to meet the supply and students’ vehicles would still be parked in residential areas.
Objector 2 This person stated that: • he objects strongly to the proposals, as the reduction in parking space would affect his business, and • many of his customers are elderly or infirm and therefore require waiting/parking space outside his business.
Lancashire Local-Lancaster – 22 January, 2008 Appendix ‘C’
Environment Director’s Response • The business has a small off-street parking area for customers (suitable for 2 cars) and the premises have a drive and a garage. • Following discussions with the Police, it has been decided that the proposed waiting restriction outside this business could be removed from the Order.
Objector 3 This person stated that: • she would like the parking restrictions on the north westerly side of Exeter Avenue and those outside the business on Cork Road to be omitted from the proposals, • although her property has off-street parking, the family have two cars, one of which is parked on the road, and • ‘green’ travel is not an option that everyone can adopt.
Environment Director’s Response • Following discussions with the Police, it has been decided that the proposed waiting restriction outside the business in Cork Road could be removed from the regulation order and the proposed length of the restriction on the north westerly side of Exeter Avenue could be reduced.
Objector 4 This person stated that: • when he bought a house in Exeter Avenue, the search details explicitly stated that there was on-street parking, • the obstruction problems only occur at the junction of Cork Road and Exeter Avenue.
Environment Director’s Response • The public has no automatic right to park on a public highway. Exeter Avenue is not a car park; its primary purpose is to enable vehicles to pass along it, and the highway authority has the right to introduce waiting restrictions there. • It is reported by the Police and residents of Canterbury Avenue that the problem of obstruction does not only occur at the Cork Road/Exeter Avenue junction. It also occurs when vehicles double park in Exeter Avenue or park close to the Exeter Avenue/Canterbury Avenue junction.
Objector 5 This person stated that: • a solution to the problem of vehicles causing obstruction is to allow the University of Cumbria to construct a car park, Lancashire Local-Lancaster – 22 January, 2008 Appendix ‘C’
• a car park should be built at the former abattoir site and a path made from it to Coulston Road, • public transport is not available or is expensive, and • he objects to more paint being placed on the country’s roads and more attention should be paid the condition of the roads, which are the worst in western Europe.
Environment Directorate • It is unlikely that a car park will be constructed in the vicinity of the University of Cumbria in the near future. • Regardless of the condition of highways in England, vehicles parked at some locations in the Exeter Avenue area cause obstruction this problem is taking up valuable Police resources and needs to be solved.
Objector 6 This person stated that: • he and his colleagues within the City Council had spoken to most of the residents in Exeter and around the corners in Cork Road and Canterbury Avenue and all think that the proposals are excessive, • the problem of obstruction occurs when vehicles park close to the junctions or double-park, and • there is a demand for parking due to the hairdressing business and people going to the allotments, and some of the properties in Exeter Avenue have no off-street parking areas. This person enclosed a map which showed their proposed parking restrictions along the south easterly side of Exeter Avenue and at the two road junctions on Exeter Avenue.
Environment Director’s Response • Following discussions with the Police, it has been decided that the length of the proposed waiting restrictions could be reduced. • The restrictions proposed by this person were a reasonable compromise, but it is thought that they need to be extended slightly as follows:- i) The restrictions he proposes on Cork Road should be extended in a south easterly direction to provide suitable visibility for drivers emerging from Exeter Avenue. ii) The restrictions he proposes on the north westerly side of Exeter Avenue should be extended to allow vehicles to pull off Cork Road into this road, and wait here if they encounter vehicles travelling in the opposing direction. iii) The restrictions he proposes on the south easterly side of Canterbury Avenue should be extended and a similar length of restriction be placed on the opposite side of the road. This would allow heavy goods vehicles to turn into Canterbury Avenue and enable vehicles about to emerge from this road to wait there whilst a vehicle proceeds along Exeter Avenue in the opposite direction and enters Canterbury Avenue. Lancashire Local-Lancaster – 22 January, 2008 Appendix ‘C’
Letter of Support This person states that he supports the proposal, but considers that lines on one side of Exeter Avenue would suffice. Petition 1 (signed by 46 people) The petition states that the signatories oppose the proposal and “We appreciate the need for double yellow lines on both corners of the street leading into Cork Road but think that the proposed length of the lines down both sides of the street is excessive and unnecessary.
Environment Director’s Response • Following discussions with the Police, it has been decided that the proposed waiting restriction outside the business in Cork Road could be removed from the regulation order and the proposed length of the restriction on the north westerly side of Exeter Avenue could be reduced.
Petition 2 (signed by 58 people) The petition states that the signatories wish to register their objection to the proposal in respect of the business situated in Cork Road and as customers, they consider that provision must be made for both waiting and parking directly in front of the business premises.
Environment Director’s Response
• Following discussions with the Police, it has been decided that the proposed waiting restriction outside the business in Cork Road could be removed from the regulation order and the proposed length of the restriction on the north westerly side of Exeter Avenue could be reduced.
Petition of Support (signed by 70 people)
The petition states that the signatories support the introduction of yellow lines to prevent irresponsible and dangerous parking on the corners of Exeter and Canterbury Avenues, allowing safe access for emergency and delivery vehicles, mothers with prams, wheelchair users and for all residents.
Lancashire Local-Lancaster – 22 January, 2008 Appendix ‘E’
Revised Proposals
No Waiting At Any Time
Exeter Avenue, north westerly side From a point 2 metres north east of its junction with the centre line of Cork Road for a distance of 11 metres in a north easterly direction. (Amended – proposed length reduced)
Exeter Avenue, south easterly side From a point 2 metres north east of its junction with the centre line of Cork Road to a point 8 metres north east of the centre line of Canterbury Avenue.
(Same as original proposal)
Cork Road, north easterly side From a point 12 metres north west of its junction with the centre line of Exeter Avenue for a distance of 28 metres in a south easterly direction.
(Amended – proposed length reduced)
Canterbury Avenue, south westerly side From a point 2 metres south east of its junction with the centre line of Exeter Avenue for a distance of 18 metres in a south easterly direction.
(Same as original proposal)
Canterbury Avenue, north easterly side From a point 2 metres south east of its junction with the centre line of Exeter Avenue for a distance of 11 metres in a south easterly direction.
(Amended – proposed length reduced)
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008
Part I - Item No. 5
Electoral Division affected: Lancaster Rural North
Lancashire Local Grant Applications Appendix ‘A and B’ Refers
Contact for further information: Misbah Bhatti, 01772 530818, Lancashire County Council, Office of the Chief Executive, [email protected]
Executive Summary
This report presents 2 applications from local organisations totalling £1,000 to the Local Grants Scheme for Lancashire Local – Lancaster District. Both applications have been submitted by County Councillor Sarah Fishwick. 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 2007/08 each County Councillor has a budget of £1,250. With 2006/07 being the first year of operation for the Local Grants Scheme, approval has been sought and granted by County Councillor Hazel Harding on behalf of the Cabinet that any unspent and uncommitted resources from 2006/07 are carried over
- 2 - to 2007/08 on the basis that they are to be committed to projects (via the normal approval process) by the end of the 2007/08 financial year.
In recommending applications for grants, regard must be had to the County Council’s 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 five core principles: participation, accessibility, equality, social inclusion and sustainability.
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. Full financial implications 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
Lancashire Local Lancaster District – Local Grants Financial Implications Appendix A
County Councillor Application Requested Carry Over from Remaining Budget Remaining Amount 2006/07 Budget for 2007/2008 Budget after application(s) is (are) approved Sarah Fishwick Crag Bank Indoor £500 Bowling Club Zero £1,200 £200 Bolton-le-Sands Village £500 Hall
Appendix B
Application to be considered for Local Grants, Lancashire Local – Lancaster District
Application for Crag Bank Indoor Bowling Club
County Councillor: Sarah Fishwick
Electoral Division: Lancaster Rural North
Name of Organisation: Crag Bank Indoor Bowling Club
Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes
How many people are in the organisation: Membership of 20 + waiting list
Does the application solely represent your electoral division? If not please provide details of other areas the project covers: Members come from: Middleton – Heysham – Lancaster – Torrisholme – Slyne – Bare – Yealand – Carnforth – Bolton-le-sands & Crag Bank
Project start and finish date: On going
How much funding will the applicant require: £500
Total cost of project: £1,411.20
Is anyone else funding the activity: Yes
If so please give details:
Name of organisation: Harold Bridges Charity Amount: £200 on submission of receipts How long is the funding for: One off donation
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 new bowling mat and a set of bowls. We also need 8 protection units for either end of mats.
How will this project benefit the community?
1
Appendix B
The funding will enable those on the waiting list to join. We also host the inter-village bowls tournament which the council used to run.
Please provide a breakdown of costs for the full amount of money you are requesting:
Mat £770 Bowls £332 8 Ends £291.60 Pr Mats £17.60 Total £1411.20
2
Appendix B
Application for Bolton-le-Sands Village Hall
County Councillor: Sarah Fishwick
Electoral Division: Lancaster Rural North
Name of Organisation: Bolton-le-Sands Village Hall
Does the organisation have a constitution/other suitable documentation: Yes
How many people work in the organisation: 16 – trustees and members of user organisations at the village hall/community centre
Does the application solely represent your electoral division? If not please provide details of other areas the project covers: Yes
Project start and finish date: 03.03.2008 – 17.03.2008
How much funding will the applicant require: £500
What is the total cost of the project: £20,000 + V.A.T
Is anyone else contributing towards the funding of this activity? Yes
Name of organisation: Community Initiatives T.B.A if successful Amount: £10,000 various trusts + own funds – Total so far £18,000 How long is the funding for: 1 year
Has the organisation previously received funding from the local grants scheme: No
Will the activity involve members of the organisation having 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 go towards equipment that is required to fit out the new kitchen at the village hall.
How will this project benefit the local community?
By providing a kitchen that meets health and safety standards present activities can be expanded and the hiring potential of the hall increased, leading to financial sustainability of the village hall. This is the main public facility for activities in Bolton- Le-Sands and a vital part of the community
Please provide a breakdown of costs for the full amount of money you are requesting:
3
Appendix B
1 Fan assisted fridge £338.00 +VAT £300 will not cover any one specific item but will help with the overall costs
4
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008 Part I - Item No. 6
Electoral Division affected: Morecambe North
Hest Bank to Morecambe Promenade Cycle Route
Contact for further information: Alasdair Simpson, 01772 534609, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate, [email protected]
Executive Summary
At the meeting held on 24 July 2007, a report was presented to the Lancashire Local - Lancaster District on proposals to provide a cycle link between Hest Bank and Morecambe Promenade by converting the footway on the A5105 to joint use. This report looks at members concerns with the original scheme and the feasibility of an alternative route along the seashore.
Decision Required
The views of Lancashire Local - Lancaster District are sought on the renewed proposals.
Background
A report was presented to the Lancashire Local held on 24 July 2007 outlining proposals to provide a link for cyclists between the canal at Hest Bank and Morecambe Promenade.
The proposals included: i) Converting the footway on the south side of the A5105 to a cycle track between the end of the promenade and Rushley Drive for uphill cyclists; ii) Providing a cycle lane on the carriageway for downhill cyclists; iii) Providing a refuge to enable cyclists and pedestrians to cross to and from the promenade by the entrance to the VVV Health and Leisure Club; iv) Opening a locked gate at the end of Rushley Drive to provide a better route for cyclists and pedestrians onto the canal.
Although there was support for the concept of a link between the promenade and the canal at Hest Bank, there were concerns about the specific scheme proposed, as follows.
- 2 -
a) The A5105 Marine Drive is a busy road with a poor safety record. 30mph was felt to be a more appropriate speed limit for the road than the current 40mph limit. Members were keen to explore whether there might be options to change the layout of the road to slow traffic and improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians. b) There were concerns about the safety of the refuge crossing given its proposed position and the high speed of approaching traffic. c) There was a desire to explore the feasibility of a route along the coast from Hest Bank level crossing to the promenade.
Members also indicated that they would consider contributing revenue from on-street parking income to help fund improvements to the scheme.
Comments on these proposals were deferred at the 4 December 2007 Lancashire Local meeting to allow Slyne-with-Hest Parish Council to meet separately and make their comments, which are now included in this report.
Existing Cycle and Pedestrian Use
Further to the previous report a survey of cycle and pedestrian use was carried out. Pedestrian flows are very low. Cyclists already make up 45% of the flow on the footway.
Cycle and Pedestrian Flows on the A5105 Between Rushley Drive and the Promenade Both sides of the road Saturday Monday 1 September 2007 3 September 2007 (4 hours) (6 hours) Cyclists on carriageway 27 59 Cyclists on footway 12 26 Pedestrians 15 32
Alternatives to Consider
A. Path along seashore from Hest Bank level crossing to Morecambe Promenade
A path along the seashore would provide an attractive route for both cyclists and walkers. However, it would be a major civil engineering project to take the path across the saltmarsh foreshore. An embankment would need to be constructed to bring the levels above the high tidal range of Morecambe Bay, with substantial coastal protection to maintain its stability. As a result the estimated cost of construction for such a path would be in the range of £2.25 to £3 million.
Morecambe Bay and the surrounding salt marshes are a European Marine Special Area of Conservation, a European Special Protection Area and a Site of Special Scientific Interest.
- 3 -
In order to get planning permission appropriate assessments (including environmental studies) would have to be carried out which demonstrate that the works would have no significant impact on the protected area; in any event it is highly unlikely that Natural England would endorse any such conclusion. The only alternative would be to prove that the creation of the path was of 'overriding public interest', which would be difficult, and a compensatory habitat would need to be found. Under these circumstances any decision would need to be taken by a Minister of the Crown.
A route along the seashore would also need the agreement of Network Rail and other landowners.
In addition this route would also have to include a link from the shore to the canal via Station Road and The Crescent. This is not an attractive link for cyclists due to the gradient, on-street parking and the number of crossing points.
B. Toucan crossing at end of promenade instead of a refuge
An alternative to the proposed refuge would be a toucan crossing. At the December 2007 meeting it is understood that the Lancashire Local indicated that it would look favourably on funding the extra cost of a toucan from off-street parking revenue in 2008/09.
A toucan has the advantage of giving priority to cyclists and pedestrians and is likely to be preferred by young or nervous pedestrians and cyclists and family groups. A drawback of a toucan crossing in this location is the potential for shunt type accidents involving a vehicle stopping at the lights and being hit from behind by a following vehicle. A toucan crossing would increase the cost of the scheme by £40,000.
The advantage of a refuge is that it would allow cyclists and walkers to cross the road in two stages. As part of the refuge scheme a right turn lane would be provided for vehicles turning into VVV Health and Leisure Club, making it safer to turn into the club. The refuge would also discourage overtaking. It might be possible to locate the refuge so that there was a short gap between the VVV entrance and the refuge. A drawback of a refuge is that there is a potential for collision with overtaking vehicles.
C. Cycle route to canal via Station Road and The Crescent
Rushley Drive is the safer route for cyclists because there are fewer potential conflicts with traffic. It is a wide residential cul-de-sac and all the houses have off- street parking for at least two cars and garages. Using Rushley Drive means that cyclists only have to ascend one hill instead of two.
The Crescent by the canal bridge is narrow and often busy with traffic, the footway is narrow and pedestrians often walk in the carriageway. Station Road is an access route from the village to Marine Drive and therefore much busier than Rushley Drive.
- 4 -
In addition there is always on-street parking because the majority of houses have no off-street parking or garages.
To access the crossing point on Marine Drive cyclists would have to cross both The Crescent and Station Road.
D. Install cycle lanes on A5105 instead of converting the footway to cycle tracks
Cycle lanes would be less attractive to family cyclists. Around 30% of cyclists already use the footway. Further, oncoming traffic would have a poor view of cyclists waiting to turn right into Rushley Drive because of the crest and bend.
East of Rushley Drive there is not the width to install cycle lanes because of the central hatching strip. Furthermore, in places there is a possibility that people would park in the cycle lanes.
E. Extend proposed cycle track into the village
Within the village the footways are not wide enough to convert into cycle paths.
F. Widen proposed cycle track by narrowing carriageway
It would be possible to widen the proposed cycle track between Rushley Drive and Morecambe Promenade by narrowing the carriageway. This would add around £75,000 to the cost of the scheme and is difficult to justify in terms of the benefits.
G. Install gateway signing at the start of the village
Gateway signing would help slow traffic down on entering the village and help reduce accidents on the sweeping bend by the railway bridge. There have been three loss of control injury accidents on the bend in the last five years, including one fatal. The estimated cost of gateway signing would be £5,000.
H. Reduce speed limit to 30mph
At present the speed limit on the A5105 from Happy Mount Park to its junction with the A6 south of Bolton-le-Sands is 40mph, however this section of road is to be included in the countywide review of speed limits that is due to be completed by Autumn 2008.
A local safety scheme was carried out on the road through Hest Bank earlier this year. The effect of the scheme on speeds is still being monitored.
Consultations
As per report – July 2007
Lancashire Local - Lancaster – 24 July 2007
- 5 -
British Waterways have written in support of the proposals subject to other parties being content with them. British Waterways welcome the opportunity to improve access to the canal as this is in line with their aim to increase visitors to the nation's waterway network.
The route is supported by local cycling groups including Dynamo, CTC and Pedal Power.
Slyne-with-Hest Parish Council Meeting (17 December 2007)
The Slyne-with-Hest Parish Council meeting was held in December 2007 and a number of residents from Hest Bank, and particularly Rushley Drive, were present. Their primary concern was that an access to the canal at the end of Rushley Drive would lead to increased on-street parking and this would cause access problems for refuge and emergency vehicles.
Other issues were:
• concern that the hedge alongside the A5105 was cut back regularly so that it did not grow out onto the proposed cycleway/footway; • the location of the bus stop opposite VVV Health and Leisure Club; • the location of lamp columns in the proposed cycleway/footway.
It was therefore recommended that consideration be given to: a) the maintenance of the hedges to keep them clear from the footway/cycleway; b) moving the bus stop out of the shared footway/cycleway; c) moving any lamp columns that obstruct the shared footway/cycleway; d) a minimum three month trial opening of the gate onto the canal towpath from Rushley Drive to be undertaken including the Easter period.
Conclusion
It is felt that conversion of the footway to a cycle track and opening of the gate onto Rushley Drive offers the best option for providing a link from the canal at Hest Bank to the promenade. It is confirmed that the scheme includes: i) Moving the bus stop opposite the VVV Health and Leisure Club entrance so that it is not a shared cycleway/footway; ii) Moving lamp columns to the back of the shared footway/cycleway as necessary.
Hedge cutting is the responsibility of the adjacent landowner, though the County Council has powers to ensure that hedges are kept cut back, which can be used in this case if necessary.
- 6 -
A toucan crossing would offer benefits to users above a refuge crossing. A trial opening of the gate onto the canal towpath would be one way of assessing the effect of the scheme on parking on Rushley Drive before making the scheme permanent, though improved crossing facilities would not be installed until the scheme was made permanent.
Advice
The views of the Lancashire Local - Lancaster are sought on the different options.
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 estimated cost of the scheme is £50,000. The cost of the proposals would be met by Lancaster City Council through the Cycling Demonstration Project. As the project is funding several other schemes in the area there is no extra funding from the Cycling Demonstration Project that could be put into the scheme.
Legal
The procedure to convert a footway to a cycle track involves removing the footway under Section 66 of the Highways Act 1980 and constructing a new cycle track with a right of way on foot under Section 65(1) of the Act.
The extent of physical conversion needed may be minimal, being little more than signing the footway as a cycle track.
A cycle track can be either with or without a right of way on foot. In this case the proposed cycle tracks would have a right of way on foot.
The decision to open the gate onto the canal from Rushley Drive would be taken in partnership with British Waterways and the City Council.
Corporate Objectives
The proposal contributes towards the County Council's Corporate Objectives of making Lancashire a good place to live and work now and in the future and a place where everybody matters by: a) Helping to reduce congestion and improve air quality in the area by promoting cycling;
- 7 - b) Making it easier and safer to cycle to and from Hest Bank and Morecambe; c) Encouraging children from Hest Bank and other nearby villages to lead a healthier lifestyle by cycling to school; d) Promoting tourism by linking National Cycle Route 6, which follows the canal from Lancaster to Hest Bank and Carnforth, with Morecambe Promenade (National Cycle Route 69), helping to regenerate the resort.
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
Results of Lancaster City Alasdair Simpson/ Council consultations Lancashire County Council/ 01772 534609 Proposed Rushley Drive Cycle Link Parking Study by Mayer Brown
Report/minutes of Lancashire 24 July 2007 Local - Lancaster
Letter from British Waterways 2 January 2008
Emails from Dynamo, Pedal Power, CTC and other cyclists in support of scheme
Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate
N/A.
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008
Part I - Item No. 7
Electoral Divisions affected: Morecambe South, Skerton
A589 Morecambe Road Overturning Vehicles at Asda Roundabout
Contact for further information: Brian Abraham, 01524 772064, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate, [email protected]
Executive Summary
A number of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) have overturned on a roundabout on the A589 Morecambe Road. This report gives the background to and suspected cause of these incidents and describes the actions that have been taken to prevent further incidents.
The report was originally presented to the Local at their meeting on 4 December 2007, but it was resolved that it be further considered and at the meeting in January.
Decision Required
That Lancashire Local - Lancaster District notes the remedial actions taken in relation to traffic management issues outlined in the report.
Background
The roundabout at the junction of the A589 Morecambe Road and B5273 Ovangle Road (known locally as the Asda roundabout) was constructed around 1990 as part of a Section 278 agreement to serve the adjacent Grosvenor Park housing development. The roundabout was constructed by the developer’s contractor under the supervision of the highway authority.
Since 2001, 5 heavy goods vehicles have overturned whilst travelling through the roundabout. The vehicles involved have all been travelling from Lancaster going straight ahead towards Morecambe or turning right from Ovangle Road towards Lancaster. Investigations carried out into these incidents have shown that the design and construction of the roundabout conforms to the standards that were applicable at the time it was designed and that the cause of overturning appears to be inappropriate speed associated with incorrect alignment of the vehicles involved.
- 2 -
Two options were available to address this issue. One involved major alterations to the geometry and position of the roundabout, which would have cost between £500,000 to £1million. The other option considered was low cost and involved introducing signs and markings aimed at reducing vehicle speed and changing vehicle paths round the roundabout. The latter option was selected and paid for out of small improvement funds. The works comprise signs warning drivers to reduce their speed on the relevant approaches and spiral markings on the roundabout to guide drivers along the correct path around the roundabout. Interactive warning signs to advise drivers of vehicles approaching the roundabout at an inappropriate speed were considered but suitable sites for this type of sign are not available with the current layout of approach roads. The works were carried out in the first quarter of 2007.
The Officer Road Safety Group has on a number of occasions considered the possibility of preventing HGVs using Ovangle Road as a short cut between the Heysham link road and the Asda roundabout. Unfortunately, HGVs do need to use this route to gain access to sites including Asda supermarket and Salt Ayre waste disposal site, and it is considered that ‘Except for Access’ restrictions would not be enforceable. Completion of the proposed Heysham to M6 link road would however remove most vehicles using the route as a short cut.
Whilst it is still early and the situation is being monitored, there have been no overturning incidents since the introduction of the new signs and markings.
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:
Nil N/A N/A
- 3 -
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
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008
Part I - Item No. 8
Electoral Division affected: All
Pedestrian Road Safety Awareness Training
Contact for further information: Alan Fisher, 01772 534663, Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate
Executive Summary
At the meeting of the Lancashire Local - Lancaster District held on 16 October, a report was presented to the Local on Mobile Safety Camera Enforcement and Community Concern Sites. In the discussions that followed, concern was expressed about road safety outside schools in terms of the activities of children and inappropriate behaviour, which put them in conflict with traffic. It was suggested that consideration be given to enforcement measures to combat this practice. It was further suggested that the Road Safety Team be requested to provide a report to the Lancashire Local on the education and training programmes they provide to help combat this kind of behaviour, reduce casualties and improve safety on Lancashire’s roads.
This report sets out the road safety education and training that the County Council’s Road Safety Group provide to children of school age within the Lancaster District.
Decision Required
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is asked to note the report.
Background
The County Council’s Road Safety Group is made up of three teams – publicity, education and training. They provide advice and training to help the people of Lancashire stay safe on the roads and work in partnership with many local and national organisations to improve road safety and reduce road casualties.
The education team provides resources and training programmes, working with schools, colleges, pre-school carers, health visitors and parents to keep young people safe on the roads whether they are cycling or walking.
The training team offers a wide variety of resources and courses to help people become safer riders or drivers, working with Approved Driving Instructors and local businesses to help improve road safety.
- 2 -
Working in partnership is the best way to work and encourage this, a strategy has been developed – ‘Together we can make a difference’. Many key organisations, including businesses, community groups, schools, associations and individuals across Lancashire have signed up to the strategy, all playing their own important part in improving road safety.
The publicity team uses a variety of ways to promote road safety and the new projects that are launched. Updates can be found in newspapers, in leaflets, in the annual ‘Roadlife’ magazine produced by the group and by logging on to the website at www.lancashire.gov.uk/roadsafety .
The following report sets out the Road Safety Activities that took place within the Lancaster District during the academic year 2006/07. Further information will be tabled at the meeting, detailing which schools are actively engaged in programmes, and the total numbers of children within the Lancaster District in receipt of Road Safety Training during that academic year and up to and including the present time.
Journeys
Journeys, a guide to road safety, is a complete toolkit that enables schools to plan road safety education and training into the curriculum. It assesses pupil’s learning needs; introduces appropriate resources and facilitates the distribution of information to parents to enable them to reinforce vital road safety messages. This is brought together by an evaluation and assessment process that culminates in an annual road safety report specific to individual schools, thus contributing to the Every Child Matters outcome to keep children ‘safe from accidental injury and death’.
48 Primary Schools received the document via a business meeting.
Right Start Practical Pedestrian Training Programme
Right Start has been developed to enable children to become safer pedestrians and is designed for use in primary schools. The programme is based on the results of research, which has shown that children learn best through practical experience in the traffic environment and it contributes to the first stage of a progressive road user education process.
It is a progressive programme consisting of three stages each broken down into a number of units
Stage 1 is for reception children and consists of 6 units Stage 2 is for year 1 children and consists of 3 units Stage 3 is for year 2 children and also has 3 units
- 3 -
Each unit consists of three activities:
What Whom Let's Talk Classroom discussion using Class teachers lead the colourful pictorial aids to discussions prepare for the practical activity Let's Do Practical activities at the Suitable adults nominated by roadside the school are trained by the Road Safety Group to deliver the practical training Let's Remember Follow up worksheets to Class teachers facilitate the use support each unit of worksheets
26 schools delivered Stage 1 involving 744 children 24 schools delivered Stage 2 involving 741 children 16 schools delivered Stage 3 involving 507 children
Passport to Safer Cycling
The scheme is designed to enable young cyclists to develop a greater understanding of road usage and to ride with an improved degree of safety, thereby reducing the risk of road crashes. It is available to children aged 10 and above.
Passport to Safer Cycling comprises of 3 modules
Module 1- Cyclist workbook Module 2- Practical Off-Road Training Module 3 -Practical On-Road Training
Volunteers nominated by the schools are trained by the Road Safety Group to deliver the practical elements of the scheme.
33 schools delivered Module 1 involving 961 students 27 schools delivered Module 2 involving 502 students 1 school delivered Module 3 involving 20 students
Consultations
N/A.
Advice
N/A.
Alternative options to be considered
N/A.
- 4 -
Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other
This item has the following implications:
Nil.
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.
Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate
N/A.
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008
Part I - Item No. 10
Electoral Division affected: All
Directorate for Children and Young People – Redesign of Children’s Integrated Services (Appendix 'A' refers)
Contact for further information: Andrew Sofield, (01772) 534323, Lancashire County Council, [email protected]
Executive Summary
New arrangements for the delivery of Children’s Integrated Services, effective from January 2008, are summarised.
Decision Required
Lancashire Local - Lancaster District is asked to note the contents of this report.
Background
Central Government’s Every Child Matters (ECM) agenda, stemming from the death of Victoria Climbie and Lord Laming’s resulting report, currently pervades all aspects of working with children, young people and families. One major outcome is the need for all local authorities and partners to have children’s trust arrangements in place by April 2008. Lancashire’ Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership has decided to ensure that its own children’s trust arrangements begin incrementally from January 2008.
Children’s trust arrangements must show 4 strands: • Inter agency governance • Integrated strategies • Integrated processes • Integrated front-line delivery
These strands coincide with 4 of the 7 work streams currently adopted by the Partnership, and 2 of the 4 have a particularly direct bearing on the redesign of the Children’s Integrated Services (CIS) Group within the County Council’s Directorate for Children and Young People. The Group previously comprised Children’s Social
- 2 -
Care, Youth Justice Services, Education Welfare, Educational Psychology, and SEN Assessment Services.
Integrated processes includes 2 elements crucial to service delivery not only by CIS and all other targeted services, but also to all universal services including schools – • The Common Assessment Framework (CAF) & the role of Lead Professional • ContactPoint (formerly known as the Sharing Information Index), which will include basic details on all children & young people in England aged 0 – 18
Integrated Front-line delivery is less well defined by central government. In all this, however, the redesign of CIS has at its heart a proposed system of front-loaded integrated assessment in line with the ECM agenda for prevention and early intervention. All CIS services will have a shared, flatter management structure comprising locality heads, service managers, team managers, and fieldworkers, all with appropriate administrative support. The 4 service areas now within each of the 5 Locality footprints are
• Integrated assessment and support • Children with specific needs (disability/learning disability) • Family support (including child protection) • Children looked after
In addition, there remain a number of services and functions which cannot be devolved into the Localities, and are therefore retained in Central Services.
In July 2006, an issues paper was published explaining how the Directorate for Children and Young People’s ECM Strategy would relate to Children’s Integrated Services. It referred to the need to reconcile the maxim that ECM is about assisting universal services to help children, young people and families, with the work of local authorities as champions of the individual and in carrying out their statutory functions.
Under the new arrangements, where concerns which might have formerly led to referral to education welfare or to children’s social care, these will be passed to the local Integrated Assessment and Support Team, which will combine staff from both those services, plus – as working partnerships with other professionals develop - perhaps other professionals. Such arrangements will, of course, require wider thresholds than those previously maintained for a child in need. CAF (common assessment framework) coordination will be required in local communities as these arrangements are also rolled out across the various Districts. These will relate to the levels of children’s trust now being established.
Appendix 'A' gives details of those managers already appointed who, under the redesigned structures, will have responsibility for Children’s Integrated Services both in this District and in CIS Central Services.
Consultations
Staff likely to be directly affected were consulted July – September 2006, and March – May 2007. Formal consultation with trade unions occurred from July – September
- 3 -
2007 for managers and fieldwork staff, and from November – December 2007 for administrative staff.
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:
Nil
- 4 -
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers
Paper Date Contact/Council/Ext
Every Child Matters – July 2006 Iain Hulland, Directorate for Principles of the Children & Young People, Directorate’s Strategy Lancashire County Council Tel: 01772 532235 Child Matters: the July 2006 Directorate’s Strategy: Alan Hazell, Directorate for Process – Integrating Children & Young People, Services within the Lancashire County Council Directorate for Children and Tel: 01772 531613 Young People
Every Child Matters – July 2006 Alan Hazell, Directorate for Redesigning the Children’s Children & Young People, Integrated Services Group Lancashire County Council Tel: 01772 531613
Consultation on the March 2007 Alan Hazell, Directorate for Redesign of Children’s Children & Young People, Integrated Services: Lancashire County Council Structure Tel: 01772 531613
Redesign of Children's September 2007 Alan Hazell, Directorate for Integrated Services Children & Young People, Lancashire County Council Tel: 01772 531613 Children’s Integrated November 2007 Services Redesign Alan Hazell, Directorate for Administrative Consultation Children & Young People, Report Lancashire County Council Tel: 01772 531613
Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate
N/A
Lancashire Local – Lancaster Appendix 'A' 22 January 2008
Lancashire County Council Directorate for Children & Young People Children’s Integrated Services
Redesigned Services – January 2008
Lancaster Fylde and Wyre Locality
Locality Head Andrew Sofield
Service Manager, Integrated Assessment & Support Penny Hindle Service Manager, Integrated Provision (Family Support) Vacancy Service Manager, Integrated Provision (Specific Needs) Julie Bradshaw Service Manager, Children Looked After Paul Hegarty Business Support Manager Vacancy YOT Area Manager Charlotte Taylor
Team Manager, Integrated Assessment & Support, Barbara Wood Team Manager, Integrated Assessment & Support, Julie Gilpin Team Manager, Educational Psychology Vacancy Team Manager, SEN Assessment Sally Robinson Team Manager, Children with Disabilities Tony Bradshaw/ Garry Dowthwaite Team Manager, Child Protection Louise Storey Team Manager, Child Protection Vacancy Team Manager, Permanence & Adoption Jane Gray Team Manager, Children Looked After (Fieldwork) Vacancy Team Manager, Fostering Maria Lewis Team Manager, Leaving and After Care Andy Carter
Residential Manager John Gregg
Centre Manager, Children and Parenting Support Service, Lytham St Annes Jennifer Kay Centre Manager, Children and Parenting Support Service, Lancaster Frankie Shorrock Centre Manager, Children and Parenting Support Service, Fleetwood Val Powell
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008
Part I - Item No. 11
Electoral Division affected: All in Lancaster
Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) (Appendix 'A' refers)
Contact for further information: Mark Warren, CAMHS Coordinator, Directorate for Children and Young People, (01772) 534255, [email protected]
Executive Summary
This report identifies national and regional issues and specific areas of progress locally within Lancaster regarding Child and Adolescent Mental Health (CAMHS).
Decision Required
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is asked to consider and comment on the report.
Background
In September 2004 the National Service Framework (NSF) for Children, Young People and Maternity Services was published by the Department of Health. This document set standards for children's health and social services, and the interface of those services with education.
The NSF set out to ensure that:
‘All children and young people, from birth to their eighteenth birthday, who have mental health problems and disorders have access to timely, integrated, high quality multidisciplinary mental health services to ensure effective assessment, treatment and support, for them and their families’.
The County CAMHS Group replaced the County CAMHS Planning Board in January 2002 as a subgroup of the County Children’s Services Planning Group. This group continued the progress of inter agency work in developing the CAMHS agenda.
In recognition of the national drive to promote Comprehensive CAMHS across the Tiers and following the Primary Care Trust (PCT) reorganisation in 2006 all partners agreed from the start of 2007 that this multi agency partnership would be renamed the County Children and Young People Mental Health and Emotional Wellbeing
- 2 -
Partnership. This current group is responsible to the Every Child Matters (ECM) reference group Integrated Processes and Delivery and has a relationship with the three PCT footprint based CAMHS Strategic Partnerships in North, Central and East Lancashire. Until the PCT changes in 2006 there were 6 local partnership boards involving three different local authorities. The current position of three allows for a more consistent and equitable management of the CAMHS Strategies.
Full details are provided in Appendix 'A' where the history of CAMHS services and the multi agency strategic structures that support them are detailed. The targets and performance indicators linked to the relevant sections of the National Service Framework are given with clear indicators of good practice and priority actions taking place in Lancashire and particularly the Lancaster area.
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:
Financial
The Local Authority CAMHS Grant is currently £1.5 million out of a total of £12 million spent on CAMHS by PCTs across Lancashire. The CAMHS grant for Morecambe Bay for the 2007/2008 financial year, administered through the Local Authority was £152,773 in the last financial year.
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
- 3 -
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers
Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No
Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate
N/A
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX 'A' 22 January 2008
Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services CAMHS in Lancashire (with reference to Lancaster District)
National Guidelines
In September 2004 the National Service Framework (NSF) for Children, Young People and Maternity Services was published by the Department of Health. This document set standards for children's health and social services, and the interface of those services with education. Standard Nine relates to the establishment of ‘Comprehensive CAMHS’ by 2014.
‘All children and young people, from birth to their eighteenth birthday, who have mental health problems and disorders have access to timely, integrated, high quality multidisciplinary mental health services to ensure effective assessment, treatment and support, for them and their families’.
Markers of Good Practice 5. There is appropriate access for 1. Staff are competent to promote children and young people with psychological wellbeing and a learning disability and a identify early indications of mental disorder. difficulty. 6. There is a multi-agency 2. Protocols for referral, support approach to meet the needs of and early intervention are those with complex, severe and agreed by all agencies. persistent behavioural and 2. There is a balance of direct and mental health needs and to indirect services and flexibility manage risks. of where these are provided in 7. Specialist Multi Disciplinary order to improve access to high Teams are appropriate in size levels of CAMHS. and skill mix to function 3. Urgent mental health care is effectively. available, leading to a specialist 8. Access to appropriate hospital mental health assessment care in a suitable environment where necessary within 24 (see also Standard 7). hours or the next working day. 9. CPA supports continuity of 4. The needs of all children can care during transition to adult be met, including 16 and 17 services. year olds.
Markers of good practice were given, see above table, of which numbers 3,4,5 and 6 were used as ‘Proxy Measures’ to judge the progress through CAMHS Mapping that Primary Care Trust’s (PCT’s) and partner Local Authorities were making towards ‘Comprehensive CAMHS’ by December 2006. This proxy measurement is now concluded but the Government expectation remains that progress will continue to 2014.
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008
The Four Tiered Approach
In 1995 the NHS Health Advisory Service issued guidance* on the development and management of these services and introduced the ‘four-tier’ model (*’Together we stand – the commissioning, role and management of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services’).
This model recognises a continuum approach, from the early intervention work which occurs at Tier 1 by front-line staff such as teachers, social workers and health visitors, to the more specialist intervention by individual professionals at Tier 2 such as clinical psychologists (i.e. Longlands Child Development Centre), child psychiatrists and specialist social workers, through to the need for a multi-disciplinary approach for more complex cases at Tier 3 (i.e. CAMHS team based at the Ross Centre). Tier 4 services relate to a relatively small number of children and young people who present with severe and high-risk conditions and may need highly specialised treatment, including in-patient care (i.e. ‘The Junction’ 8 bedded unit in Lancaster)
Governance History
The County CAMHS Group replaced the County CAMHS Planning Board in January 2002 as a subgroup of the County Children’s Services Planning Group. This group continued the progress of inter agency work in developing the CAMHS agenda.
In recognition of the national drive to promote Comprehensive CAMHS across the Tiers and following the PCT reorganisation in 2006 all partners agreed from the start of 2007 that this multi agency partnership would be renamed the County Children and Young People Mental Health and Emotional Wellbeing Partnership. This current group is responsible to the Every Child Matters (ECM) reference group Integrated Processes and Delivery and has a relationship with the three PCT footprint based CAMHS Strategic Partnerships in North, Central and East Lancashire. Until the PCT changes in 2006 there were 6 local partnership boards involving three different local authorities. The current position of three allows for a more consistent and equitable management of the CAMHS Strategies.
Lancaster CAMHS services (including The Junction) are currently provided by Lancashire Care Trust and are commissioned by North Lancashire PCT.
Finance
The county multi agency meeting was initially created to jointly manage the extra monies provided by the CAMHS Grant which was to be disseminated through the Local Authority (LA) and to prompt a jointly planned increase in CAMHS services. In 2002 the LA and PCT Chief Executives agreed a
2 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008 formula for division of the grant through the PCTs and further agreed a top slice for 7 CAMHS Social Workers in addition to the 10.2 Social Workers already out posted in CAMHS Teams. The Lancaster area has 2 whole time equivalent CAMHS social worker posts.
This formula has continued through subsequent years. A further top slice was agreed in 2005 when the County CAMHS Coordinator post was created for three years to assist with developing consistency and equity through a strategic link with each Strategic Partnership.
The PCT monies come through their Local Delivery Plan (LDP) grant which PCTs can choose to spend on CAMHS or on other services. Because of this flexibility the CAMHS grant was created to be managed through the Local Authority and spent wholly on jointly agreed CAMHS Services. The Local Authority CAMHS Grant is currently £1.5 million out of a total of £12 million spent on CAMHS by PCTs across Lancashire. The CAMHS grant for Morecambe Bay for the 2007/2007 financial year, administered through the Local Authority was £152,773 in the last financial year.
Areas of Progress:
Strategy
There have been two CAMHS Strategy periods. The first being 2003-6 where 8 PCTs in 6 local Strategic Partnerships produced 6 diverse local strategies. These were delivered and concluded including the establishment of the Grant ratio and spend and the establishment of the Strategic Partnerships.
The NSF, published in September 2004 guided the planning for the next strategy for 2006-9. To assist with this the CAMHS Board agreed the creation of the CAMHS Coordinator post in 2005 to ensure consistency in the production of the then six local, and overall Lancashire, Strategies for 2006 - 9
The CAMHS strategies provide a strategic overview outlining a multi-agency approach to the development of comprehensive CAMHS as defined by the National Service Framework for Children and Young People – Standard 9, up to 2014, the 2006-9 strategies are the first stage of this process of Comprehensive CAMHS.
PCT reorganisation in 2006 has meant there are now three local strategies covering North, Central and East Lancashire which provide detailed local arrangements for delivery of services. The 2006-9 strategies are more meaningful than the previous strategies as they are linked to the Proxy Targets and contain agreed ‘Priority Vulnerable Groups’.
The County CAMHS Group at a workshop in January 2006 identified the following vulnerable groups as the priority in the 2006 – 2009 CAMHS Strategies:
3 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008
• Children and Young People Looked After.
• 16/17 year olds young people.
• Children and young people who have a Learning Disability.
• Children and young people who are suffering from Post Trauma Abuse.
• Children and young people from a black or minority ethnic population.
• Children and young people within the Youth Justice system.
It is also recognised that these groups also increase their vulnerability by being at risk of exclusion from educational settings. Since the Adoption Act Post Adoption Support has been included. A work plan has been developed with the main headlines in Annex 1.
County CAMHS Coordinator
This post was created in 2005 with all parties agreeing to a top slice of the Local Authority CAMHS Grant. The post has assisted with developing consistency and equity through a strategic link with the County Partnership and each Strategic Partnership.
County Children and Young People Mental Health and Emotional Wellbeing Partnership Meetings
The County Partnership, which was successful in creating a structure for the CAMHS Grant and creating local Partnership Groups, has now had a substantial change of membership and focus since the PCT changes and the imminent changes in Children’s Integrated Services (CIS). The overall membership (Annex 3) is being revisited by the Partnership. The meeting is currently chaired by the Head of Children’s Social Care for CIS and the future of this role is to be debated. The Chair reports to the ECM reference group IPAD where links are made with other plans for Children’s Trust Arrangements.
Health membership consists of Commissioner representation from North, Central and East Lancashire PCTs and Provider representation from Lancashire Care Trust who manage the Tier 4 service at The Junction. CIS are currently represented by Area Managers.
The Partnership meets every three months and has developed a work plan which links with local CAMHS Strategies.
Primary and Secondary Schools are now to have a voice at the partnership along with Early Years, Healthy Schools and Learners out of School and the focus of the work is more geared to addressing issues in universal services
4 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008 than the previous focus on specialist CAMHS. Whilst there is a focus on Universal services, the Lancashire Consultants are now also represented.
Outcomes
The blunt tool of CAMHS Mapping was intended to focus on the 10% uplift of staff or spend that PCTs should have been using to boost CAMHS provision across the Tiers. However increase in resources has been mainly focussed upon Tier 3 services. There are six specific performance indicators that the Local Authority reports on in respect of CAMHS; the four Proxy Measures (PAF A70 services to 16/17 year olds, Learning Disability, Emergency Service and Complex Needs arrangements) and two Youth Offending Team (YOT) measures. The Proxy measures were reported as scoring a 3 out of a possible 4 on the Annual Performance Assessment (APA) grading system and the YOT measures as 100% and 97% in respect of Urgent and Non Urgent referrals for CAMHS Assessment and Engagement of Service.
Post December 2006, PCTs no longer have the Proxy Target indicators and so the County Partnership is currently focussing on improving pathways to services and to developing performance indicators that will truly reflect improvements or otherwise to service. Below are the proposed indicators agreed by a sub group to the County Partnership, agreed by PCT CAMHS and Local Authority Leads, which are to be developed further
Proposed Indicators
1. Number of CLA seen
2. Number of Offenders seen
3. Participation of YP
4. Number of YP that Self Harm
5. Number of Children seen from Schools
6. 16/17 on Adult Wards
7. Number of Children with Learning Disability Seen
See Annex 2 for further detail.
Other Areas of Progress
Commissioning
5 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008
A clearer position is being taken on commissioning with local partnerships developing Service Level Agreements (SLAs) with their providers which contain clear expectations. A Pan Lancashire multi agency group is developing a Tier 3 strategy which will identify an agreed baseline service.
Tier 4
‘The Junction’, a new residential CAMHS unit in Lancaster opened on the 2nd July 2007. A multi agency Board oversaw the development which is being managed by Lancashire Care Trust. Participation of young people played a major part in the development of the service and the Participation Group is continuing and building links with Tier 3 services.
Early Intervention Psychosis
This cross Lancashire Service for 14-34 year olds who are affected by the initial onset of psychosis became operational in 2007.
Workforce Development
The LAA target ‘Increased Access to CAMHS’ and 10% uplift of CAMHS across the Tiers through the CAMHS Grant has resulted in increased workforce.
Specialist Tier 3 teams usually consist of a Consultant Psychiatrist, Clinical Psychologist, Social Worker, Primary Mental Health Worker, YOT worker and Paediatric Liaison. Black and Minority Ethnic (BME), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Self Harm workers are also placed within some teams. Links are made with schools through Education Link and Emotional Health Workers who receive support and supervision from CAMHS teams. Over the last few years the limited specialist CAMHS resource has stretched to encompass direct services to children in universal and targeted services. National Workforce Development and Planning is also being led and links exist to promote local developments in line with national ones. See Annex 4 for examples of development in both training and staffing.
Participation
The involvement of young people in service planning and delivery has not previously been well developed. Regionally and Nationally engagement of children and young people is being promoted. The County Partnership is considering the ‘Investors in Children’ model which the East Lancashire Partnership has already committed to. North and Central Lancashire are both discussing both the ‘Investors in Children’ and ‘Young Minds‘ models with Central Lancashire CAMHS having just launched their Website.
6 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008
The Lancashire Young People’s Panel has been involved in discussions about CAMHS Strategy and this is planned to develop.
‘The Junction’ Participation Group was fully involved in the planning of the service and will continue to link in with Tier 3 groups.
Challenges
Challenges continue in developing services. ‘New Ways of Working’ where the Consultant led team model is being challenged will require support in a small funded service where staffing size is inequitable across Lancashire. Partnership working with non other local authorities and non LCC footprint PCTs is also an issue. Blackburn with Darwen is a partner in the East Lancs Partnership, Blackpool PCT is commissioned to provide a CAMHS service in Fylde and Wyre and Cumbria County Council is a partner in ‘The Junction’. The reconfiguration of PCTs in 2006 is still resulting in ‘settling in’ with team structures still being developed in Central and North Lancashire.
Beyond 2008/9 the CAMHS Grant and Local Delivery Plan grant will be mainstreamed finance. This is clearly in anticipation of Children’s Trust Arrangements where initiatives such as ISA will need to be incorporated.
The Overview and Scrutiny task group is currently examining:
(1) To examine performance in Lancashire regarding Access to CAMHS, in particular regarding: • Efforts to strengthen universal services and the broader definition of CAMHS – do those that need support at tier 1 have access to appropriate support? • Access to specialist services – equitability, timeliness • Transition to adult services for 16-19 year olds (2) To include a special focus on Children Looked After in addition to considering the experiences of the full range of service users (3) To make recommendations for improvements”
Performance Indicators, Outcome Measures and The Future of CAMHS
The recent development of Emotional Health and Wellbeing and the need to translate this change into the current focus on the APA and Children and Young People’s Plan has led to the CYPMH&EWB Partnership looking to outcome based means of identifying service improvement. The development of the three Partnerships, the five CIS localities and movement to Children’s Trust Arrangements managed well will assist in developing Comprehensive CAMHS and clear performance linked indicators.
Outcomes and Measures
7 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008
There are six specific performance indicators that the Local Authority reports on in respect of CAMHS; the four Proxy Measures (PAF A70) and two YOT measures. The Proxy measures were reported as scoring a 3 out of a possible 4 on the APA grading system and the YOT measures as 100% and 97% in respect of Urgent and Non Urgent referrals for CAMHS Assessment and Engagement of Service.
Proxy Measures
In September 2004 the National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity Services was published by the Department of Health. This document set standards for children's health and social services, and the interface of those services with education. Standard Nine relates to the journey to ‘Comprehensive CAMHS’ by 2014.
‘All children and young people, from birth to their eighteenth birthday, who have mental health problems and disorders have access to timely, integrated, high quality multidisciplinary mental health services to ensure effective assessment, treatment and support, for them and their families’.
Nine markers of good practice were given, of which four were used as ‘Proxy Measures’ to judge the progress through CAMHS Mapping that PCTs (and partner Local Authorities) were making towards ‘Comprehensive CAMHS’ by December 2006. This proxy measurement exercise for PCTs and Local Authorities is now concluded but the Government expectation remains that progress to Comprehensive CAMHS will continue to 2014.
The North Lancashire PCT reported that the following measures had been achieved. This has been accepted by the Care Services Improvement Partnership (CSIP).
Proxy Measure Urgent mental health care is available, leading to a specialist mental health assessment where necessary within 24 hours or the next working day.
Grade Protocols and plans are in place but are only partially implemented (i.e. Specialist CAMH service providers within the council area, between them, include on-call provision to cover emergencies in local children and young people [this may be provided by just one agency] OR An emergency service is provided which will see children by the end of the next working day.)
Proxy Measure The needs of all children can be met, including 16 and 17 year olds.
Grade Plans and protocols for 16 and 17 year olds who require mental health services are in place: some services are in place, some are still to be developed so as to provide cover across the whole council area.
Proxy Measure There is appropriate access for children and young people with a learning disability and a mental disorder
8 Lancashire Local – Lancaster District APPENDIX ‘A’ 22 January 2008
Grade Plans and protocols for children and young people with learning disabilities and mental health needs are in place: some services are in place, some are still to be developed so as to provide cover across the whole council area.
Proxy Measure There is a multi-agency approach to meet the needs of those with complex, severe and persistent behavioural and mental health needs and to manage risks.
Grade Protocols and plans are in place: access arrangements are operating but not across the whole council area
The scoring on all four measures was judged across the whole of the council area with each of the proxy measures scoring a 3 out of a possible 4 on the APA grading system. This score placed the Authority in the top half of the Authorities in the country.
Youth Offending Team
The two measures to be reported on are: All young people referred to the Youth Offending Team (YOT) and are assessed as manifesting acute mental health difficulties should be referred to CAMHS for formal assessment commencing within 5 working days of the receipt of the referral with a view to their accessing either a tier 3 or other appropriate CAMHS tier service based on this assessment. Non-acute mental health concerns should be referred by the YOT for an assessment and engagement by the appropriate CAMHS tier (1-3) commenced within 15 working days of referral.
Acute - referral within timescale = 100% . Non Acute - referrals within timescale = 97%.
Whilst the percentage scores are high the actual numbers appear low. This is despite the YOT workers within CAMHS Teams. Recruitment to some of these posts has been an issue but the overall numbers of referrals is being addressed through the work of the CYPMH&EWB sub group, see below in next section.
Mark Warren CAMHS Coordinator October 2007
9 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX '1' 22 January 2008
County CYP MH&EWB Partnership Work Programme Developments
The County CYP MH&EWB Partnership are developing a joint work programme against the broad areas detailed below.
1. Tier 3 & 4 Commissioning Strategy – • Completion of a Northwest Commissioning Strategy which will support all potential providers to develop required services
2. CAMHS LD Training - • Participation of all CAMHS to the training programme • Improved access to CAMHS for those children and young people with LD – measured through CAMHS mapping • Development of skilled workforce for LD – measured via programme audit
3. ASD Consultation – • Clear pathway developed for Identification, Diagnosis and Assessment • Improved service development and delivery • Enhanced service standard to be audited against the National Autism Plan
4. Improving Access for BME – • Improved access for BME – measured through CAMHS mapping • Participation of all CAMHS to cultural competence programme
5. Improving Participation with Children and Young People – • Defined participation programme for all CAMHS • Inclusion of service users views within service development
6. CAMHS 24/7 Crisis Support – • Development of robust care pathways for crisis support
1 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX ‘1’ 22 January 2008
• Achievement of 24/7 target – measured through CAMHS mapping
7. Improve waiting times and access – • Reduction of waiting times – measured through CAMHS mapping • Implementation of Choose and Book programme across CAMHS • Achievement of referral to first appointment target by April 2008
8. CAMHS and Education – • Implementation of training package for use in schools 9. Improve accessibility to CAMHS for children and young people with Learning Disabilities - • Production of ‘What Now’ booklet for children and young people with LD • Monitor usage via Youth and Community data base
10. Developing a skilled workforce – • Integration of CAMHS workforce strategy within the children and families programme • Achievement of Workforce priorities identified within the plan
11. Implementation of Comprehensive CAMHS – • Further achievement towards Comprehensive CAMHS – measured by CAMHS mapping in March 08
2 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX '2' 22 January 2008
Performance Indicators
Children and young people within the Children Looked After and Youth Justice system are at a much higher risk of developing mental health difficulties and research demonstrates a higher prevalence of mental health problems within these populations of children and young people. As such the performance indicators for the success of Increased Access to CAMHS must include a focus on these groups.
Proposed Indicators
1. Number of CLA seen (i) Repeat referrals (NEET/Custody/Self Harm) (ii) Localities (iii) Fostering
2. Number of Offenders seen (iv) Urgent/Non Urgent (v) YOT workers in multi agency teams
3. Participation of YP (vi) Service planning (vii) Service Development/Feedback
4. Number of YP that Self Harm Self Harm Conference 10/06 (viii) Number of CLA/YOT (ix) Number seen by CAMHS Teams (x) Number of Deaths
5. Number of Children seen from Schools (xi) Training Programmes for staff (xii) Bullying (xiii) Substance
6. 16/17 on Adult Wards (xiv) Early Intervention (xv) Adult or CAMHS Community Services
7. Number of Children with Learning Disability Seen
Current Agency Performance Indicators
YOT
Ensure that all young people who are assessed by ASSET or the mental health assessment framework as manifesting acute mental health difficulties are referred by YOTs to CAMHS for a formal assessment commencing within five working days of the receipt of the referral, with a view to their accessing a tier 3 or other appropriate CAMHS tier service based on this assessment.
1 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX '2' 22 January 2008
Ensure that all young people who are assessed by ASSET or the mental health assessment framework as manifesting non-acute mental health concerns are referred by the YOT for an assessment and engagement by the appropriate CAMHS tier 1-3 service commenced within 15 working days of referral.
Within the ‘Comprehensive Performance Management Framework’ the Youth Offending Team also has to meet ‘Key Indicators of Quality’ in relation to mental health service provision. When validating the QA audit carried out in September 2006, the Youth Justice Board stated:
‘’It was clear throughout the validation process that the long term Mental Health Worker vacancies had resulted in a serious delay in performance development’. A key priority area is, therefore:
The provision of appropriately qualified healthcare workers to youth offending teams who have the appropriate specialist skills which meet the needs of children and young people who offend.
CIS
A70 Comprehensive CAMHS This includes the Proxy measures of 16/17, 24/7, Learning Disability and Partnership arrangements for Complex Needs.
Other measures that are difficult to relate directly to the success or otherwise of CAMHS but could be influenced by the involvement of Specialist CAMHS Tier 3 include:
Placement stability of CLA Post Adoption Support Health Plans of CLA Educational Attainment of CLA NEET figures for Care Leavers
PCT
There are currently no indicators that the PCTs have to formally achieve following the achievement of the CAMHS proxy targets.
Areas to be conscious of are:
16 and 17 year olds on adult wards
BME access to CAMHS
2 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX '2' 22 January 2008
Schools
Whilst there are no specific CAMHS targets, there is an impact on the following measures:
¾ Exclusions ¾ Reintegration ¾ Educational Achievement ¾ Lems numbers
The main issue is the Tier 1 Prevention and Promotion agenda which encompasses Extended Schools, Healthy Schools, Social Emotional Aspects of Learning.
3 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX '3' 22 January 2008
Membership of Lancashire Children and Young People Mental Health and Emotional Wellbeing Partnership
Head of Children’s Social Care CIS Chair
Commissioner East Lancashire PCT
Commissioner North Lancashire PCT
Commissioner Central Lancashire PCT
Provider The Junction, Lancashire Care Trust
Consultant Psychiatrist Lancashire Consultants Group
Head of Fieldwork CIS
Area Managers CIS
CAMHS Coordinator LCC
Policy Officer LCC
Regional Development Worker CSIP
Learners Out of School LCC
Head Teacher (Secondary) LCC
Head Teacher (Primary) LCC
Early Years LCC
Youth Service LCC
Healthy Schools LCC
1 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX '4' 22 January 2008
CAMHS Workforce Developments and Innovation Training • 2002 Young Minds training ‘Looking After the Mental Health Needs of Looked After Children‘ delivered to several hundred multi agency staff. • This resource was integrated within local training strategies from April 2004. An example being West Lancs have trained 1500 staff. • Primary Mental Health Workers promote training and development within Universal services • ADHD Programmes in Schools • CAMHS training programmes to Social Workers, Foster Carers, Residential Workers, Teachers and Children’s Centre Workers • National pilot on New Ways of Working • CAMHS/EWB Training Group developing a training strategy across Lancashire • SEAL project in Primary Schools • SEAL moving on to Secondary Schools in 09/07 • Early Years CAMHS Strategy • Self Harm Conference held 10/06
Staffing Innovation • Education Link Workers working alongside Primary Mental Health Workers • BME Workers in CAMHS Teams • YOT staff placed within CAMHS teams and CAMHS Nurses within YOT teams to provide early access to CAMHS assessment (a YOT PI). • BIP link posts working directly with schools and supervised by CAMHS now funded through the Schools Development Grant. • School Nurses supported by CAMHS Teams • CAMHS Workers linked to Connexions • Intensive Support Community Service • Learning Disability Teams (all children with LD in South Lancs have a CAMHS assessment) • Children Looked After CAMHS Teams (Currently in East Lancs, plans in Development in Central and North Lancs where a model is being piloted) • CAMHS SWs provide regular support to Children’s Homes • Self Harm Teams (Linked well in recent Lytham High School) • CAMHS Service linked to Urban Exchange • Schools employing Emotional Health Workers
Many individual schools have developed a range of initiatives, including employment of school counsellors and mentors, peer counselling, and support groups for parents. There are over one hundred schools involved in the Emotional Health and Well- Being Standard of the Lancashire Healthy Schools Programme.
1 Lancashire Local - Lancaster ANNEX '4' 22 January 2008
A major effect of the development of CAMHS over the last few years is the awareness raising in schools of Emotional Health and Wellbeing issues. This is also well embedded in schools through the Healthy Schools project.
2
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22 January 2008 Part I - Item No. 12
Electoral Division affected: All
Children Looked After - Local Statistics and Approaches
Contact for further information: Moya McKinney, 01524 66246, Directorate for Children and Young People, [email protected]
Executive Summary
This report highlights key information relating to the Children looked after population of Morecambe Bay. It is important to the Children's Integrated Service that we deliver quality care to all children and young people; supporting a planned return home where possible, and providing stable, secure permanent plans for those who cannot return home.
We have a relatively low number of children in voluntary care, and the figures noted reflect an effective care planning process which provides stability for children and young people. This is generally by way of adoption for younger children and through residence order, special guardianship or care orders for older children.
Decision Required
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District are asked to note the contents of this report.
Background
Morecambe Bay has 126 children looked after from aged 0 to 18 years.
The legal status of each child is determined by a number of facts – the reason why they cannot be cared for by their parents, legal proceedings and the care plan of the local authority in promoting the interest of the child throughout their dependent years.
As of 20.012.07 the following explains the number and age of children in each legal category:
Number of Children Looked After: 126
• S20 15 none under 5 years • Care Order 57 none under 5 years • ICO 35 6 under 5 years • Placement Order 19 11 under 5 years and 5 over 5 years Total 126
- 2 - Section 20 is a voluntary agreement to accommodate a child between children social care and parents, whilst parents continue to hold parental responsibilities. Care order is under Section 31, Children Act 1989 – this allows the local authority to assume parental responsibility for a child until the age of 18.
ICO – Interim Care Order is Section 38, Children Act 1989., this is a temporary order to allow time to plan and co-ordinate assessments of a family. Placement Order, Section 21 Adoption and Children Act 2002. This is needed to allow a child to be placed for adoption.
Children are accommodated in different types of placement, dependent upon their individual needs.
• Children placed in long term foster care 67: 4 in Agency Foster Care 6 in Fostering Focus • Children placed in long term residential care: 9: 2 outside Lancashire • Children placed in task centred foster care: 38 with ongoing assessments taking place
• Children placed in short term residential assessment unit: 3
• 5 young people living independently • 72 foster carers in the Morecambe Bay Area
Morecambe Bay Children Social Care placed a total of eight children with adoptive parents outside of our local area. There are eight children we intend to place for adoption in the next six months.
14 children have plans supporting their preparation to live independently.
There are 72 foster carers in Morecambe Bay. Many have children of their own who are also involved in the task of 'fostering' a child looked after. The authority is keen to recruit additional carers in order to improve our capacity for placement choice for all looked after children.
Consultations
Moya McKinney, Team Manager, [email protected], tel: 01524 585639
Advice
N/A
Alternative options to be considered
N/A
Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other
- 3 -
None
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
None
Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate
N/A
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on the 22 January 2008
Part I - Item No. 13
Electoral Division affected: All
Children Missing from Care
Contact for further information: John Gregg, (01254) 585621, Lancashire County Council, Directorate for Children and Young People, [email protected]
Executive Summary
This report details the progress and developments made in Lancashire with regard to children missing from care.
Decision Required
The comments of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District are requested.
Background
In recent years, there has been a growing national awareness of, and concern about, the issue of children who go missing – missing from home in general, and from care in particular. The scale of the problem is substantial; national figures indicate that approx 77,000 young people go missing each year.
The picture in Lancashire reflects these statistics – in 2002, police data indicated that they received 9,000 Missing Persons reports each year, of which 6,200 became formal investigations, and of these, 4,815 related to children and young people (of whom a major proportion were looked after).
Each incident when a child goes missing requires extensive follow-up and investigation by the police; it is estimated that on average each missing person report costs approximately £1,000 in police time and resources. However, far more important, and worrying, are the human costs. Children who go missing are likely to be involved in crime – either as victims or perpetrators – substance abuse, and are at high risk of physical and/or sexual abuse.
In 2002, Lancashire Constabulary introduced a sophisticated system for the recording and monitoring of missing persons incidents (Sleuth); prior to this, the information available to both police and Social Services was patchy and largely anecdotal. The procedures which existed in respect to children missing from care were outdated and operated in a mechanistic way, rather than focusing on the needs of the child and utilising agency resources in the best way. This invariably led to
- 2 -
frustration and conflict between police, social workers and carers, and potentially left children at risk of harm.
In addition to the introduction of Sleuth, a number of other developments in 2002 created the impetus for change within Lancashire. LAC Circular (2002)17 was issued, which required local authorities and the police to produce joint protocols for responding to children missing from care, and to identify senior managers in each agency to ensure that such procedures are followed. At the same time, the Department of Health produced a Guide to Good Practice – “Children Missing from Care and from Home”, which set out a framework within which improvements may be achieved. Alongside this, Lancashire Social Services made a successful bid for funding from the Social Exclusion Unit (£86K) which enabled, in partnership with the Children’s Society, the Young Runaways Project to be set up, employing two specialist staff to work exclusively with children missing from care.
Progress to Date
Over the past four years, significant progress has been made in Lancashire towards addressing the challenges presented by children missing from care; in particular, close partnership working between key agencies has played a major part in enabling the issues to be tackled.
The joint protocols between Lancashire Constabulary and the County Council, for responding to missing children, were completely re-written in 2003 in response to the LAC circular and DoH Guidance, and laid the basis for more effective working between police and Social Services. These protocols were reviewed in the light of further experience, and re-written again in 2006. This latest version has also been adopted by the Unitary Authorities of Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen, together with the relevant Local Safeguarding Children’s Boards. They are now regarded as a model of good practice in this area of work, and have been adopted in whole or part, by a number of Police authorities and children’s services across the country. The protocols promote and facilitate the better use of scarce resources, especially by the police and Children’s Services, and particularly provide for the targeting of time and skills on the most vulnerable children and young people; as such, this work makes a valuable contribution to the overall Safeguarding agenda.
The implementation of Sleuth, combined with a positive approach to inter-agency working, has led to the effective sharing of information between Police and Children’s Services, enabling key agencies to monitor and review performance, and take appropriate action. Most significantly, these statistics show a clear trend over the past four years towards a substantial reduction in the numbers of young people who go missing. Understandably, the police require that this data is treated as confidential and, therefore, detailed statistics for the Lancaster area cannot be included in this report; however, it should be noted that the Northern police division (which includes Lancaster) has shown an overall improvement in reducing incidents of missing children.
A positive commitment to this approach has been very evident throughout the partner agencies, from a senior strategic level right through to the local implementation, and has been typified by vastly improved working relationships.
- 3 -
Some excellent work has been undertaken (by residential staff, the police and the Young Runaways project in particular) with a number of young people who have been missing from care, and who have become very vulnerable through their own actions, or because of those with whom they associate. Other agencies have been involved and contributed where appropriate (including Health, Education, YOT and CAMHS) in developing practical and sometimes imaginative responses to individual situations.
As mentioned above, Lancashire’s strategic approach to, and work with, children missing from care has attracted national interest, and a number of other authorities – Police and Children’s Services – have been keen to follow Lancashire’s lead. This work gained formal recognition in 2005 when it won a much-coveted Guardian Public Service Award.
To summarise, significant progress has been made over the past four years and much good work put in place. However, the problems, challenges and risks posed by children missing from care continue to require the sustained efforts of all concerned.
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:
N/A
- 4 -
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
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on the 22nd January, 2008
Part I - Item No. 14
Electoral Division affected: All in Lancaster District
Programme of Meetings for 2008/09
Contact for further information: S P Southworth, 01772 533464, Lancashire County Council, County Secretary and Solicitor’s Group, [email protected]
Executive Summary
This report suggests a draft range of dates for meetings of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District for the Municipal Year 2008/09 and asks the Local to consider times and venues for those Meetings.
Decision Required
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District is asked to:-
a) agree the draft programme of dates for meetings of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District for 2008/09;
b) agree preferred start times for meetings; and
c) consider preferred venues for meetings.
Background
The Terms of Reference for Lancashire Local – Lancaster District (Paragraph 5(ii)) provide that the Local shall meet on a six or eight weekly cycle and at venues to be determined by the Local.
The final meeting of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District in the 2007/08 Programme is due to take place on Tuesday 18th March 2008.
The suggested programme for Lancashire Local – Lancaster District following that meeting is as follows:-
Tuesday the 6th May, 2008 Tuesday the 17th June, 2008 Tuesday the 22nd July, 2008 Tuesday the 2nd September, 2008 Tuesday the 14th October, 2008
- 2 -
Tuesday the 2nd December, 2008 Tuesday the 20th January, 2009 Tuesday the 10th March, 2009
Meetings of Lancashire Local – Lancaster District in 2007/08 have usually begun at 6.30 pm when meeting in urban settings and 1.30 pm in rural areas and the Local may wish to continue this arrangement or, alternatively, may wish to consider other times.
As a framework for consideration, the following timings are offered as possibilities for the dates shown:-
6th May, 2008 1.30pm 17th June, 2008 1.30pm 22nd July, 2008 6.30pm 2nd September, 2008 6.30pm 14th October, 2008 1.30pm 2nd December, 2008 1.30pm 20th January, 2009 6.30pm 10th March, 2009 6.30pm
Although the Lancashire Locals are not primarily about public engagement, meetings are open to the public and to the press. Meetings in 2007/08 have taken place at various venues throughout the District, and the Local may wish to continue this arrangement.
Consultations
Officers of the City Council and the County Council’s Policy Unit, and Lancaster District’s District Partnership Officer have been consulted when preparing the suggested programme of meetings to avoid potential conflict with existing meetings and other Lancashire Local meetings in other parts of Lancashire.
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
- 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:
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 List of Background Papers
Paper Date Contact/Council/Tel No
Full Council Proceedings 23rd February, 2006 D Porter, 01772 533412, Lancashire County Council, County Secretary and Solicitor’s Group
Lancashire County Council, D Porter, 01772 533412, Timetable of Meetings Lancashire County Council, 2008/2009 County Secretary and Solicitor’s Group
Reason for inclusion in Part II, if appropriate
N/A
Lancashire Local – Lancaster District Meeting to be held on 22nd January 2008
Part I - Item No. 15
Electoral Division affected: None
Forward Business Plan 2007/08 (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
Members are invited to agree the items and dates shown in the forward business plan, subject to any additions or alterations resulting from this and 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
Implications: e.g. Financial, Legal, Personnel, Human Rights, Crime and Disorder or Other
- 2 -
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 Proposed Forward Plan 2006/7
19-Jun-07 24-Jul-07 04-Sep-07 16-Oct-07 Nov 04-Dec-07 22-Jan-08 18-Mar-08 Next year 7pm 1.30pm 6.30pm 1.30pm 4.30pm 6.30pm 6.30pm 6.30pm Caton Silverdale Morecambe High Galgate Victoria Institute, Melling Lancaster Town Morecambe Town Caton Hall Hall
Environment Directorate Extension of Lune Valley On street parking School Travel Plans - ***Sustainable Waste *Roundabout at junction Yellow buses Cycle Way including crossing busy Management*** of A589 & B5273* roads at refuges Resident's Parking Climate Change Fund School safety zones On street parking revenue Revised proposals for Resident's Parking - Permits - proposed schemes Marine Drive cycle link Process Quality Bus Route - Phase Footway to cycle track Subsidised bus services Mobile Safety Camera Revised proposals for No Waiting at Any Time 4 Bus Stop Improvements conversions - Westgate, Sites Marine Drive cycle link Order – Exeter Road, Marine Drive and Marine Cork Road and Road East, Slyne with Canterbury Avenue School bus usage Highways maintenance School bus fares Quality Bus route - *Roundabout at junction service shelters of A589 & B5273* Road Safety Scheme - 20mph speed limits Footway construction - Children/Pedestrian Road prioritisation (including update on Galgate Safety and Measures progress ref LL-LD's being taken motion) Allocation of highways Bare Lane highways funding proposals Quality Bus Route
Adult & Community Services Well Being Consultation Arts Development O&S Libraries O&S report back Arts Development O&S - report back Adult Education - report on local activity Homelessness Children & Young People City Academy Proposals School Admissions - Children's Trust Consultation on closure of xx Looked after children - Consultation on school Children's Trust & LAA Allocation of places 07/08 Arrangements Skerton and Hornby High local stats & approaches admission process target report back - Schools xx September Process for allocating Report of local progress School Admission figures Primary Capital Children's Integrated Not in Education, Primary Capital Youth Grants against LAA targets for programme - consultation Services Restructure Employment or Training - programme - consultation CYP on principles & drivers local position on Strategy and Business Case xxx SEN Provision - local Children Missing from Youth Involvement in stats & approaches xxx Care Lancashire Local Allocation of Youth Grants x Child & Adolescent Annual report on school Mental Health - local stats places and school and approaches x performance
Future of secondary education - verbal update ****Pupil exclusions & local arrangements for excluded pupils (including sites of PRUs)**** Lancashire Local - Lancaster District Proposed Forward Plan 2006/7
Other Local grants Local grants Local grants Local grants Local grants - including Local grants Grants - local, VCFS local gateway grants gateway & climate change paper Youth Grants Lancs Local - Forward Lancs Local - Forward Lancs Local - Forward Lancs Local - Forward Lancs Local - Forward Lancs Local - Forward Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Agenda Plan Election of Chair & Vice Local grants scheme Enhanced two tier working xxxx Review of LCC Chair evaluation properties in Lancaster District xxxx Report on LL-LD Response to City LCC Budget Proposals LCC Budget 08/09 Constitution Academy resolution Emergency planning Economic development - report on local activity Sustainable Community Strategy - Consider county's response
One Off Item Quarterly Item City Council Item Annual Item Every Meeting Red text Update since previous version of plan
Associated issues Battery presentation Lancs Local review action Polish project Record office trip Arts Development O&S plan