Decisions

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented the report, informing members that the Treasury Management Framework had been approved by Council in February 2021 ahead of the financial year.

 

He confirmed that the Council was £11.2 million under-borrowed with external debt remaining at £12.8m, well below the Capital Financing Requirement of £24 million. He highlighted rising interest rates and noted that were it not for Local Government Reorganisation, the Council would be considering borrowing ahead of future expenditure. He continued noting that it would be inappropriate for the council to take on borrowing that is not currently required.

 

He concluded by thanking officers for their continued hard work.

 

In relation to a request for a list of Council properties that had been declassified as investment properties, the Section 151 verbally read through the list of properties.

 

RESOLVED – That:-

 

(1)    the 2021/22 Annual Treasury Management Report be noted; and

(2)    the 2021/22 Annual Treasury Management Report be recommend to Council for approval.

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder introduced the report, acknowledging that it had been a tough year that stretched resources – particularly in the response to COVID-19 and large amounts of grants combined with preparation for Local Government Reorganisation. He thanked officers for their continued hard work.

 

Speaking on the Revenue Budget, the Portfolio Holder reminded members that the report looked at spend during the year and any carry forward into 2022/23. He informed members that the budget was set during the pandemic at a time where it wasn’t clear what the full impact would be. As a result large contingencies were set aside to cover losses which ultimately were not required, resulting in an overall underspend for the year.

 

In terms of Capital Expenditure, the Portfolio Holder noted that there was a revised budget of £15m, with £11m spent in the year. The Portfolio holder noted the large underspend, but highlighted the huge spend of £11m on various projects such as Kendal Town Hall, Flood Defence schemes and Cross-a-moor roundabout.

 

In responding to a question on employment problems impacting on expenditure, the Portfolio Holder noted that it was key to ensure resources were being prioritised and that the Council was acting ahead of events to ensure that the appropriate staff were in place. He suggested that the committee could invite officers to take a look at what is being done administratively.

 

Responding to the question of what happens to projects that aren’t completed prior to the vesting day in April 2023, the Portfolio Holder confirmed that that money could not be ring-fenced. He continued noting that it was a significant issue that was yet to be resolved, but work was being done to ensure March 31 2023 did not become a hard stop for projects.

 

Members queried why the Ulverston Leisure Centre project was on hold, noting that local residents were disappointed that nothing had been done yet. The Portfolio holder responded by clarifying that no promises were made regarding expenditure on the project, but rather it was agreed to look at a business case for the project. He continued noting that any decision would now be the responsibility of the new unitary authority, but acknowledged the strong need for a replacement pool and that there was still a firm intention to do something.

 

Members continued querying whether improvements to the sports fields and courts would be going ahead. The Portfolio Holder responded to confirm it was his understanding that those works were within the budget, and to provide some reassurance he informed members that the unitary authority had given general consent for works up to £2 million which included leisure centre and sports facilities works.

 

Members thanked the Portfolio Holder and officers for the work that went into Cross-a-moor junction, which was due to open on the day of the meeting.

 

In relation to the Shared Prosperity Fund bid, members queried what projects and funding levels were being applied for. The Portfolio Holder responded noting that he had not had sight of a list of specific projects as the Council had only applied under certain ‘themes’ at present. He also confirmed that expenditure would likely not be on Council activity but rather spent through partners, and that expenditure and delivery would be the responsibility of the unitary authority. Members continued by querying what measures were in place to ensure member engagement. The Portfolio Holder responded noting that he believed the matter would come to Cabinet, but at this stage the council only needed to notify the government which themes it would be applying under. The Director of Strategy, Innovation and Resources added that he would be happy to raise the matter and provide a written response on member engagement and further details on the funding bid.

 

Members drew attention to the large overspend on salaries, further highlighting that money spent on salaries for the planning department were increasing and not decreasing.

The Section 151 officer responded by informing members that the specialist planning team had a number of vacancies during the year and that agency staff had been used to carry out these functions as well as for COVID-19 Test and Trace and the Outbreak Management Fund. The Portfolio Holder added that a large portion of the overspend had been offset by grant income.

 

Responding to a question on the lease for Braithwaite Fold Caravan Park, the Portfolio Holder confirmed that the lease had been signed over a year ago, and would transfer over to the new unitary authority. He noted that the leaseholder was investing in upgrading the site and that the Council would continue to receive income from the site.

 

Members passed on concerns raised by residents in relation to the planning department, noting that some people were unhappy with the current service provided. The Director of Strategy, Innovation and Resources updated the meeting with latest planning performance  and confirmed that if details of particular cases were provided he would raise internally.

 

RESOLVED – That the outturn figures and variance explanations set out in the report and appendices be noted.

Cllr Wilson presented the report, expressing to Members that the work of the Task and Finish group had been very valuable and had resulted in an exciting report. He noted that the report was weighty and looked at the work of the Council over the years. He concluded, explaining that to have not formed the group would’ve been a missed opportunity to capture the Council’s key strengths to be passed on to the new authority.

 

Members echoed Cllr Wilson’s comments, noting their pride in the work of the Council and what a great shame it would be for the knowledge to be lost as part of the Local Government Reorganisation transition.

 

Members also highlighted that a close eye would need to be kept on the report and its recommendations to ensure that they were properly considered by Cabinet and the unitary authority.

 

RESOLVED – That:

 

(1)    the findings of Task and Finish group in Appendix 1 be noted;

(2)    that Cabinet be recommended to endorse the findings and recommendations within Appendix 1.

The Senior Housing Standards Officer presented the report, noting that the policy had originally been approved by Council in 2018.

 

She informed Members that the policy was being reviewed for two main reasons, firstly to ensure links to the Council plan are clear following audit recommendation and secondly to increase level for a means test from £5,000 to £10,000. She continued noting that by increasing the means test level it would bring it in line with that of Eden District Council and Barrow Borough Council and reflect national increases in labour costs, which in turn would reduce delays for those customers that need assistance most.

 

In responding to a request for figures on Disabled Facilities Grant approvals, the Senior Housing Specialist confirmed she would provide a written response with a breakdown of the figures.

 

Members thanked officers for their hard work in delivering the grants.

 

RESOLVED – That the amended Disabled Facilities Grant Policy be recommended to Cabinet for approval.

The Licensing Specialist presented a report, which requested that Members consider whether or not to grant the application for a premises licence, under the Licensing Act 2003, in respect of Bertie’s Kitchen and Bar, Unit 3b Lake Road, Coniston.

 

Members’ attention was drawn to the background and proposals to the Application, which had been submitted on 16 June 2022 and sought authorisation for the following:

 

(1)        Sale of alcohol (on and off the premises) seven days a week between the hours of 11.00 and 23.00.

 

Six representations had been received from residents and the Parish Council, which related to the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. The report noted that as part of the 28-day consultation period no representations from the responsible authorities had been received. The Licensing Specialist added that the objectors had been invited to the meeting but were not in attendance.

 

No questions were raised by Members at this point.

 

The Applicant’s representative presented their case to members, noting that the premises had been open with no alcohol for sale for a number of weeks and that they had a similar premises in Grasmere which had been operating with a licence for over three years with no complaints being submitted. The Applicant’s representative added that all of the objections had received responses and that they were responsible owners who ran their businesses properly.

 

The Chairman asked if the Sub-Committee had any questions for the Applicant.

 

Members raised questions regarding the capacity of the premises, the ownership of the land outside the premises and their intention to have live music. The Applicant’s representative responded, noting that the capacity was sufficient and did not expect to meet the maximum numbers stated within the report, that the land outside had been agreed by the planning department and that live music would be on rare occasions and would be indoors at all times with the windows closed to prevent any disturbance.

 

No further questions were raised by Members.

 

Note – The Sub-Committee passed a resolution to adjourn the meeting to exclude the press and public in making its decision and retired in accordance with Regulation 14(2) of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 (as amended) in order to further consider the application.

 

The Sub-Committee, supported by the Legal, Governance and Democracy Specialist (Solicitor) and Trainee Solicitor, then withdrew at 10.14 a.m.to consider the application.

 

The meeting reconvened at 10.23 a.m..

 

The Legal, Governance and Democracy Specialist (Solicitor) communicated the Sub-Committee’s decision.

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee carefully considered the application, the written representations provided and the oral submissions of the Applicant who attended.

 

The Sub-Committee had considered the steps that were appropriate to promote the licensing objectives and also had regard to the Guidance issued under s.182 Licensing Act 2003 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy.

 

RESOLVED – That the application be granted:

 

(1)                    for the following activities:-

 

Activity	Approved
Supply of alcohol (on and off)	Monday to Sunday 11:00 hours to 23:00 hours
Hours open to the Public	Monday to Sunday 09:00 hours to 23:30 hours

 

(2)        subject to the mandatory conditions and subject to those conditions proposed within the Application

 

The reasons for the decision of the Licensing Sub-Committee were:

 

Although the Licensing Sub-Committee recognised the concerns of those who had submitted representations against the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee were not of the view that the concerns extended beyond fears and speculation enough to justify rejection of the application. The Licensing Sub-Committee also acknowledged that no representations were received from any of the Responsible Authorities, including Cumbria Police.

 

The decision notice was to be confirmed in writing to all parties within five working days.

 

The Applicant and any party that submitted a valid representation had the right to appeal against the decision of the Sub-Committee and may do so by giving notice of appeal to the Magistrates Court for the area in which the premises concerned are situated within a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which they were notified of the decision by the licensing authority.

 

 

 

 

The Licensing Specialist presented a report, which requested that Members consider an application for a premises licence in respect of Unit 8, Lightburn Industrial Estate, Ulverston.

 

Members’ attention was drawn to the background and proposals to the application, which had been submitted on 1 June 2022 and sought authorisation for the following:-

 

(1)        Sale of alcohol (on and off the premises) 7 seven days a week between the hours of 11:00-23:00.

 

Sixteen representations had been received from residents and local councillors concerning the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance, public safety and the protection of children from harm. The report noted that as part of the 28-day consultation period no representations from the responsible authorities had been received.

 

When asked by the Chairman, no Members raised any questions for the Licensing Specialist. The Chairman then asked the objectors if they had any questions.

 

In response to a question raised by an Objector, the Licensing Specialist clarified the types of notices for Planning and Licensing and referred to the agenda pack to highlight the differences.

 

Councillor Judy Filmore, Ward Member for Ulverston West, addressed the Sub-Committee on behalf of herself as well as fellow Ulverston West Ward Members Councillors Helen Irving and Janette Jenkinson.  She referred to the objections to the application regarding the prevention of crime and disorder and issues with public safety, noting the complaints of residents. Councillor Filmore stated that this area was a peaceful residential area, which had been impacted by the actions of numerous groups of intoxicated patrons.

 

Louise Clegg, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application. She referred to the quiet but friendly nature of the neighbourhood and the impact that the proposals in the application would have on residents who would not be protected by any retrospective action. In concluding her remarks she noted that venues as the one set out in the application should only be considered within the town, not in an industrial estate where the impact on residents would be greater.

 

Victoria Gill, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application. She informed Members that those leaving the premises would cause a disturbance to local residents who were made up of both families with children and the elderly. She added that it had been difficult for those elderly residents in the area to object within the 28-day consultation period. In concluding her address to members Ms. Gill noted that those who lived in the area had chosen to be outside of the town, in a quieter area and did not think that a premises as set out in the application would benefit residents.

 

Lee Morris, a local resident, spoke on behalf of his parents in objection to the application. He referred to the responsibility of the licensees, adding that patrons could not be served alcohol if they were drunk. Similar to the previous objectors, he noted the impact on the surrounding neighbourhood and informed Members that the industrial estate had only ever had minimal use since its construction, which had not caused issues with residents. He added that that the application was not suitable for the residential area and explained the impact on residents’ health and wellbeing.

 

Bryan McQuillin, a local resident spoke in objection to the application. He referred to points previously raised by objectors at the meeting and noted that the geography of the premises would mean residents would be subjected to consistent noise, litter and petty crime due to the amount of alcohol being consumed. Mr McQuillin suggested that the geography would create a pub-crawl route for patrons, which would stretch the local police. He queried the accuracy of the application when compared with the advertisement and noted the lack of public toilets in the surrounding area. In concluding his remarks, Mr McQuillin reminded Members of the risk of public nuisance which would impact on local residents by changing the ambience of the estate and impacting on residents human rights.

 

Steve Woodburn, local resident, spoke in objection to the application. He expressed his disappointment that the police had not submitted any objections to the application during the consultation period and highlighted the potential risks of the premises being located so close to the train tracks as well as the increased risk of damage and vandalism to local businesses. In concluding his objection, he noted the lack of road markings close to the premises, which posed a risk as there would be an increase in the number of taxis coming to and from the location.

 

The Solicitor responded to queries raised by the objectors.

 

The Applicant addressed the Sub-Committee to present their case. She expressed her disappointment of the nature of the objections, adding that this had not been their intention. She noted the founding of the microbrewery, adding that it had been difficult to navigate the brewery through the Covid-19 Pandemic.

 

The Applicant noted the local focus of the brewery, which aimed to champion local produce with a low carbon footprint for its products and ingredients. She informed Members that the planned hours for the bar were to open at 3 p.m. with last orders at 22.30 p.m. with all patrons having left by 23.30 p.m.

 

The Applicant reiterated that the premises did not wish to cause nuisance, adding that two thirds of their patrons were over 55 years old. She highlighted that due to the geography, those taking the last train from Ulverston would have been using the same route whether or not the Application was successful.

 

No Members raised any questions.

 

The Applicant responded to questions raised by the objectors.

 

Note – The Sub-Committee passed a resolution to adjourn the meeting to exclude the press and public in making its decision and retired in accordance with Regulation 14(2) of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 (as amended) in order to further consider the application.

 

The Sub-Committee, supported by the Solicitor and Trainee Solicitor, then withdrew at 11.19 a.m.to consider the application.

 

The meeting reconvened at 12.50 p.m.

 

The Solicitor communicated the Sub-Committee’s decision.

The Licensing Sub-Committee had carefully considered the application and the written representations (including supporting information), the oral submissions of the Applicant and the oral submissions of those who have submitted representations and attended today.

The Licensing Sub-Committee had considered the steps that were appropriate to promote the licensing objectives and have also had regard to the Guidance issued under s.182 Licensing Act 2003 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy.

RESOLVED – That the Licensing Sub-Committee determined that the application be granted:

(1)        for the following activities:- 

 

Activity	Approved
Supply of alcohol (on and off)	Monday to Sunday 11:00 to 23:00 hours
Hours open to the Public	Monday to Sunday 11:00 to 23:30 hours

 

(2)        subject to the mandatory conditions;

 

(3)        subject to those conditions proposed within the Application with the exception that;

 

The condition:

 

‘Digital colour CCTV system installed to monitor the front of the premises and the bar area. It will be maintained, working and recording at all times the premises are open. Copies of CCTV recordings will be available at any time during operating hours to hand over to any Responsible Authority.’

 

Will be amended to read:

 

‘Digital colour CCTV system installed to monitor the front of the premises and the bar area. It will be maintained, working and recording at all times the premises are open. Copies of CCTV recordings will be retained for a minimum of 30 days and will be made available at any time during operating hours to hand over to any Responsible Authority.’

 

(4)        And subject to the following additional condition:-

 

(a)        The general public will not be permitted to use any exits at the rear of the premises except in the event of an emergency.

 

The decision and the written reasons for the decision would be confirmed in writing within five working days.

 

The Applicant and any party that submitted a valid representation had the right to appeal against the decision of the Sub Committee and may do so by giving notice of appeal to the Magistrates Court for the area in which the premises concerned are situated within a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which they were notified of the decision by the licensing authority.

 

The Licensing Specialist provided a report overview for the Application considered.

 

Members were requested to determine whether or not to grant the application for a premises licence in respect of 5 Cavendish Street, Ulverston having taken into account the 5 relevant representations submitted by interested parties.

 

 

The Licensing Specialist stated the background and proposals to the Application, submitted on 27 April 2022, for the grant of a Premises Licence for 5 Cavendish Street, Ulverston submitted by Inno Hospitality Collective Limited. The application, as set out within the report, sought authorisation for the following:

 

1. Sale of alcohol (for consumption on and off the premises) seven days a week between the hours of 11:00 and 23:30. Extended hours on New Year’s Eve from 11:00 to 01:30.
2. Late Night Refreshment seven days a week between the hours of 23:00 and 23:30. Extended hours on New Year’s Eve from 11:00 to 01:30.

 

Five representations had been received from residents. The representations mainly contained concerns relating to the ‘Prevention of Public Nuisance’. Four of the five representations had been withdrawn/resolved due to the agreed amendments to the Application:

 

1. Cease the sale of alcohol at 10:30pm and to have everyone exited the building by 11:00pm. Doors and windows will be closed at 9pm.
2. Use of the outside courtyard conditionally and for this area to be kept non-smoking. Customers to be cleared by 9pm and only used for dining (drinks with food).
3. Bottles to be collected between the hours of 8am – 6pm.

 

A representation from Environmental Health was received; which resulted in the further amendments as listed within the report.

 

The Licensing Specialist referred to one of the representations which had not been withdrawn. The Licensing Specialist had explained the amended operating hours to the Objector and that a further application to vary the approved hours would be required in the event the Applicant wished to extend the hours.  The Objector was not prepared to withdraw the objection unless the hours of operation were reduced to daytime hours only.

 

No questions were raised by the Committee.

 

The Applicant presented the case to Members and provided supporting information. The Applicant intended to offer a new dining experience and the success of the business would be dependent on good reviews of the service they provide. 

 

The Chairman asked if the Committee had any questions.

 

Members queried what impact deliveries would have on the surrounding area and the location of the business in relation to the Objector’s residence.

 

Members noted the added conditions that related to the removal and disposal of waste from the establishment.

 

Members clarified with the Applicant the use of the outdoor court yard to the rear of the building. The Applicant stressed that this area would not to be used as a beer garden.

 

The Chairman enquired if the Licensing Specialist had any questions for the Applicant.

 

The Licensing Specialist confirmed that the Applicant had already agreed to a series of conditions attached to the Application and had no questions.

 

The Chairman asked if the Sub Committee had any further questions.

 

Members sought further clarification on the surrounding properties to the premises and the additional impact this business would have. The Applicant explained no objections had been received from residents of Cavendish Street. 

 

Members sought clarification that the Applicant would be registered as a member of the Pub Watch scheme.

 

The Chairman asked the Applicant to provide a closing statement. 

 

The Applicant provided a verbal summary of the dining experience they intended guests to enjoy. Any issues or objections from local people would be addressed immediately. The Applicant was interested in creating a viable contribution to the local economy.

 

Members had no further questions.

 

Note – The Sub-Committee passed a resolution to adjourn the meeting to exclude the press and public in making its decision and retired in accordance with Regulation 14(2) of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 (as amended) in order to further consider the application.

 

The Sub-Committee, supported by the Solicitor and Trainee Solicitor, then withdrew at 10:30.a.m. to consider the application.

 

The meeting reconvened at 10.56.a.m.

 

The Trainee Solicitor communicated the Sub-Committee’s decision.

The Licensing Sub-Committee carefully considered the application, the written representations provided and the oral submissions of the Applicant who attended. 

The Sub-Committee considered the steps appropriate to promote the licensing objectives and paid due regard to the Guidance issued under s.182 Licensing Act 2003 and the Statement of Licensing Policy.

RESOLVED - The Licensing Sub-Committee determined that the application be granted:

(1)  for the following activities:- 

 

Activity	Approved
Supply of alcohol (on and off)	Monday to Sunday 11:00 hours to 22:30 hours New Year’s Eve 11:00 hours to 01:30 hours
Hours open to the Public	Monday to Sunday 11:00 hours to 23:00 hours New Year’s Eve 11:00 hours to 01:30 hours

 

(2)  subject to the mandatory conditions and to the following conditions:-

 

a)    The rear yard area is to not to be used as a smoking area;

b)    The rear yard area shall not be used after 21:00 hours;  

c)    Adequate notices shall be prominently displayed to inform patrons of the requirement not to use the rear yard area as a smoking area and that the area must be vacated by 21:00 hours;

d)    The disposal of empty bottles/glass into external receptacles shall not occur between the hours of 18:00 and 08:00;

e)    Any amplified music shall not be played at a level that will cause; unreasonable disturbance to the occupants of any properties in the vicinity;

f)     Noise or odour from any ventilation, refrigeration or air conditioning plant or equipment shall not cause nuisance to the occupants of any properties in the vicinity;

g)    All external doors and windows shall be kept closed after 21:00 hours save during access and egress;

h)    CCTV shall be provided:-

                                                           i.    in the form of a recordable system capable of providing pictures of evidential quality and in all lighting conditions particularly facial recognition.

                                                          ii.    Cameras shall encompass all ingress and egress to the premises and internal areas.

                                                         iii.    CCTV equipment shall be maintained in good working order, regularly serviced and correctly timed and dated.

                                                         iv.    Recordings will be available for a period of 30 days made available to the police and other responsible authorities following reasonable request.

                                                          v.    The recording equipment shall be of a digital hard drive or cloud based system and shall be kept in a secure environment under the control of the premises licence holder or other responsible named individual.

i)      The premises shall join the local Bar Watch scheme.

 

Having regard to the Licensing Objectives, the reasons for reaching this decision was for the prevention of crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance.

 

The decision would be confirmed in writing within five working days.

 

The Applicant and any party that submitted a valid representation had the right to appeal against the decision of the Sub Committee and may do so by giving notice of appeal to the Magistrates Court for the area in which the premises concerned are situated within a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which they were notified of the decision by the Licensing Authority.

The Principal Specialist for the Health & Environment provided a report on the revised Statement of Gambling Licencing Policy following a review and a formal consultation period.

 

The revised Policy has undertaken a formal consultation process in line with Regulation 7 of The Gambling Act 2005 (Licensing Authority Policy Statement) (England and Wales) Regulations 2005. The Overview and Scrutiny Committee have also been consulted on the revised Policy at their meeting on 04 March 2022. Should the revised draft Policy be approved, the matter should then progress to Full Council for approval in advance of the policy becoming the new licensing framework for stakeholders within South Lakeland District.

 

The Officer relayed that this Policy has sought to support and strengthen three Gambling Licencing Objectives:

 

• Preventing gambling from being a source of crime and disorder, being associated with crime or disorder or being used to support crime;
• Ensuring that gambling is conducted in a fair and open way;
• Protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling.

 

It was approved by the Licensing Regulatory Committee on 7 February 2022 that the revised Policy could proceed to public consultation. It was also approved at The Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 4 March 2022 that they recommend to the Licencing Regulatory Committee and Full Council that the revised Statement of Gambling Licensing Policy (Appendix 1) be adopted following the public consultation, and consideration of any comments received.

 

The Chairman prompted questions from Members.

 

No further questions were put forward.

 

RESOLVED: That The Licensing Regulatory Committee agreed to:-

 

1)    Note the recommendation from The Overview and Scrutiny Committee that the revised Statement of Gambling Licensing Policy be adopted following the public consultation, and consideration of any comments received;

2)    Note that no comments were received during the public consultation for members to consider; and

3)    Recommend to Full Council that the Statement of Gambling Licensing Policy (Appendix 1) be adopted. 

 

Note – Councillor David Webster, for the purpose of transparency, declared a non-pecuniary interest in this item by virtue of the fact that he knew one of the local private hire operators within the District; however, he was not bias or predetermined, therefore he remained in the meeting with voting rights.

 

The Principal Specialist for the Health & Environment provided a report on the revised Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy 2022 following public consultation. The recommendation was for the Committee to approve the revised Policy. The Policy has been reviewed in line with Statutory and best practice guidance for taxi and licensing authorities, with the suggested amendments listed within the report. Should the Members approve this draft Policy, it is due to proceed to Overview and Scrutiny Committee prior to adoption.

 

The current Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy was approved by the Committee in December 2018, since that date there have been a number of changes to take into consideration.

 

The Officer provided an outline of the background and proposals. Subsequent amendments agreed at the Licencing Regulatory Committee on 07 February 2022 are included within the report. As are the additional proposals following public consultation. Each amendment is referenced to the relevant paragraph of the draft Policy included in brackets and are also highlighted in red within the draft Policy at Appendix 1.

 

The Chairman prompted questions from Members.

 

Members requested clarification on whether it was only new vehicles that must apply to the minimum Euro 6 standards. The Officer responded to confirm the affirmative and that all new vehicles engines must be at a minimum of Euro 6 standard. This is being implemented to ensure that new vehicles on the SLDC fleet are not emitting dangerous levels of emissions and pollution. The Council supports and will encourage the use of low-carbon alternative vehicles, particularly the use of electric vehicles for Hackney Carriage and Private Hire purposes. 

 

RESOLVED – That the Licencing Regulatory Committee:-

 

(1)   Noted the contents of the report; and

(2)   Approved the draft Hackney Carriage & Private Hire Licensing Policy (Appendix 1) and agreed that this be adopted following the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting unless any matters are referred back to the Committee.

 

The Licensing Specialist presented a report regarding an application to renew the hackney carriage vehicle licence, which would require the Council to dispense with the current vehicle age limit policy. In this instance, the vehicle in question was more than ten years old and was not a wheelchair accessible vehicle.

 

The Applicant’s vehicle was first registered on 5 September 2011 and had covered 277,605 miles since this time. The vehicle had been nine years and ten months old when it was transferred to the Applicant and was not an accessible vehicle. The Licensing Specialist noted four failed MOTs, details of which were set out in Appendix 2 to the report.

 

In response to a query raised by Members, the Licensing Specialist informed the Sub-Committee that any failures in MOT should be reported to the licensing authority by the garage and Applicant, neither of which had happened on this occasion.

 

A further question was asked, regarding approximately 300 miles, which had been added to the vehicles mileage during the period when the vehicle had no valid MOT certificate.

 

The Applicant addressed the Sub-Committee, he referred to the difficulty faced during the Covid-19 Pandemic which meant he had not been able to buy a vehicle straight away which was the reasoning behind the application to extend for 12 months. He informed the Sub-Committee that he had been driving in the area for 15 years and had never asked for an extension within that period.

 

The Applicant informed the Committee that his previous vehicle, with a 2014 registration plate, had been stolen and that he had quit taxi driving during the Covid-19 pandemic until restrictions had been lifted. He concluded by informing the Sub-Committee that the car ran well despite the high mileage and noted the extended inspection report as set out in the agenda.

 

The Applicant provided answers to questions raised by Sub-Committee Members regarding why he had not informed the Council of the failed MOT, his actions following the failed MOT and the condition of the vehicle’s tyres.

 

The Applicant responded to queries raised by the Licensing Specialist regarding daily vehicle checks.

 

Following a request from the Chairman, the Applicant presented the vehicle to Members for inspection.

 

Note – The Sub-Committee passed a resolution to adjourn the meeting to exclude the press and public in making its decision and retired in accordance with Regulation 14(2) of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 (as amended) in order to further consider the application.

 

The Sub-Committee, supported by the Legal, Governance and Democracy Specialist  (Solicitor) and Trainee Solicitor, then withdrew at 10.50 a.m.to consider the application.

 

The meeting reconvened at 11.44 a.m.

 

The Trainee Solicitor communicated the Sub-Committee’s decision.

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee, having read and heard the representations made by the Applicant, and based on the submitted report, including the report of MGD Limited, and following an inspection of the vehicle by members of the Sub-Committee, the Sub-Committee

 

RESOLVED – That the Council’s age limit policy be dispensed with on this occasion and that Mr. Ullah be granted a renewal for his Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence for the vehicle bearing the registration mark MF61 ERY, for a 12 month period.

 

The evidence presented to Members at the hearing and documents contained within the report showed that:

 

a.     The Applicant’s vehicle undergoes a four-monthly MOT tests in accordance with the Council’s Policy due to the vehicle being over 8 years old;

 

b.     The Engineers report and inspection, which was conducted on 22 April 2022 at Appendix 1, did not identify any problems;

 

c.      Members were satisfied with the current state of the vehicle in light of the evidence before them; and

 

d.     This application was the Applicant’s first extension request beyond the Council’s Ten Years Age Limit for Hackney Carriage Vehicle.

 

In accordance with the Council’s Hackney Carriage & Private Hire Licensing Policy, the Applicant must produce to the Licensing Authority a test certificate, showing pass or fail, for every MOT test and Hackney Carriage Vehicle Inspection conducted throughout the licence period.

 

Additional Observation

 

Members wished to make an additional observation in relation to the information that has been presented today, Members were concerned that the vehicle was driven for a substantial distance without a valid MOT certificate and, although, the Applicant’s position is that the vehicle was not operating as a hackney carriage vehicle during this time, the Members of the Sub-Committee requested that the Licensing department consider if the Council’s Hackney Carriage & Private Hire Licensing Policy had been breached, and if appropriate, take further action.

 

 

 

 

Summary

 

Consideration was given to the entry of the Ship Inn, Sandside onto the list of successful nominations as an Asset of Community Value. The Ship Inn Community Action Group (SICAG) had submitted the nomination in accordance with Section 89 (2)(b)(iii) of the Localism Act 2011.

 

The Ship Inn had been closed undergoing building work since November 2020 but was a historic pub which served as a popular meeting destination for local residents and visitors to the area.

 

Section 88 of the Localism Act 2011 set out those uses of land which may result in a property being considered as an asset of community value, including non-ancillary uses and those that further (or have recently furthered) either the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community. The nomination referred to the importance of the Ship Inn in providing social benefit to the community through a socialising and interaction with others and noted a list of activities and amenities, which were provided by the Ship Inn.

 

The nomination considered the loss of the pub as a negative impact on the community, with no similar facility within the local area to provide a central hub for local knowledge as well as contributing towards reducing isolation. There was a considerable amount of interest within the local community to see the Ship Inn reopen to locals and visitors alike.

 

It was considered that the Ship Inn met the criteria necessary to be accepted as an asset of community value. The evidence indicated that in the recent past the use of the property as a public house furthered the social wellbeing of the community who could use it as a place to socialise and hold events. Based on the information provided, it was considered that it might be realistic to think that there was a time in the next five years where there could be another non-ancillary use of the property. It was also clear that the nomination was in the spirit of the legislation, which gives communities the right to nominate assets.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That the Ship Inn, Sandside be entered on to South Lakeland District Council’s list of successful nominations as an Asset of Community Value.

 

Reason for Decision

 

This decision links to the Council Plan priority in delivering balanced communities, it works with communities in reducing isolation and loneliness.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

The alternative option is to decline the nomination. The officers who have assessed the nomination in this case feel that the criteria in the legislation have been met and that the listing is justified on the basis of the information received. Section 88 of the Localism Act states that it is a decision for the authority whether or not the criteria are met.

Summary

Consideration was given to the award of contract to purchase recycling boxes and lids which ensures a consistent and efficient recycling operation, facilitates the replacement of lost and damaged boxes and supplies to new properties.

The Council had an annual replacement programme for boxes and lids and this was included in the capital programme. The tendered cost fell within the capital sum available; these items are on the procurement schedule which had been approved by Council in February 2022.

Details of the preferred bidder and their tender are outlined in the Part II Appendix to this report.

Decision:

RESOLVED - That

(1)        the Director of Customer and Commercial Services approve the award of a contract for the purchase of recycling boxes and lids for street scene to the preferred bidder as noted in Part II Appendix 1; and

(2)        the Director of Customer and Commercial Services agree, in consultation with the Procurement Specialist and Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer),  to enter into the appropriate contract on behalf of the Council with the supplier.

Reason for Decision

This decision links to the Council Plan priority for addressing the climate emergency by enabling consistent efficient recycling collections.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

To not purchase the boxes and lids will impact on the Council’s reputation as a leading authority on waste and recycling.

Another alternative option is not to award to the recommended bidder, however this is not a preferred option because this is the only supplier that can fulfil our specification and ensure that the full criteria is met.

Summary

Consideration was given to the award of contract for construction works to install Changing Places Facilities at Rayrigg Meadow, Millerground public conveniences. The aging public toilet block is currently owned by SLDC, and is leased to and managed by Windermere Town Council. The structure required complete refurbishment.

The proposal included the application of £25,000 grant funding from Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities for the Changing Places Scheme.

Decision

Resolved – That

(1)        the contract be awarded to the recommended bidder being the most economically advantageous tender as noted in Part II Appendix 1; and

(2)        the Director of Customer and Commercial Services in consultation with the Procurement Specialist and Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) enter into the appropriate contract and agreements on behalf of the Council with the successful bidder and the appropriate agreements/licences with the tenant and any under tenant of the Rayrigg Meadows public conveniences to facilitate the works.

Reason for Decision

The decision links to the Council Plan priority of a fairer South Lakeland – Culture and Wellbeing: improving health and reducing health inequalities.

The scheme includes a fully compliant Changing Places facility for disabled users, including addressing current access issues on site. Standard accessible toilets do not meet the needs of all people with a disability. People with profound and multiple learning disabilities, as well people with other physical disabilities such as spinal injuries, muscular dystrophy and multiple sclerosis often need extra equipment and space to allow them to use the toilets safely and comfortably. These needs are met by “Changing Places” toilets which provide the right equipment, enough space and a safe and clean environment for disabled users.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Do nothing – not convert the public conveniences structure to a Changing Places Facility and return £25,000 funding from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. This is not recommended because the current facilities do not meet the needs of all disabled people. People with profound and multiple learning disabilities, as well people with other physical disabilities such as spinal injuries, muscular dystrophy and multiple sclerosis often need extra equipment and space to allow them to use the toilets safely and comfortably. These needs are met by “Changing Places” toilets which provide the right equipment, enough space and a safe and clean environment for disabled users.

An alternative option is to award the contract to an alternative bidder or to undertake a further procurement exercise, this is not recommended because a preferred bidder has been identified as outlined in the Part II appendix.

 

Summary

Consideration was given to a new short-term Car Parking Management Agreement (CPMA) with Booths Supermarket, in respect of the car park at Booths, Kirkby Lonsdale.

The most recent agreement had expired on 11 September 2021 – the car parking management arrangements put in place by that agreement were currently continuing by agreement between Booths and South Lakeland District Council. It was proposed that the ongoing arrangement be formalised by the parties entering into a short term agreement (on the basis of the terms of the 11 September 2000 agreement) to enable the parties to progress negotiations regarding the new CPMA. Upon agreement, the proposed Heads of Terms for any new CPMA were to be subject of a further future decision.

It was proposed that the short-term arrangements for the management of the Kirkby Lonsdale car park should accommodate alignment of commencement for new arrangements for the different parking sites based in Kendal; the short stay car park situated at Stricklandgate, Kendal (which is the subject of an agreement dated 03 February 2005) for example.

Decision:

RESOLVED - That the Director Of Customer and Commercial Services agree that the Council enters into a new Car Parking Management Agreement (CPMA) with EH Booth and Co Limited (“Booths”) in respect of the car park at Booths, Kirkby Lonsdale, on the same terms as the previous CPMA for the same site (dated 11 September 2000) save for a shorter term (for a period of 12 months, terminating earlier if agreed between the parties) to allow conclusion of negotiations for a new Car Park Management Agreement to be agreed with Booths.

Reason for Decision

The CPMA links to the Council Plan priority of ensuring the car parking provision of this facility improves the economic benefit for the town and businesses. 

By entering into a new short term arrangement on similar terms to the current CPMA the Council will continue to receive income for the period specified from the car park as outlined in the current agreement which is appended to the report at Appendix 1.

Negotiations for a new CPMA will seek to secure a future income from the car park; further details / costings will be provided in due course upon the conclusion of negotiations.

As the current arrangements are continuing by informal agreement between the parties only; it is proposed that this ongoing arrangement is formalised by the parties entering into a short term arrangement (for a period of 12 months, terminating earlier if agreed between the parties) to enable the parties to progress negotiations regarding new car parking management agreement(s).

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

An alternative option would be for the Council to continue providing the car parking management services without any formal arrangements in place – this is not recommended as the previous arrangement expired in September 2021 and there are currently no formal arrangements in place regulating the relationship for provision of services/payment of income.

Another alternative option would be for the Council to cease providing the car parking management services and not to seek to put a short term agreement in place while negotiations are ongoing with Booths supermarket for a new arrangement. This is not recommended because it would leave the Council without any control over the car parking spaces and would result in a potential loss of car park revenue generated from these spaces.

Summary

 

The Portfolio Holder for Economy, Culture and Leisure introduced the report which outlined the processes in place for submission of the Council’s investment plan for the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) which it was hoped would unlock £3.8 million of investment within South Lakeland.

 

In addition to the recommendations as outlined in the report, it was proposed that recommendation 2.1(6) of the report be updated for the delegation to the relevant officers to include authority to enter into agreements to make onward payment of the funding in response to successful business cases received.

 

The Economy, Culture and Leisure Portfolio Holder referenced the evidence base and draft interventions list attached in appendices one and two. Finalisation of the investment plan would be subject to the approval of the Local Partnership Group and Shadow Authority at their meeting on the 22nd July 2022. The deadline for submitting the investment plan to DLUHC was 1st August 2022.

 

The Portfolio Holder drew attention to the challenges and opportunities that had been identified, including, low productivity, and the importance of local business support and development of people and skills.  The Portfolio Holder also drew attention to the long list of potential interventions.  Members expressed concern regarding timelines in light of local government re-organisation.  It was noted that there was a requirement for the application to the scheme to be submitted by the sovereign authority and that the first part of the funding (approximately £400,000) would be for payment during the current financial year.   

 

During discussion, Members noted that the challenges faced by rural communities needed to be acknowledged and prioritised. 

 

The Economy, Culture and Leisure Portfolio Holder acknowledged that transport was a major strategic issue and noted that whilst this particular fund was a step forward in local government being afforded more flexibility regarding how allocated funding could be spent, there was a need to follow the criteria set by central government in relation to the funding stream.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED  –  That

 

1)    The evidence base and draft interventions list in appendices 1 and 2 be noted.

 

2)    Authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Economy, Culture and Leisure authority to finalise the investment plan (based on the evidence base and draft interventions list) subject to approval of the Local Partnership Group and Shadow Authority at their meeting of the 22nd July 2022.

 

3)    Authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services and the Portfolio Holder for Economy Culture and Leisure the authority to approve any minor amendments that may arise following consideration of the selected interventions by the Local Partnership Group and Shadow Authority at their meeting on 22 July 2022.

 

4)    Subject to resolutions 2.1 (2) and (3) authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Economy, Culture and Leisure authority to submit the investment plan to DLUHC by the 1st August 2022 deadline.

 

5)    Authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Economy, Culture and Leisure authority to agree a business case development process to accept specific projects into the investment plan.

 

6)    Authority be delegated to the S151 officer and Monitoring officer in consultation with the Director of Customer and Commercial Services and Portfolio Holder for Economy, Culture and Leisure authority to accept or enter into any agreement, conditions of any grant determination letter, memorandum of understanding or any other mechanism specified by government to allow the Council to accept the funding and make onward payment of the funding in response to successful business cases and for the S151 officer to set up relevant budgets.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

The UK Shared Prosperity Fund has wide reaching implications for the delivery of Council Plan priorities and will to a greater or lesser degree help deliver many of those priorities. Specifically: working across boundaries; delivering a balanced community; a fairer South Lakeland; and addressing the climate emergency.

 

Alternative Options

 

The alternative option would be to not submit an investment plan, this would prevent SLDC from accessing the £3.8m allocation and harm delivery of critical projects within the district.

Note: Councillor Helen Chaffey, Housing Portfolio Holder arrived 10.05am. 

 

Summary

 

The Strategy Lead Specialist presented a report from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Task and Finish Group which had considered Local Government Reorganisation and the legacy of South Lakeland District Council. The Task and Finish Group report identified good practice, positive culture and productive relationships in South Lakeland and recommended that these are recognised and taken forward by Westmorland and Furness Council.

 

The Strategy Lead Specialist highlighted good practice, community engagement and positive culture that had been established. The collaborative partnerships were recommended to be further maintained and developed by the new authority. The Strategy Lead Specialist noted the success of the Customer Connect Programme and how it had transformed the way the Council conducted service delivery by focusing on the needs of the customer and community.

 

The Chairman thanked Overview and Scrutiny Committee for the report and for highlighting the value of locality working, noting that there were important lessons for the new authority moving forward.

 

Cabinet Members noted the importance of the work done by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and echoed the Chairman’s thanks for the report.

 

Councillor Janette Jenkinson, Shadow Customer and Locality Services Portfolio Holder, speaking as a representative of the Task and Finish Group, thanked officers for the report and Councillor Mark Wilson for suggesting the review.  She noted the ways in which Ulverston had benefitted from collaborative working between businesses and communities and the importance of this continuing in the future.

 

During discussion, members noted the important role of Parish Councils and Parish meetings as a link to communities and source of local knowledge.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED - That

 

1)      The findings of the Task and Finish report in Appendix 1 be noted; and

 

2)      the recommendations as set out in the report be forwarded to the Westmorland and Furness Shadow Executive.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

The report links to the following Council Plan Priorities:

 

• Working across boundaries

• Delivering a balanced community

• A fairer South Lakeland

• Addressing the climate emergency

 

 

Alternative Options

 

Cabinet may chose not to endorse the recommendations made by the Task and Finish Group.

Summary

 

The Housing Portfolio Holder presented a report on Disabled Facilities Grants Policy. She thanked officers for their work in producing the report and referred to the need for the policy to be updated following recommendation by internal audit.

In particular the Housing Portfolio Holder drew attention to the proposal to increase the level at which the Council applied a means test for the scheme, from £5,000 to £10,000. This would align the Council’s approach with that of Eden District Council and Barrow Borough Council. It was also proposed that authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services to agree a change in the means testing level where required in the future. 

 

During discussion members noted the importance of the scheme and the need to avoid unnecessary delays.  It was hoped that increasing the means testing threshold would improve the process and benefit residents.  Members also paid tribute to the memory of the Council’s Housing Specialist, David Bradley, for his work on the scheme.

Decision

RESOLVED – that

1)   The amendments to the Disabled Facilities Grant Policy 2018 at Appendix 1 be agreed; 

2)   Authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services in consultation with the Operational Lead – People Welfare and Income Maximisation and the Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) to change the means test level where deemed appropriate; and

3)   Authority be delegated to the Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) to make the necessary amendments to the Constitution outlined in paragraph 3.2(2) of the report. 

 

Reasons for Decision

 

Delivering a balanced community – The Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) Policy 2018 invokes the Regulatory Reform (Housing Assistance) (England and Wales) Order 2002, which enhances South Lakeland District Council’s (‘SLDC’) powers and duties under the primary legislation (Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996). By administrating grants in this way it helps to facilitate adaptations aiding safety and independence in the home as well as assisting Carers to care. This enables a better quality of life for our residents and helps support the delivery of balanced communities.

 

A fairer South Lakeland – this policy empowers SLDC to maximize access and use of the Disabled Facilities Grant funding particularly by way of discretionary grants in the district. This enables SLDC to assist more residents across the district where it might not without such a policy.

 

Alternative Options

 

A number of proposals have been recommended by Audit. As highlighted in 3.2 of the report. The impact of the changes means the council can help more people more quickly. The Council could decide to keep the existing Policy, however, this is not recommended as it will potentially reduce the number of people we can assist and reduces the ability to be flexible or move quickly to react to the needs of our community, for example, in reviewing the means test as necessary.

 

The recommendation to clarify the contractual arrangements between the Council, the customer and the contractors is recommended to provide greater certainty for all parties; an alternative is to maintain the status quo which is contrary to legal advice and not recommended as greater clarity around legal roles in the arrangements would assist all parties. This is an Audit recommendation.

Please note - this item was on the Forward Plan in May 2022 (31 May 2022). This item was not included in the agenda for the 04 July 2022 Cabinet meeting which was initially published on Friday 24 June 2022. Copies of the revised agenda and report relating to the item for consideration at the meeting, were available for inspection by the public in accordance with Regulation 7 (Access to agenda and connected reports for public meetings) of the 2012 Regulations”

 

Following a request from the Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer), Members unanimously agreed that the item should be considered at the meeting.

 

Summary

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented a report regarding the Covid-19 Additional Relief Fund (Discretionary Non Domestic Rate Relief). The report set out proposals which would allow the Council to administer the discretionary Covid-19 Additional Relief Fund (“CARF”) and make grants to eligible businesses in line with section 47 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 and in accordance with Government Guidance.

 

The fund had been made available by central government to grant relief on 2021/22 Non Domestic Rates liabilities to assist those businesses that were affected by the pandemic but were ineligible for other grants under the previous schemes. The report noted that the Council had been awarded £2,109,829 in funding for grants of relief in the district with Councils being reimbursed up to the allocated level of discretionary relief awarded.

 

Government guidance specified that the businesses that had been eligible for the Extended Retail Discount, the Nursery Discount or the Airport and Ground Operations Support Scheme were excluded from the scheme along with any Councils (town/parish or county councils).

 

Members thanked officers for their time and hard work in supporting local businesses and supported the proposals set out in the report.

 

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED - That

 

(1)        Subject to Council approval, the Covid-19 Additional Relief Fund Discretionary Non Domestic Rate Relief (CARF) scheme be approved as attached in Appendix 1 for implementation by the Council;

 

(2)        Authority be delegated to the Operational Lead for People, Welfare and Income Maximisation the authority to make the final decision on the award of the CARF Scheme under Section 47 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988;

 

(3)        Authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services to determine any requests for reviews of decisions taken under the CARF Scheme and that the Finance Lead Specialist (Section 151 Officer) be delegated the authority to determine any requests for review of decisions of the Director of Customer and Commercial Services under the CARF scheme for a final determination; and

 

(4)        Authority be delegated to the Operational Lead for People, Welfare and Income Maximisation in consultation with the for Finance Lead Specialist (Section 151 Officer) and the Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder to make any administrative amendments required to the CARF schemes to reflect future changes in Government guidance or change in local need.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

The proposal links to the Council Plan Priorities of:-

 

·        Working across boundaries;

 

·        Delivering a balanced community; and

 

·        A fairer South Lakeland.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

SLDC could choose not to use the discretionary relief provision which would not comply with the Government request and would not give the intended support to those businesses in the district that were impacted by the pandemic but ineligible under earlier Covid-19 relief schemes. This is therefore not a recommended option.

 

SLDC could chose to administer grants at a level exceeding the government allocation which would not be reimbursed and is therefore not affordable for the Council and also not a recommended option. Monitoring of levels of award will be undertaken to ensure that the Council will be fully reimbursed for grants awarded.

Summary

 

The Housing Portfolio Holder presented the Sustainable Warmth Cumbria report. The report set out the Sustainable Warmth Cumbria consortium bid, which had been successful for funding to support low carbon energy efficient and heating for at least 1000 private sector homes across Cumbria. The Sustainable Warmth competition had encouraged Local Authorities to apply for approximately £24 million in funding to help install energy saving upgrades and low carbon heating in low-income households by raising the energy efficiency rating of low income and low Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rated households (those with E, F or G, although D ratings were also in scope).

 

The report highlighted the fabric first approach expected by the Government which aimed to reduce household energy bills which included but was not limited to energy efficiency measures (such as wall, loft and underfloor insulation) and low carbon heating technologies (such as heat pumps and solar) but excluded heating systems which are solely fuelled by fossil fuels such as gas and oil. Funding was to be targeted at low-income households likely to be in fuel poverty and landlords whose tenants were eligible for funding (private and social) would provide at least 33% contribution towards the cost of the upgrades.

 

The report set out the strong case for proceeding with this project which had a high degree of strategic alignment with the Council Plan (as well as the Council Plans for Barrow Borough Council and Eden District Council who were also participants) in terms of tackling climate change, energy efficiency and fuel poverty.

 

Members thanked officers for their hard work on the proposals and expressed their support for the proposals, noting that projects like the Sustainable Warmth Cumbria project demonstrated how the Council wanted to work to improve the quality of life of residents as well as assist in lowering energy costs.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That:-

 

(1)        South Lakeland District Council’s participation in the Sustainable Warmth Cumbrian consortium (via a consortium of Cumbria District Councils) be approved;

 

(2)        subject to a successful consortium bid by  Cumbria District Councils (including SLDC), acceptance by the Council of its allocation of the grant funding awarded by North West Energy Hub Sustainable Warmth grant scheme in the sum of £2.1 million be authorised, provided that if the actual sum of grant awarded to the Council was more or less than £2.1 million, the difference be reported as part of the Quarterly Finance Update Reporting; and

 

(3)        subject to the award of grant funding under the North West Energy Hub Sustainable Warmth grant scheme, the Director of Customer and Commercial Services, in consultation with the Operational Lead (People, Welfare and Income Maximisation) and the Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer), be delegated authority to agree the terms of and enter into the appropriate legal agreements on behalf of the Council in relation to the project in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Housing.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

One of South Lakeland District Council’s (‘the council’) four priorities for 2021 – 2026 includes a Fairer South Lakeland and Addressing the Climate Emergency. In delivering a Fairer South Lakeland – the council has committed to providing energy advice and additional support to households in fuel poverty.

 

In February 2019 SLDC declared a climate emergency. The Council is working towards a target of being Carbon neutral by 2037 and ensuring that the existing housing stock is energy efficient is a significant element in achieving that goal. This project seeks to maximise the social, economic and environmental benefits which come from combating and developing resilience to climate change and developing sustainability.

One of the council’s targets is to reduce the percentage of homes in the lowest energy performance certificate bands E,‘F & G’. This project will go towards these commitments.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

Only consortium bids have been permitted, the Council’s only options were to participate or not to participate. It is recommended that the Council participates in the Sustainable Warmth Scheme joining our partner authorities to benefit low income households, addressing fuel poverty and low energy efficient homes.

Summary

 

The Economy, Culture and Leisure Portfolio Holder presented a report on providing cycling provision on Gooseholme and New Road in Kendal. The report set out proposals which formed part of the package of funding secured by Cumbria County Council (CCC) to repair the Gooseholme Bridge with a grant of £250,000 being secured on the basis that the new bridge would be able to accommodate both walking and cycling and would align with Sustrans objectives of improving sustainable travel methods.

 

In order to meet the conditions of the grant, CCC had to be able to demonstrate that it was possible to cycle both to and from the bridge and that a credible improvement had been made to the cycling network in Kendal. At the February 2021 meeting of the Cabinet a decision approval was given, in a report relating to Flood Relief Management Scheme at New Road and Gooseholme, to deregister defined cycling routes across New Road and Gooseholme in order to connect to the new bridge. However, due to delays with the delivery of the Environment Agency (EA) Flood Defence Scheme it had not been practical to move forward with deregistration.

 

As part of CCC work on developing a Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) for Kendal, connectivity for both cyclists and pedestrians across New Road and Gooseholme had been identified as important to the establishment of a comprehensive network of cycling and waking routes into the town centre.

 

The report proposed an alternative approach for the Council to agree as landowner that CCC in its role as the Highway Authority could amend the designation of the current paths on Gooseholme and New Road common to bridleways therefore allowing cyclists to lawfully use those pathways. This approach would be undertaken by CCC as Highways Authority through the use of a ‘Creation Agreement’, a legal agreement signed by the two parties (Landowner and Highways Authority), the right to cycle would come into existence on the date given in the agreement with notice of the agreement being published by the Highway Authority in at least one local paper. The designation would apply to the pathways on Gooseholme and New Road Common only and would not create wider legal rights across the adjoining common are with no physical change to the paths.

 

Members expressed their support for the proposals set out in the report and noted that the proposals represented the most logical way to achieve a cycle route which incorporates the new bridge at Gooseholme and New Road.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That:-

 

(1)        as the landowner of Gooseholme and New Road Common it be agreed that Cumbria County Council be permitted to facilitate the conversion of the current footpaths as marked in appendix three to bridleways  therefore legally permitting cycling on those pathways; and

 

(2)        the Director of Customer and Commercial Services, in consultation with the Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer), be delegated authority to agree and enter into the required legal agreements to facilitate the above.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

This proposal helps South Lakeland meet its Council plan objectives under addressing climate emergency by:

 

·        Developing town centres, which are attractive and accessible for living, working and leisure;

 

·        Working with Cumbria County Council and other partners to promote and encourage the provision of and access to sustainable public transport across the district;

 

·        Promoting active transport including cycling and walking; and

 

·        Supporting preparation and implementation of Kendal cycling and walking strategy

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

That the Council waits for the appropriate time within the context of the Environment Agencies flood scheme to formally deregister the paths and permit cycling on the deregistered land.

 

This would not be achievable in time to satisfy the Sustrans obligations and consequently that funding would be at significant risk.

Summary

 

The 2021/22 Annual Treasury Management Report was presented by the Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder. The report reviewed the treasury activities and the actual prudential and treasury activities and the actual prudential and treasury indicators for the 2021/22 financial year, meeting the requirement of the Local Government Act 2003, the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management and the CIPFA Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities.

 

The level of external debt remained at £12.8 million, below the Capital Requirement of £24 million which showed that the Council had not funded revenue activity through borrowing, a key prudential indicator which has helped to avoid incurring higher borrowing costs in the future.

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder referred to the current inflation levels and highlighted that inflation was expected to continue to rise amongst a perfect storm of issues and therefore, the Bank Rate was expected to rise further during 2022/23 from its current level of 1%.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        Council be recommended to approve the 2021/22 Annual Treasury Management Report.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

This reports shows performance against the 2021/22 Treasury Management Strategy, which forms part of the corporate governance arrangements that support all Council plan priorities.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

There are no alternative options, the report presents historic data on treasury performance during 2021/22

Summary

 

The Housing Portfolio Holder presented the Kendal Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). She noted that although the proposal was not for a funded plan, it was key to have a plan in place in order to secure any future funding and that Kendal had a huge potential due to the short commute distances.

 

Members were informed that the plan set out an approach for prioritised routes, with the aim of improving routes and prioritising future investment and would be a living document.

 

Note – At this stage in the proceedings, Councillor Eamonn Hennessy noted a non-pecuniary interest for transparency by virtue of the fact that he had co-authored a response from Kendal Town Council to the Kendal Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan.

 

Members raised a query regarding the reach of this programme, discussion highlighted that this was a programme across Cumbria with an LCWIP also recently completed Barrow and Carlisle.

 

A follow up question regarding Ulverston Town Council’s involvement was raised, to which the Senior Specialist (Strategy) added that he understood that Cumbria County Council had commenced a similar project in Ulverston although it would not have the status of an LCWIP.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) for Kendal prepared by Cumbria County Council be endorsed, subject to comments in section 4 of the report on how the document may be improved in future reviews. This endorsement does not fetter the Council’s discretion on any issues which may arise later relating to the implementation of the recommended route networks.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

The decision links to all four Council Plan Priorities:-

 

·        Working across boundaries – the Kendal LCWIP includes proposed cycling routes which would link Kendal to neighbouring communities, such as Natland, Oxenholme and Burneside. The LCWIP however gives short term priority to town centre routes.

 

·        Delivering a balanced community – the improvements proposed in the LCWIP will increase opportunities for people of all ages and abilities, including young people and the elderly, to access amenities and services by means other than motorised transport.

 

·        A fairer South Lakeland – improved cycling and walking routes will promote health, wellbeing and help tackle poverty by providing healthy and lower cost alternative ways to access amenities, services and for recreation.

 

·        Addressing the climate emergency – the proposals in the LCWIP will facilitate more journeys by cycle or on foot and therefore reduce carbon-producing transport.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

That Cabinet does not endorse the Kendal Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan: it is recommended that this alternative is not supported, as the support of the District Council has been important in developing the Kendal LCWIP and is likely to be important in assisting its implementation, including in its role as Local Planning Authority.

Summary

 

The Economy, Culture and Leisure Portfolio Holder presented a report on the Levelling Up Fund (LUF) bid. The report sought to enable a submission to be made to Round Two of the Levelling Up Fund for South Lakeland. If successful, the bid would bring significant investment into the district’s principle service centre of Kendal, meeting the Council’s aspirations in its Kendal Town Centre Strategy and delivery of a vibrant, enhanced town centre for residents, businesses and visitors.

 

The Economy Culture and Leisure Portfolio Holder highlighted the considerable consultation and discussion which had taken place in order to progress the bid. LUF funding was for capital schemes encompassing transport, culture or regeneration, with one successful application allowed per local authority area, proposals were able to seek up to £20 million of investment.

 

While funding had been allocated following a competitive process, across the UK places have been prioritised for funding by the Government following a qualitative assessment process. South Lakeland had been identified as “Category 3”, lowest priority of need. Bids would also be evaluated based on the other Fund criteria of strategic fit, value for money and deliverability.

 

The application centred around two projects, Project A covered Town Centre regeneration which included:-

 

(1)        New education accommodation at the Westmorland Shopping Centre, creating a third campus for Kendal College;

 

(2)        Regeneration of the historic Market Hall; and

 

(3)        Regeneration of the Marker Place.

 

Project B covered the Riverside Corridor which included enhancement of the riverside active travel route, from Abbot Hall, alongside Waterside and linking to the town centre via Kent Street.

 

The proposals were intended to support the evolution of Kendal and reinforce its role as a place to live, work and explore. It was considered that these measures would enable the district as a whole to better meet the needs of younger people and business and further embedding education in the heart of the town.

 

In response to a question regarding the inclusion of Ulverston in this project, the Senior Specialist (Economy and Culture) informed Members that Simon Fell MP who represented Ulverston had supported a bid for Barrow for his constituency and for South Lakeland, officers had considered Kendal as the best option.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        the submission of a Levelling Up Fund Round 2 bid for South Lakeland be agreed, on the basis of the proposals set out in this report; and

 

(2)        the Finance Lead Specialist (Section 151 Officer) be authorised to sign a statement of compliance to accompany the bid.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

The proposals linked to the following Council Plan priorities:-

 

Working across boundaries – Securing investment and delivering inclusive economic growth in South Lakeland’s principal service centre of Kendal, building the local knowledge and skills base and improving town centre infrastructure;

 

Delivering a balanced community – Providing a town centre for all ages, improving conditions for enterprise and increasing learning and development opportunities for students, helping to attract and retain more young people;

 

A fairer South Lakeland – An enhanced town centre offer and improved accessibility to services, with greater economic and social opportunities for all. Building closer links between further education and businesses and providing more affordable space for start-ups; and

 

Addressing the climate emergency – A more attractive town centre with cleaner air, improved environment and quality of life. Investment into active travel route along river corridor to encourage modal shift and help towards South Lakeland’s carbon neutral target.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

Not to proceed with a submission for Levelling Up Fund Round 2 on the basis of these proposals. There is insufficient time to develop an alternative bid to meet the deadline so no bid would therefore go forward for South Lakeland. Government has advised that there is no guarantee of further rounds of the Fund so there may be no opportunity to bid again in the future. As such, the recommendation is to proceed as described in this report.

The Legal, Governance and Democracy Specialist introduced the late item regarding Appointments to Outside Bodies. The report had been published on the website alongside the agenda and circulated to members in advance of the meeting.

 

The Committee gave consideration to a report on the work of the Windermere Lake Action Plan Steering Group during 2021/22 and seeking nominations for representatives to serve on both that Steering Group and the Windermere Ferry Advisory Committee for the forthcoming year.

 

RESOLVED – That the following appointments of representatives to serve on outside bodies for 2022/23 be made:-

 

Organisation	Representative
Windermere Lake Action Plan Steering Group	Councillor Gill Gardner (South Lakeland District Council)
	Councillor Dyan Jones (South Lakeland District Council)
	Councillor Paul Wileman (Lakes Parish Council)
	Councillor Kate Tripp (Windermere and Bowness Town Council)
Windermere Ferry Advisory Committee	Councillor Vicky Hughes (South Lakeland District Council)

 

Summary

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented the Revenue and Capital Outturn 2021/2/2 report which set out the Council’s financial performance for 2021/22 and the impact on reserves. He highlighted the impact of Covid on the finance team and thanked them for their hard work throughout the year and added that the Council was in a good position, despite the challenges posed by the labour market.

 

Attention was drawn to the overall net General Fund, which had a net overspend of £23,000 for 2021/22, including Covid-19 and resulted in a net contribution of £5,000 to reserves rather than the use of £18,000 reserves as budgeted. This represented a higher than projected overspend. He added that in anticipation of the impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic, the Council’s budgets for 2021/22 included a contingency budget for reduced income of £697,500, which had been partially offset by Sales, Fees and Charges Grant of £65,000 reflecting the grant only covered the first quarter of the financial year. However, thanks to a busy summer, income from car parks recovered and ended the year only £23,000 lower than budgeted so the contingency was not required for car park income.

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder noted that the largest single element of expenditure for the Council related to employee costs, mainly salaries but also pension contributions and the cost of agency and contract staff. In addition, employee costs were incurred on agency and temporary staff to ensure continuity of services while staff were redeployed to Covid-19 related tasks. He added that labour costs and the challenging labour market had made it difficult to fill vacancies which added to the expenditure.

 

Members were informed of an underspend in the capital programme of £4.1 million the majority of which related to timing adjustments with request to carry forwards budgets to 2021/22 or the removal of expenditure relating to Kendal Flood Relief programme, which was treated as agency expenditure in the Council’s accounts. The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder reiterated his earlier point in thanking officers for their hard work during a challenging period.

 

In response to a query regarding staffing and the impact of Local Government Reorganisation alongside the Pandemic, the Chief Executive noted the significant impact of the pandemic on staff and commended the resilience and commitment shown by the Council’s staff. He added that the staffing issues referred to in the report were linked to national issues around the labour market, rather than the impact of Local Government Reorganisation.

 

In response to a question raised by Members, the Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder reassured Members that although the Capital Programme was a demanding programme, work to prioritise the Council’s actions had begun. He added that he was confident that the Westmorland and Furness Authority would pick up any projects that were underway but not completed this year.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        the outturn figures and variance explanations set out in the report and appendices be noted;

 

(2)        the carry forwards set out in Appendix 1c and Appendix 2 to the report be approved;

 

(3)        Council be requested to approve the virement of £2,109,829 for the Covid Additional Relief Fund as set out in paragraph 3.10;

 

(4)        Council be requested to approve the contributions to and from reserves detailed in Appendix 4 to the report and the changes in responsibility for reserves set out in paragraph 3.17; and

 

(5)        Council be requested to approve the amended Capital Programme at Appendix 3.

 

Reasons for Decision

 

This report sets out how the Budget, set to enable the delivery of the Council’s priorities, was spent in 2021/22. Setting a sound framework for budget preparation, monitoring and reporting assists in the delivery of all corporate outcomes. The budget was developed within the context of the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) and supports all Council Plan priorities (working across boundaries; delivering a balanced community; a fairer South Lakeland; and addressing the climate emergency) through ensuring financial resources to deliver each priority.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

No alternative options are proposed. Not approving the proposed carry forwards or contributions to and from reserves may challenge service delivery during 2022/23 and beyond.

The Legal, Governance and Democracy Specialist (Solicitor) reminded members that a proposal to accept the recommendations set out in the report had been seconded and it was

 

RESOLVED – That the Director of Customer and Commercial Services be delegated authority to defer the following decision until officers were able to consider the legal impactions:-

 

(1)        Extension of the existing concrete jetty with a traditional wooden jetty.

 

 

Members discussed the application in detail and received advice from the Legal, Governance and Democracy Specialist (Solicitor) and Service Delivery Manager.

 

Following discussion on the item it was proposed and seconded to move back into Part I to continue the debate.

The Service Delivery Manager presented an encroachment application at Herons Croft Bellman Landing, Windermere. The report set out the proposals to construct a new boathouse with glass balustrade balcony and wet dock which would cover an area of 54 metres². In addition, the application sought permission to replace the existing jetty to cover an area of 33.3 metres²,which would be subject to a survey upon completion.

 

The report highlighted the dredging, which would be carried out covering an area of 90 metres² to a depth of 1 metre. A silt curtain would be used around the perimeter to ensure that all material would be able to settle back within the location with dredged material being drained on site before removal, creating no negative impact on the Arctic Char spawning ground.

 

The Service Delivery Manager confirmed that the Lake District National Park Authority had approved the application as the planning authority and the Environment Agency had provided their approval, both of which were set out in the appendices to the report.

 

During discussion on the item, Members questioned why the Lake Administration Committee had not had input on the whole application. The Service Delivery Manager confirmed that the Council had been part of the consultation process of the planning authority and that the application concerned with the encroachment on the lake bed and that the proposed balcony fell within the Council’s ownership.

 

RESOLVED – That the Director of Customer and Commercial Services be delegated authority to grant permission, subject to the completion of a new private encroachment agreement for :-

 

(1)        construction of a new boathouse;

 

(2)        replacement of the existing Jetty; and

 

(3)        associated dredging.

The Service Delivery Manager presented an encroachment application regarding an extension to the existing jetty with a traditional wooden jetty at land adjacent to Tarnedge, Lakeside, Windermere. The report set out proposals to extend the existing concrete jetty with a traditional wooden jetty, using wooden piles giving an overall length of encroachment of 16.6 metres and width of 1 metre. Furthermore, the jetty was situated within a confined area and between two existing jetties.

 

The report noted concerns raised by the applicants, that boats had been berthing on the existing jetties North and South, therefore reducing access and egress which had resulted on occasion in an obstruction to their jetty, the installation of the proposed extension would give unfettered access and egress for the applicants.

 

The Service Delivery Manager informed members of a number of objections which had been received as part of the planning process with regards to the limited space and close proximity to other jetties. He added that the application had no impact on Arctic Char Spawning in the lake with spawning occurring on the lake bed in water 15 to 30 metres deep and that both Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA) and Environment agency approvals attached as appendices to the report.

 

The Chairman invited Mrs Slater, the applicant, to address the Lake Administration Committee. The applicant spoke in support of the application and provided background and reasons for the application.

 

Following discussion on the item, members proposed and seconded that the meeting move into Part II to discuss the application in more detail.

The Service Delivery Manager presented an Encroachment Application to remove the existing jetty at Brunton, Storrs Park. Proposals for the replacement jetty included an extension of 3.4 metres to match an existing jetty, with the overall encroachment being 15.8 metres². The replacement jetty would be of wooden construction and piles would be treated with a water based wood preservative

 

The application provided details of the associated dredging to cover an area of 112 metres² with any dredged material being left close to the lake shore for 24 hours to allow any organisms to return to the lake. The report noted the spawning period of Arctic Char, which occurred both in Autumn and Spring with peak spawning numbers in November and mid-February on the lake bed at depths of 15 – 30 metres.

 

The Service Delivery Manager added that the application had provided confirmation of the approved planning consent by the Lake District National Park (LDNPA) and the Environment Agency (EA) approval.

 

Members discussed the application and noted the impact of extending jetties on the lake, and suggested a policy to control the impact of extensions to jetties. The Service Delivery Manager informed Members that the dredging associated with extending jetties did have an impact on the lake which would be highlighted in future reports.

 

Further discussion raised a query regarding the size of boats on the lake. The Service Delivery Manager informed Members that boats up to 14 metres² were able to go on the lake and that any applications for boats above this size, would be brought to the Lake Administration Committee for consideration.

 

Members emphasised their wish to monitor the impact of extending jetties and the associated dredging on the lake in order to take care of the lake for future generations.

 

RESOLVED – That the Director of Customer and Commercial Services be delegated authority to grant permission, subject to the completion of a new private encroachment agreement for the following:-

 

(1)        Removal of the existing timer jetty;

 

(2)        Replacement of jetty to match existing with extension of 3.4 metres; and

 

(3)        Carry out associated dredging.

 

 

The Service Delivery Manager presented a report, which provided Members with the achievements and outcomes of the joint operational activities from 1October 2020 to 30 September 2021. He noted that although this period covered part of the pandemic, it had still been a busy period for the Lake District due to the relaxation of restrictions.

 

During discussion on the item, Members raised a query regarding the use of Seabins on the Lake to reduce the amount of litter, the Service Delivery Manager undertook to discuss this with the Environment Agency (EA)as this was not something the Council could resource.

 

Members queried the water quality rating by the EA as excellent due to conflicting reports. The Service Delivery Manager responded, informing members that the EA took a number of samples throughout the year, the sole purpose of which was to monitor the quality for bathing. He added that although the current rating had been excellent, the 2022/23 results may change this rating.

 

Following a question regarding the Council’s public liability for the water quality in the Lake, the Legal, Governance and Democracy Specialist undertook to provide a written response.

 

Members noted the lower number of incidents on the Lake and thanked officers for their hard work to reduce the amount of safety issues in what had been a busy period for the area.

 

Members raised a number of queries regarding water quality, mainly relating to sewage in the Lake, the use of sea toilets and the holding tanks on boats. The Service Delivery Manager referred to the training session, which had taken place prior to the meeting, noting that these matters would have to be discussed with Stakeholders, the EA and landowners. He added that there were some exceptions for boats using holding tanks.

 

Members felt it would be a good idea to invite United Utilities (UU) to a future meeting in order to discuss the water quality, it was suggested that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee could add consider adding this to the Work Programme.

 

RESOLVED – That the report and appendix be noted.

The Principal Planning Officer presented the Planning Applications Performance Figures report to Members. The recommendation and consideration for Members was to note the contents of the report.

 

Providing the planning application performance figures supports the governance arrangements which underpin the Council’s decision making.

 

The Principal Planning Officer requested Members to consider an update on performance measures and recent appeals as at 30 April 2022. The Officer stated that the Team had recently undertaken a ‘bit of a purge’ on applications where they were unable to find solutions with Applicants, these Applications have been refused. The Officer explained that this has influenced the figures.

 

The Chairman requested Members to note the contents of the report and attached appendices.

 

Members agreed that the reports were very comprehensive. Members thanked the Senior Officer for data being presented consistently in an easily understandable way.

 

A motion to note the contents of the report was proposed and seconded and a vote taken and it was

 

RESOLVED: That the report and attached appendices were noted.

Variation of condition 1 (Approved plans) attached to planning permission SL/2015/0497 (20 dwellings, associated access road, landscaping and parking provision for Hincaster Trailway).

 

The Planning Officer presented the report to Members. The proposal was described as a variation of condition 1 (Approved plans) attached to planning permission SL/2015/0497 (20 dwellings, associated access road, landscaping and parking provision for Hincaster Trailway).

 

A variation, and revocation if so required, to a S106 agreement and deed of variation relating to affordable housing was approved by Members at the March 2022 Committee. At that Committee, it had been agreed with Members that the S73 Application would be presented to Committee.

 

The Planning Officer outlined the proposal as variation to three plots 13, 15 and 16 and proposed to increase the ridge height of these dwellings by 0.45 meters.

 

The Planning Officer provided the history of the plot where the previous developer went out of business, the Section 106 modification discussed in the last meeting was relayed to Members. The modifications to the three plots were explained with diagrams on slides. The impact to the street scene was discussed and the aerial surround of the site reviewed with front and rear elevations being displayed. The proposed changes to the ridge height was explained using diagrams and the impact on neighbouring properties was described as minimal.

 

Speaker: Paul Tunstall – Planning Agent, spoke in support of the application.

 

Members queried the roof colour changes in the slides. The previous design was noted to have a different colour roofing material to the proposed change image. The Chairman allowed the speaker to clarify the reason for the Members’ benefit. The Speaker confirmed that all materials will remain the same, the design illustration was purely providing comparison on like for like basis.

 

A Member enquired about the contribution towards the affordable homes element by the developer. The Officer advised that this was not a material consideration for this Application.

 

The Chairman acknowledged that whilst it may not be a material planning consideration he asked if the Principal Planning Officer could check and provide a written response to the Member with an update on the contribution towards the affordable homes element agreed by the previous developer.

 

A motion to approve the application was proposed and seconded and a vote was taken and it was

 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to the following:

 

Condition (1):

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:- 9867/3/12/Rev B Location Plan; 9867/3/1/ Rev G Site Layout Plan; E1815.03A Site Survey; 9867/3/2 House Type H1; 9867/3/3 Rev A House Type H2; 9867/3/4, House Type H3; 9867/3/4 Rev P00, House Type H4; 9867/3/6 Rev A House Type H5; 9867/3/8 Rev A, House Type H6; 9867/3/8 Rev P00, House Types H4 ABC; 9867/3/15. Site Sections AA and BB; 9867/3/16. Street Elevation; 9867/3/17. Visibility splay plan; 139.700 Street Scene. 139.200

 

Rev I Landscape Strategy Drawing; 139.300 Rev D Structural Landscaping Plan; 139.400 Rev B Boundary Treatments; 139.501 Rev C Hard Landscaping 1; 139.502 Rev C Hard Landscaping 2; 139.503 Rev A Entrance Feature Detail; 139.601 Soft Landscaping 1; 139.602 Soft Landscaping 2; 139.603 Soft Landscaping 3; 139.604 Soft Landscaping 4; 139.605 Soft Landscaping 5; and

Arboricultural Method Statement (Rachel Atkinson).

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

Condition (2):

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Landscape Strategy Drawing No 139.200. Rev I and approved Arboricultural Method Statement (Rachel Atkinson).

 

Reason: To safeguard and enhance the character of the area and secure high quality landscaping in accordance with Policy DM4 of the Councils Development

Management Policies.

 

Condition (3):

 a) No superstructure shall be erected until samples and details of all the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. b) Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details of materials unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.

 

Reason: To ensure the development is of a high quality design in accordance with Policy DM4 of the Councils Development Management Policies.

 

Condition (4):

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no development of the type described in Class A - gates, fences, walls etc, Part 2 Minor Operations of Schedule 2 of that Order shall be undertaken without the express permission of the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: The dwellings and their garden areas have been designed to minimize their impact on landscape / settlement character in accordance with Policy CS8.2 of the South Lakeland Core Strategy, and the local planning authority wish to retain control over gates walls and fences.

Change of Use from a Post Office, shop & dwellinghouse (Use class E) to dwellinghouse (Use class C3).

 

Note – All Members of the Planning Committee raised a non-pecuniary interest for transparency, by virtue of the fact that the Applicant was known to them and was a Councillor at South Lakeland District Council. All Members confirmed that they were not predetermined on this item and remained in the meeting during discussion and voting on the item.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report to Members. The proposal was described as an application for change of use from a Post Office, shop and dwellinghouse (Use Class E) to dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) at Main Street, Greenodd, Ulverston, LA12 7RB.

 

A site description was provided along with slides of photographs and a site location plan. A slide listing key issues with the changes were presented, the principle issue being the loss of community facility. The viability of the shop is not sustainable, no profit had been made. Passing trade had reduced significantly and the site was located on a one way street.

 

The application was presented to Planning Committee due to the Applicant being a South Lakeland District Council Councillor.

 

Members were updated on the recent development that the Post Office Outreach Service had been relocated to the village hall on a part time service basis since the publication of the report.

 

The Planning Officer relayed the fact that the Post Office support had been streamlined in recent years with its’ being service reduced and the shop had continued to provide support to the local community. Members discussed whether the facilities offered by the Post Office could be provided elsewhere and they were advised by the Planning Officer that there were other local businesses providing essential produce And that a newsagents in Ulverston was prepared to deliver to the village.

 

The Planning Officer described how no alterations internally or externally were planned in the proposals and explained that there would be no impact to the street scene other than a reduction in traffic and more parking..

 

Speaker – Councillor Janet Willis – Applicant, spoke in support of the Application.

 

In response to a query regarding the original use of the property, the Planning Officer noted that they did not know the planning history of the property and when it had been converted to a business.

A motion to approve the Application was proposed and seconded and a vote was taken and it was

 

RESOLVED – That the application be approved subject to:

 

Condition (1):

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

 

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

 

Condition (2):

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

 

•           Site location plan, received 21 February 2022

•           Ground Floor Plan, received 21 February 2022

•           Lower Ground Floor Plan, received 21 February 2022

•           First Floor Plan, received 21 February 2022

•           Second Floor Plan, received 21 February 2022

•           Garden Plan, received 21 February 2022

•           Existing/proposed elevations (no changes), received 28 March 2022

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Erection of detached dwelling.

 

The Principal Planning Officer provided a presentation outlining the details of the proposal.  The position of the site in relation to Kendal and Oxenholme was established with a site plan being displayed. The site for the proposed dwelling was presented and explained with access points being highlighted and an inset map illustrating the settlement boundary. The land earmarked for the Application was set outside of the development boundary, with a variety of diagrams and photographs being displayed to provide the visual setting.

 

The Principal Planning Officer explained that the Application had been called in by Councillor Rathbone on the grounds that he considered it an ‘infill’ development, despite being outside the settlement boundary. The existing development boundary close to Burton Road was immediately to the west of the site. 

 

Key policy points relative to the Application were discussed including reference to Development Strategy and Policy.

 

The Principal Planning Officer presented key policy points which related to the application, including the Development Strategy and Policy and provided an overview of the report.  He drew Members’ attention to the material considerations as outlined in the report and noted potential exceptions to Policy.

 

The Principal Planning Officer assessed the Application against the development plan via Policy DM12 Self Build and Custom Build Housing, DM13 Housing Development in Small Villages and Hamlets (Outside the AONB) and DM14 (Rural Exceptions). These policies provided scope for small and windfall sites, ensuring that for each form of housing, the qualifying criteria were met. The criteria was assessed in relation to this Application and the parameters and rules were discussed.

 

The Principal Planning Officer’s recommendation was that the Application be refused on the grounds that the development was situated outside the settlement boundary and would undermine the aims of Policy LA1.1 of the Land Allocations Development Plan Document (LADPD).

 

Public Speaker: Kate Bellwood (Planning Agent) spoke in support of the proposal.

 

The Principal Planning Officer addressed the points raised during the public participation.

 

The Principal Planning Officer responded to questions raised by Members and in doing so, stressed that each application be considered on its own merits and deviation from policy should only occur in very exceptional circumstances. The planning process was designed to guide and ensure that new developments are delivered in sustainable locations. The cumulative effect of allowing houses to be built outside of this strategy would be harmful and undermine the Council’s approved Development Strategy.

 

The Chairman stipulated the value and importance of the Council agreed policies unless there were exceptional circumstances.

 

Members requested an update on self-build targets and sight of our performance figures. The Planning Officer responded with illustrative slides showing that the Council was exceeding its targets for self-build properties. Members queried if the proposed Application was an environmentally friendly design. The Planning Officer stated that as this was an outline application there was no firm proposals to suggest that this Application would match environmental targets.

 

A motion to refuse the application following the Planning Officer’s recommendation was proposed and seconded and a vote taken and it was:

 

RESOLVED: - That the application seeking planning permission be refused on the following grounds:-

 

Reason for Refusal:

 

The proposed development is located outside the settlement boundary for Oxenholme and is therefore contrary to Policy LA1.1 of the Land Allocations Development Plan Document, the purpose of which is to ensure that new homes are delivered in sustainable locations and to protect the character of the surrounding landscape. The proposal will therefore not be in a sustainable location and will be harmful to the character of the surrounding landscape. As such, it would be contrary to policies LA1.1 of the Land Allocation Development Plan Document, CS1.2 of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and DM12 of the Local Plan Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

Extension of Sandgate SEN school comprising of new educational classrooms, multi-purpose hall with pupil facilities, teaching facilities and external works

 

Note - Councillor Susanne Long declared a non-pecuniary interest by virtue of the fact that she knew one of the objectors. She confirmed that she was not predetermined and remained in the meeting for discussion and voting on the item.

 

The Principal Planning Officer confirmed that an email had been received this morning by his colleague Sonia Swift – Planning Officer. The email from Christian Judd, Director – Architects Plus, acting on behalf of the Applicant - Cumbria County Council, requested the Application be deferred to allow additional time to address the Sport England objection.

 

The Principal Planning Officer put forward the recommendation to defer the Application. Members supported of the motion.

 

The motion to defer the Application was proposed and seconded and a vote taken and it was:

 

RESOLVED – That Agenda Item No. 6: Planning Application No. SL/2021/0495 Sandgate School at The Queen Katherine School site, Appleby Road, Kendal; be deferred to a later meeting date.

 

Note - Following a query raised by Members, the Chairman clarified that the application was a matter for South Lakeland District Council to determine and was not for the attention of Cumbria County Council.

Summary

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented a report related to additional funding for glass panels along Aynam Road, Kendal. He reminded Members that the Environment Agency (EA) had been undertaking significant work throughout Kendal and the surrounding area to reduce the impact of flooding in Kendal and other nearby settlements. Approval was granted in December 2019 with work beginning in Spring 2021 and expected to be completed by early 2024. The Planning approval included installation of aluminium framed glass flood defence panels in three locations along Aynam Road, Kendal.

In response to the Kendal Flood Risk Management Scheme, Kendal Town Council formed a Flood Relief Scheme Working Group, which included representatives from the EA and the Council to report on the scheme and identify opportunities to improve the visual design of the glass panels in public realm areas of the town. The Flood Relief Scheme Working Group undertook consultation with residents which resulted in a new planning application being submitted to improve the glass panels by extending the total length and upgrading to a stainless steel specification which was a key aspiration of the local community. Further ground investigations had enabled the EA to improve the design to more effectively control seepage and groundwater.

At its 11 November 2021 meeting, Council agreed a financial contribution of £250,000 towards the cost of the new and improved glass panels to be installed along Aynam Road, Waterside and Gooseholme through its Capital Programme. The installation of the glass panels was also dependent on a funding contribution of £150,000 from Kendal Town Council, however in light of new and improved design material costs, costs have increased with an additional £125,000 required from South Lakeland District Council in order to deliver the changes, increasing the Council’s funding contribution to £375,000.

Members expressed their support for the proposals and thanked officers for their flexibility and hard work to ensure this project moves forwards.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        Subject to the Environment Agency securing the necessary further planning permissions an additional grant of £125,000 to the Environment Agency be approved as a contribution to deliver glass panels along Aynam Road, Gooseholme and Waterside in Kendal as part of the Kendal Flood Alleviation Scheme. This funding having been previously agreed as part of the revised Capital Programme considered by Council on 18 May 2022;           

 

(2)        Cabinet’s approval to provide a grant of £250,000 to the Environment Agency to deliver the glass panels along Aynam Road, Gooseholme and Waterside in Kendal be reaffirmed as previously agreed at Council on 11 November 2021; and

 

(3)        subject to the Environment Agency securing the necessary further planning permissions, authority be delegated to the Director of Customer and Commercial Services in consultation with the Lead Specialist Legal Governance and Democracy (Monitoring Officer) to enter into an appropriate agreement with the Environment Agency within the parameters of the financial approval as detailed in paragraphs 7.1 to 7.3 of this report.

Reasons for the Decision

 

The proposal links to Council Plan Priorities of:-

 

Working across boundaries – Securing additional funding to deliver critical infrastructure in partnership with other authorities; and

 

Addressing the climate emergency – Working with the Environment Agency to deliver the Kendal Flood Risk Management Scheme and mitigate risk of major flooding events.

 

Alternative Options

 

The alternative option would be not to approve the additional expenditure of £125,000 however, this would affect the delivery of the Kendal Flood Alleviation Scheme that, in turn would affect the ERDF funding, as well as create reputational damage for the Council.

 

In accordance with the grant funding agreement the ERDF funding could be clawed back or a fine imposed as a result or any project delays. Should the funding towards the glass panels not be approved, additional funding streams would need to be sought which would create project delays.

Hybrid application: 1. Full Application for motor dealership (sui generis) including workshops, access roundabout, spine road and internal compartmentation area access junctions. 2. Outline Planning Application all matters reserved, apart from access, for employment business park (indicatively B1/B2 6400m2 & B8 2500m2).

 

The Principal Planning Officer provided a report outlining the proposed development. An earlier version of this proposal had been considered by the Planning Committee in October 2021, when Members resolved to approve the Application subject to a section 106 agreement and a number of conditions. Since then the proposal has undergone significant amendments, requiring further consideration by the Committee.

 

The Principal Planning Officer presented slides to indicate the extent of the proposed site for development as it differed from the previous application. Much of the application site was within the development boundary of Kendal on land allocated for development by Land Allocations DPD policy LA1.8 (Local Employment Allocations). The policy listed the “Acceptable Uses” for the site as those falling within Classes B1 (Business) and B2 (General Industrial) of The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).

 

The Principal Planning Officer provided a description of the hybrid application, being a full application for a motor dealership (sui generis) including workshops, access roundabout, spine road and internal compartmentation area access junctions. He described the updated proposal as now being in conflict with the development plan by including 50m of land beyond the development boundary of the town.

 

The justification for the recommendation had been based upon material planning consideration in that the revised proposal will provide space for the sustainable disposal of the considerable amount of surplus topsoil that would be generated by the development. The updated proposal provided an opportunity for landscape mitigation and offered the prospect of achieving the required biodiversity net gain entirely on-site. The material planning consideration with a condition to limit use of the area in the manner proposed, were sufficient to justify the departure from policy. A variety of photographs from differing angles were shown to explain the proposal.

 

The proposal considered last year was recapped. The issues with colour on the building designs have also been addressed with the visual impact of the buildings being reduced.

The configuration of the plan and site access was discussed. The Principal Planning Officer advised that the plan as submitted was now intended as the full and final development, subject to approval of reserved matters for the outline element of the proposal. This included the diversion of the public rights of way; diagrams and photographs served as explanation. The formal diversion to the footpaths were put to Members for consideration and approval. 

 

The Principal Planning Officer explained how the use of the topsoil enabled a contribution to biodiversity and added that the avenue of trees shown in the photographs would be lost with 50 metres of new trees being planted to compensate. He referenced the possibility for three additional offsite areas proposed by the Applicant to be developed as biodiversity net gain to attach to the proposal as an alternative.

 

The Principal Planning Officer recommended that the application be approved as there were sound material planning considerations submitted in support of the revised proposal and therefore departure from policy was justified.

To address the extension of the land into the field outside the development boundary Members requested a condition be proposed which would specify that no further building be allowed on that strip of land. The Principal Planning Officer agreed and relayed the obligations required. A discussion followed between Members as to the possibility of saving the avenue of trees and planting additional trees. The Officer responded that it would be expensive to move the existing trees. Further enquiry would be made with the Applicant. The Officer agreed that something could be added to the landscaping element that could include tree planting and possibly transplanting existing trees.

 

The Chairman clarified with Members that an amendment to this effect should be included. 

 

In response to a query raised by Members,  the Principal Planning Officer confirmed that CCC Officers and planning teams had been consulted on the proposal to redirect the public footpath, and that the plans have been approved. The proposed design was the safest and best option available based on the advice and guidance given.

 

The Principal Planning Officer agreed with the Members to include in Section 106 agreement a provision which specified that no further building or development be permitted within the 50m extension strip. This strip is for biodiversity purposes only and no other use.

 

The Chairman clarified with Members that the recommendation is to approve the proposal.

 

A motion to approve the application subject to a S106 Agreement with conditions was proposed and seconded and a vote was taken and it was:

 

RESOLVED – That the application be approved subject to:

 

a. A section 106 agreement (including Cumbria County as a signatory) to secure the following:

 

Biodiversity Net Gain

 

1) No development shall commence until a scheme demonstrating an associated minimum 10% biodiversity net gain (from the baseline conditions of the application site), either provided within the application site and/or incorporating the three off-site parcels of land referenced in the submitted Biodiversity Statement, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning Authority. The biodiversity net gain shall be calculated using Natural England’s Biodiversity Metric 3.0, or such other Metric as shall have been adopted in its place by the time the scheme is submitted. The scheme must include: (1) a timetable for implementing the proposals; and (2) proposals for the management in perpetuity of any areas contributing to the overall biodiversity net gain.

 

Construction of new roundabout and extension of the 30mph speed limit on Shap Road (A6)

 

2) No other development shall commence until: (1) the new roundabout access to the site (shown on approved drawing HT1324.1.101 P01, Revision E) has been completed in accordance with an agreement made with Cumbria County Council under s278 of the Highways Act; and (2) the 30mph speed limit on the A6 has been extended north of the new roundabout in accordance with a Traffic Regulation Order made by Cumbria County Council.

 

Travel Plan monitoring

 

3) A contribution of £6,600 to be paid by the developer to the local highway authority to fund the monitoring of the final Travel Plans;

b. And the following conditions (1-45):

 

Area of application site beyond the development boundary

 

4) The area of the application site north of the development boundary to be used for no purpose other than: (a) disposal of topsoil; (b) biodiversity net gain; and (c) landscape mitigation – all linked to, or required by, the approved development.

 

Condition (1):

Development on that part of the site identified as “the Full Application” on Proposed Site Layout, HT1324.1.101 P01, Revision E is hereinafter referred to as “the Full Permission”.

 

Development on that part of the site identified as the “Outline Planning Application all matters reserved” on Proposed Site Layout, HT1324.1.101 P01, Revision E is hereinafter referred to as “the Outline Permission”.

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

THE FULL PERMISSION

 

Condition (2):

The development to which the Full Permission relates shall begin not later than THREE YEARS from the date of this decision.

 

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

 

Condition (3):

The development to which the Full Permission relates shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

 

•               SITE LOCATION PLAN, LAND AT SHAP ROAD, MEADOW BANK, SHAP ROAD, KENDAL, HT1324.1.100CB, Issue P01, Revision A, 10 December 2021

•               PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT, HT1324.1.101 P01, Revision E, 13 January 2022

•               PROPOSED KIA SHOWROOM, HT1324.1.102 P01, Revision F, 14 January 2022

•               SHELTER BUILDINGS, HT1324.1.111 P01, Revision A, January 2022

•               Kia Detailed Drainage Plan, HT1324.1.113 P05, P01, Revision B, January 2022

•               Cut and Fill, HT1324.1.109 P01

•               Landscape Masterplan 1100-2_700 Revision 7, May ‘22

•               Construction Phasing Plan, January 2022

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

External materials

 

Condition (4):

Unless agreed otherwise in writing by the local planning authority, the external walling and roofing materials for the buildings approved by the Full Permission shall be as specified in the application form and in the approved plans detailed above. Where relevant, the external walling and roofing materials are approved as a foundation for the green walls and roofs referred to further in condition 7 and indicated on approved drawings: (1) HT1324.1.102 P01, Revision F; (2) HT1324.1.111  P01, Revision A; and (3) Landscape Masterplan 1100-2_700 Revision 7.

 

Parking

 

Condition (5):

The motor dealership approved in the Full Permission shall not commence trading until the parking shown on HT1324.1.102 P01, Revision F, including the 39 electric vehicle charging points, has been constructed and made available for use.

Reason: To ensure the timely provision of car parking in accordance with policy DM9 (Parking Provision, new and loss of car parks) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Travel Plan

 

Condition (6):

Within 6 months of the development approved by the Full Planning Permission opening for business, a Travel Plan for the ongoing business shall be submitted to the local planning authority for its approval. The Travel Plan shall: (1) identify

targets for a modal shift from the use of private cars to sustainable transport modes for those visiting the development; (2) set out measures to achieve those targets; and (3) include a timetable for implementation. The timetable must include provision for the submission of an annual written report to the local planning authority (for the agreed lifetime of the Travel plan) reviewing the effectiveness of the Travel Plan to date and setting out any necessary amendments to the prevailing measures in order to achieve the agreed targets. Thereafter, the Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed targets, prevailing measures and timetable. The prevailing measures shall be those set out initially or as may subsequently have been agreed in writing by the local planning authority following each annual review.

 

Reason: To encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport.

 

Landscaping

 

Condition (7):

No development associated with the Full Permission shall commence until there has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority a detailed soft landscaping scheme based upon: (i) the principles established in the submitted Landscape Masterplan 1100-2_700 Revision 7; (ii) the green walls and roofs shown on drawings HT1324.1.102 P01, Revision F and HT1324.1.111 P01, Revision A; and (iii) mitigation / recommendations in section 7 of the submitted Ecological Appraisal (Report Reference 5220) produced by Envirotech Ecological Consultants and dated June 2019. The scheme shall include details of: (i) planting plans; (ii) existing vegetation to be retained; (iii) written specifications and schedules of proposed plants noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities; (iv) any essential external lighting; (v) an implementation timetable; and (vi) a schedule of landscape maintenance proposals for a period of not less than thirty years from the date of completion of the scheme. In combination with the details required by condition 25, the landscaping of the area north of the existing private road to Gilthwaiterigg shown on the submitted Landscape Masterplan 1100-2_700 Revision 7 shall include at least an equivalent number of trees to replace those  that ultimately need to be felled, including the transplanting of as many existing trees as is practicable. For the avoidance of doubt, the soft landscaping scheme for the Full Permission must include, as a minimum, the 17.5m wide belt of “New 'scrub' biodiversity planting” shown to the north of the new main estate road. Thereafter, the approved landscaping scheme shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the agreed details and timetables.

 

Reason: To safeguard and enhance the character of the area in accordance with policy DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space, Trees and Landscaping) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Biodiversity

 

Condition (8):

No development associated with the Full Permission shall commence until an ecological strategy document, prepared by a qualified ecologist, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The document shall set out a strategy for the provision of biodiversity improvements within that part of the site covered by the Full Permission, reflecting the mitigation / recommendations in section 7 of the submitted Ecological Appraisal (Report Reference 5220) produced by Envirotech Ecological Consultants and dated June 2019 and incorporating the provision of five swift boxes in accordance with the submitted document entitled “SL/2019/0743: Statement re: habitat creation for Swifts (Apus apus)”. The strategy must link to the detailed landscaping scheme required by condition 7 and must include a schedule of maintenance proposals for a period of not less than thirty years from the date of completion of the development. Thereafter, the improvements shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved strategy.

 

Reason: To contribute towards the net gain in biodiversity required by: (1) policy DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space, Trees and Landscaping) of the of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document; (2) paragraph 170 of the National Planning Policy Framework.; and (3) section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.

 

Tree Protection

 

Condition (9):

No development associated with the Full Permission shall commence until there has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority a method statement detailing measures for the protection of: (1) the existing trees to be retained outside of, but abutting, the application site; and (2) all existing hedges to be retained on the boundary of the application site, all as marked on Landscape Masterplan, 1100-2_700, Revision 7. The method statement shall include both physical protection measures and a schedule of working practices. No development associated with the Full Permission shall commence until all approved physical protection measures have been put in place. Thereafter, the physical protection measures shall be retained for the duration of the construction phase of the development and all work shall proceed in accordance with the approved schedule of working practices.

 

Reason: To protect existing trees in accordance with policy DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space, Trees and Landscaping) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Land contamination

 

Condition (10):

Once the construction of the development associated with the Full Permission is complete, the approved use shall not commence until a validation report and statement (in respect of land contamination) prepared by a competent person shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. Referring to: (1) the Phase 1 Desk Study Report (October 2019); and (2) Phase 2 Interpretative Ground Investigation Report, Insight Geo (September 2019) submitted in support of this application, the validation report and statement shall detail all contamination found during the construction process and all necessary remediation undertaken.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Noise

 

Condition (11):

For the development approved by the Full Permission, all vehicle repairs and servicing shall be carried out inside the buildings hereby approved and only within areas of the buildings constructed with the sound reduction indexes listed to in section 7.0 of the submitted Noise Assessment prepared by Martec Environmental Consultants Ltd., dated. 22 January 2020. All repairs and servicing shall be carried out with the roller shutter doors kept closed.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (12):

Any extract / ventilation systems proposed for the motor dealership approved by the Full Permission shall be designed, installed and maintained not to exceed a noise level of 45 LAeq (free field) at the nearest residential properties, in accordance with section 7.0 of the submitted Noise Assessment prepared by Martec Environmental Consultants Ltd., dated. 22 January 2020.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Lighting

 

Condition (13):

The motor dealership approved in the Full Permission shall not commence trading until an external lighting scheme for this phase of the development has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall include details of: (1) the intensity of illumination; (2) predicted lighting contours; (3) proposed hours of illumination; and (4) the location and height of all lighting fixtures; and must be designed to ensure that no light is directly visible to users of the public highway. Thereafter, external illumination of the site shall operate in accordance with the approved scheme.

 

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the amenity of the area in accordance with Policies DM2 (Achieving Sustainable High Quality Design) and DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Flood risk

 

Condition (14):

No development associated with the Full Permission shall commence until a fully detailed surface water drainage scheme based on the Flood Risk and Drainage Strategy Report P21391 dated January 2022 and the Appendices attached thereto, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The surface water drainage scheme must: (1) accord with the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015), or any subsequent replacement national standards that are agreed in writing as an appropriate alternative by the local planning authority; and (2) must deliver the same treatment standard (as defined by The SuDS Manual Chapter 26) or better than that detailed in the Flood Risk and Drainage Strategy Report P21391 dated January 2022 and the Appendices attached thereto. The drainage scheme submitted for approval shall also be in accordance with the principles set out in the Flood Risk and Drainage Strategy Report P21391 dated January 2022 proposing surface water discharging by infiltration via Sustainable Drainage techniques including green roofs and walls, rainwater harvesting, permeable surfacing wherever possible, grass filter strips, and swales. Mini infiltration basins are also an acceptable infiltration technique. The drainage scheme must also: (1) include full details of exceedance routes that minimise the risks to people and property resulting from excess rainfall; (2) be designed for ease of maintenance; 3) include full details of how the soakaways are connected / extended to the sub-soil / existing undisturbed ground where the infiltration testing has been undertaken; (4) include full details of the platform / earthworks construction materials and techniques to facilitate vertical infiltration through the interface with the existing ground to the infiltration level; and (5) include full details of the cut-off drains / swales at the base of the embankments with drainage destination to prevent surface water flow affecting neighbouring sites.

 

The development shall be completed, in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (15):

No development associated with the Full Permission shall commence until a scheme for the ongoing maintenance of the proposed surface drainage system for that phase of the development has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. Thereafter, the associated surface drainage system shall be maintained in accordance with the approved scheme for the lifetime of the development.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (16):

No development associated with the Full Permission shall commence until a construction surface water management plan for that phase of the development has been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the local planning authority. Thereafter, the plan shall be adhered to for the duration of the associated construction works.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (17):

The motor dealership approved in the Full Permission shall not commence trading until a surface water validation report has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The purpose of the validation report is to demonstrate that the associated surface water drainage scheme and exceedance routes have all been constructed and installed in accordance with the details approved in accordance with the relevant conditions in this permission and are operational.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

THE OUTLINE PERMISSION

 

Condition (18):

For the Outline Permission, approval of access (save for the agreed point of access to the County Road), details of the scale, layout and appearance of the building(s), and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called the Reserved Matters) shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.

 

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development on site.

 

Condition (19):

The development subject to the Outline Permission must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:

 

a. FIVE YEARS from the date of this permission; or

 

b. the expiration of TWO YEARS from the final approval of the reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matters to be approved.

 

Application for the approval of the reserved matters must be made not later than THREE years from the date of this permission.

 

Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

 

Condition (20):

The development subject to the Outline Permission shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans (insofar as they relate to matters not reserved for further approval by condition 18):

 

•           SITE LOCATION PLAN, LAND AT SHAP ROAD, MEADOW BANK, SHAP ROAD, KENDAL, HT1324.1.100CB, Issue P01, Revision A, 10 December 2021

•           PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT, HT1324.1.101 P01, Revision E, 13 January 2022

•           Proposed Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) HT1324.1.EVA P01 12 May 2022

•           Landscape Masterplan 1100-2_700 Revision 7, May ‘22

 

Nothing on these drawings shall be interpreted as having fixed the site levels for any part of the development subject to the Outline Permission. Site levels remain to be agreed in association with the Reserved Matters referred to in condition 18 and the detailed surface water drainage scheme required by condition 30.

 

Reason:

For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

Condition (21):

The development subject to the Outline Permission is limited to a maximum gross internal area of 6,400 sq. m. of B1/B2 floor space and 2,500 sq. m. of B2 floor space, all as defined in The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).Reason: These are the assumed floor space figures used in the technical assessments submitted in support of the proposal.

 

Parking

 

Condition (22):

The layout details required by condition 18 shall include details of the parking to be provided for each separate Class B1, B2 and B8 unit hereby permitted. The parking must achieve the standards in the current Cumbria Development Design Guide (or such equivalent replacement guidance) unless supported by evidence supporting a different level of provision. All parking spaces with electric vehicle (EV) charging points must be clearly marked. The number of EV charging points must be consistent with the requirements of the development plan, or where the development plan is silent, must accord with accepted best practice.

 

Reason: To ensure the timely provision of car parking in accordance with policy DM9 (Parking Provision, new and loss of car parks) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Emergency Vehicle Access

 

Condition (23):

No individual building approved by the Outline Permission shall be first occupied until the emergency vehicle access shown on drawing HT1324.1.EVA P01 has been completed and made available for use in accordance with a detailed specification that shall first have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the local planning authority.

 

Reason: To maintain highway safety in accordance with: (1) policy CS10.2 (Transport impact of new development) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy; and (2) policy DM1 (General Requirements for all development) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Travel plan

 

Condition (24):

Within 6 months of the first occupation of each separate unit approved by the Outline Permission, or in accordance with such other timeframe as has been previously agreed in writing by the local planning authority, a Travel Plan for the respective unit shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The Travel Plan shall: (1) identify targets for a modal shift from the use of private cars to sustainable transport modes for those visiting the unit; (2) set out measures to achieve those targets; and (3) include a timetable for implementation. The timetable must include provision for the submission of an annual written report to the local planning authority (for the agreed lifetime of the Travel plan) reviewing the effectiveness of the Travel Plan to date and setting out any necessary amendments to the prevailing measures in order to achieve the agreed targets. Thereafter, the Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed targets, prevailing measures and timetable. The prevailing measures shall be those set out initially or as may subsequently have been agreed in writing by the local planning authority following each annual review.

 

Reason:

To encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport.

 

Landscaping

 

Condition (25):

The landscaping details required by condition 18 shall include a detailed soft landscaping scheme based upon: (i) the principles established in the submitted Landscape Masterplan, 1100-2_700, Revision 7; and (ii) mitigation / recommendations in section 7 of the submitted Ecological Appraisal (Report Reference 5220) produced by Envirotech Ecological Consultants and dated June 2019. The scheme shall incorporate green walls and green roofs where it is practicable to do so. The scheme shall include details of: (i) planting plans; (ii) existing vegetation to be retained; (iii) written specifications and schedules of proposed plants noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities; (iv) any essential external lighting; (v) an implementation timetable; and (vi) a schedule of landscape maintenance proposals for a period of not less than thirty years from the date of completion of the scheme. . In combination with the details required by condition 7, the landscaping of the area north of the existing private road to Gilthwaiterigg shown on the submitted Landscape Masterplan 1100-2_700 Revision 7 shall include at least an equivalent number of trees to replace those that ultimately need to be felled, including the transplanting of as many existing trees as is practicable. For the avoidance of doubt, the soft landscaping scheme for the Outline Permission must include, as a minimum, the 32.5m wide belt of “Extended 'scrub' planting as requested by Skelsmergh & Scalthwaiterigg PC” shown to the north of the new main estate road. Thereafter, the approved landscaping scheme shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the agreed details and timetables.

 

Reason: To safeguard and enhance the character of the area in accordance with policy DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space, Trees and Landscaping) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Tree Protection

 

Condition (26):

No development associated with the Outline Permission shall commence until there has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority a method statement detailing measures for the protection of: (1) the existing trees outside of, but abutting, the application site; and (2) all existing hedges to be retained on the boundary of the application site, all as marked on Landscape Masterplan, 1100-2_700, Revision 7. The method statement shall include both physical protection measures and a schedule of working practices. No development associated with the Outline Permission shall commence until all approved physical protection measures have been put in place. Thereafter, the physical protection measures shall be retained for the duration of the construction phase of the development and all work shall proceed in accordance with the approved schedule of working practices.

 

Reason: To protect existing trees in accordance with policy DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space, Trees and Landscaping) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Biodiversity

 

Condition (27):

No development associated with the Outline Permission shall commence until there has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority an ecological strategy document, prepared by a qualified ecologist. The document shall set out a strategy for the provision of biodiversity improvements within that part of the site covered by the Outline Permission, reflecting the mitigation / recommendations in section 7 of the submitted Ecological Appraisal (Report Reference 5220) produced by Envirotech Ecological Consultants and dated June 2019. The strategy must link to the landscaping of the site required by condition 18 and must include a schedule of maintenance proposals for a period of not less than thirty years from the date of completion of the development. Thereafter, the improvements shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved strategy.

 

Reason: To contribute towards the net gain in biodiversity required by: (1) policy DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space, Trees and Landscaping) of the of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document; (2) paragraph 170 of the National Planning Policy Framework.; and (3) section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.

 

Land Contamination

 

Condition (28):

Once the construction of any individual building associated with the Outline Permission is complete, that individual building shall not be first occupied until a validation report and statement (in respect of land contamination) prepared by a competent person shall have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. Referring to: (1) the Phase 1 Desk Study Report (October 2019); and (2) Phase 2 Interpretative Ground Investigation Report, Insight Geo (September 2019) submitted in support of this application, the validation report and statement shall detail all contamination found during the construction process and all necessary remediation undertaken.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Noise

 

Condition (29):

The details required by condition 18 shall incorporate measures within the design of each building approved by the Outline permission to minimise the propagation of noise to the lowest practicable level relative to the existing noise climate as established by an associated baseline survey undertaken in accordance with BS4142.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Lighting

 

Condition (30):

The details relating to the layout and appearance of the building(s), and the landscaping of the site required by condition 18 shall include an external lighting scheme. The scheme must include details of: (1) the location and height of all lighting fixtures; (2) the intensity of illumination; (3) predicted lighting contours; and (4) proposed hours of illumination; and must be designed to ensure that no light is directly visible to users of the adopted highway. Thereafter, external illumination of the site subject to the Outline Permission shall operate in accordance with the approved scheme.

 

Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the amenity of the area in accordance with Policies DM2 (Achieving Sustainable High Quality Design) and DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Flood Risk

 

Condition (31):

No development associated with the Outline Permission shall commence until a fully detailed surface water drainage scheme based on the Flood Risk and Drainage Strategy Report P21391 dated January 2022 and the Appendices attached thereto, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority.

 

The surface water drainage scheme must: (1) accord with the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems (March 2015), or any subsequent replacement national standards that are agreed in writing as an appropriate alternative by the local planning authority; and (2) must deliver the same treatment standard (as defined by The SuDS Manual Chapter 26) or better than that detailed in the Flood Risk and Drainage Strategy Report P21391 dated January 2022 and the Appendices attached thereto.

 

The drainage scheme submitted for approval shall also be in accordance with the principles set out in the Flood Risk and Drainage Strategy Report P21391 dated January 2022 proposing surface water discharging by infiltration via Sustainable Drainage techniques including green roofs and walls, rainwater harvesting, permeable surfacing wherever possible, grass filter strips, and swales. Mini infiltration basins are also an acceptable infiltration technique. The drainage scheme must also: (1) include full details of exceedance routes that minimise the risks to people and property resulting from excess rainfall; (2) be designed for ease of maintenance; (3) include full details of how the soakaways are connected / extended to the sub-soil / existing undisturbed ground where the infiltration testing has been undertaken; (4) include full details of the platform / earthworks construction materials and techniques to facilitate vertical infiltration through the interface with the existing ground to the infiltration level; and (5) include full details of the cut-off drains / swales at the base of the embankments with drainage destination to prevent surface water flow affecting neighbouring sites.

 

The development shall be completed, in accordance with the approved details.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (32):

No development associated with the Outline Permission shall commence until a scheme for the ongoing maintenance of the proposed surface drainage system for that phase of the development has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. Thereafter, the associated surface drainage system shall be maintained in accordance with the approved scheme for the lifetime of the development.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (33):

No development associated with the Outline Permission shall commence until a construction surface water management plan for that phase of the development has been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the local planning authority. Thereafter, the plan shall be adhered to for the duration of the associated construction works.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (34):

No individual building approved by the Outline Permission shall be first occupied until a surface water validation report has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The purpose of the validation report is to demonstrate that the surface water drainage scheme and exceedance routes serving that building have all been constructed and installed in accordance with the details approved in accordance with the relevant conditions in this permission and are operational.

 

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and to promote the use of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme in accordance with policy CS8.8 (Development and Flood Risk) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and policy DM6 (Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

THE DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE

 

Highways

 

Condition (35):

No other development shall commence until the estate road connecting the new roundabout on the A6 with the north-west boundary of the site (shown within the extent of the Full Application on approved drawing HT1324.1.101 P01, Revision E) has been completed and made operational in accordance with a specification that shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The specification should meet the standards for adoption set out in Cumbria Development Design Guide and must make specific provision for: (1) use by public transport; (2) cycle and pedestrian links to the A6; (3) ramps on each side of every junction to enable wheelchairs, pushchairs etc. to be safely manoeuvred at kerb lines; (4) the accommodation of all services necessary to support the development as a whole (including the development approved by the Outline Permission); and (5) a timetable for completion. None of the uses approved by this permission shall commence until: (a) construction of the estate road has progressed to the point where it has been defined by kerbs and sub base construction; and (b) the individual access(es) serving that building from the estate road have been completed to a specification that shall also have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. Thereafter, the estate road shall be completed to the agreed timetable.

 

Reason:

To maintain highway safety in accordance with: (1) policy CS10.2 (Transport impact of new development) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy; and (2) policy DM1 (General Requirements for all development) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (36):

None of the uses approved by this permission shall commence until a new shared footway/cycleway along the A6 has been constructed and made available for use in accordance with a specification that shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The new

shared footway/cycleway shall connect the entrance of the application site to the existing shared footway/cycleway that currently terminates on the east side of the A6 at the entrance of Kendal Rugby Club and shall include a crossing of the A6 meeting the necessary safety standards.

 

Reason:

To maintain highway safety in accordance with: (1) policy CS10.2 (Transport impact of new development) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy; and (2) policy DM1 (General Requirements for all development) of the South Lakeland

Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Condition (37):

Access gates, if provided, shall be hung to open inwards only away from the adopted highway, and be recessed no less than 4.5m as measured from the carriageway edge of the adjacent highway and shall incorporate 45 degree splays to each side.

 

Reason:

To maintain highway safety in accordance with: (1) policy CS10.2 (Transport impact of new development) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy; and (2) policy DM1 (General Requirements for all development) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Foul Drainage

 

Condition (38):

All foul water from the buildings hereby approved shall be disposed of via a public sewer. None of the individual buildings hereby approved shall be first occupied until it has been operationally connected to a public foul sewer.

 

Reason:

To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Construction Environment Management Plan

 

Condition (39):

No development shall commence until a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The CEMP shall provide for:

 

•               details of the proposed crossings of the highway verge;

•               defined areas for the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;

•               defined areas for loading and unloading of plant and materials;

•               defined areas for storage of plant and materials;

•               measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction, incorporating the recommendations for site-specific mitigation in section 5.1.14 of the Air Quality Assessment prepared by Wardell Armstrong (March 2020) submitted in support of this planning application;

•               no burning of waste material to take place;

•               measures to: (a)avoid excess dirt on the public highway including wheel washing facilities; and (b) clean the public highway as necessary

•               the sheeting of all HGVs taking spoil to/from the site to prevent spillage or deposit of any materials on the highway;

•               the management of junctions to and crossings of the public highway and other public rights of way/footway;

•               a scheme for recycling / disposing of waste resulting from excavations;

•               measures to control noise and vibration from plant, equipment and procedures – this to include any rock pecking and excavations;

•               construction site lighting designed to negate light spillage from the site boundary.

 

Thereafter, development shall proceed in accordance with the agreed CEMP.

 

Reason:

To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Construction Management (Ecology)

 

Condition (40):

In order to mitigate the potential impacts on protected species that might enter the application site during the construction stage of the development, the following working practices must be adhered to:

 

•               The storage of all loose materials must be palletised or similar so they are off the ground whenever possible.

•               Should any trenches and excavations be required, an escape route for animals that enter the trench must be provided, especially if left open overnight. Ramps should be no greater than of 45 degrees in angle. Ideally, any holes should be securely covered. This will ensure amphibians are not trapped during work.

•               All excavations left open overnight or longer should be checked for animals prior to the continuation of works or infilling. Back filling should be completed immediately after any excavations, ideally back filling as an on-going process to the work in hand.

•               Any vegetation to be trimmed or cleared should be checked for nesting birds before it is removed. Ideally this should occur outside the bird nesting period March-September. If vegetation clearance is to occur in the March-September period a check for nesting birds should be conducted first by a suitably qualified individual.

 

Reason:

To mitigate the potential impacts on protected species in accordance with policy CS8.4 (Biodiversity and geodiversity) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy.

 

Broadband

 

Condition (41):

None of the units hereby approved shall be first occupied until connected to high speed broadband.

 

Reason:

To meet the expectations of policy DM8 (High Speed Broadband for New Developments) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

BREEAM

 

Condition (42):

The showroom subject to the Full Permission (PROPOSED KIA SHOWROOM, drawing no. HT1324.1.102 P01, Revision F) and any building constructed pursuant to the Outline Permission which has a gross internal floor area greater than 1,000 sq. m. must achieve the BREEAM 'excellent' standard.

 

Reason:

To meet the expectations of policy CS8.7 (Sustainable construction, energy efficiency and renewable energy) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy.

 

Land contamination

 

Condition (43):

If during the course of development any unexpected contamination is found to be present, development shall immediately cease. Thereafter, development shall only recommence in accordance with a method statement detailing the nature and degree of the contamination and the techniques proposed to remove it. The method statement must be prepared by a suitably qualified independent consultant and must first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

 

Reason:

To safeguard the amenity of the area in accordance with policy DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Construction hours

 

Condition (44)

Construction work shall be limited to and never on Bank Holidays nor otherwise outside the hours of 0800 – 1800 Monday to Friday or 0900 – 1300 on Saturdays.

 

Reason:

In the interests of safeguarding the amenity and ecological interest of the existing area in accordance with: (1) policy CS8.4 (Biodiversity and geodiversity) of the South Lakeland Core Strategy; and (2) policies DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure and Open Space) and DM7 (Addressing Pollution, Contamination Impact, and Water Quality) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Topsoil disposal

 

Condition (45):

The area of the application site north of the existing private road to Gilthwaiterigg shall only be used for the disposal of topsoil generated by the construction phase of the development hereby approved and for any associated proposals for landscape mitigation and/or biodiversity net gain. Topsoil disposal shall proceed in accordance with a specification that shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The specification shall define the physical extent and overall profile of disposal.

 

No use approved by either the Full Permission or the Outline Permission shall commence until any associated landscape mitigation and/or biodiversity net gain provisions proposed within the area of topsoil disposal have been completed in accordance with the details approved in compliance with conditions 7, 8 and 26 as appropriate. Thereafter, any completed landscape mitigation and/or biodiversity net gain provisions shall be safeguarded from further phases of topsoil disposal by the implementation of protection measures in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority.

 

Reason:

To safeguard and enhance the character of the area in accordance with policy DM4 (Green and Blue Infrastructure, Open Space, Trees and Landscaping) of the South Lakeland Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

 

Separate approval and consideration was prompted by the Principal Planning Officer for the footpath diversions under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act. Members were reminded that this would be the final decision to be made for this aspect of the proposal.

 

A motion to agree the making of an order under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act to divert the public footpaths was proposed and seconded and a vote taken and it was

 

RESOLVED – that

The Committee authorises: (1) the making of the order necessary under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act to permit the consequential diversions of footpaths no. 536002 and 570013 shown on drawing no.HT1324.1.REV C and; (2) confirmation of such an order subject to no unresolved objections.

 

Note: Members requested a break at 11:26am and the meeting was adjourned. The meeting reconvened at 11:35am.

Summary

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented the Council Plan Performance Monitoring Report for Quarter 4 of 2021/22.

 

The Council Plan retained the vision of “South Lakeland as the best place to live, work and explore”, and highlighted that there were areas where the Council needed to do more and the plan identified four priority areas where activity needs to be focussed to achieve the vision. Targets listed in the report were grouped under these four priorities:

 

·        Working Across Boundaries – Delivering Sustainable Regional Growth;

·        Delivering A Balanced Community – A South Lakeland For All Ages;

·        Delivering A Fairer South Lakeland – A South Lakeland For Everyone; and

·        Addressing The Climate Emergency – A Carbon Neutral South Lakeland.

 

The report summarised the performance of a number of targets that had shown very good performance. However, in line with national trends and the influence of Covid-19 the number of homeless households living in temporary accommodation had increased. The Council monitored the state of South Lakeland’s economy, trends, strengths and weaknesses to help prioritise activities and interventions, adapting and implementing policies to positively affect the economy.

 

The most recent review during Quarter 4 2021/22 showed that only 27% of risks had been positioned above appetite, a decrease from the Quarter 4 2019/20 review, which had found that 65% of risks were above appetite due to the impact of Covid-19.

 

Members thanked Officers for their work in producing a detailed report and noted that the results of the performance monitoring report showed the good work done by the Council and remarked that they felt proud of the work of the Council.

 

Following a request from Members the Chief Executive undertook to provide an update on the Ulverston Masterplan and the future Local Plans particularly focusing on any potential land allocations.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        the Summary of Performance as detailed in the report be noted;

 

(2)        the detailed risks information contained within Appendix 1 to the report be noted; and

 

(3)        the detailed performance statistics within Appendix 2 to the report be noted.

 

Reasons for the Decision

 

Performance Monitoring underpins service delivery and provides good value for money. Performance Monitoring supports the delivery of all four Council Plan Priorities

 

Alternative Options

 

No alternative options. The purpose of the report is to receive a performance update. The Council must note successes, monitor progress and take action where appropriate.

Summary

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented a report on Section 106 Design Works at Stramongate Kendal. The report informed Members that the Council had sought approval for expenditure of Section 106 (S106) monies received from the Sainsbury’s development on Shap Road to deliver a public realm project that had been designed to increase visitor footfall to Stramongate and increase the accessibility of the area to pedestrians and cyclists.

 

The S106 funding agreement stated that funding must be used towards Town Centre Improvement Contribution, meaning the sum of £208,000 be used by the Council to fund improvements in the Northern Approach from Kendal Railway Station to Kendal Town Centre. Due to indexation the Council received a total of £224,043.85 from the Developer, Morbaine.  In addition, Kendal Town Council made a contribution of £22,000 which gave the Council a budget of £246,043.85 which had been agreed by Council on 18 May 2022 as part of the revised Capital Programme.

 

The report highlighted the proposals, including a high quality natural stone paved surface being created on the entrance to Stramongate, while still allowing left-turning vehicles from Blackhall Road. The inclusion of small trees provided a more pleasant shopping and visitor environment.

 

Although the project delivery budget was limited and currently only enables a small scheme to be developed, it was felt that the project could demonstrate how the use of good quality natural materials can bring benefits to business, residents and visitors, providing an example of the future ambitions for the town’s public realm.

 

Members expressed their support for the proposals, noting the importance of Stramongate to Kendal as home of the weekly market.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        the expenditure of up to £246,043.85 comprising £224,043.85 of Section 106 monies and £22,000 Kendal Town Council contribution, to deliver a street scape project at Stramongate, Kendal as previously agreed as part of the revised Capital Programme considered at Council on 18 May 2022 be approved; and          

 

(2)        authority be delegated to the Lead Specialist Legal Governance and Democracy (Monitoring Officer) [in consultation with the relevant Cabinet member/Leader] to agree terms and enter into a Section 278 agreement with Cumbria County Council to give effect to recommendation (1) and as detailed in section 3 of this report.

 

Reasons for the Decision

 

The proposals link to the Council Plan Priorities of:-

 

Delivering a balanced community – understanding the needs of local businesses by creating an attractive gateway towards the town centre; and

 

Addressing the climate emergency – by developing town centres which are attractive and accessible for living, working and leisure.

 

Alternative Options

 

Alternative option would be not to grant approval of the expenditure and the S106 money received would be returned to the Developer (Morbaine).

Further to the update provided by the Leader of the Council at the Annual Meeting of the Council on 18 May 2022, a document outlining the update to Portfolios Holders had been attached to the agenda.  The Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) informed Members that the Scheme of Delegation for the discharge of the Executive Functions of the Council would be circulated to Members following the meeting. Members were also provided with a copy of a document, which highlighted the update to Shadow Portfolios to the Shadow Executive.

 

RESOLVED – That the update to Portfolios to Cabinet Members by the Leader be noted and the respective Cabinet Job Description be signed by the new Cabinet Member.

Summary

 

Consideration was given to proposed nominations for the appointments of representatives to serve on outside bodies for the forthcoming year 2022/23. Members were informed that a number of the Outside Bodies had either ceased meetings or had not met in a long time and following feedback from Members, the Council had decided not to appoint to them.

 

A query was raised regarding the Reserve Forces and Cadets Association, the Legal Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) responded, noted that officers would look in to the Outside Body and make contact to inform them that the Council would no longer be appointing a representative.

 

Decision

 

RESOLVED – That the following appointments of representatives to serve on outside bodies for 2021/22 (or for terms as otherwise state) be made:-

 

Organisation	Representative (2022/2023)
Appleby Fair Multi-Agency Strategic Co-ordinating Group	Suzie Pye
Arnside/ Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Executive Committee	Helen Chaffey
Bowness and Windermere Forward Board	Helen Chaffey
Citizens’ Advice Bureau Trustee Board	Suzie Pye
Community Rail Partnership	Doug Rathbone
Community Safety Partnership	Suzie Pye
Council of Grizedale Arts	Robin Ashcroft
County Council Local Committee for South Lakeland	Jonathan Brook
County Council Local Committee for South Lakeland	Andrew Jarvis
Cumbria Community Foundation	Philip Dixon
Cumbria Housing Group	Helen Chaffey
Cumbria Joint Districts Board	Jonathan Brook
Cumbria Leadership Group	Jonathan Brook
Cumbria Pensions Forum	Andrew Jarvis
Cumbria Strategic Waste Partnership	Eamonn Hennessy
Cumbria Strategic Waste Partnership	Dyan Jones
Cumbria Better Connected	Robin Ashcroft
Cumbria Tourism	Robin Ashcroft
Kendal BID	Robin Ashcroft
Kendal Brewery Arts Centre	Robin Ashcroft
Lakes Line Rail User Group	Douglas Rathbone
Lancaster Canal Regeneration Partnership	Helen Ladhams
Lancaster Canal Regeneration Partnership	Douglas Rathbone
Local Enterprise Partnership	Jonathan Brook
Kendal Futures Board	Robin Ashcroft
Kendal Museum Working Group	Helen Ladhams
Lake District National Park Business Task Force	Robin Ashcroft
North West Housing Forum	Helen Chaffey
Public Health Alliance	Suzie Pye
Reserve Forces and Cadets Association	Roger Bingham
Safer Cumbria	Suzie Pye
South Lakes Business against Crime Partnership	Pete McSweeney
SPARSE Rural	Peter Thornton
SPARSE Rural	Giles Archibald
Ulverston BID	Janette Jenkinson
Morecambe Bay Partnership	Robin Ashcroft
Sedbergh Economic Partnership	Robin Ashcroft
South Lakeland Health and Wellbeing Partnership	Suzie Pye
The Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership (CLEP) Places Strategy Group	Jonathan Brook
Cumbria Nature Recovery Plan Group	Dyan Jones
Lake District National Park Partnership	Andrew Jarvis
Corporate Trusteeship Board (CTB)	Robin Ashcroft
Corporate Trusteeship Board (CTB)	Jonathan Brook
Corporate Trusteeship Board (CTB)	Helen Chaffey
Corporate Trusteeship Board (CTB)	Eamonn Hennessy
Corporate Trusteeship Board (CTB)	Andrew Jarvis
Corporate Trusteeship Board (CTB)	Dyan Jones
Corporate Trusteeship Board (CTB)	Suzie Pye

 

Reasons for Decision

 

Appointments to Outside Bodies assist in the delivery of the Council Plan through partnership working: “across boundaries, with a range of other local authorities, organisations and businesses”.

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

Not to make appointments, which could affect the Council’s ability to influence partners on important strategic issues.

No Member having raised concern when asked by the Chairman, it was

 

RESOLVED – That the Emergency Delegated Executive Decision made by the Chief Executive on 4 May 2022, in accordance with the Leader’s decision noted by Cabinet at CEX/104 (2019/20), be received.

 

The Licensing Specialist presented a report, which requested consideration of an application for the grant of a time limited premises licence in respect of Coast Road Festival, Aldingham. The festival would be held in a field in Aldingham and, the exact location was presented as part of a plan in Appendix 1 to the report. The application sought authorisation for the following:-

 

Sale of alcohol (on the premises) on 9 and 10 July 2022 between the hours of 12.00 – 23.00 hours each day;

 

The performance of live music (indoors and outdoors) on 9 and 10 July 2022 between the hours of 12.00-23.00 hours each day; and

 

Recorded music (inside a tent) on 9 and 10 July 2022 between the hours of 12.00- 23.00 hour each day.

 

The Licensing Specialist informed Members that part of the representations had been omitted from the agenda pack and had been circulated before the meeting; this document would be published alongside the agenda following the meeting. She added that no one from the responsible authorities would be attending the meeting as they had no comments to make on the application as a result of the Safety Advisory Group (SAG) meetings which had received and signed off an Event Management Plan, Traffic Management Plan, Noise Management Plan and Security Plans from the Applicants.

 

The Chairman noted that the Sub-Committee had received the additional representations as raised by the Licensing Specialist and were content that they had received enough time to read the documents. He added that the Sub-Committee had agreed to an additional request to speak, which had been received from the group of objectors.

 

David Owen, a local resident and employee of Pure Leisure Group, addressed the Sub-Committee. He explained that he had experience as a Director in a Local Authority; with a number of similar events and that his concerns were linked to procedure and the location of the event. Mr Owen informed Members that Pure Leisure Group own Coniston View Lodge Park and had not received contact from the Applicant, noting that Pure Leisure Group had been notified of the proposals one day before the end of the consultation period. He added that after sending in the representation, Pure Leisure Group had not received responses to queries raised regarding the amount of money donated to charities and the experience of The Lock In Barrow Community Interest Company (CIC) in organising similar events. In summing up his representation, Mr Owen expressed concern over the suitability of the location of the site.

 

Paul Marsh, a local resident, addressed the Sub-Committee. He informed Members that he had been notified of the festival by a Parish Councillor, which had given him one day to submit his representation. Mr Marsh explained his concerns regarding the consultation with local residents as well as the proposed parking site, which would involve attendees crossing the busy road to access and leave the site. Mr Marsh went on to raise an issue with plans for those leaving the site, noting that the village of Aldingham would be impacted by those leaving the site and the risk of attendees spilling on to the beach which posed a risk to safety as well as a risk to the natural environment.

 

Helen Gunning, a local resident, addressed the Sub-Committee. She noted her concern regarding the high volume of people attending the event each day and the impact this would have on the quiet local area from traffic from people accessing and leaving the site as well as fly parking and footfall traffic at the close of the event.

 

Peter Smith, a local resident, addressed the Sub-Committee. He highlighted that the Coast Guard had not agreed to perform beach patrols and that any issues that may arise would have to be dealt with by 999 response only. He went on to express concerns over the proposals for clearing the site of 5000 people within one hour of the end of the event due to the fact that two nationally famous bands would be playing at the end of each day. He added that the traffic management plan was not realistic for the number of people attending and the location of the site, which could result in congestion at the end of the event as people leave.

 

In response to a question raised by Members regarding litter collection at the site, the Licensing Specialist noted that although this was not a licensing objective, it was likely that this had been included in the documents from the Safety Advisory Group (SAG).

 

Malcolm Lingard, the applicant, addressed the Sub-Committee. He informed Members that the applicants had worked with the SAG, local police and Environmental Health Officers to get the application to this stage and noted positive feedback from meetings with the SAG and local police. Mr Lingard added that professional security and parking had been put in place for the event and that local residents had been invited to meet with the applicants to work through the document and discuss any objections, the offer for which had not been taken up. In concluding, he informed Members that a lot of hard work had gone into the application and that the applicants had been willing to compromise in order to ensure a professional and safe event for all attendees to enjoy.

 

In response to a query raised by the objectors, the applicant informed the meeting that 120 letters had been delivered in the local area and local Facebook groups had been engaged with to inform them of the event.

 

The objectors requested a response to their query regarding the method for clearing the site following each day, the applicant responded, noting that local taxis and buses had been arranged to prevent pedestrian access and egress from the site. He added that staggered stage times had been put in place to avoid all attendees leaving the site at the same time and that 50-80 SIA staff would be on site to help manage the plans and assist those leaving the site.

 

Members asked the applicant if any event staff would be undertaking checks on the beach. The applicant responded, noting that they had reached out to the local search and rescue services, however there had been a misunderstanding on their availability. To mitigate this, the applicant had arranged for “soft checks” in the local area by stewards and would block all pedestrian access to the site with extra personnel in place to prevent people walking through the village.

 

Members raised a query over litter picking following the event, the applicant responded that they wanted to go above and beyond to ensure the site and surrounding area were tidy and had contacted a local group to assist with checking the site.

 

In response to a question regarding CCTV at the event, the applicant noted that although this was not currently in place, they could accept having CCTV in place as it would assist in keeping people safe.

 

Members requested information on the applicant’s plans for poor weather and managing those leaving the site. The applicant informed the Sub-Committee that tractors would be on site to cover any issues, with pinch points having already been identified.

 

David Owen reiterated his earlier query regarding the experience of the applicants in staging large scale events. Mr Lingard responded, noting that the events had been part of a different company at that time and that they had donated money to St Mary’s Hospice for a number of years, adding that as the Barrow Lock In’s accounts for the first year had not been submitted, they would not appear on Company’s House. He noted that the applicants had also held a small event in Dalton, in aid of the charity MIND.

 

Following a request from the Chairman, Mr Lingard, the applicant, presented his closing statement. He noted that in light of the discussions in the meeting he felt the documentation had been completed well and met the licensing objectives with a focus on health and safety and that the event was a community festival. He hoped that local residents would continue to discuss any issues with the applicants.

 

Note – The Sub-Committee passed a resolution to adjourn the meeting to exclude the press and public in making its decision, pursuant to Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006 by virtue of the paragraph indicated:-

 

Paragraph 5 – Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings.

 

The Sub-Committee, supported by the Solicitor and Trainee Solicitor withdrew to consider the application at 11.00 a.m. and reconvened the meeting at 12.30 p.m.

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee had carefully considered the application and the written representations, the oral submissions of the Applicant and the oral submissions of those who had submitted representations and attended the meeting. 

 

They had considered the steps that are appropriate to promote the licensing objectives and had also had regard to the Guidance issued under s.182 Licensing Act 2003 and the Statement of Licensing Policy.

 

RESOLVED - That the application is granted:

 

(1)        for the following activities:- 

 

Activity	Approved
Supply of alcohol (on premises)	On 09 July 2022 and 10 July 2022 between the hours of 12:00-23.00 hours each day.
The performance of live music (indoors and outdoors)	On 09 July 2022 and 10 July 2022 between the hours of 12.00-23.00 hours each day.
Recorded music (indoors or outdoors)	On 09 July 2022 and 10 July 2022 between the hours of 12.00-23.00 hours each day.
Hours open to the public	On 09 July 2022 and 10 July 2022 between the hours of 11.30-23.30 hours each day.

 

(2)       subject to the mandatory conditions;

 

(3)        and the conditions agreed with the Environmental Health Department and the Police (as listed at Appendix 4 of Agenda) with one amendment:

 

            Condition 12 on Page 247 of the Agenda will be amended to read ‘A professional SIA registered   event security team will be appointed by the PLH and be supported by festival stewards. The use of bodycam by door supervisors and festival stewards will be encouraged.The security operation will be overseen by the Event Director and Head of Security who will liaise with Cumbria Constabulary.”;

 

(4)        In addition, the Licensing Sub-Committee determined to add an additional condition providing that:

 

CCTV shall be provided and will meet the following criteria:-

 

As a minimum the CCTV shall cover the main pedestrian access and egress (as referenced on ‘Coast Roads 2022 Licensed Premises Plan’) and will be of such quality as to enable facial recognition of patrons entering and leaving the licensed area;

CCTV equipment shall be maintained in good working order and images will be correctly timed and dated;

Recordings will be made available for a period of 30 days to the police and other responsible authorities on reasonable request so long as any such request is in line with data protection regulations; and

The recording equipment shall be of a digital hard drive or cloud based system and shall be kept in a secure environment under the control of the premises licence holder or other responsible named individual.

 

The decision and the written reasons for the decision will be confirmed in writing within five working days.

 

The Applicant and any party that submitted a valid representation has the right to appeal against the decision of the Sub Committee and may do so by giving notice of appeal to the Magistrates Court for the area in which the premises concerned are situated within a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which they were notified of the decision by the licensing authority.

 

 

 

 

The Annual Report from the Audit Committee, which summarised the activities of the Committee during 2021/22, was presented by Councillor Stephen Coleman the Chairman of the Committee.

 

Councillor Coleman informed Council that the Committee continued to provide robust challenge with regard to the Council’s activities and thanked the Finance Team for their hard work to keep the Audit Committee working effectively.

 

Councillor Coleman moved that the report be received and was seconded by Councillor Coward

 

It was unanimously

 

RESOLVED – That the 2021/22 Audit Committee Annual Report be received.

In accordance with paragraph 16 (j)(ii) of the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules, a report on the operation of the provisions relating to call-in and urgency during the municipal year 2021/22 was presented to Council by Councillor Vicky Hughes, chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 

Councillor Hughes reported that the urgency procedure had been used four times in the previous twelve months, with all reports being taken to Cabinet and Council and distributed to all Members.

 

Councillor Hughes moved the recommendation contained within the report and was seconded by Councillor Jarvis.

 

RESOLVED – That the contents of the 2021/22 Annual Review of the Constitution’s Call-in and Urgency Provisions be noted.

Council considered the Annual Report of the Standards Committee for the municipal year 2021/22, which was presented by Councillor Chris Hogg the Chairman of the Committee. He thanked the Independent Person, Members of the Committee and officers for their work throughout a challenging period. Councillor Hogg thanked Parish Councillors of the district for their service and added that he felt that South Lakeland District Council offered a high level of standards and again thanked officers for delivering an impressive service.

 

It was unanimously

 

RESOLVED – That the 2021/22 Standards Annual Report be received.

Further to Minute EX/015 (2006/07), annual reports for 2021/22 from Council representatives on outside bodies which had been submitted for inclusion on the agenda were presented.

 

Councillor Vicky Hughes wished to record her condolences following the death of Mike McKinley (Chairman of Lake District National Park Authority).

 

Members thanked those who had submitted annual reports adding that the reports received provided a comprehensive picture of the outside bodies.

 

A query was raised regarding information on the Cumbria Pensions Forum and a request was made for officer feedback from the outside body.

 

Members requested information on the GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Task Force and its decision making. The Legal Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) informed Members that the GSK Task Force had been set up by local Ministers for Parliament. The Economy, Culture and Leisure Portfolio Holder added that although the GSK Task Force was not an outside body, he was more than happy to discuss the details of the Task Force’s work with Members.

 

RESOLVED – That the annual reports for 2021/22 from Council representatives on outside bodies be received.

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Vicky Hughes, presented the Scrutiny Annual Report 2021-2022. The report was required by the Council’s Constitution, and provided an opportunity for the Committee to demonstrate the work that it had undertaken during the past year, and to outline the work planned for 2022/23.

 

Councillor Hughes moved that the report be received and was seconded by Councillor Jama.

 

RESOLVED – That the Scrutiny Annual Report 2021-22 be received

Further to EX/017 (2006/07), Council was asked to consider appointments to/ appoint representatives to serve on outside bodies.

 

It was proposed and seconded that Councillor Pete McSweeney be re-appointed to the Cumbria Police and Crime Panel.

 

It was proposed and seconded that together with the Leader of the Council, Councillor Andrew Jarvis be appointed as the Council’s representative on the Local Government Association General Assembly.

 

It was proposed and seconded that Councillor Rachael Hogg be re-appointed as the Council’s representative to North West Local Authorities Employers’ Organisation, with Councillor Ali Jama being appointed as the Council’s substitute on the Organisation.

 

It was proposed and seconded that Councillor Robin Ashcroft be re-appointed as the Council’s representative on the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Management Board.

 

The current terms of appointment for the Members of the Council on both the Lake District (two places) and Yorkshire Dales (one place) Parks Authorities had not yet expired.

 

Voting having been taken, it was subsequently

 

RESOLVED – That appointments to/ appointment of representatives to serve on outside bodies for 2022/23 (or for terms otherwise state) be made as follows:-

 

(1)        Cumbria Police and Crime Panel – Councillor Pete McSweeney;

 

(2)        Local Government Association General Assembly – Councillor Jonathan Brook (Leader of the Council) and Councillor Andrew Jarvis;

 

(3)        North West Local Authorities Employers’ Organisation – Councillor Rachael Hogg, with Councillor Ali Jama as substitute Member; and

 

(4)        Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Management Board – Councillor Robin Ashcroft.

In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, Council gave consideration to the political balance of the Council and to the committees and size of committees for the forthcoming year. Prior to the commencement of the meeting, Members had been provided with a revised copy of Appendix 2 to the report (Size and Seats to be allocated to Political Groups on Committees), in addition to proposed committee memberships lists as agreed with the Group Leaders.

 

Members had formed into three groups for the purposes of allocating committee places. The groups and their number of Members were as follows:-

 

Liberal Democrats – 32 Members

Conservative – 14 Members

Labour – 3 Members

 

In addition, there was one Green Party Member and one Independent Member on the Council.

 

Members noted that paper copies of the updated Appendix 2 to the report had not been circulated prior to the meeting. The Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) informed Members that the updated Appendix 2 would be circulated and published alongside the agenda following the meeting.

 

The Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) to the Council asked Council to approve the list of the committee allocations, proportional to the Council membership, together with the nominations to each Committee, which were circulated to all Members before the meeting. Nominations received for Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen to each Committee were read out at the meeting. Nominations to the County Council’s Health Scrutiny Committee, taken from the proposed membership of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, had also been included.

 

Councillor Jonathan Brook seconded by Councillor Matt Severn, moved recommendations (1) to (7) and (9) to (12) as set out within the report.

 

With regard to recommendation (8) and the appointment of chairmen and vice-chairmen to committees, nominations had been received from the Liberal Democrat Group, no further nominations had been received. Councillor David Webster, seconded by Councillor Matt Severn moved the nominations, as read out at the meeting, namely:-

 

Committee	Chairman	Vice-Chairman
Audit	Stephen Coleman	Tracy Coward
Human Resources	Rachael Hogg	Ali Jama
Licensing/ Licensing Regulatory	Helen Ladhams	Ian Wharton
Overview and Scrutiny	Vicky Hughes	Doug Rathbone
Planning	Pete McSweeney	Malcolm Lamb
Standards	Chris Hogg	Matt Severn

 

With regard to recommendation (11), the Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) reminded Members of the need for four volunteers to form the Licensing Sub-Committee and a substitute. The following Members of the Licensing and Licensing Regulatory Committee volunteers to form the Sub-Committee:-

·        Cllr Hazel Hodgson;

·        Cllr Kevin Holmes;

·        Cllr Helen Irving;

·        Cllr Andrew Jarvis; and

·        Cllr David Webster.

 

Following a vote, it was subsequently

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        the political balance of the Council, as set out in paragraph 3.2 and Appendix 1 to the report, be noted;

 

(2)        the committees, and Terms of Reference for those committees, as detailed in Table 2, Part 3 of the Council’s Constitution, be approved for the forthcoming municipal year;

 

(3)        the delegation of Council functions and Proper Officer appointments be confirms, as set out in Part 3 of the Council’s Constitution;

 

(4)        the size of the  committees, and the seats of each committee to political groups be approved and allocated in accordance with the table set out below:-

 

	Liberal Democrats	Conservatives	Labour	Green Party Member	Independent Member
Committees (64 Places)	40	18	4	1	1
Audit (6)	4	2	0	0	0
Human Resources (9)	6	2	1	0	0
Licensing Regulatory (15)	10	4	1	0	0
Overview and Scrutiny (13)	8	4	1	0	0
Planning (14)	8	4	1	1	0
Standards (7)	4	2	0	0	1

 

(5)        seats of each committee be allocated to political groups in accordance with Appendix 2 to this report;

 

(6)        seats on those committees which are not subject to political balance rues be allocated as set out below:-

 

	Liberal Democrats	Conservative	Labour	Green Party Member	Independent Member
Committees (31 Places)	19	9	2	0	0
Lake Administration Committee (24 – 16 District Council Members)	10	5	1	0	0
Licensing Committee (15)	9	4	1	0	0

 

(7)        nominations of councillors to serve on each committee, which were read out at the meeting be received;

 

(8)        Consideration be given to the appointment of Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of the committees read out to members during the meeting;

 

(9)        the delegation of executive functions, as confirmed by the Leader and set out in Part 3(4) of the Council’s Constitution, be noted;

 

(10)      Councillor Vicky Hughes be appointed as representative and Councillor Ali Jama be appointed as substitute to the Cumbria County Council’s Health and Scrutiny Committee for the forthcoming year;

 

(11)      it be noted that Cllr Hazel Hodgson, Cllr Kevin Holmes, Cllr Helen Irving, Cllr Andrew Jarvis and Cllr David Webster volunteered to form a Licensing  Sub-Committee ahead of the 30 May 2022 meeting; and

 

(12)      Councillor Ali Jama be appointed as the second Human Resources Committee member on the Joint Consultative Panel for the forthcoming year.

Members gave consideration to the draft Calendar of Meetings for the period May 2022 to April 2023 and requested that any Full Council meetings scheduled during the school holidays be moved by officers.

 

RESOLVED – That, subject to the alterations highlighted at the meeting and outlined above being made, the Council’s Calendar of Meetings covering the period May 2022 to April 2023 be approved.

It was proposed by Councillor Chris Hogg and seconded by Councillor Andrew Jarvis that Councillor Matt Severn be elected Vice-Chairman of the Council for the ensuing year.

 

Following a vote, it was

 

RESOLVED – That Councillor Matt Severn be elected Vice-Chairman of the Council for the ensuing year.

It was proposed by Councillor Tom Harvey and seconded by Councillor Stephen Coleman that Councillor Pete McSweeney be elected Chairman of the Council for the ensuing year.

 

Following a vote, it was

 

RESOLVED – That Councillor Pete McSweeney be elected Chairman of the Council for the ensuing year.

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented a report on the Corporate Trusteeship Board. He informed Members that the establishment of a Corporate Trusteeship Board would provide the necessary governance in the Council’s management of property matters related to land it holds on trust as well as assisting in preparation for Local Government  Reorganisation on a ‘safe and legal’ basis.

 

The report highlighted that the Council held a number of properties in trust with terms and deeds of trust varying from property to property. The common factor of these lands was sharing a history of a benefactor transferring the land to SLDC’s predecessor councils through a deed of trust. It was the role of the Council to act as trustee, working in the interest of the trust to protect the public benefits sought through the original establishment of the trust and in all cases, the Council acts as a corporate trustee, carrying the risks of the liabilities associated with the property and public use.

 

The proposal was to establish a Corporate Trusteeship Board to determine matters related to the management of the lands held in trust and acting in the Trust’s best interests. For expediency of establishing and conducting a Board, it was proposed that Cabinet be given authority to appoint seven Councillors to the Board. In practice, the appointed Board would be made up of the current membership of the Cabinet, enabling the Board to be held on the rising of Cabinet with the Board adopting rules of procedure similar to the Cabinet unless the trust deed specifies otherwise.

 

Members raised a question regarding the possibility of an independent person being involved on the Board to provide a different perspective on the decisions. The Legal Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) noted that the members of the Board could invite others to the meetings if appropriate to do so and further, informing members that Cabinet members would receive training on the role as Board Member as this would be separate from their role as a Cabinet Member.

 

A query regarding Ward Councillors and Town/ Parish Councils being part of the consultation on individual reports was raised. The Legal Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) agreed and added that this consultation would form part of the consultation process for each report going to the Corporate Trusteeship Board.

 

Members expressed understanding for the need to have a Corporate Trusteeship Board but questioned how communication would work between the Board and officers. The Legal Governance and Democracy Specialist (Solicitor) informed Members that there was a reporting line to the Council and that the purpose of the Board was that it should act independently of Council business.

 

RESOLVED – That:-

 

(1)        the establishment of a Corporate Trusteeship Board as described in paragraphs 3.6 and 3.7 of the report be agreed;

 

(2)        Cabinet appoint seven Councillors to the Board;

 

(3)        the Legal, Governance and Democracy Lead Specialist (Monitoring Officer) be authorised to make the necessary amendments to the Council’s constitution; and

 

(4)        it be noted that as part of the preparation for Local Government Reorganisation a comprehensive list of properties held in trust will be prepared.

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder presented a report updating the Capital Programme and Capital Re-profiling requests relating to 2021/22, which would enable efficient delivery of capital schemes during 2022/23. The report set out three requests for amendments to the Capital Programme, for each scheme, a full report would be brought to future meetings of the Cabinet to consider the proposal in accordance with the current Forward Plan. It was noted that approval was being sought at the Annual Meeting of the Council, which was required to amend the Capital Programme as each request was for more than £100,000.

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder highlighted the first request, which was in relation to Glass Panels along Aynam Road, Kendal. The report sought approval for an increase in the Council’s contribution towards the installation of the panels which would ensure the delivery of the Kendal Flood Alleviation Scheme. It was proposed that the additional costs were funded from the Cumbria Business Rate Pool reserve.

 

The second request set out in the report was regarding Section 106 (S106) Design Works at Stramongate, Kendal. The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder informed Members that approval was sought to amend the Capital Programme to include expenditure of S106 monies, which had been received from the Sainsbury’s development on Shap Road, Kendal. Receipt of the S106 monies would assist in the delivery of a public realm project that had been designed to increase visitor footfall to Stramongate and increase the accessibility of the area for pedestrians and cyclists.

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder informed Members of the final request to amend the Capital Programme, which was in relation to the Grange Lido and requested an increase in the Capital Budget of £265,000, which was to be funded from the Cumbria Business Rate Pool reserve.

 

The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder referred to the Capital Programme Re-profiling and informed Members that variations on spending in the Capital Programme reflected changes in the progress of individual schemes. Appendix 1 to the report highlighted the Capital Schemes in the 2021/22, which showed those Capital Schemes where expenditure varied from the approved Capital Programme. The total for re-profiling was £2.4 million at 4 April 2022, any further amendments would be reported as part of the 2021/22 outturn to Cabinet in June 2022 and Council in July 2022.

 

Members raised a query regarding the current fleet of Road Sweepers, the Director of Customer and Commercial Services agreed to provide a written response. Members went on to thank the Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder for his work on the Section 106 Design Works for Stramongate, Kendal.

 

Note – At this stage in the proceedings, Councillor Janette Jenkinson raised a non-pecuniary interest for transparency due to the fact that she was a Director of Ulverston Community Enterprises (UCE) and a trustee of Ulverston Coronation Hall.

 

Members sought reassurance over the funds which had been available for the Coronation Hall in Ulverston. The Finance and Assets Portfolio Holder informed Members that he was unable to make any comments on the plans of the new authorities for the Coronation Hall as this would be a decision for the new authority. He added that South Lakeland District Council had been investing considerably in Ulverston Community Enterprises and the Coronation Hall.

 

Following a request from Members, the Finance Lead Specialist (Section 151 Officer) undertook to provide a written response to members regarding the development at Cross-a-Moor.

 

The Finance Lead Specialist (Section 151 Officer) also clarified that regarding the S106 Design Works at Stramongate, Kendal, clarification was being sought in respect of the precise figures in relation to this matter – she outlined that there may be minor amendment to the figures stated, which it was anticipated would be within existing delegations within the Constitution to the Section 151 Officer to agree and so proposing to deal with any such amendment to the precise figures in the report under delegation.

 

RESOLVED – That

 

(1)        the capital programme requests set out in paragraphs 3.2 to 3.5 of the report be approved;

 

(2)        the re-profiling of expenditure and associated budgets for capital schemes between 2021/22 and 2022/23 in Appendix 1 approved by Cabinet on 13 April 2022 be noted; and

 

(3)        the revised Capital Programme at Appendix 2 be noted.

The Chairman of Licensing Committee and Licensing Regulatory Committee introduced the Review of Statement of Licensing Policy report. The purpose of the report was to inform members of the review of the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy which had been completed in line with the statutory timetable set out in the Licensing Act 2003.

 

The Statement of Licensing Policy (Appendix 1 to the report) had been through a consultation period which was detailed in the report and had been considered by the Licensing Committee and Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Statement set out the basis on which decisions under the Licensing Act 2003 should be made and strived to achieve a local balance between the commercial interest of the licensing trade and the communities they serve and affect.

 

As no key changes had been made to existing licensing legislation, the changes recommended in the review had been updated to reference Local Government Reorganisation at paragraph 1.15 of the policy, an updated best practice guide at appendix 3 and an updated list of consultees at appendix 4. The report noted that the impending changes brought about by Local Government Reorganisation within Cumbria would mean it was likely to require further review and consolidation of respective authorities existing Statement of Licensing Policies in due course.

 

RESOLVED – That:-

 

(1)        the consultation undertaken with stakeholders during the period of 29November 2021 to 9 January 2022 be noted;

 

(2)        the recommendation from the Licensing Committee and Overview and Scrutiny Committee that the Policy proceed to Council for adoption be noted; and

 

(3)        the revised Statement of Licensing Policy as attached at appendix 1 to the report, be adopted.