Part 1. Effects of affordable Housing, Chapter 1

Aim of the research

The aim of this research was to:

• produce a document which reviews the provision of affordable housing in rural areas of Cumbria;
  
• investigate the real and direct benefits of such provision on the sustainability of rural communities.

It offered an opportunity to look back at the practical result of the work of housing associations in Cumbria and identify the real differences that have been made in areas of high demand. Once a scheme has been built and let, it tends to be accepted, maintaining family, social and economic links within the community.

Many of the schemes we studied took a long while to develop from inception to completion, and involved dedicated hard work by individuals who saw a shortfall in the housing available in the community for residents who live and work locally, and a need for social landlord development to sustain the more popular rural villages in Cumbria both socially and economically.

Comments received from Cumbria Rural Housing Trust housing need surveys about RSL provision

Positive comments

‘We need more affordable housing within our community to stop the drain of young people out of the village.’
‘Without such developments there would be no housing available for local people.’
‘This community has changed so much over the years that any development to enable young people to live here would be an improvement.’
‘Only if they’re for local people and they can afford them.’

Negative comments

‘There is no housing need in this village.’
‘The houses will spoil the appearance of the village.’
‘We don’t want any future development within our community;
it will spoil the area.’
‘Social housing is for drug addicts and alcoholics.’
‘You have to be affluent to live here, i.e. access to two cars.’

Introduction

Cumbria is a very diverse county in terms of landscape and housing availability. Its physical geography is dominated by the Lake District National Park and the Yorkshire Dales National Park. For providers and enablers of affordable housing, namely local authorities, planning authorities and housing associations, there are a range of issues in the National Parks around securing enough affordable housing to ensure the area’s social and economic sustainability.

Housing: An Effective Way to Sustain Our Rural Communities

Part I: A study into the effects of provision of affordable housing in rural communities
The research examines the success or failure of affordable housing provision since 1990 in twelve rural communities in Cumbria. The research was undertaken by two students completing a Masters in Research and Consultancy at Lancaster University School of Independent Studies and project managed by Cumbria Rural Housing Trust.

Their remit was to approach the project with an unbiased view, with no previous housing and planning policy knowledge. They were to determine the success of the scheme in terms of a housing development and its direct effect on the rural community, from usage of local services such as the shop and school to the maintenance of family and economic links. In some communities they had more success than others and were able to get a real feeling from the community about the effect of the development.

The research has been funded by the Housing Corporation Innovation and Good Practice Grant and the Rural Development Programme.

Who should read it?

Anyone with an interest in social housing development and the sustainability of rural communities: either directly linked to their community or as part of an organisation’s strategic plan to ensure the provision of affordable housing to meet the rural community’s needs.

Part II: Planning to deliver fundamental change in rural Cumbria

Investigation into how the Planning Green Paper, Planning: delivering a fundamental change, published in December 2001, will affect the delivery of affordable housing in rural Cumbria and how the changes envisaged in the Paper will hinder or improve the delivery process.

The research has been funded by a Housing Corporation Innovation and Good Practice Grant and the Rural Development Programme.

Who should read it?
Anyone who wishes to gain an understanding of the current planning system and how the proposed changes will make the system work better. Anyone who wishes to gain an understanding of local governance, e.g. community strategies, Local Strategic Partnerships and the Rural White Paper.

Part III: Rural housing needs toolkit
A toolkit for communities to evaluate their local housing market. The affordability of homes, changes in the community and assess the future housing requirements of the community.

The toolkit is funded solely by a Housing Corporation Innovation and Good Practice Grant.

Who should read it?
Anyone with an interest in social housing development and the sustainability of rural communities: either directly linked to their community or as part of an organisation’s strategic plan to ensure the provision of affordable housing to meet the rural community’s needs.

Part I - Method

Based on five parameters, we chose twelve rural communities across Cumbria where affordable housing has been established within the past ten years. Table I at the end of this chapter details the breakdown of parameters for each community and Table II gives details about the schemes developed; landlord, tenure and property mix.

In choosing the communities, we decided it was important to get a mix of locations where different housing markets applied. Many communities fell into several categories:

Our initial discussions showed that it was important to establish as a measure or base line an understanding of what makes a ‘good community’ and what ‘sustainability’ meant in the context of this piece of research.

The Government has recently announced a strong commitment to sustainable development in Sustainable Communities; building for the future (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister), which comments:

‘The way our communities develop, economically, socially and environmentally, must respect the needs of future generations as well as succeeding now. This is the key to lasting, rather than temporary solutions; to creating communities that can stand on their own two feet and adapt with the changing demands of modern life. Places where people want to live and will continue to want to live’.

We would add to that ‘can live’ in terms of accessible housing market and evolving economy. These newly emerging households, currently unable to secure permanent affordable housing of an acceptable standard, are integral to any sustainable community, as they are its future. Repeatedly these households are identified by Cumbria Rural Housing Trust’s housing need surveys as inadequately housed. Without social landlord provision they will be forced to leave the areas of their choice to find more affordable housing outside the high-value areas, resulting in a loss of skills and sense of community to villages.

Stage 1

In conjunction with Lancaster University’s School of Independent Studies, two students were appointed to work with the Trust as part of their professional project research while undertaking an MA in Research and Consultancy at Lancaster University. The students had no prior knowledge of rural communities, issues around housing, the economy and planning in Cumbria, or the development process for affordable housing in rural communities.

This meant their research would not be biased towards individual communities, local authorities or housing associations in regard to whether or not a community would be sustainable. Training was provided to improve their background knowledge. They had a limited time and number of visits within each community, which understandably affected the depth of the research.

Three days of training were arranged to introduce the students to social housing. This training explored issues around housing provision and development in Cumbria to explain why the research was necessary. The training also covered what makes a community; issues of sustainability; how to measure sustainability; research techniques; how to encourage community involvement; key agencies; designing questionnaires; and health and safety awareness when working in communities.

Stage 2

A quantitative analysis looked at existing housing stock; average market prices; average rents; second and holiday homes; employment opportunities in the area; average wages etc.

We also approached landlords and tenants of each scheme to ascertain the viability of each scheme from their point of view. We considered the following factors:

The qualitative analysis was then a process of testing the perceptions of each community and services against the data available. We used census information, mainly the 1991 census (2001 was not available at the time) with 1997 Local Profiles from Cumbria County Council, OFSTED reports, and planning applications available from local planning authorities.

Stage 3

The final stage was a process of consultation within each community and with each authority and landlord who had taken part or provided information for the research. We did this firstly by holding a forum in January 2003 in which we presented all the information gathered.  The morning session focused on the results of studies in the communities, the afternoon on the analysis of current and future planning legislation that forms Part II of this study. The forum provided a valuable opportunity to gain feedback from the conclusions and fill in gaps. Delegates included parish council members, interested village residents, and representatives from the local authority, housing associations, the Housing Corporation and the Countryside Agency.

Following the forum, the village reports were completed and sent to each parish council for their comments, which are included in the conclusions for each of the villages.

Table I - Breakdown of parameters used to select settlements for research

Table II - Development details

Go to: Index, Chapter (1), 2, 3

Part 1. Effects of affordable Housing

Housing: An Effective Way to Sustain our Rural Communities

Part I: The Effects of Affordable Housing on Rural Communities

This project has been supported by the Housing Corporation through its innovation and good practice grant programme. The contents of the report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Housing Corporation.

© Joint copyright remains with the Housing Corporation, Cumbria Rural Housing Trust and Jacqueline Blenkinship.

Plain Language Commission accreditation number: 6088

Part 1. Effects of affordable Housing, Chapter 2

To understand the benefits of affordable housing in rural Cumbria, it is also important to understand the planning policies that made the development possible and the five main requirements for the successful delivery of an affordable housing development through the existing planning system. We aimed to show how the development came about; what planning was needed; the timescale of each project; the resulting developments; but most importantly – and the point of this piece of research – whether the rest of the community was affected by the building of extra houses that local people could afford.

Planning policy

The planning legislation that enabled planning permission to be granted for the developments in our case studies can all be found in the Structure Plan or Local Plan of the relevant district or planning authority. Excerpts relevant to this research are included below.

1. Exception sites

Where a planning authority wishes to approve proposals for affordable housing outside the existing village boundary, this will only be possible if the planning authority has an exceptions policy and such a policy is clearly stated, unless the authority believes the reasons for a departure from their local plan are highly material.

Policies within the Lake District National Park plan allow:
‘As an exception to policy H5, housing development may be permitted on suitable small sites in the open countryside adjoining the defined boundaries of the larger settlements, as shown on the Insert Maps, where all the following criteria are satisfied:

• site location;
  
• planning permission number;
  
• objects of the development;
  
• definitions of legal terms;
  
• terms of occupancy;
  
• the allocation of the property.

Allocation of properties – local lettings
Development can only take place on an exception site if a local survey has identified need. Houses are built with a lifespan in excess of 60 years, however, need and demand change over time. The allocations policy in such agreements needs to balance and target the provision of homes for local people with letting the houses in the long term. A cascade approach to the allocation of homes should be used, to adjacent parishes, the district and the county, if no local residents are in need. This will ensure that homes are not left empty.

Early Lake District National Park Section 106 Planning Obligation Agreements state that to be allocated a home on a development site the association must consider that the person is in need and:

• has immediately prior to such allocation been a resident within the Parish; or
  
• has strong local connection with the said Parish and in seeking to allocate any such dwelling house consider
  • family association in the said Parish; or
    
  • any periods of ordinary residence in the said Parish not immediately before the date upon which any unit of accommodation becomes vacant; or
    
  • whether such person has permanent employment in the said Parish

If, having undergone this process, there are no suitable occupants for a vacant home, then the process is to be repeated for the locality. A nomination is sought from the local authority’s Housing Department and if nobody has been nominated within 14 days, the association can allocate the property to someone it judges to be in need of the property.

These agreements have been refined and simplified to the most recent form of words:

‘The objects of the Association in carrying out the development are:
1. to construct dwellings which will fulfil the needs of the locality for housing which is affordable within the terms of the policies of the Housing Corporation and the Secretary of State for the Environment (as expressed in Planning Policy Guidance Note 3, Annex A dated March 1993 or any amendment thereafter or any other expression of Government policy in that regard) and of the Development Plan for the Lake District’

The allocation of properties is also simplified to:

• ‘a person or persons within the parish with a local need; or in the event of reasonable measures to procure such a person or persons having been taken and failed’
  
• a person from the immediate locality (adjacent parishes)
  
• a person from the District
  
• ‘any other person or persons considered by the Association to be in need of such accommodation and who throughout the period of three years immediately preceding their occupation had their only or principal home or are employed or are to be employed or were last employed in the County of Cumbria’

Mortgagee in possession
Mortgagee-in-possession clauses, or the lack of them, have led to great debate, disagreement and delay in the issue of planning permission notices over recent years. Disagreement delays the delivery of new homes.

The basis of the disagreement is founded on clause 6 of Annex B: Providing for rural exception housing; of Planning Policy Guidance note 3: Housing. This states:

‘Where planning permission is granted for affordable housing on exception sites, the local planning authority should satisfy itself that adequate arrangements are in place to reserve the housing in question for local needs, both initially and in the perpetuity. Both planning conditions and planning obligations may be used for this purpose. The inclusion of clauses in planning obligations which would enable lenders of private finance to dispose of property on the open market as a last resort if a borrower were to get into financial difficulties, are unacceptable in respect of housing schemes on exception sites. Such clauses should also be unnecessary in the case of loans to registered social landlords, in part, because of the safeguards to private lenders offered by the Housing Act 1996.’

This clause also refers the reader to 28 of Planning Circular 6/98, which takes a similar approach:

‘Where a local planning authority seeks to impose strict occupancy controls, lenders of private finance often require registered social landlords (RSL) to negotiate for the inclusion of clauses in planning obligations which would enable the lender to dispose of the property on the open market as a last resort, if the RSL is in financial difficulty. The need for such clauses can be avoided, in the vast majority of cases, if the local planning authority leaves the issue of controlling occupancy to the RSL. The Housing Corporation would take steps to persuade against open market disposal, but could not prevent lenders from doing so if the terms on which they had lent allowed such disposal. However, should lenders seek the inclusion of such clauses in planning obligations relating to affordable housing secured via the policy in this Circular, local planning authorities will wish to weigh the balance of interests carefully and make their own judgements as to the appropriateness of agreeing to such clauses. Such clauses are inappropriate on rural exception sites, where planning permission is granted, as an exception to the development plan, for sites which would not normally be released for development, to provide low-cost housing for local needs in perpetuity; it would, therefore, be unacceptable in planning terms for such housing to be sold on the open market.’

The Lake District National Park Authority has included mortgagee-in-possession clauses within its Section 106 planning obligation agreements.

Early clauses state that the association can only sell the properties on the development if disposal is:

• pursuant to any statutory provision now or hereinafter in force; or
  
• pursuant to the authorisation of the Housing Corporation under Section 9 of the Housing Associations Act 1985 (or any act amending or replacing the same); or
  
• by any Mortgagee or Charge now or at any time in the future subsisting in respect of the development or any part or parts thereof; or
  
• pursuant to an order of the courts; and

the disposal is:

• to a registered housing association as defined in the Housing Associations Act 1985 aforesaid; or
  
• to a person who throughout the period of three years immediately preceding the disposal had his only or principle home in the County of Cumbria or to joint purchasers at least one of whom has throughout the said period of three years had his only or principle home in the County of Cumbria

3. Summary

There are five main requirements for the successful delivery of an affordable housing development through the existing planning system.

Needs information is only accurate for a short time, as individual and family circumstances change.

Most developers would not provide a new development to meet 100% of the housing need discovered in any individual survey. By providing fewer homes than required initially, they deliver homes for those in highest need, with those in less urgent need able to obtain second and subsequent lettings. This also gives a slightly longer validity to the needs data collected, as only a major event, e.g. closure of a major employer in the area, would change need significantly.

The independence of the needs data is crucial to lend impartiality to the process, favouring neither the developer, landowner, lobby group nor district council. A body such as a Rural Housing Enabler should alone be responsible for the collation and initial analysis of the data collected.

There may be the opportunity to provide further new homes in the future. This is preferable to building too many homes in the first instance, which increases the risk of allocating homes to people who are not local, having empty homes or having to sell them because the developer gets into financial difficulties.

There is evidence of low turnover in many of the case-study villages, suggesting that a larger percentage of identified need can be provided for in any initial development of homes without risk of over-supply.

This is probably the most controversial matter with most rural developments. Many factors come into play:

• Availability – the willingness to sell.
• Affordability – availability at an affordable price, affordable within the financial feasibility of the developer, based on the provision of affordable houses, and the development constraints of the land.
• Location of the site – in relation to the village boundary and local plan status.
• Location of the site – in relation to services, amenities and topography.

The number of players is also a factor. It would be ideal if they were all to agree as to which site is the most suitable of any available (although this rarely happens as can be seen in the case-study villages):

• The parish council
• The village community as a whole
• Land owners
• Adjacent owners
• Planning department
• Highways department
• District council.

Most housing associations do not buy land before outline or detailed planning permission has been confirmed, and so any initial investigation work is often undertaken at the association’s financial risk. Many find themselves reluctant to undertake extensive investigation, which can cost up to £2,000, if they are not guaranteed the development against which to offset the cost.

Insufficient or inaccurate boundary dimensional information can affect the whole basis of the application. They can mean that negotiations for additional land purchase and amendments to plans must take place between the decision date, signing the Section 106 agreement and the permission notice date, so delaying the overall process. This delay can be seen in many of the case-study projects.

In three schemes, at Lorton, Glenridding and Chapel Stile, earlier involvement and negotiation between the developer and the highways authority might well have reduced the overall timescale of the planning process. In these instances, the initial planning application had not dealt with requirements for vehicular visibility to the highways department’s satisfaction.

If early dialogue between the parties had led to agreement before making a planning application, then the necessary land, cost and design could have been included within the initial proposals, reducing timescales overall.

The majority (66%) of the developments considered have been delivered through stated exception site policies. It is therefore vital that such policies should continue to be incorporated into Local Development Frameworks to ensure the development of new restricted affordable housing to meet the needs of a community.

The inclusion of mortgagee-in-possession clauses also appears to be vital, despite the statement in National Planning Policy that:

‘Such clauses should also be unnecessary in the case of loans to registered social landlords, in part, because of the safeguards to private lenders offered by the Housing Act 1996’,

With pragmatic foresight, the Lake District National Park and their peers incorporated sensible mortgagee-in-possession clauses into the draft of their planning obligations. Otherwise it is questionable how many of the 97 properties in these case-study villages could have been provided, due to lack of available funding. Many of the financiers of social housing do not have the same faith in the mechanisms of the Housing Act 1996 on which to base the guarantee for, often sizable, loan funding. This can leave housing associations with a development site and planning permission, but no funding to carry out the development.

Unfortunately, in most instances, for the developer to be a signatory to the agreement they must have a controlling interest in the land. Usually this means being the owner, or requiring the site owner to negotiate and become a signatory to the agreement. Where the owner is not the developer this need for an extra negotiating party adds complexity, and many owners are unwilling to sign any planning obligation as their interest is with the land sale, not onward development.

Village reports

• Bolton Eden District Council
• Braithwaite Allerdale Borough Council
• Castle Carrock Carlisle City Council
• Chapel Stile South Lakeland District Council
• Cliburn Eden District Council
• Coniston South Lakeland District Council
• Glenridding Eden District Council
• Gosforth Copeland Borough Council
• Hawkshead South Lakeland District Council
• Lorton Allerdale Borough Council
• Rosthwaite Allerdale Borough Council
• Shap Eden District Council

Key findings
Sustainability of the community

The effects of affordable housing on rural communities

• Communities viewed affordable housing as important in bringing them stability, and without it many of the villages would have seen their community dying.
• Schemes with local occupancy clauses were welcomed and it was important to local residents that affordable housing remained for local households.
• Service providers, schools, local shops and local employers saw the schemes as essential to enable young people and families to remain within the community and contribute to its economy.
• Children from families living in the schemes, attending local schools, have been essential in keeping the schools running.
• Affordable housing helped to maintain family links.
• In general, communities felt there was a real need for more of this provision to enable younger people to stay in the community.
• This was reinforced in communities with high averages of second/holiday homes where, without the development, the community would have not survived.
• Lack of move-on accommodation was evident. Once allocated a tenancy, households would be likely to stay in it for the long term.
• People saw the schemes as essential due to high house prices and high demand for properties in their community.
• Developments had a positive knock-on effect on other community facilities such as the rebuilding of village halls.
• In areas of high demand and high numbers of eligible households on the housing register, housing associations had temporarily suspended the register for new applications.
• In communities where the housing market was still fairly accessible to local-income households, housing association development was seen as simply a natural form of tenure in a community.
• In communities of high housing market prices with demand from people wishing to retire or buy holiday or second homes, there was a consensus that more development was needed and what had been supplied was not enough to stop the drain of young people and families from the community
• Negative comments about the developments we studied related to the (high) levels of rents and Council Tax charged for the properties in relation to local salary levels. However, residents appreciated they were far below rents for private rented accommodation and for homes to buy on the open market.

Housing needs evidence base for development of the schemes

• Housing needs surveys provided a vital evidence base for detailed planning consent. In all developments they enabled the successful allocation of schemes to residents in compliance with section 106, and successful subsequent lettings.
• Subsequent housing need surveys conducted by communities where development had taken place are still identifying a need for affordable housing provision among concealed households where single adults and young couples are living with families, in expensive and insecure private rented accommodation, split households and tied accommodation no longer suitable for the families needs.

Planning

• The average time for detailed planning consent was seven months – the shortest period three months; longest 12 months.
• Delays occurred as a result of site acquisition, planning requirements, negotiating section 106 agreements and objections.
• Objections raised centred around:
  • difficult access;
  • increase in traffic and parking difficulties;
  • loss of visual amenity with design urban style intrusive to the landscape;
  • materials to be used;
  • loss of land better used for agricultural purposes;
  • misconceptions around the possibility that in future houses would not be used to meet local needs and around the letting policy of the housing association;
  • noise;
  • disposal of sewerage;
  • proximity to the adjacent owner and concerns over effects on property value;
  • detrimental effects on the tourism industry;
  • setting of a precedent to lead to further such developments in future;
  • insufficient evidence of housing need;
  • protection of trees.
• In each case, once the scheme was completed and let, many of these fears were allayed.
• Residents viewed schemes positively; in that they were well designed and far more sympathetic to the surroundings than much of the privately owned stock.
• A number of communities had produced petitions for such development which helped in the planning process – showing the power of community involvement.
• Eight out of the 12 communities were enabled to undertake such development as an exception to planning policy.
• In most developments the parish council, local authorities and highways departments accepted the schemes.
• The end products have been successful in retaining families and local households within communities.
• Affordable housing schemes were seen as environmentally in keeping with the villages’ appearance.
• Development restrictions imposed by the National Park did not serve the best interests of the community.

The developments

• There was a 50% average return rate to the survey questionnaires.
• 83% of residents in the developments had come from the village or had strong family connections and the development had enabled these family links to be maintained in all cases.
• The remaining 17% of residents had moved from nearby parishes to access more suitable accommodation.
• Reasons for moving included unsuitable accommodation, insecure and expensive private tenancy, children at local school, to form a new household, increase accommodation size, access to services and for health reasons.
• Developments were very settled, with on average only one re-let a year.
• Three schemes were purpose-built accommodation for the elderly or households with special needs. In most cases the development had enabled households to access more suitable accommodation, maintain family links, move closer to family for support and enable households requiring such accommodation to remain in the village.
• 79% of residents worked either part time or full time with travel-to-work distances in the main averaging a 5-10 mile radius of the parish.
• In one community the travel-to-work distances ranged from 5-40 miles - this was in Hawkshead where the main industry was tourism.
• The remaining 21% were either retired, unemployed or unable to work.
• Household weekly income details given ranged from £150 to £200 and £200 to £250.
• The majority of residents had access to a vehicle and would be prepared to commute distances to access employment if it meant they could remain in the community.
• Public transport was not used as a means to access employment mainly because the service available would not allow access to employment centres for normal working times or was expensive.

The communities

• The three main attributes of living in the villages were, in order of preference:
  • scenery, peace and quiet;
  • sense of community and belonging, including the maintenance of family connections;
  • accessibility to services and public transport.
• Communities felt that high numbers of second or holiday homes and people retiring to the village did not help to sustain communities.
• Splits were emerging in some communities between new more affluent households and households with a local connection.
• These communities were split between households who wished to retain the peace and tranquillity of the village and households who wished to see more development to enable families who live and work locally to move in.
• People expressed regret for dwindling community spirit as a result of this emerging split.

Services

• The range of services available differed greatly in each community. Most had a post office with small grocery shop, pub, school and village hall.
• The school, post office and shop were seen as essential to the heart of the community.
• In all cases to shop locally was more expensive than in nearby town supermarkets.
• In areas where tourism was the main employer there was evidence of two scenarios emerging:
  • The tourism industry enabled a wider range of services to be provided locally such as a pharmacist, clothes and gift shops, banks and a number of pubs.
  • Essential services were expensive and geared towards the tourism trade, providing for example takeaway foods and clothing and not necessarily meeting the needs of the community.
• There was clear evidence that the lack of three basic services – the shop, post office and school could affect the sustainability of the community. For example, in Cliburn the shop and school had recently closed and the pub reported difficulties in attracting trade.
• In larger communities where more services existed, such as several pubs, bank and library, there were numerous community activities including computer and language courses and yoga classes.
• Many of the larger communities were within geographical valley settlements and served the more rural locations.
• In areas of valley settlements with one service such as a shop, residents would use a nearby post office or school in a neighbouring settlement. This was evident in Chapel Stile where nearby Elterwater provided additional services and the two settlements together provided a range of services and activities.
• There were examples of real community action. In Cliburn the shop has disappeared but newspapers are delivered to one resident’s house for other residents to collect.

Schools

• Residents placed great importance on having a primary school in the village. Nine out of the 12 communities we visited has primary school education for children between 4 and 11 years old.
• In general, the smaller the school the fewer pupils per teacher (about 14), which often led to a good teaching quality and curriculum, according to the OFSTED reports.
• In larger schools with more children per teacher (about 22), teaching standards and curriculum varied from satisfactory to good according to the OFSTED report.
• All schools were classed as good for dealing with children with special needs.
• All schools had positive and supportive parents of children in the school.
• In all cases where the development had enabled families with children to remain in the village, it had had a positive effect on the number of children in the school and ultimately its sustainability.
• Only one community, Coniston, had a secondary school. Secondary schools were in nearby market towns.

Police and fire

• A notable lack of importance was attached to the role of the police within the community. None of the residents mentioned the service as important to the sustainability of the community.
• The majority of communities had had police stations which were now closed.
• Community police officers patrolled the rural settlements daily, and every month a mobile van visited the community.
• None of the communities had part-time police stations. They tended to be in nearby market towns.
• Only one settlement, Coniston, had an operational part-time fire station. All the other communities again relied on nearby larger settlements where a part-time service was available.

Transport

• An average of 85% of residents in the rural communities had access to and owned at least one vehicle and would use it to travel to work.
• This is above the Cumbrian average of 75% (www.cumbria.gov.uk Census Key statistics).
• This is evidence of the importance of having a vehicle in rural communities.
• A range of public transport services was provided in many of the rural settlements during the tourism season and either ceased or became less frequent when the number of visitors declined.
• There was also some indication that public transport was seen as expensive and unreliable and did not enable residents to get to main centres of employment during normal working hours. In addition it was not necessarily a year-round service, with more services in the tourism season.

Employment

• The smaller the community, the less the economic diversity of the parish.
• Market towns were important as main centres of employment for the rural communities.
• Usually there was one main employer, either tourism or agriculture, and it was uncertain whether this helped to sustain a community in the long term.
• Salary details given ranged from £150 - £200 to £200 - £250 per week.
• Affordable housing was seen as essential in sustaining these rural communities.
• Other employment opportunities were directed towards service provision, for example running the local shop, working at the school, working in the garage etc.
• In small communities such as Glenridding and Braithwaite where tourism has become a main employer, there seemed to be few other employment opportunities and residents had to commute to main centres of employment.
• Commuter rural communities were emerging, where new residents were able to purchase market properties and commute long distances to work to command higher salaries. This appeared to be causing splits in communities, for example in Castle Carrock and Cliburn where new housing built or existing housing stock is expensive and aimed at meeting the needs of high earners and not local income earners.
• A number of residents were skilled tradesmen; joiners, plumbers, mechanics and electricians, showing the importance and adaptability of such a skill in a changing economy.
• There was evidence that main traditional employers within parishes, for example Kirkstone quarries in Elterwater, significantly affected the economy of Chapel Stile and Coniston.
• Interestingly, large new employment opportunities related to tourism do not seem to affect local employment opportunities. For example, Center Parcs was not a main employer in either Bolton or Cliburn.

The cost of a bag of shopping
As part of the research it was important to illustrate the actual difference residents in rural areas would pay for eight basic food items in the communities, compared with the bigger stores in the market towns.
The eight-item food shopping basket included:

• Bread
• 1 tin baked beans
• 1 pint milk
• 100g coffee
• 6 eggs
• 100 bags tea
• 250g butter
• 4 toilet rolls

The local shop has an essential role in sustaining rural communities. However, with the economies of scale that larger nearby supermarkets can achieve, many residents choose to do their main shopping away from the village and use the local shop for essentials or when they run out of certain items. So the role of the local shop has diminished over the years. In areas where tourism is strong, the role of the shop has changed towards focusing on the tourist trade, as was evident in Glenridding where take-away foods were sold.

Summary
The table below shows that in each community an eight-item food shopping basket costs more in the village shop than in the supermarkets in the larger market towns. The arrow represents the difference in this cost between the cheapest place to buy the items (Asda in Kendal), other market towns and the village shops. In Chapel Stile it cost 116% more - a substantial amount - to buy the same items. The table below that shows the information in data format.
In our interviews, most respondents spoke of using their village shop for ‘top-up items’ and for convenience but would do their main shop in the bigger stores. In Glenridding, the village shop explained the change they had faced over the years. When it had been a mining village it was common for the residents to use the shop as a major source for their weekly shopping. This had all changed and, to compensate and to take advantage of the tourist industry, the shop now produces quick snacks. However, it is getting increasingly hard for local shops to remain economically viable – hence the higher prices – and yet the residents spoke of this service being an important part of their community.

The cost of a bag of shopping

Go to: Index, Chapter 1, (2), 3