consequent exclusion from the DIFS tally of VNEB Infrastructure. A similar point could be made of the Vauxhall Underground access improvements (41m ), which are declared by the March 2012 VNEB OAPF (page 52) to be fully funded from TfL's Business Plan.  Fully funded items, to which CIL cannot now be expected to contribute, should be relegated to memorandum item level, so that discussion and prioritising can focus on the gaps that CIL could reasonably be contributing to. 4 At the same time, there are a number of exclusions from the list, which should be rectified. The cost of converting the Vauxhall Gyratory to two way working is estimated as 21.5m in the Vauxhall Nine Elms Public Realm Study, and this should be shown, instead of the current blank. There is no express mention of funding for Vauxhall Park, which will suffer extra pressure of use from the Vauxhall cluster development, though we understand there may be mistaken labelling of an item in the list. Express provision should be included, consistent with that park's development plan. And despite Lambeth's recognition that Vauxhall City Farm's development plans for educational and open space use are S106 worthy, they are not included in the list. An express provision for 350,000 should be made, to include legal title changes to facilitate outside fund raising. CIL -- The Comparators for Viability 5 We welcome the detailed analytic work done to analyse viability, but think this needs to be extended, particular in relation to the dense