APPLICATION No:
05/51956/FUL
APPLICANT:
Mast Lift Co Ltd
LOCATION:
Land At Lime Close, East Of Hankinson Way Salford
6
PROPOSAL:
Erection of primary and community care facility,
library, council offices and ancillary accommodation
together with layout of car park and boundary
treatment
WARD:
Langworthy
Additional Observations
This application was deferred at the meeting of the Planning and Transportation
Regulatory Panel on 2nd March 2006 to allow a further response to be made to the
matters raised by the Salford Precinct Area Forum already summarised in my
previous report and Members concerns over the design, appearance and layout of the
new building. The applicant and his architectural advisors will be present at the Panel.
My original observations are supplemented by the following paragraphs:
Pre-Application Consultations
LIFTCo, the city council and PCT have developed the current proposals in close
consultation with local residents, including two public exhibitions of the emerging
proposals and three direct meetings with the Precinct Forum.
The first meeting with the Forum was held in November 2003. The proposals have
been significantly changed to address residents’ objections to the original sketch
scheme: the access to the proposed car park has been moved, new car parking for the
use of neighbouring residents and pedestrian routes through the housing area have
been improved. All issues raised have been addressed as far as is practical.
The near final proposals were exhibited at a drop-in session in Broadwalk Library,
attended by around 60 people, in July 2004. The revised proposals were generally
supported.
There have been no changes to the site boundary since this exhibition.
Loss of parking to housing blocks
The site of the proposed building was last occupied by Lime Court, which contained
61 flats, and included 33 parking spaces, plus a number of garages. It is proposed to
provide 24 new car parking spaces for residents of Hornbeam, Beech and other
neighbouring residential blocks. Given the reduction in residential population with
the demolition of Lime Court, this level of replacement parking provision is
considered reasonable.
It is not anticipated that parking spaces will be specifically reserved for residents of
particular blocks, although this will be a management issue for New Prospect Housing
Ltd, rather than for the applicant.
The layout of the replacement car park provides a pedestrian route of adequate width
within the residential area and adequate provision for access by emergency services.
It is anticipated that the proposed parking spaces will adequately cater for delivery
vehicles and ambulances; this again will be a management issue for New Prospect
Housing Ltd, rather than for the applicant.
Impact on existing footways through the site
A dedicated, continuous pedestrian route is to be created around the proposed
replacement car park, improving on the original layout. All the paths significantly
exceed minimum footpath guidelines (1.8 metres) and are considered adequate for
pedestrians with prams and those with disabilities.
The proposed route incorporates an existing path along the side of Beech Court: this is
to be widened from 1.8 metres to 2.0 metres and proposed adjustments to site levels
will allow removal of an existing low wall that makes the existing path seem
narrower.
The footpath linking Beech Court with Broadwalk is 3 metres wide and is gated for
use by local residents only. The site layout has already been revised to minimise the
length and maximise the width of this footpath.
Objectors stated they are surrounded by car parks so visual issue of car parking
and fumes from cars
The proposed development includes 57 car parking spaces within the site for staff,
plus the 24 replacement spaces for residents. The provision of new trees along the
Lime Close site boundary will further aid fume removal and also reduce any possible
negative visual effect caused by the car park, and will enhance the area generally.
A draft ‘green travel plan’, encouraging staff, patients and visitors to consider
alternate travel arrangements other than motor vehicles, was submitted with the
planning application. The site is close to local housing and bus routes are within 100
metres, both of which will reduce the need for centre visitors to travel by car.
Construction
If planning permission is granted, there remains a great deal of work to finalise legal
and financial details and the construction timetable. The contractor is currently
looking at an 18-20 month construction period commencing autumn 2006.
Construction access will be via Lime Close, through the residential compound, until
the new access across Broadwalk is constructed. The contractor will be required to
maintain the existing compound security, working in partnership with New Prospect
Housing Ltd, and to make good any damage. Following completion of the building,
Lime Close will not be used, except in emergencies.
By trying to control construction traffic, it is hoped that any impact on existing tenant
security arrangements will be minimised and, it is hoped, eliminated.
Construction partner Laing O’Rourke are a national company with a proven record of
working in partnership with Salford communities to minimise the effects of
construction. They are the construction company responsible for Salford’s two current
LIFT developments in Lower Kersal and Charlestown, where they have been awarded
‘Considerate Constructors’ status.
Design of the Building
The LIFT design approach is based on the contemporary urban design language
championed by CABE, and is based on the principle that good design influences the
quality of people’s lives. The design should make a positive contribution to the people
who use the buildings, to the local environment and through this to the communities
in which we live and work.
The city council and PCT asked LIFTCo to provide a landmark building that would
enhance the area and are satisfied that the proposed design meets these objectives and
will be an attractive feature in the area.
The building’s scale seeks to relate well to surrounding buildings and emerging plans
to improve the character and appearance of the area .Externally the three storey
building is a mix of glass ,brick and render and is of a similar height to the nearby St
Paul’s Church.
The building will, wherever possible, be transparent, primarily at ground level,
highlighting the public areas and key circulation space. This will allow visual
connection and help establish a relationship between inside and out. The approach
specifically aims to foster high levels of animation, safety and security along
Broadwalk.
Special attention has been given to the public entrance, which is intended to be
prominent from Shopping City. The curved brickwork walls acts as a foil to the 3
storey glazed entrance screen. This reinforces the building’s landmark function and
aids internal and external navigation for its users. The glazed main entrance, with a
public square in front is a distinctive feature designed to create a landmark and attract
visitors to the building.
Internally, the upper two floors would house clinical treatment rooms with children’s
health services occupying certain areas. Privacy and security is a requirement in these
areas, hence the need for fenestration to be limited in these areas.
Most neighbouring buildings are of flat roof construction. The proposed roof deck is
stucco finished, aluminium standing seam, behind parapet walls. It is considered to
be an attractive contemporary design solution that is in harmony with the
neighbouring roofscape.
Summary
The development of this building is an urgent priority for the city council and PCT,
and it will provide replacement accommodation for Pendlebury children’s hospital
and meet some of the objectives of the SHIFT programme.
The Lime Court site was selected after a careful review of potential alternatives.
There are no alternative sites within or adjacent to Shopping City that could be
brought forward quickly enough to meet the timetables for the children’s hospital and
LIFT.
The scheme has been designed to address issues raised in pre-application
consultations, as far as is practical. The current proposal is considered to meet the
reasonable concerns of neighbouring residents. There appears to be no scope to
provide any further mitigation without compromising the effectiveness of the scheme.
Original Report
BACKGROUND
In July 2000 the government published the NHS plan, a ten year plan for the
modernising and reforming the NHS. It identified the urgent need to improve primary
care premises in England as a key constraint to the development of the services. The
plan states that the priority for investment will be those parts of the country where
primary care facilities are most in need of improvement.
The government has provided the NHS a vehicle for improving and developing
primary and community care facilities – NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust
(LIFT). The local LIFT is a joint venture between the Department of Health, the local
healthcare community and the private sector; to develop and encourage a significant
increase in investment in primary care and community based facilities.
There are 6 primary care trusts (PCT) in the area including Salford, which is coterminus with the City Council. Each of the PCT areas have growing communities
which will need more and better health and social care facilities for the foreseeable
future.
The initial focus of the NHS LIFT will be on investment in those parts of the country,
such as inner cities, where primary care services are in most need of expansion. The
Manchester, Salford and Trafford area has been identified as the first wave LIFT and
this application is submitted in this respect.
In Salford, the opportunity has been taken to use LIFT to redesign and deliver a wider
range of services, including both PCT and council services. New buildings will offer
traditional health services with other functions that attract the widest range of visitors
into each facility. For example, the four largest centres will include public libraries,
community meeting rooms and one-stop shops, where visitors can access information
on services provided by all partners.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL
The application site, to the east of Hankinson Way and Pendleton Precinct, is divided
in two by the Broadwalk which is a pedestrian avenue with tree planting along its
route.
The larger part of the application site, to the north of the Broardwalk, is the site of the
former Lime Close flats, which have recently been demolished and a car parking area
used by residents of the former Lime Court and neighbouring buildings. This part of
the application site is bounded by Lombardy and Salix Courts to the east, Hornbeam
and Beech Courts (both accessed from Lime Close) to the north and a surface car park
for residents of Briar Hill Court to the west. The surface car park to the west is
accessed from Hankinson Way, beyond Hankinson Way lies Pendleton Precinct.
The smaller part of the application site, to the south of the Broardwalk, is currently
occupied by the vacant, single storey, former police station between the Library and
Mulberry Court, with the Hankinson Way pay-and-display car park and Holm Court
to the south. The police station would be demolished.
Planning permission is sought for the erection of a three storey building on the
northern, larger part of the site. The three storey building would house a new library
and community rooms (relocated from the existing library building on the other side
of the Broadwalk), one-stop shop, café, pharmacy, and child services units at ground
floor level. At first floor level there would be General Practice Doctors surgeries,
general clinical rooms, paediatrics functions whilst second floor level would provide
accommodation for dentist surgeries, audiology suites, paediatric suites and child
services functions.
The building has a rectangular shaped footprint. The library would occupy the
southern part of the ground floor and would have full height windows allowing views
onto the Broadwalk and views from the Broadwalk into the library. Children’s
services are also proposed on the ground floor and a courtyard play area is proposed
at the eastern end of the site. The courtyard play area is to be enclosed by a 2.4m high
wall screening it from the Broadwalk.
The pedestrian entrance to the building is on the western side facing toward
Hankinson Way. The entrance has a triple height glazed entrance area and is designed
to be a prominent feature seen from Pendleton Precinct. Elevations are constructed
from rendered blockwork with rectangular shaped windows regularly spaced along
the first and second floors. A public Square is to be developed off the Broadwalk in
front of the main entrance. Within this Square nine trees would be planted and five
benches would be sited.
Most visitors arriving at the centre by car are expected to use the existing Hankinson
Way pay-and display car park. Dedicated parking for disabled drivers and drop-off
facilities will be laid out on the former police station site.
A secure car park for staff use, would be provided to the north of the building
enclosed by 2.4m high railings. Vehicular access to this car park would be via a
roadway constructed across the pedestrianised Broadwalk, from Loganberry Avenue,
which is itself accessed from Hankinson Way. The new roadway has been designed,
in conjunction with Urban Vision engineers, so as to indicate to drivers that they are
entering a pedestrian priority area and to prevent vehicles from accessing the rest of
the pedestrianised area. Vehicular gates from this staff car park onto Lime Close are
proposed to be restricted to emergency access only.
In addition, new car parking for residents of Hornbeam and Beech Courts, and other
neighbouring residential blocks, is to be provided to the north of the new building and
staff car park. These 24 spaces would have vehicular access via Lime Close. The
proposed perimeter fence would separate the staff and resident’s car parks.
A total of 16 trees are to be removed to enable the development whilst 33 trees are
proposed to be planted.
The application has been submitted with a planning and design statement, tree report,
access parking and traffic generation are also covered within the statement. The
statement broadly explains that the scheme complies with health and community
policies of the UDP, that the design has been carefully crafted to ensure the building
complements the surrounding area and meets the needs of future users of the facility.
The statement explains peak activity for visitors to the services provided is mid
morning and mid afternoon, which are outside of the normal peak times. The
statement also explains that visitors to the service will all come from local areas
thereby reducing travel to facilities at Hope Hospital throughout the day. The
statement further explains the proposal would not result in an increase in trip
generation rather a movement in trips from Hope Hospital to the site and the
application site is more accessible by bus.
HISTORY
In 2003, outline planning permission was granted for a LIFT centre comprising
library and health facilities (03/45507/OUT) on a site to the East of Hankinson Way
and North of Churchill Way. This site is also allocated for such use by policy
EHC6/2 of the draft replacement UDP. Detailed feasibility studies subsequently
development of this site to be impractical and the current proposal is being promoted
instead.
CONSULTATIONS
Director of Environmental Services – Provides advice that a ground condition and
fixed plant noise condition should be attached, otherwise no objections.
Architectural Liaison Officer – No objections subject to a condition requiring the
development is built to secure by design standards.
Arboricultural Officer – considers the five trees contribute to the amenity of the area
and advises that they are worthy of retention.
Director of Education and Leisure – No comments received
Environment Agency – No objections
Salford Precinct Area Forum – Concerned at lack of recent pre-application
consultation by the applicant with the forum and apparent changes to the site
boundary since the previous consultation. Limited parking spaces provided for
residents of Salix and Lombardy Courts with the plans showing 14 spaces for 60
properties. Parking is tight to Beech, Salix and Lombardy Courts with no
consideration to deliveries and ambulances. No footpath around the parking on Beech
Court. Existing access path to the side of Beech Court is not wide enough for people
with disabilities. Also pose the following questions/statements:
Has a traffic impact assessment been conducted?
Has a health impact assessment been conducted (air quality, noise,
disturbance etc). Especially as this site is adjacent to sheltered
accommodation and the majority of residents in the area are
elderly.
What impact will the fumes from the car park have on residents
using the gardens, which is the only local outside space?
How does this scheme fit in with the master planning process for
the area?
Why have PCT not been part of the master planning process?
Concerns regarding the security system that operates in this area
being compromised.
PUBLICITY
Site notices were displayed on 23 January 2006
Press Notices were published on 12th January 2006
The following neighbours were notified of the application:1 to 98 Beech Court
1 to 114 Hornbeam Court
1 to 69 Salix Court
1 to 26 Lombardy Court
St Paul’s Church
1 to 166 Mulberry Court
1 to 99 Holm Court
REPRESENTATIONS
I have received two responses to the application publicity, one objection and one letter
of support.
The objector raises the following issues:
Object to car park and boundary treatment
Lots of pensioners in the area have to take care when going to the Precinct
Level of noise created
The development is too near Beech Court and Hornbeam Court.
The letter of support raises the following comment :
“It does seem that this proposed project will be an enormous benefit to my
local community particularly those of us with disabilities or those who are
over retirement age by providing greater access to healthcare and community
services so it should be encouraged”.
REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY
DP3 Quality in New Development
UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY
Site specific policies: S6 Maintenance and Improvement of Town Centres
Other policies: SC9 Health Care Facilities, SC1 Provision of Social and Community
Facilities, SC2 Provision of Social and Community Facilities by Private and
Voluntary Agencies, DEV1 Development Criteria, DEV2 Good Design, DEV4
Design and Crime, EN7 Conservation of Trees and Woodland, T13 Car Parking.
REVISIED DEPOSIT REPLACMENT UDP
Site Specific policies: S2/1 Retail and Leisure Development Within Town and
Neighbourhood Centres
Other Policies: ST9 Retail, Leisure, Social and Community Provision, EHC1
Provision and Improvement of Health and Community Facilities, DES1 Respecting
Context, DES11 Design and Crime, A1 Transport Assessment and Travel Plans, A8
Impact of Development on the Highway Network, A10 Provision of Car, Cycle and
Motorcycle Parking in New Developments, EN10 Protected Trees, EN17a Resource
Conservation.
PLANNING APPRAISAL
Policies SC1, SC2, SC9 and EHC1 seek the development and improvement of health,
education and community facilities. Policies S6 and S2/1 promote the vitality and
viability of town centres. Policies DEV1, DEV2, DES1, seek to ensure development
fits in to the character of the area and is of good design. DEV4 and DES11 require
developments to be designed in order to design out crime. Policies T13, A1, A8 and
A10 require appropriate car parking to be provided and for impacts on the highway
network to be considered. Policies EN7 and EN10 seek the protection of trees. Policy
EN17a requires developments to minimise their impact upon natural resources.
Policy EHC6/2 establishes the principle of developing a LIFT facility in this area,
albeit that the detailed site has been changed.
Principle of Development
The proposal would provide new a library, primary health and social care facilities
and is therefore in broad accordance with policies SC1, SC2 and SC9 of the adopted
UDP which are all seeking to improve, maintain and support provision of social and
community facilities within the city. Policy EHC1 promotes new and improved health
and community facilities provided that five criteria are met. The five criteria are;
development should not have an adverse impact upon residential amenity and
character, not have an unacceptable impact upon environmental quality, be accessible
to the community by a range of transport options, not give rise to unacceptable levels
of traffic congestion, and finally have the potential to act as a community focus and
encourage linked trips.
In terms of policies relating to Salford Precinct both the adopted and emerging UDP’s
explain the importance of the Precinct in providing retail, leisure and other facilities
for the local community. Proposals that enhance opportunities to perform a number of
activities within a single trip are promoted as this helps to reduce the need to travel in
line with sustainable development objectives. I am satisfied the intended replacement
and new uses this application proposes will enhance the ability to undertake a number
of activities within one trip. I also consider the proposed development will enhance
the vitality and viability of the retail and leisure functions of Salford Precinct, in line
with policies S6 and S2/1.
Residential Amenity
The nearest housing to the LIFT building is Mulberry Court which is 24m away to the
south. Lombardy Court is 32 metres away, Hornbeam Court 28 metres away and
Beech Court is 25 metres away. Council separation distances require a distance of 24
metres between facing habitable room windows of three storey properties and I am
satisfied that the height and scale of the proposed building will not detract from
residential amenity.
Highways and Parking
The Government’s guidance note on transport, PPG13, also states that new
intermediate health facilities should, where possible, be located in town, district or
local centres where they will be highly accessible by non car modes of transport and
where the facilities can reinforce the range of services provided by these centres. I
consider the 59 parking spaces proposed, for use by visitors and employees, are in line
with maximum parking standards. I am also satisfied with the range of transport
options open to visitors and employees of the proposed facilities.
Objection has been received to the application on the basis of lack of parking to the
surrounding Courts. The number of residents potentially wanting parking spaces in
this area has been significantly reduced by the demolition of Lime Court. As part of
the application the applicant proposes to create 24 replacement spaces at the southern
end of Lime Close. I consider that the number of parking spaces available to residents
is acceptable, bearing in mind current maximum parking standards.
The footpath that links Beech Court with the Broadwalk is 3 metres wide and is gated
for use by local residents only. I consider the width of this footway to be appropriate
for use by those with disabilities given City Council standards require a minimum
footpath width of 1.8 metres. The layout of the replacement car park provides a
pedestrian route of adequate width within the residential area and adequate provision
for access for ambulances etc.
The proposed vehicular access across Broadwalk will introduce traffic into an area
that is currently traffic-free, albeit in a controlled and restricted fashion. I understand
that this option was devised following consultation with the Precinct Forum and that
alternative options were discounted as either involving unacceptable loss of amenity
to neighbouring residents or requiring land outside the applicant’s control. I consider
that the proposed introduction of a controlled vehicular access to a private staff car
park will not significantly weaken the character of Broadwalk as a pedestrian
thoroughfare and that the proposed detail design will not create an unacceptable
pedestrian hazard. I am also mindful that the proposed building, with the public
library located on the frontage to Broadwalk, will significantly improve the amenity,
safety, security and character of the pedestrian route, by introducing casual
surveillance and vitality along the route.
In response to concern over car fumes I would suggest that in order to re-use this
brownfield site in accordance with policy ST11 of the emerging UDP a level of
parking would need to be provided on site. Parking on site is subject to maximum
parking standards. The site could otherwise remain as underused land however the
positive regeneration benefits and community facilities would not be provided if this
were the case. The Director of Environmental Services does not object to the position
or number of car parking spaces associated with the development.
The applicant has been in discussions regarding design and traffic and highway
issues. A traffic statement and draft green travel plan has also been submitted as part
of this application.
I concur with the applicant that the proposal would not result in increased congestion
on the surrounding highway network subject to a condition binding the development
to a green travel plan. As such I have no objections to the proposal on highway
grounds.
Design
Policies DEV1, DEV2 and DES1 require development to be designed to a good
standard and to fit in with the character of the area. The proposed LIFT building has a
modern minimalist design, with contrasting brickwork and render. The architect has
explained, within the design statement, the proposed building has a modern form with
angled and curved elevations to enhance the appearance of the area. Floor to ceiling
glazing, with active uses behind, is proposed at ground floor to provide maximum
overlooking of and from the Broadwalk. The LIFT building does not extend onto the
Broadwalk or onto the communal grounds of the surrounding Courts. The height at
three storeys corresponds to the height and mass of St Paul’s Church to the south. The
height and mass also corresponds positively to the tower blocks that surround the site.
I consider the simple glazed design at ground floor is appropriate to the setting and
that the proposal corresponds positively to the pedestrian environment.
Design and Crime
I have received objection to the impact of development upon security in the
surrounding areas. The surrounding area is characterised by tower blocks with car
parking the base with the parking areas enclosed by high railings. Whilst the car park
of the development is secured by 2.4m high railings and the garden area is secured by
a 2.4m high wall, the development does seek to promote active uses toward the
Broadwalk and the car parking areas. Fencing is not proposed between the Library at
ground floor and the Broadwalk. Overlooking occurs from the building over the
public realm and vice versa except for the children’s garden which is screened from
view from the public realm. I am satisfied that this development will generate more
pedestrian activity in the area and would enhance natural surveillance within the area.
The Architectural Liaison officer is satisfied the proposal seeks to design out crime
and recommends a condition be imposed to ensure the developer seeks secure by
design accreditation. In accordance with policies DEV4 and DES11 I propose to
append such a condition.
Trees
Sixteen trees within the site are to be removed from the site to enable the
development. I consider the loss of these trees to be acceptable subject to 33 extra
heavy standard replacement trees being planted as part of the development. I would
wish to seek to ensure the remaining trees are retained and have therefore
recommended a condition be attached to secure fencing around these during
construction works.
Other Issues
The Precinct Forum have asked how this development fits in with the emerging
Masterplan for Pendleton and questions why the PCT were not involved in the
Masterplanning process.
The Pendleton Area Action Plan is at an early stage of preparation. Formal
consultation on options is not due until September 2006 and the plan is not due to be
adopted until October 2008. I see no reason to treat this proposal as premature. The
proposed building will provide a valuable public service as its location within the
town centre meets local and national policy. There do not appear to be any reasons
why development of the building on this site should unduly constrain options for the
Masterplan. I understand that the emerging Masterplan may emphasise the potential
to extend and enhance Broadwalk as a pedestrian route through the area; however, as
stated above, I believe that the proposals are consistent with this objective.
I understand that the PCT are represented on the steering group for the project. I am
advised that the applicants and the PCT have held meetings with the Precinct Forum
during development of the proposals and that the emerging scheme was amended in
response to some of their comments. Public open days have also been held at
Boardwalk Library. I understand that the last meeting was held in January 2004 and
the last open day held in July 2004 and that there have been no changes to the site
boundary and no significant changes to the proposals since then.
Value Added
Extensive pre-application discussions between Urban Vision and Council Officers
and LIFTco and their architects/consultants have informed the design and layout of
the development. The servicing and access arrangements have been amended to
improve safety within the site.
Conclusion
As the site lies adjacent to the defined Town Centre it is accessible to a range of bus
routes and by cycling and walking. Also the town centre location is ideal for the
encouragement of linked trips thereby overall reducing the need to travel. I am also
satisfied with the level of parking proposed and of impacts on traffic generation. I
agree with the letter of support that this scheme will provide an increased level of
services within the community to the benefit of local people, I am satisfied that the
proposal complies with policies EHC1, SC1, SC2 and SC9.
I consider that the proposal would be of considerable benefit to the residents of
Salford and is in accordance with both national and local policies. I consider the
development will provide positive regeneration benefits to Pendleton as well as
providing valuable community functions within the local area that enable
multifunction trips to the town centre. I consider that residential amenity will not be
adversely affected and that the design and layout of the development is to a good
standard. I also consider the proposed development to be acceptable to the
surrounding area and that it would positively contribute and interact with the street
scene. I am satisfied with the amendments to the scheme that the servicing will and
parking is acceptable. I therefore recommend that this application be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Subject to the following Conditions
1. Standard Condition A03 Three year time limit
2. No development shall be started until samples of the facing materials to be used
for the walls and roofs of the development have been submitted to and approved
in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
3. The site shall be treated in accordance with a landscape scheme which shall be
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development is
started. Such scheme shall include full details of trees and shrubs to be planted,
walls, bollards, fences, boundary and surface treatment and shall be carried out
within twelve months; of the commencement of development and thereafter shall
be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or
shrubs dying within five years of planting shall be replaced to the satisfaction of
the Local Planning Authority.
4. Standard Condition C03X Fencing of Trees/no work within spread
5. Standard Condition F04D Retention of Parking Spaces
6. The vehicular entrance gates to Lime Close shall be restricted to emergency
vehicle use only.
7. Within a period of one month of the first occupation of building hereby approved
operators shall undertake a travel survey and this data will form part of a Travel
Plan. Within a period of 6 months from the first date of occupation, a Travel Plan
shall be submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The
Travel Plan shall as a minimum include the broad areas of actions, objectives and
timescales for review and monitoring. Within a period of twelve months of the
commencement of occupation, the operator shall undertake a monitoring survey.
Within twelve months of first occupation of the building, a Travel Plan shall be
submitted for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority, which shall
include a review of targets, measures and staff survey data. Annually from the
commencement of occupation of the building, a Travel Plan shall be submitted for
the written approval of the Local Planning Authority for a period of 5 years and
then at a time agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
8. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing
measures to comply with secure by design principles, has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once approved the
development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme and
shall thereafter be retained.
9. Standard Condition M08 Site Investigation - new
10. Noise from fixed plant and machinery on site (LAeq,5 minutes) shall not exceed
the background level (LA90,1 hour) at the boundary of the nearest residential
properties at any time.
11. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme detailing
recycling of waste from the development has been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be
implemented and thereafter retained prior to the first occupation of the library and
medical facilities hereby approved.
12. No development shall be commenced unless and until a scheme(s) detailing
sustainable construction techniques and energy efficiency have been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall
be carried out and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme(s).
(Reasons)
1. Standard Reason R000 Section 91
2. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
3. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
4. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
5. Standard Reason R015A Safety-users of highway
6. Standard Reason R015A Safety-users of highway
7. Reason: To ensure sustainable modes of travel are used in accordance with
policies DEV1 of the Adopted UDP and A10 of the Revised Deposit Draft Salford
City Council UDP.
8. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
9. Standard Reason R028A Public safety
10. Standard Reason R004A Amenity-area
11. In order to provide recycling facilities in accordance with policy DEV1 and EN20
of the City of Salford Unitary Development Plan.
12. To ensure development accords with policies N17 and EN17A of the City of
Salford Unitary Development Plan, Draft Replacement Plan 2004-16.
Note(s) for Applicant
1. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from North
West Water.
2. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the attached letter from the
Environment Agency.
3. The applicant is advised that the requirements of all the conditions precedent must
be satisfied prior to the commencement of the development. Failure to satisfy the
conditions precedent renders all development unauthorised and unlawful and
appropriate action may be taken by the Council.
4. Construction works shall not be permitted outside the following hours:
Monday to Friday 08:00 to 18:00
Saturdays
08:00 to 13:00
Construction works shall not be permitted on Sundays or Bank or Public Holidays
Access and egress for delivery vehicles shall be restricted to the working hours
indicated above.
5. For further discussions regarding the requirements of the Contaminated Land
Condition, the applicant/developer is advised to contact the Pollution Control
Section of the Environment Directorate (Tel: (0161) 737 0551