21
November 2015 On behalf of Nuffield Health Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement Volume 3: Non-Technical Summary

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus - IEMA · Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 6 1.11 There have been Prior Notification Applications

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

November 2015

On behalf of Nuffield Health

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement

Volume 3: Non-Technical Summary

Contents

Contents 3

1 Non-Technical Summary 5

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 4

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 5

1 Non-Technical Summary

Background

This document summaries the Environmental Statement (ES) which accompanies the planning application 1.1

by Nuffield Health (“Nuffield” / “the Applicant”) for the redevelopment of the Former Elizabeth Gaskell

Campus site for a new hospital and wellbeing facility.

This document is a summary of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process in non-technical 1.2

language. The ES sets out the findings of a full EIA, which has been carried out to assess the impacts of the

proposed development.

The full findings of these studies and of the overall ES are presented in a comprehensive set of documents 1.3

that can be viewed during normal office hours at the Planning Department of Manchester City Council (MCC)

or online at www.manchester.gov.uk.

Site Location and Description

The site is located on the approximately 3km to the south of Manchester City Centre within the Corridor. 1.4

The Application Site (“the Site”) is bounded by Hathersage Road, Upper Brook Street and Oxford Place . 1.5

The Site area is 2.18 hectares and the site was previously in use as a university campus operated by 1.6

Manchester Metropolitan University. The site has been vacant since the university moved their Faculty of

Health, Psychology and Social Care to the Birley Campus in August 2014.

The buildings which remain on Site are the former Old Domestic School Building, Brook House and 1.7

Shepherd House following demolition of other former University structures subjected to Prior Notification of

Demolition and a Demolition in Conservation Area application. Surface car parking and internal access

layout (hardstanding) also still remains on site, together with some landscaping including grass, mature trees

and hedge planting.

The southern part of the site, and the two former manor buildings of Brook House and Shepherd House, falls 1.8

within the Victoria Park Conservation Area.

The application site extends to approximately 2.11ha. 1.9

Planning History

A Planning History search has been undertaken and this has been determined that there are no relevant 1.10

planning permissions on site. This largely due to the Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus being in situ since

the 1960s until it became vacant in 2014.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 6

There have been Prior Notification Applications submitted by Nuffield for the demolition of existing buildings 1.11

on site, which is nearing completion. Manchester City Council had no objections to these applications:

Application

Reference

Address Description Status

108593/FO/2015/N2 Elizabeth Gaskell

Campus Hathersage

Road Ardwick

Manchester M13 0JA

Demolition of three former university

campus buildings within a

conservation area.

Application Approved –

May 2015

108652/DEM/2015/N2 Elizabeth Gaskell

Campus Hathersage

Road Ardwick

Manchester M13 0JA

Prior notification for proposed

demolition of four former university

campus buildings.

No objections raised –

May 2015

Environmental Designations

The Site is also situated in the Manchester Air Quality Management Area; requiring additional consideration. 1.12

The Site lies within Flood Zone 1 (as defined by the Environment Agency’s flood zone map) and is therefore 1.13

at low risk of flooding.

Historic Environment

The Application is supported by a Historic Environment Chapter prepared by Heritage Architecture within the 1.14

Environmental Statement (ES). This work has been supported by a full Heritage Assessment of the site and

the surrounding area with full details available within these documents.

The southern part of the Application Site falls partly within the Victoria Park Conservation Area which 1.15

straddles the site. This has been a key consideration in the design evolution for the proposals with an

emphasis placed on preparing a respectful design.

There are no Listed Buildings on the site however there are a number of Non-Designated Heritage Assets, 1.16

as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework and considered within the ES Chapter. These are:

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 7

Description Heritage Designation

Brook House Non designated heritage asset

Shepherds House Non designated heritage asset

Old Building Non designated heritage asset

There are a number of Listed Buildings within the vicinity of the site which are considered, where relevant, 1.17

within the Heritage Statement found within Appendix 7.1 of the Environmental Statement Volume

2.Description of Development

The description of development as stated on the application form is: 1.18

Demolition of existing buildings and structures (as shown on Plan Reference: P4182_1150_A) and erection of a new hospital and wellbeing facility (Use Class C2) together with the use of Shepherd’s House for ancillary office accommodation, car parking, landscaping, access alterations and associated works.

Some of the key aspects underpinning the proposals are the creation of: 1.19

A sustainable redevelopment that has had respect for its surroundings.

An overall offering which is complementary to other existing uses within the Corridor.

A high quality architectural design to the building that reflects the commitment that the Applicants have for

wholesale transformation of the site.

Will provide a hospital and wellbeing facility that will be a flagship development for Nuffield promoting a

more collaborative approach to healthcare.

1.20 Overall, the scheme will deliver a high quality hospital and wellbeing facility in an highly sustainable location

which benefits from being in close proximity to the Manchester Royal Infirmary and the Children’s Hospital.

Environmental Impact Assessment

The EIA process is a procedure used to determine the potential environmental effects of a proposed 1.21

development. The ES is the document containing the findings of the EIA.

Full results of the EIA process are presented within Volumes 1-2 of the ES. 1.22

Volume 1 of the Environmental Statement has been prepared by Deloitte with input from a range of technical 1.23

specialists and includes:

Introduction.

Methodology.

Site, Surroundings and Description of Proposals.

Phasing Strategy and Construction Methodology (Property Alliance Group).

Consideration of Alternatives.

Planning Policy Context.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 8

Heritage (Heritage Architecture)

Townscape and Visual Impact (Planit)

Ecology and Nature Conservation (TEP)

Traffic and Transportation (Curtins)

Noise and Vibration (Buro Happold)

Air Quality (Buro Happold)

Summary of Residual Effects.

Project Team

Details of the EIA Technical Team are set out in Table 1 below. 1.24

Table 1 EIA Technical Team

Topic Assessment Carried Out By

Heritage Heritage Architecture

Townscape and Visual Impact Planit-IE (Virtual Planit)

Ecology and Nature Conservation TEP

Traffic and Transportation Curtins

Noise and Vibration Buro Happold

Air Quality Buro Happold

Planning Context

Throughout the design process and the EIA process, full regard has been had to Government Advice (in the 1.25

form of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)) and guidance set out in the relevant local planning

policy documents. The application proposals have also been prepared by the project partners in consultation

with Manchester City Council and a range of technical stakeholders.

A full review of the proposals against planning policy is included in the Planning Statement, which 1.26

accompanies the planning application and this is summarised within the ES. The review concludes that the

proposals are fully in accordance with adopted and emerging planning policy.

Construction Phasing

The Phasing Strategy and Construction Methodology Chapter of the ES Volume 1, prepared by Nuffield 1.27

Health and Arcadis, describes the proposed construction programme and key activities that will be

undertaken.

An anticipated construction programme is provided at Table 2. 1.28

Table 2 Anticipated Construction Programme

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 9

Activity Description Approximate Start Date

Approximate End Date

Demolition and

Enabling Phase 1

isolate services

licensed removal of all asbestos including asbestos removal within buildings 4-8

licensed removal of all asbestos including asbestos removal within buildings 2-3

grub up and remove drainage as identified on drawings, seal redundant points into remaining manholes

demolish buildings 4-8

grub up foundations and basement and infill

remove Oil Tanks

remove hard standings

April 2015

(demolition of

buildings 4-8 has

already been

completed)

April 2016

Demolition and

Enabling Phase 2

demolish buildings 2-3

grub up foundations and basement and infill;

remove hard standings as identified on drawings.

Following

Planning

determination

period & natural

England License

issue

April 2016

Construction Construction of the new Health and Wellbeing

Centre April 2016 Q4 2017

Development in

operation Q1 2018

Certain elements of the items identified in table above will run concurrently to achieve the overall 1.29

development period.

Consideration of Alternative Options

The EIA Regulations require the ES to identify the alternatives that were considered during the design 1.30

process. The EIA has considered the ‘Do Nothing’ alternative, the use of alternative sites, alternative uses

and alternative designs.

The Development Brief

Nuffield Health ran a design competition to design its new flagship facility on the Former Elizabeth Gaskell 1.31

Site seeking designs which responded to the uniqueness of the site but also matched Nuffield’s ambitions for

the development both from an external design perspective and a need for strong internal connections within

the building to allow for a collaborative approach to healthcare to be fostered.

The competition was won by Pozzini Architects who have since worked with Nuffield to progress the design. 1.32

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 10

The “do nothing” Alternative

The “do nothing” scenario refers to the option of leaving the Application Site as it currently exists. 1.33

The site was previously occupied by the Manchester Metropolitan University Elizabeth Gaskell Campus 1.34

which is now vacant with the University departing the site. The majority existing buildings were constructed in

the 1960s and designed specifically for education purposes; therefore finding a replacement tenant to use

the site ‘as is’ would be challenging.

The demolition of the existing buildings on site (as permitted under a separate Prior Notification Application) 1.35

is nearing completion and as such is already undergoing significant change.

To that extent, a ‘do nothing’ option has not been considered as an alternative as it would represent a 1.36

significant missed opportunity to deliver the redevelopment of the site that will secure new health-care and

wellbeing facilities within the City Centre and would complement existing uses within the Corridor.

A number of key benefits would also be missed should the site not be redeveloped, as set out below: 1.37

The proposals will regenerate a previously developed site which formerly a campus for Manchester

Metropolitan University. The site as it currently exists offers no contribution whatsoever to the wider

regeneration objectives for this part of the City which is located within the Corridor.

The proposals maximise a density of development within a highly accessible location well served by a

choice of means of transport.

The proposal will target a high level of sustainability, including the delivery of CO2 emissions reductions,

as indicated in the Environmental Standards Statement submitted in support of the planning application.

Manchester is the one UK’s fastest growing cities in terms of population and providing for the city’s

healthcare and wellbeing requirements are key elements in allowing the city to continue to serve the

general population.

The development is located in a highly sustainable location within close proximity of a number of public

transport services, including frequent bus services along nearby Oxford Road, and is within 2.75km of the

City Centre core area with its employment, retail and leisure opportunities.

Consideration of Alternative Sites

The proposed development will comprise of a hospital and wellbeing facility complex operated by Nuffield 1.38

Health.

Due to the operational requirements of Nuffield, any site for development needs to be of a certain scale to 1.39

accommodate the buildings required to provide a wide range of services. A crucial element for Nuffield’s

offering is to promote a more collaborative approach to healthcare provision and in order to provide a joined-

up, efficient service a large development footprint is required.

Within this context a number of sites with Manchester may be considered appropriate however many of 1.40

these will either not be available to accommodate development or have other factors which make

development on the site impractical, for example on site may lack accessible transport links or feature

heavily contaminated land.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 11

Nuffield Health has selected the Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus site because it represents an ideal 1.41

location for their new facilities. This has meant that Alternate Sites have not been considered.

The Site, in addition to being of sufficient scale to accommodate the required quantum of development and 1.42

being available for development, benefits from a number of positive factors that confirm it as an excellent

location for the Proposed Development.

The Site is located within the corridor, a growing science, health and technology industries district within the 1.43

Regional Centre. The corridor is home to a wide range of complementary uses to the Proposed

Development. These include the Central Manchester University Foundation Trust Hospitals, including the

Children’s Hospital and Manchester Royal Infirmary (MRI), which are located to the North of the site.

The MRI is a large teaching hospital for Manchester University's Medical School, and a specialist regional 1.44

centre for kidney and pancreas transplants, haematology and sickle cell disease. The hospital’s Heart Centre

is a major provider of cardiac services in the region, specialising in cardiothoracic surgery and cardiology.

Facilities have been upgraded in recent years with a number of the MRI’s wards and clinics, as well as the

renal dialysis unit were moved into new accommodation in 2007 and 2009. More recently, the Hospital has

undertaken a £25 million project to redevelop the Critical Care Facilities, which will provide 52 state-of -the-

art Critical Care bed spaces.

The Children’s Hospital provides specialist healthcare services for children and young people throughout the 1.45

North West, as well as nationally and internationally. The hospital sees 220,000 patient visits each year

across a range of specialties including oncology, haematology, bone marrow transplant, burns, genetics, and

orthopaedics. With 371 beds it is the largest single-site children's hospital in the UK and its Accident and

Emergency Department sees around 145,000 patients each year.

Additionally, both the University of Manchester and Manchester Metropolitan University are located within 1.46

the vicinity of the site. A crucial component to the success of the Proposed Development will be the ability to

recruit a well-trained workforce and the presence of two major universities will help to achieve this. The

University of Manchester’s Medical School is the largest in the country with approximately 2,000

undergraduate students per year working with over 300 GP practices, district hospitals and teaching

hospitals to facilitate their training. Over 400 new doctors graduate from the School every year.

Similarly, Manchester Metropolitan University’s Faculty of Health, Psychology and Social Care provides a 1.47

wide portfolio of undergraduate, postgraduate and professional courses across a range of academic

disciplines including; Nursing, Physiotherapy, Speech and Language Therapy, Social Work, Psychology and

Social Care, based in the University’s new £139 million state of the art Birley Building.

The presence of the above institutions within site close proximity highlights that the Site is the ideal location 1.48

for Nuffield’s hospital and wellbeing facility.

The Site also benefits from excellent accessibility within walking distance of Manchester City and also served 1.49

by strong public transport links including a multitude of bus routes along Oxford Road, a short distance from

the Site. These routes allow access to the City Centre, Fallowfield, Withington and Didsbury.

Consideration of Alternative Uses

As described above the Site’s proximity to a number of complementary uses within the corridor highlight the 1.50

benefits that are gained from developing a hospital and wellbeing facility on the site.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 12

The Proposed Development is compliant with adopted planning policy including the Manchester Core 1.51

Strategy but also the Corridor Spatial Framework which sets the vision for the wider area

The Corridor Spatial Framework sets out the vision for the Corridor with an aspiration that there will be more 1.52

than £2.5billion within the area up to 2020 and that it will gain a reputation as a knowledge industries hub

within Manchester. Similarly, there is an aspiration that by 2020 the Corridor will generate £4.7billion GVA

and have a workforce of 77,000.

The knowledge economy is vital for the economic strength of Manchester, keeping it at the forefront of 1.53

cutting edge technology and techniques that have a global impact. The Corridor is home to a wealth of

knowledge-intensive organisations and businesses. These operate in the areas of health (with particular

concentrations of bio-medical, pharmaceuticals, clinical trials, medical devices and oncology-related

healthcare), education, creative industries, financial services and information communication technologies.

It is clear from the above that the wider regeneration of the Corridor is creating an area where 1.54

complementary uses can prosper and that significant improvements have already been made. The

introduction of a new Nuffield hospital will further contribute to the success of the Corridor and its 2020

vision.

The consideration of alternate uses for the site would mean that an opportunity would be missed to allow the 1.55

development of a high quality hospital and wellbeing facility that would complement and add to existing uses

within the Corridor.

Consideration of Alternative Design

The Proposed Development’s design has progressed through a number of iterations and has been reviewed 1.56

comprehensively by the Project Team. The brief was to create a scheme that responded to the uniqueness

of the site and the aspirations of Nuffield. This initial stage was subject to a competitive design competition;

which was won by Pozzoni.

Following the competition phase, Pozzoni worked closely with Nuffield to further develop the brief for the 1.57

hospital based upon the principals established earlier in the process. This involved close consultation with

stakeholder groups to review the various facilities and departments required within the hospital and the

relationship between each of them.

These various departments were then arranged according to their activities following comprehensive site 1.58

analysis. The site provides the opportunity for both very active, visible activities and more private, quieter

activities to be accommodated alongside each other. Within the design various departments were arranged

to make best use of the advantages provided by both environments.

A significant investment of time was made progressing the design and responding as the project brief which 1.59

has continually evolved. This included revisiting and analysing options and the wider Manchester market for

context. Numerous massing options, forms and site strategies were explored and assessed on for

appropriateness based on a wide range of factors including: urban design, access, parking, Clinical and

Architectural design, landscape opportunities, spatial relationship and views in and out of the site.

A considerable amount of time has gone into considering the internal layout of the Proposed Development to 1.60

ensure that the building allows complementary uses to be located within the same part of the building. This

consideration has also influenced the exterior design of the building.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 13

The design has also considered what an appropriate height would be for the scheme setting on a complex 1.61

ranging between 2 and 4 storeys. The massing of the site has been focused on to Hathersage Road end of

the site, which was a design decision to step the development away from the Victoria Park Conservation

Area to the south of the site.

Similarly, a design decision was made to reduce the height of the ‘Wings’ of the complex as these are 1.62

extended towards the Victoria Park Conservation Area. The wings have more of a human scale to them,

representative of the Victorian terrace houses and villa which predominantly make up the Conservation

Area.

The scheme has bene designed to balance the need for an effective hospital complex against the need to 1.63

respect the surrounding area, including the Victoria Park Conservation Area. This has resulted in the design

presented as part of this submission which represents the best design option for the Proposed Development.

Conclusion

1.64 Alternate options for the site in terms of location, design and uses have been considered during the planning

process however it is considered that the scheme being submitted for the site is in an appropriate form and

location due the following reasons:

The provision of a flagship hospital and wellbeing facility development within the Corridor is in line with

planning policy at all levels and will assist in the delivery of the wider Corridor Spatial Framework that

will bring significant economic and regeneration benefits to this part of the City.

The site is highly accessible using public transport, with the Oxford Road bus corridor within close

proximity. This provides frequent services into Manchester City Centre, where other transport

interchanges including Piccadilly Station, Oxford Road Station and Victoria Station can be found, as well

as to residential areas in South Manchester including Fallowfield and Didsbury.

The site will allow the regeneration of a largely vacant and underutilised brownfield site within the

Corridor. The inclusion of a high quality hospital and wellbeing facility will develop a complementary use

within the Corridor and will experience clustering benefits from being within close proximity to other

health related uses; with the most pertinent being the Manchester Royal Infirmary and the Children’s

Hospital to the north and the health faculties of the University of Manchester and Manchester

Metropolitan University. For the reasons above it is considered that the site is in the most appropriate

location.

Environmental Impacts

Heritage

1.65 The impact assessment has demonstrated that the Proposed Development will result in beneficial impacts to

the historic built environment overall.

1.66 Mitigation for instances of any perceived adverse harm are accrued by the substantial public benefits of the

Proposed Development.

Townscape and Visual Impact

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 14

Introduction

The Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment (TVIA) chapter has been produced by Planit-IE, and 1.67

provides a baseline report, and townscape and visual impact assessment of the proposed development of

the Nuffield Health Hospital and Wellbeing Centre, Hathersage Road, Manchester.

The chapter describes the methods used to assess the impacts, the baseline conditions currently existing at 1.68

the site and within the surroundings, the potential direct and indirect impacts of the development arising from

potential townscape and visual effects, the mitigation measures embedded into the proposals or required in

addition to prevent, reduce, or offset the impacts and any residual impacts. The assessment has been

carried out with reference to the Guidelines for Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment, 3nd Edition, 2013

and with regard to relevant planning policy.

Baseline Conditions

The existing mature trees and villa style buildings (Brook House and Shepherd’s House) to the south of the 1.69

site are key site features of quality and value. However, the site is currently disused and therefore has a

negative impact on the character of the Victoria Park Conservation Area, and the townscape character as a

whole.

The site is located within the Central Manchester townscape character area, as defined by the Local Plan. 1.70

At a more local level, the site and its immediate context can be divided into a number of small-scale

character areas. The site is partially located within the Victoria Park character area to the south, which is

defined by the Victoria Park Conservation Area, and the Hathersage Road and Upper Brook Street Corridor

to the north.

The site is located on key strategic movement routes within the city centre and forms a stepping stone 1.71

between lower density, more residential scale to the south, and higher density city centre development to the

north. The height of the remaining former school building heights also reflect this transition.

A total of 10 principal viewpoints have been identified in conjunction with Manchester City Council. 1.72

Potential Impacts & Mitigation

Construction Phase

The majority of the demolition works have already been carried out prior to submission of the Full Planning 1.73

Application, and the site in this current condition forms the baseline to this assessment. The proposed

development is at a relatively early stage in the design and construction programme. It is therefore difficult

to predict with certainty the precise methodology that will be adopted for construction and site management.

However, some broad potential impacts have been identified. Potentially significant/moderately significant

impacts include:

The visual impact of HGV movement & general construction works;

The visual impacts of temporary screening measure and protective fencing;

The landscape and visual impacts of temporary parking, on-site accommodation and work areas.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 15

Operational Phase

The masterplan has been developed in accordance with good urban design principles, which avoids, 1.74

reduces or offsets potential impacts on the townscape and views. The design principles are described in full

within the Design and Access Statement that accompanies this application.

Cumulative Impacts

In accordance with the Landscape Institute Guidelines, the cumulative impacts of the site in conjunction with 1.75

proposed and committed sites are considered.

The demolition of the former school building will result in a visible ‘gap’ in the urban form, which will 1.76

temporarily impact adversely on some of the viewpoints prior to construction of the new development. The

views include:

View 6 – The former college currently terminates the view along Hathersage Road and provides a

minor landmark for orientation. Demolition will change the character of this view and impact negatively

on legibility. The cumulative impact has therefore been assessed as minor adverse.

View 7 – Demolition will result in a major ‘gap’ in the urban form. The cumulative impact has therefore

been assessed as moderate adverse.

View 8 – Demolition will result in a minor ‘gap’ in the urban form. The cumulative impact has therefore

been assessed as minor adverse.

Residual Impacts

Construction Phase

The implementation of good site management, maintenance and housekeeping will ensure that temporary 1.77

deterioration to landscape resources, character and visual amenity will be kept to a practicable minimum.

Despite these better practice measures, there would still remain inevitable adverse effects during

construction works. However in overall terms the residual effects upon landscape resources, landscape

character and the visual envelope are not anticipated to be significant and the majority of which short term,

temporary and local.

Operational Phase

Townscape Impacts

The proposals have been developed through an iterative process, and mitigation has been embedded into 1.78

the design. As a result, the proposed development is predicted to result in ‘neutral’ or ’beneficial impacts’ to

all townscape elements assessed.

The majority of existing mature trees will be retained and will continue to be managed as part of a wider 1.79

landscape framework within the site. The two villas will also be retained and Shepherd’s House will be

renovated for reuse. Both the trees and villas will ensure that the proposed development will have a

beneficial impact on the Conservation Area and the townscape character.

The scale and massing of the proposed development, and its relationship with Upper Brook Street and 1.80

Hathersage Road are also key considerations. The proposed development will function as a ‘stepping stone’

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 16

between residential scale development predominantly to the south, and the larger scale and massing of

development within the hospital development to the north, and beyond within the city centre.

Visual Impacts

Visual assessment of the site has demonstrated that despite it’s prominent city centre fringe location, the site 1.81

is relatively well screened due to tree cover and the density of surrounding development. None of the

identified viewpoints are predicted to result in negative visual effects. One of the viewpoints (view 1) is not

predicted to have any visual connection to the site. The remainder of the views are predicted to result in

negligible, neutral or minor beneficial impacts.

This report has assessed the landscape and visual impacts of the proposed development within the 1.82

application site boundary. The assessment has been carried out with reference to the Landscape Institute’s

Guidelines for Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd

Edition, 2013.

A three-stage assessment process has been adopted; firstly the nature of receptors (sensitivity) has been 1.83

assessed, secondly the nature of the effects (magnitude) likely to result from the proposed developed have

been assessed. From this the overall significance of the identified effects on receptors have been assessed.

The assessment also considers the cumulative townscape and visual effects.

The existing mature trees and villa style buildings (Brook House and Shepherd’s House) to the south of the 1.84

site are key site features of quality and value. However, the site is currently disused and therefore has a

negative impact on the character of the Victoria Park Conservation Area, urban grain and the townscape

character as a whole.

Temporary adverse impacts are predicted as a result of demolition of remaining buildings within the site, in 1.85

particular the former school building. This will result in a significant ‘gap’ in the urban grain, lack of street

enclosure and additional adverse effects on the Conservation Area character and townscape character. In

addition, there will be temporary adverse impacts on viewpoint 6, 7, 8, and 10.

The proposals have been developed through an iterative process, and mitigation has been embedded into 1.86

the design. As a result, the proposed development is predicted to result in ‘neutral’ or ’beneficial impacts’ to

all townscape elements assessed.

The majority of existing mature trees will be retained and will continue to be managed as part of a wider 1.87

landscape framework within the site. The two villas will also be retained and Shepherd’s House renovated

for reuse. Both the trees and villas will ensure that the proposed development will have a beneficial impact

on the Conservation Area and the townscape character.

The scale and massing of the proposed development, and its relationship with Upper Brook Street and 1.88

Hathersage Road are also key considerations. The proposed development will function as a ‘stepping stone’

between residential scale development predominantly to the south, and the large scale and massing of

development within the hospital development to the north, and beyond within the city centre.

Visual assessment of the site demonstrated that despite its prominent city centre fringe location, the site is 1.89

relatively well screened due to tree cover and the density of surrounding development. A total of ten

principal viewpoints were identified and agreed with the Council. None of the identified viewpoints are

predicted to result in negative visual effects. One of the viewpoints (view 1) is not predicted to have any

visual connection to the site. The remainder of the views are predicted to result in negligible, neutral or

minor beneficial impacts.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 17

Ecology and Nature Conservation The demolition and construction phases of the development works could affect trees, bats, and nesting birds. 1.90

With appropriate precautionary measures in place as part of a Construction Environmental Management

Plan, impacts of the works on bats and nesting birds can be mitigated. The loss of some trees cannot be

avoided, but new planting will compensate for this over the medium to long term.

With appropriate management measures in place as part of a Landscape Management Plan, the ongoing 1.91

operation of the site will not adversely affect wildlife.

Traffic and Transportation The Highways and Transportation chapter of the Environmental Statement has been prepared by Curtins 1.92

and provides an assessment of the likely transport impacts of the application proposals on the site and

sensitive receptors in the surrounding area. It should be read in conjunction with the Transport Assessment

which has been prepared by Curtins.

The Traffic and Transport Chapter demonstrates that the proposed scheme achieves the aims and 1.93

objectives of national and local transportation planning policy.

The accessibility of the site by sustainable modes has been assessed in detail, with the most significant 1.94

findings set out below:

The proposed development is located in close proximity to the University of Manchester, with a high

level of pedestrian infrastructure and services within acceptable walking distances of the site. Further

connections are available to a number of locations via existing public transport links;

The development is situated within an existing established urban area, and there are a significant

number of residential and city centre properties within acceptable distance of the site;

Oxford Road is located to the west of the site and is an important strategic bus route through the area

with a significant number of bus routes connecting to the adjacent hospital, university facilities and

beyond to Manchester city centre. The existing infrastructure provides access to a wide variety of key

facilities and destinations both in Greater Manchester and further afield;

Public transport provision locally to the Health and Wellbeing site will be further enhanced following

completion of the Oxford Road Bus Priority scheme; and

It is considered that the site is well located to benefit from existing pedestrian, cycle and public

transport infrastructure in accordance with the key policies referenced in this report.

The existing traffic flow situation on the local highway network has been determined based on traffic flows 1.95

extracted from Transport for Greater Manchester’s (TfGM) PARAMICS model which also includes the future

traffic implications following completion of the Oxford Road Bus Priority scheme.

The proposed study area includes; 1.96

Oxford Road/Hathersage Road signal controlled junction;

Hathersage Road/Hospital access signal controlled junction;

Hathersage Road/Upper Brook Street signal controlled junction; and

Anson Road/Daisy Bank Road/Oxford Place signal controlled junction.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 18

Highway safety has been considered on the local highway network based on personal injury accident data 1.97

supplied by TfGM which covers the most recent five year period recorded.

This highways and transportation assessment has considered the impact of the proposed development on 1.98

accessibility, traffic flows and highway safety.

In order to derive the anticipated level of traffic which will be generated by the Health and Wellbeing Centre 1.99

proposals reference has been made to the TRICS national database. The TRICS database contains traffic

survey data for a range of land uses and is the industry recognised tool for calculating traffic generation for

new developments.

As the Centre includes a gym facility as part of the wellbeing services, whilst it is considered ancillary to the 1.100

overall health services which are offered, the traffic generation of this element has been considered in

addition to the overall trips generated by the scheme to ensure a robust traffic impact assessment is

undertaken.

The assessment concludes that proposed development is expected to generate a less than 10% increase in 1.101

traffic flows on the majority of links within the study area.

The increase in traffic flows during the operational phase will result in a negligible impact on the local 1.102

highway network.

The construction phase of the proposed development would have a temporary minor adverse impact. 1.103

In terms of safety, the proposed development scheme is not expected to exacerbate any existing highway 1.104

safety issues and therefore the impact is considered to be negligible.

The nuisance arising from construction traffic would be mitigated via considerate construction practices and 1.105

road/vehicle cleaning facilities.

To mitigate against general increase in traffic resulting from the proposed development, a Travel Plan will be 1.106

produced to reduce reliance on the car and promote initiatives that encourage the use of sustainable modes

of travel including walking, cycling and bus services.

Based on the impacts which have been identified it is concluded that there are no traffic and transportation 1.107

reasons why this development should not be granted planning approval.

Noise and Vibration This non-technical summary describes the environmental noise and vibration impact of a proposed 1.108

healthcare facility, hereafter the Proposed Development, in Manchester, UK.

An environmental noise survey was undertaken at the proposed Site to determine the baseline prevailing 1.109

noise climate. The noise survey was undertaken between the 10-11th March 2015. Baseline noise levels at

the Site were found to be dominated by both local road traffic noise from Upper Brook Street, Hathersage

Road, and Oxford Place. No tactile evidence of vibration was found from sources of vibration nor were any

sources of vibration found to exist adjacent to the site including railway lines, construction sites, or industrial

facilities during the Site visit.

A construction noise prediction has been carried out for 5 phases of construction: Site Preparation, 1.110

Excavation, Piling, Welding/Cutting Steal, and General Construction. The construction plant items have been

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 19

based on typical construction items within British Standard BS 5228 and experience from typical schemes.

The unmitigated noise levels have been predicted to range from 67.6-79.5 dB adjacent to the nearest noise

sensitive receptor (NSR 1). With the implementation of a Noise and Vibration Management Plant, mitigation

measures as given in section 8 of BS 5228, and adherence to MCCs hours of construction works it is

predicted that the impact will range from negligible to moderate adverse.

A road traffic noise prediction has been carried out to assess the impact of on the environment during the 1.111

construction stage and during the operational stage of the Proposed Development. The road traffic noise

prediction and assessment has made reference to the Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN) and the

Design Manual of Roads and Bridges (DMRB). The traffic noise during the construction of the Proposed

Development is expected to be temporary and will therefore have a negligible impact on the surrounding

environment. The road traffic noise during the operational stage of the Proposed Development is also

predicted to have a negligible impact on the surrounding environment.

A noise emission prediction at noise sensitive receptors from indicative mechanical plant items during the 1.112

operational phase of the Proposed Development has been undertaken using CadnaA environmental noise

software. The results of the noise model show that a negligible impact from plant noise is predicted if the

sound power level of plant items is limited and an imperforate barrier surrounding the rooftop plant is

implemented. A plant noise assessment will need to be undertaken again upon detailed selection of plant

items such that cumulative noise emissions meet MCC requirements.

Air Quality An assessment of the potential air quality impacts from the Proposed Development has been carried out 1.113

within the EIA.

The Site is located in the Greater Manchester Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), which has been 1.114

declared due to failing to meet certain air quality objectives.

The assessment considers the existing local air quality, and potential air quality impacts from the 1.115

construction and operation of the proposed development.

The potential risk for construction activities to impact upon local air quality has been assessed, and 1.116

recommended mitigation measures given based on this risk. With implementation of these recommended

mitigation measures, the residual impact from construction is considered to be minor adverse to negligible.

With regards to operational impacts, pollutant emissions from traffic generated as a result of the proposed 1.117

development and from onsite energy generation have been assessed. The change in pollutant

concentrations at surrounding residential receptors due to traffic emissions has been predicted using air

dispersion modelling at receptor locations where the impact is likely to be greatest. The predicted impacts at

all modelled receptors is considered negligible. Air quality objectives are predicted to be met at all modelled

receptors.

Assessment of the impacts from the on-site plant emissions indicated that the maximum air quality impact is 1.118

moderate adverse. With the use of emissions abatement technology CHP NOx emissions can be reduced by

80%, which would subsequently result in a negligible residual impact at all modelled receptors.

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 20

Nuffield Health: Former Elizabeth Gaskell Campus Environmental Statement 21

This report and its appendices (“the document”) have been prepared for submission to the planning authority on

the understanding that it will be made publically available on the LPA’s and others’ websites. All copyright and

other proprietary rights in the document remain the property of Deloitte LLP and any rights not expressly granted in

these terms or in the Contract are reserved. The document makes use of a range of third party data sources.

Whilst every reasonable care has been taken in compiling this document, Deloitte cannot guarantee its accuracy.

Neither the whole nor any part of this document nor any reference thereto may be included in any published

document, circular or statement nor published in any way without our written approval as to the form and context in

which it may appear.

Deloitte LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC303675

and its registered office at 2 New Street Square, London EC4A 3BZ, United Kingdom.

Deloitte LLP is the United Kingdom member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (“DTTL”), a UK private

company limited by guarantee, whose member firms are legally separate and independent entities. Please see

www.deloitte.co.uk/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of DTTL and its member firms.