{meta} 30 August 2019 - 13 September 2019

Decisions

In accordance with the constitution, the council publishes decisions taken by the City Mayor, Deputy City Mayors and Lead Members. Use the search options at the bottom of the page to find information regarding decisions taken at executive meetings after 24 January 2017.

Details of previous decisions are available as follows:

Officer decisions are not subject to call-in, however during the period of five working days from the publication of a decision taken by the City Mayor, Deputy City Mayors or a Lead Member, a request to 'call-in' a decision may be made by either:

Requests for call-in are only used in exceptional circumstances and if a decision is not called-in, it becomes effective at 4pm on the fifth working day following publication.

Decisions published

11/09/2019 - Business Case - Learning Disabilities Supported Housing - Decision - Paul Walsh - 20 minutes ref: 545    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Adult Commissioning Committee

Made at meeting: 11/09/2019 - Adult Commissioning Committee

Decision published: 12/09/2019

Effective from: 13/09/2019

Decision:

Salford City Council - Record of Decision

 

I, Councillor Gina Reynolds, Lead Member for Adult Services, Health & Wellbeing and co-chair of the Adults Commissioning Committee, in exercise of the powers contained within the Council Constitution, do hereby approve the Great Places Learning Disability Supported Housing Proposal, Feasibility Assessment Recommendations.

 

The reasons are to support care closer to home, improvements in service quality/outcomes, cost savings and improved accommodation.

         

Options considered and rejected were to maintain the current service model.

         

Assessment of Risk. Low

         

The source of funding is the Integrated Pooled Budget

         

Legal Advice obtained. Yes, Salford Legal Services

 

Financial Advice obtained. Yes, Salford Clinical Commissioning Group

         

Procurement Advice obtained. Not applicable

         

The following documents have been used to assist the decision process.

         

Refer to report presented to Adults Commissioning Committee dated 11 September 2019

Contact Officer: Paul Walsh                    Tel No:  0161 212 4844

 

The appropriate scrutiny committee to call-in the decision is the Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel.

 

 

Signed:   GINA REYNOLDS                   Dated:          11 September 2019

 

             Lead Member Adult Services, Health & Wellbeing 

 

This decision was published on 12 September 2019.   

                                        

This decision will come in force at 4.00 p.m. on 19 September 2019 unless it is called-in in accordance with the Decision Making Process Rules.

 


11/09/2019 - Additional Care Home Fees for Hospitality Charges Above Care Requirements - Steve Dixon/Francine Thorpe - Decision - 15 minutes ref: 546    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Adult Commissioning Committee

Made at meeting: 11/09/2019 - Adult Commissioning Committee

Decision published: 12/09/2019

Effective from: 13/09/2019

Decision:

Salford City Council - Record of Decision

 

I, Councillor Gina Reynolds, Lead Member for Adult Services, Health & Wellbeing and co-chair of the Adults Commissioning Committee, in exercise of the powers contained within the Council Constitution, do hereby approve the implementation of the policy not to fund additional fees related to hospitality charges not related to care requirements that will be applicable to all commissioned health and care services in Salford.

 

The Reasons are: This will mean a consistent policy across health and care in Salford with regards to additional hospitality fees not related to care requirements. It would also mitigate the risk of inconsistency in dealing with requests individually.

 

Options considered and rejected were:

(1)  Do nothing and deal with requests on a case by case basis.

 

(2)  Salford commissioners to take further legal advice around this specific case and around overall principle going forward.       

 

Assessment of Risk has been completed in the paper by Salford CCG contract and finance team as well the Salford CCG continuing healthcare team.

         

The source of funding for commissioning is the adult’s pooled budget.

         

Legal Advice obtained is from Hempson’s commissioned by Bury CCG.

 

Financial Advice obtained by Salford CCG finance and contracts team.

         

The following documents have been used to assist the decision process.

 

Legal advice by Hempsons to Bury CCG.

         

Contact Officer: Phillip Kemp        Tel No:  0161 212 4989

 

The appropriate scrutiny committee to call-in the decision is the Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel.

 

 

Signed:   GINA REYNOLDS                   Dated:          11 September 2019

 

              Lead Member Adult Services, Health & Wellbeing 

 

This decision was published on 12 September 2019.                                    

This decision will come in force at 4.00 p.m. on 19 September 2019 unless it is called-in in accordance with the Decision Making Process Rules.

 


11/09/2019 - Request for Approval - Appointment of two Project and Programme Managers through the CAPPS or STAR Consultancy Framework to Take a Lead on Grant Funded Infrastructure Projects ref: 544    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Procurement Board

Made at meeting: 11/09/2019 - Procurement Board

Decision published: 11/09/2019

Effective from: 19/09/2019

Decision:

Salford City Council - Record of Decision

 

I, Councillor Hinds, as Chair of the Procurement Board and Lead Member for Finance and Support Services, in exercise of the powers contained within the City Council constitution do hereby approve:

 

(1)       The appointment of 2 appropriately skilled consultant project and programme manager through the CAPPS Construction and Professional Services Framework or the STAR Procurement Framework to provide support in connection with the City Council’s growing workload of grant funded infrastructure projects.  This will initially be for a 12 month period.

 

(2)       An option to extend the appointments beyond the initial 12 month period, subject to future work load, availability of funding and reaching agreement with the Councils HR team and that;

 

(3)       Delegated Authority be given to the Strategic Director for Place to authorise an extension, subject to future workload, availability of funding and reaching agreement with the Councils HR team.

 

The Reasons are:

 

·       Salford City Council’s Regeneration Team has successfully made submissions for external funding for a range of infrastructure projects through both Growth Deal and the Greater Manchester Mayor’s Cycling and Walking Challenge Fund (MCF).

 

·       The City Council’s Regeneration Team had already received authorisation from Procurement Board on the 23rd January & 13th March 2019 to appoint 3 project and programme managers, to lead on the development and delivery of these projects.

 

·       Further to this, following GMCA Board on the 30th June 2019, the City Council was advised that it had also successfully secured additional MCF project development funding for the £28 million City Centre Salford ‘Active Centres, Corridors & Neighbourhoods Project’ and £2 million RHS links project.

 

·       In addition, further funding bids have been submitted for a significant pipeline of new projects.

 

·       Salford City Council together with the other districts across Greater Manchester are now coming under increasing pressure from the GMCA to ensure that adequate resources are in place to develop and deliver the MCF projects where funding has been awarded.

 

·       The Regeneration Team in the City Council has inadequate resource to fully meet this demand.

Options considered and rejected were not to appoint based on the following:

 

§  That without additional resource, the Council does not have the ability to deliver the infrastructure projects against which it has already secured funding.

§  Equally, the council’s ability to attract further grant funding for infrastructure projects is limited without additional resource in place.

 

Assessment of Risk: Overall risk to the Council is considered to be medium

This is based on the two bullet points immediately above, which relate to the council not being able to deliver externally funded projects.

Source of Funding:

 

The proposal to appoint 2 programme managers who will be working on projects   which are funded from the Growth deal grant and the Majors challenge fund, allow all costs to be re-claimed on a staged basis from the grant funding body at the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA).

 

Legal Advice obtained from Tony Hatton- 0161 219 6323

Financial Advice obtained from Natalie Birchall – ext 2316

Procurement Advice obtained from Christine Flisk – ext 6245

 

Contact Officer: Perry Twigg ext 6053

*         This decision is not subject to consideration by another Lead Member

*         The appropriate scrutiny committee to call-in the decision is the      Growth and Prosperity Scrutiny Panel.

 

 

Signed:    BILL HINDS                 Dated:      11 September 2019                                                       

                     Lead Member

 

 

This decision was published on     11 September 2019.

This decision will come in force at 4.00 p.m. on   18 September 2019 unless it is called-in in accordance with the Decision Making Process Rules.


10/09/2019 - Eccles and Patricroft Recreation Grounds, Barton - Section 106 Investment. ref: 543    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Lead Member for Planning and Sustainable Development

Made at meeting: 10/09/2019 - Lead Member for Planning and Sustainable Development

Decision published: 10/09/2019

Effective from: 18/09/2019

Decision:

Salford City Council - Record of Decision

 

I, Councillor Derek Antrobus, Lead Member for Planning and Sustainable Development, in exercise of the powers contained within the Council’s Constitution, do hereby approve:

 

  1. The expenditure of £275,000 of Section 106 contributions towards open space improvements at Eccles Recreation Ground and Patricroft Recreation Ground.

 

The reasons are to meet the requirement of the relevant Section 106 Agreement detailed within the report and to improve local open space provision.

 

Assessment of risk: Low – The delivery of the works at Eccles Recreation Ground and Patricroft Recreation Ground, will satisfy the terms of the Section 106 Agreement.

 

 

The source of funding is a Section 106 contribution of £275,000 which has been received from the development located at:

 

§  The former Newhaven Business Park, Barton Lane, Eccles. (Section 106 Ref: 374 - 14/65186/FUL)

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Contact Officer and Telephone No: Paul Hutchings 0161 793 2574

Date: 29th August 2019

Comments: The £275,000 Section 106 funding as identified in the report has been received and is available to fund the works.

 

 

Officer: Steve Davey    TEL NO: 0161 793 3762

 

This decision is not subject to consideration by another Lead Member.

The appropriate Scrutiny Panel to call-in the decision is the Growth & Prosperity Scrutiny Panel / Community & Neighbourhoods Scrutiny Panel.

 

 

 

Signed: Councillor Antrobus                                 Dated: 10th September 2019                                               

Lead Member for Planning and Sustainable Development

 

 

FOR DEMOCRATIC SERVICES USE ONLY

 

This decision was published on 10th September 2019.

 

This decision will come in force at 4.00pm on 17th September 2019, unless it is called-in in accordance with the Decision Making Process Rules.

 


10/09/2019 - City of Salford (Various Roads) Traffic Regulation Order 2019 ref: 542    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Lead Member for Planning and Sustainable Development

Made at meeting: 10/09/2019 - Lead Member for Planning and Sustainable Development

Decision published: 10/09/2019

Effective from: 18/09/2019

Decision:

Salford City Council - Record of Decision

 

I, Councillor Derek Antrobus, Lead Member for Planning and Sustainable Development, in exercise of the powers contained within the Council Constitution, do hereby authorise the making of the below mentioned Traffic Regulation Order:

 

CITY OF SALFORD (VARIOUS ROADS) TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER 2019

 

The Reasons are:  

The Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO) is proposed in order to comply with a request from the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police to potentially control the movement of pedestrians and vehicles on City streets as part of a package of measures aimed at improving the security of people in crowded places and protecting damage to buildings from a potential terrorist attack.

The Order would give to an officer of Greater Manchester Police of the rank of Inspector or above the power to restrict all or part of any City street at their discretion on the basis of a security assessment or intelligence of a threat. The discretion must be exercised in accordance with the Schedule and any agreed Protocol for the time being in force to ensure that any interference is proportionate and that such restrictions are for the minimum extent and for the minimum period necessary.

 

Assessment of Risk:

In considering the request for an ATTRO, regard has been given to the duty to act in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. In relation to possible restriction of access to property, any interference with Article 1 rights to enjoyment of property must be justified. Interference may be regarded as justified where it is lawful, pursues a legitimate purpose, is not discriminatory, and is necessary.

It must also strike a fair balance between the public interest and private rights affected (i.e. be proportionate). It is considered that the public interest in being protected by the existence and operation of the ATTRO outweighs any interference with private rights which is likely to occur when restrictions are in operation.

The scope of restrictions must be proportionate and should only last until the likelihood of danger or damage is removed or reduced sufficiently in the judgment of a senior police officer.

                 It is considered that the Schedule to the ATTRO will ensure that any interference is proportionate, and, given the risks to life and property which could arise if an incident occurred, and the opportunity provided by the ATTRO to remove or reduce the threat of and/or impacts of incidents, the ATTRO is considered to be justified and any resulting interference legitimate.

 

The source of funding is from – the Highways Block 3 Capital Allocation for other minor works, in the 2019/20 financial year.

 

Legal Advice obtained: 

 

Traffic Regulation Orders

 

The grounds for making traffic regulation orders are set out in Section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (‘the RTRA‘). The main grounds are listed below:

 

a)    For avoiding danger to persons or other traffic using the road or any other road or for preventing the likelihood of such danger arising.

 

b)    For preventing damage to the road or any building on or near the road.

 

c)    For facilitating the passage on the road or any other road of any class of traffic (including pedestrians).

 

d)    For preventing the use of the road by vehicular traffic of a kind which or its use by vehicular traffic in a manner, which is unsuitable, having regard to the existing character of the road or adjoining property.

 

e)    For preserving the character of the road in a case where it is especially suitable for use by persons on horseback or on foot.

 

f)     For preserving or improving the amenities of the area through which the road runs.

 

g)    For any of the purposes specified in paragraphs (a) to (c) of subsection 1 of section 87 of the Environment Act 1995 (Air Quality).

Terrorism

 

An order may be made under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984(“the Act”)

 

      section 1(1)(a) for the purpose of avoiding or reducing, or reducing the likelihood of, danger connected with terrorism (for which purpose the reference to persons or other traffic using the road shall be treated as including a reference to persons or property on or near the road).

 

      section 1(1)(b) for the purpose of preventing or reducing damage connected with terrorism.

 

      section 6 made for a purpose mentioned in section 1(1)(a) or (b) may be made for that purpose as qualified by subsection (1) or (2) above.

                 In this section of the Act “terrorism” has the meaning given by section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

 

Definition of Terrorism - section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (by virtue of section 22C(6) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984) defines ‘Terrorism’ as:

 

(a) The use or threat of action where:

(1) it involves serious violence against a person; or

(2) it involves serious damage property; or

(3)  it endangers a person’s life, other than that of the person committing the action; or

(4)  it creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public; or

(5) it is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system; and

(b) The use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public; and

(c) The use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause

 

The ATTRO can only be made on the recommendation of the Chief Constable of Police.

 

Provisions          

                                                                             

The provisions which can be included in ATTROs are the same as for regular traffic regulation orders, but with the following differences –

 

§  Pedestrians can be prevented from accessing premises which are only accessible to them from that road.

§  Section 92 of the Act can be used to place bollards and other obstructions just like they can be for permanent traffic regulation orders.

§  The ATTRO may authorise the undertaking of works for the purpose of, or for a purpose ancillary to, another provision of the ATTRO.

§  By virtue of 22CA of the Counter–Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 Any statutory requirement to publish a proposal for, or a notice of, the making of an order does not apply to an order made by virtue of section 22C if the chief officer of police for the area to which the order relates considers that to do so would risk undermining the purpose for which the order is made.

§  The ATTRO may give power to a police constable to direct that a provision of the ATTRO shall (to such extent as the constable may specify) be commenced, suspended or revived (eg. to allow a constable to decide when lorries are prohibited from using the road).

§  The ATTRO may confer a discretion on a police constable (eg. to restrict use of a road by pedestrians to such number of persons as he considers reasonable in the circumstances).

§  The ATTRO may confer a power on a police constable in relation to the placing of structures or signs and may apply in connection with a provision of the Act with or without modifications (eg the power under Section 67 to place traffic signs on a road).

§  By virtue of 22CA of the Counter –Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 Any statutory requirement to publish a proposal for, or a notice of, the making of an order does not apply to an order made by virtue of section 22C if the chief officer of police for the area to which the order relates considers that to do so would risk undermining the purpose for which the order is made.

 

General

 

In addition Section 122 of the RTRA requires the Council when exercising its functions under this Act to do so in such a way as (so far as practicable having regard to the matters specified below) to secure the expeditious convenient and safe movement of traffic and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway.  The matters specified are:

 

a)     the desirability of securing and maintaining reasonable access to premises;

b)     the effect on the amenities of an area;

c)      the national air quality strategy prepared under Section 80 of the Environment Act 1995;

d)     the importance of facilitating the passage of public service vehicles and of securing the safety and convenience of persons using or desiring to use such vehicles; and

e)     Any other matters appearing to the Council to be relevant.         

 

As the local traffic authority, the Council has the duty to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of traffic (having regard to the effect on amenities) (section 122 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984). The Schedule to the draft ATTRO at Appendix 3 sets out requirements to ensure that any restrictions will be the minimum necessary to remove or reduce the danger and are consistent with the statutory requirements for making the ATTRO. In implementing the ATTRO the traffic impacts of restricting or prohibiting traffic to roads within Manchester, including, potentially pedestrian traffic, will be considered. In the event of a threat, the disruption to traffic flow would also have to be weighed against the threat of more severe disruption and greater risk being caused due to failure to prevent an incident.

 

Having a permanent ATTRO in place covering all the highways within the City Centre is considered essential due to the high density nature of the City, and the widespread nature of potential high profile targets.

It would mean that the Police would rely on the order being generally available as an operational tool but on a contingency basis that could be “activated” at any time. This would enable speedier activation of security measures and would meet operational requirements.

By way of further controls, the Schedule to the draft ATTRO requires that in most cases at least seven days’ notice of any restrictions must be given to persons likely to be affected (unless this is not possible due to urgency or where the giving of notice might itself undermine the reason for activating the ATTRO), and notice must also in any event be given to the Council and other affected traffic authorities.

The requirement for notice is intended to mitigate adverse traffic impacts by enabling alternative transport arrangements to be put in place. In addition, the Schedule prohibits any restriction being in place for more than 48 hours without the prior approval of the Council.

 

In line with statutory obligations for advertising Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO’s), including ATTRO’s, the proposals were advertised the Manchester Weekly(Salford Edition) on 15th August 2019 for a period of 21 days.  During this time formal objections can be made to the proposals.  No objections to the proposal were received.

 


Contact: Azra Furheen    Tel. 0161 234 4173

 

 

Financial Advice obtained:  N/A

 

Procurement Advice obtained: N/A


Contact Officer: Robert Owen                   Tel No 0161 779 4848

 

This decision is not subject to consideration by another Lead Member

 

The appropriate scrutiny panel to call-in the decision is the Growth & Prosperity Scrutiny Panel.

 

 

 

 

 

Signed: Councillor Antrobus                                             Dated: 10th September 2019

Lead Member for Planning & Sustainable Development

 

 

FOR DEMOCRATIC SERVICES USE ONLY

 

This decision was published on 10th September 2019.

 

This decision will come in force at 4.00 p.m. on 17th September 2019, unless it is called-in in accordance with the Decision Making Process Rules.

 


09/09/2019 - Land at Queen Street, Ordsall ref: 541    Recommendations Approved

Decision Maker: Property / Regeneration Briefing

Made at meeting: 09/09/2019 - Property / Regeneration Briefing

Decision published: 09/09/2019

Effective from: 17/09/2019

Decision:

Salford City Council - Record of Decision

LAND AT QUEEN STREET, GREENGATE, SALFORD

 

I, Paul Dennett, City Mayor, in exercise of the powers contained within the City Council’s constitution do hereby:-

 

  1. Authorise the disposal by way of Agreement for Lease of a 999 year leasehold interest in land at Queen Street, Greengate to Renaker Build Limited on the agreed main heads of terms.
  2. Authorise Salford City Council to enter into an option to repurchase if development is not progressed by an agreed longstop date.
  3. Authorise the Joint Legal Service to conclude all documentation necessary to complete the legal formalities.

 

The Reasons: To generate a capital receipt and facilitate redevelopment of the site, guided by the delivery priorities and aims of the Greengate Regeneration Strategy.

 

Assessment of Risk is Low

 

The source of funding: N/A

 

Legal Advice obtained:  Michelle Brice, Principal Solicitor 219 6303

 

Financial Advice obtained:  Alex Archer, Finance Manager 778 0498

 

The following documents have been used to assist the decision process-

Report submitted to Property/Regeneration Briefing on 9th September 2019


Contact Officer: John Nugent (Urban Vision)   

Tel No 0161 779 6072

 

This decision is not subject to consideration by another Lead Member/Director

The appropriate scrutiny panel to call-in the decision is the Growth and Prosperity Scrutiny Panel.

 

 

 

Signed: Paul Dennett

City Mayor

Date: 9th September 2019

 

 

*           This decision was published on Monday, 9th September, 2019.

*           This decision will come in force at 4.00 pm on Monday, 16th September, 2019unless it is called-in in accordance with the Decision Making Process Rules.