This is the first glimpse of how a Pendle “care village” is going to look.
Work is set to begin on the Gibfield Road development, in Colne, after plans were approved at the latest Pendle Council Colne and District Committee meeting.
Councillors gave the green light to proposals for six two-bed bungalows for the 55+ age group and 16 one-bed extra care flats in one two-storey block with a link to the existing care home. The Silk Healthcare application also includes plans for the erection of a single-storey extension and associated car parking and landscaping.
Now, a computer generated image of the site has been produced, with the applicant confirming that work is due to commence in April for a scheduled opening date of February 2016.
Silk Healthcare’s managing director Angela Swift said: “Silk Healthcare is proud and privileged to have been granted permission by the Pendle Borough Council to develop its first care village which is expected to be the precursor of many similar facilities across the North of England.
“The bungalows and supported living apartments will become an integral part of Silk Healthcare’s flagship residential care home Belvedere Manor opened in January.
“Not only is this a first for Silk Healthcare but a first for the people of Pendle. We are delighted at the interest we have received since permission was granted which shows this is a much-needed facility.”
A total of 17 car parking spaces will form part of the new development - a proposal that sparked some concern among residents. The application had been recommended for approval by case officer Kathryn Hughes.
Leader of Pendle Council Coun. Joe Cooney said: “One of our concerns was the impact it was going to have on the surrounding neighbours, but everything they have done is in line with policy.
“It wasn’t an easy decision to make, but there was no real reason not to accept it.
“Hopefully it will be a success when it’s finished.”
Coun. Tony Greaves told the Colne Times he had never heard the development being described as a “care village” and that he felt developers were “being greedy”.
He said: “I feel that they are squeezing too much onto the site, but there were no valid planning reasons for turning it down.
“The main concerns are traffic and parking and I think that we were again let down by the county highways who said it was OK.”