1 COMMUNITY FORUM (PETERSFIELD, LISS & SURROUNDING VILLAGES) 9 October 2013
EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL
At a meeting of the Community Forum (Petersfield, Liss and Surrounding Villages) held on 9 October 2013.
Present:
Councillor J Butler (Chairman)
Councillors P Aiston, B Ayer, H Ayer, J Gray, R Harris, J Onslow, G Stacpoole and J West
Partners:
Town Councillor C Mills and Parish Councillors B Biggs, H Linsley and C Robinson.
14 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs N Drew, D Parkinson and Parish Cllr Robinson.
15 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES
The minutes of the last meeting held on 2 July 2013 and the Extraordinary meeting held on 31 July 2013 were confirmed as correct records and signed.
16 CHAIRMAN’S ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Chairman:
(i) Pointed out the location of the fire exits; (ii) Asked that all present switched off their mobile phones; (iii) Asked that members of the public used the roving microphone when speaking; (iv) Said that 2014 marked 100 years since the outbreak of World War 1. It also marked the 70 th anniversary of the D Day landings of Word War 2. Many communities across the country were planning local events to commemorate these two momentous events.
As a Forum, the Chairman asked if there was an appetite amongst people to work together to plan an event to mark either or both of these events. There was money available from the Big Lottery that could be bid for, as well as money available from the Forum;
(v) Announced that there would be an Extraordinary meeting of the Community Forum on Thursday 21 st November 2013 at 6.30pm in the Council Chamber. The topic of the meeting would be to consider Liss Parish Council’s request to transfer previously allocated developer contribution funds from their proposed skate
2 COMMUNITY FORUM (PETERSFIELD, LISS & SURROUNDING VILLAGES) 9 October 2013
park project to their current project to construct a new pavilion building on West Liss Recreation Ground; and (vi) Said that the presentation for Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan would be presented before the item for Bulmer House in order to allow a longer discussion on Bulmer House.
17 DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS
There were no declarations of interest.
18 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
There were no public questions.
19 PETERSFIELD NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
The Forum received a presentation from John Palmer, local resident and a member of the Neighbourhood Plan Project Group, which is attached as Appendix 1 to these minutes.
Following the presentation there was an opportunity for questions.
• Would the website have all of the up to date information on it in preparation for the options weekend on 26 th and 27 th October 2013?
The Neighbourhood Plan Project Group would put as much information on the website as they could both before and after the options weekend. Unfortunately, the consultants would not be able to produce the information much in advance of that weekend which would limit the richness of the detail. He therefore encouraged people to come to that weekend. The Neighbourhood Plan Project Group would make provision for feedback on the website
• Given the timetable of the Joint Core Strategy and the new range of housing numbers for Petersfield, it seemed optimistic to deal with both ends of the housing range.
The planning team had made the assumption that it would be the higher range, however if it was lower, they would draw back from that.
• The findings so far had showed that people would prefer several small scale developments as opposed to larger sites. Were they confident that there were enough smaller sites to be able to do this?
The target was purely the number of dwellings, beyond that, it had not been specified. If building was high density on larger sites, the requirement could be met easily. Town centre sites was another option where smaller developments could be built. Information from Housing Needs showed the types of property that there was a shortage of. This included homes for local first time buyers in particular. There was also a growing families scenario where the jump from a three bedroom to four bedroom property was more than people could afford. Older people in
3
Community Forum (Petersfield, Liss & Surrounding Villages) (9.10.13)
larger homes wanted to downsize and move to smaller properties near the town centre.
Chris Paterson from the South Downs National Park Authority said that using interactive maps, residents had identified that there were 69 sites that could possibly be used for development. The next task was for a series of planning consultants to see if those sites identified were actually developable. Once that had been completed, they would bring forward proposals for the sites that were developable.
20 END OF THE ROAD FOR BULMER HOUSE?
The Forum received a presentation from Jess Hutchinson (Director of Operations and Transformation, In House Services), Hampshire County Council (HCC), which is attached as Appendix 2 to these minutes.
Then Forum also received a presentation from Debbie Buckland, Donna Moore and Heather Charley from Guinness Hermitage regarding Juniper Court in Gosport which was an extra care assisted living scheme which offered individual apartments with onsite 24 hour care.
Following the presentation there was an opportunity for questions. Sally Jones (Area Director, South East) HCC, Gill Nother (Service Manager, In House Services), HCC and Peter Rush (Strategic Commissioning Manager, Extra Care), HCC were also present to answer questions.
• The facilities at Juniper Court looked very nice. Was the plan to close Bulmer House and move everyone to Juniper Court?
There was a waiting list for Juniper Court which was managed by Gosport Borough Council and could be an option should those in Bulmer House want to consider it. However, the reality for most residents was more likely to be moving to other options in the area. There were no other HCC facilities within Petersfield but there were a number of independent sector homes. HCC as a provider only supplied 15% of the care market. There were 10 independent sector homes within a six mile radius of Petersfield that looked after Elderly Mentally Infirm (EMI) residents.
• When mentioning Juniper Court and other extra care schemes, 24/7 care was referred to and visits to people. When people had dementia and were not constantly supervised, unfortunate things could happen as they may not realise what they were doing. Some people felt that an extra care home would not be suitable for someone with middle to severe dementia.
HCC understood the concerns raised. Lots of people with dementia had a range of behaviours, and they would be assessed to see where it would be best to place them. For those with extreme dementia, extra care may not be the most appropriate place to house them. Similarly,
4 COMMUNITY FORUM (PETERSFIELD, LISS & SURROUNDING VILLAGES) 9 October 2013
even with residential care, despite the best will of the staff, residents may have to move to nursing homes to receive specialist care.
• A resident raised a concern regarding the alleged impartiality of a Hampshire County Councillor. The husband of this County Councillor had links to a property developing company which had built a retirement village elsewhere in the District.
The development which the resident had referred to offered no affordable housing. If developers built a certain number of houses and were not providing affordable housing, they would make a contribution to the District Council to enable subsidised affordable housing off-site. Should a decision be made to close Bulmer House, all accommodation that would go on that site would be affordable. The company referred to by the resident were not interested in building affordable housing.
The County Councillor would have made a declaration at the time of her election.
• Those residents who were currently in Bulmer House had moved there with the intention of living there and had signed a contract. By closing Bulmer House it was taking away the residents’ rights of staying there and could lead to a decline in their health. Should they be moved for the sake of providing extra care?
HCC were dealing with this in a proper and most sensitive way. If a decision was made to close Bulmer House, one of the things that HCC were making sure of was that they were providing as much continuity as possible. The social care and medical needs of the residents would be taken into account in any move.
It was important to note that HCC, along with other local authorities, were having to think of the future generations of older people, but still considering those already there. Some national research by the University of Birmingham showed that when moving residents from one home to another, in the vast majority of cases there was an improvement in the quality of outcome. There was no evidence to show that people suffered a decline as a result of having to be placed elsewhere as long as the move was dealt with competently and with sensitivity.
• The Rowan Ward in Petersfield had closed and been moved to Gosport. The elderly and mentally infirmed were being moved to Winchester and Basingstoke. It seemed that the vulnerable people of Petersfield were being moved out of the town, when what was actually required was to include something for the very vulnerable people.
The benefits of extra care was the flexibility of visits during the day. Having looked at a record of one to one care at Juniper Court, one resident had received 38.5 hours of one to one care per week. This was impossible or very difficult to deliver in HCC’s own care homes.
• How much would it cost to rent the flats at Juniper Court?
5
Community Forum (Petersfield, Liss & Surrounding Villages) (9.10.13)
A one bedroom flat with seven lunchtime meals would cost £160.97 per week. However, the vast majority of residents at Juniper Court were eligible for housing benefit. If they were eligible for full housing benefit, the shortfall they would have to pay was £26.73 per week.
• There was a suggestion that HCC’s offices in the old college building could be developed as it was currently vacant.
The college site was not big enough and had been discounted. The listed building could not be converted.
• If the current residents of Bulmer House were going to be moved to private care homes, did they have the capacity and what was the cost implication?
If the decision was made to close Bulmer House, it was acknowledged that the alternative options would need to be affordable. HCC had made sure that they could purchase care from the homes that they were suggesting. They would not suggest expensive homes.
• What was the difference between extra care and that of the care received in a nursing home?
Extra care was qualified social care workers, as it was with residential care. Nursing homes use qualified nurses who are on site 24 hours.
• Why could HCC not keep Bulmer House and also have extra care on the site?
This question had been raised at an event the previous week and it would be taken forward as a consultation response. It was difficult to continue to develop options where the buildings were outdated and not needed as much as they were 20 years ago. It had to be looked at in an objective way as to what Bulmer House could deliver in five, 10 or 20 years time and the cost of refurbishment would be very expensive. It would be a challenge to invest in that as well as invest in the future of extra care given the current financial climate.
• A District Councillor had visited Juniper Court and was very impressed. They felt that Petersfield would benefit from a similar scheme and that it would be a huge asset.
• A resident felt that the picture painted of Bulmer House was very negative when in actual fact it was very bright and cheerful with activities taking place. His children were currently able to visit their Grandmother there very easily.
Following the discussion, it was RESOLVED that the presentation and the comments of the Forum be noted.
6 COMMUNITY FORUM (PETERSFIELD, LISS & SURROUNDING VILLAGES) 9 October 2013
21 ONE-OFF COMMUNITY PROJECT FUND APPLICATION: LISS ARCHAEOLOGICAL GROUP
The Forum considered the report of the Community Project Worker, CT.024/13, which had been previously circulated.
RESOLVED that £950 be awarded to Liss Archaeological Group to carry out a community based archaeological excavation at Windmill Farm, Colemore.
The meeting commenced at 6.30pm and concluded at 8.10pm
Chairman
Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan Page 7 Minute Item2 Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
• Background • What is a Neighbourhood plan Page 8 • What can it do and what can’t it do • Why is it important • Progress so far • What we have done • Summary of feedback • How the plan is shaping up • Key Principles • Vision • What Next? • Options Weekend • Timeline to the Referendum Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
What is a Neighbourhood Plan?
• A new approach to planning
Page 9 • Giving local people a REAL say in the future of their community
• Provide finer ‘local’ detail to complement more general planning policy
• They are COMMUNITY LED, supported by Local Authorities
• They cover all forms of development (homes, shops, offices, warehouses, community buildings)
• They can protect important green spaces and historic buildings
• It’s a chance for YOU to decide how Petersfield should look in 2030 Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
What can our Neighbourhood Plan do?
• Create a vision for the future of Petersfield Page 10
• Identify sites for new homes, shops, offices, green space, local community facilities etc
• Say what development should look like, how much parking there should be and perhaps how much green space.
• Set out the community’s desires regarding transport, infrastructure, tourism, leisure, community facilities and environmental issues – and propose a how these objectives might be achieved Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
What can our Neighbourhood Plan NOT do ? • Stop development already allocated or permitted
Page 11 • Propose policies or allocations contrary to the EHDC/SDNPA strategic policies or national policies
• Propose less development than that identified in the development plan.
• Propose development which would breach other legal requirements
• Re-instate services – A neighbourhood plan can not demand that the police station is re-instated in Petersfield
• Influence or propose national Infrastructure schemes / projects
• Ignore or go against available data and evidence Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Why is a Neighbourhood Plan important for Petersfield .? • Opportunity to create a Vision for the future and consciously work towards it not just decide the next-worst place to put new homes. Page 12
• Opportunity to influence the design, quality and key characteristics of new buildings not just accept what we are given.
• Opportunity to ensure that new development happens where we want it not simply where the developers manage to buy land.
• Opportunity to preserve, maintain and enhance our green spaces and connections to the surrounding countryside not just hope that everything will work out OK. Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Petersfield’s Neighbourhood Plan - Update
• Background • What is a Neighbourhood plan
Page 13 • What can it do and what can’t it do • Why is it important • Progress so far • What we have done • Summary of feedback • How the plan is shaping up • Key Principles • Vision • What Next? • Options Weekend • Timeline to the Referendum Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
What have we done so far ..?
• We have held a series of workshops and consultations Page 14 • We have analysed these to understand what people want
• We have analysed existing data and evidence (census, previous housing need studies, transport studies)
• We have commissioned new research to provide robust information (housing needs) Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Summary of findings
• Majority would like to keep the character and ambience of the Town • Preference for several small scale developments located around the Town Page 15 rather than a few large sites • Recognition of the need for affordable housing to enable local people to live here • New housing to maintain the quality and design of existing or be even better with regard to energy efficiency • Attract businesses here for employment opportunities • Protect, conserve and enhance open spaces and links to the countryside • Attract hotels to enable Petersfield’s role as the main Gateway to the SDNP to be a major centre for leisure activities • Recognise that our infrastructure i.e. transport, health, schools, leisure, community facilities needs to complement any additional housing Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Petersfield’s Neighbourhood Plan - Update
• Background • What is a Neighbourhood plan Page 16 • What can it do and what can’t it do • Why is it important • Progress so far • What we have done • Summary of feedback • How the plan is shaping up • Key Principles • Vision • What Next? • Options Weekend • Timeline to the Referendum Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Key Principles: 1. Petersfield must continue to feel ‘compact’ Page 17 2. Petersfield must continue to have a close relationship with the surrounding countryside
3. Petersfield must retain its markets, festivals and events
4. Petersfield must continue to act as a centre for the surrounding area Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Our Vision: In the years up to and beyond 2028, the people of Petersfield will live in a thriving market town and recognised gateway to the South Downs National Page 18 Park.
Careful development and use of space will have resulted in a town which still feels compact whilst being closely connected to the surrounding landscape through footpath and cycle links as well as its many green spaces.
Our town will have retained its market character which will be further enhanced by the quality of its built and natural environment. Its vibrant town centre will be supported by a mix of retail, business and residential accommodation which meets the needs of the people of Petersfield and the surrounding areas whilst respecting the town’s heritage and setting within the South Downs National Park. Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Petersfield’s Neighbourhood Plan - Update
• Background • What is a Neighbourhood plan
Page 19 • What can it do and what can’t it do • Why is it important • Progress so far • What we have done • Summary of feedback • How the plan is shaping up • Key Principles • Vision • What Next? • Options Weekend • Timeline to the Referendum Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Options Weekend – 26 and 27 October 2013 • Options for the overall Vision of the Town Page 20 • Options for the Policies we could put in place
• Options for the Sites that could be allocated for certain types of development
Petersfield Policy Plan 1969
Come and have your say! Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Timeline • July - Dec 2013 Produce several options and policies for the Plan for community engagement and consultation
Page 21 • 26 th and 27 th October Options weekend in the Festival Hall
• Jan 2014 Draft Neighbourhood Plan for final comment by Petersfield Residents
• February 2014 Consult and finalise The Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan
• March/April 2014 Independent examination (complies with national and local policy)
• May 2014 Local Referendum to adopt Neighbourhood Plan.
• July 2014 - Adopt and implement Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan Petersfield’s neighbourhood plan - Petersfield’s how we’ll be in 2030. Neighbourhood Plan
Contact us ...
The best way is to call or visit the Town Hall, they can either answer your queries or get one of the Team to contact you. Page 22
• Petersfield Town Council phone number is - 01730 264182
• Our website is - http://www.petersfieldsplan.co.uk
Thank you Petersfield Meeting Page 23 9th October 2013 Minute Item3 Why social care is changing • Hampshire’s ageing population • Older people want more choice and control • Different expectations Page 24 • Choosing to stay in their own homes for longer or choosing alternative care • Demand for residential care homes is reducing • Demand for Extra Care assisted living facilities is increasing • Higher levels of dependency when people move to care settings Investing in Modern Alternatives • £45 million in Extra Care assisted living Schemes • Proposing 4 new schemes in Petersfield, Basingstoke, Romsey, Basingstoke & Lyndhurst
Page 25 • Supporting people to live at home e.g. telecare and adaptations • Investing in reablement services • Extensions in HCC nursing homes – Oakridge ( Basingstoke) and Westholme (Winchester) Extra Care assisted living
Extra Care assisted living provides a combination of; •comfort, security, support and a 24/7 dedicated care team – residential care Page 26 With; •personal choice and independence – What is Extra Care?
One development 1 or 2 bed apartments For rent or sale
Page 27 Communal facilities 24/7 care services Viable alternative to a residential care home People remain part of and active within the wider community
www.hants.gov.uk/extra-care Benefits for individuals • Safe environment in which to remain independent for as long as able • Enables couples to remain together, when one of them develops greater care needs
Page 28 • Increases financial autonomy and flexibility • Greater independence, wellbeing & choice • Security of tenure • Remain part of the wider community Improved Outcomes Those in Extra Care assisted living; •Are less likely to enter institutional accommodation
Page 29 •Will have better health outcomes •Are less likely to be hospitalised •Experience a lower number of falls
*Kneale, D., Establishing the Extra in Extra Care: perspectives from three Extra-Care housing providers (International Longevity Centre-UK, 2011).
www.hants.gov.uk/extra-care Benefits for the wider community • Housing and care based solution • Release of family housing Page 30 back into the market • Scheme facilities act as a community hub • Develops a culture of participation, both from and with communities • Helps to maintain overall balanced community
www.hants.gov.uk/extra-care Example New Build Schemes Lion Oak Court, Andover Juniper Court, Gosport Page 31
Campbell Place, Fleet Newman Court, Basingstoke
www.hants.gov.uk/extra-care The public consultation • Full public consultation on the closure of 4 homes and 1 day centre.
Page 32 • Consultation runs from 29 July – 18 October • If proposals taken forward resident and their families will have local options • Final proposals and consultation results back to Councillor McNair Scott • Final decision made on 27 November Why Bulmer House?
• Built in 1976, cannot meet future needs of older people • Harder to support people with physical and mobility Page 33 needs and to maintain privacy and dignity • Site provides a suitable available option for a new Extra Care assisted living scheme • Bulmer House day centre would be temporarily relocated before transferring into the proposed Extra Care scheme How to take part
• Complete an on line questionnaire at: www.hants.gov.uk/residential-careconsultation.htm Page 34 • Request a paper copy of the questionnaire by emailing [email protected] or calling 01962 845692 • Write to; Bianca Hurst, Adult Services, Elizabeth II Building, 3 rd Floor West, The Castle, Winchester, SO23 8UB. Page 35 Questions This page is intentionally left blank
Page 36