Object
Publication
Representation ID: 24405
Received: 22/03/2021
Respondent: Trustees of Richard Gurney Children's Settlement
Agent: Mrs Nicole Wright
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Policy 5 has not been positively prepared, is unjustified, ineffective, and inconsistent with national policy as it fails to secure a suitable strategy to deliver high-quality elderly accommodation in sufficient numbers to address an identified need.
Paragraphs 275 to 277 of the GNLP discuss an identified need regarding elderly accommodation (there is discrepancy in the councils figures regarding need with 2842, 3857, and 3909 spaces identified as needed). The GNLP identifies the strategy to address this need through a mix of allocated sites (4 in total, equating to approximately 300 spaces) and the rest of the identified need to be taken up on housing allocations. It is known that having a small proportion of elderly needs units on larger allocations creates a poor quality of life for residents, as they are typically isolated, away from POS and interaction with others. Additionally, such policies have additional viability implications, potentially undermining housing allocations. This is reinforced by the Inspectors report when assessing the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan Policy H6, summarising that specialist housing for older people cannot be expected on mainstream housing sites and these should be addressed by specific allocations. This is reflected in paragraphs 59 to 61 of the NPPF where a variety of land is needed to come forward to ensure the needs of groups with specific requirements are addressed.
The current plan places a great emphasis on the delivery of elderly accommodation through housing allocations, which is not considered to be an effective or justified strategy, nor a strategy consistent with national policy.
It is considered that to make the plan sound, a significant number of dedicated allocations should be made regarding the provision of elderly accommodation. It is considered that traditional C2 institutions are not the answer, but instead the promotion of ‘care villages’ where semi-independence can be secured for elderly people, with care and welfare available on site as their health deteriorates. Given the substantial need, it is considered that a policy supporting elderly care provision is not sufficient, and that as a strategic priority more dedicated sites should be allocated to provide elderly accommodation.
One potential site that could be allocated to help address the need is the Sprowston Sports and Social Club. The loss of the site would be mitigated through the allocation of a care village, providing necessary social infrastructure. Additionally, with the provision of POS on site, it would benefit the local community whilst encouraging a healthier and active lifestyle for the elderly residents, adhering to the aspirations of the GNLP.
This representation is submitted by Le Ronde Wright on behalf of the Trustees of site at Sprowston Sports and Social Club.
This submission relates to Policy 1, Policy 2 & 3, Policy 5 and paragraphs 275 to 277, and Policy 6. See summaries for detail.