WAVERLEY Council is being urged to bite the bullet and provide larger and better facilities for the Brightwell Gostrey Centre for the elderly, in a newly built community centre on a new site in the East Street redevelopment. But the recommendation, put forward by the council's community overview and scrutiny committee (O&S) and due to be considered by the ruling executive next Tuesday, runs counter to the views of Waverley's management team. For the officers want a complete review of the council's approach to supporting day centres and activities for older people, before it considers making significant capital investment. Until that review has been undertaken, they believe the council should maintain its original decision that the centre should be refurbished as part of the redevelopment project on a "like-for-like" basis. The present masterplan for East Street shows the entrance lobby, toilet facilities, bathroom and medical room at the centre to be demolished to provide vehicular access. Developers Crest Nicholson have produced proposals which involve major work to the building, reducing the width without reducing the overall space available. The council has already failed in one attempt to provide extra room, arranging for the architect who designed the two newest day centres in Waverley - at Milford and Haslemere - to draw up plans increasing the space by 20 per cent. But land constraints meant that the building had to be two-storey and the need for a fire- escape stairwell, corridors, lifts and first-floor toilet facilities absorbed most of the additional space. Pat Frost, chairman of the community O&S committee, told The Herald: "As far as I am concerned, and the committee is concerned, we believe that the centre should be relocated, on one level, and should be bigger to meet the needs of Farnham. She described the current building as "tired and sad". As the major population centre in Waverley, Farnham should have the type of modern facility that other towns in the borough have, catering for the differing needs of different ages of elderly people, she urged. "I am very passionate about it. Here we have an enormous development going on and personally I want to see that Farnham does get something for the community out of it. "The committee made the point 15 months ago that it should be a bigger and better centre. It is disappointing that they have not taken our comments on board." While Waverley officers have indicated "no sites are readily available", Mrs Frost believes there should be scope for incorporating a new centre at ground-floor level below some of the residential accommodation. She also raised the question of how the centre's activities would be able to continue during construction, with walls being knocked down around them. The answer, the executive will be told, is that it would be possible for the core activities of the day centre to be relocated on a temporary basis. Assisted bathing, for instance, could take place at Riverside Court and Falkner Court; lunch clubs could be held at Church House, Riverside Court, in church halls, the Memorial Hall or St Andrew's Church and office accommodation could be supplied at Farnham Locality Office. Also needing to be found temporary alternative accommodation would be the WRVS meals-on-wheels operation. The report to the executive puts the capital expense of providing a new centre at well over £1 million, although noting that disposal of the current centre would help defray the cost. Also, the centre's committee has indicated its willingness to help through fundraising and grant applications, suggesting that between £4-500,000 could be achievable over time. In recent years the Gostrey Centre has tended to cater for the fairly frail elderly and the officers' report poses the question of whether Waverley wants to support specialist centres forn the frail elderly, or target its resources on the active elderly. "There is a clear issue of principle that needs to be determined before the council commits considerable resources - should Waverley borough council continue to support day centre activities as it has previously, when there are other priority areas that the council is clearly responsible for that also need investment?" the executive will be asked. "The council has no statutory duty to provide specialist day centres for older people, but has done so as a wider agreement with Surrey County Council. The basis of that earlier agreement many years ago (some 30 years ago) no longer holds. "One of the fundamental questions that the council needs to ask itself is whether it should be involved in the provision of day centres at all. The statutory responsibility for day centres lies with Surrey County Council."
