UPDATED: Christchurch Hospital plans unanimously approved (From Thisisdorset)

Not surprised that this was passed after all of the publicity and advertising of loss of services. I still question whether they will ever be built and improved or even retained if the merger is refused. And The winner is quantum who get to build a private nursing home and private senior living flats in the conservation area.

FrogKiss wrote:
Not surprised that this was passed after all of the publicity and advertising of loss of services. I still question whether they will ever be built and improved or even retained if the merger is refused. And The winner is quantum who get to build a private nursing home and private senior living flats in the conservation area.

Indeed, this is a thinly veiled cover for yet another property development scheme where the only winners are the developers and their acolytes.

FrogKiss wrote:
Not surprised that this was passed after all of the publicity and advertising of loss of services. I still question whether they will ever be built and improved or even retained if the merger is refused. And The winner is quantum who get to build a private nursing home and private senior living flats in the conservation area.

If there's no alternative its better to have that than a load of empty decaying buildings.

I wonder whether this scheme would be necessary if Christchurch wasn't importing so many geriatrics? It is high time there was a concerted campaign to discourage retirement to the area. It is of no benefit to local people.

radical wrote:

FrogKiss wrote:
Not surprised that this was passed after all of the publicity and advertising of loss of services. I still question whether they will ever be built and improved or even retained if the merger is refused. And The winner is quantum who get to build a private nursing home and private senior living flats in the conservation area.

If there's no alternative its better to have that than a load of empty decaying buildings.

Unfair to say there is no alternative, There are always alternatives!

In this instance no real alternatives were pushed forward by the trust, who effectively blackmailed the council by threatening to pull out of Christchurch if the development wasnt allowed (despite previous promises).

Quote from The Dear Leader's blog:-
.
"So now we can move on and get delivered all the benefits described by the applicants in terms of new build and medical services".
.
Quote from the Trust:-
.
"and aim to retain services including Macmillan and outpatients".
.
Emphasis on the word AIM methinks!

So what would all you do gooders want to do with the place ...let it fall down, it's in a poor state already.The outcome of this is great news for Christchurch and the surrounding area. I'm sorry to say all you historians living in the area are in a time warp, something's need to move on and this project is one of them.
Clearly it's got the approval of many and common sense has prevailed .
A last the cllrs have approved something worthwhile.
Also good news about extra employment in the area, so those out there who are negative about this project, think about this side of the argument.

ajj-dorset wrote:

radical wrote:

FrogKiss wrote:
Not surprised that this was passed after all of the publicity and advertising of loss of services. I still question whether they will ever be built and improved or even retained if the merger is refused. And The winner is quantum who get to build a private nursing home and private senior living flats in the conservation area.

If there's no alternative its better to have that than a load of empty decaying buildings.

Unfair to say there is no alternative, There are always alternatives!

In this instance no real alternatives were pushed forward by the trust, who effectively blackmailed the council by threatening to pull out of Christchurch if the development wasnt allowed (despite previous promises).

There would have been the loss of the doctors surgery for starters.
The rest of the building would have then been left to decay and eventually have to be pulled down, by that time the Trust would have sold them off for housing just as they did with the other half of the site some 16 years ago.
Obviously they blackmailed the council and obviously it worked.

skydriver wrote:
So what would all you do gooders want to do with the place ...let it fall down, it's in a poor state already.The outcome of this is great news for Christchurch and the surrounding area. I'm sorry to say all you historians living in the area are in a time warp, something's need to move on and this project is one of them.
Clearly it's got the approval of many and common sense has prevailed .
A last the cllrs have approved something worthwhile.
Also good news about extra employment in the area, so those out there who are negative about this project, think about this side of the argument.

i am intrigued that you think reducing the provision at the hospital whilst building another care home and yet more housing is worthwhile?

The jobs argument is a false one and one perpetuated by all developers hoping to build on a site, the staff numbers at the hospital will be cut, the only new jobs i envisage will be at the privately run care home (which will be competing with others locally, almost certainly reducing their staffing levels). Construction will no doubt go to one of the many large building firms with deep pockets who tend to use very few local workers.

The council have been held to ransom, the Trust have simply sold this land to a developer, happily misleading the public to ensure it gets its way.

ajj-dorset wrote:

skydriver wrote:
So what would all you do gooders want to do with the place ...let it fall down, it's in a poor state already.The outcome of this is great news for Christchurch and the surrounding area. I'm sorry to say all you historians living in the area are in a time warp, something's need to move on and this project is one of them.
Clearly it's got the approval of many and common sense has prevailed .
A last the cllrs have approved something worthwhile.
Also good news about extra employment in the area, so those out there who are negative about this project, think about this side of the argument.

i am intrigued that you think reducing the provision at the hospital whilst building another care home and yet more housing is worthwhile?

The jobs argument is a false one and one perpetuated by all developers hoping to build on a site, the staff numbers at the hospital will be cut, the only new jobs i envisage will be at the privately run care home (which will be competing with others locally, almost certainly reducing their staffing levels). Construction will no doubt go to one of the many large building firms with deep pockets who tend to use very few local workers.

The council have been held to ransom, the Trust have simply sold this land to a developer, happily misleading the public to ensure it gets its way.

And your point is?

Nothing to improve facilities for the people of Christchurch, just an 'aim' to continue what already exists. A con trick to provide a commercial development of a prime site, bought and paid for by the people of Christchurch many years ago.
Just to be expected I suppose.

Will be sad to see the building go, but times move on. I just feel sorry for those who believe that hospital services will carry on at the site for any length of time. Give it a year or two and the Macmillan unit will be quietly moved elsewhere. Outpatients will be be held at Bournemouth and the rest of the site can be disposed of to build the rest of the housing estate. It's just not financially and staff viable to run a few services on the Christchurch site. It has been quietly closing it's doors for the past few years.

Loyal2AFCB wrote:
I wonder whether this scheme would be necessary if Christchurch wasn't importing so many geriatrics? It is high time there was a concerted campaign to discourage retirement to the area. It is of no benefit to local people.

They bring in money, earned elsewhere.

Everything in life is a compromise.

1. @ job creation. So, how many jobs were lost when the hospital was stripped of all wards and beds? It's not actually a hospital at all any more.
2. 'Poor condition'. From inside knowledge of all buildings to go I can vouch for them being in excellent condition.
3. Great points above, most very astute, but where were all your voices when we needed you to write in to the council to object?

Crank wrote:
1. @ job creation. So, how many jobs were lost when the hospital was stripped of all wards and beds? It's not actually a hospital at all any more.
2. 'Poor condition'. From inside knowledge of all buildings to go I can vouch for them being in excellent condition.
3. Great points above, most very astute, but where were all your voices when we needed you to write in to the council to object?

I was one of the 15. And agree that this will end up as christchurch medical centre. So how far afield will residents have to travel now that there are no overflow wards at Christchurch. St Leonard's at ringwood or perhaps further?