Call for action over Cirencester eyesore (From Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting WGS NEWS to 80360, or email
us
Akeman Court on Cricklade Street was closed by Bromford Housing Association in Autumn 2008
8:00am Monday 3rd September 2012 in News By Ian Craig
Akeman Court
ANGRY residents living near a derelict building in the centre of Cirencester have hit out at the social landlords and planning authority they say have left the building to become an eyesore.
Former sheltered housing site Akeman Court on Cricklade Street was originally closed by Bromford Housing Association in Autumn 2008 because of lack of demand.
Although Cotswold District Council resolved to grant planning permission to Bromford to demolish the building and replace it with six houses and seven flats in August 2010, the building stands untouched two years later.
Although eighteen letters of objection were received in response to the original application to demolish the building over concerns around over-development of the area and lack of parking, residents are angry the building has now been left to fall into disrepair.
Sheila Snelgrove, who lives in nearby Jobbins Court, has been campaigning for something to be done for several years, and said she had been forced to move out due to the stress it was causing her.
“The decline of the area is unacceptable and I became too embarrassed to invite family and friends to my flat,” she said.
“I became depressed because no-one took any notice or showed concern about us – the people who were long term residents in Cirencester, people who had moved into town and prepared for retirement, people who had worked in Cirencester and contributed to community services.”
She added many residents were unable to sell their properties due to the state of the area.
“I cannot return to Cirencester where I had lived and worked for nearly 40 years,” she said.
“I have been crippled physically, emotionally and financially.”
Bromford’s head of development Chris Holland said the plans were on hold as part of a wider review and will be holding a review to discuss the way forward in October.
“We hope to be in a position to move forward with the site in the near future,” he said.
CDC planning officer Mike Napper said the council was not in a position to force Bromford to take action on the site.
“Clearly we as the planning authority do not wish to see it deteriorate further but it hasn’t got to the stage where it’s a dangerous – if it did the council would do something,” he said.
Comments(13)
snowarden
says...
1:00pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Robert Jeanes
says...
2:36pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Planners and architects and developers, all anonymous now but certainly not at the time it was built.
Not a single curve in sight! Straight lines off the drawing board which the public has to endure for decades.
There are plenty more of these hideous, poorly-crafted designs which are a rude affront to the eye.
I expect Standard readers could name a few.
David Broad
says...
4:03pm Mon 3 Sep 12
snowarden
says...
7:01pm Mon 3 Sep 12
ciren001
says...
8:21am Tue 4 Sep 12
Robert Jeanes
says...
9:40am Tue 4 Sep 12
Architects are equally responsible for duff, unimaginative design which we all have to endure for decades. It simply is not good enough to pass this off as someone else's responsibility and shortcoming.
If an 'architect' is content that that an ugly building is his/her legacy then that just about sums up the problem.
'Regulations' are a jobsworth's Godsend. Charm, harmony, and inspiration perhaps, are not part of the building agenda and that is why disasters have been routinely and mechanically trotted out.
snowarden
says...
10:38am Tue 4 Sep 12
ciren001
says...
11:56am Tue 4 Sep 12
Olly Cromwell
says...
8:48am Wed 5 Sep 12
StephanieP
says...
11:18am Wed 5 Sep 12
David Broad
says...
2:02pm Thu 6 Sep 12
It's difficult for the Portfolio holder and for Joe as shadow as the way the situalion is arose is very complicated.
But having said that and not apportioning blame it's not acceptable for 20 plus RSL owned units to be left unoccupied when there are people desperate for accomodation.
bobirving
says...
5:35pm Thu 6 Sep 12
David Broad says...
11:26am Mon 3 Sep 12
It's not the planners fault, the permission to redevelop could have been sought with the building fully occupied, and permission was approved back in 2010.
There was and maybe still is a similar empty unut in Northleach, single ocupancy flats, Old peoples flats but equally suitable for young people.
I bet CHYP could make good use of Akeman Court,
There is no shortage of teens and twenties who want to leave home and have their own place.