Akeman Court on Cricklade Street was closed by Bromford Housing Association in Autumn 2008

Akeman Court 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)

David Broad says...
11:26am Mon 3 Sep 12

I find this unacceptable.
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.

snowarden says...
1:00pm Mon 3 Sep 12

Maybe if BHA was to rent these and other empty flats (Northleach to mention one) The rent on the other properties that they manage would not be so high compared to other towns and cities, I lived in Cirencester for a while where every year my rent would rise even though BHA would send me a letter to inform me that they was adjusting the rent to meet or be closer to the target rent of the property which was over £25 a week less!, Interestingly enough, so say, there are over 400 people waiting on the housing register!, Living in or around Cirencester because of BHA has become a luxury rather than so say cheap affordable housing....Best thing about Cirencester is the A419 bypass which goes straight past it, it's a joke.

Robert Jeanes says...
2:36pm Mon 3 Sep 12

The real villains are the those who conceived this architectural disaster in the first place. Real people got paid for this and it was not all that long ago too.

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

I went and checked and Fortey House Northleach is still unoccupied, and yet people are crying out for accomodation.

snowarden says...
7:01pm Mon 3 Sep 12

The Architects who designed these places should be made live in them! It's a case of ohh look a small patch of land - lets see how many dwellings for rent we can build there. Squeeze as many as possible into a tiny space, to maximise the rent potential.

ciren001 says...
8:21am Tue 4 Sep 12

snowarden, Im not saying I think the building is attractive in any way, but I think you will find that the architects were working to a brief and budget set down by the owners/developers and would have had to be in accordance to the building regulations at the time. The appearance would have had to have passed planning etc. Blame the regulations and maybe the developers not the architects.

Robert Jeanes says...
9:40am Tue 4 Sep 12

No ciren001. No, No, No.
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

You only have to drive around a "new build" housing estate to see an array of boring wooden framed brick clad houses with no parking, Tiny windows, no front garden and a small "yard" back garden, Bedrooms no bigger than the bed, Putting it quite simply - no body wants them, Most people want a good looking house, A decent size, with somewhere to park the car which isn't a mile away from the front door, Do they really think it's fun carrying a weeks shopping from a communal car park?, and a decent sized garden. These houses are designed for profit not for their intended use, They will get "passed" back and forth through mutual exchange many times as tennants try to swap them for a real sixties council house - when houses were built properly with thought - using decent building materials.

ciren001 says...
11:56am Tue 4 Sep 12

At the end of the day architects may not like everything they design and im sure not all are able to turn work away on principles (unless your name is Foster, Rogers, Grimshaw etc), they have to make a living and as i said earlier are often constrained by budget and therefore have to use materials to suit. the client would ask the architect to maximise the return for their outlay. I personally hate it but thats the way it is. also the building in question may look awful now but was pretty similar all other buildings of the same period in and around Ciren.

Olly Cromwell says...
8:48am Wed 5 Sep 12

Don't forget to claim the 12.2 mile round trip on your Councillor expenses, David.

StephanieP says...
11:18am Wed 5 Sep 12

Why no comment from Joe Harris, the Lib Dem self-styled Shadow Portfolio Holder for Housing?

David Broad says...
2:02pm Thu 6 Sep 12

I can't claim expenses Olly, the 9 mile round trip was not an official duty,
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

Could be a good thing for CDC to spend some of their £27 million reserves on, eh? Plus jobs for local lads to bring it up to scratch, improving the insulation and heating. No-brainer as they say...

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree