Skip to main content

Agenda item

25/00650/FUL - Land at Nos. 26 To 48 Austin Road Cirencester

Proposal

Demolition of existing 12 no. flats and construction of 14 no. new houses and flats.

 

Case Officer

Martin Perks

 

Ward Member

Councillor Claire Bloomer

 

Recommendations

PERMIT subject to no objection from Gloucestershire County Council Archaeology, as well as completion of a S106 legal agreement covering Biodiversity Net Gain, financial contributions towards Cotswold Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation and the North Meadow and Clattinger Farm Special Area of Conservation, and the provision of affordable housing.

 

Minutes:

Proposal

The proposal was for the demolition of existing 12 flats and construction of 14 new houses and flats at Land at 26 – 48 Austin Road, Cirencester, GL7 1BT

 

Case Officer: Martin Perks

Ward Member: Councillor Claire Bloomer

 

Original recommendation: PERMIT

 

The Chair invited the Case Officer to introduce the application.

·         Late papers were received containing comments from Gloucestershire Archaeology, who raised no objections.

·         The Case Officer shared location maps, site location, various photographs of the existing buildings, similar local developments and elevation drawings.

 

Public Speaker

Millie Nicholls Agent – Bromford Housing. 

 

The speaker addressed the Committee in support of the application to redevelop the existing flats at Austin Road.

They stated that the current buildings did not meet modern building regulations and were not viable for refurbishment. The block experienced high levels of antisocial behaviour, which affected staff resources and negatively impacted resident wellbeing. The physical condition of the buildings required substantial ongoing investment to maintain basic standards.

The speaker noted that similar blocks in the vicinity had already been successfully redeveloped. The proposed scheme would deliver 100% affordable housing, using a fabric-first design approach to improve energy efficiency and reduce heating costs. Bromford, the applicant, highlighted their strong track record, financial capacity, and continued investment in affordable housing across the Cotswolds. The application was presented as an opportunity to replace substandard housing with high-quality, sustainable homes that met current standards and supported long-term community wellbeing.

 

Member Questions

A Member asked about the anticipated timescale for the proposed development.

The Case Officer and the Chair advised that, based on their experience of similar Bromford developments, completion was typically achieved within a relatively short timescale.

 

A Member questioned whether the proposed scheme could accommodate a greater number of homes, suggesting that the site appeared to have capacity for additional units.

The Head of Planning advised that the Committee could only consider the application as submitted.

 

A Member welcomed the replacement of the existing block but raised a concern about the environmental impact of demolition. They asked whether any provision had been made for managing waste materials.

The Head of Planning explained that, although the District Council did not have a specific waste minimisation policy, the County Council did. The applicant would be responsible for managing demolition and construction waste, with the disposal of materials governed by separate legislative frameworks.

 

A Member asked whether progress was being made on completing the Section 106 legal agreement relating to biodiversity net gain.

The Case Officer confirmed that the agreement was in progress and would be completed shortly.

 

Member Comments

 

A Member welcomed the applicant’s commitment to high energy performance standards and expressed support for the scheme, highlighting the benefit of providing energy-efficient homes for people on lower incomes in the centre of Cirencester.

 

A proposal to PERMIT the application in line with the officer recommendations was proposed by Councillor Brassington and seconded by Councillor Fowles.

 

This proposal was put to the vote and agreed by the committee.

 

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages