Old Gaol work to start (From Herald Series)

As the developers have paid less for the site - because of the 'property price crash'...now that prices are back up, could someone from the council reasure us that the developers are now paying the higher, original price for the site!?
The £2m drop in price would go along way to alieviating the 'other' council woes...and surely....surely...t
he original price would have been ring fenced in someway...in case the property prices went back up...which they have.

Or are we all losers again...thanks to the council....except for the developer of course...?!

What's the betting the listed bits will 'accidentally' come down with the rest of it? £2m price-drop must have been a massive kick after the millions spent on post-vandalism safety repairs etc by the council over the years (letalone the mess it was left in when it ceased to operate as a leisure centre).

Doozer,Newcy, you're jumping the gun a bit, it's bad enough the council refuse to tell us what they're likely to end up getting for "our" building, so far the Vale/us has not received a penny from the sale, nor will they give a date as to when they/we will get paid? if ever !! A
After today's announcment they've "lost" over a million in over paying housing benefits, doesn't give much confidence of ever getting anything from this, they' can't look after money they've got, let alone something that may come as a promise !!

thats a shame they are going to ruin that beautiful building by turning it into homes......its a listed building, keep it that way!

Fiona says "...its a listed building, keep it that way" - I assume she doesn't mean literally in the dismal state it is now in? Although COG (Community in the Old Gaol) spent 2 years in a vain attempt to secure some part of the site for community use, there was never any doubt that the original listed building would be preserved: there were strict controls in the brief, the planning application had to go through all sorts of hoops and English Heritage will not allow the fundamental appearance of the old building to be messed around with.

I assume that the demolition work referred to is the modern sports hall and swimming pool which would have been bound to go in any redevelopment of the site: I doubt if anyone would shed tears for them on aesthetic grounds!

I am glad that something is happening - but hope that as the work progresses the developers will reconsider what uses to make of the ground floor "public" areas so that they become a hive of activity for local people and tourists.

Abingdonian - you are quite right. It is the ugly modern bits that are going and the listed buildings are staying and will almost certainly look better as a result of this devlopment than they do now.

fiona88 - how does turning a listed building into homes make it any less of a listed building? I would far rather see old buildings in towns turned into well designed, good quality homes (that are much needed) than build on more green fields.

Abingdon Neil, I fear that the anger and frustration felt by many regarding the Gaol is not being acknowledged by the decision makers. Perhaps part of the issue is that many residents hoped beyond hope that his central iconic area of the Town was going to be developed...with residents hopes and dreams and aspirations in mind. You know...hopes like 'community usage'. Just more homes (which will probably be too expensive for many), pouring more cars into the already stationary traffic on Bridge street..with a couple of shops thrown in as some kind of token gesture....leaves many feeling rather deflated about the whole situation. Another wonderful opprtunity...missed. Again.

I would agree with you, seeing old buildings turned into homes in a central town location is far far preferable to them being left to ruin...or indeed building on our green and pleasant lands... Having said that, turning said 'old buildings' into something that can be used by that community is far far preferable to building some flats.

The 'People of Abingdon' wanted and deserved a lot from the Old Gaol. They didn't / aren't going to get it and have been let down by the people charged with the decision. I fear that the community will not be as behind this project as the Councils may want. But then why should they be? The Council doesn't seem to even acknowledge this frustration...

As for "How" the decision was reached for the Gaol plan/developer...and what has happened regarding the 'discounted price' is a whole other tale...and yet again...it is US, the People of Abingdon who lose out.

But yes. I am sure it will all look nicer than it does now.

Although I can sympathize with anyone that wanted the old gaol to become a community space, part of the problem is that campaigners such as COG seemed to represent a minority of people, probably why the council gave them a deaf ear.

I was fairly new to the Town when all the various campaigns were going on I'm afraid. I was only aware of COG - which seemed a good idea (from what I knew, which I accept is/was limited). What or who were the other campaigning bodies? I have heard this 'argument' before, that COG only represented a few people...who then represented everyone else? What was the "Let's Have More Flats" campaign? What was the "No Cinema for Abingdon" drum being banged? I didn't hear them....

Were there in fact NO other campaigns other than COG? If no one else voiced an opinion...that's their fault. It 's wrong to assume that the people who didn't sign-up to COG were automatically against it. If you can make that assumption...then I can make the assumption that "voter apathy" dictates that those that didn't sign-up were happy that others were representing them...so they DID all agree with COG.

The fact still remains, from what I understand, that the whole tendering process...it's "Vale" of secrecy (bad pun intended) leaves a very bitter taste regarding the whole business. "Blacked out windows", £2million discounts...the list goes on...meanwhile, the Good people of Abingdon are getting (mainly) just another block of Flats...
It's all just a shame, that's all.

I think the problem is that COG had lots of ideas of how to use the space, but the council did not have the vision or imagination to really take them on. When dealing with thick skinned local politicians, you have to have a plan and back it up with a cash flow forecast. COG did not really have anything like that, and even people who agreed with their general aims disagreed about how the space would be best used. This made it relatively easy for the council to ignore them...