”We approved ‘eyesores’ – but won’t tell you why…”
Saturday 20th February 2010, 2:30PM GMT.
Properties such as this were approved by deputies Peter Sirett, Jenny Tasker, Barry Paint, Janine Le Sauvage and Jack Honeybill. (0916833)
Environment has refused to discuss why its political board members approved controversial developments that have been branded ‘eyesore architecture’ by campaigners.
Just days after the department said its planning process was more open and transparent, it rejected requests to explain why it favours glass and steel developments in sensitive island sites.
And nearly two years after being advised by an independent expert to open up its decision-making process, the department is still undecided whether to introduce open planning meetings.
Former UK chief planning officer Chris Shepley was commissioned by the Policy Council to carry out a review of the island’s planning service.
One of his recommendations was that when the department’s board dealt with a planning application the meeting should be open to the public and the media.
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Another case of Expert imigrant labour, without soul or passion. But why do we not have control? If we cannot get rid of these people, then does it come as a surprise that they can do just as they like, without any fear of losing their well paid jobs ?
Report abuse
Don’t know what all the fuss is about. Looks fine to me. Many like to have a moan about something or their lives don’t feel complete.
Its a common trait for many old Guerns to fear change. At the same time complaining about the price of bread.
Get a life instead of spending it on the fringes controlling others. I think one of the reasons is maybe envy.
Commercial buildings is the area that needs much more consultation. These are making huge differences in the overall shape of the islands appearance.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. For sure this is no stunner but there are many similar buildings in the islands. It reminds me of sixties minimalism.
Not everybody’s cup of tea. Obviously the owner likes it. They live there so its time others got on with their own lives!
Report abuse
Why this objection to glass? Didn’t the island used to be covered with glass houses? Oh, and why the fuss now about the Clifton house that was approved in 2003….by the IDC….’which never let that sort of thing happen’….and was built several years ago. And as for the house in the photo – it doesn’t look finished…a bit premature to be libelling it as an ‘eyesore’ perhaps?
Report abuse
This article is a disgrace. Nigel Baudains and Richard Digard, hang your heads in shame.
The building is not yet finished. It is being clad largely in blue granite. It is set down into the hillside and from almost everywhere will hardly be visible.
Additionally, your photograph omits the building next door which is a particularly ugly bungalow and conservatory combination.
If you are going to stir-up a debate on this issue, then pick on buildings that are finished.
Report abuse
Five deputies who don’t care for promises of open and transparent government.
Report abuse
looks like a fish tank to me…
Report abuse
The eyesores are the bearded, anoraked organisers of this so called campaign. Being campaigners give them no authority to make anything than a comment. If they actually had any support there might be merit in running this story. Quite frankly this ‘campaign’ is getting worldwide attention and making Guernsey a laughing stock. Let’s be frank, this island has no architectural heritage.
Report abuse
What an absolute disgrace.
These people should not be in such a position of authority.
Report abuse
As i thought some of these members are not even local guernsey people. Whatever next! this building is a result of (its not what you know but who you know..
Report abuse
Coco, what a rubbish remark! What has being “local” got to do with it?
Report abuse
Paul I’m not entirely a Guern but have been here 35 years and yes, I do ‘fear change’ if it’s change for the worse, which these buildings undoubtedly are, and yes, I do have a life, a very nice one, which is why I and a lot of others don’t wish the beauty of the Guernsey we chose to live in to be blighted with ugliness any more than it has to be. Do you really want it to end up looking like any other English town suburb? The ‘difference’ of Guernsey is what people love about it.
Report abuse
Really well said Roy Bisson, I couldn’t agree more. If we want to widen the debate widen the photograph. The house next door is the thing that sticks out like a sore thumb.
Report abuse
Stephen, you are so right, the quicker Guernsey introduces a Freedom of information Law, the better. These people will have nowhere to hide.
They should have gone to Specsavers !!!
Report abuse
greg my remark is not rubbish,its the truth
and if my remark is all you have to comment on then i suggest you get a life
Report abuse
Good to know that Guernsey still has all the democracy of an anaconda hungry for its lunch
Report abuse
@Matti – “Do you really want it to end up looking like any other English town suburb?”
You don’t think the ribbon development of 1960s bungalows with bolt on UPVC Conservatories hasn’t done that already?
This libelled (and un-finished) ‘eyesore’ replaced a completely undistinguished bungalow….
Report abuse
What I find bizarre about this campaign is that they seem to completely overlook the atrocious designs that blighted the island in the last century. Look at the hundreds of soulless, cheaply built block-work chalet bungalows on many of the island’s estates. Is this the island’s heritage that the campaign is trying to protect?
Report abuse
Have you driven down the coast road down there lately, that building is very very obvious from the coast road, and I have to say, even though I am for the most part a fan of modern architecture this building looks awful and does stick out like a sore thumb.
Report abuse
Is the Bill Lockwood listed @ http://www.basmooarc.com as ‘planning/architect’ the same Bill Lockwood that used to be Guernsey’s chief planning officer?
Report abuse
Don’t expect me to sign any petition set up by NIMBY people anxious to retain their “safe” spot in Guernsey; I happen to like new architecture – but no one has asked me what I feel. The best thing these campaigners could do is to protest about the dozens or run down, ramshackle old greenhouses which are definately more of an eyesore than any new building. As for being local v non-local – how very ’70s of you. Grow up.
Report abuse
Coco – your remark is rubbish, and a tad racist, as per usual with this site there’s always one.
Report abuse
Sarnia Expat – of course you haven’t been asked for your opinion. Campaigns such as this are run by intransigent individuals who have decided that their view of architecture and heritage is right and the rest of us are wrong. Anyone who dares to disagree is either dismissed as a foreigner trying to impose their will on us (despite the fact that many born and bred locals don’t have a problem) or an idiot with no idea of aesthetics.
These people are the worst kind of dictators – imposing their particular view on everyone and demanding conformity. Ironic really, as one of their arguments is Guernsey heritage. Well, the Guernsey heritage I know is people who are a little nonconformist and refuse to be pushed around by small minded bullies. My suggestion therefore to the property owners being demonised here is to act in traditional Guernsey “donkey” style, stick two fingers up at these busybodies and tell them to mind their own business!
Report abuse
Coco, your comment is rubbish, but unfortuantely the rest of my post somehow disappeared. I tried to point out the that designer of many of the houses that people are complaining about is also local, so your point makes zero sense.
Report abuse
Crazy bearded NIMBYism aside, if i was the private owner of that property (assuming not still owned by a devloper) i would be absolutely furious that my property had been singled out by the Press, and be requiring justification from them as to why they felt it appropriate to publish this photo. i wonder if it comes under PCC code for ‘privacy’?
Report abuse
Mr Le Page – your comments at 10.09 are spot on.
I think the property in the photo, is going to end up being a wonderful home with tremendous views – pretty much a “dream” house. So congratulations to those who had the vision to approve the plans.
Having these types of discussions about the merits of one form of architecture and it’s aesthetics over another seems to be as logical as arguing over Manchester United or Arsenal. What it does seem to bring to the surface is an intolerance and occasional bigotry that surprises me. Apologies for being so naive!
Report abuse
Paul Le Page – Care to explain how 2 men starting a petition against something they feel needs attention makes them “dictators”
And as for your ironic statement about our Guernsey heritage of being “nonconformist”… Don’t YOU think that starting a petition against something is a way of non-conforming with the current situation?!?!
As for the design of the buildings, in the right place they can look OK, but from a design/structural point of view I’d say they are rubbish and ANYBODY could design and detail the drawings for them…
Report abuse
This is a local shop for local people!
Report abuse
I think Paul Le Page’s comments were spot on. The whole issue being debated comes down entirely to being a matter of taste and these gentlemen clearly think they are right and everyone else is wrong.
Judging by the comments being posted and assuming that this forum represents a cross section of the Guernsey residents then those against the campaign clearly outnumber the ones for it.
Add to that the fact the gentlemen in question supported the petition with 2 photographs of unfinished buildings and 1 image that bears NO resemblance whatsoever to the house at portelet, the whole thing really is a great big bag of hot air that will make not one iota of difference.
Report abuse
The Environment Department can (and have) passed plans that contravene their very own planning laws. Once plans have been passed there is no appeal irrespective of any contravention.
This has a massive impact on Guernsey and those unfortunate enough to live anywhere near these developments.
There are plans currently with Environment for a site on Coupee Lane, they needed to re-submit new plans because the developers know that those already passed by the department do not actually fit on the site. How does that happen? Who was involved? What did they gain?
Why have we got developers on the Environment board?
Planning is not a transparent process and when greed conflicts with heritage it is not just a mere matter of taste.
Report abuse
Absolutely spot on Bryn.
All these blokes seem to really want is for us, jo public, to sit up and notice what makes the island special. You surely either doff a hat to your history or you become a soul-less copy of America. Isn’t that why we have an IDC?
Report abuse
St Peter:
Care to explain how 2 men starting a petition against something they feel needs attention makes them
“dictators”
- My point here was that these people are attempting to dictate to property owners and developers what kind of design is acceptable.
And as for your ironic statement about our Guernsey heritage of being “nonconformist”… Don’t YOU think that starting a petition against something is a way of non-conforming with the current situation?!?!
- Yes, you could argue that. I would also argue that their campaign is attempting to force property owners to conform their designs to what they consider to be acceptable.
As for the design of the buildings, in the right place they can look OK, but from a design/structural point of view I’d say they are rubbish and ANYBODY could design and detail the drawings for them…
- Your opinion, which the property owners and developers are not obliged to share.
Incidentally, for the record I have no axe to grind. I am neither a property owner, or likely to become one in the near future!
Report abuse
Step aside and let Guernsey move on
I have become increasingly frustrated and annoyed by the stance taken by an older generation of local residents towards contemporary architecture on the island. After reading the paper today, 16th February and the front page headline ‘Campaign aims to end eyesore architecture’ I felt I could no longer sit back and let our island be ruined by individuals unable to let Guernsey move on.
Have we seen or even asked the younger generation of the island their thoughts? So far the only comments have been by people in their latter years…
Traditional Guernsey homes have their place in time, where building materials were scarce and often restricted to granite and timber with small window openings to shelter islanders from the prevailing winds and elements. Times have changed and progressed with the quality of materials and the way in which we live. We no longer want to live within small rooms lacking light and why shouldn’t we open our aspects to enjoy our stunning views that we are so blessed with in Guernsey…?
The George Road project is a perfect example of how modern day building materials can now withstand direct exposure to seaward facing elevations so why this prominent eastern elevation shouldn’t be glazed to encapsulate the view is both nonsensical and farcical.
Architecture should have its place in time. We have all seen Guernsey granite farmhouses and cottages dating back to the 1400’s, Regency townhouses, Art Deco inspired homes, 1960’s bungalows and of course the architecturally challenged chalet bungalow that has littered our west coast… My point is to let go of the pastiche – after all why would anybody want to try and replicate what has already been done? I am simply not interested in seeing rendered boxes or mock farmhouses. Our future generations will not thank us for leaving them without architecture time lines as we have been left. It is critical that these architectural statement homes on prime sites are allowed to happen to not only provide us with landmarks but to inspire the remaining islanders that forward facing architecture is vital to our islands future.
I couldn’t agree any more with Jamie Falla’s leaving comment in the paper today (16 Feb). If these dated and uninspiring individuals wish to create a petition then channel their energy into stopping the incinerator from being built and financially crippling the island for our children and children’s children.
Yours passionately
Mr Future Guernsey
Report abuse
Do we have a list of all the buildings on Guernsey which warrant protection?
Do we have an organisation like English Heritage who protect these buildings?
Its all very well going for a so called Grand Design from channel 4 but are they built to last the next 500 years?
I note that plans have been submitted for a barn in one parish to be modernised externally as well as internally and pre date the 1600s?
There is a bigger picture here and one that needs addressing.
Report abuse
Mr Future Guernsey.
Oh dear, why do I suddenly fear that future?
You may hate the island as it is, the point is you can find huge numbers of indentical box houses any where in the world.
If you truly believe that not buldozing any building over 20 years old, to replace it with a steel and glass box, is ruining the island, I dispair.
Report abuse
Spoken like a true architect/builder/developer/planner Mr. “Future Guernsey”.
I’m 30 years old and I find that post you made utterly, utterly patronising. It’s blatantly one sided towards the business of the development/design/building merry-go-round that is being legitimately called into question by these “older folk” whoever they are.
You want my opinion? You almost surmise that by being younger I want to live in a soulless goldfish-bowl! No thanks! I’d go and live in New York if I wanted to stare at glass and steel “architectural landmarks” all day long, cheers.
I don’t see beauty – I see profit and ease of build! I don’t see landmarks, I see temporary scrapheaps of glass and steel that I’ll be embarrassed to tell my grandchildren about. I don’t see how this style of architecture brings any value whatsoever to anyone in Guernsey, with the possible temporary exception of the owner, peering out the window. That is of course; right up until he or she is also looking at nothing but goldfish bowls all around them, lamenting the fact they now live in a tacky overpaid version of Benidorm, at which point they move on to the Cotswolds! ;)
Report abuse
Being Local has everything to do with it, coming from elsewhere obviously shows u have no respect for guernsey as a place or its people with comments like that! Us guernsey people dont like it! Its such a shame that people coming into our island are changing it dramatically and jsut because of the size of your wallet- well you know what- go flash your cash else where and stop doging the tax!!!
Report abuse
The problem with this debate is it’s getting polarised. Steve Le Cheminant thinks that those who don’t mind these buildings wants to demolish everything over 20 years old, whilst Defo.. thinks that everyone who isn’t local doesn’t care about the island.
What total claptrap!
If you take the xenophobic blinkers off long enough I think you’ll find that the debate is not split neatly down those lines. Some locals favour development, some immigrants want to preserve. Some (including me) would like to see a bit of tolerant coexistence – some old, some new. Take the town seafront picture – I don’t have a problem with the old seafront and the new build side by side. In fact I think it shows the world that traditional and progressive can coexist and work together.
Report abuse
So Defo, how do you explain the fact that some of the designers of these eyesores are themselves local people???
Report abuse
@defo
Some of us who have come to the island have contributed considerably to the increased standard of living.
I have been here over thirty years and I have paid my taxes and paid for the development of three Breton style cottages employing local builders and tradesmen all of whom do a darn sight better job than in the UK.
In my business I only employ local people. I am not here to dodge tax as youso rudely state. I came here originally because the islands children were evacuated to the school my mother was attending and she and I fell in love with the island.
I am fed up with local Guernsey people telling those who employ them and have added to their prosperity to get off the island. We live in a global world with transient people. I love Guernsey and promote it wherever i go.
However I am sure that Defo will be pleased to know that in future I will keep my mouth closed and only be employing non-Guernsey people as I would not want him to feel that i was ruining his island
Report abuse
Defo.. Please don’t speak for “Us Guernsey people”, that would mean you are speaking for me, and I find your xenophobic remarks highly offensive. God forbid anyone should associate me with your attitudes, and quite right Mr Le Page, the word for it is definitely claptrap!
Report abuse
Defo & Coco:
What exactly do you consider to be ‘local’? And if I am local, and my neighbour is not, do I have more rights than him? It doesn’t sound like racism to you because most of the people in Guernsey are white. But what about if my neighbour was of an visible ethnic minority, and has fewer rights than me. Sound like racism then?
Come on guys, move with the times. Your comments are outdated and do not have a place in modern society. Whether you are non-local, or local is irrelevant in this case.
Report abuse
Oh dear Paul, perhaps if you read the posts you would not spout so much arrogant drivel.
I was replying to future guernsey post where he stated that ’ I felt I could no longer sit back and let our island be ruined by individuals unable to let Guernsey move on.
Architecture should have its place in time. We have all seen Guernsey granite farmhouses and cottages dating back to the 1400’s, Regency townhouses, Art Deco inspired homes, 1960’s bungalows and of course the architecturally challenged chalet bungalow that has littered our west coast… My point is to let go of the pastiche – after all why would anybody want to try and replicate what has already been done? I am simply not interested in seeing rendered boxes or mock farmhouses.
So sorry font of all knowledge for confusing you.
Report abuse
Defo
I’m not locally born and bred and so according to you that means that “coming from elsewhere obviously shows u have no respect for guernsey” [sic].
Tosh.
I can’t abide the car showrooms which local architects blights our [yes "OUR"] Island with and call them houses. But then, they’re local and I’m not, so following your [hah!] logic then they must be respecting the place and I’m not.
Small wallet and all taxes paid here by the way.
Report abuse
@Greg
- because the inference is there are local people within this story who seem to care more about their wallets than the look of the island?
@John
- some might say that despite incomes being at an all-time high the standard of living here is progressively going down the toilet. Money itself has not made this island a nice place to live for everyone, despite your inference otherwise. Any Friday/Saturday night in town might allegorise this state of play for all of us.
What irks the protesters, as if it wasn’t crystal (glass) clear, is that many feel it is the IDC’s long standing remit is to keep the island looking congruous, to apply rules and use conservative judgement, to conserve it’s natural (underlined) beauty… and yet is seemingly going hell-for-leather recently to cover the place in glass/concrete etc? What gives?
Report abuse
I certainly don’t claim to be the fount of all knowledge Mr Le Cheminant. However perhaps you should read your own post sir: “If you truly believe that not buldozing any building over 20 years old, to replace it with a steel and glass box, is ruining the island, I dispair.”
This comment clearly states that Future Guernsey (and those who want development) would favour demolishing buildings over 20 years old and replacing them with the more “modern” design.
So, although I admit it was a exaggeration to suggest you thought the “progressive” types wanted to demolish everything in sight, you still attributed comments to him that he never made.
For starters Future Guernsey didn’t actually suggest demolishing anything – he didn’t even use the word in his post! What he was suggesting (if I’m not mistaken) was that rather than copying old styles to “fit in” we allowed modern developments to exist alongside the older developments (whether 20 or 200 years old) thus preserving what he called “architecture time lines.”
So, perhaps you too were confused?
Report abuse
The glass fronted house on Clifton is about as appropriate a structure to be located directly above a thousand year old church at the focal point of town as a drive thru fast-food resturaunt would be at that site.
Report abuse
I read Mr Roffey’s recent article regarding perceived local ‘xenophobic’ tendencies with great interest, and when reading this, it got me thinking about the whole racist/xenophobe/local versus non local debacle regarding many things, including, particularly, development, that has been hotly debated for many years now.
I can appreciate both sides, that is, locals who (generally, not all) feel that they are being ‘invaded’ by ‘foreigners’ who force change on them (like it or not, often not) despite the fact, like it or not, it is still actually THEIR ISLAND, but are powerless to do anything about it; and those who move here, bringing with them their wealth (our tax status being more attractive than our coastline to many) and who, when benevolently spending that wealth locally on ‘upgrading’ their open market residence/whatever, feel that because they are putting money into our economy/employing local architects/tradesmen (sometimes, certainly not always!) that they are contributing to the island and not being appreciated as (they feel) they should be…
as do the architects, who appear to think they are somehow doing us all a favor, and that therefore anyone who complains is an old stick in the mud ingrate who should go and whinge about something else.
– I appreciate that this same contentious development happens to local market properties, but the common denominators are always the same things, mainly MONEY, but also very well paid architects and the Environment Dept…
even the ‘I wish I could afford to live in a glass box’ brigade inadvertently acknowledge that.
My point is yes, modern architecture has it’s place (even here), but is it right that it should have an apparent carte blanche to be built where ever the client/developer wants, as long as there’s enough cash involved?
What is perceived is the slow but sure erosion of that very thing we love (that is, Guernsey’s individuality) by the power of money (dirty word for the ‘you’re just jealous’ brigade, I can assure you I have ample, and have no urge to live in a glass box, however magnificent the views). It holds such a swathe over the island, that it and it’s industry appear to be able to do what they like, when they like, whilst Mr Le Page pays top wack stealth tax (Soc Sec) because he’s a self employed grower, and receives letters threatening him with court because he built a small shed in his back garden without permission.
For some, it seems the ‘local’ has become the 2nd class peasant in his own home, with the wealthy (and those who control it) becoming the masters.
Anyone who is bold enough to acknowledge this view can surely see why there is this unhealthy polarisation, but the question is, what can be done about it it?
The civil servants and politicians that are dictating our future and how our island is going to look in the years to come need to be seriously reined in, and not just allowed to make noises about the fact they’re ‘considering’ becoming more transparent (I would say accountable) for their ill informed, poorly thought out decisions, which will, sadly, shape this island long after they’re retired and moved to Spain because the Guernsey they’ve created is a ‘nice place to visit’, but not somewhere they want to live any more.
Report abuse