‘We’ll scrap Leale’s plan’
Thursday 12th August 2010, 2:30PM BST.
Leale's Yard. (Picture by Adrian Miller, 0982402)
DOWNSIZING Leale’s Yard could lead to the development being delayed or scrapped altogether, the Co-op’s board warns today.
And it says if it cannot agree a way forward with Environment, it could take legal action against the States.
In a two-page open letter to members in today’s Guernsey Press, chief executive Jim Hopley vents his frustration at planning’s latest restrictions on the future of the Co-op-owned site.
It accuses Environment, which last month announced that the proposed retail development should be reduced by 20%, of moving the goalposts.
- 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
again, something that’s going to be good for the island seems to be falling away from us again.
Why not just completely revert back to the dark ages and be done with it!!!
Report abuse
Suggest you leave it for 5-10 years like the developers did at the Royal Hotel. Afterwards I am sure that the Guernsey government will be willing to use a bit of common sense rather than idiots being idiots for the sake of it.
Will hapilly sign anything the co-op want to support this development, the bridge is in a state because of a lack of movement on leales yard. Shame on the States! (not that any of them would care!)
Report abuse
An excellant open letter by the co-op.
Fairly well sums up the Environment Department and its procedures.
Can only feel sorry for any company or individual who has the drive to develop something good for Guernsey, only to meet a department, with civil servants who are complete jobsworths!
Why don’t the planning department actually say what they want to see built?
Oh they did! but by the time they considered the application, their was probably a change in staff and a ‘complaint’ from a third party to act upon!
The co-op did’nt stand a chance, advised the scheme was to small by environment at the start and now its to big!
I’ve got a co-op number, which i think makes me a shareholder.
Here’s my advice:- change the drawings to read ‘Data Park’ with ancillary retail units and it will fly thro’ the process.!!
Report abuse
Can this government never make up their mind, its like the waste strategy all over again. Set the guidelines, move them and at half time change the referee and change the goal posts again, this time making them half the size and both on the same half of the pitch. The politicians and civil servants (those guys that have secure pensions, unlike the rest of us) need to wake up in this island. Investment is being stifled in certain areas,
Report abuse
Well well there is a surprise! Does someone have fingers in other pies?
Voted in by the people, working against the people.
Report abuse
This proposed development was far to big and totaly out of keeping with the area, Just look at the architects impression in today’s press of what the Co-op want to put there and tell me if you think that blends in with a low level small scale waterfront development. Four story high steel and glass, in fact Admiral Park Mk 2 . Steel and glass buildings that are so grotesquely out of proportion they will completely overwhelm the area rather than blending into what is already there It looks exactly what it is, a carbon copy of any UK shopping mall you can find in most towns anywhere in the UK.
The whole thing will decimate the area both visually and culturally. The trouble with modern architecture is that everything is streamlined, flat surfaces and geometric shapes, without the fine detail that lends character and beauty to so many older buildings. People feel comfortable with what they see as pleasing to the eye. Although It is not just a matter of aesthetics, it is about our very identity as a community, which has as part of it the shared relationship between people and the place where they live. Building on what we have in a similar scale and style maintains continuity and helps to focus the islands culture and identity. If you look back and see the beautiful Georgian and Victorian buildings that grace a large part of the town of St Peter Port, these were designed by architects who clearly had a passion and a flair for their work and an eye for proportion and detail, people who knew how to blend buildings into their surroundings. These buildings are often described as graceful, stylish and elegant Georgian town houses with grand front entrances and perfect symmetry with neighbouring buildings. Compare that with the bland soulless unimaginative boxes that are being designed today, with the depressing result that the richness of this community is being destroyed by those who would never have had the talent to create it in the first place.
I am not surprised at the Co-ops reaction to Environments demand that the whole thing is scaled down; We have seen it before, it is the big business gun to the people of Guernsey’s head once again saying give us what we want or we will pick up our ball and go home. Today’s editorial which is always headed as being the “voice of the people”, if it is, it is not the people I talk to, could have been written and maybe it was, by Mr Roffey chairman of the Co-op. And while I am on the subject, how many of you get to sit down and discuss your plans with the entire environment board? As I understand the Co-op did some time ago.
Report abuse
i am sure i recall 6 to 12 monts ago honeybill refusing to remove himself from environment’s voting about this issue, quite blatantly, without any valid justification. he will correct me if am wrong. this is a complete disgrace – the co-op represent ordinary folks with little personal clout, most of whom support the co-op’ future. the co-op played the game to the letter, but could be stuffed by a few powerful self-interested businesses and individuals. honeybill should resign if he did not withdraw from all the related meetings.
Report abuse
why is that the north of the island can’t have a nice attractive shopping area, don’t the residents in the area deserve it being improved and access to good facilities?
Town landlords don’t want it as it will mean they may have to reduce their rents. it should be built and let market forces decide where people want to shop. if rents in town were reasonable businesses may not be shutting up shop.
don’t blame the people who are trying to improve an area of Guernsey for the issues caused by the greedy landlords
Report abuse
Completely agree David Jones.
Report abuse
The States announced this to the public before they discussed it with the Co-op… is this the States’ new way of dealing with all of it’s business? This is how they treated Aurigny. Totally unprofessional.
Guernsey is now a modern community in a modern world but is lacking in modern facilities, we desperately need something like the proposed Leale’s Yard. From the artist’s impression it looks very nice. The older generation do not like change. We are not in Georgian/Victorian times any more, we need to move on and build something representative of today. They could swap the steel for Guernsey granite though I suppose.
Report abuse
Love the way everyone leaps on the civil servants, like the shareholder. The States decide something, the servants carry it out to the letter. When the States fail to grow a pair and backtrack on any decisions its the civil servants who get blamed for wasting money….
odd. And before I get the obvious, I’m in finance (the other pariah, not the CS!)
Report abuse
ahh, Dave, indeed, what a shame that the Environmental (terrorist) department didn’t apply your (spot on) theory when they were inflicting our seafront with Admiral Park……
Report abuse
…by the way, top tip for the Co op (or anyone) considering applying to the aforementioned illustrious department…
when applying for planning permission, simply rename your house/company, adding the words ‘Bank’ or ‘Fund Services’ to the end of it, and they’ll give you permission for anything!
I had a total ‘mare getting permission for a little shed in my back garden, so renamed our house, ‘Our House Bank’, and I now have permission to build three glass fronted tower blocks there, plus a multi-storey car park in our adjoining green zone field….
wish I’d done it years ago! ;0)
Report abuse
Scarlett
I’d laugh if it wasnt so true!
Dave Jones
Could you just expand on one point that you made.
You said this “The whole thing will decimate the area both visually and culturally”.
I understand the point from a visual perspective, but fail to see how the culture of this run down area will be adversely effected. Could you please expand on this??
Report abuse
I think the Bridge shopping area needs a proper revamp with affordable rents for shops – you only have to look on the bridge to see there only a handful of shops left trading. If something isnt done the Bridge will become a skeleton town with empty shops and building left empty for kids to break into and set alight to etc.
Report abuse
Dave Jones
I hope this is your personal opinion? As a high profile member of the community do you still want to “live” in previous times or it’s just that you want the “look” to be the same?
I agree with you on a large part of what you have written but as Scarlett mentions in her post it depends on what is being built and the permissions that come along with it. We could get into a huge debate about Jersey and comparing the Water Front and the positives and negatives there but it always should come back to the demand of additional buildings/services needed? What ever happened to the Casino, the Belle grave bay and all the other “grand schemes” when we can’t even get our Cinema sorted out!
Whooh just realised I am getting into many other post themes. The Friday feeling is kicking in!
Report abuse
David Jones
It will not decimate the area! Have you seen how ugly the Bridge is right now????
Besides the people want it, so, it would be pretty cool if the useless politicians on this island could do what WE WANT for a change. This is OUR island to make decisions on, NOT just yours!
Report abuse
Dave H
Dave I will try. The culture of a place isn’t just about language, or customs or what type of food we eat, or even cultural events peculiar to a country or place. It is also about the built environment, it is described in the definition of the word as “urbanity” recognition of where we live, the type and style of the buildings we have grown up with. You see it all over the world whether you are in Amsterdam with their ornate Dutch gables or in China with their decorated buildings and there long curved roofs with their ridge lines topped with glazed ceramic tiles. Both these examples reflect the culture of the country through their buildings. In France you will hear people often remarking that something “looks very French” in its design or presentation something that reflects the French society i.e. its culture.
The back of the site is as you say completely run down but that is not the area that concerns me most, it is the waterfront streetscape that I think will be ruined. We already know that the far end of the bridge towards Vale garage will see some of the buildings demolished, which is why they are charity shops at the moment. I see nothing in these new plans that show me that what these buildings will be replaced with, or how any modern buildings would blend in with the existing streetscape from the Mariners Inn, Tozers the paper shop, along that water front group of shops. The truth of the matter is that they won’t. Also what is built at the back is hugely important, can you visualise what a group of four storey steel and glass buildings will look like towering above the existing street, when viewed from the approach to the Bridge. I can and it fills me with horror. There is one other thing that you need to think about, once this Admiral park Mk 2 is built, ask yourself how long you think it will be before a request in a few years time comes in to demolish the rest of the water front properties? The excuse will be that there is little need to preserve them as the largest part of that area is now modern steel and glass. The domino effect is well known to developers but you can’t use the excuse for radical change until you have built an example to point at, in order to justify more change. What you will have lost when that happens, is all the things that made St Sampson attractive and different in the first place
Report abuse
Dave Jones, a backward politician with backward thinking views. Not at all in touch with the hopes and aspirations and lifestyles of 21st century islanders.
As Ortac so succinctly puts it: “Guernsey is now a modern community in a modern world but is lacking in modern facilities, we desperately need something like the proposed Leale’s Yard.”
As for Honeybill, a total disgrace and further evidence that the political membership of the Environment Dept (possibly with the exception of Jenny Tasker) is not fit for purpose.
Report abuse
Martino
That little rant must mean that any country or government or group of people who want to protect what we have, are backward and backward thinking. Unlike you, I have not been hoodwinked by a few shiny baubles from the Co-op, my job as a politician is to represent all views on the island and I am not at all surprised that many of them differ from yours.
PS
Remind me, isn’t Jenny on the Co-op board?
Report abuse
Dave
Thanks for the reply.
I can appreciate what you are saying, but I dont think the culture of the bridge is prescribed from the type of buildings that are present.
If buildings do have such an impact and I appreciate that in some cases like you highlight they do, and places like Bath in England, then what does the current sorry state of most of the bridge add culturally to that area. I cant see many people getting off their boats at the multimillion pound Harbour and looking at the bridge skyline and saying “this is very northern Guernsey”.
I completely agree that the last thing we need is another glass/ steel eyesore, but the bridge is not Bath and that area is perfect for a serious retail development proposal which in my opinion the island seriously needs.
Isn’t there some middle ground here?? Look at the Albert Dock in Liverpool, which has been regenerated with new shops and restaurants and done in a manner in keeping with the surrounding environment, and to be frank, is fantastic!
Surely something like that can be done for The Bridge!
Report abuse
It may fill you will horror Mr Jones, but what about the rest of us? Is this not our island too?
Too many people in politics in Guernsey have this 2D view, which is really un acceptable. I do however appreciate that unlike the mojority of them, you at least come on here and add to the discussion, but I think we would all like to be listened to.
Report abuse
Dave Jones.
I don’t need to visualise 4 storey buildings, the article in the press has pictures!
Just a correction to your post, i count 5 storeys in the picture i’m looking at.
But i do agree, a bit more granite and some red pantile roof’s and some brick chimneys would keep the design local and in keeping with its surroundings.
As for Jenny Tasker, i’d throw her out with Honeybill and all.
A sign is a sign in my view, but a sign is not a sign when positioned where Mrs Tasker likes it.
On the subject of Mrs Tasker, did the St.Peter Port parish rates go down this year as were not building that new constables office at the Cotils? Or are we still saving up to paint the one we’ve got?
Report abuse
Rosewallhill
So do I and I agree the area needs brightening up but it also needs to keep its proportion of a small water front streetscape with some new buildings at the back that would enrich the area with clever design and respect for the older part in the front of the project.
Donk
It is an opinion I share with others. I want to live in a community that keeps its history and recognises that this Harbour area is special. I tell you now, it could easily end up like the Jersey waterfront which is pretty dire, if what is put there is not thought about carefully. There are a very small number of people to shop in Guernsey and overdevelopment could leave you with just as many empty shops as there are now, except that the new steel and glass will look very grubby in a few years time and when the retailers can’t make it work the Bridge area will become another enormous suite of offices. AP Mk 2 completed. I am glad you agreed with a large part of my post.
Sanguine
Correction, some people want it! I don’t think the Bridge is ugly at all, nor I might add do lots of local people or visitors and who see St Sampson for the first time and remark about how well it fits into its harbour setting. It might need some help to get it to look its best again but that certainly doesn’t mean leveling the place which is what I fear will be its eventual fate once the first stage of these horrendous proposal get past. Of course the derelict stuff at the back needs redeveloping, I am certainly not against any of that but it has to fit with what we have not overwhelm the area by its size and massing.
Report abuse
I think it is such a shame that all of the people renting out the workshops in Leales yard were kicked out some time ago and many have had to stop trading as a result of no being able to find suitable or affordable units to rent.
why not just rejuvinate the old building that are already there – they do it all of the time in the UK – for a start we need an icelands down this end of the island as the coop has no choice and charge extortionate prices – all of these old people that cannot get around to town or st martins are being ripped off. Lets give them a little more choice – my gran has a field day when i take her to town or to icelands in st martins – she is constantly moaning about how awful the coop is! Pull your fingers out and start building something, stop wasting time and money, decide what you are going to do and do it!
Report abuse
Dave
Political/Personal
At least you have given your time to comment compared to others and even though we all might not agree I respect someone that has an opinion and sticks to it. We still need a Guernsey Boy that wants to protect his home!
Respect given until I disagree with you!
Report abuse
Dave, I want an island that functions, not one that looks pretty or in keeping.
The bridge is ugly, the shops and some of the people really bring it down!
Report abuse
What a silly question Dave and with it you’ve given me the open goal I thought you would.
Of course I know Jenny Tasker is a Co-op director. The crucial difference between her and Honeybill is that she had the intelligence and, more importantly, the integrity to realise her position on Environment was compromised on this issue. Honeybill did not.
Oh, and Dave, everyone knows where you are coming from on Leale’s yard. You want to see the whole scheme wrecked and nobody is fooled by all this nonsense about a scaled down scheme or a lick of paint to put the Bridge right. You know that by changing the goalposts and reducing the retail element by 20 per cent you will have succeeded in ruining the viability of the entire scheme. That way you can have the quaint old Guernsey bomb site preserved in aspic forever.
Report abuse
don’t be hoodwinked by all this cultural and architectural guff from dave jones. he is so far to the right that the possibility of an organisation like the co-op, with its core values of shared ownership, led by people with core left wing values of equality, fairness and society, just stick in his craw. i am sure he will oppose the co-op for the simple reason roffey is still about and still able to win his arguments, logically and ethically, most every time.
Report abuse
Martino
Jenny did exactly what she should have done and that is recognized by all including all of her fellow Deputies. Also have you completely lost the plot altogether? I never realised, that I had the power to wreck this proposed scheme. The last time I looked I didn’t have a seat on the Environment department and I have absolutely zero influence over their deliberations. Perhaps you can tell me how I have moved the goal posts? At what point did I single handily instruct the Environment department to turn down what is currently being proposed. Did it ever occur to you? that they might take the same view as I and many others do on this project and scaling it down is not wrecking the proposals but making them more acceptable for the water front landscape where it is suggested the development is built. The problem with you Martino is that you really don’t care, if Environment had just nodded this scheme through and something hideous and too big to be viable was built. That would have been OK with you. Any development would do so long as it doesn’t upset the Co-op. it wouldn’t matter a jot whether it was totally out of keeping with the area and when it failed because the critical mass of shoppers just isn’t here in Guernsey, to make a massive retail venture viable, you would just say “Oh well lets move on” “we don’t want to hamper progress” much good that will be, when one of the most picturesque water fronts has been lost for all time and when St Sampson looks more like Jersey than Guernsey. Your last comment is laughable it just takes us back to toys out of the pram yet again, the normal position for Mr Roffey and one I have experienced over several years, when decisions are taken he doesn’t agree with.
Blah
If I am as far to the right as you suggest, then I would be all in favour of un-controlled capitalism and profit above all other considerations, which I most certainly am not. As for the shared values of the Co-op they give a dividend to their shoppers, however that dividend isn’t free, it is paid for by the cost of your groceries over the year. There are numerous products in other retail outlets that are cheaper than the Co-op and it is for the shopper to decide how they want to save money. You can call it shared ownership, call it what you like but nothing in this world comes free. As for Mr Roffey I am not sure he has won his argument has he? Environment turned down the current proposals.
Report abuse
Hey is Dave Jones turning into our island’s version of Prince Charles? Opposing any new modern building in favour of pastiches of ‘quaint’ olde-worlde geogian or victorian buildings. All the Co-op’s after doing is building a carbunkle on the face of an old friend eh Dave?
When Dave’s in his manor up at the Bridge doesn’t he ever notice the Guernsey Electric buildings and chimneys. And what about Quayside, that’s not very victorian is it.
Report abuse
Oh Dave, please, if anyone has lost the plot then it’s you, not I…
I never said you had the power to wreck the scheme. I said you wanted to see the scheme wrecked (subtle difference), and as a deputy you have far more influence (among your peers and in the House if it ever comes to a vote) than the average man or woman on the street.
This is why you must be taken to task for your position on this scheme, which as blah points out is being shown up now (mostly by yourself in your own posts) as vindictive and personal. The toys from your own pram are littered all over this thread for all to see.
PS Perhaps you’d care to comment on your pal Jack Honeybill’s decision to remain at the Leale’s Yard discussion despite his admitted vested interest? You’ve been a bit quiet on that one so far.
Report abuse
Martino
It is matter for Deputy Honeybill; it is for him to explain his position not me and why is he “my pal”? We are both States members, that’s where it begins and ends. Also how does he have a vested interest in Leal’s yard? Secondly where have I ever said I want this scheme wrecked you are the one that keeps writing your own scripts. What I have said is that in my view this is the wrong scheme and it would appear Environment very much share that view. Also why would this scheme ever come to a vote in the States, it is a private development nothing to do with the States and therefore the States has no say in it. I might remind you that States projects are subject to the same scrutiny by the planners and Environment as every other development. They also turn down some States schemes in the first instance until they reflect better what fits. This is about size, type of buildings height and massing, nothing else and I have been consistent in that view since my first letter on the subject in 2008, I also have copies of letters making the same points about the proposed development at Admiral Park in 2006 and letters making similar points about the Market going back to 2003, so I suppose that was all personal and vindictive too. You are upset because I won’t agree with you, which in your world makes it personal and vindictive, that’s very odd and shows the immaturity of your argument. My posts have been measured and well argued and I have stuck to the issues, if you can show me where I have turfed the rattle out of the pram I would be pleased to look at the evidence. You will have to accept that there will need to be changes if this company wants this new development to go ahead and I look with interested to see what those changes might be.
Report abuse
I lived a walk away from The Bridge for many years and used the shops down there all the time, it was a very vibrant little area, now I find the place has deteriorated to such a degree it is really quite tatty.The Coop is far too small especially the car park and the charity shops (as much as they are doing a terrific job)are not what is needed, particularly the amount of them down there. Cash is needed to be pumped into the area, perhaps not on such a grand scale as the Coop plans, but lets get on with something down there before all the shops close down.I know Dave Jones wont agree but the marina has tidied up the harbour, in my opinion that was much needed as the smell down there was awful and needed upgraded, its a shame there are not a few visiting berths down there.As for the traffic, well whoever thought of that plan, when Mrs Le Page holds up the traffic at Bulwer Avenue to waitfor a parking space outside the Candy shop to go and buy a quarter of sherbert lemons beats me, and before you all laugh that is the truth it does happen.
Report abuse
Dave Jones said,
“If you look back and see the beautiful Georgian and Victorian buildings that grace a large part of the town of St Peter Port, these were designed by architects who clearly had a passion and a flair for their work and an eye for proportion and detail, people who knew how to blend buildings into their surroundings.” Georgean and Victorian architecture was beautiful but since Victorian days how on earth can you say that when you look at The Truchot area, The new Royal Court,the building now blocking out the Old Royal Court, The new buildings on the north side of The Avenue, Custard Castle (Sir Charles Frossard House), the new residence above The old Little Theatre Site, the disgraceful blot on the skyline estate in Hautville and the ruination of the interior of the Town Market to name a few?
These are all from the imaginations of the new wave architecture that in NO WAY fit in with the image of st Peter Port.
Report abuse
Dave Jones you are a man of vision, rear vision, always looking back and never forward. You live in your own little dream world where you view the Bridge area as “one of the most picturesque water fronts” instead of the decaying dump that it really is.
If you have your way Guernsey in general and the Bridge area in particular will continue to decay and stagnate and die but I will give you one thing. You have indeed been consistent in opposing any scheme to improve and regenerate the run down parts of our island.
Yes, you did it with Admiral Park, which has breathed new life into another awful bomb site. And, as valeite so rightly observes, you did it with the new marina at St Sampson’s, which has brightened up and improved that little corner no end.
There is, though, a certain vehemence that has given your latest opposition to Leale’s Yard an extra spiteful edge. Your animosity comes through in your posts on this thread and if you look back (you’re good at looking back) you’ll see that I was not the first one to point it out!
Report abuse
Martino
who are you exactly? (not that i care) as you seem to know it all and anyone who dosent agree with you will be subject to a certain amount of cildish slagging.
I can imagine you in a room with a 100 peoeple not agreeing with you, and you thinking they must all be idiots.
Theres only one kind of person worse than someone who cant admit to being wrong, and thats someone who doesnt even know when their wrong.
Report abuse
Peter
Peter be careful with comments like that, you will have Martino taking you task for being backward.
As for the rest, I agree with you. I wrote to Roger Berry head of the Old Board of Admin at the time about the hideous looking New Court Buildings and I agree completely about the Market. The one common factor in all of those buildings that you list is the absence of any real architectural talent. The new Court building is an off the shelf UK design, have a look at Jersey and you are looking at mirror buildings you will see the same building in many towns in the UK where their courts have been replaced with this bog standard model.
The MOJ have a set of plans that they believe all courts should follow we got the same. As you say most of these buildings are totally out of keeping with the rest of the historic town of St Peter Port.
Martino
The visual impact of AP is pretty awful from any angle. In front of the buildings is a forest of traffic light poles and signs which you clearly find attractive. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion I bet we could revitalize the area up at the Vale castle another decaying dump I suspect in your opinion, if we knocked it down and put a Co-op up there together with some other retail outlets. There is nothing wrong with making sure that what is being proposed is in proportion with its surroundings and you have put forward no real argument as to why the Environment Departments decision is wrong. Unlike you, I accept that there are different opinions to mine and that is great in any democracy. Finally you talk about my latest opposition to Leal’s yard, I have been opposed to the current set of plans put forward since day one, there is nothing “latest” about it. The sum total of your response is to accuse those who agree with that decision, of being spiteful or beastly to the developer
Report abuse
I can sympathise with Dave Jones thoughts on SOME modern architecture
Whilst I cannot claim to be anything of an expert ( for instance I’m old fashioned enough to like an oil painting that actually looks like what it is supposed to represent )I can recall the horror I felt a couple of years back when the Press printed photos of the results of a competition to design a new Yacht Club building on the edge of the Careening Hard
I thought everyone of them was an abomination but no doubt some people liked them
Report abuse
You really have lost it this time, Dave, with your conclusion that because I support the regeneration of a wasteland I must also be in favour of ‘developing’ one of our finest ancient historic monuments.
Also, I thought I had made it abundantly clear that the Environment Decision as it stands is wrong because it has destroyed the viability of the Leale’s Yard project (which is exactly what you want).
What we can conclude safely from your ramblings is that the whole of the Admiral Park site would still be a bomb site, rusting gas tanks and all, if you had had your way.
Report abuse
Angry, confused and illiterate. Yes, bcb, you fit perfectly the profile of a typical member of the DJ fan club. And I’m not telling you who I am because I wouldn’t want to be stuck in a room with one of you, let alone a hundred!
Report abuse
Martino
My, my you really are bad tempered today, bcb is confused and illiterate presumably along with everyone else who disagrees with you. PR really has got you wound up. So its ugly steel and glass or nothing according to you. NOWHERE have I ever written or said that either of these sites should NOT be redeveloped. Having made one horrific mistake with Admiral Park, I am not eager to see the same done again at the Bridge. I don’t think for a second that this set back has made the project less viable, the Housing units alone will bring in enough revenue to pay for the tacky commercial buildings and the Co-op will still have a multimillion pound site that they will vacate when the new supermarket is built. The trouble is with you Martino is that you read one scaremongering headline and you believe it.
Report abuse
Martino
I dont even know DJ and wasent reffering to only your posts on this topic but many others.
So form a one post you conclude you know about me? thats exactly why you are the type of person who thinks they know it all.
And dont worry you wouldnt be stuck in a room with me for very long as i think 10 minutes listening to you would have me running for the hills.
Angry,frustrated,rambling on,cant be polite to anyone who has a different opinion, thats you!
Report abuse
Lets get building bigger the better the bridge has nearly nothing left
Report abuse
Dave
I didnt know you had a fan club? Do you have a website and a newsletter? If you have badges then im in!
Report abuse
Don’t flatter yourself bcb.
I’m not obsessed with you in the way you are with me. I find your posts dull, inconsequential and forgettable and picked up on the first one here on this thread only because it was a personal attack against me that had nothing to do with the subject matter.
I think i’ll ignore them from now on because the bad grammar, the awful spelling and the typos give me a headache!
As for your idol (you don’t need to know someone to be a fan) I’ll just leave him to carry on digging that great big hole for himself because I know he just can’t resist.
Are you deep enough now Dave?
Report abuse
Martino
What personal attack! are you telling me you dont insult (at some point) those who dont agree with you, or that you are not a know it all? try reading back over many of your posts.
Given you a headache? result,,,,
Maybe he`s digging the hole for you? we live in hope.
as for the rest yaaawn.
Report abuse
Martino
I think what really galls you is that people wont let your views go unchallenged. If I have a different opinion on this development from yours, it is seen now as “digging a great big hole” for myself. You have managed to include a whole vocabulary of personal insults against anyone who disagrees with you. We are all, either, illiterate, confused, spiteful, vindictive or just plain backward thinking. You remind me a little of Alan Partridge a character who has a real problem with people who don’t live in his curios little world. We must stop thinking for ourselves and stop digging as we can only have an opinion so long as it corresponds with yours. It really is very odd.
Report abuse
“Of course I know Jenny Tasker is a Co-op director.”
And another 46 probably having Co-op numbers (and therefore shareholders). It’s a Co-op conspiracy I tell thee :-)
Report abuse
A number of recent comments have strayed off the main subject of this thread. Please keep comments on-topic.
Report abuse
Thisisguernsey – indeed.
My big issue with this is who is going to fill the shops? That’s businesses and shoppers!
The coop maybe marginally cheaper than other retailers but I have serious reservations regading their business acumen. You only have to go into an existing store to realise the hopeless customer service they provide.
Anyway back to who…I just can’t see what stores would want to set up on the Bridge that a, aren’t already in Town or b, who would get the footfall to make it worthwhile setting up on the Island.
So that leave a few trinket shops. Or empty shops.
The words white and elepahant spring to mind.
Report abuse
Totally agree with Dave Jones.
Report abuse
I too agree with Dave Jones – and would never have described him as right wing. Yes the Co-op is probably more ethical than Tescos, but it still wants your money.
The scheme is totally inappropriate. Anyone would think that the Bridge was 20 miles from town by some of these posts!
Report abuse
Peter
My agreement with you is that I do believe some areas of the town have been ruined by inappropriate developments and their architecture in recent years, so I am not sure why you find that difficult to understand. My point is that the large town houses are things of beauty in my eyes I don’t ask anyone to agree with me or not, it is simply my opinion. As for your other points, there is clearly no comparison with those buildings of the past and the glass and steel boxes being thrown up today. Also I don’t profess to be speaking for ALL the people but I do know that there are many who hold the same view as I do on this issue. You are also right about our younger people, some of them like some of the new developments, so yes it may be a generation thing and I have never pretended otherwise. I no longer own or operate any excavators and have not done so for several years, we are employed to do the job we are paid for, not have other professions, Housing is not a part time job and I don’t treat it like one.
Report abuse
Guernsey needs this development like a hole in the head… it is quite unsuitable. As Gilthead said… a white elephant. A community of 60,000 people does not need 2 major shopping areas within a couple of miles of each other….. there would simply not be the business to keep it afloat.
More importantly though, urban regeneration should not be about shopping malls designed to suck in traffic from far and wide, worsening the local pollution. Urban regeneration should be about creating desirable places to live and work, and designed for the people who live and work there so that the daily needs can be met without the need to travel far and wide.
Report abuse
…meanwhile, at Our House (Bank) the plans for the two tower blocks and a multi-storey car park out the back were coming along splendidly, then, horror of horrors, Envo put their foot down and said I couldn’t add 20 condos and an olympic size swimming pool..!!
How ungrateful! After having gone to all that effort, selflessly trying to help the community, and offering over 200 finance jobs for locals (half of them imported, but still..), all they could waffle on about was the ‘enormous profit’ I’d be making, and some tripe about the ‘devastating impact on the surrounding area’…!
So. I reminded them I was a BANK, threatened to withdraw the whole thing (and deny all those poor poor people of a job)…et voila! Envo backed down and allowed the lot.
Seriously, Co op, show some sense, let the Co op BANK reapply with the same plans, an’ it’ll fly through, you sillies!! ;0)
Report abuse
Reading thru the opinions above, Dave Jones acquits himself ablely, with dignity and honesty. Martino, the bile and vitriol you distribute toward anyone with a differing opinion shows you have the mentality of a stroppy teenager. You have done yourself and your argument no favours whatsoever with your personal attacks and projection of negative emotions on Dave Jones. The Bridge needs rejuvenation. That much is obvious. Does it need hundreds of tonnes of steel and window? As an outsider, the last thing I want to see is those souless business parks you see with a Gigantic Cinema and a Witherspoons, a Mickey D’s and a Burger King and a Pizza Hut, a JD sports and a Large Boots, that litter every region of the UK. What Dave Jones is trying to guard against is admirable and true and I for one agree whole heartedly. Rujuvination and Restoration is what is needed not demolishment and destruction of culture.
Report abuse
I think it’d be a real shame to lose this opportunity.
I can understand what Dave Jones is saying though about the appearance – would there be no possibility of making it look more in character with the bridge as opposed to the glasshouses along the front?
I also do think however the size it originally wanted to be was too much – as expressed in previous posts, we don’t need two towns but a bit of rejuvenation of the currently hagged bridge, with little more than charity shops is needed and this could be a good thing for Guernsey
Report abuse
No bile, no vitriol, just facts.
What ‘honest’ Dave fails to tell you is that a significantly scaled down version of what’s on offer would not be commercially viable. End of. Sure, you could lose a few per cent of the retail element and I bet this has been factored in by the investors but there is a critical mass below which they and the potential new retailers really won’t go. It’s as simple as that.
It’s all very well coming up with some pie in the sky theoretical plan to ‘rejuvenate and restore’ what is there already but who’s going to invest in that? It is also dishonest to compare the Leale’s Yard plans with Admiral Park – and I say that as someone who doesn’t at all mind the way Admiral Park turned out compared with what was there before. The two sets of plans are quite, quite different and those who pretend they are one and the same are the ones using scaremonger tactics.
Report abuse
bcb,Scarlett,PW Fudgedonut,Wombat,St Peter, guernseygirl,splat,Donk.
In fact, I thank all of you who have supported my stance and that what is currently being proposed is to large and not in keeping with the original streetscape of the Bridge area and when I say original I mean what was set out at the time the Clos du Valle was filled in and the Bridge at St Sampson was created. Rejuvenation of this area is long overdue and all I ask is that it is done in a manner that preserves the low level waterfront character that we have at present. It is perfectly possible to have new development for retail shops and cafés that will not look wholly out of place and is constructed in materials that blend with the existing surrounding buildings. I also agree with those who say that if the development is to big then other parts of the island will suffer in terms of trade I will predict we will then see more and more shops turned into fast food takeaways of every nationality, just as you have seen up through the Bordage and areas around Trinity square. The changing face of Guernsey has to manage and it can give the island consumer everything it wants without destroying the small island symmetry that we have been used to and which is admired by those who visit this island. I am taking a couple of weeks break but I hope the discussion continues, input from the people of Guernsey is hugely important on theses large developments because if we get them badly wrong then everyone has to live with it for years afterwards.
Report abuse
“scaled down version of what’s on offer would not be commercially viable”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/guernsey/8526883.stm
Some of it must be viable, buildings are starting to go up.
“What ‘honest’ Dave fails to tell you is that a significantly scaled down version of what’s on offer would not be commercially viable”
You are doing it again it’s not his fault – wind it in man.
Digital Dave is engaging with Jo Pubic; love him or hate him he’s giving you an opinion, time and a right to reply. Couldn’t have done that 10 years ago, so please cut the bloke some slack.
Did he snog your first girlfriend at school or something?
Report abuse
Just as a matter of interest, why does it appear that some in support of this development are taking the either or/all or nothing stance?
Who can honestly say that they KNOW that if the Co op chucks their toys out of the pram, another company won’t come along and do something there, maybe in 10 minutes, maybe in 10 years?
When people unquestioningly take the blackmailing, posturing threats of ‘all or nothing’ from ANY large institution (or politicians, remember the incinerator debacle? We were all ‘doomed’ if we rejected that one…)
I find it sad on two levels…
one, that we simply cannot be so trusting of large corporations in this day and age (especially when moneys involved, dodgy mortgage, anyone?)…
and two, that certain apparently sentient, intelligent people still choose to do so, seemingly unaware that we simply CANNOT do that any more.
Report abuse
Seems like this is going to be like another Ebeneezer Church thing.
Report abuse
You’re splitting hairs Neil.
That part of the scheme, the 16 new homes, is the one small, non-retail part of the scheme that can stand alone.
We’re talking about the retail element on this thread and, as I understand it, any attempt to significantly reduce that retail element will result in the rest of the scheme (apart from those homes) being scuppered.
If the Co-op and their developer partners do pull out can anyone really see anyone else coming along in the next 10 years, let alone the next 10 minutes, to put millions into a new, smaller “more acceptable” scheme – especially given the way the IDC/Environment have dillied and dallied over this one for years on end?
Report abuse
Martino
They could put more homes instead of retail, that would work for me as Housing Minister.
I realy am going on leave.
Report abuse
…and Sark will crumble and fall into the sea if Sark Estate Management pull the plug.
Apparently.
As for any one ‘seeing’ someone else coming along and taking advantage of the opportunity that the Co op may choose to leave, as I’ve said, Martino, NO ONE KNOWS.
I’m as sceptical abut large corporation’s pr spin regarding their selfless intentions, and how it has to be their way or no way, as much as I am of anyone who claims to have psychic powers and are able to predict the future…;0)
Report abuse
Why are we developing retail in St Sampson when there are loads of empty shops in town. With the growth of ‘etailing’ such as Amazon, this is a trend that is going to grow. A retail development is not needed here. What about a residential development, with high-quality apartments and houses. There are restaurants close and the marina and its got great transport links with town.
I am all for the Co-op and the addition of a CO-OP store in such a location could be looked at. However, there are serious issues here with regards to additional traffic and the small roads. It seems St Sampsons keeps being short-changed with the addition of new developments where a thorough transport strategy hasn’t been considered. Get a traffic planner in at the early stages of any development proposal, not architects, who have about as much idea as my Grandmother about traffic planning.
Report abuse
Martino….
You are right…. this thread is about the retail element of the development. In a community of 60,000 people, we do not need two main retail centres both designed to pull in traffic from all over the island….. one is enough. Our main town already struggles to keep its shops filled. Planning to attract more traffic into St Sampson’s will not make it a more attractive or healthy place to live…… and certainly won’t make it cheaper as is suggested by some posts. Any retail shops included in the project should be for the people who live within that area…. the kind of shops that one ‘needs’ to use regularly. The emphasis should be on creating an urban environment that is desirable to live in because you could access everything you need by walking. That would help people living there to keep their costs down as well as automatically making the place more pleasant to live. ( I am NOT talking about pedestrian precincts here!) So include some retail outlets, but make them small…. NOT department stores, which would not be primarily for the benefit of the local population.
Other things that could be included could be more residential with a good mix of types & prices; small unit workshops; restaurants; library….. maybe space for a small market?
St Sampsons already has the best and quickest links into town than any other parish in the island.
Report abuse