Charlie Hungerford's house
FIRST they flooded Jim Bergerac’s home in Queen’s Valley, now they want to knock down Charlie Hungerford’s house.
If the TV detective ever makes a return to the Island, he might have trouble finding a place to stay…
Plans to demolish Charlie’s house, which was featured in the hit 80s detective show, have been submitted to Planning by a multi-millionaire Jersey businessman.
Tom Scott has applied to knock down Windward House on Mont Sohier, St Brelade. He wants to demolish three houses on the site and outbuildings, which are in the green zone, to build five properties.
• See Friday’s JEP for full story and background on the famous house.
Article posted on 31st July, 2009 - 2.57pm
49 Article Comments
What a Surprise!
another end of an era!
Report abuse
good , hope it generates, some work for local firms.
Report abuse
DONT LET IT HAPPEN
If this goes ahead it just shows that planning do not really care about the island and its lovely buildings.
Report abuse
Got to say who cares on this one. Its a house, not a particularly nice one either. I’m almost quite sure we don’t have tourists coming over here actually looking for these things any more.
Report abuse
Knock down an historic house in a green zone?
No problem Mr Scott, will be the answer from planning.
Report abuse
I’ve got five quid says he gets what he wants !!!
Report abuse
Between tom scott and dandara this place really will be a concrete jungle.
Hong Kong eat your heart out!
Report abuse
Rock on Tommy!
Report abuse
Time that planning stops the rot in dividing farms and houses for the selfish personal gain of a few already rich developers and fat cat entrepreneurs, at considerable cost to the infrastructure of Jersey.Windward House is unique as the only remaining property with a largish area of land overlooking Ouaisne Bay.It should retain its integrity as a single property and be included in the register of Sites of Special Interest (SSI) as well as its land as an Important Open Space (IOS) under the proposed revision of the Island Plan.
Report abuse
Oh well i guess if he gets permission to build in the green zone then money does talk after all.
Report abuse
im disgusted as for saying tourists dont look for these places now i still do and ive been coming to jersey for 22yrs.why should tom scott be allowed to pull down a lovely house
Report abuse
If this building is destroyed, don’t blame Tom Scott. Blame Freddie Cohen and his attitude toward the island’s architectural and coastal heritage.
If Tom Scott dropped the word “iconic” into his application this demolition is probably as good as a done deal.
I feel so old being able to remember the days when people bought houses because they wanted the house, not because they wanted to demolish it.
Report abuse
Charlie Hungerford…now I only saw Bergerac a handful of times but seem to remember he was the highly irritating ‘comic relief’ character.
They should have demolished the house whilst he was still in it lol. Would have boosted the tv ratings as well
Report abuse
Give Tom what he wants and needs, the island needs more homes for us folks who have just qot our qualies, we need the access to the housing market especially if our families come oer to live with us as well.
Report abuse
Well this is Sandbanks at Poole in Dorset all over again!This is going to happen more and more unless Planning take firm control.
I’m not saying nothing should be allowed but this is a unique building of an era that is slightly out of fashion at the moment,it also has a unique plot of land with it which gives a picturesque backdrop to the Bay below it.
My alarm bells tell me we are about to see five “Unique”(Except they are being built everywhere at present) over-sized “Minimalist” creations posing as “Art Nouveau” or “Art Deco” replicas put on the skyline here?
Sadly I fear this out of fashion, though not unattractive empty building (Whoever painted it pink?) is doomed whatever the outcome, and will only be missed by those who remember it in years to come.What concerns me is that this planning proposal takes in the rest of the garden as well!
There is a design view that says an original, even if it is “Out of fashion”, is still worth preserving especially if it’s replacement is not an original of current generation in design, but a bad replica of an earlier design period.
Take for example the current Lord Bath, he’s a passionate fan of sixties art, but you don’t see him creating a bonfire out of the family Gainsbouroughs and Turners to accommodate that taste? So why are Planning allowing this to start happening with architecture all over Jersey?
Be prepared to see even new buildings disappear from sites like this in other parts of the Island.And in twenty years your five minimalist structures here will disappear under a massive luxury flat development, along with what’s left of the greenbelt view currently enjoyed from the Bay below when you look up at the current structure.
Oh and if by rare chance this building does survive, Planning Department, please leave it with a plot of ground for a garden that does justice to it’s size.
Anyone prepared to lay a bets on the outcome here?
Report abuse
The comment from “Someone” is absolutely incorrect – just look at the full page in the JEP! It is actually a visitor/fan of Jersey and Bergerac who brought this to OUR attention as islanders!!!
As for the statement about the house being “not a particularly nice one”, – incorrect again! I have been inside the house and in the gardens on many occasions – the house is beautiful, and a one-off. Having been round the world, it is one of my top 5 homes ever. As “Realist” states, Windward House is unique and I second that it should be protected.
As “Joy” states (good on you Joy!), I also know that tourists do come to see these places, many of them still coming back every year. The thing that they say to me is that they are put off coming back by a lot of the private new buildings/developments. Tourism is based on beaches and history, and many tourists I speak with dislike the modern buildings and “walls/fortresses” going up everywhere on this small island.
Can someone start a petition to save this house from demolition?
Report abuse
I think it would be awfull if this house is knocked down. Tourists still do come over to Jersey to hunt down all the places on Bergerac, myself and my partner are two of them that have been doing it for the last 20 years.
What is the point in having “green Zones” if the uba-ritch can just do what they like.
There are places where new home can be built without knocking this and the other down, there are areas on Jersey that would benifit from doing up with new and modern houses, leave this one alone please.
Report abuse
Jersey’s low tax regime depends on a stock of properties which are available to wealthy immigrants.Windward House is a prime example of a 1(1)K property with extensive land, which is almost unique in Jersey and greatly benefits the environment of Ouaisne bay as a single property and obviously should not be replaced by five houses and eventual sub division of land,unless planning and environment abjucate their responsibilities under the Island Plan. It is time that sub dividing ever diminishing unique properties such as Windward House, for the pecuniar gain of a few influential and already very rich entrepreneurs,are subject to an urgent review of planning law.The law should be equal to all,whether rich or poor.
Report abuse
I appeared in the original article stating my sadness at the loss of this wonderful property. I don’t mind being called a BERGERAC fanatic and yes it was the TV show that originally introduced me to Windward House … BUT I fell in love with Jersey and its buildings, and especially this one, due to its uniqueness, plot and the original builders/architects concept and layout, not the TV drama!
I did a great deal of research on the house some time ago and was shocked at the lack of historic & photographic information (despite 10 years worth of TV appearances plus public Open Garden events there is none online or in print). Now I am shocked at how easily resigned it appears that the good people of Jersey give up their “treasures”!
My original goal was to appeal for photos, articles, stories, anecdotes, clippings, contacts, owners and staff names/dates, etc both pre- and post-Bergerac, in an attempt to keep a written and photographic record of this historic building before its too late. (Please contact JEP if you have any so they might pass it on to me!)
Now it appears that no one even knew about the Planning Application! This may be because it is titled “land at Windward” rather than “Windward House”, or because locals don’t always have time to notice changes on their doorstep. We are all a bit guilty of not appreciating things while they are there, and only when they are gone and lost forever.
All I know is that the ORIGINAL OWNER was “Francis William Synge LE MAISTRE (1859-1940) Born St Aubins. Lived at Graystones, St Aubin and then at Grey Gables, which he had built, then sold and built another, Windward House, where he lived from 1925 till his death in 1940.”
JEP Open Gardens article dated 08/04/1982 states “The house overlooks the La Cotte site, the finds from which are to return to the Island shortly for display, and in the grounds of Windward House is a deep natural spring with the Dolmen de St Pierre, indicating that early man settled nearby. The house was built in 1924 for the local artist Le Maistre, who built galleries on the north side in which to keep his watercolours”. This explains the extra wide and long corridors – a feature I always rated about the house.
I would love Windward House to be restored and improved on – just look at what a fantastic job has been done on Cardington House in St Aubins. It is (only) a 5-bedroom boutique house, and on a much smaller plot. Couldn’t Windward House be transformed in to something like this and make it a stunning garden, wedding, conference and events venue? With the gardens restored and opened to the public from time to time, and a private residence at other times?
The argument for housing for those who need it doesn’t seem a valid one here, as it won’t be affordable and it will only be 5 larger properties on smaller plots of land for multi-millionaires. As it is in a coastal area of outstanding natural beauty I am in favour on no further development of this rare and wonderful corner of Jersey overlooking Ouisane and St Brelades Bays. Please someone come up with some better ideas!
Report abuse
I was interested to read comment no 16 from Jason who has actually been inside the house and gardens.Just looking at the photograph I couldn’t understand why anyone would wish to knock it down as it appears to be in good repair and not exactly derelict or needing extensive restorative work.It is therefore clearly just a case of a wealthy man wanting to add a few bob more to his millions.Perhaps he could put 2 or 3 tower blocks on the site and call them luxury appartments then he could make even more money out of it.
And before someone suggests that I,and others,are envious of the rich I can happily say no I am not.Just sad that Jersey is losing everything that was once good and unique.
Report abuse
Just in passing can anyone fill me in on Mr Scott’s history of property development in this Island?
I am not seeking to be vindictive here, just interested in how he seems to be yet another incomer who seems to be able to bulldoze some fairly controversial things through our local planning controls when some locally based people find themselves fighting for years just to install a dormer window?
Time for Planning to be placed under “Close Scrutiny” and a few “Enquiries” to be made, and followed up!
Report abuse
Get a life people. The house has been run down for years; the last owner flogged everything off except for the site. What’s to preserve?
Report abuse
re jason r comment. thank you jason we all need to fight for things we care about.it was bergerac that brought myself and my family to jersey 22years ago.we still love coming over and look for things and places like charlies house.i to think these places and things are of interest are few and far between.you need tourists too many places of interest have closed or closin.keep charlies place intact.
Report abuse
Windward House was also once owned by a spinster member of the Dawson family, whom came over to Jersey, just post war from Scotland, where their parents had been successful distillers of Peter Dawson whiskey.They gave Portelet Common to the island and even provided the thatched shelter for the Elizabethan canon on Beaumont hill.There were other benefactors, such as the Boot family, of Boot’s, the chemist, whom gave Beauport bay to the island and built the Lalique church at Millbrook and donated Millbrook Park.The Berni family of Berni Inns also made substantial provision for the good of Jersey. Tom Scott falls into this category and yet he wants to demolish Windward House and build five houses to further enrichen himself at considerable cost to the fragile ecostructure of an island, whose environment is being swiftly ruined by profit for personal gain.It seems that those latter day profiteers, already enrichened, can ride roughshod over our overstretched planning department and provide very little, as compared to previous benefactors,in return.
Report abuse
So let me get this right,a guy from the UK who is a fan of a TV series from 20 years ago thinks that an old large house should be saved because it was used as a TV set in the series? And if this application has been “in planning” and subsequently advertised since the begining of the year, how come nobody local has spoken out?
What about the Monty Python sketches that were filmed here, anything from that we should save?
If this property is so important and given its high media profile in the series, then why has it never been listed as an SSI or building of local importance when the IDC / PEC have done their various extensive island surveys over the last 20 years listing the good and the great of Jersey properties?
Maybe the experts over these decades see no merit in this architecture and not fans of TV series.
Report abuse
In my view this is just another example of the filthy rich looking after each other regardless of how it affects others, unbridled self centredness ,we never should have let ministers have innordinate power,even Freddie himself has said so,the long term problem with all these architectural monstrosities is that they will remain ugly for generations, Freddie Cohen is the one allowing this..challenge him,call him,I feel he really needs to be stopped,look at Portelet, the old train station at Corbiere, Le petit Fort letacq,the proposed Benidorm timeshares at Watersedge,the awful design for Le Braye which has only just been refurbed. Wolfs caves,the ridiculous stuff he calls “art” go see the monster of Sandybrook at Le providence est, I could go on and on with examples of this crazy thinking……..Just STOP this environmental hooliganism and misguided destruction of our character.by outsiders who abuse their wealth,which clearly they have far more of than taste.
Report abuse
I live very close to Windward House and my family and many friends on the island know it well. I used to go round to play there when I was a child, and then when older to cocktail parties and always had a super time. Happy Memories.
I am gutted about the plans, as I was hoping that someone decent would be retaining it as one home. There was a rumour of this, hence I did not object.
When I did hear earlier in the year, I viewed the plans and I tried to rally round some folks to try and buy the place, or stop overdevelopment. Most locals hadnt heard and were sympathetic when I told them … until I mentioned Tom Scott owned it! When they heard this, most of them shrugged their shoulders with resignation. How sad!
Without support I fear this charming pocket of Jersey will now be lost. I wish I was younger and had the energy to take it one myself and for Jersey and for what is right, not necessarily for tourism or tv shows.
Rozel Joe misses the point that the UK fan clearly stated he saw Windward House in the tv show, but fell in love with it and Jersey on a later visit, not because of the show. What is wrong with passion, pride, preservation of beautiful things? Perhaps not everyone knows where it is located – it is usually not fully visible from the beach until Autumn/Winter?
I have many photographs of Windward House I can share with anyone interested. I would be delighted to upload them to the internet if someone could suggest a suitable site with gallery facility – facebook, twitter, photobook? Which one is the best? I agree we should keep a record of the grounds and property for future generations.
Finally, I end on a sad note. I physically felt sick and cried when the grounds were decimated. There has been a steady decline as the property has remained empty for what must be 4 years now, all the while looking more likely of demolition the worsely neglected it got! However when the trees, hedges, grasses and borders were stripped leaving the house almost naked-like, I felt very angry.
Planning has not yet been passed, and I am sure that in a Green Zone, some of the trees were centuries old and valuable, including the pine trees at the foot of the gardens near the Biaritzz Hotel, and Tom Scott should have waited for full permission.
Report abuse
Need a comment from a lawyer here, is it possible for a member of the public to take out an injunction against the planning minister for transgresssing the island plan…….? please
Report abuse
28. truthseekerc I agree with you. Will get back to you when I know the answer.
Report abuse
truthseeker
No chance at all. The best you could do would be to seek a judicial review of any decision on the Wednesbury grounds (look em up). But the problem is showing that you have locus: i.e. that you will suffer any harm.
FWIW, I wanted to knock down my house, which was architecturally much less attractive than Windwards Ho, and was told by my architect (who it turned out was full of tosh, but that’s another story) that Island policy was that you could not knock down a house that was structurally sound.
Report abuse
Generally speaking, there is only a presumption against development in the countryside zone.
There is already a property there. What might be an isue is the likely substantial increase in what planning would call the “footprint” of the buildings on site.
Could a member of the public ask the Royal Court injunct the Minister? In theory, perhaps, although the likely success is another matter.
A better avenue would be to seek judical review in the event that development permission is granted. The political avenue is always a possibilty too, particularly where the departure from the Island Plan [which is approved by the States and not any minister] is likely to be significant.
Report abuse
Regarding comment number 30; I understand that there is a “sustainability policy” in place which raises a [that word again] presumption against demolition where a property is sound. This would seem to make sense for obvious reasons, not least of which is the fact that demolition waste can be pretty toxic stuff, particularly when the inevitable ingress of water starts to drive the toxins into the water table.
Unfortunately, that presumption seems to be observed more in the breach than anything else. All around us we see perfectly sound hotels etc coming down. If planning were now to seek to rely upon the presumption, an applicant would have ample precedent and/or comparators with which to counter a refusal on that ground. In short, any such presumption is now effectively worthless.
Judicial review, by the way, can be brought on the grounds of procedural impropriety. Sometimes you don’t have to go as high as Wednesbury [for the benefit of other viewers, "Wednesbury" means that a minister or other decision maker has come to a decision at which no reasonable decision maker could have arrived!]
Report abuse
Thank you Gentlemen, food for thought,and proof if proof be needed of the immense value of this forum…
Report abuse
What about this Dolmen and natural spring(De St Pierre) which are mentioned as being in the grounds of this building? Surely they are protected as should access to such ancient monuments? I am quite sure if we had a proper tree protection law on this Island that was enforceable, that there has already been a violation here, or if there isn’t now there is going to be!
As for the house itself there needs to be a scheme locally such as that operated by English Heritage where buildings such as this one ,and their grounds, are listed!The scheme should include a grants scheme to assist owners of such properties to maintain the structure so that it does not deteriorate. With that scheme in place,where an owner has allowed such deterioration (As with this property at present) to secure permission to demolish the structure such action should result in criminal prosecution!
The listing of buildings should not however be so inflexible that no improvements are allowed, or even complimentary development, but the penalties should be enforced regardless of how wealthy the applicant is!
This should be particularly applied to properties and sites in unique coastal locations where controls should be enforceable as to the offshore as well as the onshore aspect of any development allowed.(Even if the States have to fine themselves for the new incinerator, and the old swimming pool building on the Fort. Oh and Cyril Le Marquand House! not because it’s coastal but because it exists!)
Report abuse
Nick (34): There is a local scheme to protect buildings and land; it has been around for over a decade. You can search the list on the Planning Dept web site. There are also, albeit limited, grants available.
SSi’s are actually registered as part of this scheme with the Royal Court and therefore protected by law as opposed to policy. The Historic Buildings Dept of Planning requires considerable detail when considering an application, including in some areas archaeological desktop studies.
SSi’s protect many buildings and parcels of land. Sustainability is subjective. Is it better to retain an old building and thus sustain its structure and materials, or by demolition, reuse what materials one can and construct a new building that requires less energy to run and the new build is therefore more sustainable in environmental terms.
Report abuse
The location of Windward House is extremely sensitive, being so visible on the headland above St Brelades Bay. This is a stunning beach, the inspiration for Debussy’s “La Mer”, itself a beautiful piece of music.
The existing house is totally sympathetic to the setting and the grounds that it stands in. I see no good reason why it cannot be retained and returned to a habitable residence.
As King Freddie has shown himself to be insensitive in many of the planning decisions that he has made, I am sure that Jersey is soon to despoil itself further. What a shame.
Report abuse
Thanks Rozel Joe, I will check that out, although it would seem the scheme you describe has no “Teeth!”. I am talking of a scheme where any proposals put to Planning on properties such as this would necessitate the proposer (Owner) explaining the condition of the house at that stage if it has been allowed deliberately to fall into disrepair without taking advantage of grants available to stop that happening, just to secure permission to demolish!Such action would be a criminal offence.
As would the removal of significant trees which would all be identified with a metal tag and registered on the planning file (Not a difficult task with the computer.There could even be a photo recording condition at time of registration).Removal without good reason, and permission, would then be a criminal offence.
This site and building is much too sensitive and important to be allowed to go to Planning on the current basis without some kind of action to determine why it is not being protected?The Historic Buildings Department of Planning should be pro-active (With rights of access) not re-active waiting for someone to lodge an application!
People need to register their concerns with Planning now without delay regardless of preconceived and fatalistic predictions as to the outcome. At least this travesty would not have gone ahead uncontested regardless of outcome!
Report abuse
Does anyone have any contacts at Jersey Radio, BBC TV Jersey or Channel News so we can get more public feedback on what the island thinks we should do with this?
Report abuse
This is the Planning Application Reference number P/2008/2711 for “Land at Windward” (ie Windward House).
You can object or support online at: http://www.gov.je/planning
Click on “Do you want information about planning applications in your area?”
Then click: “Browse the Register of Planning Applications”
This is the application wording:
17 Jan 2009 Land at Windward, Le Mont Sohier – Mr T Scott. Demolition of 3 existing dwellings and outbuildings and the construction of three detached dwellings and two gatehouses. Green Zone. Ref: P/2008/2711
The wording does make it appear lose 3 gain 3 but in fact the original house with separate garage accommodation look right together (as one building and are barely detached). The cottages off the drive are quite a small footprint.
I have looked at length at the plans at the States offices and the proposed buildings are 3 very big properties plus the 2 gateshouses which, whilst looking innocent on paper, are quite large houses in themselves. So it is definitely 5 properties on this special site
Report abuse
Melanie:I followed your instructions and despite quoting the reference number you mention I got the response that “No planning application was traceable”. Is there a reason the Planning Office web site is not obviously functioning on this particular enquiry I wonder?
Report abuse
I was aghast when I read about this. I have fond memories of Windward House and am sad that Freddie Cohen may say YES to this, thus adding to his list of monstrosities recently given the go ahead!
Without money or status no local person would ever have been allowed to build some of the ugly properties now littering my beautiful island.
Report abuse
I have lodged my objection!
Report abuse
Nick (41) I too looked at the web site and used the same ref. number. No problem. It seems the Planning Office web site is obviously functioning on this particular enquiry, as it does with all other applications.
As for Nick (32) The Historical Buildings Dept and the process of developing or changing anything that is a BLI, pSSI or SSI has very sharp “teeth” and uses them and are proactive in addressing any application that has a listed property on it.
Buildings or land are deemed worthy of protection by a panel of experts who are well qualified and well experienced in these matters and have local and UK professionals on them. The list is under constant review and considers internal detailing as well as external and “grouping” of buildings.
Windward is not on that list and because it is a high profile building (TV Series) it isn’t a “new discovery” which does sometimes occur. The comments on this web site are emotive and it is good to see people taking an interest, but fond memories of a building or place are not sufficient reason to protect it or consider it as part of the islands heritage.
Whatever people’s feelings are about Windward, its actual history, facades, internal and external detailing, proportions, use of materials etc will have been assessed and as it’s not on the list, the property will have been considered as having no merit worth protecting.
The listing process considers all buildings not just old ones, as an example, Romerils building in Dumaresq Street is listed.
Also consider, today’s architecture may one day become part of the islands heritage and reflect the way Jersey has evolved through the centuries.
Report abuse
It might be of interest to those of you expressing concern over this proposed development that preliminary contact with a Ms Inge at the Historic Buildings department of the States Planning Department has produced a response that they are aware of the presence of a dolmen in the grounds of the house.They were not aware of the House’s history and I have urtheforwarded the detail provided by Si Jones concerning the original owner and designer Francis William Synge LE MAISTRE (1859-1940)who was reputed to be a local artist of some significance, and who incorporated certain architectural features into the house to enable him to display his water colours.Whilst not much internet information on this gentleman is available as a significant artist, my investigation has taken a different turn when I explored the fact that as a reasonably well heeled individual (As evidenced by the house) he may have been a patron of other famous local artists of his generation or time. It turns out I don’t have to look much further than our own Jersey Museum and the Barreau/Le Maistre Watercolour Gallery. Perhaps someone from Jersey Heritage can fill us in on the detail here?Apparently this renouned art gallery is named after two jersey families who are (Were?) significant patrons of the arts.
Obviously a house, with architectural features deliberately designed into it by a significant local artist and patron of the arts, and a possible associate of several famous artists and architects of his day, should be demolished immediately! (It would be funny if it wasn’t so desperately sad!)
Report abuse
List this unique property and its grounds and protect it from sub division.Windward House is in an area of outstanding beauty and its grounds, as part of a single property, are integral to the protected coastline, as underlined in the island plan.
Report abuse
What a stupid idea, making five dwellings from one.
Soon there won’t be anywhere left in Jersey where very important people like Charlie Hungerford can live in isolation and say:
“Look at me, All this is mine”.
Report abuse
how sad to hear of the demolition of the house just visited jersey its changed so much looked for the hotel we stayed in for our honeymoon pulled down for re-development, i thought some how jersey would remain in the whole unchanged maybe like the isles of scilly.
Report abuse
there will be no green land left in jersey before long. there dosn’t seem any need to demolish it or any of the other houses!!! why can’t they just leave alone?!
Report abuse
Excellent post, Rozel Joe (#43). My feeling is that P&E should have very good reasons before intervening in redevelopment though new developments are different, particularly if they take place in the green zone. The Living Legend is another example.
People not liking a particular change isn’t a good enough reason to block that change. A house appearing on tv also isn’t a good enough reason. I also wonder whether the fact that it is Tom Scott who is the developer has affected people’s opinion.
Contravention of the Island Plan is a possiblity but my understanding is that the Island Plan also commits the States to providing more housing. A balance needs to be struck between competing priorities.
Incidentally, in relation to the dolman, can anyone confirm whether this still exists? As far as I’m aware, it doesn’t.
Report abuse