‘Why bother listing buildings if you’re just going to knock them down anyway?’
Wednesday 21st December 2011, 2:57PM GMT.
Mr Ferarri outside the Broad Street buildings which will be lost
HISTORIAN André Ferrari says that it is no use listing buildings for protection when they just get knocked down anyway.
In a letter to the JEP editor pubished today, Mr Ferrari says that there always seems to be an excuse to justify the loss of historic buildings.
Mr Ferrari, who has published two books on Jersey’s architectural heritage, says that there is now enough material for a third book of buildings that were demolished despite being listed for protection.
• Letters: Click here
Saturday 26 May
- Senator charged with grave assault
- J2: Your guide to what's on, including Jubilee Diary
- Queen's Jubilee: Win one of 60 diamonds
- Free cup of coffee for every reader
- More medals at Jeux des Iles
- Win tickets to family teddy concert
The Queen's Diamond Jubilee
JEP Jubilee Editions
Saturday 2 June: Guide to Celebrations
Wednesday 6 June: Souvenir of Events
View The Queen in Jersey supplement
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
Just think how many they would have knocked down if they had not listed them!
Report abuse
I agree with keeping worthwhile, built to last and substantial buildings that have some practical use and would pass proper Health and Safety requirements as these buildings pictured obviously do. But to keep so called historic buildings that have no street scene credentials,no historic links, are virtually isolated on their own next to modern facades and were not built to last 170 years, with the result that they are crumbling,is backward thinking and impedes sensible growth.
Mr Ferrari, Charles Dickens is not returning to Jersey!
Report abuse
why not have planning stipulate that they retain the facades,and build around them…whilst not as easy…quirky,respectful and a talking point for the developers to crow about…. et Voila…everybody happy.
Report abuse
Keeping the old obsolete facades is a nonsense. Let us have a modern frontage, efficient both thermally and hermetically.
Modern need not be ugly or unattractive if designed sympathetically to the surroundings.
We are going to end up with a messy hotch-potch if these fanatics make us keep every building just because it was built years ago.
Report abuse
The point here is not whether individuals believe that this or that listed building deserves protection. The fact is it has been given protection, and the point of listing is to preserve the building. Therefore it should not be demolished. If you don’t think the building should be protected then there should be a debate about delisting it. As Mr Ferrari says, the problem at the moment is that listing has lost all meaning: if it can be ignored to increase the profitability of a commercial development then there really is no point. The Planning department seem to have lost sight of their mandate to enforce planning policy, not act as the government arm of commercial developers.
Report abuse
I think you’ll find that virtually every building in town is listed so planning can charge for every minor alteration. User pays-remember.
Report abuse
No, that’s not correct. If that were the case, a legal cause of action would accrue on the basis that the legal provision relating to the protection of buildings had been used for a purpose which is ultra vires the minister.
J Goldridge-Embers (retired)
Report abuse
I didn’t say they admitted it but it is what is happening. Planning permission to renew a garage roof planning permission to replace old air conditioning units–why?
Report abuse
If they don’t admit it then you have no evidence of such practice. Your questions as asked in your post will be answered if you collect the relevant explanatory leaflets or speak to a senior planning officer.
Report abuse
I hate the fact that buildings get listed when the average joe on the street a) could give a damn about it b) doesnt even know what building your talking about anyway.
There are a small few people who are interested in these buildings and so the rest must suffer. Just take a walk aroudn town and see the number of buildings that are in serious need of a revamp. it just makes town look ugly.
As nigel said, “modern need not be ugly”
Report abuse
The rich or influential developers seem to be able to get away with knocking listed buildings down when they feel like it, and the listings are ignored by planning. If I wanted to demolish 6 buildings I bet I wouldn’t get planning permission to do so.
Now the Le Masurier family say they want to leave a legacy for the island, but they are just ruining yet more of our history. This is an important part of the industrial history of St Helier, and now it will just be bulldozed to make way for more ugly modern buildings.
I can understand Dandara et al but I think the Le Masurier’s should be ashamed of themselves for destroying yet more of our heritage.
Report abuse
Who sais the buildings would be ugly just because they are new? They would certainly be more efficient.
Report abuse