Friday, July 25, 2008
Skip Navigation LinksHome / Features / Letters to the Editor

BUILDING MAY NOT BE A GEM, BUT IT`S PART OF OUR IDENTITY

Friday, May 16, 2008
LETTERS
From Robert Jones, 4 Reeth Lodge, Castlehaven Lane, Niton Undercliff, Ventnor:
HAZELHURST, in Gate Lane, Freshwater Bay, just round the corner from where I was born, never was an architectural gem and the developer who wishes to demolish it is doubtless right it’s not in good condition (CP, 09-05-08).
You could say the same about a lot of properties in the older parts of towns and villages across the Island; they’re not good enough for English Heritage to slap on a protection order, so why not haul them down and replace them with something modern?
Two reasons spring to mind. One is that there have been so few buildings of the slightest distinction built in the past 50 years on the IW, too many of which in more recent times have been blocks of expensive flats.
Another is that buildings such as Hazel-hurst have mellowed over the years and belong where they are: they contribute to the feeling of place, which we are losing, not just on the Island but nationally.
We’ve accepted too often older properties, which are difficult and costly to renovate, should make way for bland, off-the-shelf designed properties which contribute nothing aesthetically, socially, environmentally or historically to the Island.
By historically, I mean what future generations will ask about their built environment is just the same question as so many are asking already: “How on earth could they have allowed that to be built here?”
The Freshwater Bay area still retains much of the character I remember from well over 50 years ago but that character is a fragile thing.
Knock a chunk out of it, put gleaming, new, identikit, characterless buildings where older ones stood for 150 years or more, and you can destroy it.
Hazelhurst could be converted, if the will were there to do so, into flats or separate houses. It’s just the cost that deters developers from doing that, rather than demolishing and starting afresh.
Does it always have to be profit first, last and always, or will the Island and its planners realize we have something of value in its own right, and we ought to keep it?