bierlijn Posted 9 June , 2009 Share Posted 9 June , 2009 I've just spotted a notice attached to the fence opposite the coach park and monuments at Hill 60. It says that the land has been acquired for development and a permit has been submitted to build a 'family house' there. The notice says that objections must be lodged within a month of the date on the notice, 10th April. But I walk the dog up to Hill 60 every few days, and I've never seen it before. Has anyone spotted this and lodged an objection? I'll attach a photo of the sign tomorrow, but there is a map below showing the plot concerned. It's going to be bye-bye to the view of Ieper which gives Hill 60 its context, except for small gap between this and the next house on the right. If the new owners don't hang out their washing on the day you're there. Hugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Reed Posted 9 June , 2009 Share Posted 9 June , 2009 That's a real shame. Given the tremendous number of visitors to that car park, I wonder if they know how busy it will be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob B Posted 10 June , 2009 Share Posted 10 June , 2009 I would anticipate that the clearance of the ground for the construction will be fun, with the iron harvest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 10 June , 2009 Share Posted 10 June , 2009 Can I volunteer to help dig the foundations; I have my own shovel and will not require payment. Of course there is a greater debate here with respect to new development on the battlefields or near sites of historic interest. I would like to think that the local authorities in Flanders are fully aware of the need to preserve the battlefields for the generations to come, whilst still allowing those developments which show an empathy for their surroundings and do not detract or in any way impinge on the existence and preservation of the battlefields. The authorities at both a local and national level must realise that certainly in respect of Flanders the battlefield sites are a great asset in bringing both revenue and visitors to this part of Belgium and must be prepared to strike a balance with regard to new development that is heavily biased towards the preservation of an asset which once destroyed can never be brought back. Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 10 June , 2009 Share Posted 10 June , 2009 The age old problem again, we brits have to realise, that we have no right to impose our thoughts on the people living on the battlefields, it's an evolving living landscape, and there will be development, in many cases sites have been lost forever, ie boezinghe, the proposed house is not being built on the site of hill 60, if it was maybe there would be some cause to object, however, the view of ieper, however important some may feel it is, is not "a site", remember had the buildings not been re built after the war, where would we all stay, eat, drink? oh and how would we get there with no roads?,there has to be development, if the house proposed starts doing b&b i guess they would do a roaring trade with all the visiting brits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 10 June , 2009 Author Share Posted 10 June , 2009 The public notice attached to the fence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 10 June , 2009 Author Share Posted 10 June , 2009 And here's the view from the Light Division memorial. Without the outlook onto Ieper, Hill 60 looses its context for visitors trying to understand the importance of the battlefield. With the view blocked, there will not even be a sense of it being a hill, just an uneven field flanked by houses. I mean, Yorkshire Trench gives the impression that the Germans set up a Mercedes Dealership and carpet warehouse, whereas here it'll look like the British were occupying someone's front lawn. I really hope this application has been rejected. Hugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 10 June , 2009 Share Posted 10 June , 2009 i take it you don't work for merecedes or the carpet factory in boezinghe then, or you just might have a different point of view, hugh, lol. i understand your point about perspective from hill 60, but there are many many places, all along the western front that have changed over the years, even if it is only the trees that have grown and blocked the view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Banning Posted 15 June , 2009 Share Posted 15 June , 2009 Without the outlook onto Ieper, Hill 60 looses its context for visitors trying to understand the importance of the battlefield. With the view blocked, there will not even be a sense of it being a hill, just an uneven field flanked by houses. Hi Hugh, I have good news to report. Peter has been in touch with the provincial government and they are happy to report that they are looking into the threat here and are looking to buy the ground around this proposed building site. They will then ensure that no building is erected, thereby safeguarding the view from Hill 60 to Ypres. So, good work by the Province I should say! All best, Jeremy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 15 June , 2009 Share Posted 15 June , 2009 Excellent news Jeremy, please keep us up to date with developments. Regards Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 16 June , 2009 Author Share Posted 16 June , 2009 Jeremy, That's great news, and please pass on my thanks to Peter for following up this matter with the provincial government. Purchase and protection of this land would be a generous and sympathetic move by the Provincie, and fits ideally with the reorientation of the IFF Museum to treat the whole of the remaining war landscape as an extension of the museum. My surprise was realising that the application to develop the land came from the address of the Hill 60 cafe. Hugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egbert Posted 16 June , 2009 Share Posted 16 June , 2009 ......they are looking into the threat here and are looking to buy the ground around this proposed building site......... So is it the British thread they are looking at or the British threat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Reed Posted 16 June , 2009 Share Posted 16 June , 2009 Good news, Jeremy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter and Ellen Posted 20 June , 2009 Share Posted 20 June , 2009 Most certainly good news. I saw it the other day and shook my head in disbelief. Mind you, we could have asked for a viewing platform to be built in the carpark to get us high enough to see over the house or perhaps a wind turbine with a viewing window part way up. Oops sorry, just kidding! Regards, Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 20 June , 2009 Author Share Posted 20 June , 2009 Perhaps the provincial government will remove the miniature version of The Dump, in the photo to the left of the horse. I had to actually climb the Light Division memorial to get a decent view of Ypres over it (I'm only admitting that now that the danger is over). Hugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 29 June , 2009 Share Posted 29 June , 2009 Purchase and protection of this land would be a generous and sympathetic move by the Provincie, and fits ideally with the reorientation of the IFF Museum to treat the whole of the remaining war landscape as an extension of the museum. can you explain this statement in a little more detail please? willy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 29 June , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 June , 2009 can you explain this statement in a little more detail please? willy It was some statement of intent I read somewhere, in reference to the museum's disappointment about the removal of the St Jan bunkers. I don't know any more than that. Hugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 29 June , 2009 Share Posted 29 June , 2009 It was some statement of intent I read somewhere, in reference to the museum's disappointment about the removal of the St Jan bunkers. I don't know any more than that. Hugh ok, thanks i will ask in iff later this week when i'm in ieper, seems to be a rather bold statement thats all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irishmen1916 Posted 29 June , 2009 Share Posted 29 June , 2009 Correct me if I am wrong but isn't this whole area riddled with tunnels ? even the trains slow down when they pass on the near bye line, wouldn't have said that this was a particularly safe place to build a house. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 29 June , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 June , 2009 Yes, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they'd be digging into Trench 39, which must have had both offensive and defensive tunnels passing under it. Anyone got a map? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugout Posted 30 June , 2009 Share Posted 30 June , 2009 Already from the start, I’m observe this topic. I fully understand and appreciate the concerning of many peoples for or WW1 heritage and the conservation of our battlefield landscapes. But I also would like to ask some peoples to inform thyself about the way local councils and Flemish directions work, and specially what ways a ask for a building permission go trough, who gives advise on what, and finally what terms and conditions the final building permission contains, before spreading “consternation” on this forum. I’m sure that a little research and some information quests at some local authorities will provide a other and clear view in the situation and the future plans of the local governments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 3 July , 2009 Author Share Posted 3 July , 2009 Already from the start, I'm observe this topic..... But I also would like to ask some peoples to inform thyself about the way local councils and Flemish directions work, and specially what ways a ask for a building permission go trough, who gives advise on what, and finally what terms and conditions the final building permission contains Perhaps as you do know these things, you could have spoken up earlier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry_Reeves Posted 3 July , 2009 Share Posted 3 July , 2009 Dugout has politely made some good points, and his point of view deserves better than the sarcastic remark above. TR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bierlijn Posted 3 July , 2009 Author Share Posted 3 July , 2009 No sarcasm intended. Apologies for any unintended offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britman Posted 6 July , 2009 Share Posted 6 July , 2009 I've been reading this thread with interest, and I sympathize with both sides of this debate. However, I feel that we should leave this particular item to the local jurisdiction. Arguing that this new house (if it ever gets built) will spoil the view, is pretty weak IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now