Brighton City reaches for the sky in bid to reverse its ‘lost decade’ of neglect

[WATFORD zero]

The fact that it p***es of the Noble Organisation (who had nothing to do with the West Pier burning down) has to be a good thing

 

[Armchair]

After reading the article I also read the comments and this one summed up my reaction to it pretty well -

"I wonder who put you up to write this article? British Airways? The developers of the proposed new residential tower in Hove? The I360? Or those in line to become the developers of the King Alfred site? This is an appalling piece of journalism, littered with subjective assumptions, endorsed by those with historic and current vested interests, when in fact many of these assumptions have still to be tested and approved, in both the public and political arena. Many Brighton residents, in fact, don't agree that more tall buildings are needed in a crowded city bounded by the sea. They certainly didn't agree with the truly banal Frank Gehry proposal, which fortunately was killed off by the financial institutions once the recession struck. The fact that complex partnerships are required to develop new buildings in the city should be no excuse for significant and fundamental lapses in the determination of architectural quality, or the enabling of totally inappropriate development. What's important is the effective curation of Brighton's unique 'sense of place'."

Why,for example, do we need to let the seafront arches go as they, as the comment says, are part of Brighton's unique sense of place. I welcome new development but prefer it to complement our existing architectural heritage.

More important though is how we support and upgrade our infrastructure to support these new developments. Our streets are already in disrepair, we have one hospital that is creaking at the seams, our road systems and parking cannot support the existing volume of traffic, we have no decent park and ride facilities for visitors. Yet our Council are talking 30,000 new homes and millions more visitors being attracted. It seems to me that those elected to manage our city, of whatever political flavour, are more interested in projects which result in self aggrandizement rather than a better environment for their citizens. Of course we need to encourage business, development and employment, but lets get the balance right.

 

[Saladpack Seagull]

Reference the west pier I understood it was the owners of the Palace pier (Brighton pier) whom argued it was unfair competition as they had to pay for any repairs/upgrades themselves.

I'm pretty sure you're right. I had to search back through the failing memory banks to remember what went on but I think you're spot on. The two structures could have existed (as before) as similar yet fundamentally different entities, but sadly this was not to be. Whether the West Pier bled to death or was done to death, the result is the same.......

 

[knocky1]

Surprised anything gets built locally due to the moaners.

The one thing that is clear, is that around the world there are many people that enjoy views from up high, such as the Shard and Walkie-Talkie in London, CN tower, Top the rock, etc in Manhatten. I would therefore expect the i360 to prove to be popular with visitors.

Personally I think it should have been called the i180 given that half the view will just be the sea,

The view will not be circular but spherical.
Square degree (deg2) is a non-SI-compliant unit measure of solid angle. Other denotations include sq. deg. and (°)². Just as degrees are used to measure parts of a circle, square degrees are used to measure parts of a sphere. Analogous to one degree being equal to π / 180 radians, a square degree is equal to (π / 180)2, or about 1 / 3283 or 3.0462×10−4 steradian (0.30462 msr).

The number of square degrees in a whole sphere is approximately 41253 deg2. This is the total area of the 88 modern constellations in the sky.

As you want to half this by ignoring half the sphere to the South we would have the i20626.5 not i180.

 

[BN9 BHA]

Brighton was a bit grubby and smelly last time I visited.

Same day as a Brighton v Palace match?

 

[Blue3]

Spot on! It was the Greens who were responsible for a hundred years of wear and tear and not maintaining the undercliff along Madina Drive.

Missed the point which was just putting the things right is more than the public purse can afford

 

[Bold Seagull]

Walking along the seafront it cuts completely through the view! A giant doughnut will not help.

Depends which way you're facing.

 

[BN9 BHA]

The only bold design in the last 40 years has been amex house and the amex stadium.

The Van Allen Building

 

[Bold Seagull]

We have loads of underused cycle lanes though

Where are they underused?

 

[Bold Seagull]

The only bold design in the last 40 years has been amex house and the amex stadium.

Brighton Library.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Can't really see the i360 doing any more for B&H than the Spinnaker Tower has done for Portsmouth. OK it's a 'visitor attraction' same as the Brighton Eye currently is, but a pretty meh one at that. Visitors don't exactly seem to be falling over themselves to visit the Brighton Eye, seems to be mainly empty anytime I've gone past there. Reckon visitor numbers will remain much unchanged by its addition to (and IMHO blot on) the landscape. Premier League football will attract WAY more visitors to the town...

 

[e77]

'In a city that needs to build 30,000 homes by 2030, to reach targets set by the government, that will help. But more tall buildings are needed in a crowded city bounded by the sea and the South Downs National Park, and Brighton will have to look wider to enlist the help of neighbouring towns such as Newhaven, Lewes, Shoreham and Worthing.'

No, because Worthing is struggling to make it's new homes target (as I am sure the rest of the places named there do s well) so is unlikely to pick up the slack left by Brighton.

The Guardian really does get a nosebleed if it has to get out of London or Brighton.

 

[Wellesley]

Brighton was a bit grubby and smelly last time I visited.

Stop blaming yourself. Although I admit you're not the smartest looking chap in the World, you're not that bad that you affect the whole city, and the smell soon lifted once you'd left.

 

[Triggaaar]

Progress is all well and good, but Hove is starting to look like Las Vegas.

 

[Guinness Boy]

After reading the article I also read the comments and this one summed up my reaction to it pretty well -

"I wonder who put you up to write this article? British Airways? The developers of the proposed new residential tower in Hove? The I360? Or those in line to become the developers of the King Alfred site? This is an appalling piece of journalism, littered with subjective assumptions, endorsed by those with historic and current vested interests, when in fact many of these assumptions have still to be tested and approved, in both the public and political arena. Many Brighton residents, in fact, don't agree that more tall buildings are needed in a crowded city bounded by the sea. They certainly didn't agree with the truly banal Frank Gehry proposal, which fortunately was killed off by the financial institutions once the recession struck. The fact that complex partnerships are required to develop new buildings in the city should be no excuse for significant and fundamental lapses in the determination of architectural quality, or the enabling of totally inappropriate development. What's important is the effective curation of Brighton's unique 'sense of place'."

Why,for example, do we need to let the seafront arches go as they, as the comment says, are part of Brighton's unique sense of place. I welcome new development but prefer it to complement our existing architectural heritage.

More important though is how we support and upgrade our infrastructure to support these new developments. Our streets are already in disrepair, we have one hospital that is creaking at the seams, our road systems and parking cannot support the existing volume of traffic, we have no decent park and ride facilities for visitors. Yet our Council are talking 30,000 new homes and millions more visitors being attracted. It seems to me that those elected to manage our city, of whatever political flavour, are more interested in projects which result in self aggrandizement rather than a better environment for their citizens. Of course we need to encourage business, development and employment, but lets get the balance right.

Certainly agree with that last part. The services that we have currently cannot cope with the population and tourists that we have currently. The sort of investment going on privately and from the public sector on the i360 should be matched in investing in schools, hospitals and emergency services and it isn't.

Can't really see the i360 doing any more for B&H than the Spinnaker Tower has done for Portsmouth. OK it's a 'visitor attraction' same as the Brighton Eye currently is, but a pretty meh one at that. Visitors don't exactly seem to be falling over themselves to visit the Brighton Eye, seems to be mainly empty anytime I've gone past there. Reckon visitor numbers will remain much unchanged by its addition to (and IMHO blot on) the landscape. Premier League football will attract WAY more visitors to the town...

Also this. We spent a fantastic day with the kids in the summer holidays in Portsmouth but it certainly wasn't to see the Spinaker Tower - it was to go to the Historic Dockyard. Again, investing in making what we have already more attractive (and keeping the services up to go with visitor numbers) should be paramount, The Historic Dockyard - with its year long tickets, interactive actors and Action Stations building - is an example of how to do this well.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Walking along the seafront it cuts completely through the view! A giant doughnut will not help.

The view of what? The blue/grey bit, depending on the weather, called the sky? Just turn through 20 degrees and it is a clear view again, doh!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Also this. We spent a fantastic day with the kids in the summer holidays in Portsmouth but it certainly wasn't to see the Spinaker Tower - it was to go to the Historic Dockyard. Again, investing in making what we have already more attractive (and keeping the services up to go with visitor numbers) should be paramount, The Historic Dockyard - with its year long tickets, interactive actors and Action Stations building - is an example of how to do this well.

There is little doubt however that the Historic Dockyard saw a huge uplift in numbers because of the Spinnaker and Gun Wharf development. When Portsmouth City Council explored developing the wharf, they knew they needed an icon to be a visual indicator of the regeneration. The tower is now as much a marketing tool whose image features on every bit of Portsmouth marketing, websites, literature etc. The Dockyard in turn has seen a big upturn in numbers because of this and in return has been able to reinvest in its own offering. These developments are not in isolation, it was a long term strategic plan by Portsmouth that has paid off. They were talking about all this when I was studying there through the '90's.

We had the year tickets too, and it proved great value.

 

[Easy 10]

That rotting carcass of the West Pier perfectly symbolises the suffocating influence of the NIMBYs and BANANAs this city has been held hostage to for generations.

 

[BigGully]

Walking along the seafront it cuts completely through the view! A giant doughnut will not help.

You might lend that to any building, I think the structure will become part of the view, I am guessing it cuts whatever is beyond the 'shadow' of it but cannot think what we might be missing out on.

I have spent too much time playing, drinking, laughing on the seafront, but cannot remember ever commenting on the view easy or west, it will no doubt impact on whatever you think you wont be able to see anymore from any given point, but I think the tower will more than compensate for the missed unimpressive hotel/housing skylines that you say it might effect.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

After reading the article I also read the comments and this one summed up my reaction to it pretty well -

"I wonder who put you up to write this article? British Airways? The developers of the proposed new residential tower in Hove? The I360? Or those in line to become the developers of the King Alfred site? This is an appalling piece of journalism, littered with subjective assumptions, endorsed by those with historic and current vested interests, when in fact many of these assumptions have still to be tested and approved, in both the public and political arena. Many Brighton residents, in fact, don't agree that more tall buildings are needed in a crowded city bounded by the sea. They certainly didn't agree with the truly banal Frank Gehry proposal, which fortunately was killed off by the financial institutions once the recession struck. The fact that complex partnerships are required to develop new buildings in the city should be no excuse for significant and fundamental lapses in the determination of architectural quality, or the enabling of totally inappropriate development. What's important is the effective curation of Brighton's unique 'sense of place'."

Why,for example, do we need to let the seafront arches go as they, as the comment says, are part of Brighton's unique sense of place. I welcome new development but prefer it to complement our existing architectural heritage.

More important though is how we support and upgrade our infrastructure to support these new developments. Our streets are already in disrepair, we have one hospital that is creaking at the seams, our road systems and parking cannot support the existing volume of traffic, we have no decent park and ride facilities for visitors. Yet our Council are talking 30,000 new homes and millions more visitors being attracted. It seems to me that those elected to manage our city, of whatever political flavour, are more interested in projects which result in self aggrandizement rather than a better environment for their citizens. Of course we need to encourage business, development and employment, but lets get the balance right.

I was waiting for this comment. It's exactly this type of comment, and person, which causes so much stagnation.