The Sage of Sussex

Adam Trimingham - The Argus Thursday, 6 June, 2002

Thousands of people have written to Brighton and Hove City Council complaining that proposed new seafront buildings will block views of the sea and West Pier.

Back in the 1860s, there were vociferous objections from much the same area when the pier itself was proposed. Yet it is now the only Grade I listed pier in Britain and the irony is that the controversial new development is proposed to make it viable.

There were also objections when the Aquarium Terraces development was planned between Marine Parade and Madeira Drive and again the main complaint was that sea views would be lost.

Looking along the Brighton and Hove seafront, there are already many obstacles to sea views if you count them as being anything between the north side of Kingsway/King's Road and the Channel. There are lots of shelters, the bandstand, some seafront cafes, the Babylon Lounge and Al Fresco restaurant.

In Hove, there are hundreds of beach huts which are extremely effective in blocking views of the sea from more than a mile of the main seafront road. There is also an island site containing the King Alfred Leisure Centre, shops, restaurants and several blocks of flats.

Most people's views on sea views seem to be based on the status quo. They accept the beach huts although I can just imagine the outcry if they were not there and the city council suddenly proposed them. They like the piers even though the Palace Pier has a host of hideous looking structures at the far end which provide much of its commercial lifeblood.

My line on sea views is different. To me, it's a matter of what is architecturally pleasing and what is not. The Aquarium Terraces are visually an improvement on what was there previously (have people forgotten the Viking Swing and the go-kart track?), although it's a shame that the high-class restaurants proposed by developers have failed to materialise.

As for the West Pier pavilions, I would prefer something bold and soaring to the long, low development currently proposed, although the reason this has not been done is it would not find favour with the heritage organisations.

I do not believe as a matter of principle that nothing should peek above the parapet of King's Road.

I would sweep away most of the beach huts, which are ugly, outdated structures well past their sell-by date, because they really do block sea views.

Instead they could be put in clusters actually on the beach where they belong and architectural competitions could be held to design a few smart seafront cafes to replace them.

What's strange about Brighton and Hove is that although the city has seven miles of seafront, there are remarkably few places where people can sit over a coffee, Chardonnay or cod and chips and enjoy a seafront view.

The biggest eyesore on the seafront is something most people once again take for granted - 30,000 cars and lorries roaring along it every day and hundreds more using it as a parking lot.

The biggest improvement of all would be to take traffic right off the seafront or to sink part of King's Road into a tunnel. Then we really would have fine seafront views - but I am not holding my breath expecting that to be approved tomorrow.

We should be taking a radical look at the city seafront, which is one of the most splendid in Europe, examining everything from a monorail and a Madeira Drive traffic ban to improving the appearance of Hove Lagoon.

Bold new schemes should be seriously considered, but always with the proviso that they should enhance its elegance rather than detract from it.