Eye say! This lofty ambition gets high praise...

The pier was like walking on water. The tower would be like walking on air, says scheme's architect

Claire Truscott - The Argus Saturday, 1 April, 2006

AT A packed press conference at Alfresco restaurant next to the derelict West Pier, a gaggle of reporters pored over plans to construct the highest observation tower in the British Isles.

Glynn Jones, chairman of the West Pier Trust, explained this was their answer to the debate on how best to preserve the pier's Victorian heritage while regenerating the city's seafront.

The plans include two restored Eugenius Birch designed toll booths at the front of the boarding platform and some of the profits from the attraction would be ploughed into cleaning up the steel wreckage in the sea.

Architect David Marks, of Marks Barfield, which designed the London Eye, said that rather than "walking on water", as the West Pier was once described, he wanted to allow people to "walk on air".

Given the long-running political debate over the future of the site, questions quickly followed.

Asked if they were concerned about a lack of vision in the council, given the lack of a clear party majority and the recent rejection of the marina development, Mr Marks said: "Vision is infectious. The success with the London Eye came after scepticism at the beginning.

"I think the council will see it as something complementing the regeneration of a young city.

"The West Pier caused outrage when it was first built and it's the darling of the city now. I expect this will be exactly the same."

They insisted it was not the end for the West Pier. Artefacts from the site will be housed in exhibition space at the bottom of the tower and once it has been approved, discussions will continue on the restoration and reconstruction of the pier.

Mr Jones said: "It's exactly the opposite of the end of the West Pier. It's a phoenix from the flames."

John Wells-Thorpe, an architect from Brighton who is backing the scheme, said: "There has been a change of feeling over the last few years, a realisation that the new can live comfortably with the old.

"This is a 21st Century obelisk. There is a difference between preservation and conservation and this is continuing the tradition of innovation. I was born in Brighton but there's been a lot of negativism over the years and I moved to Norway where they are more positive about developments.

"I hope the council, which has been a bit wishy-washy in the past over the marina and King Alfred, get behind this. They're
there to attract investment. If it goes on like this no one will ever invest in Brighton and Hove again. You'll be able to write off the city for another generation."

Julia Barfield, joint architect of the tower, said: "We are very optimistic about it. We will be steered through the politics by the West Pier Trust. It's all about listening to people's views and trying to accommodate suggestions."

Reaction from the business community was overwhelmingly positive.

Broadcaster and writer Simon Fanshawe said: "I think it's fantastic. It's a really imaginative response to the West Pier.

"It's about confidence and saying to the rest of the world we are moving to the next phase of Brighton.

"This is a great opportunity to raise our eyes above the horizon. Cities grow and change."

Paul Wright, general manager of the Holiday Inn, opposite the pier, said: "We've offered our lobby to house the moving model of the Brighton Eye.

"I think it's fantastic for the city and this end of town. It will put it even more on the map. I can't see anything bad with it."

Early comments from council officials suggest many welcome the plans.

Council leader Simon Burgess said: "It's a highly innovative proposal, from a company with an impressive track record. It would be a very interesting way of remembering the West Pier.

"Piers were horizontal Victorian viewing platforms, this is a vertical 21st Century version - rising from the same spot, and retaining the seafront heritage with a museum at the base.

"Following the success of the London Eye, Marks Barfield could have taken their new ideas just about anywhere in the world. I'm delighted that they want to try Brighton and Hove.

"Clearly there will now be a lot of debate in the city, and our planners will need to examine all aspects of the proposal very carefully."
Former council leader Lord Bassam of Brighton said: "This is a brilliant concept that sums up the spirit of modern Brighton.

"It will be one of the best visitor attractions in the South-East and a great boost for tourism in Sussex.

"It is a diamond in the string of pearls along Brighton and Hove seafront."

Lord Bassam said the Brighton Eye would be a sure fire economic success that built on the Victorian foundations of Brighton such as the piers and Volk's Railway.

He added: "Councillors should vote for this and put the interests of the city first. There will doubtless be opponents but the city needs attractions of this nature to stay ahead of the game."

Brighton Pavilion MP David Lepper said: "I think it's a very exciting plan. I've not seen the detail but I think the idea's in the spirit of the West Pier, even if it's happening in a different direction.

"The underlying characteristic the Victorian piers had was the combination of elegance and flamboyance and this seems to have the same combination.

"It would make an excellent tourist attraction for Brighton and facilities for local people.

"There's no doubt that the current make-up of the council means that those who don't like to look to the future and are concerned only with preserving parts of the city can win the day, but I hope they will be open-minded."

Convenor of the Green Party, Keith Taylor, said: "This novel proposal would reflect the exuberance of our seafront and deserves careful consideration. In particular we need to make sure the seafront views from the upper promenade are retained.
Additionally, we'll be pressing for discounted entrance fees for visitors who have used public transport to get to the Brighton Eye."

Roy Pennington, a Labour city councillor representing the Regency ward, signalled reservation over the tower.

He said: "My initial reaction was it could become a folly but it's an exciting opportunity for the whole of the city. It also looks a bit like a massive mobile phone mast."

Support for the 600ft tower has come from some surprising places.

Elaine Evans, a founder member of the West Pier Trust who resigned over previous plans for a redevelopment, said: "I do like this as long as the supporting building is below the level of the promenade.

"I think it will be lovely because it's slim. I'm quite a conservationist at heart but I like new architecture if it's in the right place."

Roger Hinton, of the Regency Square Area Society, based opposite the site, said: "Having spoken to one or two members, we think it's an interesting proposal and we certainly look forward to seeing more details.

"One of our main concerns would be noise but generally speaking it's an interesting and innovative proposal."

However, John Gavin, secretary of the society, said: "I don't like the pole but it's only a personal opinion. I think to compare it to the Spinnaker Tower is absolutely ridiculous.

"The Spinnaker Tower is beautiful but this is a telegraph pole isn't it?

"And they're not going to use it to rebuild the West Pier. It seems to me the West Pier Trust have wanted to get rid of the West Pier for a long time.

"There might be an appropriate place for it but I think at the bottom of Regency Square is not it. "Conversely, my wife likes it, she thinks it's great."

The most vociferously negative reaction came from the street. Views from the general public were decidedly pitched against the tower.

Andria Allan, 36, of Shirley Street, Hove, said: "I think the London Eye is fantastic but aren't there other things they could think of doing other than a pole?

"It might be quite good for tourism as long as it's not blocking views but I can't imagine they would then ever use the money to do anything with the West Pier."

Huw Williams, 37, of Dudley Road, Brighton, said: "Given the volume of change happening on the seafront I think this city needs to decide what the seafront should look like.

"This is the third major radical imposition on the skyline of Brighton proposed recently. This one irks me least of the three but you can't judge each on their merits alone."

Fiona Rollings, 27, of Finsbury Road, Brighton, said: "I was a little shocked. I think it's awful and I would absolutely hate to see that on Brighton seafront. I think it would ruin the charm of the seafront."