King Alfred scheme should be “a brilliant example of local development and architecture”

Former Hove MP Ivor Caplin said he wanted to see award-winning architecture on the site on Hove seafront and described the current designs as “a bunch of boxes”.

It follows strong criticism from Argus readers responding to a first glimpse of the much anticipated design released on Tuesday with derogatory comparisons to “Costa Brava”, “Croydon by Sea” and a “retro Butlins”.

But council leader, councillor Warren Morgan said his first priority for the multi million pound redevelopment was not to win architecture awards but to get a modern leisure centre that could be delivered.

And leading city architects have leapt to the plans’ defence claiming residents could trust award-winning colleagues Haworth Tompkins and urged residents to be patient at this early stage of the process.

Former Labour MP Mr Caplin was a city MP during the selection process for designs by renowned architect Frank Gehry which fell through in 2008.

He said: “This site needs proper architecture and the initial drawings I have seen didn’t seem much more than boxes on the seafront when we need something more dramatic, it should be a brilliant example of local development and architecture.

“I don’t want to keep harping back to Gehry but it did bring something dramatic to the seafront.

“What we don’t want, and what I’m sure the council won’t allow, is for this to drag on for years and years but there is a balance from having something dramatic and where we are now.

“I would hope any architect working on this project would be thinking this is where I should be winning a RIBA award.”

Argus readers continued to show their disapproval for the initial designs with commentators claiming yesterday the city deserved better and that the council had failed residents in selecting a “drab design”.

Critics online and on social media described it as "Crawley-on-Sea", a "boring generic block" and "nasty for everyone who will have to look at it".

But the scheme has had its defenders including Paul Nicholson of Chalk Architecture who said it had every chance of being a “very successful project”.

He said: “It does look like very grown up architecture, something you would expect to see in central London and maybe something Brighton is not used to seeing.

“Haworth Tompkins are brilliant architects and I have every faith in them that they will come up with something really great."

Paul Zara of Conran and Partners said whatever was proposed for the site would cause a “fuss”.

He said: “It has great potential, good buildings are created by good clients and good architects and we have this here.

“I’m sure there will be changes and I don’t think the images they have produced are really selling the scheme.”

Luis Diaz, senior lecturer in architecture at the University of Brighton, described the design as a welcome change from Frank Gehry’s design.

He said: “On such a site like King Alfred it’s important to remember that the focus should be on the seaside and not necessarily on eye-catching architecture and I think it understands the character of Hove more than its predecessor. "

WHAT WE NEED IS A MODERN LEISURE CENTRE – NOT AWARDS FOR ARCHITECTURE

The Argus spoke to Brighton and Hove City Council leader, councillor Warren Morgan about the King Alfred scheme.

The Argus: Did you expect that there might be some sort of backlash considering the anticipation and expectation that has built up around the project?

Cllr Warren Morgan: With any project or proposals there are going to be mixed reactions. Some of the criticisms of the new scheme are the direct opposite of those levelled against the Gehry scheme ten years ago. So where that was too bold, too avant-garde, this is criticised for not being ambitious enough.

The Argus: Do you think any of that criticism is fair? What are your own thoughts on the design?

Cllr Morgan: It isn’t my role to pass judgement on the design. I’ve been involved in this project from the start, four years ago. My aim all along was to get a modern leisure centre scheme which could be delivered financially, not one which would first and foremost win architectural prizes. 
The current centre can’t stay open much longer, it is 90 years old and is hugely expensive to run. 
Hove needs a new, modern leisure centre with a much bigger range of facilities. Without a financially deliverable scheme, Hove will lose its leisure centre. 
The city is criticised for being too slow to deliver on regeneration and new much-needed projects, yet there is always opposition to new proposals, so we have to find the right balance between listening and delivering. Remember, the Gehry scheme didn’t fail because of its architecture, it failed because it wasn’t financially viable.

The Argus: In terms of the planning consultation, what in particular about the design, facilities or general layout for the site could be changed following feedback?

Cllr Morgan: That’s up to the public, the planning committee and the developers. We set out what we wanted from a leisure centre, and asked the competing developers to come back with a scheme that delivers that. 
The housing is needed to pay for the leisure centre, so that has to be included in the final scheme. We don’t have the hundreds of millions of pounds to just build the centre ourselves as a standalone project.

The Argus: Could it change substantially if the general city consensus is against the plans or is this indicative vision the route we are now going down?

Cllr Morgan: Quite simply, if the facilities were substantially added to or the housing considerably reduced, then the scheme would no longer be viable. 
It would be like agreeing a kitchen extension quote with a builder, and then demanding an extra floor but at half the agreed price. 
However, look at how the original designs of the new Sussex County Hospital scheme changed before final planning approval. There is always room to amend and adapt within financial constraints. 
It isn’t an ideal site for a leisure centre but it is the one we have. We have run out of time to organise a replacement so we do need to get on with it. 
Views on architecture will always be subjective and divided but people need to remember that this is about giving local residents and future generations somewhere to swim, to exercise, to dance, to relax, to play sport and do gymnastics and martial arts.

TALK TO ME IF YOU’RE UNHAPPY WITH THE DESIGNS

Rob Starr

THE Hove businessman behind the King Alfred plans has issued a come and talk to me plea to residents unhappy with the current designs.

Rob Starr, co-founder of The Starr Trust, the preferred bidder developing the site, said now was time for listening to the public with plenty of scope for residents to have a big say on the final proposed design for the site.

Council leader Warren Morgan said that it would not be possible to substantially change the leisure centre facilities or amount of housing following public consultation but there was room to amend and adapt designs “within financial constraints”.

University of Brighton architecture lecturer Luis Diaz described the scheme as “straightforward and malleable enough” to be adapted to benefit from residents’ input.

Architect Paul Nicholson agreed it was still “very early on” in the process with “a lot of design work still to do”.

A public consultation on the plans will be held in the second half of the year before a planning application is submitted at the start of next year.

Mr Starr said he accepted that not everyone would like the designs but that the scheme now needed constructive criticism to move forward.

He said: “Just saying we don’t like it full stop doesn’t help.

“But if people say we don’t like this and why and this is what I think I could do.

“That’s much more helpful than just saying I don’t like it, it’s Benidorm or its Crawley-on-Sea.”

Mr Starr advised residents not to mistake a few pictures “taken out of context” for the completed design.

He described the process as “at a really good starting point” and that it was now the time to hear other views.

He said: “I think that is what consultation is for.

“We have come up with what we think is the best way to achieve a lot on the site, a leisure centre, a lot of housing, a lot of outdoor space.

“If people have other ideas then come and talk to us. Now is the time.

“In terms of design, people will have a say on that.

“There was always going to be this gut reaction but people need to take a step back, look at what we are going to deliver and then suggest how we can make it better.

“People can find me easily. I’m always out in George Street so come and talk to me. I’m not hiding.”