THE rejected plans for the King Alfred development have been revealed.

The design, created by Nick Lomax of Brighton’s LCE Architects, includes bold diagonal lines inspired by sails and an elevated swimming pool which would have had views over the sea to the south and west.

The plans, which were created alongside French development firm Bouygues, were rejected in favour of those by Crest Nicholson and charity the Starr Trust, on January 21.

The designs have been broadly praised since Mr Lomax put them on his website yesterday.

Samer Bageen, a university town planning lecturer, said: “The proposal would have provided the city with a fantastic new civic building, something the approved scheme does not provide.

“The decision has been made but I just think it’s important that the public see that there was an alternative.”

Mr Lomax said he had placed the importance of the silhouette of the buildings from the middle distance at the heart of the plans.

Michael Doyle, who runs Doyle Town Planning in Brighton, praised the designs.

He said: “The rejected plans are obviously much bolder in terms of massing and capture some of the spirit of the earlier Frank Gehry scheme.

“There is a much better mix of low, medium and taller buildings that will create a more interesting silhouette on the seafront skyline.

“Placing the lower-rise leisure centre adjacent to the lawns to the west is a good move.”

Mr Bageen added: “It is not clear if the leisure centre building has a plaza in front of it but it looks like it does.

“If so, then the overlooking from inside the centre onto the plaza and the seafront beyond would have provided the city with a fantastic new civic building.

“This is something the approved scheme does not provide.”

Roger Amerena, from Brighton and Hove Heritage Commission, said: “There may not be better use of the site proposed but the concept departs from the block effect design of the Crest Nicholson proposal, which is pleasing.”

Helmut Lusser, chairman of the Hove Civic Society, said the design has many attractions.

But he stressed that now the decision has been made we should “make the best of that situation”.

Brighton development consultant Ed Allison-Wright said: “Hopefully the disclosure of these plans will help to fuel the healthy debate in our community about the site and its future, ahead of its redevelopment by the winning bidder, Crest Nicholson.”

HERE'S WHAT YOU ARE MISSING... THE ALTERNATIVE

IT started around a creative table with marker pens and bright white sheets of paper.

But after growing into a striking, slanted design encompassing 660 flats and a leisure centre, it was consigned to history on January 21.

Nevertheless, Nick Lomax, the chief architect behind the losing bid, thinks it is important for us to see the design.

He said: “I just think it’s important that the public see there was an alternative.

“For me it’s about having an intelligent debate. Maybe it’s of interest for other people to see different ways of looking at the site.”

Of prominence is the slanting silhouette design, intended to be seen as a sculpture from the Downs and out at sea.

LCE Architects worked with engineers and landscape architects Aecom on behalf of the client, overseas developers Bouygues.

When asked if he knows where the design went wrong, Mr Lomax said: “The honest answer is I don’t know.

“Designing something is quite complicated – I think it’s such a subjective business. The more I’m in this game, the more subjective it seems.

“Stylistically you have to design what you believe to be right. It was very important to us to create a good silhouette.

“Obviously we as a practice and team are very disappointed with the outcome but there was a marking system and we have to accept that.”

Mr Lomax’s company, LCE Architects, spent the best part of a year designing the 25m competition pool, gym and cafe that form the leisure centre as well as an esplanade, restaurants and bars at the base of 660 flats complete with underground parking.

He said: “When you have spent a year designing something you become emotionally attached to it. It will be interesting to see how people react to the designs.

“We are not actually going to make any progress unless there’s a reasoned and sensible debate.”

The 62-year-old said: “We felt the pool should be a civic building of pride that stands alone from the rest of the development.”

The leisure centre frontage features the same transparent glass design of the Jubilee Library, which Mr Lomax worked on, across its interior floors, but also a see-through effect that dramatises the sea with uninterrupted views.

The pool halls face on to the western lawns while a cafe looks on to a teaching pool. There are two entrances on Kingsway and the promenade, adding to the airiness.

He said: “We felt the pool should be a civic building of pride that stands alone from the rest of the development.

“Also we felt the link to the sea was quite important. If not, why put it on the seafront?

“Brighton and Hove has a major sea bathing tradition, probably one of the oldest in the world, so we thought that was important.”

He said the aim was to create a quality environment that raises the spirits when you walk into it.

Mr Lomax also hoped people would feel good getting to the leisure centre; his team planned to discuss with the council how Kingsway could be improved, potentially reducing the main road down to one lane and broadening the pedestrianised area.

Of note is the 25m competition pool – not the Olympic-sized pool that people have clamoured for in the past.

Mr Lomax said: “The expense of building them and maintaining them does create a problem for the viability.”

Another point of note here is that the “enabling development” is the four “piers” of flats of varying height and profile, creating three garden courts.

Typically, a leisure centre would be an enabling development in allowing someone to build a block of flats but here the flats were the enabler in making the leisure centre viable.

Mr Lomax said his slanted buildings would still have worked with the existing architecture because the view from the road would only show the shortest side of the most dominant 20-storey part of the structure.

He also puts the resistance to “modern interventions” in the streetscape down to a loss of confidence following the building boom of the 1960s.

Mr Lomax said: “I think what has happened over the past 50 years, certainly in the 1950s and 60s when a lot of old building were knocked down and new ones put up, is there has been a loss of confidence.

“We seem to have a very particular view of how we protect old buildings. In Europe there’s a much greater trend to put new buildings up against older buildings, of making modern interventions.

“There is an acceptance in Europe that modern architecture has moved on. But then again not everything in Europe is perfect.”