Skyscrapers have not had a good name in Brighton and Hove since the Sixties, when they started to scar the seafront and many of the most beautiful streets.

Eventually people and planners rebelled and none has been built for 30 years.

But now a rare combination of factors has meant that suddenly there is a spate of plans for tall buildings in many parts of the city.

It could be that the second stage of skyscraper building will start in the new century.

Why are the existing skyscrapers so reviled? It's partly because of their form. No one could call Theobald House, tallest tower block owned by the council, a thing of beauty.

It's partly because of the materials used. Nettleton Court and Dudeney Lodge in Hollingdean could have been built from a child's construction kit.

It's because the architecture was appalling. You can only look at Chartwell Court above Churchill Square with a shudder and give thanks its twin was aborted at birth.

As for Sussex Heights, at 330 feet the biggest of them all, you can only wonder at the audacity in proposing so awful a building in such a sensitive location.

Most of all they were the wrong buildings in the wrong place. The Royal Sussex County Hospital block dominates Kemp Town in an unfriendly manner.

The Albion Street excresences can been seen behind the Royal Pavilion. The many blocks by R Green Properties have defiled much of Hove, doing more damage than Hitler's bombs, while the Bedford Hotel is a momumental example of disgusting design.

Sadly, successors to tower blocks have not been much better. The Thistle Hotel looks like the Broadwater Farm estate in Tottenham. The Brighton Centre is a sad grey mutation in the heart of the city. The Prince Regent swimming pool is stark and grim. The Marina is a bit of a mess.

On too many occasions, the city has simply been so pathetically grateful to get development of the kind it wanted, such as new civic offices, that it put design second with the result that there has not been a single building of great note in Brighton for the last half century.

Environment councillor Chris Morley, a man with a keen eye for architectural detail who is particularly fond of Thirties-style buildings, wants all that to change. He has declared from the rooftops, high and low, that it's time for good and challenging design. He has given a nudge to friendly firms of architects who are interested in the city. Now we are seeing the results.

Piers Gough, born in Brunswick Square and a lover of Brighton and Hove, has already provided intriguing ideas for how Brighton Marina can be linked back to the city instead of being an isolated concrete island. Now he has produced plans for a pyramid-style building in North Road and a curious conical skyscraper for part of the Endeavour Motors site near Preston Road.

Meanwhile Nick Lomax, head of a locally-based architectural practice, has produced plans for an extraordinary 18-storey tower on the Medina House site in King's Esplanade which would be the highest building in Hove. This slender spire would contain only 23 maisonettes would be visible for miles.

More may be to come. Piers Gough is one of the architects bidding for redevelopment of the King Alfred leisure centre in Hove and the adjoining 400 flats. Even more eminent names are there including Lord Richard Rodgers and Frank Gehry, who designed the amazing Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.

Some of the skyscrapers may not be much good. If so, they should be firmly rejected. But Brighton and Hove should not automatically eliminate tall buildings because of past mistakes.

If 400 flats have to be built at the King Alfred, and that is an if, might it not be better to have a soaring tower or two than mediocre slabs like Spa Court and Flag Court?

Councillors and planners should be putting design as a prime consideration rather than as an afterthought. If the new tower blocks are landmark buildings in the right place and things of beauty, then the sky's the limit.