Brighton council offers £14m loan to kickstart i360

A £35 million viewing tower dubbed a potential “tourism magnet” could be back on track thanks to a funding boost.

The planned i360, near Brighton’s West Pier, is expected to attract up to 800,000 visitors a year and create more than 500 jobs.

Developers have now received £3 million from the Coast to Capital local enterprise partnership, a panel designed to bring investment into the area.

Brighton and Hove City Council has also revealed it is prepared to loan the rest of the money – £14 million – to kick-start the project.

This means work could start on the project by the end of the year.

David Marks, of developers Marks Barfield, said: “We are not looking for a subsidy or a grant, and we will not put any burden on the taxpayer.

“I firmly believe our investment in the i360 will be the trigger for a lot more investment in the city, just as the London Eye was for the South Bank.”

A report will go to the council’s cabinet next week recommending the local authority look at loaning the money.

It would be repaid over 12 years from profits from the attraction.

Independent economists Aecom have said the i360 is likely to earn about two-and-a-half times more than the loan.

If judged viable, the loan will be signed off by the council in July.

The opening of the i360 would see the removal of the Brighton Wheel, which is currently based near the Palace Pier.

Geoffrey Bowden, the council’s cabinet member for culture, recreation and tourism, said: “At this stage we’re looking into the option. This would be a business and regeneration proposal by the council, not an act of charity.

“We are proposing this because the project is at such an advanced stage and the developers already have 50% of their funding in place.

“This project being at a standstill is costing the city at least £5 million a year, blocking completion of the seafront regeneration and preventing lots of other spin-off business taking place nearby.

“By making a loan, we end those problems, boost public coffers by renting out nearby seafront arches, collect more in business rates, radically smarten the seafront and create hundreds of jobs.”

A council spokesman said the loan option could not always be used as there were strict regulations meaning it could only be used where a project was self-funding.

The £3 million was from £23 million of grants from Coast to Capital announced last night.

About £6 million was awarded to the £83 million |Airfield Park business centre in Bognor which will create more than 800 jobs.

A further £1.2 million has been handed to those behind the Malling Brooks scheme in Lewes which is the first part of a multimillion pound regeneration of the town centre.

Comments(65)

FC says...
12:47pm Tue 1 May 12

How has this story not got any comments on it yet? I'm expecting full on rage from nimbys, please.

Hove Actually says...
12:55pm Tue 1 May 12

Wow where did we get £14,000,000:00 from?

Kate234 says...
12:56pm Tue 1 May 12

The Greens will never let this through it is too positive for the City and they hate tourists, business and employment.

Crystal Ball says...
12:59pm Tue 1 May 12

Yes, the town really needs this ahead of: housing, community, transport and social infrastructure doesn't it? Nice one B&H Council, again.

Falstaff says...
1:06pm Tue 1 May 12

If "Independent economists Aecom have said the i360 is likely to earn about two-and-a-half times more than the loan" then how come private investors have not come forward? What's the rate of interest to be charged? Will the council have to borrow to lend the £14 million? On what basis is the i360 supposed to attract 800,000 people a year? What are the 500 jobs? Where's the evidence?

The ferris wheel was supposed to pull in tens of thousands of people a month - has anybody seen it remotely full? Is there any proof that the i360 will do any better?

Lots of questions to answer before the council gambles with our money.

Busterblister says...
1:08pm Tue 1 May 12

I have no problems with the i360 being built, but surely if it's a "tourism magnet" then it must be able to attract funding from banks/VC's etc. at commercial rates. Why are we as taxpayers subsidising this? The £14m will be tied up, and of course, there's always the possibility that the venture won't be that sucessful.

brightonsparkle says...
1:24pm Tue 1 May 12

Falstaff wrote:
If "Independent economists Aecom have said the i360 is likely to earn about two-and-a-half times more than the loan" then how come private investors have not come forward? What's the rate of interest to be charged? Will the council have to borrow to lend the £14 million? On what basis is the i360 supposed to attract 800,000 people a year? What are the 500 jobs? Where's the evidence?

The ferris wheel was supposed to pull in tens of thousands of people a month - has anybody seen it remotely full? Is there any proof that the i360 will do any better?

Lots of questions to answer before the council gambles with our money.
I agree completely I went on the ferris a couple of weeks ago with friends who where visiting - 1. it not very good there is nothing to see as it not high enough and 2. We were the only people on there - it has been a disaster and if the i360 is going to end up the same I do not wish the council to invest, that is not being a nimby that is sound financial practice

Stripes says...
1:29pm Tue 1 May 12

David Marks, of developers Marks Barfield, said: “We are not looking for a subsidy or a grant, and we will not put any burden on the taxpayer.

*Apart from the £14 million loan.....from the taxpayer.*

And a comparison to the London Eye, pleeeeeeease! Situated on the thriving southbank with views of London landmarks OR "on your right - 25 miles of grey sea and a rusting pier shaped ironworks, on your left - the rooftops of Brighton. WOW, watch them flock.

fredaj says...
1:32pm Tue 1 May 12

Gosh! What a lot of negative comments.

RickH says...
1:32pm Tue 1 May 12

Stripes wrote:
David Marks, of developers Marks Barfield, said: “We are not looking for a subsidy or a grant, and we will not put any burden on the taxpayer. *Apart from the £14 million loan.....from the taxpayer.* And a comparison to the London Eye, pleeeeeeease! Situated on the thriving southbank with views of London landmarks OR "on your right - 25 miles of grey sea and a rusting pier shaped ironworks, on your left - the rooftops of Brighton. WOW, watch them flock.
Maybe we should add views of....Seven Sisters, the Isle of Wight and the South Downs National Park to the list too. Seems like its not just horses that wear blinkers.

Stripes says...
1:36pm Tue 1 May 12

I wish I didn't have to wear blinkers and had superman vision such as yourself.

Spanners says...
1:37pm Tue 1 May 12

assuming our beloved council loan the £14m here is my prediction for the future

1)The things costs far more and takes far longer to put up than originally planned

2) Project then requires extra loans from the bank or council to finish. Prob the council as any sane bank would not fund this without some serious assets to secure the loan against

3) After a short time in operation the combined effect of being saddled with too much "unforseen" debt and income not being as much as forecast means the business is on the brink of insolvency

4) After a little more time the thing goes t1ts up and goes through a prepack adminstration. Which leaves the "new" business running just fine and its debts left behind in the old company

Result - Council are owed many millions they'll never see

RickH says...
1:47pm Tue 1 May 12

Stripes wrote:
I wish I didn't have to wear blinkers and had superman vision such as yourself.
You can see the Isle of Wight from the top of the helter-skelter on the pier on a clear day, the Seven Sisters are easily visible from 'ground level' on the Palace Pier and the Downs loom large all over town, so super-hero eye-sight isn't needed. As a the lyrics in a favourite song of mine state "...you don't need eyes to see, just vision..."

Morpheus says...
1:57pm Tue 1 May 12

RickH wrote:
Stripes wrote:
David Marks, of developers Marks Barfield, said: “We are not looking for a subsidy or a grant, and we will not put any burden on the taxpayer. *Apart from the £14 million loan.....from the taxpayer.* And a comparison to the London Eye, pleeeeeeease! Situated on the thriving southbank with views of London landmarks OR "on your right - 25 miles of grey sea and a rusting pier shaped ironworks, on your left - the rooftops of Brighton. WOW, watch them flock.
Maybe we should add views of....Seven Sisters, the Isle of Wight and the South Downs National Park to the list too. Seems like its not just horses that wear blinkers.
Why settle for views when you can visit these places and get more enjoyment compared to being in a glass doughnut? Or it the cheap way and get a bus to Race Hill.

MouthO says...
2:00pm Tue 1 May 12

Reading this and rubbing my eyes in disbelief, surely this cannot be allowed to happen when our city is already in such financial turmoil, please someone in authority intervene and stop this wilful waste of money...I suggest the council should first speak to Portsmouth council about the Spinnaker Tower fiasco and how that has never met its full potential. Let the i360 get PRIVATE investment, and if it fails so be it, then Brighton & Hove council will not have to gamble and waste OUR money!

PorkBoat says...
2:14pm Tue 1 May 12

NO! Let the "West Pier Trust" find the cash, aren't they the ones behind this scheme? I can think of many more things that B&H Council could invest £14 million in. Housing for a start.

toldsloth says...
2:16pm Tue 1 May 12

The last time I checked, the council wasn't a bank. There is no way on earth a private organisation should be "loaned" £14M or ANY sum for that matter from the coffers of the council. It is exactly this type of hair-brained scheme which results in loss to the taxpayer and hasd been proved timne and time again not to offer VFM.
What in God's name is going on in Brighton & Hove at the moment? Blanket 20mph speed limits, massive price hikes for parking, increased bus fares, stupid hair brained road schemes (Old Shoreham Road. Lewes Road) etc. The last sraw for my was the proposed 20mph limits announced the other week - enough is enough and a £14m loan is WAY out of order.

DGee says...
2:22pm Tue 1 May 12

I know I've got a better idea for the 14 mill, spend it on housing for people that were born in the city and are living in squalid bedsits.

ripmaxman says...
2:31pm Tue 1 May 12

Where did this £14 million miraculously come from? One minute we are told they have to increase council tax because of a shortage of funds and now they find £14 million. I would like to know where the rainbow was that they found this pot of gold?

Attract visitors! I think not with the exorbitant parking charges people will go to other resorts on the South Coast.

As far the big wheel is concerned, I went on it with my cousin, and it is a total waste of time and money. You can see almost as much from the end of the pier without having to pay!!

DGee says...
2:38pm Tue 1 May 12

I know I've got a better idea for the 14 mill, spend it on housing for people that were born in the city and are living in squalid bedsits.

Pebbles says...
2:47pm Tue 1 May 12

I would much rather have B&H Council "invest" this money in a new pier.... providing of course that such money for housing cannot be used for "legal reasons".

The i360 will cost millions to operate and will become a rusted white elephant within a couple of years... and will then be left to rot.... collapse... and suddenly catch fire....

ripmaxman says...
2:51pm Tue 1 May 12

DGee wrote:
I know I've got a better idea for the 14 mill, spend it on housing for people that were born in the city and are living in squalid bedsits.
I totally agree. I thought that was what the Greens wanted to do.

PorkBoat says...
3:31pm Tue 1 May 12

Isn't the idea behind the i360 to raise money to build a new West Pier? So instead of spending x million on a tower, how about cutting out the West Pier Trust scammers, and putting the money straight into building a new pier? Or is that to simple. Who's making money out of all this? Who's going to investigate the West Pier Trust? Just who are they?

Hetherington says...
3:39pm Tue 1 May 12

I am writing to you following the article in today’s Brighton Argus.

I am not surprised that Marcus Barfield was going to approach the Council for money as at the start of April they started to tidy up there very untidy site and doing cosmetic work on the site, along with new posters etc. Surely they don’t think this was sufficient for the Council to Loan them £14,000,000.

I can’t for the life of me believe that Brighton Council are so gullible that they will be once again drawn into this ridiculous project, that is purely one man’s ego – David Marks!

I appreciate that they were drawn in enough by granting of the initial Planning Permission and now they are proposing to GIVE Rate Payers Money to fund this outrageous Tower.

I hope that the Council has the foresight to reject their request OUTRIGHT!

My reasons for asking that the Council withhold funds, are as follows:-

If the Project Developer could not realize funding in times of plenty when Banks where lending money, as the project figures did not stack up, they will definitely not achieve it now, hence their approaching the Council for funding.

This Project WILL NEVER make a profit as how can anything that has between 30-50 people riding on at a cost of £10 per head every 20 minutes (at best) achieve revenue of £35,000,000,
at flat rate with No Interest / No Loan Repayments / No Tax / No Wages etc. It would take at least 6.5 years to raise this kind of revenue, with NO expenses incurred.

The true sums need to be done and I would appreciate a look at the figure supplied by Aecom as I feel that they are seriously lacking in their realism, and that like the initial project they are
A PIE IN THE SKY!

If the Council fund this project Brighton Rate Payers will never see a return on their money only a Tower that will be a further drain on the Councils already bleak funds, and a drain to the Brighton Tax Payers, that will require permeate, year on year support. And although we can look to our neighbors in Portsmouth where there tower is supported this project would never break even.

How can the Council give away this money when there have been so many cut backs in the Council budgets affecting the Old and Disabled? They are taking the money away from those in most need to fund a ludicrous project.

Brighton Council need to wake and smell the roses David Marks failed at the London Eye it was his ex-wife that moved the project forward etc., it won’t work!

Why not let Marcus Barfield get the funding elsewhere if this project is so viable. Or is it Banks have seen the figures and know that it is a long term TURKEY that would require long term support - in our case Rate Payers permanent commitment and funding!

Brighton Council Don’t Be so Daft!

Nick Brighton says...
3:44pm Tue 1 May 12

What guarantee is there, that the recipients of the loan don't squander it and then go bust, leaving the Council (tax payer) £14m out of pocket?

bug eye says...
5:28pm Tue 1 May 12

YES at last a good idea from the council, it will be a success in this location unlike the ferris wheel that is in the wrong location and is not the promised Brighton O. If the council invested more in the city like this it will get more out to invest in homes and jobs etc. GREAT IDEA at last. Ihope the council will now invest in the black rock complex too.

tinker000 says...
5:45pm Tue 1 May 12

BLOCK ASAP

robpotter says...
6:10pm Tue 1 May 12

A contribution of 40% (£14m out of - at the moment - £35m) is hardly a "kick start" - it's probably the biggest single funder. Hetherington's comments above are bang-on: this pile of junk is quite literally pie in the sky. If the council can scrape up £14 million, let them spend it on something useful and of lasting value to local people, not a vanity project.

And don't say it will attract tourists - God knows we've seen enough letters to the Argus from people saying they'll never come back to Brighton because the parking is so ridiculously expensive.

Falstaff says...
6:53pm Tue 1 May 12

Now found the original estimates for the ferris wheel. The operators were expecting 250,000 a year to have a go on it. The i360 people say they are expecting 800,000. Given that we have around eight million visitors a year (that includes business people and those visiting relatives), that would mean around one in eight of all those coming to Brighton would go on one or the other.

Does anyone seriously think that's going to happen? If it's hot, visitors go to the beach. If it's cold they go to places like the Pavilion. I just can't see enough either going in circles or up and down to make either attraction viable.

What's the betting the i360 is never built and the ferris wheel is dismantled well before its supposed five-year temporary planning permission is up?

saveHOVE says...
7:21pm Tue 1 May 12

It's a glorified lift. With a doughnut cage going up and down, up and down around the 4 metre wide pole with a spiral staircase inside it for escape if it gets stuck at the top one day.

Planning consent was granted in 2007 and as I recall, with no provision for coach drop-off, nowhere for taxis to drop off, nowhere to park and requiring a re-routing of the cycle path.

This will blight the view from the prestigious (bang goes their prestige) Grand and Metropole hotels.

If it was a goer they would, after 5 years of trying have achieved funding. They have failed because this is a bad investment prospect. Experts know this. Why don't council officers?

The Council officers who are rolling the Greens should be sacked forthwith.

gordongull says...
8:04pm Tue 1 May 12

“We are proposing this because the project is at such an advanced stage and the developers already have 50% of their funding in place.''

So what? What's that got to do with us?
Advanced stage? I didn't notice anything resembling a partially built tower at the weekend!

Why is the project ''being at a standstill'' costing the city at least £5 million a year? and why not complete the regeneration of the seafront without a tower?

500 jobs seems unlikely, and do they include temporary construction staff?

The Council is proposing to take a reckless gamble with public funds, in order to help developers put up an unaesthetic and inappropriate structure.
If it's too misty to see The Seven Sisters, There's always Seven Dials.

fedupwithgreens says...
8:15pm Tue 1 May 12

another white elephant,another waste of taxpayers money and another reason to not vote for the green party !

Hovite says...
8:25pm Tue 1 May 12

This won’t actually attract more visitors to the city; I mean no one is going to come to Brighton just to go on this, so it won’t bring anymore revenue to the local economy.

It is a use it once gimmick and of no benefit to local residents.

The Palace Pier has 1 million visitors over the year, but this is includes people using it regularly. There would be no repeat business with the i360.

I could maybe understand if the i360 was an add-on at the end of a new pier but not just dumped on the shoreline. If the estimated users is 800,000, this means 2192 people using it a day and that is not taking into account all the wet windy cold days in the winter.

It can only be used, weather permitting and no one is going to use it on anything but a clear day.

As others have said, if the developers can’t persuade anyone to invest, it means there is a massive problem to it making money and it is a dead duck!

mimseycal says...
8:44pm Tue 1 May 12

The mind boggles. Does any one in our council have a modicum of common sense?

wexler53 says...
10:22pm Tue 1 May 12

Please get rid of the Greens !!! Why can't the aliens come and take them away? Ideas like this prove they truly are nincompoops....Get rid of the Green Scourge !!!

Phani Tikkala says...
10:46pm Tue 1 May 12

Save your money and get the best view of Brighton for free by going up to the racecourse/Bear Road and looking down

Mmmm the i360.... Should get a good overhead view of the knocking shops, air conditioning units, and Churchill Square. Nice

John Steed says...
11:17pm Tue 1 May 12

scandalous idea, banks are for loans but then unlike star struck councils banks look at the figures before lending any wonga, guess they realise its a bad bet

Busterblister says...
8:26am Wed 2 May 12

Hovite wrote:
This won’t actually attract more visitors to the city; I mean no one is going to come to Brighton just to go on this, so it won’t bring anymore revenue to the local economy.

It is a use it once gimmick and of no benefit to local residents.

The Palace Pier has 1 million visitors over the year, but this is includes people using it regularly. There would be no repeat business with the i360.

I could maybe understand if the i360 was an add-on at the end of a new pier but not just dumped on the shoreline. If the estimated users is 800,000, this means 2192 people using it a day and that is not taking into account all the wet windy cold days in the winter.

It can only be used, weather permitting and no one is going to use it on anything but a clear day.

As others have said, if the developers can’t persuade anyone to invest, it means there is a massive problem to it making money and it is a dead duck!
As Dr Johnson once said: "Worth seeing, but not worth going to see".

Morpheus says...
9:34am Wed 2 May 12

Nick Brighton wrote:
What guarantee is there, that the recipients of the loan don't squander it and then go bust, leaving the Council (tax payer) £14m out of pocket?
This really is the key question the council has to answer. No guarantee, no loan!

gordongull says...
11:56am Wed 2 May 12

500 jobs at say £14,000 each average per anum. (A figure I've plucked out of the air, but maybe on the conservative side), = £7million a year wages to find.
No wonder the banks have got vertigo!

flatflat says...
12:53pm Wed 2 May 12

Fantastic idea...it will look tremendous. Just what Brighton needs. This money is a loan and will be repaid with interest. It will regenerate the whole area and produce an extra £5m in revenue for the Council per year and it will result in 500 new jobs. Stop moaning!!!

toldsloth says...
1:51pm Wed 2 May 12

flatflat - are you on medication?

HappyCat says...
4:32pm Wed 2 May 12

How come the council can risk £14 million when it is cutting services because it wasn’t able to put the Council Tax up even higher?

Who carries the risk if it goes over budget or doesn’t make money? And that seems likely.

Where will tall these visitors park? It is naive to expect more than a minority to come on public transport.

Is an observation tower really such a great, novel and wonderful thing that people will flock to it? They have had them in places like Bush Park in Florida for years and no one seems very interested in them there either.

If the council has £14 million spare to lend, why not rebuild the vandalised pier?

gordongull says...
6:44pm Wed 2 May 12

My counter-proposal is for a commercial or residential tower block to be constructed at the Council owned Black Rock site.
It would incorporate a top floor restaurant and roof terrace open to the public, similar to that of the Montparnasse Tower in Paris, and be twice as tall as sussex heights, without, of course, sharing any of the design features of those two structures.
i360 sounds quite contemporary, so I have'nt got a problem with the name of the now- defunct scheme at the West Pier being retained:)

flatflat says...
11:58am Thu 3 May 12

It will be a great tourist attraction, this is what Brighton needs. Have you seen all the empty shops...we need tourists to spend money in our City. And the i360 will look amazing...not like the pathetic wheel. Brighton needs to be in the forefront for all attractions. We need it and deserve it.

RickH says...
1:55pm Thu 3 May 12

Morpheus wrote:
RickH wrote:
Stripes wrote: David Marks, of developers Marks Barfield, said: “We are not looking for a subsidy or a grant, and we will not put any burden on the taxpayer. *Apart from the £14 million loan.....from the taxpayer.* And a comparison to the London Eye, pleeeeeeease! Situated on the thriving southbank with views of London landmarks OR "on your right - 25 miles of grey sea and a rusting pier shaped ironworks, on your left - the rooftops of Brighton. WOW, watch them flock.
Maybe we should add views of....Seven Sisters, the Isle of Wight and the South Downs National Park to the list too. Seems like its not just horses that wear blinkers.
Why settle for views when you can visit these places and get more enjoyment compared to being in a glass doughnut? Or it the cheap way and get a bus to Race Hill.
By your logic, the same could be said for riding the London Eye, going up the Eiffel Tower, the Empire State Building, the Spinnaker Tower or, indeed, any other tourist attraction that offers views across the locale. I suppose 'tourist attraction' are the key words here.

beachfronttrader says...
5:45pm Thu 3 May 12

Everyone in this city cares that our reputation as innovative and accepting is protected and progressed, many influential business people and commentators will be watching this carefully. After the Geahry/K.Alfred failed the pier being put on the market and the steady decline in optimism I think the Council are behaving in a reckless and elitest way.
The rationale for considering the merits of investment are flawed. The fact that Geoffrey Bawdwin considers leasing seafront arches as a key factor is just bizarre - there are no empty arches i know of.
The council recently let the old paddling pool to a young leisure company who spent thousands of their money brightening the appearance and bringing a new attraction to the seafront. Perhaps the council would like to consider investment opportunities from the local cafe/bar/coffee shops who i am sure could equally offer a good return.
This is nothing more than grandstanding and in no way should our city put this project above the need for a new leisure centre and better healthcare facilities. If the council put this out a referendum it would be shot down in flames. If the council are going to invest in the city it cannot be in a dubious tourism attraction like this. It will not add considerable new visitors, it will help the 12restaurants on Preston Street. It will destroy the new businesses such as Brighton Wheel and the segways company and how can a council refuse private investment from the likes of Mike Holland only to make themselves owners of a risk they have no experience whatsoever of managing.
If this project goes forward then Brighton is unfortunately doomed. Even the debate makes the city look quite amateur in the eyes of external investors.
Maybe we should wipe the sea breeze off our glasses before pointing at an 'opportunity'

flatflat says...
12:20pm Fri 4 May 12

Sounds like a self centred view!!!
Thinking yourself are you?
Good on the Council...you will get my vote.

MouthO says...
2:02pm Fri 4 May 12

flatflat wrote:
Sounds like a self centred view!!!
Thinking yourself are you?
Good on the Council...you will get my vote.
flatflat...I remember reading your posts here before you were against the wheel, you are only in support of the i360 as you live opposite the wheel, so you definitely have a self centered view, best if you keep schtum as not only are you a 100% NIMBY!!! your also a BIG hypocrite!!! LOL

MouthO says...
2:03pm Fri 4 May 12

flatflat wrote:
Sounds like a self centred view!!!
Thinking yourself are you?
Good on the Council...you will get my vote.
flatflat...I remember reading your posts here before you were against the wheel, you are only in support of the i360 as you live opposite the wheel, so you definitely have a self centered view, best if you keep schtum as not only are you a 100% NIMBY!!! your also a BIG hypocrite!!! LOL

flatflat says...
3:08pm Fri 4 May 12

You cannot compare the pathetic Wheel with the superb i360...500jobs £5m a year extra revenue for the Council. So where do you live? What is your real reason for the gripe...not I suspect what you are making it out to be. In any event we all know the Wheel is for a limited period, and we need a new atraction.

toldsloth says...
8:59am Sat 5 May 12

flatflat - "wee need tourism" - hang on, it cost £4 per hour to park on the street and more to use the car parks in this "tourist town". The council is trying to introduce a blanket 20mph speed limit, the council is throttling arterial routes with hair-brained schemes that favour cyclists and you are in favour of them spending £14m on an observation tower? Bear in mind this is money which the council are planning on borrowing themselves! What planet are you on or are you actually one of the loony councillors proposing this lunacy?

The supposed "tourists" cannot get to the city in the first place because of the huge traffic jams caused by the ridiclous road layouts and when they get here, they struggle to find a parking space. When they do it's so expensive that they can't afford to spend any more money on "attractions" and instead spend their time walking up and down our dilapidated seafront and marvelling at the ruins of the West Pier. They certainly don't go on the "wheel" at £8 a throw so there is no way they will spend a similar amount going up the i360 to have a view of the rooftops of Brighton!

Things like this make our city a laughing stock and without realising, the combined forces of idiocy are gradually ruining our city. They will need the £14m themselves to undo all the hair brained schemes at some point in the future to avoid the place going bankrupt because the "tourists" have gone to other tows with easier access and cheaper parking!

Popped vanity implant says...
7:52pm Sat 5 May 12

The figures seem to clearly show this as insanely risky. If the council are aware of the sensible postings above then approving such a loan would also seem to be require some form of police investigation and/ or independent audit and economic evaluation? It will then be shown as a high risk venture and unsuitable for council involvement? Gamble your own money and stop spouting blue-sky nonsense, it's embarrassing

mimseycal says...
8:00pm Sat 5 May 12

The council have nothing to fear really. If it is successful, which is highly questionable, they will gain the kudos. If it fails, which is highly likely, we all will pay the penalty.

Win/win for our councillors really ;)

nosolution says...
9:54am Sun 6 May 12

I think it is about time a motion was brought in at the next council meeting calling for a vote of no confidence in the Green regime.Surely then they could all be forced to resign before the whole area goes down the toilet.Not a week goes by without one crazy idea following the last one....

vga says...
2:57pm Sun 6 May 12

The existing west pier structure could easily and cheaply be turned into a coverered market. The area already supports a vibrant and successful market through the summer months. Just take whats already there, and make it better. There is no need for a new pier or a ridiculous tower.

mimseycal says...
3:07pm Sun 6 May 12

Now I like that idea. A market on the Western Pier.

Want to start a petition?

brighton bluenose says...
8:33am Mon 7 May 12

flatflat are you really that daft that this will bring 500 jobs to the city!? OK there will be the initial construction jobs - many of these will be so specialist on such a structure that your average local brickie or chippie wont get a look-in. In terms of permanent jobs the Argus reported on 15 July 2008 that it would create just 40 full-time jobs, so there may well be a few additional jobs in local bars and restaurants - but 460??!! Give me a break!! In terms of costs we were told in the same article that the tower would cost £20m now we are told it will be £35m - this despite the recession and dramatic falls in construction costs over the last few years - call me a cynic but these figures don't add up. And this is all before we begin to discuss the disruption to the seafront and the main road for the year long or more construction period!!!

brighton bluenose says...
8:46am Mon 7 May 12

Correction # 1 - 21 month construction period!!
Correction # 2 - Argus also reported on 15 Sept 2010 that it would cost £40m - they are clearly making up figures as they go along!!!

mimseycal says...
8:59am Mon 7 May 12

All this for a POTENTIAL tourist magnet? When it will be sited in the midst of a huge tourist repellent consisting of overpriced parking fees, closed shops and run down seafront?

Yeah ... right ... I believe you. Now how much did you say you wanted for the Golden Gate Bridge?

Nivag1 says...
12:29pm Mon 7 May 12

So this one in Weymouth (almost identical it appears) is costing just £3.5 million. Why the difference?

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-dor
set-17743434

gordongull says...
4:47pm Mon 7 May 12

The 'Weymouth Eye' tower is only about a third as high as the proposed i360, and appears to be far less sophisticated.
This is to be expected considering that it has been constructed at only 10% of the Brighton and Hove project.
An economically viable tower should attract private sector funding. If economic conditions, are not favourable, the project should either be put on hold until such time as private investors become available, or scrapped so that the seafront regeneration can be completed with alternative plans.

bbbazcooper says...
7:29pm Mon 7 May 12

if they don't build it soon the weeds on our grass verges will b higher than this tower - and they don't cost anything !

Burgess Boy says...
12:29am Tue 8 May 12

The people behind this venture must have spent a small fortune trying to get this thing off the ground, so you have to ask yourselves how impartial their advice can be when you consider how much they must have to lose at this point both financially and in terms of saving face...?

Whoever it is at the council that is being won over by this lot needs step back for a moment and think very carefully about why they are so desparate to get this thing built? Is it because they are so keen to see Brighton on the up and up, or could it be because they have put so much on the line that backing out now is no longer an option for them?

Either way, the council has no place gambling away our money in the hope this project delivers on its promises when the only real winners will be the bank balances and egos of those currently blowing smoke up the posteriors of our elected leaders.

KempyLocals says...
5:58pm Fri 11 May 12

It does look a bit like a roulette wheel....red or black....for Councilors to decide. No pressure most won't get re-elected if they back this gamble. Why is it only Cllr Theobald rightly suspicious here....this is a fact....look closely at the visual images and you will see a mini David Marks laughing......all the way to the bank!

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree