GEHRY /GOUGH
 

KING ALFRED REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
Three dramatic, and dramatically different, proposals for flats and an entirely new indoor sports and swimming complex for this site are at present being exhibited for public consultation before a decision is made by the council on which will proceed.

Frontrunner in the 'Wake-up Hove' stakes must be the proposal by architects Frank Gehry and Piers Gough with sculptor Anthony Gormley which includes four slim tower blocks of flats ranging between 17 and 38 storeys high which surround a three storey plateau containing the sports and leisure facilities and pools. The architects claim that the total public open space, on several levels, is greater than the site area. The Anthony Gormley sculpture is located in a deep subterranean spherical chamber, with tidal seawater (complete with nautical smells and noises to match). Above this chamber is a winter garden enclosure with a matching, but fully glazed, sphere above it.

Another proposal, designed by architects Wilkinson Eyre, consists of lower residential slab blocks ranging between 8 and 11 storeys high with the sports facilities and pools in a separate, but linked, five floor leisure centre.

The final scheme is designed by the Richard Rogers Partnership and consists of five slab blocks of flats, each with their longer dimension running north-south, and ranging from five storeys high at the north and between nine and nineteen storeys at the south. The leisure facilities are mainly underground, or at ground level, with decked open spaces above them forming pedestrianised squares and gardens.

Each scheme contains some car parking facilities for the leisure centre and flats.
The process of examining the schemes and their financial appraisal by council officers has begun.
Further development of each of the designs is likely before a front-runner is selected.

APRIL 2004 UPDATE
The proposals have been reduced to two - the Gehry / Gough and the Wilkinson Eyre projects.

JULY 2004 UPDATE
The proposals by Gehry/Gough have been selected by the City to go forward to a Planning Application

The City's Policy & Resources Committee have announced their preferred developer for the new sports centre, with retail space and some 438 flats: Karis/ING with architects Frank Gehry and Piers Gough leading the team of consultants. This decision has been welcomed by those who find the exceptional design of their towers exciting and attractive (particularly when compared to our present inheritance of tower blocks) - but amongst others it has not met with approval!

The decision was based on financial reports to the Council. The economic impact of the Karis/ING scheme was preferred to the Barratt-Brunswick/Wilkinson Eyre bid (who proposed lower buildings with 468 flats); and the Council's consultants considered that it 'best promoted the image of the city, continuing business confidence and in turn attracting further investment'.

The scheme will provide greatly improved sports facilities. The present rundown, under-used facilities require a huge annual subsidy. It is forecast that, with the new sports centre, the subsidy per user will fall from nearly £2 to just under £1, with 75% more users likely than at present.
The Council stipulated that the scheme should include a large number of affordable flats, as central sites for dwellings for key-workers are very scarce.
This proposal provides 175 which, while welcomed by the
Council, has resulted in a scheme that consists of four very high towers. The assessment of the impact of the buildings' bulk and height and the number of additional people living in the area – as well as the expected number of visitors 'just looking' at the buildings - will continue to be critical as the scheme develops. The public open space on the decks beneath the towers will be specifically designed to attract visitors, as will the public viewing gallery on the eighteenth floor of one tower.

We need to discover whether the sea can be seen between the towers, when viewed from the streets to the north; and whether a sea view is maintained closer to, where the sports buildings stretch across the site, with public decks above them. The impact of the towers when seen along the coast, from various points within Hove and from the Downs beyond, will also be critical

The designers have explained that the current drawings represent a very early stage of design and that there may be quite radical changes. Frank Gehry is known for his determination to develop and improve his original ideas for new buildings, which often results in the production of literally hundreds of development sketches and models.

For further information on this proposal visit:www.brighton-hove.gov.uk

DECEMBER 2004 UPDATE
The City council recently signed a legal agreement with Karis Holdings for the re-development of the King Alfred site on Hove’s seafront. This signals the start of detailed design development for the housing, by Gehry Partners, leisure facilities by HOK Sport with co-ordinating architects CZWG and a sculptural intervention by Anthony Gormley.
A full planning application is expected at the end of June. Meanwhile, Karis is carrying out further consultation.
A meeting with the Society is planned for mid-February, before final decisions on the planning application proposals are taken.

JUNE 2005
Karis Holdings now have a website asking for public comment here

SEPTEMBER 2005
On 12 September the Policy and Resources Committee of the City Council approved this development, on behalf of the council as landlord. A full planning application will follow and it will take some months before it reaches the Planning Applications Sub-Committee for decision. Since the committee will, as the local planning authority, be deciding this application in which the council has a considerable financial interest, as owner of the freehold of the land, the application may be ‘called in’ for decision by the government.

An article by Hugh Pearman, some of which appeared in the Sunday Times, may be seen here

View of model from Kingsway, looking towards the sea.

The raison d’etre for the re-development of the King Alfred site on Hove’s seafront is to provide a new sport and leisure centre, to replace the out-dated and run-down 1938 buildings which house inadequate, poorly maintained facilities. From a recent presentation it is clear that the combined architectural and planning expertise of HOK Sport working with Frank Gehry and Partners have produced a stunning seafront building with superb new sports and swimming facilities. The representatives of various sports on the local consultation panel reported that they are pleased with the technical planning of the interconnecting pools and dry-sports facilities and both the exterior and interior appearance, now shown clearly in detailed plan and sectional drawings, with coloured perspective views, reverberates with the dazzling display of forms and colour for which Gehry is renowned.

Floreat Hova, indeed.

But? and, sadly, there is always a but, all this comes at a price. The price to be paid by the residents of Brighton & Hove, and all the visitors to the city who will surely wish to see and enjoy this fine new sports centre, is that it is to be surrounded, all to tightly, by blocks of flats on three sides which are proposed to be between nine and eleven storeys high. It is as if Gehry’s magical sports and leisure building needs to be tightly protected by burly ‘bouncers’ closely spaced around its perimeter. These buildings, probably perfectly presentable in themselves, on a somewhat larger site, here seem likely to overwhelm the new seaside ‘sports palace’, and the existing nearby buildings, which should be allowed considerably more breathing space.

What, you will be asking, of the ‘wonky towers’ ! They are still there, but now there are only two of them, with interesting sculptural forms. However, they now appear almost stunted because their height is only about half the thirty-eight storeys of the competition winning scheme, and this also gives them the appearance of being wider. Nevertheless, they are still more than twice the height of any nearby existing buildings.

On 12 September the Policy and Resources Committee of the City Council approved this development, on behalf of the council as landlord. A full planning application will follow and it will take some months before it reaches the Planning Applications Sub-Committee for decision. Since the committee will, as the local planning authority, be deciding this application in which the council has a considerable financial interest, as owner of the freehold of the land, the application may be ‘called in’ for decision by the government.

But, if HOK Sport and Gehry have answered the brief that they were given, the question remains, was it the right brief ? Some of us would suggest that the result might imply that the City Council has been too greedy and that, if the detailed project proposals now provided show that this number of market and affordable flats is needed to pay for the sports facilities, then, on this site, it is too many and therefore something must be omitted. But then the sums don’t work out! Perhaps Su Doku enthusiasts should turn their attention to real life planning problems!

OCTOBER 2005
The Planning Application Drawings are now viewable on the City Council site here

18 NOVEMBER 2005
The Society has now considered this application, and its views are shown
...The Society feels very strongly that the present scheme is unacceptable and should be refused...

19 APRIL 2006
It is reported that the District Valuation Office has stated in a commissioned investigation into financial viability that the current scheme is unviable, and that the projected profit will be insufficient to permit the required local improvements under Section 106 agreements.

Suprisingly, Sue John, the council's deputy leader is quoted as saying:
"Without a doubt we are at a critical time but I don't think there is anything in that report we should be worried about."

Time will tell.

26 APRIL 2006
It is reported that both English Heritage and the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment who between them constitute the Government's main democratic advisors have been unable to support this development.

30 JUNE 2006
It is reported in The Argus that Sue John, speaking on behalf of the authority's cross-party King Alfred project board, revealed the scheme as it stands would no longer be considered by the council.
She said:
"The design team, led by Frank Gehry, have undertaken further work to address the concerns raised.It is unlikely that the council will be asked by the applicant to determine the current planning application."

Coun. John said a further report would be given to the committee when a more definitive statement could be made.

3 OCTOBER 2006
It is reported in The Argus that the revised scheme will show the main towers to be two floors higher, with the height of the perimeter blocks reduced ...

4 OCTOBER 2006
An interesting report in The Argus of the debate, both for and against...

5 OCTOBER 2006
The Policy and Resources of the city council, as landlords, voted to support the revised scheme, and it will now go forward to the Planning Committee to gain approval. However, an amendment was agreed to attempt to relocate a number of the homes, necessary in order to pay for the leisure centre, to another location which would reduce the housing density of the site. We look forward to seeing the result of this measure.

Of course, this reduction in numbers was the original view of the Society ...

10 OCTOBER 2006
A view, from the north, of the model of the new scheme. Certainly an improvement on the original scheme. and when the bulk has been reduced by building 'a substantial part' of the enabling development on another site, it will be improved yet again.

A view from the north east which shows the considerable bulk of the east block in relation to the existing buildings.

18 OCTOBER 2006
It is reported in The Argus that the developers are to proceed with their application, despite the amendment by the Policy and Resources committee to reduce the bulk of the buildings ...

30 OCTOBER 2006
The documents and drawings for the new Planning Application may now be viewed online.
The Planning Application Number is BH2006/03429

Your attention is drawn to the perspective views showing the proposals in context (about two-thirds down the list of documents, titled '13 October 2006 Supporting Documents landscape and visual impact report part 7') : this is a requirement of the planning process, and in order to see how well this may be carried out it is only necessary to glance at the Marina application. Whatever view may be held of the Marina development, it must be acknowledged that the planning application was exemplary and left no doubt as to the appearance of the proposed towers.

It would appear from the photomontages of the King Alfred that the new buildings will be transparent ...these little line drawings may have been carried out in this manner to reduce cost, but they certainly give no impression of the massive bulk of the new work. One wonders why?

9 NOVEMBER 2006
CABE has responded to the latest proposals (as above, without the suggested reduction).
Extracts from their review may be read here
The design panel was, out of 30-40 advisors,

Alan Leibowitz (Chair)
Julia Barfield
Christopher Egret
Chris Miele
Joanna van Heyningen
Bob Allies

We note that CABE Commissioner Paul Morrell has declared his interest as Quantity Surveyor to Karis.

Julia Barfield is a director of MarksBarfield, designers and promoters of the i360 project at the West Pier.

Bob Allies is a director of Allies and Morrison, the practice responsible for the proposal at Brighton Station for the 42 storey tower that was refused planning permission on April 27 2005 and is currently the subject of an appeal. They are also the architects for the proposals at the western end of Brighton Marina encompassing the ASDA site.

With such established links to high-rise developments within the city, it would perhaps have been prudent for them both to have made a similar declaration of interest.

14 NOVEMBER 2006
Committee member David Robson has these photographs of the 'Fred and Ginger" in Prague by Frank Gehry

24 NOVEMBER 2006
The Society's views of the latest submission may be seen here

DECEMBER 2006
An interview with Frank Gehry in The Wall Street Journal

MARCH 2007

23 MARCH 2007
The Planning sub-committee of the city council granted consent, subject to a number of conditions, to this proposal.
"A shameful act ..."

A report on the meeting by BD here

APRIL 2007
At the Annual General Meeting of the Society on April 16 the following resolution was passed nem.con.:
BH2006/03429:Redevelopment of the King Alfred/RNR Site, Kingsway, Hove.
That the Committee be authorised to:
1. Take all steps necessary under the Town and Country Planning (Development Plans & Consultation)(Departures)Directions 1999 to secure the 'call-in' for determination by the Secretary of State after a Public Inquiry of this application.
2.Seek judical Review of the City Council's decision to be 'minded to grant consent'to the planning application.

Details of a letter to the Government Office for the South East are shown
Members are encouraged to write on their own behalf to the address shown with their own concerns as well as those shown in this letter.

MAY 2007
GOSE (The Government Office for the South East) has announced that the Secretary of State, Ruth Kelly, has decided not to ‘call in’ the King Alfred scheme for a public inquiry. This is very disappointing but there are now only a handful of schemes dealt with in this way annually and Ms Kelly’s planning role is not to police the behaviour of the City Council. The Society is waiting to hear from counsel whether he advises that we have a possible route to have the decision of the Council challenged through Judicial Review.

JUNE 2007
Counsel has advised:
1. The resolution passed by the Sub-Committee in March was not a final one.
and
2. That the Sub-Committee had the right to reconsider the matter, especially following the election which put in place a new administration.
and
3. The Sub-Committee had the right to come to a different conclusion from the members of the earlier Sub-Committee, providing that it had proper planning grounds to do so.

The Society's representation to the Council may be seen here

JULY 2007
A special meeting of the Planning sub-committee was held on July 11 to consider outstanding details and the Section 106 agreement relating to this development. This was the first time since the local elections that this newly constituted committee had considered the scheme: under the previous committee, the Tory members had voiced strong opposition and voted against it receiving planning permission. Now, however, they were in overall control of this committee, yet the scheme received unanimous approval.

At a time when there is national debate regarding general disenchantment with Politics, this case could act as a marker: when integrity meets pragmatism, the former develops amnesia.
One assumes that those councillors who were once so strong in their views do not expect to be taken seriously in future.

16 JANUARY 2008
The Argus carrries an interesting report on the pressures felt by City council planning officers who were involved with this application.

"...Planning officials penned an angry letter to their boss complaining they were made to feel pressured into backing the £270 million seafront King Alfred development decision, it has emerged...."

The Regency Society is endevouring to obtain a copy of this letter, and has appealed to the Information Commissioner's Office.

Top of page

For a larger image, click on the thumbnails...