King Alfred: Progress in the right direction

10.47.44am BST (GMT +0100) Thu 24th Jun 2004

Brighton and Hove's seafront

A number of major concessions have been made in response to public concerns over the King Alfred. At last night's meeting of the Policy & Resources Committee, significant changes to the height, housing and commercial elements of the scheme were made.

Speaking at the meeting, Liberal Democrat Group Leader, Councillor Paul Elgood said:

'Last year we were unable to accept the plans for the King Alfred - they were too high, too commercially dominated and we felt that the provision of luxury housing had no place in a scheme being put together by the council.

'We did however support the sporting element of the proposals, and outlined that we would have funded these through a Community Trust, a model increasingly used by councils across the country as a way to redevelop tired and out-dated sports and leisure centres.'

The Liberal Democrats welcomed the significant changes to the proposals, those being:

· The reduction of height is a massive step forward, and very welcome. This reduction is critical.

· The reduction of the commercial space provides assurances that the right balance between commercial and leisure is being struck.

· The change of luxury housing for smaller apartments is important, the council should not be putting together luxury housing developments. These will assist those who don't qualify for affordable homes, as there is a dire lack of one or two bedroom flats for sale in the city. The increase in the number of affordable units is additionally welcome.

· A more realistic approach to car parking is common sense.

· In addition, the ongoing consultation which has taken place has produced a positive outcome.

At the meeting, the Administration acknowledged that Lib Dem Councillors had continually lobbying for the reduction in height of the towers.

Cllr Elgood added: 'We have repeatedly called for these issues to be taken into account, especially the reduction of the height of the towers and are pleased that these are being taken on board. We feel that this considerably meets the demands being made.'

The Liberal Democrat amendments were as follows;

· Cap the overall height of the towers to something like 20 stories or less.

· Allow for a further debate at P+R during the final stage of development, meaning that the Project Board must seek agreement of its outcomes with P+R.

· Thirdly, to ensure public consultation continues, which was sadly omitted from the original recommendations.

Councillor Elgood made clear that his party did not support the initial brief for the development and that the Lib Dems would 'keep their powder dry' as to the final outcome of the development process.

Cllr Elgood concluded: 'The decision those of us who oppose the scheme have to make today is whether to continue opposing for the sake of opposing, or to seek critical compromises in the development - which make a massive difference to the scheme. On the basis that Planning will have the final say on the plans, we feel the best and most realistic and pragmatic approach is to try and get the best possible proposal on the table at this stage. We are therefore moving this amendment to the recommendations to safeguard this progress.'