The great West Pier debate

What should be done with the West Pier? This question has been asked - and answered '“ many times and by many people over the past 30 years. English Heritage declared the Grade I listed monument is beyond repair.

But does this mean the people of Brighton and Hove should continue to watch the West Pier slowly crumble into the water and settle for a single-pier city?

In this special feature, ANDY PARSONS (@AndyYelo), a Brighton-based architect and founder of Yelo Architects, and BEN COPPER (@NutshellConst), a Sussex-based contractor and founder of Nutshell Construction, discuss their thoughts.

Should the West Pier be restored or should it be built from scratch?

Andy: It certainly shouldn't be restored in its previous guise. It's been destroyed, so there is no point putting back a classic restoration. But Brighton does need another pier - a modern alternative.

Ben: If we'd been having this conversation 20 years ago, before it was badly damaged in the early 1990s there could have been a case to restore, but now there is so little left. I do, however, think the principle of the pier could be restored.

What would your dream alternative West Pier look like?

Andy: Contemporary, modern-looking. It should be more than just a promenade with seaside entertainments. I'm thinking of a mixed-use pier with a tower at the end, hotels with a dock, bars, restaurants, maybe an art gallery. Brighton could do with a decent art gallery.

Ben: There's plenty to say about taking the vision of the original pier and keeping that as a mantra for what it does now. The West Pier was one of the earliest piers to be built in the United Kingdon and technically quite advanced. It was a modern, daring thing to do at the time. And that's exactly what we should take forward in terms of the construction. As the West Pier has fallen down so slowly, a lot of the interiors have been salvaged and I think we should incorporate these remains into the new build. Expose some of the existing seabed; you could do a glass box that went down into the sea, viewing a section of the sea.

Would that be very expensive?

Ben: Yes.

Andy: Yes - as it would be technically challenging.

So you think there should be some housing on the pier?  

Ben:  From an economic and development perspective, it's hard to argue against that.

Andy: Yes, definitely. Historically, there has been housing on bridges so I don't see why it couldn't be on a pier. Rather than longitudinally - like the Ponte Vecchio in Florence - I'd suggest the housing is in a tower; 40 to 50 storeys would be achievable.

How far out would this pier go - it sounds like it would be longer than before?

Andy: Yeah, definitely. Why not? It would be good to take the end back into deeper water and have ocean liners mooring at the end.

What materials would you use?

Ben: Glass and metal. Metal framing, with plenty of glass.

Andy: Steel, glass, perhaps some ceramics - like those used in the Santa Caterina Market in Barcelona.

What would make this pier absolutely Brighton?

Andy: Making it a sustainable pier, maybe one that generates energy. There's lots of options with a pier-like structure: solar roof, wind turbines, or even generating blue energy through waves and currents.

Ben: For me, the good thing about Brighton is the willingness to get up and go. The pier should be a continuation of the fact that what we do in Brighton is very different and very bold. That's what's cool about Brighton. It would be great to rebuild the 'Daddy Longlegs' '“ Brighton's old carriage out to the sea that one could travel along.

Andy: It's amazing to think that they did that in Victorian times. Even today, that would be technically difficult.

Do you think the i360 being so close would impact the pier in anyway?

Ben: I would see them as part of the same development.

Andy: It's like a beacon for the development of the pier; they'd complement each other well.

How would this pier be funded?

Andy: It has to be a commercial enterprise.

Ben: Commercial venture. That's what enables these things to happen.

Should Brighton have two piers?

Andy: I think we should have more. They're such beautiful structures and, if they served many purposes, they would be a real benefit to the city.

Ben: I agree with Andy. More piers could provide significant housing and offices that a growing city needs.

Andy: Looking at Brighton's 'blue' fringe is an interesting alternative to looking for housing sites on the 'green' fringe.

What would you suggest we do about parking?

Andy: No parking. Brighton is desperately in need of a park-and-ride - or a tram system, anyway.

Ben: I'm fully in favour of a system re-think. This project is such a potential change to the seafront, one of its mitigating factors might be that it doesn't need parking, but that it changes the whole infrastructure of public transport.

Logistically, do you have any idea how long this whole process would take?

Ben: With design, planning, approval and build, it's a 10- to 15-year timescale. The build alone would take three to five years.

What's the call to action? Where do we start?

Andy: There should be a public debate held to ensure something is done. If it did go ahead, it would need a competition to find an architect of world class like Frank Gehry.

Ben: I think there's a reverse statement about Brighton and Hove as a city, if we don't do something with the pier. Brighton and Hove is surging forward and I think if, on our watch, we let a structure renowned throughout the world crumble to dust in front our eyes, what does that say about our heritage? The fact is, at the moment there is a structure there, not much, but something. I think it says a lot more about us if we choose not to act.