Artist's impression of the 'O'

Brighton & Hove City Council is deferring a decision on plans for a temporary 60 metre high ferris wheel on Brighton seafront for further talks.

The Brighton ‘O’ proposed for the Lower Esplanade, east of the West Pier, was scheduled for a decision at this Wednesday’s planning committee.

Planners were recommending refusal because the current proposal overlaps the site for the planned ‘i360’, observation tower, one of the city’s major projects. Both the i360 architects Marks Barfield and the West Pier Trust are expressing concern that the 18 metre overlap could hamper work on the i360, which has planning permission.

Another reason for refusal is the potential for noise and disturbance to nearby residents and visitors to the Hotel Metropole directly opposite, as well as other businesses.

As the plans stand there could be problems with construction traffic and machinery, with two developers working concurrently and that would be a valid reason for refusing the application.

The site is part of the Regency Square Conservation Area and close to the Grade 1 listed West Pier.

Approved in October 2006, the i360 project also includes the reinstatement of key listed features from the West Pier, such as the original Victorian toll booth.

Paramount Attractions has submitted the Brighton ‘O’ application for temporary (two year) planning permission for a spokeless observation wheel with 32 rotating gondolas or ‘pods.’

Councillor Lynda Hyde, chairman of the planning committee, said:
“We have decided to defer the Brighton ’O’ application until the February 3 committee to give the applicants more time to resolve the issues with the neighbouring site and its overall impact.

“The i360 is an important major project for the city and will bring long-term benefits to the area. The developers of the i360 are concerned that as it stands the neighbouring scheme could make it hard for them to fulfil their planning obligations. Also some of the experts we consulted felt unable to make a full impact assessment because of a general lack of technical detail on the submitted plans, so it seems sensible to give it more time.”

For more information about Brighton and Hove Council view:
www.brighton-hove.gov.uk