Councillor Mike Middleton (Letters, May 29) accuses Peter Salvage of "misrepresenting the facts" when saying Brighton and Hove City Council offers no alternative to supporting one of the three redevelopment options for the King Alfred centre, all involving construction of at least 300 flats.
Why, then, despite having a "no" box on its survey, does the council tell us this way nothing will be done to improve the centre?
Most importantly, why does the council say it will "consult the public on the three options and this will inform the council's decision about which one to go for". This implies an attitude of fait accompli.
The council tells us the only way to fund this project is by residential development. If this is all its consultants can come up with, they need to go back to the drawing board with a fresh brief.
Every single option needs to be looked at in detail, including recreational and retail development. It is simply not believable this is the only way.
The council's own web site cites examples of successful funding of sports centres to include office and retail development - still not desirable but options nonetheless.
Questions need to be asked about why a few individuals in the council seem so determined to push ahead with this scheme.
-Keryn Crabb, Hove
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article