Protesters say magnificent sea views of the seafront at the West Pier could be obliterated by a plan to restore the ruined pier.

Developer St Modwen is proposing a large leisure scheme on either side of the West Pier in Brighton to make sure the beautiful but dilapidated seaside feature survives into the future.

The proposals have angered conservationists and neighbours.

They fear the height and size of the development would destroy Brighton and Hove's open seafront and blot out the panoramic view across the English Channel.

Opponents have produced this collage of the seafront, viewed from King's Road, Brighton, to illustrate how the proposed development could loom above the promenade.

They fear the structure would tower five metres above the upper ground level, blocking the view of the pier, beach and sea for tourists, passers-by and residents across the road.

The artist's impressions were produced by the Regency Square Area Society which has joined forces to fight the plans with the Brighton Society, Hove Civic Society, Friends of Brunswick Square and Terrace and the Kingscliffe Society.

Members were responding to comments from Dr Geoff Lockwood, chief executive of the Brighton West Pier Trust, who told The Argus on Thursday such a development was needed to save the West Pier.

Clive Buxton, spokesman for the Regency Square Area Society, said: "To Dr Lockwood, in his quest for the Holy Grail of a restored pier, the end justifies the means.

"We do not agree. To destroy the essential character and heritage of the city's seafront in order to rebuild the pier is in our view a case of the tail wagging the dog. This is a step too far.

"It is ironic that the very development promoted by Dr Lockwood will obscure a view of the West Pier from the seafront over a wide area."

The Regency Square Area Society fears the plans would set a precedent which the Noble Organisation, owners of the Palace Pier, would be keen to follow by seeking planning permission for a similar development.

Mr Buxton said: "With such a precedent, a Palace Pier development would certainly be approved. Do we want or need Churchill Square-type shopping centres on the seafront? The answer surely must be no."

The society also asked planners to consider the outcome of the redevelopment on the aquarium site near the Palace Pier, where six out of eight units remain empty.

Members said a new development would, with a predicted economic downturn, mean more empty units. Dr Lockwood told The Argus he could not understand why people questioned the necessity of a development on the proposed scale to achieve the restoration of the West Pier.

He said it had taken years to prove this to the Heritage Lottery Fund, English Heritage and Brighton and Hove City Council, who all wanted to see a development of the minimum necessary scale.

He said: "My impatience is with those representatives of local societies who, despite the evidence, are trying to say the pier can be restored without such a development."