Frequency Asked Questions

The facility’s history as a 1930s building that was extended in the 1980s means that many aspects of the design and layout are compromised and fall short of modern standards and expectations.

A refurbishment of the existing building would not address these issues. They could only be resolved by replacement with a modern facility designed and built to reflect Sport England's guidance and best practice in modern sports facility operation. For example:

Sports halls

The current sports halls are constructed directly above the 1930s swimming pools, which has dictated their size and shape. The halls do not meet Sport England or sports’ national governing body (NGB) requirements. The run-off outside the lined areas is constrained, and there is no spectator seating.

The heights of the ceilings, windows, and skylights reflect the original use as pool halls.

The natural lighting requirements for newly designed sports halls are very different and the impact of bright sunlight creating glare for users of the current facility is an ongoing issue.

Pools

The main 25m pool and leisure water area use the same shared body of water and have a common filtration system. The leisure water should be maintained at a higher temperature than the main pool, but this is impossible with the current design. A refurbishment could not feasibly address this, nor the associated issue of contamination which could result in both pools being closed.

The main pool has only 6 lanes, which limits its use as a competition pool and the fixed depth of the teaching pool doesn’t allow for different uses and activities.

In addition, the open layout of the current pools can cause issues with acoustics and limits opportunities for groups wanting to have a more private environment to swim for example those facing cultural barriers to participating.

Gym and health and fitness provision

The space occupied by the gym was previously the location of the café, and as with the sports halls is not a purpose-designed space. It accommodates 31 stations, much smaller than would be expected for a modern flagship sports and leisure facility. It could not accommodate the minimum of 100 stations proposed for the new West Hub.

Relocating the gym elsewhere in the facility would not be feasible without, say, giving up one of the sports halls or re-purposing another existing space further compromising the facility as a whole.

Gym and fitness remain one of the most popular ways for people to be active in our city, and therefore increasing the capacity and performance of our gyms and studios will enable us to meet the demand now and in the future.

Health and fitness membership is one of the most important income sources for a modern leisure centre, and so a constrained gym would also limit the financial viability of the facility.

Refurbishment would require extensive structural work. It would also be almost impossible to match modern energy efficiency standards using the existing structure as a starting point. Taken together, these factors mean that over the life of the facility, the carbon impact of refurbishment would be greater than that of demolishing and replacing it.

Refurbishment is sometimes appropriate for exceptional buildings where there's a sufficiently compelling case.

For example, the council has recently completed a refurbishment of the Corn Exchange and Dome Theatre. The decision to refurbish reflects the building’s status as a Grade 1 listed building which Historic England has identified as having sufficient architectural merit to warrant inclusion on the National Heritage List for England. In addition, the building’s layout remains well-suited to hosting events such as concerts and theatrical performances.

By contrast, the King Alfred has not been listed by Historic England. As set out above, its design and layout mean that it cannot effectively fulfil the role of a modern sport and leisure centre.

The work we have completed with our sport and leisure specialists and their architects over the last year has shown that refurbishment would be costly and would only extend the facility’s life for around 10 years. Furthermore, it's much more difficult to predict the final cost of a refurbishment than for a new build. Costs can much more easily increase far beyond expectations due to discoveries on-site once work begins.

We need the new West Hub leisure centre to serve the city for the next 30 to 40 years. By starting fresh with a completely new building, we have the opportunity to deliver a facility that matches best practices and will remain affordable to operate for years to come.

We'll ensure that the design of the new facility will complement the new facilities at Hove Beach Park and will be appropriate for a landmark building at this iconic location on the city’s seafront.

The current site has always been one of the options that we have considered for the new facility and remains an option now. However, the cost and complexity of building on the seafront site is one of the key reasons why past projects have not been successful.

Brighton & Hove City Council therefore considered more than 20 sites across the west of the city and engaged with over 100 developers and landowners to invite them to come forward with sites.

All potential sites were examined through a detailed process that looked at factors including:

• location
• transport links
• current land ownership and availability
• planning constraints
• the potential offered by the site to deliver an excellent facility for the city

The large majority of the sites were not suitable because they failed to meet those requirements. Of all the sites examined, only 2 were identified as suitable for progressing further which were the current site, and the land south of Sainsbury’s at the junction of Old Shoreham Road and the A293.

The business case developed by our specialist consultants (Continuum Sport and Leisure) showed that a facility on either site could represent a compelling investment for the council.

Having considered the findings of the business case, alongside other factors relating to planning policy, legal matters, loss of green space, and the outcomes of public engagement, councillors decided to proceed with the current site.

The delivery of the new King Alfred Leisure Centre is a key part of the council’s Sports Facilities Investment Plan (SFIP).

The SFIP was developed through analysis, review, and consultation, and the proposed specification was developed as part of that work. It reflects what you told us about your priorities. It also reflects the outcome of work we have done with sports and leisure experts to identify the best mix and balance of facilities which will provide the maximum benefit for the city whilst remaining cost-effective.

For example, our decision to opt for a 25-metre pool rather than a 50-metre pool is informed by research and analysis work we did earlier this year with Sport England and Swim England to better understand the city’s water and pool space requirements. That work showed that the increased cost of delivering a 50-metre pool in the new facility would severely hinder Brighton & Hove City Council’s ability to provide high-quality sport and leisure provision across the rest of the city.

The current unmet demand for swimming cannot be met in one single location, and therefore provision should be spread across the city as set out in the SFIP. It could also make the new facility too costly to deliver and maintain in the longer term.

The new facility will instead feature a 25-metre pool complemented by a separate teaching and learner pool and fun leisure water (for example, a splash pad) for our children and young people. Taken together, that water space will provide a balanced and flexible offer to meet the diverse needs of the whole community.

Promoting economic and social inclusion, health, and civic pride is one of the 5 key themes (‘a fair city’) that make up our economic strategy for Brighton and Hove.

We'll be working hard to make sure that residents from all of our local communities can access and benefit from the new facilities that we'll be delivering.

We'll be considering options including pay and play, the Leisure Card scheme, and other targeted programmes that provide access to free and low-cost opportunities to make our facilities as accessible and affordable as possible.

The specification for the new facility includes a parking provision in the undercroft of the site. The design for the new facility aims to provide similar capacity to the current carpark, around 120 spaces.

Not at this stage. However, as the project progresses to the next stage we'll undertake work to analyse the likely increases in local traffic and we'll examine public transport and active travel needs for the new facility.

Those factors will be considered as part of the travel plan which will be prepared as part of the full planning application.

Following the recent additional community engagement, plans are expected to be submitted later in early 2026 with preliminary works starting on site in early 2026.  Designs are now available to view by residents and key stakeholders before submitting the full planning application.

Ahead of redevelopment of the site we undertook an asbestos survey of the redundant bowling hall. High quantities of asbestos-containing debris have been identified within ceiling voids, beneath the main bowling alley structures, and as loose contamination on several floor areas. These areas are all closed off to staff and to the public. 

To make the building safe for future project teams and others, it is evident that a comprehensive asbestos removal program will be required. This will necessitate the removal of all asbestos containing materials (ACMs), along with the soft strip-out of internal walls, ceilings, floor coverings, and soft furnishings within the affected areas to mitigate the risk of cross-contamination and the spread of asbestos fibres. 

The proposed soft strip works to address the asbestos contamination are not considered demolition, therefore planning agreement is not required.  

To ensure continuity of sport and leisure provision on the site, we intend to keep the current King Alfred open and operational until to the new facility is opened. However, the work to deliver the new facility will require the disused bowling alley area to be demolished as part of the pre-commencement works.  

A Prior Notice For Demolition Application was submitted at the beginning of December 2025. The demolition work is expected to commence in April 2026, pending approvals.  

The bowling alley area has been closed for more than 20 years, and it is expected that most items of historical significance would have been removed around the time of the closure or during the following years. However, we will make an assessment to establish if there are any items of sufficiently compelling historic importance to salvage, taking due account of the practicality and cost of decontaminating the items to make them safe to handle. 

All works will be undertaken in a fully compliant manner, with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) being notified of the necessary elements. 

We recognise that it is regrettable that the 6 blue badge bays in front of the King Alfred facility have been lost. However, that has been unavoidable in order to enable the set-up the site compound which is needed for the essential soft strip works in the King Alfred basement area.  

We have worked with our contractor Willmott Dixon to keep their site compound as compact as possible, and to re-provide the 6 parking spaces as close as possible to the original location. The contractors have already completed that work, with 6 blue badge spaces now added to the adjacent car park.  

We are also working closely with groups representing disabled people, and from those discussions we recognise that on-street parking is preferable for some users, for example those with high-sided vehicles. With that in mind we are working with our planning colleagues with a view to adding three new on-street blue badge spaces nearby. Together with the 6 bays already re-provided, that will result in a net increase of three to the number of designated blue badge bays in the area. 

In addition to the designated bays, blue badge holders may also park free of charge in any of the paid-for bays in the area and may also park on double yellow lines for up to 3 hours. 

The seafront bays will not be replaced. The new King Alfred facility will extend onto the esplanade, and the road will have to be stopped-up to enable that to happen. The undercroft car park at the new facility will feature 8 blue badge bays which will be located for maximum convenience being close to both the main vehicular access and the lift to surface level.  

The whole facility has been designed to reflect current regulation and best practice in accessibility, with extensive engagement with groups representing disabled people. The new facility will provide a much better proposition for the city’s disabled people, not just in terms of active leisure, but as an attractive destination from which to enjoy the location and sea views. 

When the construction works begin next year, a separate temporary car park will be established on Hove Lawns, which will also feature blue badge spaces. 

The work our contractors are currently undertaking involves a soft strip and targeted asbestos removal under controlled conditions. The work is supervised by the principal contractor (Willmott Dixon), working with a specialist team of asbestos removal specialists who are Health and Safety Executive (HSE) licenced asbestos removers. The HSE have been notified of the works (under the ‘F10’ process). A full Construction Phase Plan in place which has been signed off by the Principal Designer (CDM) prior to commencement. 

The works are segregated from public areas and undertaken with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) observing appropriate waste handling procedures. The operational areas of the facility are outside the scope of the work, and remain safe for both our operator, Freedom Leisure, and for customers to continue using. 

The council is aware that an application has been made to Historic England for the existing facility to be added to the National Heritage List for England. However, that makes no material difference to soft strip works proceeding. 

A previous application to have the King Alfred Leisure Centre was submitted in 2016. That application was rejected.  The decision summary is publicly accessible on English Heritage’s Heritage Gateway here: https://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=1436099&resourceID=7.  

The demolition of the bowling alley area will be a subsequent and separate piece of work which will require a planning application. That is also unaffected by the submission of an application for listing.  Residents will be able to comment on the demolition application through the statutory consultation process.