Answering your questions
Councillor Alan Robins, Lead Cabinet Member for Sports and Recreation has answered some frequently asked questions about the King Alfred Development in a video.
These questions and answers, and more, can also be read below.
Why can’t the existing facility be refurbished?
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.
Why has the current site been chosen for the new facility and why aren't there more alternatives?
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.
How have you arrived at the current specifications for the facility?
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.
How will the council make the new facility affordable and accessible for local people, many of whom have been hit hard by the current cost of living crisis?
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.
What parking provision will be available?
The specification for the new facility at either site includes a parking provision that is greater than for the current site.
The outline parking capacity for the new facility is 200 spaces, compared to the 130 spaces available in the council car park located next to the current facility.
Have you done a predicted travel analysis for increased use at the current site?
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.
What are the next steps for the project?
A decision on the site for the new facility was made by Cabinet at its July meeting. Councillors agreed to deliver the new facility on the existing site, whilst seeking to keep the existing facility operating for as long as possible whilst the new facility is constructed.
Delivering the new facility will be a major project that will require significant planning and preparation.
With that in mind, during the summer and autumn of 2024, we'll work to appoint the professional team that will lead the next stages of the project. This will include appointing the lead architect who will develop the design up to the level of completeness required for the planning application.
We are aiming for work on site to commence in early 2026, with the construction expected to take 22 to 24 months, with completion in early 2028.
Designs will be shared with residents and key stakeholders before submitting the full planning application.