The King Alfred leisure centre could move to Hangleton under council plans to replace it.
The creaking leisure centre, which now regularly closes because of heating or water issues, is set to be demolished and a new one built in the coming years.
The new centre could be built on the same site – but Brighton and Hove City Council has been looking for other options.
This week, it revealed it is also considering moving the centre to land south of Sainsbury’s car park off Old Shoreham Road.
Council leader Bella Sankey said: “We are delighted that, with support from residents, sports club members, centre users and community groups, we can now share our final site options for a new leisure centre in the west of the city.
“The next steps are really important ones. We want as many people as possible to engage with this process and to give their views, thoughts, and reflections on the proposed sites so that we can take this into account when making the final decision on the location of our new leisure centre.
“This is an exciting new chapter for the city and we are all looking forward to seeing the new leisure centre come to fruition.”
Councillor Alan Robins, chair of the Culture, Heritage, Sports, Tourism and Economic Development added: “I’m delighted that we’re moving forward with this long-awaited project and will finally be building a modern and energy efficient new sporting facility.
“We will continue to work with independent experts to review the delivery options and determine which best balances value for money with what we know residents want.
“That work, together with the outcomes of the engagement, will both be taken into account when taking a final decision at our committee meeting in March.
“On site work is expected to begin in 2025.”
Council officers have been working since 2022 on identifying and assessing suitable sites, of which seven were shortlisted last year.
Following a detailed analysis, this two have now been identified as possible locations for a new leisure centre. They are:
Each of the sites offers potential for a ‘state of the art’ leisure centre, complete with 25 metre competition swimming pool, separate learner pool and splash pad, sports hall, health and fitness facilities, including gym and cycling studio, group exercise space and café.
However, due to differences in location and size, there are separate proposals for each site.
Both would feature two 25m pools and a 100-station gym and cycling studio, with studios and group exercise space, plus on-site car parking and a cafe.
But while the existing site could accommodate a splash pad, the HAngleton site coudl fit in a flume too – and an eight-court sports hall, as opposed to a six-court one at the existing site.
The Hangleton site would also have room for a family activity zone for activities including climbing, soft play, TAG Active and an adventure zone – and the potential for community health facilities
Over the next few weeks, residents from across the city are being invited to complete an online questionnaire – click here to access – and share their views on the site options and proposals.
They can also pick up copies of the questionnaire, view the proposals and meet with council officers at special ‘drop in’ events on:
- Tuesday 16 January, King Alfred Leisure Centre, 9am to 6pm
- Wednesday 17 January, St Richard’s Community Centre, 9.30am to 12noon
- Wednesday 17 January, Portslade Library, 10am to 5pm
- Wednesday 24 January, Hove Library, 10am to 6pm
It needs to stay by the sea. And what about the ballroom? It needs to have an events space.
Why does it have to be by the sea, and why does it need a ballroom?
Good luck with the move to Hangleton.Gridlock and nightmare to get to. I wont bother going . Seafront is perfect for a leisure centre with the new Hove seafront development.
I agree wholehearted with you Robert.
Historical context. If you are Brighton born and bred, you will know. HMS King Alfred. Brighton council just want to sell the King Alfred site to a property developer. There were great flumes at the King Alfred in the 1990’s. I should know as I worked there. They have already replaced the boiler. They could use the old ten pin bowling site next door for a climbing, family complex. They used to have Laser zone there.
There’s no logical reason why it needs to stay by the sea. A ballroom doesn’t have to be attached to this, although the sports hall could be repurposed for events in this way, most likely.
Proper competition pools are 50m not 25m. My neighbours schlep up to Crawley and Guildford with their daughter because our pools are too short, making loads of unnecessary car journeys for the lack of a suitable pool here. We’ve got Premier league football but no ambition for our swimmers, even though we’re by the sea. Any developer who can’t make it work with a 50m pool should be ruled out of the running. Let’s hope Labour’s Bella Sankey isn’t a political pygmy like her Green predecessors.
Sealanes is a 50m Pool. no good?
sealanes has no deep end and so cant be used for competitions
Spot on, even recreational swimmers need a good length…
Moving it away from the city centre will make it less accessible to those with no cars and encourage those who do have cars to drive rather than use other environmentally friendlier modes of transport.
I can’t agree with this comment, the current king Alfred site is rather a long walk from the main bus routes unless you live on the 700 bus route. If you live in Central hove and can walk, that’s great, but the sainsbury’s sight is more accessible by bus than the King Alfred is. Its likely to take people much longer if they are from central hove though
I respectfully disagree with you Justin about your fears, however it would make a good consideration point to ensure public transport caters for the new site to encourage travel by other methods than cars.
Absolute insanity. It is no longer serving the same community if it is moving miles away.
It will be a HANGLETON leisure centre. Where are they going to put it anyway? There is a caveat preventing further building on the Sainsburys land. The locals must resist losing their leisure centre at all costs.
Very much look forward to this going ahead. I think it will be good, it will be easy to get to as it will be just off old Shoreham road, it will be near Portslade Station, and bus stops are near by. I assume south of Sainsbury’s it means area around Portslade cricket club so not going to affect benfield valley as some comments suggest. This will be great for the Portslade/Hangleton & knoll area.
It will be built on the current Benfield Valley sports ground, meaning that Portslade Cricket Club would have to be moved out from their current home, as well as the 2 junior football pitches that are currently at the park.
Historical context. If you are Brighton born and bred, you will know. HMS King Alfred. Brighton council just want to sell the King Alfred site to a property developer. There were great flumes at the King Alfred in the 1990’s. I should know as I worked there. They have already replaced the boiler. They could use the old ten pin bowling site next door for a climbing, family complex. They used to have Laser zone there.
If they are going to do it do it right. 50 meter pool is the Olympic length.
Needs to be 50m I’m afraid. Anything less is unacceptable. It also needs to stay on seafront to avoid generating huge numbers of car journeys.
While I can appreciate the reduced construction costs and increase in space available at the Sainsbury’s adjacent site, it’s simply much too far away to be palatable. According to Google maps, it’s a 45 minute walk from the current site, the same distance as Prince Regent, so for those living in central or eastern Hove, Prince Regent would become their nearest pool, which is already extremely busy.
I’d also be curious if the reduced construction costs would offset the loss in revenue from lower visitor numbers in the long run.
Fantastic for those in the city living in Portslade and Hove with excellent bus services serving Sainsbury, good parking, and easy road access from all over the area.
About time we got investment into sports and leisure in the area.
About time we got any investment in the area. If this goes ahead at Sainsbury’s it will be brilliant.
Not so great if you live next to the green land south of Sainsbury’s. This is part of the Benfield valley and has a covenant preventing development.
Ultimately it’s an empty spaced that is probably going to be utilised in the future if you like it or not.
Makes an argument for an additional swimming pool / leisure centre to be built in central Brighton. No reason why development can’t work towards a second one eventually.
The King,Alfred centre is a hallmark of Hove sea front and any new facility should be built on the same site. It would be wrong to change it’s location. I suspect any alternative plan would result in a block of flats.
It’s actually going to be a block of flats either way. If built at the current site it’ll be built on the carpark and then the old building will be sold off once it’s finished.
Perhaps something could be said for doing without the facilities for a few years and just knock it down and rebuild in the exact same location. But evidently that’s not what’s being considered.
Who are the councilors for the area its been agreed?
Why not do something similar to what Worthing did and build the new leisure centre on what’s now the carpark BEFORE developing the existing site, meaning no interruption in service?
There is too much previous form in Brighton and elsewhere of leisure facilities being demolished and never replaced. The loss of the Black Rock lido is a case in point. An empty site for 40 plus years.
Current location is dreadful if you have children. It’s hard to get to. Parking costs make it unaffordable. You can’t get the train there except without a major hike with a buggy. They could make another bus line or use the yellow 57 to Sainsbury’s?
I doubt it will be a new facility, the safe money is on Senior Housing, because that frees up current social housing.
Have BHCC factored in the cost of legally fighting the “in perpetuity covenant” preventing building on the land at Hangleton? Benfield Valley is one of the last remaining green lungs (apart from Sainsburys) along the length of Old Shoreham Road and building there would mean almost continuous housing etc from Shoreham to Brighton! Think also of the added traffic pollution in the Sainsburys area and the new road layout to gain access!
I don’t think any trees would be disturbed in the current ‘plan’ we have to accept the space left is limited and with a burgeoning city it’s inevitable to have land developed
Limited space means a compromised leisure facility, so not an improvement, but a minus.
It’s a good idea close to the train station at portslade and the A27.. good space to use. People
Need to realise we have very limited space as the barrier of the sea prevents development. Lets get Brighton where it’s good be with proper facilities and sports areas. The Kingsway development is much needed for a very tired Hove
I thought that brown land was meant to be used first instead of green land, and yes I agree a 50m pool is needed not another 25m one.
The idea that the Southern plot of land below Sainsburys is better and bigger and could have a flume is ridiculous, anyone remember that king Alfred had flumes and due to a lack of maintenance from this council messed that expensive investment up. They cost 1/4 mil 35 years ago.
There is already a sports centre in Portslade by the way.
With the fact that this council want to build flats north of sainsburys and this sports centre below sainsburys there will be no green land left is pretty shocking.
People need green space especially if they all living in flats, remember covid anyone?
Don’t understand the “Hangleton is much too far away, it’s a 45 minute walk from the King Alfred” arguments. That’s just IMBYism (yes I know I made that up). Surely the King Alfred is much too far away from all the people who live near the new site.
What about where I live? Neither site is anywhere near Hove Park, so should I object to both options?
Why should we assume that this is just for residents of Brighton and Hove? Surely the important issue is how the access to it will be for visitors as well as residents? And the Sainsbury site is much too far away from the centre. The present location of the King Alfred, with its close link to the Kingsway development, would be perfect for all. As for bus services, it is only a short walk away from Church Road, one of the main bus routes running through the city. And there are plenty of buses to and from Hove Station.
We do not need another i360 mess up due to lack of interest on the part of the general public.
The council will simply move it and then the existing land will be used for flats that will be to expensive for locals to buy
take all the leisure centres in house. they have been left to go dilapidated via the deal with Freedom Leisure
Is that it, just picking up king Alfred and plonking it down in bengield valley, what we need i is councillor and officers with some thoughts let’s take back a field on the outskirts of the city and build a leisure centre that we can all be proud of, let’s face it if the football stadium had come up now it would have never been built.
Classic. Flog off the seafront site for expensive second home flats and build cheap in Hangleton/portslade!
Not with a Primary Residency Clause, they won’t.
The centre they could build at the land south of Sainsbury’s sounds like a no brainer: bigger, better and many more facilities for families and the community. It is not far from the current site and easily accessible for everyone in the west of the city.
Hangleton will be the preferred site as the King Alfred will be sold off for luxury flat. Don’t be fooled there is also plans put in for the rest of Benfield Valley. What was once a nature reserve and seen a green valley will all be built on. Ironic really when they have spent so much time and money making Valley Gardens greener
Senior Housing is what I’m thinking the old KA site will become, because it will have the secondary effect of releasing social housing.
Has anybody tried completing the questionnaire?
Question 3 has gone missing.
Again a development with NO 50mt pool !!
When will these people realize that is the standard size for competition ???
Build it in Hangleton with a 50m pool.
There is an alternative to development on the rest of Benfield valley. Saint Helen’s green ,large space, underused, no sport played, existing bus routes, close to local shops.
Save Benfield valley build on St Helen’s.