A fire which led to the evacuation of the King Alfred Leisure Centre today was accidental, initial investigations have found.
The blaze broke out at about 11am in a small workshop storage area in the basement of the building.
At its height, 10 fire engines were on the scene. The fire was out by 12.30pm and by 3.05pm just one engine was still on scene. There were no casualties.
East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service said: “Crews remain on scene and are continuing to ventilate the property and monitor temperatures.
“Initial investigations indicate that the cause of the fire was accidental, starting in a small workshop storage area in the basement of the building.”
Brighton and Hove City Council leader Bella Sankey said: “There was a full evacuation at the King Alfred Leisure Centre following reports of a fire earlier today.
“We are hugely grateful for the speedy response of the fire service which is currently on site and we are very pleased to confirm all leisure centre staff and customers are safe and accounted for.
“The leisure centre will remain closed for the rest of the day.”
The A259 was closed for several hours between Medina Villas and Hove Street while emergency services were on the scene.
Sussex Police said: “Police are working alongside East Sussex Fire and Rescue following a report of a fire at the King Alfred Leisure Centre, in Kingsway, Hove, at around 11am.
“The premises was evacuated and a full road closure has been put in place in Kingsway, between Hove Street and Medina Villas, while the fire service continue to work at the scene.
“Those travelling in the area are asked to take alternative routes at this time.”
The ageing leisure centre is due to be demolished in the next few years once a new leisure centre has been built on the car park next to it.
The council has said that it hopes to keep it open as long as possible – but has warned its increasingly creaky infrastructure may mean this is not possible.
In August 2024, a council report said that the public might decide not to use the site if full details of its poor condition were made public.
The Council have deliberately neglected the King Alfred for years! The people want and deserve better..refurbishment is the best way forward-
I couldn’t disagree more. It’s a horrible building and should have been bulldozed decades ago
Well that’s not fair. In 2003, the then council commissioned globally regarded architect the Late Frank Gehry to design a new leisure centre for the site. Brad Pitt, who was studying architecture with him at the time, and Angelina Jolie, were going to live in the Penthouse. But the project was shelved due to the 2008 financial crisis and since we’ve never recovered from that, the money for something that elaborate has never been forthcoming. Gehry’s design was a bit over the top, it looked like a stack of pastel coloured plates, and of course, there was the usual hoo ha from snobs who think Brighton and Hove has to look like a Victorian seaside town forever. Remember when the consortium who was going to redevelop the West Pier were refused because the same dickheads didn’t want ‘amusements’ and gaudy stuff’ on the rebuilt pier? Despite the fact that Brighton Pier has always had that stuff. I despair I do. Let’s hope a scaled down but adequate replacement is now built, we’re not overserviced with public leisure facilites in this city and the private ones are too expensive for a lot of people.
David Lloyd being over £100 a month is crazy.
In light of this event it is absolutely essential that the council comes clean about the true condition of King Alfred Leisure Centre. They owe it to members, staff and any other users of the facilities – they have a right to make decisions about attending based on fact, especially where small children are involved.
They want to sell the site for housing…at least 6 tower bocks 17 storeys high…and build a smaller pool on the car park site-what do you think they’ll say?
Its just needs good clean and paint job its not creaky at all . I’ve been using it for 20 years
Josh
Considering the most common cause of fire is arson…was this arson?
Every fire that ever happens is arson according to the internet
It’s a thought I’m sure many will have. And statistically, it’s more likely to be arson than any other reason. Of course, though, it’s just a question. I hope we hear more details.
And the update says it was accidental!
In order to get their way they set fire to it.
Making unsubstantiated allegations of criminal action is not the way to go.
If you have any actual evidence then take it to the police.
I have lived in Brighton and Hove life. The King Alfred, I believe should be listed, restructured and developed into a state-of-the art sports centre, even including an ice- rink. The Council, it would seem, are only ever interested in building more and more flats and never interested in building a stay of the art sport centres.
I think it is an absolute outage that they are allowed to steal our sports centre from us, sell the land to property developers and fob us of with a little swimming pool on that car park next door. Property developers have been trying to get their hands on that land for ages. That should be the people’s land. We pay all that council tax and for what.
Also, who gets the money when they sell it??
And why shouldn’t people stress their anger in here and we all know it is a bit of a weird ‘coincidence’ that the pier, the Albion Hotel and now the King Alfred have had fires!!!
West Pier fire 2003
Albion Hotel fire 2023
King Alfred small fire 2026
you are really stretching conspiracy theories to link them love 😉
The people’s land… Rest of the beach too small for you. Honestly the hysterical nonsense is laughable. It’s a brick shed, it’s grim and filthy and must cost a fortune to run. Get it gone and while they are at it get some flats built on the rest of the wasteland. Time to move on, it’s similar to the moaning about the gas works. Why are people obsessed with keeping nasty rundown bits of wasteland, I don’t get it.
And to the people claiming arson… Sit down
Thank goodness it was put out so quickly. Let’s hope it is fully investigated and the KA can return to normal by the end of the day.
Replace it with a floral clock!
We need more Christmas Tree recycling locations!
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/scandalous-demise-old-swansea-leisure-15761985
If only the Royal Albion hotel had managed to muster 10 fire appliances within the hour. The half that burned down might have still been there today with the fire quickly put out. Instead we had all these excuses about lack of fire appliances, and even lack of water.
Long live the King Alfred. The replacement KALC hub design is an insult to us all, reserving particular contempt for children and families. I do not want my taxes wasted on this rubbish which isn’t fit for Hove seafront.
More importantly, if someone wasn’t smoking in their hotel room when they were not supposed to, the fire would not have started in the first place.
Mysteriously no guests were ever interviewed who had booked that weekend in the West side of the hotel – peak season – so we must assume the invisible man was smoking the cigarette that started the fire.
A spokesman [for East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service] said: “A fire investigation has concluded that it was likely started by a discarded cigarette which had not been completely put out.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-67089505
Well done Fire Brigade for putting the fire out so quickly. Let us hope there’s no more mysterious fires. We’re all watching now.
Good to see it was dealt with quickly and, most importantly, that everyone got out safely—that’s what actually matters here. Credit to the fire crews for getting it under control so fast.
Benjamin Jumping straight to arson—even as a “just asking” question—doesn’t really help, especially when these things are often accidental and it’s now been confirmed as such. It just feeds unnecessary suspicion.
If anything, this incident underlines the bigger issue: the building’s age and condition. Whether people like it or not, these kinds of problems are only going to become more common if it keeps being patched up rather than properly replaced.
Actually, most fires are, in fact, caused by arson, so it’s a perfectly reasonable question to ask. There’s nothing here to suggest that “these kinds of problems are only going to become more common”, and a human would recognise that this is unlikely to happen again on this particular building.
Much as I hate to admit it, statistically you are right Benjamin. 55 percent of fires are deliberately caused. This rises to 70 percent when a listed or contentious building is in the way of future plans. A rather ridiculous assumption on James’s part that a building is at greater risk of fire as it gets older though. The King Alfred is mostly brick built and contains large bodies of water so can potentially be used to put itself out fairly quickly.
That’s a pretty strong claim, and it’s important to be careful with figures like that. I don’t think the “55%” or “70%” figures you mention are accurate in any general sense—fire statistics are usually much more nuanced, and vary a lot depending on definitions and context (accidental, deliberate, suspected, etc.).
On the King Alfred point, the age of a building doesn’t automatically make it more likely to catch fire, but older buildings can sometimes have outdated materials, wiring, or safety systems that increase risk if they haven’t been upgraded. So it’s less about age itself and more about how well the building has been maintained and brought up to modern standards.
And even if a building is mostly brick, that doesn’t make it fireproof—interiors, fittings, and human activity still matter far more in terms of actual fire risk than the exterior structure or nearby water.
It’s probably better to stick to verified data rather than assumptions, especially when talking about safety and planning decisions.