Agenda item - Public Involvement

To consider the following matters raised by members of the public:

(a)           Petitions: 

To receive any petitions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 8 July 2024

(b)           Written Questions:

To receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 12 July 2024

(c)           Deputations:           

To receive any deputations submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 8 July 2024

(a)           Public Questions

1)             King Alfred

24.1      Mary Sandell read the following question:

Given that you have provided rough costings, could you tell me what Low stack and high stack mean with regard to leisure facilities (types)  and housing (quantities).

24.2      Councillor Robins provided the following reply:

As set out in the cabinet paper, the business case examined two options for constructing the sport and leisure centre on the current site. The first of these occupies 20% of the total site, and as such would need to be built over more levels to accommodate all the features of the new facility. We have referred to this version as the ‘stacked design’. The outline design work suggested one or two levels of parking below ground and three to four stories of construction above ground. So, a maximum of four stories above ground.

The second option used half the site, with surface car parking, and would require two stories of elevation to accommodate the same specification. 

The paper refers only to the new sports and leisure facility. A key lesson learned from past projects is to keep the design and build of the facility separate from any residential development on the site. Any proposals for residential development on the remainder of the site will be dealt with through the planning process. 

2)             King Alfred

24.3      Laura King read the following question:

The King Alfred is a significant building on Hove seafront, yet nowhere in the latest report on the King Alfred does it mention heritage.

How does our council justify the demolition of one of the last remaining coastal Land Ships in the country, training 22,500 men and women for WWII naval Service, in between doing double duty as a south coast destination leisure centre, rather than the restoration and rebirth of this seafront art deco, community leisure centre asset like Saltdean Lido?

24.4      Councillor Robins provided the following reply:

The existing building has always been a purpose-built leisure centre for the local community rather than an MoD facility. We recognise that, like many buildings across the country, it had a temporary use during WW2 as a naval training facility. That’s a piece of history we are keen to remember. However, remembering that short period of the facility’s use should not prevent the city from having the modern, sports and leisure facility it deserves. 

As the project moves forward, we will be looking to engage an archivist to document the history of the building and to make sure that any historic artifacts are collected and preserved. We would also look to commemorate the history of the site in a suitable way within the new facility, for example a pictorial display to show its history and the development of the site over the last century. As with other similar projects, we’ll look to involve local groups and stakeholders to agree how best that can be achieved.

3)             King Alfred

24.5      Diane Montgomery read the following question:

The decision as to whether to demolish the King Alfred Centre and build a new sports centre should not be made until a Whole Life-Cycle Carbon (WLC) Emissions Assessment has been completed. This would consider the embodied carbon in the existing building; the option of retrofitting as opposed to demolition and would ensure that the project is fully consistent with the Council’s commitments to be carbon neutral by 2030.

Can the Council provide an assurance that any major decisions regarding the future of the King Alfred Centre will not be taken until a WLC Assessment has been completed and made publicly available?

24.6      Councillor Robins provided the following response:

I understand that Cllr Robinson has been in discussion with you on this topic and has provided you with responses to similar questions. 

Carbon reduction is an important part of the overall case for delivering the city’s new leisure centre. However, as set out in the cabinet paper, there are other equally important factors which the council is considering, and which will inform the approach we adopt. Those factors include maximising value for money, minimising the risk to practical delivery, and improving the health of the city’s residents through increased participation in active leisure. 

The cabinet paper also makes clear that the design and layout of the current building mean that a refurbishment could never bring it up to modern industry standards. Our structural engineers have investigated the building’s current condition and identified what work needs to be undertaken to address the most serious issues and keep the leisure centre open. Their assessment is that the recommended works would extend the life of the facility for around 10 years after which replacement would be required. That also means that a refurbishment could never be cost effective. This is set out in paragraphs 3.3 – 3.6.

Outline benchmarking work undertaken by architects Faulkner Brown has shown that a new facility will deliver lower whole life carbon emissions than a refurbished facility and much lower than the current facility. More detailed WLC assessment will be completed as we progress into the design stages of the project, when we will have more detailed designs on which to base those assessments.

(b)           Deputations

1)             King Alfred Leisure Facility

24.7      Cabinet received a deputation relating to proposals for the King Alfred leisure facility.

24.8      Councillor Robins provided the following response:

Thank you, Anne for coming along today to present your deputation.

The proposals before us today do not recommend a relocation to Benfield Valley.

I found your deputation submission and your presentation today very informative and congratulate you on all the good work yourself and other volunteers are undertaking in the community.