Named local schemes and plans, with the responsible body and the latest stage established by the source checked. A proposal, funding announcement and completed project are different things.
King Alfred site, Hove seafront
King Alfred Leisure Centre replacement
A replacement for the ageing seafront leisure centre would provide accessible pools, fitness and family facilities. The design has been submitted for public scrutiny.
Final designs published for the planning process · evidence dated 2026-03-09
Responsible body: Brighton and Hove City Council
Latest evidence: The council published final proposals and invited planning comments. This is evidence of the proposed design, not proof of planning approval, a funded construction contract or an opening date.
Next thing to establish: What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- Unmapped: a verified current ward boundary or council ward statement is still needed.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
Final proposals for King Alfred Leisure Centre revealed →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Plan homes and care around an older population →
Bring support closer to people in poor health →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →Madeira Terrace and Madeira Drive, Brighton
Madeira Terrace restoration
Restoring the terrace and adding an accessible lift should make this stretch of seafront easier to reach while preserving its historic ironwork.
Restoration work in progress at the dated update · evidence dated 2026-02-25
Responsible body: Brighton and Hove City Council
Latest evidence: The council reports the lift structure progressing and repaired ironwork returning to site. It explains that extra testing was needed before original structural iron could be reused.
Next thing to establish: What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- Unmapped: a verified current ward boundary or council ward statement is still needed.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
Accessible lift takes shape as Madeira Terrace restoration progresses →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Make Madeira Terrace restoration deliver usable access →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →St James’s House; Nettleton Court and Dudeney Lodge; five Whitehawk blocks
Rehousing and replacing eight ageing tower blocks
Eight council blocks are to be replaced, with a rehousing policy agreed. Residents need clear support through moves; a decision to redevelop is not a completed replacement home.
Redevelopment and rehousing policy approved in March; a further masterplan decision is scheduled for November 2026 · evidence dated 2026-03-19
Responsible body: Brighton & Hove City Council
Latest evidence: Cabinet approved demolition and replacement of eight named blocks and the rehousing policy. Its decision names Hollingdean & Fiveways, Kemptown and Whitehawk & Marina as affected wards. A notice published 14 October lists the next masterplan and land-assembly decision for 12 November; it is not an approval.
Next thing to establish: What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- Unmapped: the named sites or programme area have not been matched to the ward boundaries used by these statistics. No ward-wide effect is inferred.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
Cabinet decisions, 19 March 2026, item 155, pages 5–6 →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Help households move safely before rebuilding the blocks →
Make room for homes people can afford →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →What this local evidence covers
23 of 23 wards
Have at least one valid census comparison with the whole council. Missing measures stay visible.
Read the neighbourhood evidence →3 reviewed plans and projects
3 have a source-dated stage; 0 have some funding evidence; 0 have some cost evidence. These counts do not prove that funding or costs are complete.
Check each project →0 verified ward links
Project locations cannot be treated as a map of who benefits. Each record explains any verified ward association.
Read the sources and limits →What is still missing
The reviewed local schemes are a selected evidence collection, not a complete council capital programme.
Current service capacity, incomes, waiting lists, school demand and project outcomes need additional verified local evidence before firm claims can be made.
The March 2026 King Alfred planning outcome has not been confirmed in the reviewed evidence. The Madeira Terrace update does not confirm final reopening. These dated council updates were available through indexed extracts; direct page retrieval failed.
Project locations have not yet been checked against current ward boundaries. No ward impact is inferred from a city-centre address.
The November 2026 masterplan decision is pending. Named affected wards in the March decision have not been joined to this package’s statistical boundaries; no completion or rehousing totals are inferred.
