Campaigners shed tears of joy as a controversial plan to build hundreds of homes on a former gasworks site was turned down by councillors.

The developer St William spent three years on its plans for 495 homes, including 11 blocks of flats up to 12 storeys high, on the former gasworks site bounded in Marina Way.

The planning application included 2,791 square metres of commercial floor space at ground floor level and a “green link” between Marina Way and Roedean Road.

The fate of the £280 million scheme was decided at the end of a six-and-a-half-hour meeting of Brighton and Hove City Council’s Planning Committee at Hove Town Hall on Wednesday.

The meeting was told that more than 1,700 objections to the scheme had been sent to the council from neighbours to national heritage organisations.

But planning manager Jane Mostyn said that the decision-making process was “not a referendum”.

Officials had advised councillors to grant planning permission subject to conditions including a request that St William make “reasonable endeavours” to provide affordable housing.

The committee voted seven to three against the scheme because it would be too big and cramped, would harm the area’s historic heritage and contained too few family homes.

Questions about “affordable homes” dominated the meeting with councillors concerned about an “airy fairy” proposal to sell 40 per cent of the homes sold to Sovereign Housing Association.

This would improve the chance of vital funding from Homes England but, councillors were told, a legally binding agreement was not possible.

It was an issue raised by resident representatives Marie Sandsford, Stephen White and Beccy East for the campaign group AGHAST when they addressed the planning committee.

Mrs East said: “We urge you to be brave today and stand up to a developer with deep pockets who cares about is shareholders and not the needs of our city.”

Labour councillor Gill Williams, who represents Whitehawk and Marina ward, criticised the plans and voiced concerns about affordable housing.

As the council’s cabinet member for housing and new homes, she was acutely aware of the need for more housing but banged the table as she railed against the scheme.

To cheers from the public gallery, Councillor Williams said: “We cannot accept ‘reasonable endeavours’ for affordable housing.

“Tell this developer to go back to the drawing board, to try harder and do better. We should only accept safe and genuinely affordable homes in our city.”

St William’s land and development director Ashley Spearing said that the affordable housing contribution had to rely on “reasonable endeavours” to secure it to satisfy the coditions of a prospective grant from Homes England.

When concerns were raised about short-term holiday lets, Mr Spearing told councillors that anyone buying a 999-year lease would be barred from using their home as an “Airbnb”.

Conservative councillor Carol Theobald said that the area was scruffy and needed developing.

She said: “There’s some good things about the application, including the underground car parking. I do like the circus and the lovely green round building.

“But I do think the excessive height of the proposed scheme is outside the tall building zone and will be highly prominent, especially from the South Downs and the seafront.”

Labour councillor Maureen Winder said that it was an opportunity missed, adding: “It doesn’t relate to people’s needs in a human way and building a community, where it’s integrated with what’s going on around there. It feels exclusive and this will be too expensive for a lot of people.”

Labour councillor Liz Loughran, who chairs the planning committee, was concerned about light, over-development and the lack of family homes big enough to suit people working from home.

Councillor Loughran said: “Some of the blocks are too high, aggravating the density issues. There has been a failure to get the public on board during the consultation process. The process was not carried out to a satisfactory conclusion.”

Brighton and Hove Independent councillor Mark Earthey was torn and said that he was not happy with the science and expertise on decontamination, saying: “I don’t think it meets the housing needs of the city.

“We need more three-bedroom properties and I can’t see our residents being able to afford to live here.”

Labour councillor Jacob Allen said that he welcomed the idea of the round building retaining the view for people travelling down Wilson Avenue.

He said: “We are not rich in strategic, sustainable brownfield sites. Counties in the ‘green belt’ would be salivating over sites like this and seeing cranes going up as soon as possible.”

Green councillor Sue Shanks was pleased to see affordable housing that looked like it would happen when it looked like nothing.

She said: “I hope we get to a state where the council could build more social housing on sites like this.

“I don’t think I could oppose building on a brownfield site to be honest as this is where we are today and it really needs developing. I am reassured about contamination.”

Labour councillors Jacob Allen and Alison Thompson and Green councillor Sue Shanks voted for the scheme.

Brighton and Hove Independent councillor Mark Earthey, Conservative councillor Carol Theobald and Labour councillors Liz Loughran, Ty Galvin, Birgit Miller, Maureen Winder and Paul Nann voted against.