Plans to knock down two houses and replace them with a nine-storey block of flats have been rejected over fears the development would create “unacceptable” living conditions.

Brighton and Hove City Council planning officers criticised the plans, which would have seen the semi-detached houses at 145 - 151 Kingsway, Hove, demolished to make way for 42 apartments.

During the consultation 74 comments were received objecting to the proposed development.

Concerns included that the building would be taller than neighbouring properties and would overlook them and that the development was of a poor design and was not in keeping with the Pembroke and Princes Conservation Area.

Read more: CGI of flats which could replace 1930s Hove homes facing demolition

The Hove Civic Society and the Regency Society jointly objected, as did the Brighton Society and the Conservation Advisory Group.

Ten letters were received in support of the development, including three from residents of one of the application properties. Reasons given included that it would provide much-needed housing, rejuvenate the area, and would be an energy-efficient building.

Applications for the demolition of the existing semi-detached houses have previously been refused six times between 2008 and 2010.

Plans would have seen two houses demolishedPlans would have seen two houses demolished (Image: Chapman Lily Planning Ltd)

Council officers criticised the “excessive size” of the building and judged it to be out-of-place in the “prominent and sensitive location”.

They said the project would produce a cramped form of development and would overdevelop the site.

They said the scale of the proposed development would result in a significant loss of daylight to neighbouring properties and that some residents at Viceroy Lodge would suffer loss of privacy.

Officers also raised concerns about the living conditions of 28 of the flats which would only have a single aspect.

They said the south-facing flats would be prone to overheating and those facing north (and particularly those with or below balconies) would suffer from insufficient natural light.

They added that the plans submitted offered a low provision of planted areas with an undue proportion of the outside spaces being hard surfaces.

Read next: Councillor fears King Alfred could cost millions more than projected

Councillor Jacob Allen, deputy chairman of the planning committee, said: “We are committed to delivering accessible, affordable and high-quality homes for all in the city.

“The size and scale of this application, however, has caused a lot of concern for neighbouring residents and community groups, and would not have delivered new homes of the quality set out in the planning policies we judge applications against.

“The issues with this scheme identified in the officer’s decision significantly outweigh the benefits of the additional homes in this case.”