Neighbours have banded together to fight plans for an eight-storey block of flats on Hove seafront.
So far Brighton and Hove City Council has received 72 letters of objection to the proposals to demolish three homes at 239-243 Kingsway to build the block of 37 flats.
One of them, Oli Urpi, is concerned about loss of privacy as the proposed flats will overlook his family home in Braemore Road.
He said: “What they have put in is a step down towards us, so there are five stories finishing six metres from our house.
“Five stories with balconies on the back looking into our garden, where they can see us sitting in the conservatory eating dinner.
“Our garden would not be private as we would be overlooked by people.”
He believes that, if the block is built, his family would lose 40 per cent of the sunlight in their garden.
Mr Urpi pointed out that even though there are eight-storey blocks on the opposite corner and between Berriedale and Welbeck Avenues, he believes that the proposed building is taller.
Limited parking is among the many issues raised by neighbours.
In her letter, Braemore Road resident Philippa Bull said: “For a proposed building of 37 units on the site, there is very minimal car parking provision, especially insufficient visitor parking which will lead to pressure on on-street parking on the surrounding roads.
“The proposed access, removes the amount of existing on-street parking bays and is directly opposite another car park entrance.
“This will lead to a significant concentration of car movement at the junction and a danger to pedestrians and cyclists.”
A total of 26 parking spaces, including two disabled bays, and 54 cycle spaces are included in the development.
The developer Agenda Homes said that, based on local car ownership and use, it expected future residents to use 24 spaces.
Hove’s Labour MP Peter Kyle and Wish ward Conservative councillors Robert Nemeth and Gary Peltzer Dunn have also objected to the project.
Councillor Nemeth said: “Councillor Garry Peltzer Dunn and I have worked hard with residents to liaise with the developer and assisted in the creation of the Braemore and Berriedale Residents’ Association to get the best possible deal for our area.
“To his credit, the developer was very approachable and turned up to all meetings that we called for. However, it was not possible to square our positions.
“We are currently against the scheme but are still holding out hope that several elements will be improved including, in particular, the massing of the rear elements.
“If changes are made to the satisfaction of those living nearby, we will be delighted.”
Ahead of the planning process the developer held public consultation events resulting in several changes of design.
In its supporting statement Agenda Homes’ agent Indigo said: “The development proposals will not result in any unreasonable loss to the privacy of neighbouring properties.
“The units in the scheme are designed to prevent overlooking and protect the privacy of occupiers of properties in Braemore Road and Kingsway without unduly restricting the quality of the proposed accommodation.”
Anyone wishing to comment or view the application can search for BH2018/00937 in the planning section of the council’s website.
At a very early stage the developers met with representatives of saveHOVE, the Regency Society, the Brighton Society, Hove Seafront RA (who organised the meeting), as well as Garry and Robert (Wish cllrs). They were receptive of thinking,comments and ideas and there was a further showing of plans before this final one.
The sad truth is that the Kingsway was designated a Tall Building Corridor in the 2003 Tall Building Study which was adopted as the Tall Building policy document used by BHCC. Anything over 6 storeys is tall.
Our meeting was held in one of the villas – very spacious villas, set far back from the noisy Kingsway with sloping garden in the front. I thought losing these two family houses would be sad but BHCC is under Govt pressure to provide NUMBERS of dwellings and Hove is seen as empty compared to Brighton. Hove is under siege.