FEARS that university expansion would add further strain on Brighton and Hove’s housing are “misconceived”, lawyers have told a planning inquiry.

University of Sussex representatives say that the proposed expansion of their Falmer campus to 18,000 students within three years would in fact help Brighton and Hove City Council to meet its own housing needs.

But the council’s legal team labelled the scheme an “inappropriate and insensitive over-development”.

The arguments were heard at the first day of a planning inquiry into proposals for 4,022 student rooms and 60,000 square metres of academic facilities which were denied planning permission last summer.

James Strachan QC, representing the University of Sussex, described the planning committee’s rejection as “a bitter disappointment and a travesty” of process after it was endorsed by the council’s planning, heritage and arboriculture officers.

He described the committee’s reasons for rejection as driven by a desire to “restrict growth of the university”.

Concerns about increases in students seeking accommodation within the private rented sector were “misconceived” and without planning policies to support it.

He added: “The masterplan scheme would in fact only serve to increase student accommodation on the campus and to reduce the proportions of students that might otherwise look for accommodation in Brighton itself.”

He argued the plans would work towards ridding building “errors of the past” and fulfilling original architect Sir Basil Spence’s vision for the campus, which envisioned further expansion.

Barrister Robert Williams, representing Brighton and Hove City Council, said that the authority was not requesting the campus “remain in aspic” but labelled the proposal an “inappropriate and insensitive over-development”.

He said the university was unable to provide sufficient off-site campus accommodation for its growth ambitions without adversely impacting on the council’s housing stock.

The council estimates the “shortfall” of bed spaces could be as high as 800 but suggested the university could come back with an amended application once additional off-campus accommodation had been secured.

Mr Williams said the plans would transform the campus into a more “urban environment” with an “adverse” impact on the campus’s eight listed buildings.

The plans were also rejected on arboreal grounds with up to 529 trees to be felled.

The university argue many of those trees have a life expectancy of less than 20 years and represent a small proportion of 40,000 trees on the campus and surrounding woodland

Mr Williams said: “Given that many of the trees to be felled are of semi mature or mature status, they simply cannot be replaced on a like-for-like basis.”