Plans to create eight studio flats on a derelict site in the centre of Falmouth are being opposed by local councillors although they feel the principle of developing the site is acceptable.

Gill West is behind the new scheme for the land at the rear of St George's Arcade behind Church Street which replaces a previous application which sought permission for one building to be used as a house in multiple occupation (HMO) for up to ten unrelated residents.

The current application proposes a building with three storeys to the front of the site and two to the rear. It would house eight studio flats and there would be parking for two vehicles.

Architectural assistant, Niamh Roseway-Jones, says: "Whilst the accommodation has been provided over three storeys the ridge height has been limited to 23.40m in keeping with the surrounding buildings. The second floor accommodation has been provided within the roof space, and the installation of roof lights ensures privacy is retained for the surrounding residential properties.

"The building will enhance the conservation area by respecting its surroundings with its sympathetic use of traditional materials, scale and proportions; and will also ‘lift’ the area by replacing a derelict building which only serves to depress its surroundings."

The proposals are being opposed by several local residents, most of whom claim that despite the application being for studio flats, the development will still be a student HMO. This was dismissed by town councillors, however, who said as the flats would be self-contained and not shared accommodation, it could not be classed as a HMO.

Councillor John Spargo said: "I think Falmouth needs this kind of accommodation but this is a bit too big. The principle of having something there is acceptable, but this is over-bearing."

Councillor Candy Atherton added: "It's very big and right in the heart of a conservation area. It will also bring a lot more students into an area that already has a very high concentration of them."

The town council's planning committee is asking Cornwall Council to refuse the application because the development would be too big, overbearing and not in keeping with the conservation area. Members do however agree that the principle of development on the site is acceptable.