Three detached homes at 29, 31a & 31b Seabourne Road, Bexhill-on-Sea

What was proposed

The retrospective application sought permission for three detached family homes, including gardens, parking and access, with changes from the approved drawings.

“Report to - Planning Committee Date - 30 July 2026 Report of the - Head of Planning Subject - RR/2026/0759/FULL Address - 29, 31a and 31b Seabourne Road, BEXHILL Proposal - Retrospective application for demolition of existing dwelling and construction of 3 No. detached family dwellings including gardens, parking and access to Seabourne Road. View application/correspondence…”

“This application follows the granting of planning permission for three detached dwellings in June 2024 under Application Ref: RR/2024/379/P. The dwellings have not been constructed in accordance with the approved drawings and consequently this is a retrospective application made under Section 73A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). The Applicant seeks…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site contains three completed homes on a sloping residential site near Bishops Walk, with neighbouring bungalows and a badger sett behind the gardens.

“The application relates to a development of three detached dwellings located on the northern side of Seabourne Road, close to the junction with Bishops Walk. The site lies within a large residential area within the development boundary for Bexhill. There is a badger sett on the site behind the gardens of the dwellings.”

“The site slopes down from south to north and previously contained a detached bungalow and single garage. There are three adjoining properties: No. 4 Bishops Walk, which is a detached bungalow at a lower ground level to the north, No. 33 Seabourne Road, which is a detached bungalow to the east, and No. 2 Bishops Walk, which is a detached bungalow to the west.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions and changes

Several permissions had established three homes on the site, but the completed development differed in height, decking, spacing, materials, landscaping and roof panels.

“Details for planning permission RR/2024/379/P granted in June 2024 (determined by the Planning Committee): - Height of dwellings at front (facing Seabourne Road) – up to 6.5m - Height of dwellings at rear (facing No. 4 Bishops Walk) – up to 7.2m - Width of dwellings – 7m - Depth of dwellings – 16.2m - Depth of rear raised decking – 2.3m - External materials palette – brick, horizontal cladding and slate roof tiles - Number of bedrooms – four per dwelling…”

“A development of three detached dwellings has now been completed but not in accordance with the drawings approved under Condition 2 of planning permission RR/2024/379/P. The main change relates to the height of the dwellings which the Applicant has previously advised came about because of not identifying the correct gradient of the site on the drawings at application stage – the site is steeper sloping.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The town council made no comment, while a councillor objected over retrospective development, amenity, drainage, biodiversity, scale, design and the street scene.

“One OBJECTION from Councillor Delany raising the following concerns (summarised): • Retrospective regularisation of non-compliant development. • Residential amenity – height, overlooking and outlook. • Surface water drainage and flood risk. • Biodiversity. • Scale, design and street scene.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Four committee members visited the site, and the applicant and a local ward member spoke at the meeting; the ward member opposed the scheme.

What members debated

Members criticised the retrospective application, questioned spacing, roof materials, overlooking, badgers, planting and precedent, while accepting that three homes had already been approved in principle.

“During the discussion, Members expressed disappointment that retrospective permission was being sought and raised questions regarding the number of amendments for consideration, and the number of times applications for the site had been considered by the Planning Committee in recent years. Members accepted that the principle of planning permission for three detached dwellings had already been approved.”

“Concern was expressed regarding overlooking of No. 33’s garden from No. 31b, and it was suggested that additional planting be required by condition to mitigate the impact. Members also raised the question of precedent, asking whether granting retrospective permission would indicate to developers that retrospective applications were acceptable. It was felt that this practice should be discouraged, not encouraged.”

Minutes

The vote

A motion to grant permission with amended conditions and additional boundary planting was carried by five votes to two.

“Councillor J. Barnes moved that the application be GRANTED (Full Planning Permission) in accordance with the officer’s recommendation, as detailed in the report, including the amendments to Conditions 2 and 4, and subject to an additional condition requiring boundary planting between No. 31b and No. 33 to mitigate overlooking, and a tweak to Condition 3 to require strict adherence to the LEMP.”

Minutes

What was decided

The committee granted full planning permission, retaining conditions for privacy, ecology, drainage, parking, permitted development, lighting and privacy screens.

“Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification), no enlargement of any part of a dwelling hereby permitted shall be carried out without a planning permission granted by the Local Planning Authority.”

“No external lighting shall be installed on the dwellings hereby permitted (other than the external lighting authorised by this planning permission), until full details of the proposed external lighting has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Installation of the lighting shall then be carried out and thereafter retained in accordance with the approved details.”

Minutes

Extra planting condition

An additional condition required screening planting along the eastern boundary beside No. 33 to reduce overlooking and protect residential amenity.

“Within three months of the date of this decision, details of a soft landscaping scheme to provide ‘screening planting’ to the eastern boundary of the rear of the site – the boundary between the site and No. 33 Seabourne Road – shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.”

Minutes