Two semi-detached homes at 96 Victoria Avenue, Hastings

What was proposed

The application sought demolition of a residential garage and construction of two three-bedroom semi-detached homes with parking and landscaping.

“AGENDA ITEM NO:5 (a) Report to: PLANNING COMMITTEE Date of Meeting: March 2026 Report from: Planning Services Manager Application address:96 Victoria Avenue, Hastings, TN35 5BT Proposal:Demolition of existing residential garage to provide two new 3-bed semi-detached dwellings, with associated parking and landscaping.”

“The site is comprised of land adjacent to an existing residential property at No. Victoria Avenue and contains a brick-built garage with a garden area to the rear. There is an existing access to the garage along Victoria Avenue. The site is located between two, two storey residential brick clad properties, along a residential street. Victoria Avenue contains a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced dwellings, with predominantly kerbside parking.”

Officer report

Objections from residents

Five objections raised concerns about parking, privacy, overbearing effects, daylight, outlook, construction disruption and the proposed fence height.

“The comments within these letters include, ·Lack of parking ·Impact on existing parking ·Disruption during construction ·Loss of privacy ·Overbearing ·Loss of daylight/sunlight ·Loss of outlook ·properties to be rented or sold ·Height of proposed fence 5.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application, a neighbour’s objection was read out, and the ward councillor presented residents’ concerns.

What members debated

Members debated the neighbouring bedroom window, daylight, the site’s density and parking, with differing views on whether the proposal caused unacceptable harm.

“[name withheld] advised that the plans indicated that a door within the extension had replaced an existing opening, which would have been the original rear window. He confirmed that this original rear window had been the primary light source for the bedroom and that the side window had originally served as a secondary light source. He acknowledged that the resulting condition was not ideal but stated that the applicant had amended the current proposal to reduce the impact.”

“Cllr Horn responded that the length of the proposed building continued to raise issues and questioned whether the extended footprint was necessary. Reference was made to the inclusion of ensuite bathrooms within a three-bedroom layout, noting that such features were atypical.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillors voted six in favour and two against granting full planning permission.

“RESOLVED by 6 votes for and 2 votes against…”

“To Grant Full Planning Permission subject to the following conditions:”

Minutes