43 homes at Sandfield Farm, 108 Northwall Road, Deal

“Planning permission is sought for demolition of the existing buildings and structures on site and the erection of 43 dwellings, parking (with a shared access off of Northwall Road) and landscaping.”

“In terms of units, the application consists of the erection of 5 apartments and 38 houses consisting of a mixture of terrace, semi-detached and detached dwellings in a range of sizes (housing mix set out below). The units would largely be two storeys in height but to the south the houses and apartments extend up to three storeys to include parking at ground floor level. The materials would incorporate brick, cladding, glazing and tiles.”

“The application site relates to a plot of land approximately 1.6ha in area located towards the western end of Northwall Road. The application site is located outside of the settlement confines of Deal, within an archaeological notification area, the Thanet Coast and Sandwich SPA Zone of influence, flood zones 2 & 3 and the Strategic highway tariff zone.”

“The application site lies outside but adjoins the settlement confines to the southern boundary. Deal is identified as a Tier 1 settlement under Policy SP4 of the Local Plan, which supports residential development that is commensurate with the scale of the existing settlement and located within or adjoining its boundaries.”

“The proposed development would result in 43 dwellings on a predominately brownfield site in a sustainable location. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) places a strong emphasis on locating housing development within sustainable locations. On this basis, principle of development in this location is considered acceptable subject to meeting the criteria of policy SP4, which is discussed in more detail below.”

“The Principal Planner advised that the site was in flood zones 2 and 3 which meant there was a high probability of flooding. The applicant had carried out a sequential test in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and seven comparator sites had been identified which were either at the same risk of flooding or had an additional medium or high risk of surface water flooding and, as such, had been discounted.”

“Councillor D R Friend commented that he knew the site well and, in his view, the proposed development was the perfect use of a brownfield site. In response to comments made by Councillor Cronk, the Principal Planner informed Members that the level crossing could not be accessed by vehicles.”

“Councillor Nee questioned whether the alarm system was absolutely necessary as, in his view, the noise would be a nuisance for existing properties and was unlikely to deter a determined trespasser. The Principal Planner stressed that Network Rail had specifically requested an alarm in order to make the development acceptable. However, officers could seek more details as part of the Section 106 agreement.”

“RESOLVED: (a) That, subject to a Section 106 agreement to secure Heads of Terms and further negotiations with Network Rail regarding the need for and impact of the level crossing audible alarm system, Application No DOV24/00858 be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:”