Outline detached dwelling at 86A Chestfield Road, Chestfield
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Canterbury Planning Committee on 21 Jul 2026.
What was proposed
An outline application proposed a detached dwelling and garage, including access, layout and scale.
“PROPOSAL: Outline application for detached dwelling and garage including access, layout and scale…”
“APPLICATION TYPE: Outline planning application…”
Officer report
The site and planning history
The site is land and an access road behind a listed building, where permission had already been granted for five dwellings.
“The application site is a plot of land and an associated access road to the east of the wider 86A Chestfield Road site. Bounded by the Chestfield Conservation Area to the north and east, and behind the Grade II Listed 88 Chestfield Road, this application proposes an additional dwelling on an area of land previously identified as a mixed grass/shrub tree planting area under application CA/25/00181 relating to five detached two-storey dwellings with associated car barns.”
“CA/25/00181 - full planning permissio granted by the Planning Committee for ‘5 detached two-storey dwellings with associated car barns following demolition of existing dwelling’.”
Officer report
Objections received
Six representations and the parish council objected over density, biodiversity, trees, overlooking, traffic, parking, drainage, heritage, access and sewerage.
“Overdevelopment • Loss of biodiversity • Damage to trees • Overlooking • Noise and pollution • Concerns regarding parking, safe access, turning head and risks to pedestrians • More refuse bins, sewage, water use and disposal • Increased flooding risk • Scale and layout of dwelling will have a negative impact on the conservation area and adjacent heritage asset • Removal of landscaping will harm visual amenity and character of locality • Proposals do not commit to BNG and…”
“Out of keeping with other housing on the site • Extra traffic • Additional refuse bins • Clarification regarding loss of visitor parking spaces and EV charging points • Back garden infill not in keeping with area • Overdevelopment/tight density of housing • Concerns regarding access • Concerns regarding foul sewerage…”
Officer report
The committee vote
The first vote failed, but after members could not identify sufficient reasons to refuse, defer or visit the site, a second vote approved the proposal.
“- 4 - For the proposal (2): Councillors Edwards and Prentice Against the proposal (3): Councillors D Smith, I Stockley and Thomas Abstained from voting (3): Councillors Buckman, Dixey and Mckenzie…”
“Members were unable to identify sufficient reasons to refuse or defer the application or to justify undertaking a site visit, as such the original recommendation, to Grant, subject to legal agreement and safeguarding conditions, was again proposed and seconded.”
Minutes
Sources
- Canterbury Planning Committee minutes, 21 July 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Canterbury's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Canterbury Planning Committee
- Council
- Canterbury
- Date
- Tuesday 21 July 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Canterbury committee decisions →
This committee's year
24 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.