®Planning appeal decision
36 Tile Kiln Hill, Blean, Canterbury, CT2 9EE
Planning appeal 3288261 at 36 Tile Kiln Hill, Blean, Canterbury, CT2 9EE (Canterbury City Council) was dismissed on 22 August 2022 by Inspector Glassar S, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the wider area, with particular regard to the effect on the setting of a designated heritage asset.
‘3 No. 4 Bedroom detached dwellings to the rear of 36 Tile Kiln Hill, Blean, Kent CT2 9EE.’
- Authority
- Canterbury City Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Glassar S
- Postcode
- CT2 9EE
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the wider area, with particular regard to the effect on the setting of a designated heritage asset
- nutrient neutrality with particular regard to the Stodmarsh Nature Reserve Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Ramsar site
What decided it
The harm to the setting of the Blean Conservation Area, characterised as less-than-substantial but nonetheless requiring great weight in the planning balance, was not outweighed by the limited public benefits of three additional dwellings.
the limited public benefits of housing delivery and windfall site provision did not outweigh the less-than-substantial harm to the setting of the designated heritage asset, which the Framework identifies as an irreplaceable resource deserving great weight in its conservation
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy SP1Policy SP4Policy DBE3Policy HE1Policy HE6Policy HE8
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 130Paragraph 199Paragraph 200Paragraph 202
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Canterbury City Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022
- Dismissed28 September 20266008107Dane Cottage, Hoggs Lane, Petham, CT4 5PJ
- Dismissed28 September 20266008105Dane Cottage, Hogg Lane, Petham, CT4 5PJ
- Allowed24 September 2026601061482 Island Wall, Whitstable, CT5 1EL
- Allowed18 September 20266009081Ground Floor, 2 Douglas Road, Herne Bay, CT6 6AE
- Dismissed11 August 2026600962869 Joy Lane, Whitstable, CT5 4DD
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.