Appeal 3303984
Public case and site metadata stored from the official casework database, including fields that were empty in the source release.
A clearer next step
See how Inspectors approached issues like yours
Bring your planning decision into a private workspace. We separate the disputed points, then match them with source-located Inspector reasoning from similar appeals.
- See which issues the decision appears to turn on
- Compare the facts and open the full appeal records
One private comparison
How the refusal review worksOne-off service · No subscription
Similar appeals are evidence to inspect, not a prediction of your outcome.
Official decision document
The decision, section by section
5 sections
Read the development description and the Inspector’s text from the official decision PDF in source order. Source headings are retained where available. Personal and contact details are removed by an automated privacy filter; this is source material, not Rules for You analysis.
Section 01
Development description
No verified development description has been extracted from an official decision PDF yet.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
[name]
The main issue is the effect of the development on the character of the dwelling and the surrounding area, including the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site comprises a detached bungalow, with a driveway and off-street parking to the front. It is located in a short row of other dwellings with no prevailing architectural style. The wider area consists of open countryside.
The proposed double garage would be sited forward of the bungalow and would be clearly evident from the public domain. To my mind, the scheme would erode the spacious character of the locale and the wider AONB, primarily due to its excessive height and proximity to the road, and would have a dominant effect over the host dwelling that lies on marginally lower ground.
I note the appellant's intention to partially sink the garage into the land. However, the effect of this would be offset as, due to its substantial height and proximity to the road, the element would remain visible particularly when approached from the east along [site address] . I am also aware that the development could be screened with hedging, still any such planting would need to be of a height, extent and density that of itself would look unusual or out of place along a domestic frontage within a pleasant rural locale.
I appreciate that there are other instances of detached garages in the vicinity, nevertheless those identified by the appellant do not lie immediately in front of the main house. In any event, development at other sites would be neutral considerations in any balance against planning harm, and I am mindful that each case must be assessed on its own merits. _________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________
I conclude that the scheme causes harm to the character and appearance of the dwelling and the surrounding area, including the AONB. It conflicts with Policy DHG9 of the Rother District Council Development and Site Allocations Local Plan (2019) and Policies OSS4 and EN3 of the Rother Local Plan Core Strategy (2014), which seek to secure new development of acceptable scale and appearance that conserves the character of the landscape.
Section 05
Conclusion
Based on the preceding and all arguments raised, the appeal is dismissed.
Planning inspector and document dates
The official casework attribution is grouped under a one-way keyed hash and shown only by its local identifier. Decision-letter dates and page references are extracted by fixed first-page rules and checked against that authoritative record.
Appeal Decision
- Extracted inspector · page 1
- Inspector attribution ID 212No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 7 November 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 25 October 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3303984
- Application reference
- RR/2022/3/P
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Rother District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000064
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Householder developments
- Appeal type reason
- 1. Refused planning permission
- Appeal reason
- Refusal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- Not recorded
- Floor space
- 42 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Not recorded
- Historic building grant made
- Not recorded
- Relates to a conservation area
- Not recorded
- Flooding is an issue
- Not recorded
- Site within an AONB
- Not recorded
- Site within an SSSI
- Not recorded
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 27 July 2022
- Valid date
- 27 July 2022
- Start date
- 12 September 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 May 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 7 November 2022
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- No
- Bespoke
- No
- Date recovered
- Not recorded
- Date not recovered or derecovered
- Not recorded
- Call-in date
- Not recorded
- Costs applied for
- Not recorded
- Enforcement grounds count
- Not recorded
- Enforcement grounds
- Not recorded
Source and catalogue history
When this record appeared in the rolling official release and when the catalogue stored it.
- Source
- Planning Inspectorate casework database
- Source data system
- Horizon
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 23163
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:26
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21