Single storey and part two storey rear extension to form kitchen on ground floor and balcony to existing bedroom on first floor. Glazed flat roof panel between proposed extension and existing utility room
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Character & Appearance
Extensions
Policy Weight
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 27 April 2026
by P Terceiro BSc MSc MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 5 May 2026
Appeal Ref: 6005964
Wattle Hill Oast, Beacon Lane, Cripps Corner, East Sussex TN32 5QP
• The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)
against a refusal to grant planning permission.
• The appeal is made by Mr and Mrs R Harley against the decision of Rother District Council.
• The application Ref is RR/2025/1815/HOU.
• The development proposed is a single storey and part two storey rear extension to form kitchen on
ground floor and balcony to existing bedroom on first floor. Glazed flat roof panel between proposed
extension and existing utility room.
Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Preliminary Matters
2. The description of development above is taken from the planning application form.
However, I have removed any wording which does not relate to acts of
development.
Main Issue
3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of
the host building and area, having regard to the location of the site within the High
Weald National Landscape (HWNL).
Reasons
4. Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 requires that regard be
had to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of National
Landscapes. I am also conscious of my duty under Section 245 of the Levelling-up
and Regeneration Act 2023 to seek to further the purpose of conserving and
enhancing the natural beauty of the area.
5. Wattle Hill Oast is a well-presented converted oast house. Despite previous
extensions and alterations, the agricultural design and form of the building remain
perceptible, which along with features such as the brickwork and single roundel,
contribute to its aesthetic quality. As such, regardless of the construction of more
recent buildings within the site, the former agricultural function of the building
remains legible in its character and appearance.
6. The appeal is set within the HWNL, and its special qualities include historic
farmsteads, routeways and field boundaries set in a mosaic of fields interspersed
by woodlands and hedges. The HWNL includes locally distinctive historic buildings
such as oast houses. The appeal building, due to largely retaining its appearance
Appeal Decision 6005964
2
and form as a former agricultural building that utilises traditional materials,
positively contributes to the landscape and scenic beauty of the HWNL.
7. The proposed rear extension would include a hipped roof as well as a section of
flat roof which would be utilised as a balcony. A set of first-floor double doors
would be inserted to provide access into the balcony. The design of the rear
extension is therefore of distinctly domestic appearance, which would be at odds
with the largely retained agricultural character and appearance of the host building.
This would be exacerbated by the proposed glazed link structure which would
connect to the existing single storey rear projection.
8. The extension’s hipped roof would protrude through the eaves because of its
excessive height, therefore failing to relate well with the existing single storey
projection which is not so tall. In addition, taken together with the existing single
storey rear projection, the scale of the proposal would dominate the rear elevation
of its host and would detrimentally alter its form. As such, the proposal would
appear as an incongruous addition to its host that would erode its legibility as an
oast and harm its character and appearance. The use of appropriate materials
would not overcome this harm.
9. The quality of the HWNL includes the locally distinctive oast houses. As the design
of the proposal would dilute the agrarian appearance of the building, the HWNL
would be harmed in this case.
10. Thus, the proposal would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance
of the host building and area, including HWNL, contrary to Policies OSS4, RA3,
RA4, EN1 and EN3 of the Rother Local Plan Core Strategy 2014, and Policies
DHG9, DEN1 and DEN2 of the Development and Site Allocations Local Plan 2019.
Amongst other things, these policies seek to ensure the retention of the legibility of
historic farm buildings, conserve and enhance the landscape and scenic beauty of
the HWNL, and support extensions that respect and respond positively to the
scale, details, overall design, and character and appearance of their host, take
account of the original form and function of their host and the cumulative impact of
extensions.
Other Matter
11. Ewhurst Parish Council supports the proposal. However, this does not alter my
findings above regarding the identified harm.
Conclusion
12. The proposal conflicts with the development plan and the material considerations
do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it.
For the reasons given above the appeal is dismissed.
P Terceiro
INSPECTOR
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.