Elm Cottage, Further Ford End, Clavering (curtilage listed, LBC)

6006330·Uttlesford·23 Sept 2026dismissed·UTT/25/2657/LB

Tier label used

—

The tier sentence ¶19

“increase the number of people using local services”

Summary

A reduced resubmission of rear extensions to a curtilage-listed farmstead cottage still failed. The extensions eroded the plan form that explains its place in the courtyard group, and the heritage assessment could not say what fabric would be lost (DL 14-17). Benefits were largely private (DL 22).

Why this is cited

This decision was picked up by the search on the words above, which refer to services, not to a settlement tier. generic.

Sources

Decision on the Planning Inspectorate appeals service · full decision note · letter pins-corpus/6006330.txt

One entry in a register of 203 decisions that matched the search for a settlement-tier label, each read at every matching passage and classified by how the label influenced the decision. The quotation was checked against the source named above. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Text, data and images on this page are released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence: share and adapt them freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers. Source and data: github.com/planningdistilled/research.