A · The shorthand applied wrongly: tier treated as the answer, no route sentence
smaller village
“Braceborough is identified as a ‘smaller village’ within the LP Policy SP2 settlement hierarchy”
There is none. The decision says nothing about the walk, the footway, lighting or the bus service.
A garden bungalow at the entrance to Braceborough village and conservation area was dismissed. It was cramped, sat forward of the building line, and caused "less than substantial harm … at the lowest end". The letter is dated 17 Aug 2026 but is written entirely under the 2024 Framework: ¶11(d) with a 4.07-year supply, ¶212 "great weight", ¶215, and the ¶139 "not well designed should be refused" rule.
Tier treated as making the site "a sustainable location where small infill is supported in principle" with no route analysis; dismissed on other grounds. In the register this counts as a case where the tier was treated as the answer on location and the decision contains no route sentence, the shorthand this piece is about.
Decision on the Planning Inspectorate appeals service · full decision note · letter pins-corpus/6007771.txt