Two-bay cartlodge-style garage and workshop/garden store

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 17 September 2026 by John Felgate BA (Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 24th September 2026 Appeal Ref: 6009544 Bulls Green Cottage, Clodmore Hill, Arkesden, Essex CB11 4HQ • 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 & Mrs Edwin and Sophie Bee against the decision of Uttlesford District Council. • The application Ref is UTT/26/0201/HHF. • The development proposed is a two-bay cartlodge-style garage and workshop/garden store. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a two-bay cartlodge- style garage and workshop/garden store, at Bulls Green Cottage, Arkesden, Essex CB11 4HQ, in accordance with the application Ref UTT/26/0201/HHF, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: G100/102/-Rev 2; and G100/101-Rev2. Preliminary matters 2. Amended plans were submitted by the appellants on 25 March 2026, following the receipt of comments from the Council’s conservation officer. These new plans are acknowledged in the Council’s refusal notice. I have made my decision on this basis. Reasons for decision 3. Bulls Green Cottage is a late 18th or early 19th century timber-framed cottage, with plastered walls and a thatched roof. The property is set in a large plot, in wooded countryside, and accessed via a gravelled ‘byway open to all traffic’. The building is listed, Grade II, and has been recently extended to the rear, with the benefit of the necessary approvals. In the absence of any other evidence, its significance as a heritage asset seems to me to lie in its evidential value as an example of local building styles and construction techniques, typical of a modest rural dwelling of its time, such as might have been associated with small-scale farming, horticultural or forestry activities. 4. The development now proposed would comprise a 2-car garage, of standard size, with a smaller workshop and garden store attached. The new building would.be constructed mainly of black weatherboarding on a timber frame, with a brick plinth. The hipped roof would be in two sections, with a lowered apex over the store, and natural slate covering throughout. Appeal Decision 6009544 2 5. In the Uttlesford Local Plan (the ULP), adopted in March 2026, Core Policy 61 seeks to conserve heritage assets and their settings in a manner appropriate to their historic character and significance. Core Policy 62 requires that proposals within the curtilage of a listed building should respect the building’s historic context and setting, including through design, siting and materials. In the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), revised in August 2026, Policy HE4-1 seeks to avoid or minimise harm to heritage assets and their settings; and Policy HE5-3 makes clear that it is the effect on their significance, rather than the scale of the development, that should be the prime consideration. 6. In the present case, the new garage and store would be sited within the listed building’s present curtilage, and would be forward of the house, close to the byway. In this position, there is no doubt that the development would be within the heritage asset’s setting. 7. But nevertheless, the new building would be modest in size, simple in form, and suitably rustic in character and materials. In all these respects, the design seems to me entirely sympathetic to the surroundings, and unobjectionable in terms of appearance. In addition, the garage would be well away from the house itself, separated by about 13m or so, at the nearest point. To my mind, this combination of scale and distance would ensure that the new building was visually subordinate. Seen from the byway, the existing trees on the site boundary would provide screening from the south, and a green backdrop from the north. This, together with the acceptable design, would result in the development being unobtrusive. 8. Overall therefore, the scheme would result in a suitably designed minor building, in an inconspicuous position, and comfortably separated from the main house. Consequently, in my view, the development now proposed would not detract from the listed building’s setting, and would leave its significance as a heritage asset unharmed. 9. For these reasons, I find that the appeal proposal would conserve the setting of Bulls Green Cottage in a manner appropriate to its historic character and significance, and would respect its historic curtilage and context, in accordance with the relevant ULP and NPPF policies identified above. Conditions 10. In granting permission, I have imposed the standard conditions relating to the timescale for commencement, and requiring adherence to the approved plans. The reason for the latter is to ensure certainty as to the details that have been approved. 11. I note the Council’s request for a further condition preventing the use of the new building as a separate dwelling, but such a condition is unnecessary as such a use would require planning permission in any event. Conclusion 12. For the reasons explained above, I now conclude that the appeal should be allowed. J Felgate INSPECTOR