Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council appeal evidence
Refused over character and appearance in Blackburn with Darwen?
Learn which local changes inspectors found harmful and what made an altered roof acceptable.
Recently refused?
Create a free account for a private planning workspace.
No payment at signup. Refusal-review ordering may not be open.
- Matched locally
- 16 of 28
- eligible decision families
- Allowed
- 1
- matched appeal records
- Dismissed
- 15
- matched appeal records
- Householder
- 15
- of 16 matched records
AI-assisted. Cited sources and wording were checked before publication. Based on 5 source-linked examples shown below. Review method and limits.
Planning Data area point: Blackburn with Darwen LPA (53.692659, −2.46758). This is the published representative point for the authority boundary, not a town hall, camera position or appeal site.
Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council appeal findings
Roof, porch and extension changes in Blackburn with Darwen
Some selected extracts state conclusions rather than detailed design analysis; appeal 66104 also includes conservation-area effects and sits at this issue's edge.
Counted against appeals
Porticos, extensions and porch roofs found harmful
Entrance portico harmed building and area
The Inspector found the proposed entrance portico unacceptably harmful to the existing building and surrounding area.
Side and rear extension caused harm
The Inspector concluded the double-storey side and rear extension would significantly harm the host building and local area.
Pitched porch roof had adverse effect
The Inspector found the proposed pitched porch roof would significantly harm the host dwelling and surrounding area.
Helped or needed
Why the altered roof was acceptable
Cat-slide loss was not harmful
Replacing the cat-slide roof was not itself harmful, although the forward-facing gable would look more strident and be clearly visible.
Dark material and light render
They reflected elements of the property opposite, and the overall composition was found not to detract from the area.
Your refusal notice
Check these details
- Does the refusal notice identify harm to the building, surroundings, or both?
- Which roof, porch or extension feature does the notice say creates harm?
- Does the notice compare materials or detailing with nearby properties?
The selected roof-alteration example, appeal 36960, does not answer every portico, porch or extension refusal. These decisions do not predict another result.
Appeal evidence examples
Compare allowed and dismissed appeal reasoning
Each example separates the development, the Inspector-stated issue that selected it, and the reasoning from the decision. Compare the facts as well as the outcome: these examples do not predict how a different proposal would be decided.
Allowed appeal examples
1 example
10 August 2023 · Allowed
Development described in the decision
a dormer to be added to the south east elevation and alterations to the north east elevation.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect on the character and appearance of the area. www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
Although described as a dormer, the proposal would introduce a large forward facing gable at first floor level to replace the existing cat-slide roof. This would fundamentally change the appearance of the property and its relationship with the surrounding area. Although the existing design shares many similarities with the property on the opposite corner, at the entrance to The Copse, the loss of this cat-slide roof feature would not in itself result in harm to the surrounding area. The proposed alternative modelling of this part of the property would result in a more strident appearance which would be clearly evident when in [address] and The Copse. However, it would represent an interesting architectural feature that would to some extent, reflect the detailing and materials of elements of the property opposite. It is proposed that it would be finished in dark materials above a light coloured lower render. This would be acceptable and the overall composition would not detract from the character or appearance of this area and would add some interest to it.
Paragraph 3 · Source page 2
Dismissed appeal examples
4 examples
13 September 2023 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
described as ‘proposed insertion of entrance portico to front elevation’.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the existing building and the surrounding area.
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
I therefore find that the proposed development would have an unacceptably harmful effect on the character and appearance of the existing building and the surrounding area. Conflict would thereby arise with Policy 11 of the Blackburn with Darwin Local Plan Part 2 (2015), which requires, amongst other matters, for new development to achieve a high standard of design, respect, enhance and reinforce local character, and make a positive contribution to the surrounding area. It would also not accord with advice within the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document ‘[name] (2012) and the design objectives of Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Paragraph 8 · Source page 2
22 May 2023 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
the erection of a double storey side and rear extension with part rear single storey extension.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host building and the local area.
Paragraph 3 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
On the main issue, I conclude that the proposed development would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the host building and the local area. As such, it conflicts with Policy CS16 of the Blackburn with [name] and Policy 11 of the Local Plan Part 2. These policies require new development to achieve a high standard of design, respect, enhance and reinforce local character, and make a positive contribution to the surrounding area. It is also contrary to [name] 1E, RES 7E and RES 8 of the Council’s SPD, which note that the design and materials of an extension should be in keeping with the existing property. The proposal is also at odds with the National Planning Policy Framework, which states that developments should add to the overall quality of the area and be sympathetic to local character.
Paragraph 10 · Source page 2
12 March 2025 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
a retention of a rear dormer.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the existing property and the conservation area in general.
Paragraph 4 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
I conclude that the development harms the character and appearance of the existing property and the conservation area in general.
Paragraph 12 · Source page 2
15 November 2023 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
to replace existing flat roof structure with a new pitched roof structure to the existing front entrance porch.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area.
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
For the reasons given, the proposal would have a significant adverse effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the area. It would fail to comply with Policy 11 of the Blackburn with Darwen Local Plan Part 2 Site Allocations and Development Management Policies 2015; the Residential Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2012; and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework insofar as they seek to ensure good design that demonstrates an understanding of the wider context and makes a positive contribution to the local area.
Paragraph 6 · Source page 2