Broxbourne Borough Council appeal evidence
Refused over character and appearance in Broxbourne?
See the stated local design concerns and what the allowed examples did, and did not, explain.
Recently refused?
Create a free account for a private planning workspace.
No payment at signup. Refusal-review ordering may not be open.
- Matched locally
- 31 of 46
- eligible decision families
- Allowed
- 9
- matched appeal records
- Dismissed
- 21
- matched appeal records
- Householder
- 28
- of 31 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: Broxbourne LPA (51.725125, −0.047333). This is the published representative point for the authority boundary, not a town hall, camera position or appeal site.
Broxbourne Borough Council appeal findings
Unbalanced designs in Broxbourne street scenes
The selected examples have a different outcome mix from the matched local set. Allowed extracts give only conclusions.
Counted against appeals
Dismissed designs that harmed the area
Overall design was unbalanced and incoherent
For the enlarged dwelling, the Inspector said it would appear incongruous and harmful in the street scene.
Double-storey extension harmed area character
The extract concludes that the double-storey extension would harm the area’s character and appearance.
Driveway gates harmed area character
The Inspector found their detrimental effect on area character and appearance was not outweighed by benefits.
Helped or needed
Allowed conclusions of no harm
No harm to area character
For the side extension, the Inspector concluded that the proposal would not harm the area’s character and appearance.
No harm to dwelling or street scene
For the front extension and garage work, the Inspector concluded there would be no harm to the dwelling or wider street scene.
Your refusal notice
Check these details
- Does the refusal identify an unbalanced or incoherent overall design?
- Which features would change the parent building or street scene?
- What evidence supports no harm to local character and appearance?
The selected examples include extensions and driveway gates, so their facts may differ from yours. 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
2 examples
3 November 2022 · Allowed
Development described in the decision
described as Two storey side extension.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
I therefore conclude that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the area. There is no conflict with Policies DSC1 and DSC2 of the Broxbourne Local Plan 2018-2033 (2020) which amongst other things seek to achieve good design respecting character and design and be appropriate to the local context and site.
Paragraph 8 · Source page 2
3 November 2021 · Allowed
Development described in the decision
existing carport converted to study. Proposed two storey front extension creating new garage and first floor with master bedroom, internal and external alterations. Existing driveway and crossover width extended.
Issue identified by the Inspector
I consider that the main issue in this case is its effect on the character and appearance of the area.
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
I conclude that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the existing dwelling or wider the street scene and that it is consistent with local plan policies DSC1 and DSC2.
Paragraph 8 · Source page 2
Dismissed appeal examples
3 examples
26 February 2025 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
two storey extensions to north and south elevations and addition of a floor to create a three storey dwelling.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the local area.
Paragraph 3 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
For these reasons, the overall design of the proposed development would be unbalanced and incoherent. Consequently, it would not deliver high quality design and would appear incongruous and harmful in the street scene. Therefore, the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the local area. Consequently, it would not comply with Policies DSC1 and DSC2 of the Broxbourne Local Plan 2018-2033 (2020) which require that developments must enhance local character and have a design and external appearance that does not unduly impact upon the wider setting.
Paragraph 10 · Source page 2
5 February 2026 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
Double storey side and rear extension, partial demolition of brick fence.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Paragraph 3 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
I therefore conclude that the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the area, contrary to Policies DSC1, DC2 and ORC3 of the Broxbourne Local Plan (2020). These policies seek to ensure, amongst other things, that development is well designed and that proposals for extensions to existing dwellings are of a scale, design and external appearance that does not unduly impact upon the parent building and wider setting, whilst also identifying that there will be a presumption against the loss of amenity spaces.
Paragraph 12 · Source page 2
20 October 2022 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
for gates to the frontage of the driveway.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue in this appeal is the effects of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Paragraph 3 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
I have taken account of all other mattes raised but find that the proposal would have a detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the area. These effects would not be outweighed by any benefits that the proposal may bring with it. As a consequence, the proposal is contrary to Policies DSC1 and DSC2 of the Broxbourne Local Plan and there are no other matters that outweigh that conflict. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.
Paragraph 9 · Source page 2