Appeal Decision 3258654 (Waltham Forest London Borough Council) — 2021-01-05

Appeal Decision 3258654 (Waltham Forest London Borough Council) — 2021-01-05
Outcome: Split decision
Case type: Householder (HAS)
Development: Householder developments
Appeal type: Written Representations
Location: 52 Browning Road, LONDON, E11 3AR
Postcode: E11 3AR
LPA: Waltham Forest London Borough Council
LPA code: E09000031
PINS reference: 3258654

=== FULL INSPECTOR DECISION ===

Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 7 December 2020
by Martin Chandler BSc MA MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 5 January 2021

Appeal Ref: APP/U5930/D/20/3258654
52 Browning Road, Leytonstone E11 3AR
•
•
•
•

The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
against a refusal to grant planning permission.
The appeal is made by Mrs Donna Wilson against the decision of the Council of the
London Borough of Waltham Forest.
The application Ref 200951, dated 16 December 2019, was refused by notice dated 30
July 2020.
The development proposed is extension of dwelling house to side and dormer at roof
level, replacement windows and roof covering.

Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed insofar as it relates to the dormer window to the rear
of the property.
2. The appeal is allowed insofar as it relates to the side extension and planning
permission is granted for the extension of dwelling house to side, replacement
windows and roof covering, at 52 Browning Road, Leytonstone E11 3AR, in
accordance with the terms of application, Ref: 200951, dated
16 December 2019, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions
in the attached schedule.
Main Issue
3. The main issue is whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the
character or appearance of the Browning Road Conservation Area.
Reasons
4. Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act
1990 requires that special attention shall be paid to the desirability of
preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas.
5. The appeal site is located within the Browning Road Conservation Area (CA). It
is a detached cottage with space about it, set at the end of a short cul-de-sac
of cottages. The significance of the CA derives from a collection of modest 19th
century cottages which have a somewhat informal relationship with the
principal road. Due to its siting, perpendicular to the terraced cottages, the
appeal site contributes to the informal layout of the area in a positive manner.
6. The proposal would seek to extend the dwelling to the side, replacing a single
storey lean-to structure with a slightly wider two storey addition. The side
extension would not be set back from the front of the existing cottage, and
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Appeal Decision APP/U5930/D/20/3258654

instead it would continue the eaves and ridge height of the property. In doing
this, it would create a double fronted property with a central front door.
Despite this, the proportions, materials and general appearance of the
extension would be entirely complementary to the existing building, indeed the
introduction of natural slate onto the roof would represent an important benefit
of the proposal. In addition, the building would continue to have space about it
and its relationship with the adjacent terrace and existing road would not
fundamentally alter.
7. As a consequence, I conclude that the proposed side extension would preserve
and enhance the character and appearance of the CA. It would therefore accord
with Policies CS2, CS12 and CS15 of the Waltham Forest Local Plan Core
Strategy (2012) (CS), DM4, DM28 and DM29 of the Waltham Forest Local Plan
Development Management Policies (2013) and guidance contained within the
Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document
(2010). Taken together, these seek amongst other things, a high standard of
architectural design, which relates to the host building and preserves or
enhances the character and appearance of the area.
8. However, the proposed dormer window would seek to extend across a
significant proportion of the widened house. It would therefore be a wide and
dominant addition to the roof. The rear elevation is highly visible due to the
presence of allotments to the rear of the site. Although views of the dormer
window would not be from within the CA itself, they do represent views into the
CA and therefore its character and appearance continue to be relevant
considerations.
9. The design of the dormer window would indicate a modern and interesting
addition to the roof. However, despite this considered design, due to its width,
the dormer window would dominate the roof of the enlarged building. It would
therefore compromise its pleasant cottage proportions which the side extension
would respect. Accordingly, I conclude that the proposed roof alteration would
represent a prominent addition that would harm the character and appearance
of the CA. The level of harm would be less than substantial and therefore, in
accordance with Paragraph 195 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the
Framework), the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the
proposal. On this basis, the proposal would provide the appellant with an
enlarged living space, however, this is primarily a private benefit and therefore
I attach limited weight to this matter.
10. The use of natural slate would be a public benefit to which I attach moderate
weight. However, paragraph 193 of the Framework confirms that great weight
should be given to the conservation of the CA. Accordingly, I am satisfied that
the benefits of the proposal would not outweigh the harm that I have
identified. As a consequence, I conclude that the proposed dormer window
would harm the character and appearance of the CA. It would therefore fail to
comply with the Policies identified above.
Conditions
11. In light of my findings, conditions are necessary in the interests of precision
and clarity to establish the time limit for commencing development as well as
the approved drawing numbers. In addition, to ensure the proposal fulfils its
requirements in relation to the CA, a condition regarding materials is
necessary. Finally, due to the presence of a protected tree on the appeal site
https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

2

Appeal Decision APP/U5930/D/20/3258654

and the nature of the development permitted, a condition is necessary in
relation to tree protection.
Conclusion
12. For the reasons set out above, the appeal is allowed insofar as it relates to the
proposed side extension, and replacement windows and roof covering.
13. In relation to the dormer window to the rear, the appeal is dismissed.

Martin Chandler
INSPECTOR

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS
1) The development hereby permitted, insofar as it relates to the side
extension, replacement windows and roof covering, shall begin not later
than 3 years from the date of this decision.
2) The development hereby permitted, shall be carried out in accordance with
the following approved plans, insofar as they relate to the side extension,
replacement windows and roof covering: HM 052 A000; HM052 A005; HM
052 A006; HM 052 A007; HM 052 A012 REV 1; HM 052 A013;
HM 052 A014 REV1; HM 052 A015; HM 052 A019; HM 052 A020 REV1;
HM 052 A021; and HM 052 A022.
3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the
development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing
building.
4) Prior to the commencement of any earthworks, site preparation works and
development onsite, an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) prepared by
a suitably qualified arborist in accordance with BS 3998:2010 shall be
submitted to and approved by the Local Authority. The AMS shall provide for
the following and the development shall be implemented in accordance with
details set out within it:
- A Tree Constraints Plan (TPP) identifying the RPA of trees to be retained
and which may be affected by the proposed development works (in
particular Beech T1 of 30/04 referred to as T1 in the report) to be set out.
- Assess any proposed work within the RPA including demolition excavation
or proposed construction within the RPA (including patios or driveways) of
this or any other tree subject to the report which may be negatively
affected by either excavation, demolition or construction works, including
storage of materials etc.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

3