Appeal 3359601

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The description of the proposed works in the banner heading above has been shortened from what was submitted on the application form to omit unnecessary information for the purposes of accurately describing the proposed scheme.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling and the surrounding area.

The appeal dwelling is a two-storey mid-terrace property situated on [address] in Walthamstow. The local area is made up of quiet suburban roads featuring small rows of terraced dwellings which have a broadly similar scale, age and cottage-style appearance as well as a number of semi-detached dwellings.

The lower half of the front elevation of the appeal dwelling features attractive brickwork with arched brick detailing above the fenestration and the front entrance. The upper half of the front elevation is mainly rendered in cream but also has attractive brick detailing along the shared boundary with [address]. The upper and lower halves of the front elevation are separated by a brickwork band three bricks in width which protrudes slightly from the front wall. Appeal Planning Officer APP/U5930/D/25/3359601

The front elevations of other dwellings on the terraced row upon which the appeal dwelling sits all have the same attractive brickwork on the lower half and brickwork band separating the upper and lower halves. The upper halves are a mix of different colour renders. Some of the dwellings in the terraced row have had alterations made to the front elevations including front porch additions, alterations to fenestration (which has also resulted in the loss of the arched brickwork detailing in these cases) and one example of a two-storey side extension. Notwithstanding these alterations, the dwellings in the terrace remain of a similar scale, design and form and the retention of the brickwork lower half and brickwork band creates a consistent, attractive and balanced appearance.

In relation to the front elevation, it appears from the very rudimentary drawing and the description of the proposed works submitted that the installation of the insulation would fully cover and obscure the original brickwork and detailing of the appeal dwelling including the brickwork band and brick detailing along the shared boundary of No 6. This would result in a significant change to the appearance of the property. Given that the front elevation is highly visible from the public street, and the mid-terrace position of the appeal property, this covering would disrupt the detailing of the front elevations of dwellings on the terrace which, despite various alterations and additions, remains an attractive feature of the streetscape.

Consequently, the proposed development would be an incongruous and unsympathetic addition to the appeal dwelling which would harm its character as well as that of the neighbouring dwellings and wider streetscape.

Furthermore, the submitted supporting information is of poor quality and does not demonstrate how or if the insulation would relate to the existing architectural detailing on the front elevation. The drawing submitted is basic and lacks detail on how the insulation would be installed particularly at the boundary of the appeal dwelling and over the windows and doors. It also does not give a clear impression of the extent of the protrusion of the insulation relative to neighbouring properties.

It is therefore unclear how the proposed development would be installed and how it would appear thereafter. If installed poorly, it would result in a further harmful impact to the appearance of the appeal property and neighbouring properties. Given this uncertainty, I am also unable to recommend the approval of the insulation to the rear elevation of the appeal dwelling even if this would be acceptable in principle given it is not visible from the public street.

The appellant has stated that the main purpose of the proposed development is to improve the energy efficiency of the dwelling to help residents reduce energy bills. However, the appellant has not provided detail on the current energy efficiency performance of the appeal dwelling and has not quantified the improvement that the proposed development would bring in terms of energy efficiency and reduction in bills. In the absence of this detail, I can only give this submission limited weight in my assessment. For the reasons outlined above, the harm that would be caused by the proposed development would therefore outweigh the unquantified sustainability related benefits.

The fact that there are examples of alterations in the terraced row and other external insulation in the wider local area does not outweigh or nullify the harm the proposed development would cause to both the appeal dwelling and street scene in this particular case. Appeal Planning Officer APP/U5930/D/25/3359601

For the reasons set out above, the proposed development would cause harm to the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling and local area and so would not comply with Policy 53 of the London Borough of Waltham Forest Local Plan Part 1 2020-2035 (adopted 2024) which requires that development proposals reinforce local character and respond appropriately to their context.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and agree with the reasoning and recommendation. On that basis the appeal is dismissed.