Planning archive 2022-2023


Archive has 1306 results

  • Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (21 002 196)

    Statement Upheld Planning applications 30-Mar-2023

    Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to protect her amenity when it allowed its land to be used for the processing, storage and export of building waste from demolition works related to a large public infrastructure project. We found the Council was at fault and should take action to remedy the injustice the fault has caused and prevent recurrence of similar fault.

  • Cornwall Council (22 010 660)

    Statement Upheld Planning applications 30-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a delay in considering a planning application. The Council has apologised for its error and the delay this caused. We are satisfied this is a suitable remedy to the complaint.

  • Cheshire East Council (22 010 812)

    Statement Upheld Enforcement 30-Mar-2023

    Summary: Mrs X complains about a lack of enforcement action by the Council after a developer removed an understory that provided privacy to her property. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault by the Council. We found there were significant delays in the process which have impacted the time taken to find a resolution and restore privacy to Mrs X’s property. The Council have accepted our recommendations.

  • East Lindsey District Council (22 017 869)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 30-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

  • Mid Suffolk District Council (22 016 904)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Enforcement 30-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action on a breach of planning control. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants our involvement.

  • Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (22 015 598)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 30-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a planning application for a development which will next to the complainant’s property. We are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

  • Teignbridge District Council (22 016 607)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 30-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant had the right to appeal to the Planning Inspector.

  • Cornwall Council (22 016 978)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 29-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council granting planning permission for a development without imposing the conditions suggested by the complainant. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner, and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

  • Gedling Borough Council (22 016 049)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 29-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters related to a planning application on a site adjoining the complainant’s property. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

  • North Devon District Council (22 016 783)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 29-Mar-2023

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s planning notification and decision on a development next to his business premises. Errors in the notification process did not cause a significant personal injustice to Mr X warranting investigation. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s planning decision‑making process to justify investigating.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings