Planning applications archive 2005-2006


Archive has 15 results

  • London Borough of Southwark (04B06313)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 30-Mar-2006

    Summary: 'Mrs Shelley' (not her real name for legal reasons) complained that the Council did not consult her about revised plans for a proposed development next door to her property. She had not been given the opportunity to comment on the changes and considered them to have badly affected her amenity.

  • North Shropshire District Council (05B00163)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 29-Mar-2006

    Summary: 'Mr and Mrs Smith' (not their real names for legal reasons) live next door to a development site on which the developer applied to build two semi-detached houses. The application was recommended for refusal because of the impact on Mr and Mrs Smith's bungalow. Members of the Committee made a site visit and voted to refuse the application. They indicated that they would be willing to approve an application for smaller houses on a larger site.

  • Carlisle City Council (04C13744)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 16-Jan-2006

    Summary: 'Mr and Mrs Callahan' (not their real names) complained about the Council's handling of a planning application for a substantial extension to their neighbour's home.

  • London Borough of Southwark (05B02405)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 16-Jan-2006

    Summary: A company wished to erect a telecommunications mast in a residential area. A pre-application consultation exercise was carried out, attracting 83 responses and revealing widespread opposition to the idea. When the Council received a planning application, it publicised it by posting a site notice, which was the legal minimum form of publicity required, and by letter to the local conservation society. The Council did not receive any representations apart from those submitted by the society. The application was approved by officers acting under delegated powers, whereas if representations had been received the application would have been referred to the Community Council for the local area for a decision.

  • Bedford Borough Council (04B16901)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 12-Jan-2006

    Summary: 'Mr Vincent' (not his real name) lived close to a field used by a model aircraft club. The Council received complaints about noise in autumn 2003, but did not investigate until summer 2004, partly because flying ceased over the winter. The Council did not decide whether the activities caused a statutory noise nuisance. The activities did not have planning permission and the Council asked the flying club to make an application. The Ombudsman considered that the Council missed an opportunity to take noise readings to decide whether noise levels were acceptable before determining the planning application.

  • London Borough of Merton (04B09253)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 15-Dec-2005

    Summary: 'Mr Rose' (not his real name for legal reasons) lived in an upstairs flat next door to a takeaway. In May 1999 he complained to the Council about the vibration, noise and smells from the ventilation system installed without the benefit of planning permission. He also complained about its appearance.

  • Arun District Council (03A06111)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 08-Dec-2005

    Summary: 'Mr Cooper' (not his real name for legal reasons) complained about the Council's grant of outline planning permission for a substantial housing development next to his land.

  • Stratford-on-Avon District Council (04B18695)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 25-Oct-2005

    Summary: 'Mrs Lynton' and 'Mr Harris' (not their real names) lived in houses on either side of a site where their neighbour built a residential extension. They complained that the Council, in approving the neighbour's planning application, failed to consider their amenity, particularly the issue of overlooking to Mrs Lynton's property and loss of light to Mr Harris'.

  • Rossendale Borough Council (04C12526)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 07-Oct-2005

    Summary: Two families say that there was fault by the School in the way it administered its process for entry to the School in September 2005.

  • St Albans City Council (04A05724)

    Report Upheld Planning applications 29-Sep-2005

    Summary: 'Mr and Mrs Howarth' and 'Mr Bell' (not their real names for legal reasons) complained about the way that the Council handled planning applications for extensions to a neighbouring property.

;