Summary: The Council was not at fault for the way it considered a planning application near to Mr X’s property.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council handled a planning application for the replacement of a single storey building at the rear of a school, near to his property. Mr X says this is out of character with the local area, inappropriate to build on the Green Belt and harms the outlook from his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the complaint made by Mr X and the responses from the Council. I discussed the complaint with Mr X over the telephone. I considered the online planning documents and the Committee Report. I sent a draft of this decision to Mr X and the Council and considered comments received.

Back to top

What I found

National and local planning guidance

7. National Planning Policy Framework (2019) (NPPF) deals with development proposals in the Green Belt. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.
8. NPPF says a local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in the Green Belt, however there are some exceptions where it would be appropriate.
9. The Council’s Development Plan provides the same level of protection to the Green Belt as the NPPF and says construction of new buildings in the Green Belt is inappropriate. However the Development Plan does allow development in the Green Belt in certain circumstances.

The Council’s planning guidance

10. The Council’s planning division information sheet, on planning committee meetings says, members of the public making written comments on planning applications have the opportunity to address Councillors at Committee if they wish.
11. Anyone wishing to speak must have already written in expressing his or her views on the application.
12. The public can inspect Committee on the Council’s website, at the Civic Centre or in public libraries from five working days before the Committee meeting. Alternatively, members of the public can contact the Planning Division to find out if an application is included on an agenda.

What happened

13. Mr X lives next to School Y. In 2017 School Y applied for planning permission for a single storey extension to an annex building.
14. The Council refused to grant planning permission in August 2017 on the basis this was inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The Council decided the proposal was harmful to the character of the area and any benefit, educational or otherwise, would not outweigh the harm to the Green Belt.
15. School Y appealed to the Planning Inspectorate who found in their favour. The Planning Inspectorate decided the proposal was inappropriate development in the Green Belt. However the Planning Inspectorate decided the educational benefits such as SAT preparation, use of the building for those with learning disabilities and mobility issues would outweigh the proposal’s limited harm.
16. In November 2019 School Y made a planning application to replace a single storey classroom building. This involved knocking down the existing classroom annex and replacing it with a new single storey building.
17. In January 2020 Mr X objected to School Y’s planning application. Mr X said:
• The Council objected to the previous planning application in 2017 so should preserve its position.
• This application is more harmful than the 2017 application. Mr X said the development is bigger, larger and taller in area.
• School Y deliberately cut down trees to make space for the previous planning application in 2017.
• This application does not make the same educational provision as the previous one.
• The new classroom structure will be higher than the existing one.
• The new classroom structure extends beyond the existing site lines for the houses in Mr X’s street. Mr X provided a photo showing this where he has etched the proposed structure in white.
• The total area of the new building is greater than the existing building and proposed extension from the last planning application.
• The existing building was only supposed to be temporary and should have been taken down in 2004.
• The building does not fit in with the conservation area and looks like an industrial warehouse site.
18. School Y put in a statement of very special circumstances. The statement said there were safety concerns over the existing building as it was in poor repair and not practical to refurbish. The statement mentioned the proposal would provide educational benefit for children with special educational needs, children with mobility needs and SAT preparation space. The statement also mentioned the previous Planning Inspectorate decision which said the educational benefits outweighed the development’s limited harm to the Green Belt.
19. On 20 August 2020 the Planning Committee approved School Y’s application. The Committee report shows the Council considered national and local planning policies. The report shows the Council considered this was inappropriate development in the Green Belt but decided School Y demonstrate very special circumstances applied to justify development on the Green Belt. These included the educational benefits of the building, and the fact refurbishment of the existing building was not practical. The Council also considered the building would not be overly bulky or out of character with the area and the development would not result in undue loss of light or outlook from neighbouring properties.

Mr X’s complaint

20. Mr X contacted the Ombudsman with concerns about the Council’s decision to approve School Y’s planning application. Mr X said:
• His ward Councillor, who had objected to the previous planning application in 2017, was denied knowledge of the Planning Committee meeting.
• The local Village society missed the chance to object at the Planning Committee meeting as the Council did not notify them.
• The statement of very special circumstances was not posted until after the Council granted planning permission.
• The very special circumstances were not valid.
21. The Ombudsman passed Mr X’s complaint onto the Council.
22. The Council provided its response to Mr X’s complaint in April 2021. The Council said:
• In told Mr X’s ward Councillor about the Planning Committee meeting on 3 August 2020 and sent them a link to the agenda. The Council said it published its agenda for the Planning Committee meeting on its website on 11 August 2020.
• The agenda for the Planning Committee meeting was in the public domain before the meeting. The Council said it says in its notification letters and on its website that it does not notify parties of the Committee dates. In relation to Mr X’s objections the Council said these were on the record of the planning application and there were no obstacles for the public to make objections at the Planning Committee meeting.
• The Planning Committee report set out the case for very special circumstances which was published before the Committee decided to grant planning permission. The Council said it published the statement of very special circumstances on 28 July 2020 which was before the decision. The merits of the very special circumstances was a matter for the decision makers to consider.
• The Council said it was satisfied the decision reached was appropriate and followed correct procedure.
23. On 10 April 2021 Mr X contacted his ward Councillor to raise concerns about why the local Village society could not make representations at the Planning Committee meeting. He also raised concerns about the impact of the development on his property including the height and scale of the new building in comparison to the existing building.
24. The ward Councillor responded to Mr X on 15 April 2021 to say the Council notified them about the Planning Committee meeting but they did not review the agenda in advance. The Councillor thought the Council notified applicants and residents before a meeting, but this was not the case. The Councillor said residents were in fact expected to check the Council’s website for details of the meeting. The Councillor also provided Mr X with details of the percentage of pupils with special educational needs at School Y.
25. The Councillor told Mr X because the Planning Inspectorate decided the previous planning application in 2017 was suitable and the educational benefit outweighed the harm to the Green Belt, the Council cannot discount this from future applications. Although this application was for a replacement building rather than an extension the Councillor said the new building was not significantly larger than the existing building and proposed extension which the Planning Inspectorate granted. They also said the same very special circumstances regarding education applied to this application. The Councillor said if the Committee refused planning it was highly likely the Council would have lost any appeal brought by School Y.

Analysis

26. When considering complaints, we may not act like an appeal body. We cannot question the merits of the decision the Council has made or offer any opinion on whether or not we agree with the judgment of the Council’s officers. Instead, we focus on the process by which the decision was made.
27. Mr X complains about the process the Council followed when approving School Y’s planning application. Mr X said he and the Village society lost the chance to object at the meeting as they were not notified of this. The Council’s planning guidance does not say it will notify individuals about Committee meetings. It says the Council will publish Committee agendas on the Council’s website, at the Civic Centre or in public libraries from five working days before the Committee meeting. In addition members of the public can contact the Planning Division to find out if an application is included on an agenda. In this case the Council published details of the Committee meeting on its website. Therefore the Council has followed its policy and I cannot say it was at fault for failing to notify Mr X and the Village society.
28. When deciding whether to grant planning permission the Committee report shows the Council took residents’ objections into account. It considered national and local planning policy. It also shows the Council considered the impact of the development on the Green Belt but decided the educational benefit outlined in the very special circumstances statement outweighed the harm to the Green Belt. It was a matter for the Committee members to weigh up the arguments for development in the Green Belt against the educational benefits of the development. In coming to this decision the Council considered the previous Planning Inspectorate decision which decided similar educational benefits outweighed the harm to the Green Belt.
29. In addition the report shows the Council considered the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the area and on the amenity of neighbouring properties.
30. I am satisfied the Council properly considered the planning application in line with national and local policies. It has properly considered the development’s impact on the character of the area, neighbouring amenities, and the Green Belt. While I recognise Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision, this was a decision it was entitled to make.

Back to top

Final decision

31. I have completed my investigation and found there was no fault by the Council in how it decided a planning application for the replacement of a single storey building at the rear of a school.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

32. I did not consider Mr X’s concerns that the existing building should have been demolished in 2004 due to the time which has passed. If Mr X or other residents had concerns the existing building should have been demolished in 2004 they should have raised these concerns at the time and complained to the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman