Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development near the complainant’s home. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about how the Council has dealt with a planning application for a site near his home. He says the Council has not imposed suitable planning conditions and failed to ensure the developer has complied with conditions relating to the access road for the site.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision and have considered his comments in response.

Back to top

What I found

4. When a local authority receives a planning application it must look at the development plan and material planning considerations to decide if the proposal is acceptable. Material considerations relate to the use and development of the land in the public interest and includes matters such as the impact on neighbouring properties and the relevant planning policies. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material considerations in determining a planning application and the planning conditions that may be necessary.

What happened

5. The Council granted planning permission to Mr X in the 1980s to build a detached dwelling. The permission was subject to conditions. One of the conditions required the provision and maintenance of adequate sight lines on the access road for the new dwelling.
6. In 2016, the Council received an application to build two detached dwellings at a site near Mr X’s home. The application was referred to the Council’s planning committee for determination and planning permission was granted. The developer has since submitted amended applications for the development. These applications were also considered by the Council’s planning committee and permission was granted.
7. Mr X was not aware of the applications at the time but contacted the Council in 2019 after works started to complain the developer was not complying with conditions attached to the access road for the site.

Assessment

8. I will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application for a development near Mr X’s home. This is because I am unlikely to find fault by the Council.
9. When the Council granted Mr X planning permission in the 1980s it was subject to a condition requiring the provision and maintenance of adequate sight lines for the access road to the development site. The new dwellings will share the access road with Mr X’s property. However, Mr X says the Council has failed to ensure the developer has complied with this condition.
10. The new development was not subject to the same planning condition for the access road and therefore it is unlikely I could say the Council was at fault for not ensuring the developer complied with this condition. I understand Mr X says the Council should have imposed a similar condition on the permission for the new development as it had to his and other developments in the area. But it is for the Council to decide the planning conditions that will be necessary for a development and permission will not automatically be subject to a condition just because other applications have in the past.
11. Mr X says the new development will cause highway safety issues. But the case officer addressed the impact of the proposal, including the suitability of the access arrangements and highway safety, before deciding the application was acceptable. The Council also consulted the Local Highway Authority, and no objections were raised. As the Council properly considered the application before granting planning permission it is unlikely I could find fault. I understand Mr X disagrees, but the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement in this regard and the Ombudsman cannot question this unless it was tainted by fault.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman