Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application. There was no evidence of fault in the way the Council approved the application, but there was a failure to properly publish details of planning condition discharge information, which the Council has agreed to remedy.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve new buildings for a business on land behind their home.
2. Mr and Mrs X say the Council’s decision to approve the development will result in a loss of trees in a woodland and an increased number of large vehicles on the roads near their home.
3. Mr and Mrs X also complain that details to satisfy planning conditions are not shown on the Council’s website.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
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 read the complaint and discussed it with Mr and Mrs X. I read the Council’s response to the complaint and considered documents from its planning files, including the plans and the case officer’s report.
7. I gave the Council and the complainants an opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision and took account of the comments I received.

Back to top

What I found

Planning law and guidance

8. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies on the local development plan, unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
9. Planning considerations include things like:
• access to the highway;
• protection of ecological and heritage assets; and
• the impact on neighbouring amenity.
10. Planning considerations do not include things like:
• views over another’s land;
• the impact of development on property value; and
• private rights and interests in land.
11. Councils may impose planning conditions to make development acceptable in planning terms. Conditions should be necessary, enforceable and reasonable in all other regards.
12. The Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 require that certain decisions and their background papers are publicised on council websites, as soon as is practicable after the decision is made.
13. The regulations apply to a decision that has been delegated to an officer, if it:
• grants a permission or licence;
• affects the rights of an individual; or
• awards a contract or incurs an expense that materially affects the council’s financial position.
14. The regulations require that any such decision should be made available to the public:
• at the council offices;
• on the council’s website, if it has one; and
• by any other means the council considers appropriate.
15. The written records should include the following information:
• the date the decision was made;
• the record of the decision and its reasons;
• details alternative options, if any considered and rejected; and
• a record of any relevant conflict of interest.

What happened

16. Mr and Mrs X live in a village. An established business operates on and from the land behind their home.
17. In 2017, the business applied for planning permission to add buildings and carry out other works. The Council publicised the application and it received comments from the public and other consultees. The Council considered the application. The Council’s planning case officer assessed the application and wrote a report, which included:
• a description of the proposal and site;
• a summary of the information provided by the applicant;
• a summary of the relevant planning history of the site;
• details of relevant planning policy and guidance;
• an assessment of the main planning considerations, including:
1. the design;
2. the likely impact on neighbouring amenities;
3. the effect on the highway and highway safety;
4. the impact on nearby heritage assets; and
5. the impact on ecology, biodiversity, trees and landscape.
18. The planning case officer recommended approval, subject to planning conditions. The application and other documents, including the case officer’s report was considered by the Council’s planning committee. The committee decided to defer its decision so members could visit the site themselves.
19. After the site visit, the committee met again to consider the application, which it decided to approve subject to planning conditions, as recommended by the planning case officer.
20. The decision was issued, but the development has not yet begun. Mr and Mrs X say they tried to find out what decisions have been made on planning conditions and what information any such decision was based on.
21. I asked a planning manager for an update. The planning manager told me that the applicant has submitted applications to discharge planning conditions. Two conditions have been discharged and two others are under consideration. The Council’s decision on the two conditions that have been discharged were not on its website, but the planning manager said he would take steps to rectify this.
22. The planning manager said it was the Council’s practice to publish condition discharge decisions on its website after they were made, but he acknowledged it was not the Council’s practice to publish background papers.

My findings

23. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made. Where we find fault in the decision-making process, we decide whether it caused an injustice to the complainant. To do this, we need evidence to show that, but for the fault, the outcome would have been different.
24. In this case, I can see the Council followed the process we would expect and took account of the material planning considerations before it made its decision. In these circumstances, I find no fault in the way the Council made its decision to approve the application.
25. The Council is obliged by regulations to publish details of its decisions, including dates, reasons and background papers at its offices and on its website. It has not complied fully with the requirements of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, and this is fault. Because of the fault, Mr and Mrs X were not able to know the full details of the development behind their home.

Agreed action

26. To remedy this complaint, the Council has agreed to:
1. apologise to Mr and Mrs X for its failure to publish planning condition discharge details in accordance with regulations. It should send its apology in writing to them within four weeks from the date of our final decision;
2. change its working practices so that they comply with the regulations. It should do this and report back to us with any changes it makes within three months from the date of our final decision.
3. before any changes to its working practices take effect, rectify its records relating to this planning decision and provide the complainants, upon request, with information that would have been available to them, but for the fault.

Back to top

Final decision

27. There was fault in the way the Council kept records of its decisions on planning condition details. I have completed my investigation as the Council accepts my findings and remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman