Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for a bungalow near her home, which she says affects her amenity. There was no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained that the Council did not properly consider her objections before granting planning permission for a bungalow near her home. Mrs X says the new dwelling is 7.5 metres from her property with a wall across all her windows.
2. Mrs X says this is causing her enormous stress, anxiety and sleepless nights and the value of her property will drop considerably due to the lack of light, air and security.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
4. 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

5. I spoke to Mrs X and considered the information she provided. I also made enquiries of the Council and considered its response.
6. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Mrs X and the Council and invited their comments. I considered the comments I received before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Planning law and guidance

7. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies on the local development plan unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
8. Planning considerations include things like:

• access to the highway;
• protection of ecological heritage assets; and
• the impact on neighbouring amenity.

9. 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.

10. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material consideration in determining a planning application.
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. Some councils issue guidance on how they would normally apply planning policy. The guidance is sometimes found in the local plan itself or issued in separate supplementary planning documents. Planning guidance and policy should not be treated as if it creates a binding rule that must be followed. Councils must take account of their policy along with other material planning considerations.
13. Amongst other things, guidance will often set out separation distances between dwellings to protect against overshadowing and loss of privacy.
14. Although guidance can set different limits, councils normally allow 21 metres between directly facing habitable rooms (such as bedrooms, living and dining rooms) or 12 metres between habitable rooms and blank elevations or elevations that contain only non-habitable room windows (such as bathrooms, kitchens and utility rooms). An ‘elevation’ is the face or view of it from one side shown in a plan.
15. Councils will sometimes allow closer separation distances, depending on the circumstances. For example, less distance is often considered acceptable, if:
• the elevations are at an oblique angle, so they are not directly facing each other;
• there are landscape or boundary features that obstruct views; or
• close-knit relationships in the area are common.

What happened

16. In May 2020, the Council received a planning application for a single storey dwelling with a detached garage, close to Mrs X’s home.
17. Mrs X objected to the planning application. She said the side wall of the proposed building was located seven metres from her property and therefore extremely close to her front windows and door. Mrs X said her only windows are east and west facing and the east facing windows would look straight onto a brick wall, the height of the proposed building extended over her front facing ground floor windows and the pitched roof extended over her two-front facing bedrooms. Mrs X said the development would significantly impact natural light and air to her property.
18. The case officer produced a draft report, recommending that the application should be approved. The report was sent to a team leader for approval. The case officer’s report included:

• a description of the site and proposal;
• comments from neighbours and other consultees;
• relevant planning policy and guidance; and
• an appraisal of the main planning considerations, including impact on neighbouring amenity, design matters and highway safety;

19. The case officer’s report was considered by the team leader and a manager. They considered the objections made by Mrs X, particularly with regards to the proximity of the proposed building to Mrs X’s property. The Council approved the planning application subject to conditions. The decision notice stated the following conditions had been imposed in the interests of neighbouring amenity:
1. landscaping, including planting of the west boundary;
2. no roof enlargement or alteration should be carried out without a further application for planning permission; and
3. no walls, gates, fences and other means of enclosure should be carried out anywhere along the length of the western boundary without a further application for planning permission.
20. Mrs X complained to the Council through its complaint’s procedure. In addition, Mrs X said no site visit had taken place and the case officer’s report did not list her objections about loss of natural light and air. The Council did not uphold Mrs X’s complaint.

Back to top

Analysis

21. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made. We look for fault in the decision-making process, and if we find it, we decide whether it caused an injustice to the complainant.
22. In this case, I can see that before it made its decision the Council considered the application and relevant planning policies. It gave neighbours and other consultees the opportunity to comment. Mrs X’s objections were escalated, and consideration was given to the closeness of the proposed building and the impact on Mrs X’s amenities. In light of Mrs X’s objections, the Council approved the application subject to conditions. The Council followed the process we would expect and so I find no fault in the way it made its decision.
23. It is acknowledged that a site visit was not undertaken but as the Council has explained this was due to restrictions in place during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is noted that the case officer had previously visited the area to assess other applications and therefore had some familiarity with the plot. I find no fault.
24. Mrs X is correct in stating that the case officer’s report did not include her objections about the impact on light and air. However, the courts have made it clear that the officers report do not need to be perfect. They do not have to be a comprehensive record of every possible issue or policy that might be relevant. It is enough if the key issues considered to be contentious have been covered. As there is no right of appeal for third parties, we do not get to use our judgement about what should have been important or what weight should have been given to any consideration.
25. The Council has confirmed there is no written policy or guidance relating to separation distances but outlook impact on neighbouring properties was considered in the case officer’s report. The distance between Mrs X’s home and the new building are less than that which is generally considered acceptable by local planning authorities. However, as explained in paragraph 22, the main planning considerations, including the impact on Mrs X’s amenity was considered before a planning decision was made.
26. I appreciate that Mrs X will be disappointed, but I have found no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have completed my investigation on this basis, finding no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman