Summary: We will not investigate the complainant’s concerns about the Council approving a planning application which was contrary to what it said in a document in 2015. We are unlikely to find fault by the Council has caused the complainant significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr X, has complained the Council granted planning permission for development despite it contradicting previously stated views on high rise development. He says the Council has not explained why it has changed its position.

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’.
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault;
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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 that is likely to have affected the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered what Mr X said in his complaint. The Council also provided background information, including its response to Mr X’s concerns. I have also seen information about the planning application on the Council’s website.

Back to top

What I found

Background – planning decisions

6. Councils must decide planning applications in the light of the current planning policies and guidelines. All decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
7. The National Planning Policy Framework does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. It constitutes guidance in drawing up plans and is a material consideration in determining applications.
8. Material considerations relate to the use and development of land in the public interest, and not to private considerations such as the applicant’s personal conduct, covenants or reduction in the value of a property. Material considerations include issues such as overlooking, traffic generation and noise.
9. Local opposition or support for a proposal is not in itself a ground for refusing or granting planning permission, unless is it founded upon valid material planning reasons.
10. Government statements of planning policy are material considerations.
11. General planning policies may pull in different directions. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material consideration in determining a planning application.

Analysis

12. Mr X says a document produced by the Council in 2015 rejected the idea of high rise residential blocks. However, it has recently granted planning permission for a substantial residential development that includes high-rise towers. He says the Council has not properly explained this apparent reversal of policy.
13. The Council had to consider the application against current policy and guidance. It is clear much of this has altered since 2015. There is no expectation the Council would now be expected to put more weight on the 2015 document than on the present policy and guidance. Indeed, the Council might be acting at fault if it did so. I have seen nothing to suggest fault in how the Council considered the application.
14. Further, I do not consider Mr X has been caused significant personal injustice if the Council has not explained to his satisfaction how its planning policies have changed since 2015.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council has caused Mr X injustice that warrants our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman