Summary: The complainants said the Council failed to address properly their objections to the planning application filed by their neighbours. They considered the Council’s approval of the planning application would result in the property’s overdevelopment and loss of amenity for the complainants’ property. We found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the planning application and how it dealt with the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainants (Mr X and Mrs X) say the Council’s failings when considering their neighbours’ planning application will result in the site overdevelopment and reduced access to direct daylight in their property.
2. Mr X and Mrs X also raise concerns about the way councillors applied the Planning Committee Code of Conduct, when deciding whether they should attend a planning committee meeting at which the neighbours’ planning application was considered.
3. Mr X and Mrs X are dissatisfied with the way the Council handled their complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read the complaint and all the documents attached. I also read the Council’s response to the complaint and considered documents from its planning files, including the plans, case officer’s report and a planning decision. I watched the footage of the Planning Committee meeting during which the planning application for the property next to Mr X’s was considered.
6. I reviewed Wolverhampton Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) 3 and SPG 4, Planning Committee Code of Conduct for Councillors and Employees (Code) and Wolverhampton Statement of Community Involvement.
7. Mr and Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Planning law and guidance

8. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies in 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 from a property;
• 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. Before planning decisions are made, council planning case officers often write reports to set out their views and recommendations to inform the decision maker. The purpose of the case officer’s report is not merely to facilitate the decision, but to demonstrate the decisions were properly made and due process followed. Without an adequate report, we cannot know whether the council took proper account of the key material planning considerations or whether judgements were affected by irrelevant matters.
13. However, the courts have made it clear that case officer reports:
• do not need to include every possible planning consideration, but just the principal controversial issues;
• do not need to be perfect, as their intended audience are the parties to the application (the Council and the applicant) who are well versed of the issues; and
• should not be subject to hypercritical scrutiny, and do not merit challenge unless their overall effect is to significantly mislead the decision maker on the key, material issues.
14. Regulations set out the minimum requirements for how councils publicise planning applications.
15. Some councils issue guidance on how they would normally make their decisions and how they generally apply planning policy. The guidance is sometimes found in the local plan itself or issued in separate supplementary planning documents.
16. 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.

Council’s policies

17. It is the responsibility of the individual Councillor to consider whether to declare a personal interest and whether the interest warrants withdrawal from the meeting when the matter arises. (Planning Committee Code of Conduct for Councillors and Employees paragraph 4.5)
18. The Council’s complaint policy says that a Stage 1 complaint will be allocated to a senior manager from the service area complained about. If the complainant is not satisfied with the Stage 1 response, they can request a further investigation by the Complaints Manager.

What happened

19. Following submission of the planning application on the property next to Mr X’s house, the Council consulted with five residents living closest to the property.
20. Mr X objected to the planning application. In his view the proposed built of a six-bedroom property in place of the existing four bedrooms, would make up overdevelopment. Mr X was concerned about the increased traffic and parking capacity. He also claimed it would cause the unacceptable loss of sunlight to the rooms in his property.
21. A few days later the Planning Officer dealing with the application accepted in part Mr X concerns about the loss of sunlight and suggested one metre reduction in the length of the extension. She also told Mr X he could speak before the Planning Committee if he wished to present his objections.
22. Mr X did not agree with the Planning Officer the proposed reduction to the extension would protect his house enough from the loss of daylight and at the end of April 2021 raised further concerns about the planning process.
23. At the end of May 2021 the Planning Committee meeting took place during which the planning application to develop Mr X’s neighbouring property was discussed. Before this discussion some members of the Planning Committee, including the Head of Planning, visited the site to decide weight of Mr X’s objections.
24. At the beginning of the Planning Committee meeting one of the councillors withdrew from the meeting, as she did socially know Mr X. Another councillor, who also knew Mr X, took part in the meeting.
25. During the meeting the Planning Officer referred to the findings of her report and recommended the approval of the planning application. In her report she addressed Mr X’s concerns about the potential overdevelopment and loss of amenity. She confirmed the proposed property size, although larger than the current one, is suitable in terms of scale and mass in relation to the plot size. The proposed house is not out of character with the surrounding area. She also justified her view that the reduced extension would be acceptable in terms of the neighbours’ amenity in relation to mass, scale, overbearing impact, light and privacy.
26. Afterwards Mr X gave reasons for his objections to this planning application. He raised the lack of robust process when addressing his detailed and specific arguments. He reiterated his views on unacceptability of the size of the proposed development and inadequate findings of the Planning Officer’s report on parking and increased traffic. Mr X referred to the Council’s SPG 3 and SPG 4 when raising his arguments about the loss of daylight in his property and the potential impact on him and his family.
27. During subsequent voting the Planning Committee approved the planning application.
28. On the same day Mr X complained about the meeting and a few days later received a response from the Head of Planning.
29. In response to Mr X’s Stage 1 complaint raised in mid-September 2021, the Council advised of a separate process to challenge the Committee Standards issues.
30. The Head of Planning provided a substantive response to Mr X’s Stage 1 complaint in the beginning of October 2021. He explained how the Council considered Mr X’s objections to the planning application and gave the Council's reasons for its decision to approve the application. He reiterated the matters of design and degree of impact on neighbours’ amenities are matters of judgement and each case is treated on its own merits.
31. Mr X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s Stage 1 response and queried the Council’s practice of the same officer dealing with both the early and later stages of the complaint process. In the beginning of December 2021 the Council’s Customer Engagement Officer responded to Mr X’s Stage 2 complaint.
32. A few days later Mr X received a comprehensive response from the Monitoring Officer on his complaint about the way the councillors applied the Planning Code of Conduct during the Planning Committee meeting in May 2021.

Analysis

33. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made. We look for evidence of fault causing a significant injustice to the individual complainant.
34. Before the planning decision was made on the amended plans, the Council considered the plans, relevant policy, sent consultation letters to the neighbours and consulted with right agencies. The Council considered comments from Mr X and other consultees. This is the decision-making process we would expect, so I cannot say the Council was at fault.
35. Mr X believes the case officer’s report failed to properly address his objections. The facts of the case suggest the Council took needed steps to consider Mr X’s objections and in particular sought reduction of the proposed extension by one metre, members of the Planning Committee visited the site to verify the Planning Officer’s findings and the Council considered this planning application at the Planning Committee meeting. All available evidence suggests the Council followed the right process in reaching its decision so further investigation is unlikely to find fault.
36. Regarding participation of Mr X’s acquaintance in the Planning Committee meeting while another acquaintance declared her interests and withdrew from the meeting, I am satisfied the councillors followed the Code and there was no fault. The Code leaves deciding on declaration of interests to individual councillors who must settle whether a particular relationship would affect their neutrality. It is a subjective matter, therefore there is no need of the same approach from all members.
37. While I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the decision the Council made, I cannot say, on the basis of the evidence I have seen, that it was at fault in how it decided to grant the planning application. So I cannot comment on the merits of its decision.
38. The Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint about the planning application process under its complaints policy. The Head of Planning as a senior manager in the department carried out Stage 1 investigation. The Customer Engagement Officer reviewed the complaint at its Stage 2. Any errors in the Stage 1 response, such as the number of residents consulted during the application process, are not significant enough to impact the result of the investigation. I do not find fault in the way the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

39. For the reasons explained in the Analysis section, I have completed my investigation and do not uphold Mr and Mrs X’s complaint.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman