Summary: The Council was not at fault in how it reached its decision to approve a planning application near Mr X’s house. It considered all the relevant information including Mr X’s objections. We have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council used a flawed transport report to support its decision to approve a planning application for a housing development near his house.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

4. I have considered Mr X’s complaint and have spoken to him about it.
5. I have also considered the Council’s response to Mr X, the planning application file and the Council’s Development Plan.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law

7. All decisions on planning applications must be made in accordance with the council’s development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
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. General planning policies may pull in different directions (e.g. in promoting residential development and protecting residential amenities).
11. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to be given to any material consideration in determining a planning application.

What happened

Background

12. Mr X moved into his house in 2012. The house was part of a new development of 12 houses, on the site of a former business.
13. In 2013, the Council adopted its Land Allocations Development Plan Document (the Plan). This included a site (Site A) allocated for 28 houses near where Mr X lives. The Council had carried out four rounds of public consultation between 2008 and 2011 on the Plan. The Plan was considered by a Planning Inspector ahead of its adoption.
14. In April 2021, the Council received a planning application for 29 houses on Site A.
15. In support of the planning application, the developers commissioned consultants to carry out a Transport Assessment Statement.
16. Mr X submitted objections to the proposed development. The majority of his objections were in reference to the Transport Assessment. He questioned whether the consultants had visited the site and whether they had carried out a real time on the ground traffic survey.
17. The developer confirmed the consultants had not visited the site. The Transport Assessment was based on a desktop exercise. They deemed this method appropriate given the Covid-19 pandemic and the fact the site was allocated in the Plan and had already been through a site allocation assessment process.
18. The Council granted planning permission in December 2021. This was subject to a legal agreement which was agreed in March 2022.

My findings

19. The allocation of a site for development is not a guarantee that it will be developed for that use. However, it is good indication that the allocated use is suitable on the site given it has been through the rigorous Local Plan making process and agreed by the Planning Inspectorate.
20. Mr X argued that when the site was allocated, the housing development where he lives had not been built. He said this development and other changes in the village meant the traffic situation had changed since the Council allocated the site. He said the Transport Assessment Statement did not consider these factors and a full site-based up to date assessment should have been carried out.
21. There is no specific requirement for site-based evidence to be produced by a developer. The Council made a judgement that the desk-based Transport Assessment was adequate to inform its decision. The fact the site was already allocated and had been through various assessment processes provided a basis for the Council’s decision. In addition, the Highways Authority did not object to the proposed development or the content of the Transport Assessment.
22. I cannot question the Council’s decision if it was made properly. I am satisfied the Council considered all the relevant information. It was aware of Mr X’s concerns about the Transport Assessment. However, when it weighed up all the material considerations, the Council considered it had enough information to reach its decision. There is no fault here.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation. There was no fault in how the Council reached its decision to approve the planning application. Its decision was in accordance with the adopted Development Plan.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman