Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application. Or in its decision there is no breach of planning control at the new houses opposite the complainant’s home.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council:
• failed to follow its Residential Design Guide; and
• failed to consider her amenity

when it granted planning permission for new houses opposite her home.

2. She also says it refuses to accept there is a breach of planning control

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X says the Council has failed to follow local and national guidance requiring a separation distance between properties of 22 metres. She says the distance between her home and the new property is less than 22 metres.
7. She also complains the road where she lives is narrow and the new properties will lead to parking problems and disputes.
8. The information I have seen shows the Council sought the opinion of the Highway department. Highway Officers confirmed they had no objections to the proposed properties, subject to a new parking layby opposite the new access road to the development. Therefore, there is no evidence of the development leading to parking problems.
9. Mrs X complained the new property opposite her home was too close. The Council opened a planning enforcement investigation. An Enforcement Officer visited the site and confirmed the properties were built according to the approved drawings. The Officer returned to the site and measured the distance between the front elevations of the new property and Mrs X’s home.
10. Measurements for separation distances are between main elevations – not from projections such as bay windows.
11. The Council says its measurements confirm the distance between Mrs X’s home and the new property is over 22 metres. It also confirmed the new house is slightly higher by approximately half a metre. The Council is satisfied there is no breach of planning control.
12. I understand Mrs X disputes the Council’s measurements. However, it confirms accurate measurements were taken in her presence.
13. The Ombudsman does not provide a right of appeal against the Council’s decision that there is no breach of planning control. Our role is to review the process by which the Council has reached its decision.
14. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council here to justify an investigation. In reaching this view, I have considered that:
• it is for the Council to judge whether there is a breach of planning control.
• the Council has visited the site, and has considered separation distances
• the Council consulted the Highway Department which had no objections.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision on the planning application or on Mrs X’s report of a breach of planning control.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman