Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council decided to approve a planning application for a temporary installation near to his home. Mr X said this has caused increased traffic and illegal parking in the area. We do not find the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council decided on a planning application to install temporary classroom space at a school near to his home. Mr X says the Council failed to properly consider how the increased capacity of the school would affect parking and traffic in the local area. As a consequence, Mr X has said he has to avoid leaving or returning to his home around the times the school opens and closes.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint and considered information he provided. I also considered information received from the Council.
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

Relevant law and policy

7. Where planning permission is required, a council must decide on planning applications in accordance with its 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 it is founded on valid material planning reasons.
10. Government statements of planning policy are material considerations.
11. General planning policies may pull in different directions (e.g., in promoting residential development and protecting residential amenities).
12. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to give to any material consideration in deciding a planning application.

What happened

13. The Council received a planning application for the temporary installation of additional classroom space and alterations to a car park layout until December 2025 from a school near to Mr X’s home. The application was supported by additional documents and plans, including a design and access statement and a transport assessment.
14. The Council consulted locally on the application and consulted with its highways department. It published the transport development consultation on its website. This considered the additional numbers of pupils and staff, and how they would likely impact on highway safety and the road network.
15. Mr X made submissions on the application directly to the Council. Mr X said the plans would reduce the number of parking spaces at the school and would cause further road safety issues. Mr X questioned the accuracy of the transport assessment and explained illegal parking was already a persistent problem. Mr X also questioned the accuracy of the school’s travel plan.
16. The Council’s highways department considered all the available information and confirmed it had no objections to the application.
17. The Council’s planning case officer’s report on the application outlines the relevant local plan and policies and sets out the officer’s consideration of whether the temporary installations would impact the local highway. The report recommended the application be approved.
18. The Council approved permission for a temporary period based on the case officer’s report.

Analysis

19. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. Our role is not to consider whether a planning application should have been approved or not. We look at whether there was fault in how a council made its decision. If we decide there was no fault in its decision-making process, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome. We cannot uphold a complaint simply because a person disagrees with a council’s decision.
20. I have considered the steps the Council took to consider the issue of increased traffic and parking generation, as a material consideration when looking at this application.
21. The case officer’s report shows they considered and applied relevant policy and consultations, they considered how the development would affect traffic and parking in the area, and they decided there was not a significant enough impact to justify declining the application. I do not find fault with the process the case officer followed when making their recommendation to approve the application.
22. Mr X has said the traffic in the area has increased and he frequently witnesses illegal parking from parents, but that is not a reason for me to find fault with the Council. As the case officer made a judgement taking into account relevant policies, I cannot otherwise question whether their decision was right or wrong. I find no fault in the Council’s decision-making process.
23. Mr X has also questioned the accuracy of the transport assessment and consultations that formed part of the application. However, the Council has demonstrated it fully considered the submissions and made relevant enquiries of its highways department, I do not find it at fault here.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I find no fault with how the Council considered this planning application and have ended my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman