Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not properly consider a planning application near his home. The Council is not at fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council did not properly consider a planning application near his home because it did not take account of his objection to the application.
2. Mr X says he has lost an opportunity to object and may suffer loss of amenity as a result of the decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
4. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. 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

6. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint. I considered documents obtained from the Council about the planning application.
7. 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

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, precise, enforceable and reasonable in all other regards.
12. 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.

What happened?

14. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
15. A planning permission near to Mr X’s home was submitted. Mr X objected in writing to the proposed development.
16. Planning permission for the development was granted.
17. Mr X complained to the Council that he had not been notified of the Planning committee meeting and that his objection had not been considered. The Council did not uphold his complaint.

Analysis

18. I have reviewed the planning officer report and the recording of the planning committee meeting relevant to the application.
19. Although it did not specifically refer to Mr X’s individual objection, the planning officer report shows that the Council summarised a large number of objections to the proposed development, under a numbered list that broadly included Mr X’s objections.
20. The planning committee had access to all supporting documents relating to the application, including Mr X’s written objections.
21. The officer report does refer to the impact on listed buildings, which was referred to by Mr X in his objection.
22. The Council also applied conditions to the development relevant to Mr X’s concerns. The existence of those conditions indicates the Council considered the issues relating to Mr X’s main concern. Mr X says the conditions are not specific enough. However, the specificity or otherwise of the conditions is not fault. Mr X may consider they do not go far enough, but that in itself does not constitute fault.
23. The Council is under no obligation to inform objectors about a planning committee meeting considering an application. Mr X may wish the Council to adopt a different process but this does not constitute fault. I have therefore not investigated this matter further.
24. On the balance of probabilities, the Council considered Mr X’s objections. This is not fault by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

25. I have not found fault by the Council. I have now completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman