Archive has 1613 results
-
Statement Not upheld Planning applications 18-Mar-2022
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to grant planning permission for two dwellings next to his property. We have not found the Council to be at fault. It considered Mr X’s objections to the application when granting permission. As there was no fault in the process, we cannot question the merits of the Council's decision.
-
Vale of White Horse District Council (21 006 970)
Statement Not upheld Other 18-Mar-2022
Summary: There was no fault in the Council’s handling of a planning and environmental health matter concerning a village shop and café. The Council did not intend to prevent the café serving hot food and so it is not fault that the planning permission allows this. The Council has also given adequate reasons why it does not consider the café is causing a statutory odour nuisance. For this reason, we have completed our investigation.
-
Stratford-on-Avon District Council (21 016 223)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council decided to grant planning permission for development in its area. This is because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision.
-
London Borough of Wandsworth (21 017 739)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainant’s planning application. This is because the complainant has already appealed to the Planning Inspector.
-
Stratford-on-Avon District Council (21 017 947)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council decided to grant planning permission for development in its area. This is because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision.
-
London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (21 016 572)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the Community Infrastructure Levy process. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council administered the process.
-
Northumberland County Council (21 016 741)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.
-
London Borough of Enfield (21 012 655)
Statement Closed after initial enquiries Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a planning application for a dropped kerb. This is because Ms X had appeal rights to the Planning Inspectorate which we would reasonably have expected her to have used.
-
Bedford Borough Council (21 002 339)
Statement Upheld Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: Mr X complains about how the Council handled his neighbour’s retrospective planning application for two air conditioning units’ installation. The Council was at fault for failing to carry out a night-time noise assessment. As a result, it failed to consider the impact the air conditioning units’ installation would have on Mr X’s amenity. This caused Mr X distress, inconvenience and time and trouble. Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused.
-
Ribble Valley Borough Council (21 009 355)
Statement Not upheld Planning applications 17-Mar-2022
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to approve a planning application for development on land behind his home. We ended our investigation as it was unlikely to result in a finding of fault or achieve a meaningful outcome for Mr X.