Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of a planning application for the house next door. We will not investigate this complaint as we have not seen any fault in the way the Council publicised and considered the application. Further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mrs X complains:
• the Council did not tell her about a developer’s planning application to convert the property next to her into flats and extend and alter the property
• the Council has not considered the impact of the development on daylight/sunlight to her home
• the work has caused noise, vibrations, fumes dust and dirt which caused health problems and negatively impacted her home

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’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the following:
• Mrs X’s complaint and supporting information
• the Council’s response to Mrs X’s complaint
• the planning documents for the application
• the Council’s procedures for publicising planning applications
5. Mrs X commented on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. The general power to control development and use of land is set out in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Permission is needed for any development or change of use of land and may be granted by a Local Planning Authority.
7. As part of the consultation process for non-major development, the Council must display site notices or send letters to neighbours. It must also show the application on its website.
8. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies in the local development plan unless other material planning considerations suggest they should not.
9. Planning considerations include, but are not limited to:
• access to the highway
• the impact on neighbouring amenity, including the impact on daylight/sunlight
• protection of ecological or heritage assets
10. Planning considerations do not include:
• views over another’s land.
• the impact of development on property value
• private rights and interests in land.
11. Councils need to provide evidence to show they have considered the material planning considerations. This evidence is normally found in the planning officer’s report and the planning decision notice.
12. It is for the decision maker to decide the weight to give to any material consideration in deciding a planning application. Local opposition or support for a proposal is not in itself a ground for refusing or granting planning permission.
13. When considering complaints about planning applications, we look for evidence the Council followed a proper process before making its decision. We expect to see evidence the Council has identified the material planning considerations raised by the application and properly considered them. The weight an officer gives to those considerations is a matter for their judgement. We will not come to a view on the merits of the planning application. We cannot criticise an officer’s professional judgement or assessment of the application if there is no evidence of fault in how they reached that judgement.

What happened

14. The Council received a planning application in October 2018 from a developer who had bought the house next door to Mrs X’s home. The application was for permission to:
• demolish the rear extension and convert the property into flats with:
• a terrace
• a basement extension
• four lightwells
• a ground floor rear extension
• a part first floor rear extension; and
• a rear dormer extension
15. The Council validated the application and displayed site notices on 4 lamp posts close to the application site. It also published the application and associated documents on its website.
16. The Council’s adopted procedure for publicising planning applications says:

“Where the Council has the option of either displaying site notices or serving notice on adjoining owners and occupiers to meet the requirements of Article 15 the Council will, with effect from the 8th of June 2015 display site notices close to the application site rather than by individual notification to adjoining residents by letter.”

17. Mrs X says she was not aware of the application and doubts the site notices were displayed. However, the Council has identified the numbered lamp posts and the date the notices were displayed. One of the lamp posts is directly outside Mrs X’s home. The Council received 4 objections and one supporting comment on the application from members of the public. I accept that Mrs X did not see, the site notices. However, given the Council has identified the specific lamp posts, and that other people have made representations I am satisfied that on balance, the site notices were displayed.
18. The Planning Officer assessing the application visited the site and prepared a report of the scheme. The report notes that while it had not received any objections from Mrs X’s address, the developer had provided a specialist report on the impact of the proposal on the daylight and sunlight.
19. The Planning Officer notes in the report the position of Mrs X’s home and outbuilding. His opinion was that because of the height and depth of the proposed extensions there would be no significant impact on Mrs X’s amenity. He also noted the daylight and sunlight report. This confirmed that while there will be an impact of the light received by Mrs X’s home, particularly the kitchen, this would not be so significant to warrant refusing the application.
20. The Planning Officer recommended the application be approved with certain conditions. The conditions include:
• a condition to forbid using the extension roofs as a terrace or balcony
• landscaping and boundary treatments must be completed before any of the property is occupied; and
• a detailed method statement for the excavation and construction of the development must be approved by the Council before the work can begin
21. The Council granted planning permission in March 2019.
22. In March 2020, the Council received an application to vary the approved scheme. Again, it displayed site notices on the lampposts. No objections were received. The Planning Officer again prepared a report, and following consideration of the scheme, permission was granted.

Assessment

23. We are not a planning appeal body. Our role is to review the process by which planning decisions are made.
24. On the consultation process, the evidence I have seen shows the Council did display site notices. It identified where the notices were displayed and received representations from members of the public. I am satisfied site notices were displayed and the Council followed the correct procedure for publicising planning applications.
25. Ms X does not believe the Council considered the impact of the scheme on her home. The Planning Officer visited the site and prepared a report. The report includes details of the position of Mrs X’s home and the locations of windows. It also refers to reports commissioned detailing the impact on daylight and sunlight.
26. The Council must consider planning policies and guidance when making decisions. However, there can be competing interests which mean an application cannot fully comply with policy. We would not expect the Council to rigidly apply policy to its decisions in these circumstances. Officers must consider the application on its merits, against the purpose and objectives of policies and plans.
27. I have read the planning officer’s report and I am satisfied the officer properly considered the application taking account of:
• the proposal plans
• the relevant planning history of the site
• the impact on neighbouring properties
• relevant national and local policy; and
• other material planning considerations.
28. The documents I have seen show the material issues were considered, including relevant policy and guidance and the impact on Mrs X’s home.
29. Mrs X disagrees with the Planning Officer, but the officer is entitled to make their own reasoned assessment and it does not mean there was fault in the decision. This is a matter of professional judgement. We cannot question the merits of the officer’s decision to recommend approval where the decision has been properly made.
30. The Council followed the process we would expect and took account of the material planning considerations before making its decision. I have seen no evidence of fault in the information I have seen, and it is unlikely that further investigation would lead to a different outcome.
31. I understand Mrs X is concerned about noise, vibration, dust etc during the construction period. The Council required the developer to put in a construction method statement for approval before work started, which he did. There will inevitably be some degree of disruption during construction work. However, the Council has required the developer to take relevant steps to mitigate the impact of the work. It has also advised Mrs X how to report any specific concerns.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I will not investigate this complaint. From the information I have seen, there was no fault in the way the Council dealt with the planning application. And I consider further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman