Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration and decision to approve a planning application. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the process to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council granted planning permission for her neighbour’s extension based on inaccurate and incomplete plans.
2. She also complains the extension breaches the 45-degree rule and failed to respond to her promptly.

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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

Background

6. Planning authorities must publicise all planning applications. Depending on the nature of the development, publication may be by newspaper advertisement and / or site notice and / or neighbour notification (The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.) The notice will invite ‘representations’ for or against the application and explain how those representations may be made. The opportunity to make representations is not the same as being consulted. The authority must consider all material representations it receives but officers will not correspond with members of the public who have objected to a planning application.
7. Councils should approve planning applications that accord with policies in the local development plan unless other material planning considerations indicate they should not.
8. Planning considerations include like:
• access to the highway;
• protection of ecological and heritage assets; and
• the impact on neighbouring amenity.
9. Planning considerations do not include like:
• views from a property;
• the impact of development on property value; and
• private rights and interests in land.
10. Councils may impose planning conditions to make development acceptable in planning terms. Conditions should be necessary, enforceable, and reasonable in all other regards.
11. Planning officers may consider the loss of light or overbearing impact a new development is likely to have on existing buildings. They often use a rule of thumb, known as the ‘45-degree rule’. To do this, they imagine a 45-degree line from the mid-point of the nearest habitable room window on the neighbour’s property. Some councils also apply a ‘rising’ 45-degree line, with an upward angle of about 25 degrees. Only those parts of the development above and beyond the point where the line touches the development will be considered potentially problematic.
12. Some councils include this test, or versions of it, in their published Supplementary Planning Guidance, which shows how they apply policy to protect amenities.

What happened

13. Mrs X’s neighbour applied for planning permission for a single storey rear extension. The Council publicised the application. Mrs X put in detailed objections including (but not limited to):
• proposed height breaches height limit within 2m of boundary wall
• length and width exceed 45-degree line from nearest habitable room window
• overshadowing, blocking natural light and sunlight from her ground floor
• plans lack enough detail to show impact on Mrs X’s home
• loss of privacy; and
• overlooking.
14. The planning officer’s report lays out what legislation has applied to the case and details of Mrs X’s objections.
15. The Officer addresses the objections, detailing the 45-degree rule and the Building Research Establishment (BRE) document outlining good practice on daylight and sunlight. The report acknowledges the single storey extension will come closer to Mrs X’s property than the existing building. And there will be an impact on the light received by Mrs X’s windows with a changed outlook. However, the Officer’s opinion is this will not be “so significantly harmful as to result in an adverse loss of light or outlook to the occupiers of this neighbouring dwelling.”
16. The Planning Officer considered the proposal, objections, and relevant policy. They concluded the application was acceptable as it “would not result in a significant loss of amenity to local residents and not impact detrimentally on the character of the area.” This is a professional judgement and decision the officer is entitled to make.
17. I understand Mrs X considers the plans were inaccurate, but the Council is satisfied the information available was sufficient to make an informed decision. Also, while the 45-degree rule of thumb is a useful tool, it does not form part of the Council’s adopted planning policy.
18. Mrs X also complains the Council failed to respond to her promptly. However, the Council is not required to engage in correspondence with objectors as part of the statutory planning process.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered and subsequently approved her neighbour’s planning application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman