The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions when consulting on a draft masterplan or planning application. The Council considered the planning application and has investigated complaints about construction noise and dust without fault.
The complaint
The complainant, who I shall call Mrs X, complains that notification and consultation about the use of land near her house in the draft masterplan framework was inadequate.
She also complains that the Council did not notify her by letter of a planning application for major development near her home. And, the Council did not adequately consider the impact of the planning application on her home.
Mrs X also complains the Council has not monitored compliance with planning conditions relating to construction near her home. She believes that her property has suffered damage from the construction work.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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) If we are satisfied with a council’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)
How I considered this complaint
I read the papers put in by Mrs X and discussed the complaint with her.
I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Mrs X’s complaints relate to an area of land hear her home, between the town and a major road. This area of land was allocated for housing and employment.
Draft masterplan In May/June 2020 the Council carried out a six week public consultation on the draft masterplan for the land behind her home. The consultation included online material and questionnaires, telephone consultations, hard copy consultation packs delivered on request or available from a café, supermarket and community centres/groups, media releases, letters, emails and 23 site notices. In a report to Committee the Council said that while methods of engagement differed because of COVID-19, the consultation provoked a higher level of response than the consultation on a nearby masterplan the previous year.
Mrs X complains that notification and consultation about the use of land near her house in the draft masterplan framework was inadequate. She explained that she has not got access to the internet and was concerned that the masterplan copies were put in a supermarket 1.5 miles away rather than a local shop.
The Council has said that it notified Mrs X’s home of the master plan by letter and that she spoke directly to the project manager by telephone. The Council explained that due to COVID-19 this supermarket was the only one open and willing to host hard copies. Mrs X got a copy of the master plan from the supermarket but complains that she had to travel over a mile and this could discriminate against older people.
I can find no evidence of fault in the Council’s consultation with Mrs X. She was notified by letter, spoke to the officer involved on the telephone and got a copy of the draft master plan. While I understand the consultation was different because of COVID-19, I can see the Council used all the methods it could do to consult residents. Mrs X could respond to the consultation and so I find no evidence of fault that caused her injustice on this point. Placing the hard copies in a local large supermarket for those without internet access seems sensible to me, especially as due to lockdown many smaller places would be closed or unable to help.
Notification of planning application Mrs X says the Council did not notify her of the planning application by letter. The Council has said (and its website shows) it notified Mrs X of the application by letter, along with 434 other residents. I find no fault by the Council on this point.
Consideration of the planning application Mrs X complains the Council did not adequately consider the impact of the planning application on her home. Mrs X feels the Council put her and her neighbours houses in with the allotments when considering the application.
The planning application was a large complex application that included outline planning consent for employment use on 2 plots and a full application for access, a new roundabout and a distribution centre. The planning application was approved by Committee Members and I can see from the Committee report that Mrs X’s property was not mentioned specifically. Given the scale of the development, it is understandable the Council could not consider the impact on every property individually.
The planning officers report does consider the impact of the development on residential properties on the road Mrs X’s property is on. The Council says ‘it was a large and complex application whereby the recommendation to approve was made on balance, recognising there would be some unavoidable adverse impacts but that ultimately, these were outweighed by the benefits of the proposal’.
The planning report considered objections because of the impact of the site. Officers felt that it was recognised that because of the nearness to the major road the site would appeal to the logistics sectors which tend to have buildings with a larger footprint and height. The report said that larger buildings should occupy the part of the site away from residential properties, with buildings closer to Mrs X’s road being on a ‘more human scale’. However, the planning report accepted developing the site would impact adversely on visual amenity. The report recognises there would be significant impact from the changes in landscape to properties on Mrs X’s road.
The planning report considered that adequate levels of residential amenity would be retained by siting larger buildings to the west of the site. However, there would be a loss of view but there was no legal right to a view. The report noted the Council would consider the impact of the buildings on plots 2 and 3 at the reserved matters stage.
I understand Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision and the impact of the development on her home. The planning application is for a number of large distribution centres which the Council accepts will have some adverse impacts on the view. However, Committee Members could consider all the facts, including the impact on nearby residential properties when they made their decision. So, I can see no evidence of fault.
Compliance with construction planning conditions Mrs X complains the Council has not monitored compliance with planning conditions relating to construction near her home.
The Council’s pollution control officer said that ‘the approved construction method statement includes measures to control the emission of dust, dirt and noise during construction works. There is also a condition restricting working hours and dust and noise monitoring. There are three management plans in place. These are a construction management plan, a dust management plan and a noise management plan. These detail the procedures to control dust, noise and vibration’.
The Council has said the pollution control team have received complaints from residents regarding dust and noise. These have been investigated by either visiting the complainant's properties to try to witness the issues or sending out letters with officer contact details and diary sheets to record further noise or dust issues.
The Council sent me records of the visits carried out. The pollution control officers view is that ‘on each visit to the development site, dust suppression has been in place and used in areas where machinery is working. Noise has been at a reasonable level for a large construction site. There is no evidence that any planning conditions have been breached’. The planning officer also monitors informally every time they are in the area and has not observed a breach of condition.
I can find no evidence of fault in the Council’s response to Mrs X’s complaints about noise and dust. I understand that she is concerned that vibration from construction may have caused damage to her property, but this is a private legal matter between her and the developer.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is not upheld as there is no evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman