Summary
Mr C complained about the council's handling of an application for four wind turbines near his home. He told us the council failed to respond to his letters before the case went to planning committee. We found that the council had replied reasonably and within a suitable timescale to Mr C's letters which postdated the committee meetings. We told Mr C that the council's obligation was to consider any material objection made to the application and that they were not obliged to respond to ongoing correspondence other than, as in this case, via the complaints handling procedure.
We found that the council had followed the usual and agreed decision-making process. The case was heard by a planning committee which recommended planning approval be delegated to a senior planning officer. We found no evidence, as Mr C believed, that the council had extended its usual 28 day representations period to 90 days. We found evidence that Mr C's objections were properly taken account of within the decision-making process.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201404383 as a PDF (11.05 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018