LGO criticises council over flawed handling of planning amendments

The Local Government Ombudsman has criticised a Dorset council over its handling of amendments to a planning application for a housing development.

Jane Martin said she welcomed Christchurch Borough Council’s co-operation, but decided to complete the investigation and issue the report because there were “issues of public interest”.

A Mrs Evans and Mr Harris (not their real names) had complained about how Christchurch dealt with proposed amendments to the development next to Mrs Evans’ home which involved the construction of 12 dwellings and a hotel. Mr Harris, Mrs Evans’ son, was a trustee of the property.

The complainants were unhappy that the council had failed to notify them of the amendments, which meant they were unable to comment on the proposals.

Christchurch had not felt the need to contact Mrs Evans and Mr Harris because a council officer considered the changes to be minor.

The amendments included plans to decrease the distance between Mrs Evans’s building and the new construction at ground level by extending the footprint towards her property by 1 metre, as well as decreasing the distance at first floor level by 2.5 metres. The installation of full-length glass doors in place of a window, causing a significant loss of privacy by offering a full view into Mrs Evans’ bedroom, was also classed as a minor amendment.

The Ombudsman said the planning officer’s decision was “marginal, [but] not utterly unreasonable”.

However, she added that the local authority had failed to keep a proper record of its consideration of the amendments and the manner in which it had reached its conclusion. This lack of evidence undermined Mrs Evans and Mr Harris’ confidence in the process – their outrage was “justifiable”, the LGO argued.

Martin said: “It would have been a more transparent process if the complainants had been notified of the proposed changes and this may well have given them greater confidence in the decision-making process and the council’s decision to approve the changes.”

The Ombudsman acknowledged that while some of the amendments would increase overlooking of the complainants’ property, others would have seen a decrease.

She also criticised the council for failing to spot the omission of obscure-glazed screens to the balconies on the final set of approved drawings, arguing that this had led to uncertainty.

The LGO found Christchurch guilty of maladministration and recommended that it pay £500 to each of the complainants to remedy the injustice.

The council has agreed to introduce improvements to its record-keeping procedures as well. These include the chronological organisation of all files maintained for planning applications, including a log of all site visits and a record of all telephone calls. Amended plans will also be more widely publicised, enabling a transparent planning application process.

Christchurch has also secured the installation of obscure-glazed screens on part of the development.

Ed Archer