LGO - Council which ignored planning duties reminded of Ombudsman accountability role
16 Sep 2016 04:32 PM
Local authorities across England are being reminded that the Local Government Ombudsman has the same powers as the High Court to require evidence, after Plymouth City Council failed to comply with its recommendations.
The LGO was called on to investigate complaints from two separate homeowners about a series of errors by city planners when approving a second application on an uncultivated field.
During the planning process, officers failed to publicise the new application properly in the neighbourhood, failed to ask for a flood risk assessment from the Environment Agency, included the wrong plans in the report to the planning committee, and significantly misrepresented how the new proposals would affect neighbours in the report.
Consequently, one resident says she no longer has any late afternoon sunshine in her kitchen, sitting room and dining room and has a Juliet balcony overlooking her garden and decking in the new garden affords an uninterrupted view into her bedroom
The other couple feel overlooked and their outlook is dominated by a two-storey house.
Both homeowners say their properties now flood because of inadequate consideration of drainage of surface water from the site
The Ombudsman's report of the case says that the council was obstructive and challenged the Ombudsman’s findings of fault. It has had a number of opportunities to acknowledge the errors made but has refused to do so or to follow recommendations made.
Dr Jane Martin, Local Government Ombudsman, said:
“The role of the Local Government Ombudsman to hold councils to account when they get things wrong is well established and has a statutory basis.
“Authorities can and do have the chance to comment on my decisions before they are finalised, including providing evidence if they wish to challenge the findings, but they should cooperate with the investigation process. Compliance with LGO recommendations is extremely high, based on a relationship with local authorities of mutual trust and respect. This is essential for achieving redress for citizens.
“I would now urge Plymouth council to learn from my report and accept the recommendations for remedy I have made.”
To remedy the injustice caused Plymouth City Council has been asked to apologise to both families. It should ask the District Valuer to assess the current value of the complainants’ properties and the value each would have had if the developers had built according to the original plans and pay the difference between the two valuations.
It should pursue the proposals in the drainage report completed in the course of the investigation and ensure adequate drainage is in place before the onset of winter. It should arrange for all members of its planning committee to have at least one day’s training from professionally qualified planning officers who are not employed by the council to ensure they can robustly challenge planning officers views prior to making decisions
The council should also pay both families £500 each in recognition of the time and trouble to which they have been put.