permission refused because a side elevation plan was missing

[carbonated]

Dear all,
We have applied for a Certificate of Legal Development for an outbuilding close to the existing house on a site that slopes away from the house.

A section plan (along with plan view, rear elevation location and site plans), showing how the proposal relates to the sloping ground level was submitted. The application has been refused on the basis that no side elevation plan was submitted.

The decision came in 1 week before the end of the determination expiry date, meaning it took 11 weeks for them to notice this plan was missing, since the LPA included time reserved for consultation of neighbours, although under a CLD none should be required.

We are wondering if this is a fair reason for refusal and whether it should have been picked up at validation stage, and notification to amend the application given to us much sooner. The LPA has not published a list of required plans for CLD applications although their validation list does say that all sides of the proposal should be shown if full planning permission is being applied for.

If you think it should have been picked up at validation stage, do you think we should ask that a further application with the side elevation plan is given a shortened determination time especially since it is a CLD?

Many thanks for your thoughts.

Nate

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

When alls said and done I would just whack it in again with the additional elevation, that elevation should have been submitted initially and it should have been picked up at validation stage. Whilst is crap service, I would have been badgering them from about week 5 for any feedback. Just whack another back in for your free go.

 

[tony1851]

If you submit an application for a LDC, the onus is on you to prove that one should be given; if you don't give full information, the LPA cannot tell if it should be, and can refuse on the grounds of insufficient info.

Having said that, I agree it's rubbish service; the admin people should have picked this up early on and advised you to supply the drawing. What are these people being paid for??

 

[^woody^]

If you submit an application for a LDC, the onus is on you to prove that one should be given; if you don't give full information, the LPA cannot tell if it should be, and can refuse on the grounds of insufficient info.

I certainly do not think that a missing elevation is failing to provide necessary information. The information is there in the other plans provided, the planner could and should interpret the drawings as part of their job.

It's definitely not a valid reason for refusal.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I certainly do not think that a missing elevation is failing to provide necessary information. The information is there in the other plans provided, the planner could and should interpret the drawings as part of their job.

It's definitely not a valid reason for refusal.

You're saying a planner should be able to interpret an elevation without seeing it?

It's certainly a valid reason for it being deemed invalid.

 

[^woody^]

It may be invalid for registration, but a planner should be able to interpolate an elevation view from a plan view and think there is no relevant impact or a potential impact and more detail is required.

We do have nonsense situations where we have to draw an elevation view even when there is nothing to show because the view is obscured. This can be determined from the plan view.

 

[tony1851]

If you submit an application for a LDC, the onus is on you to prove that one should be given; if you don't give full information, the LPA cannot tell if it should be, and can refuse on the grounds of insufficient info.

I certainly do not think that a missing elevation is failing to provide necessary information. The information is there in the other plans provided, the planner could and should interpret the drawings as part of their job.

It's definitely not a valid reason for refusal.

I would guess that planners will put their own interpretation of what's needed for a complete application, though in some circumstances it might be difficult to check height in the absence of an elevation.

All that aside, OP could try an appeal but at what cost in time? Easier in the long run to shut them up by providing the necessary elevation.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

@woody That's fine until someone gets away with something they maybe shouldn't because the planners assumed what an elevation would look like, then they'll be criticised won't they? Damned either way.

 

[carbonated]

Very many thanks for your replies.

I think the gist is that any reasonable person would have expected this to be picked up and a request made to me for the missing information.
I of course would have just submitted it had I been informed it was required, at the validation stage or even during the determination period.

Im going to see the officer tomorrow and make sure there isnt anything else she wants that isnt there. Ill let you know how it goes....