Bid to build new shops and apartments in Hartlepool's King Oswy Drive is rejected after hundreds sign petition

Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now
Plans to provide two new shops and apartments as part of a shopping parade have been rejected following a 250-signature petition.

Applicant GCS Developments NE wanted to provide two additional retail units on the land, which is currently used for car parking and can be accessed off Nicholson Way.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The proposals also featured two apartments above the units, each offering two bedrooms, with three parking spaces between them.

Plans to build new shops and apartments in Hartlepool's King Oswy Drive have been rejected.Plans to build new shops and apartments in Hartlepool's King Oswy Drive have been rejected.
Plans to build new shops and apartments in Hartlepool's King Oswy Drive have been rejected.

Yet councillors on the committee voted unanimously to refuse the application following recommendations from planning officers.

A petition on behalf of the existing shops in the King Oswy Drive precinct featuring 253 signatures had also been submitted against the proposals.

This had raised concerns including the removal of already “insufficient” parking spaces exacerbating existing issues and causing a “further reduction” in the number of people visiting the shops.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Council planning officers said they were recommending refusal for three reasons, including the proposal resulting in an “in an unacceptable impact on highway and pedestrian safety” due to the removal of parking spaces.

They also had concerns over the “unsympathetic design” being to the “detriment” of the appearance of the area and proposals having an “adverse impact” on the privacy of a neighbouring property.

Read More
Hartlepool residents place own barriers in front of Hartlepool car park to deter...

Councillor Rob Cook said: “Everybody agrees that we should refuse on the basis of the various issues.”

A design and access statement submitted on behalf of the applicant stated the development would “respond positively to the site and its local setting” and can be accessed “safely and conveniently”.