Hartlepool door row: Council to contest business’s planning appeal
Council bosses are to contest an appeal made by a training company to keep its controversial replacement door as it is.
Hartlepool Borough Council issued Evolution Training, based in Scarborough Street, with an enforcement notice to restore the traditional features of its previous door after having a retrospective planning application rejected for the replacement.
The previous door was smashed by a car in February last year and a uPVC replacement was installed.
The Hartlepool Mail previously reported the company was appealing the decision, citing other examples of similar doors in the area and disputing it is ‘out of character’ with the area.
Councillors on the Hartlepool Borough Council planning committee have now given council officers the go-ahead to contest the appeal and take it to the Planning Inspectorate.
The Planning Inspectorate is a Government agency which deals with planning appeals after a decision has been made by local authorities.
Daniel James, council planning team leader, said: “An appeal has been submitted against an enforcement notice that was served in respect of a replacement door in Scarborough Street.
“The application was refused by the committee back in September last year and subsequently granted permission to take enforcement action to secure removal of it and reinstate original features.
“Therefore we seek members authority to contest this appeal.”
The planning committee previously objected to the new door at its September meeting stating it was ‘out of character’ with the Church Street Conservation Area where it is located.
Evolution Training bosses will now be hoping the appeal will be successful and they will not have to make changes to the current door.
Speaking to the Hartlepool Mail in November, Joan Chapman, general manager at Evolution Training, said: “The council did issue us with an enforcement notice and I’ve now put in an appeal so we’re currently waiting for the outcome of the appeal.
“We appealed on a number of grounds, the main one being that other buildings in the street and the area have the same type of door and uPVC that we’ve used, and I supplied a number of photographs to support the claim.”
She had previously said the replacement door was ‘more substantial, safer, more secure for staff’ and ‘looked nicer’ than the previous door.
The former timber door to the property was replaced with a composite dark blue door with a white uPVC frame.
The window above the door has been replaced with white uPVC cladding and timber boarding placed to the side of the frame, while decorative details have been removed.
Nic Marko, Local Democracy Reporting Service