Plans approved for 17 business units in Hartlepool

The borough council’s planning committee this month gave the green light to the redevelopment of land at Mainsforth Terrace, which was previously home to the Havelock Day Centre before its demolition in 2020.

New plans for the cleared site sought permission for 17 “commercial business units” distributed across three, two-storey blocks located along the site’s boundaries.

Associated parking was proposed centrally within the site with 28
spaces, with access taken from Mainsforth Terrace and vehicles being “required to exit through the existing site access along Burbank Street (north).”

Proposed planning uses for the business units included “research and development of products or processes”, industrial processes and storage and distribution uses, with ancillary first floor office units associated with respective ground floor uses.

During a council public consultation on the plans there were objection comments from four separate residential properties, with concerns raised about the location and scale of the buildings, traffic parking and highway safety, noise impacts and more.

Although the development passed several key planning tests, Hartlepool Borough Council’s planning department had recommended the application for refusal over its scale and design.

A report published ahead of the planning committee noted the development’s “extensive scale and mass” and said it would “create an undue, overly dominant and unsympathetic development that fails to respect the character of the application site and wider surrounding area.”

Arguments for and against the proposal were put forward at a planning committee meeting on June 17, 2026, at Hartlepool Civic Centre.

A representative for the applicant said technical issues, including flood risk, drainage and highway safety, had been resolved and that the council’s economic development team “actively supports the scheme”.

The applicant’s agent added the refusal recommendation from council planners was a “matter of planning judgement” and listed the benefits of the scheme, including regenerating a derelict brownfield site, local investment and jobs and enhanced biodiversity.

Council planners argued that the plans would “not be compatible with the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area”, in conflict with planning policies.

However following debate an alternative motion to approve the application, against the refusal recommendation of council planners, was proposed.

After being put to a final vote, the plans were approved by a majority of councillors present.