Understanding planning · 13 min read
Planning application documents: what to read first
Understand planning application documents, officer reports and decision notices. Use a reading checklist, document table and worked example to inspect a case.
Application overview
Change of use from dwelling house (C3) to 7 bed HMO (Sui Generis) including two storey extension to rear, hip to gable roof, dormer windows, bin compound, 3no. parking spaces and cycle storage
Proposal details
- Reference
- 25/0186/FUL
- Ward
- Longlands/Beechwood
- Agent
- Miss Emily Andrews
- UPRN
- 100110117421
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsDocuments 12 of 12
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Planning statementSupporting Documents | 17 Mar 2025 | View |
| Nutrient nutrality calculatorSupporting Documents | 17 Mar 2025 | View |
| Proposed elevations & block plan Dwg no.HRM04CDrawing | 17 Mar 2025 | View |
| Proposed plans Dwg no. HRM 03DDrawing | 17 Mar 2025 | View |
| Existing plans & proposed block plan Dwg no. HRM01CDrawing | 17 Mar 2025 | View |
| Transport statementSupporting Documents | 17 Mar 2025 | View |
| Application form redactedApplication Form | 17 Mar 2025 | View |
| Consultee Notification ListConsultation Notification List | 28 Apr 2025 | View |
| Neighbour Notification ListNeighbour Notification List | 28 Apr 2025 | View |
| Existing elevations Dwg no. HRM 02ADrawing | 11 Jun 2025 | View |
| Decision NoticeDecision | 30 Jun 2025 | View |
| Officer ReportReport | 30 Jun 2025 | View |
Documents open on the council website. Browse council documents if a link has changed.
Application timeline
Council milestones and published deadlines. A deadline passing does not confirm a decision.
Decision due date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council sourceConsultation expiry date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council sourceStatutory expiry date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council source
Decision & conditions
Decision NoticePlanning conditions
- Poor standard of accommodation In the opinion of the local planning authority the proposed HMO accommodation does not provide an acceptable standard of accommodation suitable for long term accommodation or reasonable standard of amenity for occupiers contrary to the Councils Conversion Policy and Para.135 of the NPPF.
- Rear extension & dormer window & hip to gable extension In the opinion of the local planning authority the size, scale and design of the extensions are considered to be out of keeping with the host property and will not contribute positively to the streetscene and character and appearance of the area. In view of the above the proposed additions are considered to be contrary to Policy CS5 (c) and DC1 (b) and contrary to the Councils Urban Design SPD.
- Nutrient Neutrality not achieved The proposal would result in an increase in population and a consequential increase in wastewater and nutrients (specifically nitrogen) entering into the drainage system which would, in turn, add to existing nutrient burdens within the River Tees. Unmitigated, this proposal would have an adverse impact on the Teesmouth and Cleveland Coast Special Protection Area, which would be contrary to Local Plan Policies CS4 (j) and DC1 (a) and the NPPF and would fail to meet the legal requirements of the Conservation of Species and Habitat Regulations 2017.
- Impact on neighbouring properties In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority given the position of the rear extension adjacent the shared boundaries, its design, scale and siting will result in a significant impact upon neighbouring properties in terms of loss of light, visual impact and outlook and perception of privacy through increased level of use contrary to DC1 (c).
- Insufficient parking provision In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the inability to achieve in curtilage parking within the site will create an unacceptable impact on existing residents and the ability of them to park within the residents parking scheme contrary to Policy DC1 (test d).
Related records
No related records were published in this section.
