The opposition to the threatened eviction of B&Q from their Welwyn Garden City store continues to grow. The group ‘Community for B&Q’ has been formed via the Welwyn Garden City Society to act as a Rule 6 Party to the B&Q Public Inquiry. A Rule 6 Party can participate in the proceedings of a public inquiry, but applications for this status can only be made by established organisations. The forming of this group gives a chance for the community’s voice to be heard at the top table.
The Planning Inspectorate requires formal objections from the community to be made by 25 September 2023. Details of how to object and some draft text are given below and will hopefully also on be on Together for WGC’s website).
‘Community for B&Q’ want to build on the sterling work of Ricky Cooper in his previous petition:
https://www.change.org/p/b-q-petition-against-demolition-of-b-q-welwyn-for-151-new-homes
We never expected this speculative application to evict B&Q in order to build even more flats to proceed to a Public Inquiry.
A key aspect of the defence to this appeal is that Hemel Hempstead-based Thrive Homes have failed to meet the Council’s stipulation that –
‘…the proposals will only be permitted where it can be clearly demonstrated that the existing land or premises are no longer required to meet future employment requirements and business and community needs’.
Community for B&Q fully supports the Council’s position at this Public Inquiry. The representations will supplement, not duplicate, the Council’s defence. We will focus on delivering high-quality evidence in the proceedings.
Ward Councillor Russ Platt stated:
“Our community made it clear that they objected to the loss of the store in 2021 when the initial application was made. This has clearly not changed, if anything the appetite to keep B&Q as the existing retail site has grown.
Everyone knows that this is an employment site; it is listed as such in the existing and emerging local plans, the council rejected the application on this basis (amongst others) and there is nothing that the developer has presented to negate this. So, I cannot see on what basis the developer hopes to overturn the policy driven decision that the Council correctly made in refusing the initial application – it is an unnecessary appeal that will now incur costs for the council to defend, money that could and should be spent on many other services for our residents.”
Welwyn Garden City Society quotation:
“B&Q employment and retail should be maintained in the Garden City because it makes sense, there is avid community support, it is in the Council’s Local Plan and it conforms to the ideals of Ebenezer Howard the founder of the town. It is amazing that this proposal to evict B&Q has gone to an expensive Public Inquiry.
The Hemel Hempstead-based developer has failed to evidence that the retail is not being used, despite specific request from the Council. Community support is high and the Appeal will be vigorously defended”.
We have been contacting useful resources including the B&Q store and their Head Office.
We have also been in touch with the community participants in the recent Public Inquiry at B&Q Cricklewood:
Anyone wanting to help with the opposition to this appeal should contact the Society or Ward Councillor Russ Platt. All-time contributions, no matter how small, will increase the chances of the community successfully defending this appeal.
Together for WGC will review their participation at their next meeting scheduled for 21st September.
Thanks for your continuing support.
Please help our campaign
Please find below some text for residents’ objection.
Submit your objection to the Government Inspector before
25th September 2023
via email to: alison.bell@planninginspectorate.gov.uk
Please also send a copy to us at info@wgcsociety.org and Together for WGC.
Re: B&Q, Swallowfields, Welwyn Garden City Appeal APP/C1950/W/23/3327269
I object to this proposal to evict B&Q from Welwyn Garden City. I regularly use the store and it’s loss will increase travelling times, be very inconvenient, increase congestion and add to environmental pollution. We do not need any more flats – where are they going to work and shop?
A blend of employment and housing conforms to the ideals of Ebenezer Howard the founder of the town. B&Q employment and retail should be maintained in the Garden City because it makes sense, there is wide local community support and it is in the Council’s Local Plan.
It is amazing that this proposal to evict B&Q has gone to an expensive Public Inquiry. The Hemel Hempstead-based developer has failed to prove that the retail is not being used, despite being specifically requested by the Council.
There are already advanced plans to build over 300 small flats within just 250m of the B&Q store. Over 1,800 flats are planned/ underway on the nearby Broadwater Road. It appears that many of the recently completed flats in Phase 1 of the Broadwater Road West development remain unsold.
The site is a key retail store in Welwyn Garden City and one of the few available for a retailer with substantial site requirements. B&Q provides an essential local service to the many local residents in the area. It is much-loved and widely supported by the local community. Wickes is the only alternative but it has only a limited range and no garden centre.
The eviction of B&Q would mean the loss of over 50 local jobs. There is no suitable alternative site for B&Q in the area. There are many alternative sites for flats.
Moving the store would have a high environmental impact. It would result in increased pollution and a move away from the UK Government’s ‘Net-Zero’ target. Some residents would need to travel over 18 miles to comparable shops elsewhere, incurring more or longer car journeys and increasing road congestion in areas that are already very busy. The current location is very sustainable as it is walkable and bikeable.
The proposed dwelling mix ignores the Council’s policy guidelines which do not require so many small flats.
Please reject this unnecessary appeal. The Council is being forced to spend unnecessary money fighting the actions of this speculative developer. This means a loss of funding for local services caused by the developer’s failure to comply with the Council’s Local Plan.