Say NO to the Lidl signs at Moors Walk!  

 

 

Latest update: July 7th.

The signs appear to be illuminated overnight again. Lidl have been asked not to leave them on out of shop hours and for many months they didn't. Now they are, the signs blaze away all night at the moment. An annoyance to residents, a waste of electricity, and a general degradation of the whole area.

Lest we forget of course that according to the council the signs are "in keeping with the character of the area"!

Is it no wonder that the 24 new flats above the shops sit unsold and unoccupied, the signs don't exactly add to the flats desirability do they?

 





  

Update: April 10th:

The Welwyn Times this week carries the following story about developments regarding the signs READ IT HERE.

So the council now say they will not be renewing the signs when consent expires. To be clear the councils head of development control has written:

"I can confirm that the Council will seek to have the signage removed once the three year period has expire" (09/03/09)

That expiry date is August 2010 so keep a note in your diary.

I'm sure the powers-that-be at Lidl in London will be preparing their own case for an extension on this visual blight on Panshanger residents!

This is a minor victory for common sense and aesthetic values, over in-effective planning policy enforcement by our council. They seem to be prepared to let this sort of corporate disregard for long established rules go unchallenged....well not in our "back yard" thank you.

 

The Panshanger group has responded to the last letter from WHBC. Again it challenges the validty of the planning consent and seeks a full explanation from the council as to how these signs are deemed to be in character with the area, and how it can be claimed they do not detract from the amenity of the area.

Here are the photo's from the letter:



 

The full letter can be read HERE.

 

 

Latest update 26th October

A new response has been received from WHBC in response to the further request for the answers to questions that seek to justify how planning consent was ever given for the signs. Yet again it fails to answer the most pressing question of all, along with a set of other statements which in overall make up a very confused message.

 

They key points are:

 

1) WHBC finally admit they made a mistake in all their correspondence so far. The planning consent given is for 3 years and not 5. This means Lidl will have to re-apply for consent by August 2010,  but hopefully the signs will be removed before then.

2)  WHBC maintains the signs are not detrimental to the visual amenity of the area. However no justification of their assertion is given, other than it it the subjective view of a single planning officer. I think a five year old would probably be able to tell you the signs are the odd thing out if you asked him/her to comment on the scene.

3) They maintain that  " additional advertising would not clutter the area and be out of keeping with the character of the area". - How can this hold water when there is no other advertising of this kind at all in the area?

4) They agree their own report on the signs was misleading and even though one of the signs is not at an entry/egress point of the car park as Lidl said it would be, refuse to do anything about it.

5) They apologise for the mistake in the last letter which said  "I can confirm that the correct notification process was not carried out and that the decision in invalid."

6) They claim the site notifications were correctly sited. According to them that means by the Lidl shop and not 200ft away where the signs actually are. This is highly debatable. 

7) They have apparently not yet had a response from Lidl regarding the illumination times, it must be almost 2 months since they wrote to them.

8) They state that they do not have to take on board local opinion regarding a planning decision "The interests of residents...cannot determine the outcome of an application".

9) They state that the national advertising guidelines are just guidance. It is ultimately up to them what gets permission and what doesn't. That's fine but why was the national guidance seemingly ignored in this instance, what was the motivation behind that decision?  It clearly wasn't ignored in the case below at the Attimore barn? 

 

So WHBC have accepted they have made a number of mistakes so far in this sorry saga, but steadfastly refuse to re-look at the consent. 

Sadly this seemingly non-participatory,  non-inclusive approach to local government is also evident in many other recent planning decisions. I can't help wondering what we good folk of Welwyn Hatfield have done to deserve this.

To be continued... 

 Its also worth noting that all three Panshanger councillors were copied on this communication and none of them responded at all. Previous attempts to enlist their representation have all failed. So far they have done nothing to help residents challenge the council on this issue. In fact it's worse than that as they have took action points at a meeting and agreed to help, but have not done so.



 

23rd September

We are now awaiting a response to our latest letter to WHBC planning. Apparently it's going to take longer than usual, presumably this time the reply will be proof read and will not contain the schoolboy errors of the last one. These made it contradictory in it's message and would have been funny, if they didn't reveal an obvious lack of attention to detail by the department.

Separately, this week WHBC have refused planning permission for a sign at the bottom of the Ridgeway by the Attimore barn. Planning application number N6/2008/1279/AD.

This sign was unlit, it was fixed to a wall, and it was only temporary. It was to have advertised some new key worker apartments for sale at the location. The application was refused.

So how come the Lidl signs, which are lit, are mounted on public ground, and are permanent, were granted permission for several years?

Where is the consistency and logic in planning matters? It defies belief.

I'm sure most residents would have lived with these temporary signs with no grumbles. As for the Lidl signs, residents feel  they should go! 

 

11th September

The Panshanger Residents Group have now responded to the letter from WHBC which was an insufficient explanation of why Lidl got permission for these signs. Many questions were left unanswered by WHBC, most importantly the fact that these signs are out of keeping with the character of the area, and so reduce the public amenity. One of them also no longer fits its purpose as documented in the planning application documentation from Lidl, i.e. it does not mark and entry/access point to the car park. It is also the case that the dwellings closest to the signs were not consulted about the planning application, which is contrary to the local and natioanl planning process.

The signs are not now lit at night, most of the time, although exceptions have been noted.

The latest  letter sent on the 10th of September can be seen  by clicking here.

Check back here for further  developments on this issue, the signs may have been  installed for a while now but the matter is certainly not closed as to local people they are an ever present eyesore which must be removed.

To find out more about this issue please email info@welwynhatfield.co.uk 

 

Latest Update: 12th August  

After the coverage of this story in last weeks Welwyn Times which can be read here a response to the open letter to WHBC has been received. Whilst some of the questions raised in the letter were addressed in some form others were not, and many were glossed over without full explanation. The Panshanger Residents Group will now collate a considered response in reply to the council, details of that response will appear on this page in due course.

The only concession made by WHBC was that the signs should not be illuminated all night and informed they would ask Lidl to switch them off out of store hours.

I am pleased to report that last night the signs were indeed unlit overnight.

If you would like to add your voice to this campaign please get in touch by emailing info@welwynhatfield.co.uk 

 

 

From July 18th.

Note: This webpage has no affiliation with Lidl Supermarkets in any shape or form.

Panshanger residents have recently had ugly and out of character advertising signs foisted upon them at Moors Walk. The illuminated signs for the Lidl shop really detract from the public amenity of the area. Everybody we've spoke to agrees, except of course for Lidl themselves and  Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council who gave express planning permission for three years. How permission was granted is a mystery as their are whole host of reasons why it should not have been.

If you are unsure where Moors Walk is in Welwyn Garden City  Click Here  to go to a map.

A group of local residents have got together and sent an open letter to WHBC amongst others, to seek the removal of the signs. The letter was sent to members of the council on July 18th and a meaningful response is awaited.

 

  To date there have been four letters printed in the Welwyn Times about the signs.

  So far the council have replied to any individual objection by sending a standard letter that does not individually

  address the concerns of the objector.

  Local councillors have been aware of the issue, and are being relied upon to rally to the support of local residents.

  The Welwyn Garden City Society also supports the objection to the signs.

 

Lets act together to get these things taken away!  If they stay, what will be next environmental degradation to our area?

If you would like to add your voice to the objection click here and send an email toinfo@welwynhatfield.co.uk

The prime objections to the signs are as follows:

1)     Welwyn Hatfield has six large neighbourhood shopping centres as listed in the district plan section 13.10. No other centres currently have similar or equivalent signage. This sets a dangerous precedent. What will now prevent a proliferation of such signs?

2)     The WHBC Delegated Report claims the Oak Tavern pub sign as an existing equivalent sign. It is not, their sign is a few feet from the pub and is not illuminated, is smaller, and is in keeping with national pub tradition. This is wholly different to the Lidl signage.

3)     The Delegated Report states �In terms of visual amenity of the surrounding area, it is not considered that the addition of two illuminated flagpole signs would be visually intrusive to such an extent to warrant refusal and cause overall harm to the area but would respect the character of the immediate surrounding area�

 We strongly disagree with this statement; they are very intrusive and eye-catching because they are vastly different in colour and design to anything else in the locality. We cannot comprehend how large blue flagpoles and red/blue/yellow signs respect the character of the area? In addition, at night one of the illuminated signs is clearly visible from almost 1000 feet away towards Herns Lane. We hold that they are detrimental to the character of the area.

4)     The WHBC Delegated Report states �It is considered that additional advertising would not clutter the area and be out of keeping with the character of the area�. We strongly dispute this statement for reasons stated in points two and three above.

5)     The Delegated Report states  �With one sited adjacent to the roundabout and at the entrance to the parking area it serves to highlight this access point and the other denotes the new access to the site developed as part of the new scheme.  The advertisements could be said to aid the circulation of traffic.� Included in the file is a copy of the Moors Walk Proposals Site Plan (Wastell and Porter Architects) dated and stamped by the planning office 26th June 2007, and showing the locations of the proposed signs.  This plan clearly shows the old entrance off the roundabout as closed, with the words �exist. entrance moved� clearly legible.  The planning officer seems to have been careless of this fact in her report. In fact the sign adjacent to the old entrance is likely to distract and confuse.

6)     Incorrect adjacent notifications; the flats adjacent to the Lidl shop were notified of the planning application, but they are not adjacent to the signage. The signage is approximately 200 feet away from the shop. Several properties are adjacent to the signage but they were not notified of the application (and would have objected to it). In our view this makes the express consent given invalid as it was based on a process contrary to section 5 of the Advertisement Consent Guidance Notes.

7)     The signage is illuminated outside of shop hours and throughout the night, causing light pollution and electricity wastage and therefore carbon emissions. The Advertisement Consent form asks in section f3 whether the illumination will be static or intermittent. Details of illumination times do not appear anywhere in Lidl�s completed application form.

8)     In Lidl�s application document pack they included copies of an appeal case they won against the planning refusal of similar signage in Leasowe Road, Wirral. This was presumably to highlight to WHBC that they would appeal if consent was not granted, thus causing more expense to WHBC. They won the appeal in that case but only the express condition the signage was not illuminated outside shop hours. WHBC made no such conditions and subsequently the signs are lit all night. In addition, the Wirral Lidl shop is in an industrial area beside a busy dual carriageway, and a new development on a derelict site � a very different environmental proposition to that of Moors Walk, where the signage is wholly inappropriate.

 The Wirral Council originally refused consent stating the following on 06/10/2006: �In the interests of amenity and in particular because the advertisement forms an unduly obtrusive feature by reason of its size and height which the Local Planning Authority considers detrimental to the visual amenity of the area and the residential amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings and is therefore contrary to Policy HS15 of the Wirral Unitary Development Plan.�

 This is precisely the kind of statement we would have expected WHBC to  make, instead of immediately capitulating to the business interests of a large multinational with deep pockets.

 

9)     The application pack submitted by Lidl is based on the old entrance/exit to the car park being in place. They seemed unaware that this was to be blocked off when they made the application. In their application Lidl claim the rationale for the signage is �to give clear and safe guidance to the access/egress point for visitors to the Lidl store�. The application pack included two photographs of the original entrance/exit with a mock up sign beside it. The application pack did not include any mock up of the new entrance/exit arrangement at Moors Walk, which is itself highly controversial and the subject of a petition. Express Consent should not have been given as the application pack was factually inaccurate in this respect. One of the signs is nowhere near the access/egress point, and they submitted no mock up of the other sign beside the new entrance.

10) The Delegated Report states that signage will comply with the District Plan and Supplementary Design Guidelines 2005. We strongly feel that is does not comply for the multitude of reasons stated above and would challenge WHBC to justify that statement.

11) The WHBC Planning website states that it follows the department for Government and Local Communities national planning document �Planning Policy Guidance:19 Outdoor advertisement control�. This document applies nationwide criteria to control the use of advertising. On review of that document the Lidl signage clearly does not comply with section 11 and 12 and we again challenge the validity of the local planning process in granting consent.

A copy of the letter as sent is available for download : Open Letter

If you would like to add your voice to the objection and stay informed of progress send an email toinfo@welwynhatfield.co.uk

The councils own designed guidelines document which applies to street advertising can be downloadedhere and from the WHBC website.

The signs for those that haven't seen them:

1) By day

2) By night (10:00 PM - the shop closes at 8:00).

This webpage has no affiliation with Lidl Supermarkets in any shape or form.