Plans for new Sainsbury’s supermarket recommended for refusal

Newark & Sherwood Council will make a final decision on the proposal, for grassland off Nottingham Road, Southwell, during its planning meeting on March 16.

The only other supermarket in the town is a Co-op on The Ropewalk, which some residents say has a “monopoly” and is “expensive”.

However, others fear a new supermarket would impact on other traders in the town and affect its character.

The development would create about 40 jobs and include an Argos click-and-collect service.

Supporters of the plans said it would “bring Southwell into 21st century”, but objectors said it is the wrong site for a new supermarket.

If built, the Sainsbury’s would be open Mondays-Saturdays, from 7am-10pm, and from 10am-4pm on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

However, the scheme would involve the loss of trees and hedgerows, which has been criticised by some residents, while Southwell Civic Society fears the development “would irreversibly alter the character and identity of the town”.

Overall 142 people commented on the plans, of which 48 were objections.

Those supporting the plans said the outlet is “urgently needed” in Southwell and would bring jobs and growth, adding it is “unreasonable” for residents in Southwell to take long round trips to do a food shop.

However, objectors said it was the wrong site for the development.

A council tree and landscape officer said: “The proposal would result in the loss of important groups of trees/woodland worthy of tree preservation order, a negative impact on visual amenity, character and biodiversity of the town of Southwell and potential destruction of ancient woodland.”

Council documents stated: “The convenience retail picture in the town is one where there is a lack of choice and competition in the local area, with the evidence showing people are travelling further afield to undertake main food shopping at larger foodstores.

“The applicant has demonstrated through this application that the retail needs of residents are not currently being met.”

However, officers added they were not satisfied with the environmental impacts of the development and recommended the application for refusal.