Asda refused permission for a new store in Norwich

An artist's impression of plans for a new Asda supermarket off Hall Road in Norwich. An artist's impression of plans for a new Asda supermarket off Hall Road in Norwich.

Thursday, September 20, 2012
4:04 PM

Asda has dramatically been refused permission for a new superstore in Norwich.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

The Hall Road site for the proposed new Asda store.The Hall Road site for the proposed new Asda store.

Norwich City Council’s planning committee today decided to refuse permission for the store at the old Bally Shoe Factory site in Hall Road, which Asda bosses said would have created 300 jobs.

But the committee decided by five votes to four to reject the scheme, saying the superstore was too dominant for a district centre, the plans did not make best use of a brownfield site, protected trees would be removed, and pedestrian access was not good enough. Another reason for refusal was the dominance of the car park.

The store would have had a net floor space of 3,406 square metres and would have formed part of a new district centre, also including a pub, a community centre, a gym, a 334-space car park, four industrial units and four units which could have been used for retail, takeaways or cafes.

Representatives for Chapelfield Shopping Centre had also raised concerns the development could threaten the vitality of the city centre.

While officers at City Hall said the level of floor space in the superstore would be “disproportionately large”, they said councillors had to balance their decision with the other economic and community benefits the development would bring.

Asda had said up to 300 jobs would be provided within the superstore, and a further 125 over the rest of the development.

The scheme had been backed by a number of families who live in nearby Tuckswood and Lakenham, who were looking forward to the jobs it would create and having a superstore on their doorsteps.

Asda, which held public exhibitions on the plans last December, had said the proposals include much more than just providing a superstore and would regenerate a “significant location” in the city.

As reported in the Norwich Evening News, the development plans for the area were put on hold for several years after the recession put an original £122m plan for the Harford Place site on hold.

See tomorrow’s paper for the full story.

41 comments

  • So Chapelfield see it as threat to the vitality of the city centre. What a joke! I don't remember seeing a supermarket in Chapelfield or Castle Mall..... I rarely visit the city centre anyway, I can get almost everything I need from the Queens Road Sainsbury's, or Morrisons at Riverside, with free parking too. An Asda on the doorstep would have been very nice, along with a few other small retail outlets. A bit more choice for the locals, within walking distance, and a huge boost to the local economy.

    Report this comment

    Carol Bolton

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • if it was a tesco , there would be no need for permission in norwich as tesco obviously pay out big enough bonus box's to our councillors . please dont delete this comment as its only what half of the general norwich public feel . why is it one rule for tesco's and another for other shops . this decision stinks !

    Report this comment

    adinorwich

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • i normally hate change but cannot believe this was turned down.gutted.

    Report this comment

    bookworm

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Have I got this right? Quote “But the committee decided by five votes to four to reject the scheme, saying the superstore was too dominant for a district centre and dominant car park. The proposed incinerator at Kings Lynn will overshadow and pollutants follow the prevailing wind over the town. 300 foot chimney stack”. Extra 1000 plus Lorries per week. Stress anxiety caused and 35 permanent jobs. The mind boggles!

    Report this comment

    Alan Allan

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • So at 3406 square metres, the store was "too dominant" for a district centre? I would call Tesco Blue Boar lane a district centre and it has 10153.8 square metres - Go figure that one out!

    Report this comment

    IT Man

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • So it was the Greens and Liberal Democrats that turned down this decision, well what more could anyone expect from them both. Perhaps they both have some brilliant idea what to do with a derelict eyesore of a site and at the same time create some 300 badly needed jobs.

    Report this comment

    mike smith

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • it would of gotten permission if it was called Tesco! Would be good to get Asda this side of the city!

    Report this comment

    Grace

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • What a shame,if you live in this area you have the choice to walk,bus,or car,it would have been an excellent idea to have a shop closer to the LakenhamTuckswood housing estates.Also Notcutts and Aldis cafes are always very busy,so it is obvious people would like more of this here instead of keep going to the city which has lots of visitors now and makes parking difficult.Oh well doesnt surprise me,one day maybe!!!!!!

    Report this comment

    foxey

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Crazy decision !!. 300 jobs plus all the jobs during construction, walk past the place everyday such an eyesore, does Norwich council not believe in re generation ?

    Report this comment

    Simon Creevy

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • what planet are these people on? never mind that we might want an Asda this side of Norwich, never mind the jobs it would have created in construction, and running the store, never mind it would have created someting nice and good in a run down area, just refuse it on some trumped up reason :(

    Report this comment

    catalonia13

    Friday, September 21, 2012

  • Brenda and her little gang of luvvies don't get off lightly either, two nulabour luvvies couldn't be 'bovverd' to turn up in to swing the vote in favor of jobs....nuLabour isn't working and they are all unfit for purpose..simples.

    Report this comment

    nrg

    Friday, September 21, 2012

  • Cue for Tesco to be accepted

    Report this comment

    Jacob Burns

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • I have to agree with the vast majority of posts, it is difficult to understand what the reasoning is behind this decision. It would have brightened and livened up the area and provided much needed investment in an area that desperately needs it. What a missed opportunity :-(

    Report this comment

    Jaguar

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • What a pathetic decision by people who obviously do not live in the real world. I thought we needed to create jobs, not leave eyesore sites undeveloped. Who elects these idiots?

    Report this comment

    Tractorboy

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • So 300 new jobs could have been created meaning more money coming into the city centre from those workers - this is a very short-sighted decision, no doubt by people who have never shopped at Asda! I live very close to the proposed site and I work past the old Bally factory each day - what a wasted opportunity to breath live into the area and give us locals more of a community hub. So, instead of more 'local' trips to a large new supermaket, continued trips by car will be required for all those living in Lakenham and Tuckswood - Norwich a green city?

    Report this comment

    Engle1970

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Maybe the committee members are waiting for a huge housing development to be put there. So they can slap their back pockets just like in the ASDA adverts, to pocket the difference of another kind. (Allegedly)

    Report this comment

    chebram71

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Well this was a surprise! What happened to all the previous plans then? Had they not been agreed? It was supposed to be finished in the next 18 months or so, and now it's not going ahead at all! Surely they could have just asked Asda to reduce the size of their development? That area is a disgrace. We also live locally and walk past it every day. And why on EARTH have they got 247 security men on site, living in their little van!! There's surely nothing there worth nicking! It's a prime site going to waste. Glad I've never voted Green or Lib Dem. Can't trust either of em.... I bet they have a hidden agenda, and it won't be anything to benefit mere members of the public like you and me!

    Report this comment

    Carol Bolton

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • if it was a tesco , there would be no need for permission in norwich as tesco obviously pay out big enough bonus box's to our councillors . please dont delete this comment as its only what half of the general norwich public feel . why is it one rule for tesco's and another for other shops . this decision stinks !

    Report this comment

    adinorwich

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • I have a plan Put it on the Pinebanks site No problems with planning permission in Broadland

    Report this comment

    No to tory boy

    Wednesday, September 26, 2012

  • Carol good post, I'd add the ASDA would probably be be open 247 as well unlike Sainsbury's and Morrisons. I live in the city centre and like all monopolies they destroy choice and not foster them. I think Poundland are behind this, they have huge profits sell products on false advertising as bigger and better value but often smaller size and thus worse value. What I've heard of walmartasda though with sweatshops, no big business is good truth be told, but I have little money, we need a revolution haha.

    Report this comment

    ad h

    Friday, September 21, 2012

  • Crazy decision !!. 300 jobs plus all the jobs during construction, walk past the place everyday such an eyesore, does Norwich council not believe in re generation ?

    Report this comment

    Simon Creevy

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • did i read right? chaple field raised concerns it would upset the vitality of the city.... they didnt then when they built that huge lump right in the middle of the city then ? there was no reason to refuse as i see it

    Report this comment

    trev

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • I have no view on the rights or wrongs of the decision. It will probably be won on appeal anyway. But 300 new jobs? How ridiculous. Supermarkets don't create many extra new jobs, they simply redistribute them from somewhere else. That supermarket would turnover several hundred £million a year, maybe more. Do people seriously think that those customers have suddenly found all that extra money under their mattresses? It's money that would have been spent somewhere else. A lot of it in other supermarkets for sure, but a decent sum at little shops along Hall Rd, or lakenham or other nearby neighbourhoods.

    Report this comment

    Tom Jeffries

    Friday, September 21, 2012

  • Kind of hypocritcal isn't it given the empty retail units in Norwich caused by the opening of Chapelfield shopping centre? Schuh is the lastest shop to abandon one of it's doubled up outlets in the city whist staying in Chapelfield due to the longer lease.

    Report this comment

    NigelS

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Just so everybody on here knows, it was the Greens teaming up with the Lib Dems who voted to refuse the Asda planning application, which could result in the loss of 300 new jobs. All the Labour councillors voted in favour of the proposed store, as we care for jobs for local people.

    Report this comment

    Paul Kendrick

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Bet if it was Tesco they would have got permission!!! An Asda there would have been great. I hope they appeal.

    Report this comment

    Michelle Reece

    Sunday, September 23, 2012

  • Kerching! Where were the rest of the planning committee if only nine voted? This should be carried out again with the full representation present.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • if they can approve dozens of grotty housing estates why not an ASDA?my suspicions are aroused.

    Report this comment

    bookworm

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • I don't want another supermarket , but others might. If Asda didn't think they would make money out of it then they wouldn't plan it. So, what will happen is appeal after appeal and the tax payer will payout. The democracy in the Uk is through the till and not the ballot box .

    Report this comment

    augustuspablo

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • I have to agree with the vast majority of posts, it is difficult to understand what the reasoning is behind this decision. It would have brightened and livened up the area and provided much needed investment in an area that desperately needs it. What a missed opportunity :-(

    Report this comment

    Jaguar

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Here we go again. Instead of trying to get Asda to amend their proposals the Council will now to have to fight an expensive. appeal. Spending council tax payers` money which they can ill afford. The only winners once again? The lawyers.

    Report this comment

    BG

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Crazy decision !!. 300 jobs plus all the jobs during construction, walk past the place everyday such an eyesore, does Norwich council not believe in re generation ?

    Report this comment

    Simon Creevy

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Totally crazy Norwich city council how much did Chapel field pay you to refuse this?

    Report this comment

    Mark Hayes

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Oh well, when the shops at Chuckle Field start becoming boarded up, then Asda can move in there.

    Report this comment

    Bruce87

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Staggering comment from one of the green thingy's that voted down the jobs and supermarket. David Rogers, Green councillor for Nelson ward...“If you look at the latest satellite pictures of the North Pole you can see the ice shrinking in front of your eyes. We should not be encouraging projects like this, which burn up fuel.” This party and its people are dangerous and all raving bonkers...who in their right mind votes for these twits???????

    Report this comment

    nrg

    Friday, September 21, 2012

  • asda own brand chocolate--try it.it is 30p for 100g.sometimes reduced to 17p.

    Report this comment

    bookworm

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Bet if it was Tesco they would have got permission!!! An Asda there would have been great. I hope they appeal.

    Report this comment

    Michelle Reece

    Sunday, September 23, 2012

  • What a pathetic decision by people who obviously do not live in the real world. I thought we needed to create jobs, not leave eyesore sites undeveloped. Who elects these idiots?

    Report this comment

    Tractorboy

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • Surely this cant be the end of the matter. Up till now, almost everyone and their dog thought that this was a good way to revitalise an area that used to employ many people, and add some modern facilities to a wasteland. There must be more to this than the very sketchy report published.

    Report this comment

    Abraham

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • So 300 new jobs could have been created meaning more money coming into the city centre from those workers - this is a very short-sighted decision, no doubt by people who have never shopped at Asda! I live very close to the proposed site and I walk past the old Bally factory each day - what a wasted opportunity to breath live into the area and give us locals more of a community hub. So, instead of more 'local' trips to a large new supermaket, continued trips by car will be required for all those living in Lakenham and Tuckswood - Norwich a green city? Of course Asda will fight the decision as they know how much capacity there is in the area for their second store!

    Report this comment

    Engle1970

    Thursday, September 20, 2012

  • NRG. Rogers is probably a useless global warming researcher from the UEA to spout tripe like that. Probably the only job he could get !

    Report this comment

    "V"

    Friday, September 21, 2012

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Most read business stories

Alan Wright with his Shower Power Booster invention that was rejected by Dargon's Den. Photo: Steve Adams

Dragons’ Den failure has not held back Norwich entrepreneur

The words ‘I’m out’ too often spell the end for an invention before it has even left the drawing board.

Read full story »

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT