Plans to bring John Lewis at Home and Waitrose stores to Basing View recommended for approval

Basingstoke Gazette: A computer-generated image of the proposed new superstore A computer-generated image of the proposed new superstore

PLANS to bring a John Lewis at Home and Waitrose combined superstore to Basing View are being recommended for approval this week.

A planning application for the landmark store was submitted to Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council by Muse Developments, the company spearheading the regeneration of Basing View, in October 2013.

Planning officers have now recommended the plan for approval, and councillors on the borough’s development control committee will make the final decision at a meeting on Wednesday, March 12 at 6.30pm.

The proposed 78,000sq ft John Lewis at Home and Waitrose store will be built on council-owned land as part of £200million plans to regenerate Basing View.

A customer café, 416-space car-park, staff offices and service yard are also included in the plans along with the addition of a taxi rank at the front of the new store and a bus stop to the north of the store’s proposed car park.

The planned development also includes two council-owned car parks to the west of Basing View, and the site of former pub Poison, will be the location of a new landscaped area.

A major overhaul of the road network around the site is also proposed with key changes set to include: n The western arm of Upper Basing View (extending north to south) will be moved 50m west within the site and will be widened to accommodate shared cycle and pedestrian footways on both sides of the carriageway.

  • The subway connecting two council car parks to the west of the site to the proposed John Lewis store will be filled in and replaced with a toucan crossing.
  • A reconfigured junction between the western arm of Basing View and Lower Basing View will provide an exit and left turn only junction from Lower Basing View.
  • A new stepped and ramped access to the underpass opposite Matrix House which connects Basing View to Eastrop Roundabout.

The planned superstore will be only the second of its kind in the country. If the plans are agreed, the store, which will create 300 new jobs, is set to open in 2015.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:35am Mon 10 Mar 14

Barney123 says...

Developers always seem keen to push how many jobs will be created. How exactly will a furniture store and a supermarket create 300 jobs? Will there be many over the living wage?
Developers always seem keen to push how many jobs will be created. How exactly will a furniture store and a supermarket create 300 jobs? Will there be many over the living wage? Barney123
  • Score: -24

8:38pm Mon 10 Mar 14

jonone says...

Barney123 wrote:
Developers always seem keen to push how many jobs will be created. How exactly will a furniture store and a supermarket create 300 jobs? Will there be many over the living wage?
John Lewis Partnership is generally well liked by the people who work there. The wages are (as far as I know from people who work for them) are OK for the sector, and the bonuses are generally very generous.

And it is very easy for such a store to create 300 jobs as not all will be full time.
[quote][p][bold]Barney123[/bold] wrote: Developers always seem keen to push how many jobs will be created. How exactly will a furniture store and a supermarket create 300 jobs? Will there be many over the living wage?[/p][/quote]John Lewis Partnership is generally well liked by the people who work there. The wages are (as far as I know from people who work for them) are OK for the sector, and the bonuses are generally very generous. And it is very easy for such a store to create 300 jobs as not all will be full time. jonone
  • Score: 13

8:59am Tue 11 Mar 14

JJ38JJ says...

I'm wary of the claim that these sort of developments 'create jobs'. Obviously at a basic level there is truth in it - if you open a shop you have to have builders building it and people working in it. But unless everyone that works there lives in the borough it just means that more people will move here. Most people don't live alone so that means another house that has to be built and at least one other person who has to find a job. Net effect on employment - insignificant. Net effect on local housing and infrastructure - probably negative.
I'm wary of the claim that these sort of developments 'create jobs'. Obviously at a basic level there is truth in it - if you open a shop you have to have builders building it and people working in it. But unless everyone that works there lives in the borough it just means that more people will move here. Most people don't live alone so that means another house that has to be built and at least one other person who has to find a job. Net effect on employment - insignificant. Net effect on local housing and infrastructure - probably negative. JJ38JJ
  • Score: -15

6:12pm Wed 12 Mar 14

jonone says...

JJ38JJ wrote:
I'm wary of the claim that these sort of developments 'create jobs'. Obviously at a basic level there is truth in it - if you open a shop you have to have builders building it and people working in it. But unless everyone that works there lives in the borough it just means that more people will move here. Most people don't live alone so that means another house that has to be built and at least one other person who has to find a job. Net effect on employment - insignificant. Net effect on local housing and infrastructure - probably negative.
Obviously shouldn't bother then should we? (Clearly my previous comment sent you blubbing to the admins, so hope this is toned down enough)
[quote][p][bold]JJ38JJ[/bold] wrote: I'm wary of the claim that these sort of developments 'create jobs'. Obviously at a basic level there is truth in it - if you open a shop you have to have builders building it and people working in it. But unless everyone that works there lives in the borough it just means that more people will move here. Most people don't live alone so that means another house that has to be built and at least one other person who has to find a job. Net effect on employment - insignificant. Net effect on local housing and infrastructure - probably negative.[/p][/quote]Obviously shouldn't bother then should we? (Clearly my previous comment sent you blubbing to the admins, so hope this is toned down enough) jonone
  • Score: -5

10:30am Thu 13 Mar 14

deepinsight says...

All approved now !!
All approved now !! deepinsight
  • Score: 1

12:35pm Thu 13 Mar 14

JJ38JJ says...

jonone wrote:
JJ38JJ wrote:
I'm wary of the claim that these sort of developments 'create jobs'. Obviously at a basic level there is truth in it - if you open a shop you have to have builders building it and people working in it. But unless everyone that works there lives in the borough it just means that more people will move here. Most people don't live alone so that means another house that has to be built and at least one other person who has to find a job. Net effect on employment - insignificant. Net effect on local housing and infrastructure - probably negative.
Obviously shouldn't bother then should we? (Clearly my previous comment sent you blubbing to the admins, so hope this is toned down enough)
I genuinely don't know what you are talking about. Not me jonone. In fact I gave you a +1 for your last comment in this thread.
My point is that developers often use the creation of jobs to justify their plans. In reality where unemployment is relatively low it just adds to the local housing need. And it's the same 'developers' that benefit from that.
[quote][p][bold]jonone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JJ38JJ[/bold] wrote: I'm wary of the claim that these sort of developments 'create jobs'. Obviously at a basic level there is truth in it - if you open a shop you have to have builders building it and people working in it. But unless everyone that works there lives in the borough it just means that more people will move here. Most people don't live alone so that means another house that has to be built and at least one other person who has to find a job. Net effect on employment - insignificant. Net effect on local housing and infrastructure - probably negative.[/p][/quote]Obviously shouldn't bother then should we? (Clearly my previous comment sent you blubbing to the admins, so hope this is toned down enough)[/p][/quote]I genuinely don't know what you are talking about. Not me jonone. In fact I gave you a +1 for your last comment in this thread. My point is that developers often use the creation of jobs to justify their plans. In reality where unemployment is relatively low it just adds to the local housing need. And it's the same 'developers' that benefit from that. JJ38JJ
  • Score: -1

12:40pm Thu 13 Mar 14

non-stick says...

I'm not anti this proposal in any way although I do have concerns with the traffic implications on Eastrop roundabout.with the inevitable increase in traffic. I also tend to be dubious about claims for additional jobs as there is always a risk to similar businesses in the locale with this time of development. Time will tell and anything which improves choice and raises the profile of the town ought to be welcomed (albeit with some reservation).
I'm not anti this proposal in any way although I do have concerns with the traffic implications on Eastrop roundabout.with the inevitable increase in traffic. I also tend to be dubious about claims for additional jobs as there is always a risk to similar businesses in the locale with this time of development. Time will tell and anything which improves choice and raises the profile of the town ought to be welcomed (albeit with some reservation). non-stick
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree