GERMAN supermarket chain Lidl is resubmitting plans to build a new supermarket in Malvern Link.

The chain, which has more than 200 outlets in the UK, bought the former eurohaus garage site, in Worcester Road, in January last year and applied for planning permission to demolish it and put a new store in its place.

Permission was refused by Malvern Hills District Council but the company is to ask the authority to think again by resubmitting the application.

"We wouldn't have bought the site if we didn't think it had great potential," said Mark Kennedy, property manager at Lidl.

"It's company policy to treat each site on its individual merits, and we're going to push as hard as we can to get this one to go ahead. We won't sell the site until we've been down every avenue.

"We will submit the application in the next two months. My gut feeling is that it will be turned down and go to appeal.

"If it does go that far, I am confident that whoever conducts the independent appeal will see how flexible Lidl has been with its application so far, and will give permission."

Any appeal against the council decision would be handled by a Government inspector.

Lidl had wanted to demolish the derelict garage, as well as other buildings on the 1.5 acre site, in order to build a 1,000 square feet store, with parking for nearly 100 vehicles.

Despite a cautious welcome from local traders, on the grounds that it might bring more shoppers into the Link, the plan prompted a furious reaction from residents living nearby.

Traders next door also voiced concerns that on-street parking currently available in front of their shops could go.

More than 800 petition signatures were gathered and submitted to the council, alongside 75 letters of objection.

Tom Falcon, who lives opposite the site and co-ordinated the anti-supermarket campaign, said: "As far as we're concerned, the circumstances haven't changed.

"We've got to wait to see what develops, but we will oppose it just as we did before."

Planning officers recommended the application be refused the first time around, which it was at a meeting in June. The grounds for refusal were that it would have harmed the conservation area, the building would have dominated neighbours, concerns over highway safety and the fact that mature lime trees on the pavement would be lost.