Every single objection takes us one step closer to stopping the development. We need your help.


The way the developers have submitted these two applications complicates the planning process and makes it easy for letter-writers to think that their first letter was enough and as it’s so complicated, they won’t bother. The clearest example of this so far, is the use of an ‘overlapping’ technique – submitting two separate planning applications at different times with slight differences and then separately adding amendments to those plans. Both applications amount to the same outcome – a gigantic commercial warehouse development that will change the landscape, environment and the state of your surrounding areas for ever.  Here’s the rub – the second application won’t be the last either! 



The developers have submitted a second application and we need you to submit a second objection in response, as your original objection won’t be carried over. You can resubmit your original comments adding any further points specific to the second application. If you do not have a copy of your original objection, you can find them against the outline application here: https://pad.basingstoke.gov.uk/DocumentViewer/?DocumentClassCode=DC&Folder1Reference=20/02162/OUT At the bottom of this page you can find the differences between the two applications.



Unfortunately, you cannot submit an objection to both applications in one email or letter so ideally you will need to submit two separate objections quoting each associated reference number.

The reference numbers for the two planning applications are:

1st application: 20/02162/OUT

2nd application (priority): 20/02586/FUL

If you only make one objection, please make the 2nd application your priority as we have gathered less objections for this application so far.

By Email:

Email your comments to planning.comments@basingstoke.gov.uk

Clearly quote the planning reference number/s (20/02162/OUT OR 20/02586/FUL) and the application site address: Oakdown Farm A30 Dummer Basingstoke Hampshire RG23 7LR.

By Comment on the council website:

You can leave a comment on each planning application directly on the council website.

Here’s how to do it:

  • Visit this page on the Basingstoke Council planning website: https://planning.basingstoke.gov.uk/online-applications/search.do?action=simple
  • Register or login to the website
  • Search for the priority application reference number (20/02586/FUL)
  • Click on the comments tab
  • Complete the simple form (make sure you copy and paste your comments into a word doc so you have them for easy reference for the second application)
  • Submit your comment.
  • Now search for the second application reference number (20/02162/OUT) and follow the same process for the second application.

By Post: (Objection by email or comment on the website is preferred due to delays on postal objections caused by Covid-19)

Write two letters to: Planning Development, Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, Civic Offices, London Road, Basingstoke, RG21 4AH

Clearly quote the planning reference number/s (20/02162/OUT OR 20/02586/FUL) and the application site address: Oakdown Farm A30 Dummer Basingstoke Hampshire RG23 7LR on each letter.

Further guidance on how to make an objection can be found here: https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/comment-on-a-planning-application

What shall I say?

Each of the comments are read and treated individually therefore it’s important that each response is seen as separate and are your personal views. For this reason, we cannot draft a sample comment that you can copy and paste, however we have provided a list of all of the points that have been raised as issues and concerns by members of CAGE and the local community that you can find below.

Please read through the list and identify each point you also share as a concern. In your own words, please cite these issues as concerns in your emails/comments/letters. The more points you cover, the more effective your comments will be.

Example message introduction:

I write to you with concern surrounding the planning application (ref no: 20/02586/FUL ***OR*** 20/02162/OUT) for Oakdown Farm A30 Dummer Basingstoke Hampshire RG23 7LR. I would like my comments to be counted as an objection towards the application and I have outlined my concerns below:

  • Example concern
  • Example concern
  • Etc


List of potential concerns

There are two applications in play:

First application: 20/02162/OUT

The OUTLINE application which seeks formal approval only of access arrangements such as road layout and agreement to the principles for development of the site. All other matters will be reserved until the submission of further planning applications.

Second application: 20/02586/FUL

The FULL application which seeks formal approval of access arrangements and infrastructure AND the building of Unit 1 (the largest building on site).

You can find details of the differences between the two applications at the bottom of this page.


  • Opportunism – Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council (BDBC) now recognises the need for strategic development of this area, but this application risks compromising the outcome for BDBC residents
  • Loss of Agricultural Land – this is a greenfield site which, once built upon, is gone for good
  • Air Quality – the increased volume of diesel powered vehicles will produce more pollution through exhaust fumes and tyre emissions 
  •  Noise – impact of road usage on users and residents, especially given plans for future housing developments nearby, and potentially noisy generators for backup electricity supply
  • Lighting – there will be light pollution as this is a 24×7 operation


Transport and Travel:

  • Increased Traffic Volume:-
    • Delays at Southwood lights and along A30 into and out of Basingstoke
    • Unsafe weaving on the very short stretch of the M3 between Junctions 7 and 8
    • Safety issues and delays at the A303/A34 junction (Bullington Cross) which has steep uphill gradients and some very short slip roads
  • HGV traffic using the A303 <> A30 link past the Crematorium as a short cut and safety concerns at this junction
  • Rat-runs through local villages as current road users seek ways of avoiding delays caused by additional traffic
  • Public Transport – 24/7 site operation makes availability of public transport at all times unlikely
  • Walking and Cycling – safety of walkers and cyclists will be compromised by new road layouts and increase in traffic, especially HGVs
  • Wayfarers Walk – safety of walkers will be compromised by new road layouts and increase in traffic, especially HGVs


Landscape and Visual Impact:

  • Countryside location – the plans are unsympathetic to the existing character of the area
  • Access to and from Basingstoke – this is currently an attractive green corridor which will be permanently changed by the industrial landscape of the site
  • Heritage – the development will be visible to users of many public footpaths, the Dummer Conservation Area, and the surrounding agricultural land
  • Shielding through use of a bund – loss of more agricultural land to the south of the M3 rather than on the development site itself 


Business Need:

  • Unnecessarily large scale of development – this application provides more than double this amount of that “required” by BDBC Local Plan (271,000 sqm v 122,000 sqm)
  • Alternative sites – none are explored in the application despite the existence of several brownfield sites in Basingstoke and Andover which have remained un-let for long periods
  • Usage – actual usage for the proposed units has yet to be determined which could severely affect much of the information in the application, e.g. volumes of traffic and emissions. The second application provides more detail about Unit 1, which will be the largest building on the site.  The name of Amazon appears on some of the documents and the revised drawings are very similar to Amazon’s Tilbury site.
  • Demand – some may see the new site as an opportunity to provide much needed employment, however there is some confusion between the two applications which give different figures for number of employees so consider the promises carefully before accepting this as a reason to not object.


Buildings Design and Construction:

  • Development scale – unnecessary density of buildings and infrastructure maximises use of site and causes overspill onto other land
  • Utilities – these will require major changes to existing infrastructure but there is no firm commitment yet from providers to deliver these
  • Road Restrictions – as seen during recent work on the A30, major changes to road layouts will lead to long delays and encourage the use of other local roads as rat-runs
  • Bund – will severely restrict usage of existing road and footpaths



The second application still covers the full site but now provides more detail about Unit 1, which will be the largest building on the site. Information about the other units is not covered but the infrastructure needed to support Unit 1 is included. The name of Amazon appears on some of the documents and the revised drawings are very similar to Amazon’s Tilbury site.

There is some confusion between the two applications which give different figures for number of employees and traffic movements. The developer is also proposing to retain material excavated from construction of the first unit to level off adjacent land.  

The new application also does not appear to take into account objections and comments made by several statutory consultees in relation to the outline application. However, we understand that the consultees will also have to comment separately on this application as well. By treating these as two separate applications, it is possible for Unit 1 to be approved and built independently of these existing comments being fully addressed which presents a huge concern.

Planning Context

BDBC Local Plan covers the Borough’s requirements for this type of development and the key elements are:-

  • Section 7.8 – Up to 122,000 square metres of storage and distribution floorspace to meet future needs
  • Policy EP1 – The site is not allocated for this purpose but this does not exclude consideration provided certain criteria are met; BDBC also issued a Press Release on 04/08/2020 – “Council takes a proactive approach to vision for M3 Junction 7 land” which sets out the Council’s desire to pull together several potential proposals into one strategy. However, this does not directly affect the current application which will need to be considered by BDBC before it can decide this strategy.

More details of these points can be found at:-

Local Plan – https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/content/doclib/1592.pdf

Press Release – https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/rte.aspx?id=298&task=View&itemid=9762

Click on below icons to share this page with your friends and family that are likely to be impacted and would want to have their say.

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin