Clump House, Farleigh Lane, Dummer, , RG25 2AF Ms S. Tarvit & Deane Borough Council Civic Offices London Road Basingstoke Hampshire RG21 4AH 27 Aug 2020

By e-mail: [email protected] and [email protected]

Dear Ms Tarvit,

Ref: BDBC Planning 20 August 2020 Application Reference: 20/02162/OUT Address: Land at Oakdown Farm A30 Dummer, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG23 7LR

The above planning application was put forward without any realistic notification to the public, although I have now discovered its existence, those who have put forward the application did not inform many local residents (including myself), therefore I (and many others) were not able to participate in any debate organised by the developer.

With regards to the above planned development, please log my objection to this application based on 3 main issues. That this application does not meet the Local Plan, the environmental impact, and the increased traffic safety concerns around M3 Junction 7.

1. Overall planning a. BDBC adopted its Local Plan 2011-2029 in May 2016. The adopted Local Plan forms part of the statutory development plan for the Borough. It sets out the council’s vision and strategy for the area until 2029 and should provide the basis for decisions on planning applications. The adopted Policies Map shows the site as being located outside of any defined settlement boundary (Policy SS1) and within open countryside. The site is greenfield and outside this Neighbourhood plan and so should be denied. b. BDBC should consider alternative sites that are brownfield sites or vacant sites for example there are over sixty sites that are not let within the Basingstoke / Andover area. (42 in Basingstoke and 21 in Andover). This would be a far better option that destroying open countryside. c. The Scale of development is double the amount required by this local plan (271,000 v 122,000 sqm) and so should at least be restricted to half its size if planning gets approved. 2. Environmental impact: a. The location of the site directly impacts the strategic networks identified in the B&DBC Green Infrastructure Strategy (2018-2019). These networks / buffer zones connect core biodiversity areas to allow wildlife to move between them. In particular, the site location is crossed by the ancient woodland and grassland buffers and therefore should be denied. b. The density of the development is far too heavy as It would appear that 90% of the 40 hectare / 100 acre site will be turned into warehouses / parking. This will have a huge impact on the local environment and should not be allowed to happen. c. Loss of good quality agricultural land (Grade 3)– this is a greenfield site which should remain as agricultural land and not used for development. d. Air Quality – the increased volume of diesel powered vehicles will produce a dramatic increase in pollution through exhaust fumes and tyre emissions e. Noise – impact on road users and residents, especially given plans for future housing developments near the site f. Lighting – light pollution will be heavy as the site will require high level of lighting to ensure a safe working environment and would be 24/7 and so will have a major impact on those living within a wide area. 3. Traffic safety concerns a. Traffic is forecast to grow by an extra 1600 vehicles per day, with minimal modification to the approaching junctions. This number of vehicles is only an estimate and could be far higher depending on the actual use of the warehouses. The impact of this extra heavy goods vehicles on traffic safety has not been taken into account as only minor improvements have been made. It would appear the developer has only considered the financial implications on the project. b. If we review the incident of accidents around the M3 Junction 7, this appears a high-risk area as there are so many accidents, including some fatalities. Upon reviewing accidents over the last 10 years around the M3 Junction 7 area on www.crashmap.co.uk, you will see the below map of accidents:

i. This indicates that all routes to this site have a high accident risk and that the site is unsuitable for a warehouse to be located here as the number of accidents will only increase. The only sure way to ensure there are no more accidents is to turn down the application. ii. If the site is to be considered, then all these high risk locations would have to be redesigned as part of a condition for the application and all paid for by the developer. This should include the following: 1. M3 Junction 7 slip road should have an extra lane for the site traffic leading to site access. 2. HGV access should only be off the Junction 7 and not via the A30 as this would avoid the HGV’s from using the Junction A30 to Rd and any access off the A30. 3. M3 West bound Junction 8 should have an extra lane to allow traffic from Junction 7 direct access onto Junction 8 and so avoid the merging of the traffic at this location. Based on these three points I hope that the application is turned down and that the site remains as agricultural land.

Many thanks

Yours sincerely

Tom Hext

Mr Thomas H Hext

Copied:

Councillor Mark Ruffell - [email protected]

Councillor Ken Rhatigan - [email protected]

Councillor Stuart Frost - [email protected]

Councillor Diane Taylor - [email protected]

Councillor Hannah Golding - [email protected] c. d.

I write regarding the above planning application to which I strongly object for the following reasons -

1) The visual impact This is a countryside location outside of the Settlement Policy Boundary and the proposal is far too large and unsympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area.

2) The location of the site directly impacts the strategic networks identified in the B&DBC Green

Infrastructure Strategy (2018-2019). These networks / buffer zones connect core biodiversity areas to allow wildlife to move between them. In particular, the site location is crossed by the ancient woodland and grassland buffers.

3) The proposal will have an obvious impact on noise, light and air quality for residents/ walkers/ cyclists living and utilising the surrounding area. In particular, the residents of Ganderdown, Dummer and the committed developments at Basingstoke Golf Club and Hounsome Fields. Lighting for a 24/7 operation in itself will have a significant impact. There is also a close, quantitative relationship between exposure to high concentrations of small particulates and increased mortality or morbidity, both daily and over time. Small particulate pollution has health impacts even at very low concentrations and the

WHO guidelines are likely to be exceeded by this proposal. There are obviously concerns regarding these factors given the nature of the application and the impact of the large amount of HGV traffic plus the actual development which will produce 10,400 tonnes of CO2 p.a. In addition, I am unsure how this proposal fits with the Council’s declaration of a Climate emergency.

4) The development will negatively impact the entry into Basingstoke from J7 and the A30. This is a high traffic area, particularly at rush hour, resulting in queues. The A30 is frequently extra busy as a result of M3 accident closures/ roadworks. The M3, junctions 6 to 9 are accident hot spots. In particular junctions 7/8 as a result of unsafe weaving on to/leaving the A303.

This area is currently a green corridor leading into a primarily residential area. The heights and sizes of the buildings located so close to the carriageways will industrialise the landscape and will inevitably be difficult to shield and protect the current character.

5) Road restrictions during construction and beyond will cause many issues on surrounding minor roads.

Therefore safety for cyclists and walkers is of great concern.

6) Walkers on the Wayfarers footpath already have to cross two carriageways which will carry a significant rise in traffic particularly HGV.

7) The applicant is suggesting that no HGV traffic will leave or arrive at the site via the A30 leading to the southwest and therefore must assume that no HGV traffic will used the A30 to A303 slip road past the

Crematorium. The applicant has not considered the impact on the A303/A34 junction with its poor design, short slip roads and known delays in busy hours. They are promoting it as the preferred route that HGV’s will take to / from the North.

8) During construction there would be a huge impact on access to Dummer via Tower Hill including the main footpath used by residents and walkers alike.

9) The negative impact on wildlife as well as the general vista. Given recent restrictions placed on the development of the Basingstoke Golf Course site because of foul water capacity, the applicant should be made to demonstrate a firm commitment from providers for the required services. How will services such as electricity and water be brought to the site? What will be the impact of this be to trees, hedges, wildlife?

10) There are, at present, 42 vacant warehouses to rent in Basingstoke alone with 21 in Andover.

I question, therefore the need to build more and is the aforementioned what we want to leave as a legacy for future generations?

Traffic is forecast to grow to an extra 1600 vehicles per day, with little modification to the approaching junctions. The highways reviewers have noted the impact on the M3 and A30 and have suggested a heavy use of HGVs on the A303 slip past the crematorium and past Dummer and Northwaltham villages. The developers have noted in addition that all site traffic will pass Ganderdown cottages, I am very aware of the safety risk this will also pose for families living there. The surrounding green areas including the green corridor on the A30, the surrounding agricultural land and the village of Dummer, being conservation area will all be affected. As a cyclist and runner in the local area I am concerned for my safety and safety of others using these roads with a large number of heavy vehicles. I am also aware on the effect to the air quality for people in the villages and near by.#

The vast area of hard paving should be reduced by the use of underground parking. This would permit a corresponding increase in the natural green space and would reduce the rainfall run-off and the cost of dealing with it. The difference in level between the plateaus lends itself to the introduction of underground parking beneath the buildings and under the hard-paving. Undergound parking should be provided for all the Basingstoke Gateway employees’ cars as a minimum and for as many of the heavy vehicles as possible. The TA identified the PIC locations as follows:

• M3 Mainline;

• M3 Junction 7;

• A30 - M3 to Southwood Corner;

• A30 Southwood Corner;

• A30 Site Frontage;

• A30 Roundabout;

• A30 Hatch Warren Rbt to Rbt;

• A30 Kempshott Roundabout;

• A30 Kempshott Rbt to Brighton Hill Rbt; and

• Brighton Hill Roundabout.

Proposed Mitigation at A30 / A30 Southwood Corner

BDBC adopted its Local Plan 2011-2029 in May 2016. The adopted

Local Plan forms part of the statutory development plan for the

Borough. It sets out the council’s vision and strategy for the area until

2029 and will provide the basis for decisions on planning applications.

2.2 It is to be noted that the site is not within the boundary of a

Neighbourhood Plan.

2.3 The adopted Policies Map shows the site as being located outside of any defined settlement boundary (Policy SS1) and within open countryside. The site is greenfield but not Green Belt and does not form a strategic allocation in the adopted Plan

a. b. If fact this is even mentioned in the information supplied by the applicant, noting that the M3, M3 Jnt7, A30 – M3 Southwood Corner, A30 Southwood corner and AS) site frontage are high accident areas. List of potential concerns This is an 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. Environment: Opportunism - 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 on road users and residents, especially given plans for future housing developments near the site Lighting – the developer wants to leave this topic for later planning applications for individual building(s) Biodiversity - the plans directly impact the strategic buffer zones identified in the BDBC Green Infrastructure Strategy 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 – the rural location and long hours of darkness could discourage these activities as an alternative to car use 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 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: 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 unlet 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 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