Planning appeal decision
Land to the East of Station Road, Oakley, Hampshire
Planning appeal 3269526 at Land to the East of Station Road, Oakley, Hampshire (Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council) was allowed on 11 August 2021 by Inspector Gilbert-Wooldridge T, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area.
up to 110 residential units (Class C3) with all matters reserved except for access
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- Gilbert-Wooldridge T
- Postcode
- RG23 7EH
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area
- the effect of the development on the setting and significance of Church Oakley Conservation Area
- the effect of the development on highway safety and access
- whether the development would promote sustainable transport modes
- whether the development would make adequate provision for community and infrastructure needs arising from the development
- the extent of the shortfall in the Council's 5 year housing land supply
- the overall planning balance having regard to the development plan and national policy
What decided it
The lack of a 5 year housing land supply engaged the NPPF paragraph 11(d) tilted balance, and the significant benefits of housing delivery were not significantly and demonstrably outweighed by the moderate adverse impacts identified.
The adverse impacts, including conflict with LP Policies SS1, SS5, SS6 and NP Policy 1 and less-than-substantial heritage harm, were afforded moderate weight and did not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the significant benefits of housing delivery, affordable housing and economic benefits, so the presumption in favour of sustainable development applied.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy SS1Policy SS4Policy SS5Policy SS6Policy EM1Policy EM4Policy EM5Policy EM10Policy EM11Policy CN1Policy CN3Policy CN6Policy CN7Policy CN8Policy CN9Policy EP1NP Policy 1NP Policy 3NP Policy 6NP Policy 8NP Policy 10
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 57Paragraph 74Paragraph 110Paragraph 111Paragraph 112Paragraph 174Paragraph 176Paragraph 199Paragraph 200Paragraph 202
- Judgments
- HJ Banks & Co Ltd v SSHCLG [2018] EWHC 3141 (Admin)
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in Basingstoke and Deane
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Allowed26 October 2026600755075 Park Prewett Road, Basingstoke, RG24 9RG
- Dismissed6 August 20266007440Land West Of Millars, Station Road, Cliddesden, RG25 2FG
- Allowed10 July 20266004025Basingstoke Sports and Social Club, Fairfields Road, Basingstoke, RG21 3DR
- Allowed19 June 20266005805White Bungalow, Ash Lane, Silchester, RG7 2NL
- Allowed16 June 20266004924Newlyn House, North of West Ham Lane, Basingstoke, RG22 5EE
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®