Four dwellings and access at Land At Mac's Field To The South West Of Bells Meadow St Mary Bourne
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Basingstoke Development Control Committee on 25 Feb 2026.
The site and its surroundings
The site was an open agricultural parcel outside the settlement boundary, within the National Landscape and conservation area, near existing homes and community facilities.
“The site comprises a rectangular parcel of land measuring approximately 0.49 hectares located to the south of an unnamed road. It lies to the southwest of St Mary Bourne, just off the village’s main thoroughfare. The site is located outside of the Settlement Policy Boundary.”
“The application site is an open area of agricultural land set within the North Wessex Downs National Landscape and was laid to grassland at the time of the case officer's site visit. Directly north of the site is a residential development known as Bells Meadow, consisting of eleven dwellings. Beyond this development sits the St Mary Bourne Bowls Club. To the east of the site is the community play area and cricket club. Bourne House is situated immediately to the west.”
Officer report
Earlier planning history
An earlier application for one detached dwelling with associated works was withdrawn in June 2021.
“20/02309/FUL Erection of 1 no. detached dwelling; with associated parking, turning, landscaping, private amenity space and access. Withdrawn 22.06.2021”
Officer report
What officers recommended
Officers recommended approval because the housing, economic, community and biodiversity benefits outweighed the limited landscape, heritage and flood-risk harms.
“The proposed development would also result in less than substantial harm to the significance of the St. Mary Bourne Conservation Area and associated non-designated heritage assets (including archaeology). In applying the NPPF, where a proposal would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, that harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.”
“The proposal results in a minor conflict with national policy for addressing flood risk regarding the Sequential Test, as the site lies within an area at risk of surface water flooding. Whilst mitigation measures have been proposed and would effectively manage flood risk, the design and layout have not demonstrated that the development was shaped by this constraint, leading to a technical policy conflict.”
Officer report
Consultation responses
Highways and several technical consultees raised no objection subject to conditions, while landscape and historic environment officers objected to harm from the development.
“Consultee Comment Where in the report this is considered Landscape Objection – in summary: - Erosion of the rural aspect of the site by infilling an agricultural fields. - Harm also associated with the introduction of additional domestic paraphernalia. iv Trees No objection subject to conditions v Biodiversity No objection subject to conditions v Nature Space No objection subject to conditions v Historic Environment Objection – in summary: - Erosion to the setting of the vi…”
“Conservation Area through the loss of separation between Bourne House and the village core. - Development would compound pre- existing creep of the central built settlement undermining the rural setting of the heritage assets.”
Officer report
What people said
Objections focused on countryside development, landscape, flooding, drainage, privacy and highway safety; supporters cited housing, village life, design and community benefits.
“Comment Where in the report this is considered 1. Conflicts with the neighbourhood plan as it is outside the Settlement Policy Boundary i 2. Previous housing was built as affordable housing under exceptional housing provisions i 3. Not in line with neighbourhood/village design statement I, iv 4. Location on a greenfield site i 5. 37 new homes have been built in the village – this addresses the housing shortfall i 6. Loss of agricultural land i 7.”
“Design and layout are well thought through and flows extremely well iv 12. Outside landscaping will be a positive addition, especially from the public right-of-way iv 13. A good extension to the development that is already there iv 14. Plans are in keeping with the countryside and do not spoil the countryside and peaceful setting of that area iv 15. Would be pleasing to the eye iv 16. Address the need for well-designed homes and promote sustainable development iv 17.”
Officer report
The committee decision
The committee approved the application subject to a legal agreement securing significant on-site biodiversity net gain enhancements, with refusal delegated if this was not secured.
“RESOLVED that: the application be APPROVED subject to the application entering into a legal agreement (in accordance with the Community Infrastructure Levy…”
“Significant on-site biodiversity net gain enhancements…”
Minutes
Sources
- Basingstoke Development Control Committee minutes, 25 February 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Basingstoke's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- Basingstoke
- Date
- Wednesday 25 February 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Basingstoke committee decisions →
This committee's year
27 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 3 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.