News
Keeping you updated
January 2025
Popham Airfield Matters releases Prospectus detailing their alternative vision for the future of the airfield.
Late Autumn 2024
Dear Popham Airfield Matters members, we would like to update you on the latest developments in the plans for Popham.
Introduction
Introduction
A lot has happened since the beginning of the year when Popham’s inclusion in The Local Plan by Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (BDBC) was made public.
Firstly any interested parties, for or against, had to register their comments by the beginning of March, this process being referred to as ‘Regulation 18’. This resulted in a large number of wide ranging objections from individuals and local and national organisations.
Popham Airfield Matters was launched over the May Bank Holiday weekend to provide a voice for anyone opposed to the closure of the airfield and development of a 3000 house ‘Garden Village’. Numerous press and magazine articles, appearances at local village fairs and council meetings and national events have seen the membership grow to around 2000.
A change of Government has meant a new National commitment to increase the building of new homes. A new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has been proposed to facilitate this. This impacts directly on the BDBC plans, and therefore the future of Popham Airfield - and many other UK airfields.
In a letter to the Basingstoke Gazette in September senior councillors revealed that in view of the objections they had proposed to remove Popham Airfield from the Local Plan. This was confirmed when a Popham Airfield Matters member asked a formal question at the Planning Committee meeting on October 3.
However, in view of the new draft NPPF issued by the incoming Labour Government, BDBC is required to increase annual housing supply from 828 to 1194 homes per year. BDBC have protested to the government stating that if they have to amend their plan now, they would need to relaunch their process with a two year delay, and issue a new call for land and would likely need Popham and many other additional sites.
What can you do to make a difference?
The Popham Airfield Matters team, the General Aviation Awareness Council, the Airfield Operators Group and others will continue to monitor the NPPF and exert pressure wherever possible on your behalf.
Flying Clubs, pilots, local residents and interested businesses and organisations can also make a significant impact – please contact your MP, local Councillors or the Press to continue to explain how important Popham Airfield is to Basingstoke and Deane and its surrounding areas.
If you would like further information and / or can identify any other actions that Popham Airfield Matters should be undertaking, please get in touch! For details of the first Popham Airfield Matters AGM in March 2025,
The regulation 18 consultation comments
In view of the large number of extremely high quality objections that had been submitted, the leader of the council and cabinet member for planning and infrastructure of the BDBC said in September that they had intended to delete the Popham Airfield proposed allocation as a ‘Garden Village’.
For the full list, see here https://consult.basingstoke.gov.uk/node/17/submissions
Thank you to all who submitted their ‘very persuasive’ comments (BDBCs words!).
1631 representations were submitted which contained 7000 comments (source BDBC)
2179 comments objected to the development of Popham airfield. They were submitted by pilots, local residents, businesses, and national bodies. The comments were broad ranging and knowledgeable of the issues, generally substantial and not NIMBY in nature
574 comments related to the potential loss of flying and aviation activity with many noting the diverse and key role played by Popham Airfield in General Aviation in a local, regional and National level
329 comments related the potential impact on the environment which included detailed comments from regional environmental organisations
325 comments related to the loss of a community asset and the social infrastructure
200 comments relate to the loss of employment and impact on local businesses
183 comments related to the resultant urban sprawl and risk of coalescence that would result from a large development at Popham.
However, at a Council Committee in October it was stated that the need to increase numbers put Popham back into the list of sites to be considered.
The new Government’s proposed changes to the planning system and its implications for Popham and other airfields.
The Government plans to increase housebuilding and wants to use ‘brownfield land’ in preference to greenfield sites. This could threaten airfields in two respects – firstly because airfields are not explicitly excluded from the ‘brownfield land’ definition and secondly, as landowners may see this as a financial opportunity. But, retaining a network of airfields across the Country is important for General Aviation (GA) – now and for the future.
So Popham remains vulnerable, despite it obviously not being ‘brownfield’ land.
Why the new ‘National Planning Policy Framework’ matters to the future of General Aviation in the UK
It is clearly sensible to use brownfield land for development rather than encroach on the countryside. There has been a definition of ‘brownfield’ for many years and originally airfields were explicitly excluded. Then when policy documents were being revised, that exclusion got lost – not intentionally but by oversight. This has not been too much of a problem until now. But the new draft ‘National Planning Policy Framework’ has not corrected this oversight and therefore, GA organisations have made representations arguing strongly for the original exclusion to be reinstated.
This is because the new Government is pressing for an increase in new housebuilding, for understandable reasons. This may make Local Planning Authorities (who often do not understand what GA is all about) look to airfields as suitable housing land and, in addition, a landowner may see this as an opportunity.
The Government’s planned housing for Basingstoke and Deane would increase from currently 828 a year to 1194 and for neighbouring Winchester district the current annual figure would increase from 676 to 1099.
How this impacts on Popham
Basingstoke and Deane consulted on its draft Local Plan early in 2024. It was planning to consider all of the consultation responses and progress to the next stage, publishing a final, ‘Regulation 19’ Local plan this winter. However, in the light of the Government’s changes it is likely to have to return to the draft to revise it.
There is therefore a risk that with the ‘brownfield’ definition, the increase in Basingstoke and Deane housing numbers and the need for Winchester to accommodate more housing could conspire to increase the risk to Popham airfield (and potentially Micheldever).
How to get in touch with Popham Airfield Matters, or attend the AGM
Our first AGM will be held at 2pm on either Saturday 22nd or 29th March (final date to be confirmed by email) 2025 at the Warren Centre, Micheldever Station, SO21 3AR. All members are welcome, please let Jac Aldous know if you can attend.
You can contact us here: contact@pophamairfieldmatters.org or by using our contact form
John Chaplin (Chairman and Strategy)
Brian Lloyd (Membership and Events)
Ann Bartaby (Planning consultant)
Jac Aldous (Secretary)
Mark Fotherby (Treasurer and Webmaster)
Bob Dennay (Local representative)
Early Autumn 2024
We promised to keep you up-to-date with any developments. Firstly, Basingstoke and Deane BC have published all of the ‘Representations’ that were made to The Local Plan’ under Regulation 18. Effectively these are the comments and submissions that the public and interested bodies have made to all the areas of land proposed for development in The Local Plan, which had to be lodged with the council before 4th March 2024. The link is here. https://consult.basingstoke.gov.uk/node/17/submissions
As you can see, by far the majority of submissions were objections to the development of Popham - in fact there were more objections to Popham than all the other proposed developments combined.
The developers have also submitted their initial plans for the development, which they’ve renamed ‘Coxford Garden Village’ in an attempt to conceal the fact that it entails the destruction of Popham Airfield. It’s a glossy, professional looking presentation that promises a lot, but has no substance as to how any of the criteria and objectives can be achieved. https://consult.basingstoke.gov.uk/submission/bsgd-c6-lpu23-1529/observation
The new Labour Government has committed to building more new homes, and reforming planning regulations to help achieve this. We are not opposed to these objectives, but we are resolute in our belief that there are better, less destructive to local amenities and the environment sites in The Local Plan that actually meet B&DBCs own criteria much better than Popham does.
Our Planning Consultant Ann Bartaby, is currently responding to the new Government’s National Planning Policy Framework, which is essentially the Town Planner’s Planning Guidebook with key principles for the formulation of Local Plans and principles to be used in dealing with planning applications.
The new Government has published its proposed revisions to what Mr Gove put in place and is inviting comments. This matters to us because 20 years ago, airfields were explicitly excluded from being called ‘brownfield’ sites. 10 years ago, in another version, that explicit exclusion was omitted. But there was no reason given for this - normally any conscious change would be justified. After this, the Government stated that policy had not changed - but did not correct the omission. Then in 2015, Brandon Lewis, in a debate in the Commons specifically labelled all airfields as being brownfield. However, whereas for the last few years it has been possible to set out a case to demonstrate such nonsense, the new Government is, very clearly and strongly saying ‘brownfield’ and ‘previously developed land’ should be the priority locations for new housing.
That therefore constitutes a major threat to us (and of course every airfield). We will happily share Ann’s comments when she submits them.
As you can see, the threat to Popham airfield is real, but by no means inevitable. With your help, we can help the council and landowners realise a better alternative future for Popham Airfield.
Thank you for your support, we really do appreciate it.