PLEASE SIGN THE ORIGINAL PETITION  https://c.org/4m5Ln9sqFP 

It feels like we have come full circle.

When this petition first began, we were fighting a proposal for 1,200 houses in Medstead and Four Marks. That was four years ago. Since then, we have endured a change of government, several revisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), and now we face yet another upheaval as EHDC is subsumed into a new Unitary Authority.

But through all the noise and political churn, one truth has not changed: We still need the right homes, in the right places and at the right price, supported by the right infrastructure—so that East Hampshire remains a great place to live, work, and raise the next generation. Instead, it often feels like the opposite is happening, policies shift, structures change, and yet communities like ours are expected to absorb growth on a scale and speed that no reasonable person would call “modest” or “sustainable”.

The reality on the ground: Medstead is a village and this is not “modest development”. Since 2017, there were approximately 350 homes in what EHDC calls “South Medstead”. Since then another 340 homes have been built, and a further 257 have received planning approval. That is 597 dwellings built and/or approved—an increase of roughly 170% in the last 8–9 years. This is far in excess of ANY other village location in East Hampshire. "South Medstead” and Four Marks are designated as a Tier 3 settlement: a place with a “more limited range of services”, suitable for “modest development to meet local needs.” So, let’s be clear. Adding 850 more houses on top of the 530 already approved (257 in Medstead, 273 in Four Marks) is not modest development. It is not proportional. It is not fair. It is not locally led and it's certainly not sustainable. It is simply mass, overwhelming, overdevelopment in rural villages. 

No wonder residents increasingly say: “Medstead and Four Marks has become a dumping ground for new development—while infrastructure stands still.” and "Why are our lovely villages being "planned" by large housing developers, all simply for profit?" And the data backs them up.

2.      Evidence of infrastructure stress 

A range of local evidence shows infrastructure is already strained—often to breaking point: 

Highways

The A31/Lymington Bottom Road, A31/Boyneswood Road, and A31/Telegraph Lane junctions regularly operate at or above capacity in peak hours. Developers’ own transport assessments repeatedly model junctions close to “severe” thresholds—precisely the kind of cumulative impact test the NPPF recognises as grounds for refusal (NPPF para 111).

Flooding and drainage

The entire Lymington Bottom/Lymington Bottom Road corridor is an ancient river channel and frequently “comes to life” after heavy rain. Regular serious flooding occurs at Four Marks School and at the Lymington Bottom Road/Five Ash Road junction and Grosvenor Road in Medstead —making school crossing hazardous and at times rendering Lymington Bottom Road and Grosvenor Road impassable, both for pedestrians and vehicles.

Utilities

Residents report repeated water pressure failures, sewer surcharging/discharge impacting the River Wey chalk stream at Alton/Holybourne, and electrical outages—issues acknowledged in correspondence from water providers in connection with recent planning applications.

Urbanisation and loss of village character

Back-garden and infill developments of dense, red-brick estates are completely changing the character of “South Medstead” beyond recognition— as field after field is built over, and wildlife habitat is lost, whilst damaging the very social cohesion that makes village life work. Over time it becomes an unacceptable dormitory community as so many new residents work outside the village as there is little local employment.

3.      The cumulative harm is obvious—even if the spreadsheets pretend otherwise

In the last couple of years alone, Medstead has seen several developments approved within a stone’s throw of each other, including:

Boyneswood Road (54)
Beechlands Road (62)
Longbourn Way (95)
61 Lymington Bottom Road (46)

All these developments funnel traffic onto the same constrained network—west to Winchester, east to Farnham, or north via Medstead village to Basingstoke, which is effectively a single lane through Medstead village High Street due to permanently parked cars.

All vehicles heading to the A31 are forced through pinch points: 

the single-lane road tunnel on Lymington Bottom Road, 

or the single-lane chicane over the railway bridge on Boyneswood Road. We've already heard of road rage incidents at this location with the current level of traffic.

Common sense tells us what will happen when hundreds more homes are added into a small area feeding into the same bottlenecks: cumulative harm.

Yet too often, traffic modelling and desk-based assessments appear to contradict lived reality. 

And when local knowledge is dismissed, consequences often follow. When EHDC ignored local warnings about flooding in the village of Farringdon, the result was disastrous, the newly built houses had to be demolished due to ‘flooding’.

It should be a lesson: ignoring residents is not just disrespectful—it can be a risky decision-making strategy.

4.      Planning policy is clear: housing numbers do not override sustainability

Even where housing land supply pressures exist, the NPPF does not require councils to approve development that is plainly unsustainable:

• NPPF para 11(d)(ii): permission can and should be refused where adverse impacts significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. Given the cumulative consequences outlined above, this threshold is met for many proposals in Medstead and Four Marks.

• NPPF paras 110–111: development must be safe and must not create unacceptable impacts on highway safety or severe cumulative impacts on the road network.

• Decision-makers are required—through planning practice guidance and established case law—to assess the cumulative impact of committed development, not pretend each application exists in isolation.

• “Boosting housing supply” is not a blank cheque. Inspectors have repeatedly dismissed schemes in rural contexts where infrastructure capacity, settlement hierarchy, and cumulative harm are not credibly addressed.

5.      Call to action: this is the moment to show up

Cala and Bewley are proposing 850 new houses either side of Lymington Bottom Road, Medstead.

For the reasons above, this proposal should be rejected—at Planning Committee and if necessary, at appeal.

But I must be honest, based on past decisions, rejection is not guaranteed unless residents make their voices impossible to ignore.

So, I urge you to attend the forthcoming “consultation” meetings and make your views known:

Tuesday 13 January – Four Marks Village Hall, 2pm – 6pm
Wednesday 14 January – Medstead Village Hall,  2pm – 7:30pm

ATTENDANCE IS IMPORTANT 

THIS COULD BE OUR LAST CHANCE TO SAVE OUR VILLAGE

Further details and useful information are on the SMASH website: http://www.smashonline.co.uk  

Please strongly object to this proposal. Please don’t be taken in by the developer’s "vision of utopia". This is the developer’s ploy to make the reality of a huge urban style red brick housing estate in a village location more palatable.

Thank you for your support throughout 2025, and I wish you a healthy and joyful 2026.

I will leave you with my poem written at the beginning of this journey - which I hope will not prove prophetic:

I used to live in a village
I would like you all to know
I used to live in a village
Not so long ago

I used to live in a village
Where farmers farmed their land
I used to live in a village
Now they take cash in hand

I used to live in a village
With countryside where I grew
I used to live in a village
Now houses obscure my view

I used to live in a village
Where wildlife used to live
I used to live in a village
Will future generations forgive?

I used to live in the village
We need to ask ourselves why?
I used to live in a village
We let our village die!

Happy New Year,

Steve
Chair, SMASH

850 new houses proposed in 'South Medstead' - SMASH STRONGLY OPPOSE this application                                       

Cala and Bewley Homes have invited residents to two 'Consultation' meetings, one on Tuesday 13th January and the other on Wednesday 14th January at Four Marks and Medstead Village Halls respectively. They are proposing 2 huge speculative urban style housing estates, totalling 850 dwellings over approx.106 acres of the last remaining open green fields in the southern part of Medstead. This proposal is inappropriate/unsustainable/unfair/overwhelming.

These huge urban style housing estates (which are much more suited to towns and cities) will totally change the character of Medstead and our lovely rural village will be destroyed!

Background

Medstead and Four Marks is designated as a Tier 3 settlement by EHDC. This assignment recognises that the settlement has  'a more limited range of services....' but is suitable to accommodate 'modest development to meet local needs...'  850 on top of the 530 already approved (257 in Medstead, 273 in FM) is not modest it is mass overwhelming development.

In 2017 there were approx. 350 houses in ‘South Medstead’ (as EHDC planners like to call it!). Since then there have been approx. 340 more built with a further 257 given planning approval – that amounts to an approximate increase of 170% in the number of dwellings built or with approval here over 8/9 years, which is significantly more than any other village location in East Hampshire! 

Furthermore, when you add on the current number of new dwellings already approved in Medstead & Four Marks (ca 530) then around 3,000 more vehicles will be added to the A31 and our local village roads. This number doesn't even include all the extra delivery/white vans that will also come as all these new residents do their on-line shopping! Even with the developer's promises of some unproven highway improvements, this huge increase in traffic will inevitably bring lots more congestion/queues, road safety issues & increased air pollution/green house gases, both adversely affecting peoples’ health & contrary to EHDC climate emergency goals. The Council acknowledges that M&FM are not sustainable locations, they are car dependent. There were several accidents that we know off on the A31 in FM over the last 18 months and then just before Christmas there was sadly a fatality on the A31 by the new roundabout where they are building 320 houses outside of Alresford.

What about the local wildlife – where will they go? A vast area of green habitat will be lost. Where will the deer, badgers, foxes, hedgehogs, bats, red kites, owls, buzzards, sparrowhawks, hazel dormice etc. live and forage? Certainly not in small gardens surrounded by high fences. Even when biodiversity improvements are promised by developers, often they never materialise. A recent research report by WILD JUSTICE (authored by university academics) found that of the new build housing estates they evaluated only 53% of the promised ecological enhancements were actually delivered.

 Click on the link to see the report  WILD JUSTICE 

What about our local flooding issues? We all know about the regular flooding at Lymington Bottom Road by the pig farm, at Beechlands Road, at Grosvenor Road, outside Clementines at Lymington Barns. None of this has ever been improved by building more local houses! In fact, flooding has worsened at Lymington Barns since the Austin Fields estate was built above it. Who hasn't seen the accumulated surface water outside the fruit shop being pumped unlawfully onto the highway by the railway bridge after heavy rain?

If this development goes ahead then it means the end of 'South Medstead' as we know it. This development along with the others given permission last year i.e. Off Holland Drive (54), Beechlands Road (62) Longbourn Way (95), at 61 Lymington Bottom Road (46) will amount to a total of 1,100 new dwellings. 

This will bring 10+ years of local building construction work. This means that, us the local residents, will have to endure a significant increase in construction traffic, noise and dust, to name but 3 issues.

What can you do?

Attend the 'consultation' sessions on the 13th and 14th January at the village halls (see poster opposite).

Word of Warning

Don't get 'sucked in' to the developers' 'promises' or perhaps their leading questions, e.g. 'Do you want more affordable housing? Of course, most people would say yes to this question. But beware, they often then 'spin' these responses to indicate residents are 'for' their proposal.

However, in the last 9 years, 130 affordable units have been built in 'South Medstead' alone and there are currently a further 70+ approved. We doubt the local need extends any further than these numbers. Affordable properties should be planned for where they are needed most and it's certainly not Medstead currently. 

So don't forget, any positive comments you make may be used by the developers as support for their proposals. So please make sure that your objections are clear.

Leave your feedback and ensure it is recorded. Take a photo if you can and send it to us at SMASH.

Join the SMASH FB page at SMASH FB  and keep up to date via this website.

Thank you once again for your help and support.

The SMASH Team

Please sign the petition Thank you