Petition 5000+ signatures, EHDC open letter and ‘Declaration of the concerned’
1. Petition 5000+ signatures
Firstly, I should just like to thank you all so much for your support regarding this matter. I am delighted that our petition has now reached more than 5,000 signature — 5,053 at the last count.
This is a fantastic achievement and sends a clear message to decision-makers: the communities of Medstead and Four Marks have had enough of overdevelopment in our villages. Our voice is loud and clear, and they ignore it at their peril — especially with local elections taking place this week.
I am extremely grateful to the following local election candidates David Burton,
Full details of the 'Declaration of the Concerned' are included later in this update.
As the declaration sets out, this proposal for 850 houses in ‘South Medstead’ — on top of everything our community has already endured — should be rejected.
We believe that development on this scale would cause significant and demonstrable harm. It is inherently unsustainable, unjustified, overwhelming and unsafe.
2. OPEN LETTER to East Hampshire District Council
You will see below that we have written an open letter to EHDC highlighting the tremendous milestone our petition has achieved in surpassing 5,000 signatures. This remarkable level of support reflects the depth of public concern and the growing dissatisfaction with the current approach to planning and development in our area, which simply seems to be led by developers alone.
The letter also sets out the mounting opposition to the recent Cala/Bewley Homes proposal for 850 new houses, explaining clearly why a development of this scale is entirely inappropriate for this location and should not be considered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start
Dear Richard (Millard - Leader of EHDC), Dawn Adey (Chief Executive of EHDC) and Adam Harvey (Chief Planning Officer of EHDC)
Our petition opposing large-scale development in the villages of Medstead and Four Marks, launched in 2022, has now exceeded 5,000 signatures—representing around ca. two-thirds of our combined population. This is not a marginal concern or a vocal minority; it is an overwhelming democratic mandate from the communities you serve. It is backed up by compelling authentic evidence from real concerned people - see attachments on our website.
Despite this, our villages continue to face relentless development pressure. Since 2017, the southern part of Medstead or 'South Medstead' as the Council call it has seen 338 houses built, with a further 257 already approved in. This is a 140% increase in dwellings in this location. Now, Cala and Bewley are proposing an additional 850 homes around Lymington Bottom Road in 'South Medstead'. Taken together, this scale of expansion is not only disproportionate—it is unsustainable, unjustifiable, overwhelming and unsafe.
The public response has been unequivocal. At the recent developer consultation, the level of anger and frustration expressed by residents was unprecedented. People feel ignored, side lined, and increasingly distrustful of a planning process that appears to disregard both local voices and cumulative impact. Putting several development sites in close proximity to each other and treating them as 'individual' sites which don't interact together goes beyond the realms of common sense and is indefensible.
With the May elections upon us, SMASH has asked all candidates for the Alton Rural Ward to take a clear and public stand. Three have already endorsed our “Declaration of the Concerned.” .
Voters are paying close attention to where candidates—and current representatives—stand on this issue.
It is critical to recognise the political reality: support, or even passive acceptance of developments on this scale will be seen by residents as a direct failure to represent their interests.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is explicit—where development would result in demonstrable harm, it should be refused. Given the volume of recent and approved housing, the impact on Medstead's village character, surface water flooding, utility capacity, strain on inadequate infrastructure, loss of green fields and wildlife and the strength of community opposition, that threshold has already been exceeded. This proposal would compound that harm significantly and exponentially.
We therefore call on you to take a clear and principled position: oppose this development and stand with the communities you serve.
Anything less will be interpreted as a disregard for the expressed will of the community.
I look forward to your response. (now on website)
Yours sincerely,
SMASH + over 5,000 signatories
Steve Adams
Chair
end
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Declaration of the concerned document
‘Declaration of the concerned’ - Regarding the Proposed 850-Home Development in South Medstead.
‘South Medstead’ has been among the most heavily targeted areas for housing development in East Hampshire over the past nine years and continues to be so. During this period, over 338 houses have been constructed, and a further 257 houses have been granted planning permission within the last 18 months alone.
If all of these developments proceed, the total number of households in ‘South Medstead’ will rise to 945 , representing an increase of over 170%. In effect, ‘South Medstead’ will have seen its population almost triple over this period, yet there has been no commensurate increase in infrastructure, services, or local employment opportunities to support such enormous growth.
While residents fully recognise the need for new housing, there comes a point where the scale of development exceeds what is reasonable for a rural settlement. At that stage, development begins to appear unplanned and disproportionate, rather than part of a balanced and sustainable strategy.
Given the scale of housing already delivered and approved locally, it is clear that ‘South Medstead’ cannot fairly be characterised as opposing development. The community has already absorbed substantial growth.
However, residents and local elected representatives are increasingly concerned that this trajectory cannot continue indefinitely without serious consequences for the character, infrastructure, wildlife habitat, safety, and sustainability of the area. The SMASH ‘Say no to 1300 houses’ petition has reached over 5000 signatures showing the strength of concern locally.
The recent proposal by Cala Homes and Bewley Homes to build approximately 850 additional homes in ‘South Medstead’ represents a scale of development that the community believes is wholly disproportionate and unsustainable.
For this reason, the undersigned have come together to formally express their concern and opposition.
This proposal should not proceed for the following reasons:
Landscape Harm and Impact on Rural Character
The scale and location of the development would significantly alter the rural landscape and undermine the character of ‘South Medstead’.
Unsustainable Transport Location
The site is not well served by sustainable transport options, increasing reliance on private vehicles.
Highway Capacity and Safety Issues
Existing roads, railway bridges and A31 junctions already experience congestion and safety concerns particularly at rush hour, which would be exacerbated by such a large development.
Infrastructure Constraints
Local schools, GP surgeries, utilities, and other services are already under pressure and lack the capacity to support substantial additional population growth.
Conflict with the Settlement Hierarchy
The scale of the proposal is inconsistent with the role and size of ‘South Medstead’ within the district’s settlement hierarchy.
Prematurity Relative to the Emerging Local Plan
Determining such a large development ahead of the completion of the Local Plan risks undermining the proper strategic planning process.
Ecological and Environmental Constraints
The proposal raises concerns regarding environmental impact and the protection of local habitats and biodiversity.
Cumulative Impact of Development
When considered alongside ongoing and approved development for example Beechlands Road (62), Land West of Longbourn Way (95), Boyneswood road (54) and 61 Lymington Bottom road (46), the cumulative effect of so many houses in close proximity using the same roads, lanes, infrastructure and services - would fundamentally change the scale and urbanise ‘South Medstead’.
Surface water Flooding
Lymington Bottom Road at Five Ash Pond, Grosvenor Road and at the Clementine green grocers regularly flood after heavy rain. Last year a car was abandoned at the Five Ash Pond due to flooding and on another occasion the road was closed.
For these reasons, we respectfully urge the planning authority to reject any such proposal and ensure that future development is proportionate, sustainable, and aligned with the long-term planning framework for East Hampshire.
This declaration is supported by
SMASH
5053 signatures from the SMASH petition https://c.org/4m5Ln9sqFP
Plus the following May 7th 2026 Election Candidates:
David Burton
Antonia Cox
Alexandra Erhmann
4. FOR MORE INFORMATION
Thank you again for your unrelenting support and loyalty to our campaign.
If you require further information then please go to our website at link to the SMASH website