FOUR Marks residents have been "badly misled" in the lead-up to last Friday's publication of the first draft of East Hampshire's new local plan, the village's district councillor Anne Storey said this week.

Among the most controversial proposals in the district local plan - the blueprint for development in the area up to the year 2011 - is an allocation of land north of Brislands Lane as the site for 150 new houses.

The stretch of land in question runs from alongside Four Marks' recreation ground through to the back of houses in Winchester Road.

Mrs Storey, who has already been successful in "a terrific battle" to bring the number of houses allocated from 200 down to 150, points to information included in EHDC's questionnaire "Your area, your future".

This document, circulated to all households in the district in May 1998, formed the part of the basis from which the draft of the new plan was formulated.

It had been suggested that 200 houses were to be shared between Four Marks and Medstead, she said. "If the idea had been put for another lump of development in Four Marks, which I believe is wrong, I feel it would have brought a far greater response.

"By putting them all in Four Marks you are going to overload the facilities" (such as the school and the village hall) "many of which have been provided by the hard work of local residents."

If the proposed development were to be spread between the villages it would have the beneficial effect of boosting local shops, schools and so forth while not threatening the character of the rural area.

"There are many sites within Medstead quite close to facilities in the centre of the village - and they have a better bus service than we have," she said.

"To put it all into Four Marks is just going to destroy the whole character of the area - not to mention the devastating effect of extra traffic on the lanes and roads.

"The actual land area of Four Marks is very small, the fourth smallest parish in the district, but we are getting developed as one of the larger settlements - only because we have been targeted with development previously."

Past experience has made parish council chairman Peter Hobbs cynical about the number of houses the village is actually likely to end up accommodating.

In the period of the previous local plan (up to 2001) the proposed 125 dwellings had in fact mushroomed to permission being given for 291, he pointed out, "of which only about 25 can be said to relate to permission granted for an earlier period.

"Development since 1991 represents a staggering increase in a village with few employment opportunities and minimal public transport and has exacerbated the rapid trend towards a totally dormitory settlement where the inhabitants have to rely on the motor car in order to travel to schools, shops, work, surgeries and so on."

Government policy is for sustainable development and a reduction of use of the car, he pointed out. The Four Marks proposals run contrary to this guidance.

(See also Page 3 of printed paper)