Blog

ADD UPDATE, 9 December 2016: Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s cabinet have today published a paper ahead of the crucial full council meeting next Thursday (15 December) recommending that the council pursues options B and C.  Setting out some of the factors in the debate, the paper recommends “the Council confirms its commitment to act in progressing” these proposals.

This heads-up makes it EVEN MORE ESSENTIAL that all of us who believe options B and C represent an unsustainable and undeliverable solution to Eastleigh’s housing problems attend the council meeting to register our opposition to them.

Not only are they the most environmentally damaging options but they also offer no prospect of linking to a sustainable public transport system.  They will therefore – without doubt – generate huge additional traffic congestion for the whole area.

If you live in Bishopstoke, Fair Oak, Upham, Owslebury, Allbrook, Colden Common, Chandler’s Ford, Highbridge, Brambridge, Twyford or Otterbourne, you are likely to be badly affected by these ill-considered plans.

The meeting will be held at 7.00pm next Thursday, 15 December, at Kings Community Church, Upper Northam Road, Hedge End, Southampton, SO30 4BZ.

This unusual venue takes up to 1,300 people, which suggests the council knows local residents oppose these plans in their droves.  TV, radio and newspaper journalists are now interested in this story.  We really do need EVERYONE there to make our case as forcibly as we can.

Councillors need to understand that we won’t cease in our opposition, and will go wherever we need to go to attend meetings.  This is a fight for the sustainability of the future of Eastleigh and its surrounding area – our villages, our lifestyles, our environment.  

We demand the best for the whole of the borough.  PLEASE ATTEND.  PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD.

Thank you.

To read the full paper, click here.  The key clauses are numbers 44-70.

ADD UPDATE, 8 December 2016: A 2002 book sponsored by Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC), which pledges to protect threatened wildlife in the fields and ancient woodland of Eastleigh, has been uncovered by ADD researchers.  Should EBC proceed with proposals to build 6,000+ houses and a major new road north of Bishopstoke and Fair Oak – so-called options B and C for its Local Plan – the development would carve through the book’s ‘Stoke Park Priority Area’, which is home to a wide range of rare species including the ‘purple emperor’ butterfly, dormice and lesser quaking grass (see picture above).

‘Wild about Eastleigh – a biodiversity action plan for the borough’, the foreword for which was written by TV naturalist Chris Packham (click here for Part One; and here for Part Two), pledged to protect every one of the threatened species – recommendations that EBC specifically promised to act upon.

Chris Packham wrote: “Safeguarding this fantastic variety of plants, birds, mammals, insects and fungi is never easy, particularly here in the south at a time when the pressures on the land are at their greatest ever.  This is why Eastleigh Borough Council has taken the important step of banding together organisations and individuals who are dedicated to conserving our local wildlife to produce this book… Eastleigh covers a tiny fraction of the earth’s surface yet it is still very important, particularly for those of us that live in it.  We are the ones best placed to ensure that this rich community of life continues to prosper so please join us in action, because as we all know… tomorrow is too late.”

If today’s EBC – led by Councillor Keith House, the same man who was in charge in 2002 – decides in favour of options B and C, it would be a broken promise of monumentally irresponsible proportions.

As one example, the book (Part Two, p.53) quotes the plight of the Stoke Park Priority Area’s dormice population, saying: “The dormouse is identified within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan as a species in need of priority action to halt its decline and to help restore populations.  In the past 100 years it has become extinct in 7 counties and surviving populations have become more and more isolated as woodlands and linking tree cover has been grubbed up.”  If EBC adopts options B and C, a major new road would carve a path between two ancient woodlands, making a mockery of any promise to protect these precious woodland mice – and destroying much else besides.

In another case, the book (p.53) cites the plight of the area’s quaking grass.  It says: “During 2000, a population of the rare plant, lesser quaking grass was recorded from the large arable field to the north of Stoke Park Woods.  This species of grass has declined considerably within the UK over the past century due to changes in farming practice and has been identified as a priority species for action in Hampshire.”  That “large arable field to the north of Stoke Park Woods” would be covered by the tarmac of the proposed new road.

These are just two of the threatened species.  Overall, the book (p.52) singles out Stoke Park Woods, which dates back to the days of King John, as having a particularly “diverse and species-rich plant population”, and gives a firm promise to protect no less than 40 species that live there.  It says: “These plants are called ancient woodland indicator plants and are typical components of botanically rich ancient woodland communities.”

A proposed ‘action’ in the book (p.54), which was backed by EBC, states: “To ensure there is no further loss or fragmentation of semi-natural habitats as a result of development, the Local Plan identifies important wildlife sites that must be protected from development.”

Given Councillor House must have agreed to this book, and its actions, surely he can’t now ignore it?  Doesn’t he have an obligation, if only a moral one, to honour the book’s commitments?

If EBC goes ahead with options B and C, it would be an ecological disaster for rare flora and fauna – not only locally but nationally too.  If anything has changed since 2002, it’s our need to protect our environment even more vociferously.  We can’t allow our politicians to break their promises.  We must stop this madness now.

Please join us at EBC’s next full council meeting on 15 December, at which we believe councillors will – unbelievably – favour options B and C.  The meeting will be held at 7.00pm at Kings Community Church, Upper Northam Road, Hedge End, Southampton, SO30 4BZ.  

 

ADD UPDATE, 5 December 2016: As you know, ADD believes that Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) will make a crucial decision regarding its proposed Local Plan at its full council meeting on 15 December.  In particular, we believe it will decide in favour of its most destructive options, namely options B and C.  We are extremely grateful to everyone who has sent letters to their respective Eastleigh Borough Councillors, Winchester City Councillors, MPs and other elected representatives expressing concern and consternation about these shocking proposals.  If you have yet to do so, we thought this letter, published in the Daily Echo on 1 December 2016, might spur you into action!

ADD UPDATE, 2 December 2016:  Ahead of Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s council meeting on 15 December, at which we believe it is likely to decide in favour of its Local Plan’s options B and C, its most destructive proposals, all EBC councillors have today received a report from planning consultants West Waddy, commissioned by ADD.  This report looks at the options through the prism of nationally recognised planning best practice and environmental guidelines, as well as EBC’s own research and publicly stated objectives.  ADD’s covering letter (below) emphasises the “momentous” nature of the decision and urges the councillors to recognise the report’s conclusion that options D and E “are overwhelmingly the best suited to meet Eastleigh’s housing needs from a practical, environmental and traffic perspective”.

COVERING LETTER

Dear Councillor,

Eastleigh Local Plan

Last summer we wrote to you about one of the most momentous decisions that Eastleigh Borough Council will ever be asked to take – determining the shape of the Local Plan 2011-36.  This will have an irreversible impact on the whole character of the borough and some neighbouring areas.

It is a source of great concern to a lot of people that the options for meeting the demand for new housing in Eastleigh are being driven by developers who would not have to live with the consequences of their actions.  With this in mind, Action against Destructive Development (ADD) commissioned a report from planning consultants West Waddy.  Their brief was to look at the options objectively through the prism of nationally recognised planning best practice and environmental guidelines, as well as Eastleigh Borough Council’s own research and publicly stated objectives.

Their conclusion is that Options D and E are overwhelmingly the best suited to meet Eastleigh’s housing needs from a practical, environmental and traffic perspective.  Furthermore, the North Bishopstoke link road (or bypass) is not required to relieve congestion on Bishopstoke Road, and Options D and E can be delivered without causing coalescence or the need to build the Chickenhall Lane Link Road.  Whilst of course we do not claim that this report provides all the detailed answers, we nonetheless appeal to the council to engage with us in constructive dialogue before ruling out these options.

We would also ask you please to take the trouble to read and consider the arguments put forward in the enclosed report and the accompanying comparison of Options B and C with Options D and E, assessed against EBC policy objectives.  The issues at stake are incredibly important for the whole area, and we thank you for your trouble.  We will send you further reports as and when we commission them.

Yours sincerely,

Deborah Mitchell on behalf of ADD

Action against Destructive Development (ADD)

ADD is a coalition of villages, residents’ associations and supporters who oppose Options B and C of the Eastleigh local plan, and who believe strongly that there are better ways to meet the demand for additional housing.

 

Daily Echo, 24 November 2016: RESIDENTS and council leaders in Colden Common have backed plans to fight thousands of new homes.  Nearly 200 people gathered at Colden Common Community Centre to hear about the ongoing campaign by Action against Destructive Development (ADD).  The group is battling plans by Eastleigh Borough Council to build thousands of homes between Bishopstoke, Fair Oak, Upham, Colden Common and Allbrook to meet government targets.  The homes could be served by a major road which campaigners fear will “merge” the villages.  Residents in the village gave strong backing to ADD and its campaign to ensure that the borough’s housing needs are met in a way that protects the countryside and communities.

ADD ALERT, 23 November 2016: At its next council meeting on Thursday 15 December, we believe Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC) is likely to decide in favour of its Local Plan’s options B and C, its most destructive proposals, which would involve the development of 6,000+ houses and a major new road in, and north of, Bishopstoke and Fair Oak.  We are appealing to anyone who is against these options to attend this meeting to leave EBC councillors in no doubt about the strength of local residents’ opposition.  The meeting will be at 7.00pm at Kings Community Church, Upper Northam Road, Hedge End, Southampton, SO30 4BZ.  If you need a lift, let us know.  We look forward to seeing you there! 

So far:

• Over 1,400 people have signed the petition against options B and C, submitted to EBC on 21 July 2016.
• Over 1,060 people support our cause on Facebook.
• Over 1,060 people have signed the petition to get the Chickenhall Lane Link Road built as soon as possible.
• Over 20 key local and national organisations support our cause.
• All three local MPs support our cause.
• Not a single person has responded positively to our question about whether anyone is in favour of options B and C!

ADD has done a vast amount of work getting to grips with EBC’s options and is strongly of the opinion that options D and E represent a better solution for our housing needs and for the future of our area.

If you value this area, and wish to protect it, please do SHOW UP to this crucial meeting!  If you don’t, it could be too late.

Thank you very much.

New ‘night blight’ maps for England, released by the Campaign to Protect Rural England this summer, show the problem of light pollution worsening across the country.

The maps, which come at a time of increasing awareness of the harmful effects of light pollution on the health of people and wildlife, provide powerful support for CPRE’s campaign to encourage local councils and developers to take light pollution into account when planning new developments.

In Hampshire, CPRE is campaigning for a Green Belt for South Hampshire, which would protect the countryside between the urban conurbations of South Hants and the New Forest National Park to the east and the South Downs National Park to the west and north. This, they say, would not only assist with urban regeneration but also prevent unnecessary sprawling of large built-up areas into unspoilt countryside – which only results in more light pollution and a shameful waste of energy and money.

As Eastleigh Borough Council weighs up the options for its Local Plan ahead of its meeting in December, let’s hope it doesn’t abandon its much-vaunted hopes for a greener world at the crucial moment and takes CPRE Hampshire’s recommendations for a Green Belt, amply supported by its ‘night blight’ map of the borough (above), into account.

ADD UPDATE, 20 November 2016: It was standing room only as around 175 people packed into the community centre at Colden Common to hear an update on the Eastleigh development plan from representatives of Action Against Destructive Development (ADD).  The meeting gave its strong backing to the action group and its campaign to ensure that the borough’s housing needs are met in a way that protects top-quality countryside and the characters of local communities.

Opening the meeting, Kate Beal Blyth of ADD said their campaign had the support of a wide range of organisations and individuals.  She read a message from local MP Steve Brine, thanking the action group for its work and pledging his continued help.

John Lauwerys told the gathering that there were more appropriate ways open to the Council than options B and C of the Eastleigh plan, which would mean building more than 6,000 houses in Bishopstoke and Fair Oak.  Options D and E, he said, made better planning sense.  They would locate housing nearer to existing public transport and to places where people wanted to be such as urban centres, public transport and motorways.  B and C would maximise car usage, meaning at least an extra 30,000 vehicle movements a day.  Furthermore, options D and E were more compact, making it possible to create a central community focus, whereas B and C amounted to ribbon development.

Mark Baylis said that option B, which involves building a major new road through part of Colden Common, would permanently change the character of the village. He said the plan was developer-led, and it contradicted Eastleigh Borough Council’s stated objectives of protecting the countryside, promoting biodiversity, preserving the identities of individual communities and tackling climate change.  The new road, he said, was likely to increase rather than relieve congestion, and make it more likely that Colden Common would eventually become a suburb.

Caroline Dibden of the Campaign to Protect Rural England told the meeting that, from their perspective, options B and C were by far the worst of all those under consideration.

As well as ADD members, there were words of support from district councillors Richard Izard (who also chairs Colden Common Parish Council) and from Sue Cook, with the latter reading out a message from the chair of neighbouring Twyford Parish Council.  There was also backing at the meeting from Otterbourne and Allbrook and North Boyatt Parish Councils.

There followed a lively question and answer session lasting more than hour, with several of those present saying there was an urgent need for the Chickenhall Lane Link Road.

Afterwards Kate Beal Blyth, who chaired the meeting and is a founding member of ADD, said she was “very encouraged” by the level of support shown by villagers and by the number of people who came forward offering to help their work.

ADD UPDATE, 18 November 2016: Yesterday we asked you to write to your local Eastleigh Borough Councillors or Winchester City Councillors ahead of Eastleigh Borough Council’s crucial meeting on 15 December in which we believe it will decide in favour of its most destructive proposals for its Local Plan, namely options B and C.  Whilst we gave you correct email addresses for all the relevant Eastleigh Borough Councillors, Winchester City Councillors, Hampshire County Councillors and MPs, we made a mistake regarding a physical address.  Should you wish to send a letter rather than an email, please find all the correct details below.  Thank you again for all your support.  Our campaign is gathering incredible momentum!

NEWSFLASH: EBC LOCAL PLAN – CRITICAL MOMENT APPROACHING. PLEASE WRITE TO YOUR BOROUGH / CITY COUNCILLORS NOW!

ADD UPDATE, 17 November 2016: ADD believes that Eastleigh Borough Council will make a crucial decision regarding its proposed Local Plan at its full council meeting on 15 December.  In particular, we believe it will decide in favour of its most destructive options for the plan, namely options B and C.

As time is now ticking fast, we are urging everyone in Bishopstoke, Fair Oak, Upham, Owslebury, Allbrook, Colden Common, Twyford and Otterbourne to write to their local Eastleigh Borough Councillors or Winchester City Councillors to ask what they are doing on your behalf to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe, either directly (if you live in Eastleigh) or by taking up the case with neighbouring politicians (if you live within Winchester City Council).  Borough / City Councillors should know what their constituents think and value, particularly given the magnitude of this issue!

Whilst we strongly encourage you to make your letter/email as personal as possible (using your own reasons to object to options B and C), please find below a draft to give you some ideas.  NB Please do make this letter/email your own as duplicate copies only get counted once!

Please also find below email addresses for all relevant Borough / City Councillors, plus relevant MPs and County Councillors (whom we encourage you to copy on any emails).

If you are sending a hard copy letter to an Eastleigh Borough Councillor, please send to Eastleigh Borough Council, Eastleigh House, Upper Market Street, Eastleigh, SO50 9YN.  Alternatively, if you are sending to a Liberal Democrat Borough Councillor, Eastleigh Liberal Democrats have a Freepost address: Freepost RTLH-YXCX-BKXE, Eastleigh Liberal Democrats, 107 Leigh Road, Eastleigh, SO50 9DR.  No stamp is required for the Freepost option.

If you are sending a letter to a Winchester City Councillor, please send to Winchester City Council, City Offices, Colebrook Street, Winchester, SO23 9LJ.

Thanks to everyone’s support, our campaign is gathering momentum!  Please keep up the pressure!

DRAFT LETTER/EMAIL (CONTACT DETAILS BELOW)

STARTS

Dear [your Councillor],

I am writing to ask what you are doing to address the threat to [name of your village/ward] posed by Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s current development proposals within their proposed Local Plan till 2036.  Anyone who has studied options B and C of EBC’s proposed Local Plan to build 6,000+ houses and a major new road (https://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/media/184064/151217-Issues-and-Options_postcabformat.pdf) will realise that we face a planning and environmental disaster [and, if you live in Eastleigh, huge financial risk to the borough] if EBC chooses these options (the website www.add-eastleigh.org is informative on these issues).

In particular, options B and C would:

• Destroy much-loved, precious countryside, impacting a Site of Special Scientific Interest, two sites of Ancient Natural Woodland and numerous Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation.
• Destroy the unique identity of each of our communities.
• Destroy our quality of life in many ways, including through vastly increased traffic congestion (due to the estimated 30,000 extra daily car journeys that, despite the proposed new road, would ultimately end up back in the current road system).

Incredibly, I am told that EBC is likely to favour options B and C at its council meeting on 15 December so – as I am sure you are aware – time is of the essence to ensure this does not happen.

Of course, I understand that we need new homes in Eastleigh but options B and C seem to be calculated to cause maximum damage to our precious environment whilst there are other places in the Borough that could absorb this kind of growth with far less impact, in particular EBC’s options D and E in the area around Allington Lane. One would never believe that EBC’s slogan is “tackling climate change”!

Indeed, from a planning perspective, there are plenty of reasons why options D and E make the most sense, not least because they would produce a compact, sustainable community, well connected to the centre of Eastleigh and therefore directly boosting the town centre.  In contrast, options B and C would produce a series of unconnected housing estates strung along a road (of questionable value) that won’t relate to Eastleigh town centre at all.

As my local Borough [City] Councillor, I assume that you are also very concerned about this issue and are doing everything in your power to ensure EBC [or if you live within Winchester City Council – “to lobby neighbouring politicians to ensure EBC”] makes the right choice regarding its Local Plan.  Are you, for example, lobbying hard for the Chickenhall Lane Link Road to be built as soon as possible?  As you’ll no doubt know, this long-planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.

I much look forward to hearing what actions you are taking to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe.

Yours sincerely,

ENDS

CONTACT DETAILS

Borough / City Councillors – prioritise contacting the ones for where you live!

Eastleigh – full list (with postal addresses) is at: http://meetings.eastleigh.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?fn=ward

Bishopstoke West: Cllr Anne Winstanley (cabinet member) [email protected]
Bishopstoke West: Cllr Vickieye Parkinson-McLachlan [email protected]

Bishopstoke East: Cllr Trevor Mignot [email protected]
Bishopstoke East: Cllr Angela Roling [email protected]

Fair Oak: Cllr Des Scott [email protected]
Fair Oak: Cllr Rob Rushton [email protected]

Allbrook: Cllr Sarah Bain [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Maureen Sollitt [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Chris Thomas [email protected]

Winchester – full list (with postal addresses) is at: http://www.winchester.gov.uk/meetings/councillors/

Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Sue Cook [email protected]
Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Richard Izard [email protected]

Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Lawrence Ruffell [email protected]
Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Amber Thacker [email protected]

Otterbourne: Cllr Jan Warwick [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Brian Laming [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Eleanor Bell [email protected]

FOR COPYING ON EMAILS

Relevant MPs
Steve Brine, MP for Winchester [email protected]
Mims Davies, MP for Eastleigh [email protected]
George Hollingbery, MP for Meon Valley [email protected]

Hampshire County Councillors
Bishopstoke and Fair Oak: Cllr Martin Lyon [email protected]
Bishopstoke and Allbrook: Cllr Andy Moore [email protected]
Colden Common, Twyford, Upham, Owslebury: Cllr Rob Humby [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Phil Bailey [email protected]

IN ADDITION:

As we believe EBC will favour its most destructive options at its meeting at on 15 December, we need as many people as possible to attend in order to demonstrate support for our cause.  The meeting will be held at 7.00pm at Kings Community Church, Upper Northam Road, Hedge End, Southampton, SO30 4BZ.  Please ink this date into your diary now!  If you need a lift, let us know.

IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO, PLEASE ALSO:

• Sign this petition to get the Chickenhall Lane Link Road built as soon as possible.  This long–planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.
• Email us to register your support and offer your help.  In particular, we want volunteers to deliver campaign leaflets and to help with our research.
• Consider donating to our cause to enable us to afford the best planning and traffic / highways consultants and other professionals to ensure we have the highest possible chance of success.  Donate here.  Any donation – big or small – will make a difference.

If you value living in this area, and wish to protect it, please ACT NOW!

ADD UPDATE, 17 November 2016: ADD believes that Eastleigh Borough Council will make a crucial decision regarding its proposed Local Plan at its full council meeting on 15 December.  In particular, we believe it will decide in favour of its most destructive options for the plan, namely options B and C. 

As time is now ticking fast, we are urging everyone in Bishopstoke, Fair Oak, Upham, Owslebury, Allbrook, Colden Common, Twyford and Otterbourne to write to their local Borough Councillors to ask what they are doing on your behalf to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe, either directly (if you live in Eastleigh) or by taking up the case with neighbouring politicians (if you live within Winchester City Council). Borough Councillors should know what their constituents think and value, particularly given the magnitude of this issue!

Whilst we strongly encourage you to make your letter/email as personal as possible (using your own reasons to object to options B and C), please find below a draft to give you some ideas.

Please also find below email addresses for all relevant Borough Councillors, plus relevant MPs and County Councillors (whom we encourage you to copy on any emails).

If you are sending a hard copy letter to anyone at EBC, please use the available free post address: Freepost RTLH-YXCX-BKXE, Eastleigh Liberal Democrats, 107 Leigh Road, Eastleigh, SO50 9DR.  No stamp is required.

Thanks to everyone’s support, our campaign is gathering momentum!  Please keep up the pressure!

DRAFT LETTER/EMAIL (CONTACT DETAILS BELOW)

STARTS

Dear [your Councillor],

I am writing to ask what you are doing to address the threat to [name of your village/ward] posed by Eastleigh Borough Council (EBC)’s current development proposals within their proposed Local Plan till 2036.  Anyone who has studied options B and C of EBC’s proposed Local Plan to build 6,000+ houses and a major new road (https://www.eastleigh.gov.uk/media/184064/151217-Issues-and-Options_postcabformat.pdf) will realise that we face a planning and environmental disaster [and, if you live in Eastleigh, huge financial risk to the borough] if EBC chooses these options (the website www.add-eastleigh.org is informative on these issues).

In particular, options B and C would:

• Destroy much-loved, precious countryside, impacting a Site of Special Scientific Interest, two sites of Ancient Natural Woodland and numerous Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation.
• Destroy the unique identity of each of our communities.
• Destroy our quality of life in many ways, including through vastly increased traffic congestion (due to the estimated 30,000 extra daily car journeys that, despite the proposed new road, would ultimately end up back in the current road system).

Incredibly, I am told that EBC is likely to favour options B and C at its council meeting on 15 December so – as I am sure you are aware – time is of the essence to ensure this does not happen.

Of course, I understand that we need new homes in Eastleigh but options B and C seem to be calculated to cause maximum damage to our precious environment whilst there are other places in the Borough that could absorb this kind of growth with far less impact, in particular EBC’s options D and E in the area around Allington Lane.  One would never believe that EBC’s slogan is “tackling climate change”!

Indeed, from a planning perspective, there are plenty of reasons why options D and E make the most sense, not least because they would produce a compact, sustainable community, well connected to the centre of Eastleigh and therefore directly boosting the town centre.  In contrast, options B and C would produce a series of unconnected housing estates strung along a road (of questionable value) that won’t relate to Eastleigh town centre at all.

As my local Borough Councillor, I assume that you are also very concerned about this issue and are doing everything in your power to ensure EBC [or if you live within Winchester City Council – “to lobby neighbouring politicians to ensure EBC”] makes the right choice regarding its Local Plan.  Are you, for example, lobbying hard for the Chickenhall Lane Link Road to be built as soon as possible?  As you’ll no doubt know, this long-planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.

I much look forward to hearing what actions you are taking to prevent this planning and environmental catastrophe.

Yours sincerely,

ENDS

CONTACT DETAILS

Borough Councillors – prioritise contacting the ones for where you live!

Eastleigh – full list (with postal addresses) is at: http://meetings.eastleigh.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?fn=ward

Bishopstoke West: Cllr Anne Winstanley (cabinet member) [email protected]
Bishopstoke West: Cllr Vickieye Parkinson-McLachlan [email protected]

Bishopstoke East: Cllr Trevor Mignot [email protected]
Bishopstoke East: Cllr Angela Roling [email protected]

Fair Oak: Cllr Des Scott [email protected]
Fair Oak: Cllr Rob Rushton [email protected]

Allbrook: Cllr Sarah Bain [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Maureen Sollitt [email protected]
Allbrook: Cllr Chris Thomas [email protected]

Winchester – full list (with postal addresses) is at http://www.winchester.gov.uk/meetings/councillors/

Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Sue Cook [email protected]
Colden Common & Twyford: Cllr Richard Izard [email protected]

Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Lawrence Ruffell [email protected]
Upham and Owslebury: Cllr Amber Thacker [email protected]

Otterbourne: Cllr Jan Warwick [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Brian Laming [email protected]
Otterbourne: Cllr Eleanor Bell [email protected]

FOR COPYING ON EMAILS

Relevant MPs
Steve Brine, MP for Winchester [email protected]
Mims Davies, MP for Eastleigh [email protected]
George Hollingbery, MP for Meon Valley [email protected]

Hampshire County Councillors
Bishopstoke and Fair Oak: Cllr Martin Lyon [email protected]
Colden Common, Twyford, Upham, Owlsebury, and Otterbourne: Cllr Rob Humby [email protected]  

IN ADDITION:

As we believe EBC will favour its most destructive options at its meeting at 7.00pm on 15 December, we need as many people as possible to attend in order to demonstrate support for our cause. Please ink this date into your diary.

IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO, PLEASE ALSO:

• Sign this petition to get the Chickenhall Lane Link Road built as soon as possible.  This long–planned road, favoured by many stakeholders, would increase the viability of more appropriate development options.
• Email us to register your support and offer your help. In particular, we want volunteers to deliver campaign leaflets and to help with our research.
• Consider donating to our cause to enable us to afford the best planning traffic / highways consultants and other professionals to ensure we have the highest possible chance of success. Donate here. Any donation – big or small – will make a difference.

If you value living in this area, and wish to protect it, please ACT NOW!