It is important to be clear and open about the specific grounds for allocating "a minimum of 250 dwellings" to Fishbourne. Fishbourne has delivered on housing development since the 1930s, with at least one and more recently two major developments for each decade (except the 1940s for obvious reasons). These have been absorbed and integrated into the village. 250-plus new houses to the west would completely alter the population dynamics. The offer of 1000 homes, which has been made by the developers over the next few years would have the effect of doubling the population. Attractive though such an offer must be to planners seeking to find offers for the additional number of houses for Local Plans (2025 and 2030) there are other important issues at stake affecting the quality of life in this area. The consultation meeting at Fishbourne 16/1/18 showed a heavily developed corridor along the A259 with serious implications for further houses into the future - "Solent City" planned to become a reality!

Fishbourne has limits set by the A27 to the north and east and the Harbour Conservancy to the south (- just as the CDC area has limits set by the South Downs National Park and the Harbour Conservancy area ) Here in Fishbourne there is now little room left for further housing, within the "built-up-area" as redefined by the new Neighbourhood Plan 2020-2035 currently in preparation. If the newly designated "wildlife corridor", takes up space across potential Clay Lane sites it is arguable the resulting shortfall should be absorbed elsewhere.
Anyone not familiar with the village and area could mistake the Bethwines site as an obvious possibility for easy development now and especially as opening the way to meet new targets in ensuing CDC Local Plans. However attractive this might be to planners under pressure it should not negate genuine planning decisions which provide for the well-being of people and the environment, built and natural into the future. With the example of the classic mess, in planning terms, of Peacehaven just down the road, we should be warned!

1. Within the Fishbourne Neighbourhood Plan 2014-2029, agreed by referendum, a residential area was set taking into account limits to the east (Chichester), north (A27) and south (Harbour area). The value placed by residents on the Bethwines site as a village amenity and as a delineating gap not to be used for housing was clear at this stage. The necessity for a new Neighbourhood Plan superseding the 2014-29 plan does not lessen the objections in any way.
The Bethwines location would be tacked on to the existing built up area, not "well integrated". Access to "facilities" would be mostly by car using roads already congested and in Blackboy Lane crumbling and decrepit, and worsened by potential bus route use. 'Out in the fields' is not 'well integrated'!

3. There are sufficient transport problems already. As for the physical mess a major building development of 250 homes-plus could occasion on Blackboy Lane - the mind boggles! The recent weeks of disruption to traffic of the two house development to the south of Blackboy Lane would be nothing to it. Add to that the potential roadworks improving the A27 by-pass and the Whitehouse Farm development (access for lorries off Clay Lane planned) Fishbourne folk will be in for a number of uncomfortable messy years/decades!

5. Detailed consideration of the impact of development on the surrounding landscape, including the South Downs National Park and Chichester Harbour AONB and their settings. Development should be designed to protect long-distance views to the South Downs National Park;

Add to this the protection of the distance views to the west of the village across the coastal plain including the spectacular sunsets. This is also an area where the light qualities of the proximity of Chichester Harbour and the open sea can be appreciated. This special reflected light influenced the development of salad crop farming and the fruit tree nursery, once world famous. Bethwines land is also good quality farming land which should be protected. Particular local circumstances suggest that once broached for a relatively few houses, this would open the way to further and further developments reducing or even filling the settlement defining gap between Fishbourne and Bosham and between Chichester and the ribbon development along the A259. Protection of Chichester Harbour requires greater consideration than merely signing it off on the south side of the A259. It is part of the sweep of land down from the Downs and across the coastal plain to the sea. This needs to be evident in the landscape and environment, for the benefit of human beings, and for the benefit of migrating wildlife.

6. Opportunities for the expansion and provision of green infrastructure into the wider countryside including between settlements and facilities;
Fishbourne village has its historic western boundary which is the rural Blackboy Lane. Land to the west of Fishbourne already provides that green infrastructure providing a north/south flight path from harbour to the Downs. Local residents report regular sightings of bats between the Railway Cottage and Bethwines Farm, and also the presence of red kites, sparrow-hawks and peregrine falcons.

7. Demonstration that development would not have an adverse impact on the nature conservation interest of identified sites and habitats;
There is concern over flooding in Fishbourne which has implications for other areas. Run-off is into the Harbour and proximity means it is particularly affected by the tides and the ponding of water at high tide by the prevailing westerly winds. Standing water in the fields in an increasingly common occurrence in this area. Concreting over for housing will exacerbate the problem possibly leading to increased threat of flooding for existing homes in the path of the run-off. This inevitably impacts harbour-side environments

9. Provision of infrastructure and community facilities in accordance with the most up to date Infrastructure Delivery Plan;
This is a fine ideal but as with our Neighbourhood Plan 2014-29 promises can be reneged upon and while pavements and footpaths in existing developments are generally OK, paths between them or linking them to the rest of the village have rarely received adequate attention or maintenance, a pattern that may apply to other things especially in a time of financial restriction and therefore be on-going. Imposing a town-sized population on a rural environment requires more than merely plonking down houses. Plans have to identify what is needed and have the committed means for implementation.