Para: 4.130 Given the present constraints on development in the area, the Local Plan Review provides for only limited growth focused on enabling these communities to continue to sustain its local facilities and contribute towards meeting locally generated housing needs, and support for the rural economy, in line with the overall Plan strategy and settlement hierarchy.

The current CDC CLPKP defines Plaistow and Ifold villages as a combined 'Service Village', the definition is as follows:
"Service Villages (local centre for services providing for villages and parishes): Villages that either provide a reasonable range of basic facilities (e.g. primary school, convenience store and post office) to meet the everyday needs of local residents, or villages that provide fewer of these facilities but that have reasonable access to them in nearby settlements." (CLPKP)

The settlement of Ifold is defined by a Settlement Boundary.

In the Settlement of Ifold there is no shop, pub, school, medical facilities or recreational facilities to meet the everyday needs of local residents, other than a village hall and a Scout & Girl Guide Hut both run by and reliant on volunteers.

Plaistow village is outside a settlement boundary, and therefore in the countryside (or "Rest of Plan Area" as defined in the current CLPKP Policy 2 - Development and Settlement Hierarchy).

In Plaistow village there is a primary school; village shop; Church; pub; village hall with youth club (with its own multi-use outdoor games area) and preschool (with its own dedicated outdoor play area); weekly Royal Mail Post Office outreach service; village green; outdoor, fenced children's playground; cricket pitch with practice nets and pavilion; and a football field with pavilion.

The notional link of the two settlements being classified as a combined 'service village' is, in reality, 'not reasonable', as householders in the Ifold settlement do not have comparable ease of access to facilities and services. Therefore, when evaluating sites for housing development across the entire Parish and with reference to the NPPF, a site in Plaistow village is more sustainably located than any site in Ifold, even within the limits of the 'service village' designation.

The service village notation in the Local Plan CLPKP revolves around reasonable access to services and facilities. In the case of Ifold 'reasonable access' can only be achieved by the use of a car or taxi service, whereas for Plaistow, village services and facilities may be accessed by residents on foot. Within the Service Village notation all potential housing sites are therefore not equal in terms of access to facilities and services.

Out of all the villages in the North of the District area, Plaistow village does not have a Settlement Boundary, yet it is a village that has the most number of facilities and services. All other villages have sustained considerable levels of new housing development over the past 15-20 years yet Plaistow village has not absorbed any of that housing.

The planning consultancy AECOM, appointed by Locality a partner organization of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), conducted a Site Options and Assessment (August 2016) of the proposed housing sites to be considered for inclusion in the Plaistow and Ifold Parish Neighbourhood Plan. Their study concluded that the CDC Site Allocations DPD site had a high probability of being considered less sustainable in terms of national planning policy at Examination, than the alternative sites in Plaistow, given that the Ifold settlement currently has no services and few facilities - following the closure of its village store.
In the AECOM report (dated August 2016), under conclusions and recommendations (page 25) the following comments are drawn to the attention of Chichester District Council planning department:
'Ifold is fundamentally a less sustainable location than Plaistow.'
'The NPPF...would not support any further residential development at Ifold due to the lack of services and facilities within walking distance.'
'It would be virtually impossible for any party, including for CDC, to argue that development at Ifold would be justified for as long as there is no shop, school or pub in the village but there is a range of suitable and available sites at nearby Plaistow.'
* Importantly, this conclusion should be used in the case against the current allocation of Site 4 (Land to the North of Little Springfield Farm by CDC in their current Site Allocations Development Plan Document (SA DPD).
* The second bullet point on page 26 of the AECOM Report (August 2016) sets out that:
"The approach to sustainable development in the English planning system as set out in the NPPF and reiterated in both Chichester's adopted Local Plan and in the Little Springfield Farm appeal decision means that Plaistow is effectively the only settlement in the Parish that could be considered suitable for new housing development."

Plaistow village should have a defined settlement boundary that takes into its conservation area and with consideration of the many other housing development sites brought forward by Plaistow landowners. They are sites that were not discounted by the Parish Council in its neighbourhood planning activities but not brought forward as the housing allocation in the previous Local Plan had been accounted for in a suitable site Land opposite the village green, Common House Road, Plaistow. Defining a settlement boundary in Plaistow would manage any housing development to be brought forward by those landowners.

Further evidence in support of this is set out as follows:
* Ifold is approximately 2.4km from the centre of Plaistow village, which has the most facilities and services: a school, shop, Church, hall, post office services, village green, children's playground, other recreational facilities and a pub;
* Facilities and services in Ifold are limited to a village hall and a Scout Girl Guide HQ (which rely on volunteers);
* There are no public open spaces or a children's playground in Ifold;
* Plaistow Road, Ifold is a 40 mph speed zone up to the boundary and then becomes a 60 mph speed zone up to Plaistow village. There are no pavements. pedestrian crossings or street lighting to permit safe pedestrian access to the limited Ifold facilities or the facilities in Plaistow.
* The Local Education Authority (West Sussex County Council) 'Home to School and College Transport Policy' applied walking distances are: 3.218688 kilometres (two miles) in relation to a child who is under the age of eight; and 4.828032 kilometres (three miles) in relation to a child who has attained the age of eight. However, in approximately 1997/1998 West Sussex County Council made arrangements for the provision of bus transport for Ifold school children to and from Plaistow and Kirdford Primary School. This is because the Plaistow Road route is regarded by the County Council as too hazardous for a child to walk. The County Council were going to withdraw the free service that had been provided for a number years or withdraw the service entirely as they were not required to provide a bus. The only grounds to have a free service retained was safety, which the Parish Council proved and the County Council agreed.