City of York Council

STRENSALL WITH TOWTHORPE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN:

POST- EXAMINATION DECISION STATEMENT

Regulation 18 of the Neighbourhood Planning

(General) Regulations 2012 (as amended)

This document is the decision statement required to be prepared under Regulation 18(2) of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012 (as amended). It sets out the Council’s response to each of the recommendations contained within the Report to City of York Council of the independent examination of the Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan (“the Plan”) by independent Examiner Mrs Rosemary Kidd, which was submitted to the Council on 13th October 2022.

This decision statement, the independent Examiner’s Report and the submission version of the Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan and supporting documents can be viewed on the Council’s website: www.york.gov.uk/neighbourhoodplanning in line with the current arrangements in the Councils update Statement of Community Involvement.^{^[1]}

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), City of York Council (“the Council”) has a statutory duty to assist communities in the preparation of neighbourhood (development) plans and to take plans through a process of examination and referendum. The Localism Act 2011 (Part 6, Chapter 3) sets out the Local Planning Authority’s responsibilities under neighbourhood planning.

1.2 This statement confirms that the modifications proposed by the Examiner’s Report have been considered and accepted and that subject to making the recommended modifications (and other minor modifications) the Plan may now be submitted to referendum.

1.3 The Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan was designated by the Council as a Neighbourhood Area on 6^th January 2016. The Plan covers the parish of Strensall with Towthorpe and a small area of the parish of Stockton on the Forest. Strensall with Towthorpe is situated to the north of the City of York, and north east of Haxby. At 2011, the parish had a population of 6,047. The plan area includes Strensall Common which is a Special Area of Conservation, an example of lowland heath habitat. Part of the area is also a Site of Special Scientific Interest. It is entirely within the Local Planning Authority’s area.

1.4 Strensall with Towthorpe Parish Council undertook pre-submission consultations on the draft Plan in accordance with Regulation 14. Consultation on the Pre-Submission Version took place between 1^st June and 15^th July 2018. A second Pre-Submission consultation took place between 1^st March and 12^th April 2019.

1.5 Following the submission of the Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan to the Council in June 2021, the Council publicised the draft Plan for an eight-week period and representations were invited in accordance with Regulation 16. The Submission consultation took place between 15^th November 2021 and 7^th January 2022.

2.0 INDEPENDENT EXAMINATION

2.1 The Council appointed Mrs Rosemary Kidd, Dip TP, MRTPI, with the consent of Strensall with Towthorpe Parish Council, to undertake the independent examination of the Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan and to prepare a report of the independent examination.

2.2 The Examiner examined the Plan by way of written representations supported by an unaccompanied site visit of the Neighbourhood Plan Area. Clarification on a number of issues was sought from the Qualifying Body, their Planning Agents and the City of York Council during the Examination process.

2.3 One of the key policy issues to be addressed through the examination was the future of Queen Elizabeth Barracks at Strensall. The issue was being discussed through the City of York Local Plan Examination, which was also being held in 3 phases, between May and September 2022. As the Barracks site was due to be discussed in detail in Phase 2 of the Local Plan Examination, in July 2022, the Qualifying Body, their planning agents and the City of York Council asked for the Neighbourhood Plan examination to be temporarily postponed for a period of approximately 6 weeks until the outcomes of the discussions regarding the future of the Barracks were considered at the Local Plan Examination. The Examiner agreed this was an appropriate course of action to take, given the circumstances and agreed to the temporary postponement of the Neighbourhood Plan examination.

2.4 The Examiner’s Report was formally submitted to the Council on 13^th October 2022. The Report concludes that subject to making the modifications recommended by the Examiner, the Plan meets the basic conditions set out in the legislation and should proceed to referendum.

2.5 Following receipt of the Examiner’s Report, legislation requires that the Council consider each of the modifications recommended, the reasons for them, and decide what action to take. The Council is also required to consider whether to extend the area to which the referendum is to take place.

3.0 DECISION AND REASONS

3.1 Having considered each of the recommendations made in the Examiner’s Report and the reasons for them, the Council, has decided to accept all of the Examiner’s recommended modifications to the draft Plan. These are set out in Table 1 below.

3.2 The Council considers that, subject to the modifications being made to the Plan as set out in Table 1 below, the Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan meets the basic conditions mentioned in paragraph 8(2) of Schedule 4B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) is compatible with the Convention rights and meets the requirements of paragraph 8(1) of Schedule 4B to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

3.3 As a consequence of the required modifications, the submitted version of the Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan will be modified accordingly, for it then to proceed to referendum.

3.4 The Examiner recommended that the Neighbourhood Plan should proceed to referendum based on the boundary of the Neighbourhood Plan, as designated by the City of York Council on 14^th June 2018.

3.5 This decision was made at a meeting of the Council’s Executive on 16^th March 2023.

3.6 This decision statement is dated 16^th March 2023.

Other information:

The Neighbourhood Plan document will be updated to incorporate all the modifications required and re-titled Referendum Version. The date for the referendum and further details will be publicised shortly once a date is set by the Council.

Table 1: Examiner’s Recommended Modifications

Strensall with Towthorpe Neighbourhood Plan Policy	Examiner’s Report Reference	Recommended Modification	CYC Consideration/ Justification
Basic Condition 1 – Has regard to National Policy	Recommendation 1	Check and update any references to and quotations from NPPF of February 2019 to those of July 2021.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Basic Condition 4 – Compatible with EU obligations and human rights requirements	Recommendation 2	Update the HRA Screening Opinion to accord with the latest update in 2021	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Neighbourhood Plan – As a whole	Recommendation 3	Improve the clarity of the Proposals Map so that the boundaries of sites and properties referred to or designated in the Policies of the STNP can clearly identified. Delete the Community Actions from the Proposals map and include them on a figure within the text.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Local Planning Policy	Recommendation 4	Revise paragraphs 3.2.1 – 3.2.2 as follows: “The development plan for York comprises the saved policies of the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) relating to the general extent of the York Green Belt. These policies YH9(C) and Y1 (C1 and C2) which relate to York’s Green Belt and the key diagram insofar as it illustrates general extent of the Green Belt. “The City of York Draft Local Plan Incorporating the Fourth Set of Changes was approved for Development Management purposes in April 2005 (DCLP). Whilst the DCLP does not form part of the statutory development plan, its policies are considered capable of being material considerations in the determination of planning applications where policies relevant to the application are consistent with those in the 2021 NPPF, although the weight that can be afforded to them is very limited. “The Publication Draft City of York Local Plan 2018 (the emerging plan) was submitted for examination on 25 May 2018. In accordance with paragraph 48 of NPPF 2021, the emerging plan policies can be afforded weight according to: a) the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation the greater the weight that may be given); b) the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and c) the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the previous NPPF published in March 2012. (NB: Under transitional arrangements plans submitted for examination before 24 January 2019 will be assessed against the 2012 NPPF). “The evidence base underpinning the emerging plan is also capable of being a material consideration in the determination of planning applications.” “Subsequent to the submission of the Publication Draft Local Plan to the Secretary of State in 2018, two further consultations were held on proposed modifications to the Publication Draft in June 2019 and May 2021. These consultations included consultation on new evidence base”. Revise paragraph 3.3.4 to read: “City of York Council are proposing a number of modifications to the submitted Local Plan, which include an amendment to move the village Green Belt boundary to follow Ox Carr Lane. This boundary change was included……..” Paragraphs 1.4.3 and 3.3.5 – Add further updates on the progress of the emerging Local Plan.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
4.2 Objectives of the Plan	Recommendation 5	Revise the first objective to read: “To contribute to meeting York’s housing requirement”	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy CP1: Safeguarding Existing Car Parking	Recommendation 6	Revise Policy CP1 to read: “Existing parking provision supporting places of employment, schools, shops, public houses, churches, community facilities, doctors, dentists or public services will be safeguarded. “Loss of parking spaces will be considered appropriate where it is demonstrated that the parking spaces are no longer required; or alternative provision in an accessible and comparable location is secured.” Add the following to the end of paragraph 5.1.6: “The level of on-street parking is set by the local highway authority through a separate process to planning.”	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy CP2: Increased Public Car Parking	Recommendation 7	Revise policy CP2 as follows: Revise the first paragraph to read: “Development should include provision……” Delete the second and third paragraphs and site CP2.1. Delete the site from the Proposals Map.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy CF1: Protection of Community Facilities and Services	Recommendation 8	Revise Policy CF1 as follows: Revise the title of the Policy to “Safeguarding of Community Facilities.” Revise the first paragraph to read: “The community facilities listed below and shown on the Proposals Map should be safeguarded for the benefit of the community.” Move the paragraph beneath Table F to the justification. Revise the final paragraph of the policy to read: “Development that would result in the loss of a community facility will only be supported where: Delete point 1 and 2 Retain points 3 and 4. Delete “Development will only be supported where it can be demonstrated that” from point 3. Correct the location of CF1-11 on the Proposals Map.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy CF2: Local Green Space	Recommendation 9	Revise Policy CF2 as follows: “The sites listed in Table G and shown on the Proposals Map are designated as Local Green Space and will be protected from development in a manner consistent with the protection of land within the Green Belt. Inappropriate development on them that would be harmful to the open space should not be approved except in special circumstances. List of sites: Revised as follows Delete site CF2-12 Queen Elizabeth Barracks Tennis Courts. Renumber and rename sites in accordance with the revised LGS Assessment submitted in August 2022 as follows: CF2-1: Land at Strensall Bridge CF2-2: The Heath CF2-3: Foss Bank – Westpit Lane CF2-4: Wild Haven (Ash Walk/Pasture Close) CF2-5: Lakeside Gardens CF2-6: Howard Road CF2-7: Strensall Bowling Green CF2-8: Strensall Sports and Recreation Ground CF2-9: Robert Wilkinson Playing Field CF2-10: Queen Elizabeth Barracks Sports Ground CF2-11: Strensall Park Playing Fields CF2-12: Northfields/The Village ‘Green’ CF2-13: Hallard Way CF2-14: Pasture Close CF2-15: Land West of Knapton Close CF2-16: Foss Bank/Chaldon Close/Woodleigh Close CF2-17: West Pit Lane CF2-18: South of Lynwood Close CF2-19: Land at York Road/Toby Court CF2-20: Hollis Crescent CF2-21: Strensall Park ‘Green’ CF2-22: Littlethorpe Close CF2-23: Northfields Allotments CF2-24: New Lane Allotments CF2-25: Strensall and Towthorpe Cemetery CF2-26: St Mary the Virgin Churchyard CF2-27: St Wilfrid’s Garrison Churchyard CF2-28: Ox Carr Lane/Flaxton Road/Lords Moor Lane Verges CF2-29: Newton Way/Knapton Close CF2-30: Southfields Road CF2-31: South of Middlecroft Drive CF2-32: Westpit Lane Hedge CF2-33: River Foss – South Bank Revise the second sentence of the policy to read: “The enhancement of a designated Local Green Space to improve its value for amenity, recreation and / or biodiversity will be supported.” Revise the boundaries of the areas and numbering on the Proposals Map. Update Appendix 2 to include the revised LGS Assessment submitted in August 2022.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Heritage & Design	Recommendation 10	Revise paragraph 5.3.6 to read: “In addition, the Character Appraisal identified the following local landmarks: Queen Elizabeth Barracks, the listed buildings of St Mary’s Church and the two historic bridges over the River Foss. The design of the recent pedestrian bridge is also noted. These landmarks are of interest as they are intrinsic……” Delete the last two sentences of paragraph 5.3.7. Add the following after paragraph 5.3.7: “Conservation Area Appraisals have been approved by CYC for each of the three conservation areas in the plan area. They provide further information on the significance of the conservation areas, heritage features, landmarks, gateways, views and landscaping.” Delete reference to “Woodhall Planning and Conservation” throughout the SWTNP. Update the maps in Appendix 4 to show the boundaries of the Character Areas more clearly.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy DH1: Promotion of Local Distinctiveness	Recommendation 11	Revise Policy DH1 as follows: “Development proposals should have regard to the Strensall with Towthorpe Village Design Statement and Strensall with Towthorpe Character Appraisal. Development should be laid out and designed to make a positive contribution to the local character and distinctiveness of the character area. It should respect the following matters: “Gardens and open spaces “Gardens and open spaces between buildings that contribute to the rural and visual character of the neighbourhood plan area should be retained. Development that would result in the sub-division of gardens should not harm the local character, distinctiveness and visual amenity.” The loss of front or side gardens areas to hardstanding for vehicle parking should be avoided. Proposals should not impact on rural and visual amenity or road safety. “The openness of the large gardens in Strensall village along the west side of Moor Lane/Princess Road, both sides of Lords Moor Lane (to the north of York Golf Club) and along the north side of The Village shown on the Proposals Map should be maintained.” “Open spaces, particularly those designated as Local Green Spaces, should be safeguarded and enhanced.” “Views “The impact of development proposals on the key views identified on the Proposals Map should be assessed through a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. Development should be designed to incorporate views over adjacent countryside, where appropriate. Highways and Rights of Way – change “must” to “should”	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy DH2: General Design Principles	Recommendation 12	Revise Policy DH2 as follows: Include a new heading “Heritage Assets” and include the first two points of Scale and Massing revised as follows: “Development within or affecting the setting of Strensall Village, Strensall Railway Buildings and Towthorpe Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings and other designated and non-designated heritage assets should respect the significance of the heritage asset and make a positive contribution to the conservation of the heritage asset. Proposals will be considered in accordance with national and Local Plan policies and will take account of the Conservation Area Appraisals and significance of the heritage assets.” Revise the third paragraph second line of Scale and Massing to read: “…..and make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness of the character area as identified in the Strensall with Towthorpe Character Appraisal. If appropriate ……” Add the following to the end of this paragraph: “Buildings of an outstanding contemporary design will be supported.” Revise the heading “Layout” to “Open Space” and include the following: “Open spaces shall be provided on site as part of development proposals in accordance with the requirements of the City of York Local Plan. Open spaces should be designed to provide an attractive feature to enhance the appearance of the development a well as provide areas for children’s play, sports and allotments. Include the two paragraphs from Layout in the Open Space section. Add “where appropriate” at the beginning of the first paragraph of “Layout”. Revise the second sentence of “Boundary Treatments” to read: “Where appropriate, front boundaries should be defined…..” Add the following to the end of the first paragraph on “Roof Form”: “…..or modern materials with a similar appearance.” Replace the second paragraph on Roof Form with “Roof forms and materials are expected to match desirable local characteristics, particularly in conservation areas. Plan depth should be sympathetic to desirable existing village plan forms so as to generate familiar pitched roof geometries and roof heights.” Add the following to the justification: “Conservation Area Appraisals for the Strensall Village, Strensall Railway Buildings and Towthorpe Conservation Areas provide an assessment of the character of the conservation areas and identify suggestions for future management improvements.”	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy DH3: General Shop Front Design and Policy D4: Shopfront Signage	Recommendation 13	Combine Policies DH3 and DH4 as follows: “1. Where there is a proposal to alter, replace, or create new shopfronts, it will be supported where: a) the design enhances the scale, qualities and appearance of the building and is in keeping with its surrounding area, in respect to its design, scale, materials and colour; b) Shopfront signage is of a scale, design, materials, finish and position within the fascia to match and be tailored to the building and streetscene, with hand painted signage applied directly to the fascia board particularly encouraged where it achieves this; and c) Lighting is fitted externally and without the use of internal box lighting. 2. Within Strensall with Towthorpe Conservation Areas, and on buildings identified as heritage assets: a) Restoration of original shopfronts will be supported. Proposals which set out to remove, replace or substantially harm shop fronts of historic merit will not be supported. b) Illumination of signage will be supported where the fittings, wiring and level of illumination is designed to enhance the historic character and appearance of the building and conservation area.” Move the final paragraph of Policy DH3 on historic photographs to the justification.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy DG1: Strensall Park, Policy DG2: Alexandra Road, Policy DG3: Howard Road	Recommendation 14	Revise Policy DG1 as follows: “To be supported, development within the Strensall Park area, as defined on the Proposals Map, should demonstrate it reinforces the following locally distinctive features: a) Buildings of two storeys; b) Houses laid out around a narrow highway, with grass verges and trees. The central grassed area with mature trees provides a focal point to the estate and is a key feature; c) Housing set in generous gardens; d) Roofs pitched parallel to street. Flanking walls incorporated with mono-pitched flat roof garage; e) Multiple flue chimneys located on ridge line and at gable ends; f) Constructed of red brick, rendered and painted white, with roofs of modern clay pantiles; g) Upvc doors and window frames; h) Large square openings on ground floor with vertical proportioned elements. Remaining openings generally vertical in proportion; i) Low brick boundary walls and gate piers with stone coping detail. Metal gates at driveway and footpath entrances. Any proposals should ascertain that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of the Strensall Common SAC or SSSI.” Revise Policy DG2 as follows: “To be supported, development within the Alexandra Road area, as defined on the Proposals Map, should demonstrate it reinforces the following locally distinctive features: a) Buildings of two storeys and semi-detached; b) Houses on the south side of the street with principal facades to the south (rear): c) Housing set in generous gardens; d) Roofs pitched parallel to street or hipped. Mono-pitched garage roof hidden by small parapet; e) Multiple flue chimneys located on ridge line or located centrally within roof slope; f) Glazed red brick or red brick, with roofs of modern concrete tiles or pantiles; g) Upvc doors and window frames; h) Large square openings on ground floor with vertical proportioned elements. Remaining openings generally vertical in proportion; i) Variety of post and wire fencing and hedge boundary treatments; Any proposals should ascertain that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of the Strensall Common SAC or SSSI.” Revise Policy DG3 as follows: “To be supported, development within the Howard Road area, as defined on the Proposals Map, should demonstrate it reinforces the following locally distinctive features: a) Buildings of two storeys; b) Houses on south side of the street with principal facades to the south (rear); c) Housing set in generous gardens with mature trees; d) Roofs pitched parallel to street or hipped. Mono-pitched garage hidden by small parapet; e) Multiple flue chimneys located on ridge line or located centrally within roof slope; f) Glazed red brick or red brick, with roofs of modern concrete tiles or pantiles; g) Upvc doors and window frames; h) Large square openings on ground floor with vertical proportioned elements. Remaining openings generally vertical in proportion; i) Variety of post and wire fencing and hedge boundary treatments; Any proposals should ascertain that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of Strensall Common SAC or SSSI.” Revise paragraphs 5.4.19 – 5.4.20 to reflect the latest position agreed at the Local Plan Examination on these sites.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report. NB: In relation to the Examiners final point (Revise paragraphs 5.4.19 - 5.4.29 to reflect the latest position agreed at the Local Plan Examination on these sites), it was decided to delete these paragraphs as they are now superseded, and add a new sentence to paragraph 5.4.18 to reflect the open space provision at Howard Road, in the City of York Local Plan Proposed Policy Map Modifications January 2023 document.
Policy DG4: Queen Elizabeth Barracks – Design, Policy DG5: Development Brief for the Redevelopment of the Queen Elizabeth Barracks – Master Planning / Planning Principles	Recommendation 15	Delete Policy DG4. Retitle Policy DG5: Development at Queen Elizabeth Barracks, Strensall Revise the Policy to read: “1. Development at Queen Elizabeth Barracks will be permitted where: a) It can be demonstrated that it will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Strensall Common SAC as justified by an appropriate residential assessment; and b) Residential development, if proposed as part of development at QEB: (i) Does not result in a net increase in the current number of units, in order to manage and minimise impacts associated with recreation on the SAC; and (ii) Reflects the housing need identified in the City of York Council’s latest strategic housing needs assessment and, where viable, includes appropriate provision of smaller properties suitable for older residents and for first time buyers to meet particular neighbourhood housing needs. c) Integration and connection with the existing community at Strensall is maintained through retention of the existing sports and community hall provision (shown in figure X) or reprovision of the sports and community floorspace at the site, with provision for wider community access to the newly provided facilities. d) The wider impacts of the development on social and community infrastructure in the locality, including education and local retail / services provision, have been assessed and mitigation secured through conditions or planning obligations. e) Transport impacts associated with any development can be appropriately managed and mitigated, with priority given to the design of the development to include more sustainable modes of travel, in particular cycling and walking, to be secured through a travel plan. f) It can be demonstrated that development has had regard to the following design principles: (i) the incorporation of landscaped areas; and (ii) the retention of mature trees where possible and supplemented by new tree planting where appropriate. 2. A masterplan should be developed for the site reflecting the principles set out in revised Policies DG1-3 and should be informed by a Heritage Assessment, including a photographic record of the site and buildings. This must identify any buildings of historic or architectural interest and demonstrate how proposals would respond to, and where appropriate incorporate these into the design of the development.” Include a diagram within the text to show the location of sports provision and the community hall at the Barracks. These only need to be shown on the Proposals Map where they are referenced under other policies. Show the site on the Proposals Map in accordance with that shown on the updated Proposals Map May 2022, renamed from DG4 & DG5 to policy DG5. Update paragraph 5.4.22 to reflect the outcomes of the Local Plan Examination.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Policy DG6: Affordable Housing	Recommendation 16	Revise Policy DG6 as follows: Revise the first paragraph of the policy to read: “……a mix of affordable and market housing…….. understanding of local housing need within the Parish in accordance with the latest strategic or local housing needs assessment.” Delete the second paragraph. Add new Community Actions: “The Parish Council will seek to ensure that affordable housing is made available to those with a local connection to the Parish in the first instance, in accordance with the local connections criteria set out in Appendix Three.” Revise paragraph 5.5.5 to refer to the latest data on housing need. Delete paragraph 5.5.1. “5.5.5: The City of York Council’s Local Housing Needs Assessment (2022) sets out the latest evidence of the property size and tenure needs across the City. It confirms, for example, that the focus of affordable home ownership and affordable rented provision should be on 2-bed properties. However, the mix applied to individual development sites should also be informed by the nature and character of the area, along with understanding of the existing mix and turnover of properties within the Parish.” Delete “and 3 properties in the rear gardens of 5/6 Northfields” from paragraph 5.5.6.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Community Infrastructure Levy	Recommendation 17	Revise the text in section 7 to read: “7.1 The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations were introduced in 2010 by the government to help pay for infrastructure to support development. In June 2022, the City of York Executive agreed to move forward with a CIL for York. Paragraph 7.2 unchanged. “7.3 The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) makes clear that 15%, or up to a maximum of £100 per new house, of any CIL collected by a local planning authority must be paid to the Parish Council in the area in which development takes place. Following adoption of a neighbourhood plan, the amount to be paid to the Parish Council increases to 25% (uncapped) of the levy revenues. “7.4 This money can be spent more widely than on infrastructure – but must be used to address the demands that development places on the area. This means Strensall with Towthorpe Parish Council is free to spend the money on projects that will directly benefit the neighbourhood area as long as the money supports growth of the settlements. Delete first sentence of paragraph 7.5 and add the second sentence: “Through the current consultation, the Parish Council would like to understand priorities for improvements to infrastructure and what community priorities exist for improvements to the village.” to paragraph 7.4. Delete paragraphs 7.6. 7.7 and 7.7.1. 7.8 and 7.8.1 unchanged.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Appendix 2: Local Green Space	Recommendation 18	Replace with the revised Local Green Space Assessment submitted in August 2022. The Appendix should also include clear maps to show the boundary of each site and photographs where available.	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.
Appendix 3: Local Connections Criteria For Affordable Housing	Recommendation 19	Revise Appendix 3 as follows: “Remaining in perpetuity for local people notwithstanding any statutory provisions such as the Right to Buy or Right to Acquire.” “In support of meeting local affordable housing requirements, any new affordable housing is expected to be allocated to those with an assessed housing need and local connection to Strensall or Towthorpe in the first instance.” Make the family connection more explicit: “Has a close family member (mother, father, adult son, adult daughter, adult brother, adult sister): currently residing in the partnership area and who has been a resident for the last 5 years and with whom they have an established close relationship.” Make ‘other special circumstances more explicit: “Have an essential need to live close to another person, who currently lives in the area, and who has been resident for the last 5 years, to provide or receive essential daily care or support.”	Agree with the modifications for the reasons set out in the Examiners Report.