Deposit Draft Policy Number And Title	Proposed Modification / New Policy	Reasons for Proposed Modification
Strategy Policy 1: Overall Strategy	Delete Policy.	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 1.5 and 1.8 to 1.9)
Strategy Policy 2: Location of Development	~~2A: The Role of Urban Areas)~~ The urban areas centred on Leicester and adjoining settlements and the main towns of Ashby, Coalville, Hinckley and Earl Shilton, Loughborough, Lutterworth, Market Harborough, Melton Mowbray, and Shepshed will be the main urban areas for housing, employment, services and leisure. The vast majority of development will be directed to locations within and adjoining these urban areas in accordance with Strategy Policy 2B. ~~Within Rutland, the majority of development will be directed to Oakham, Uppingham and the edge of Stamford.~~ ~~2B: The Priority Locations for Development within Leicestershire and Leicester~~ ~~Development will be allocated according to the following list which is set out in priority order:~~ ~~(a) within or adjoining the central area of Leicester City and within or adjoining other town centres of the main towns;~~ ~~(b) other town centres within Leicester and its adjoining settlements;~~ (c) other locations within the urban areas of Leicester and its adjoining settlements and the main towns where there are good public transport, walking and cycling links with central areas and other more local centres; (d) locations which adjoin the urban areas of Leicester and its adjoining settlements and the main towns where there are good public transport, walking and cycling links with central areas and other more local centres; and ~~(e) if required to meet any remaining development requirements, locations within and adjoining other settlements where there are good public transport links to Leicester City and/or the main towns.~~ ~~(f) Development in locations defined d) and e) above will only be permitted provided commercial public transport services to defined standards are secured.~~ ~~2C: The Priority Locations for Development in Rutland~~ ~~The priority for development in Rutland is as follows:~~ ~~Within Oakham and Uppingham, followed by locations on the edge of Oakham, Uppingham and Stamford, where there are good public transport, walking and cycling links with the town centres.~~ ~~2D: Development in Rural Centres and Other Settlements in Leicestershire and Rutland~~ ~~Within and adjoining rural centres, development of an appropriate scale, size, form and character will be allocated to support their role as centres for services and employment.~~ Within and adjoining other rural settlements, proposals for small scale development to meet local needs will be allocated provided they are in keeping with the size, form and character of the village.
	*Strategy Policy 2: Central Leicestershire Policy Area* *In order to:* *make optimum use of the available urban capacity for development in the existing built-up areas within the Leicester and Leicestershire Urban Area;* *balance housing and employment development within the Central Leicestershire Policy Area; and* *secure integration between land use and transport policy objectives,* *provision will be made within the Central Leicestershire Policy Area for 31,500 dwellings and for 376 hectares of employment land for the period 1996-2016.*	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 2.1 to 2.14) subject to reducing the provision for housing in the Central Leicestershire Policy Area. The Panel supports the Pre-EIP Change to include a new Strategy Policy 2 'Central Leicestershire Policy Area' but recommends some rewording to refer to the optimum use being made of the available urban capacity for development in the existing built up areas within the Leicester and Leicestershire Urban Area. The Panel also recommends that provision should be made within the CLPA for 35,450 dwellings compared with the 28,750 dwellings put forward by the Structure Plan Authorities. Whilst it is considered that the wording changes better reflect the intention to make optimum use of urban capacity in the existing built-up area of the Leicester and Leicestershire Urban Area, the Structure Plan Authorities do not accept an increase in housing provision within the CLPA outside Leicester as all the increase would be on greenfield land. This would compete with the increased provision in Leicester itself and could frustrate this policy objective.
	*Strategy Policy 3A: A Sequential Approach towards of Development* *Land for development will be allocated in development plans in the following priority order:* *(a) previously developed land and buildings within or adjoining the central area of Leicester and the town centres of the Main Towns (Ashby, Coalville,* *Hinckley/Earl Shilton, Loughborough, Lutterworth,* *Market Harborough, Melton Mowbray, Shepshed, Oakham and Uppingham);* *(b) previously developed land and buildings elsewhere within the Leicester and Leicestershire Urban Area and the Main Towns;* *(c) other land within the Leicester and Leicestershire Urban Area* and *the Main Towns;* *(d) land adjoining the Leicester and Leicestershire Urban Area and the Main Towns, particularly where this involves the use of previously developed land;* *(e) land within or adjoining Rural Centres, or other settlements which are or will be well served by public transport, particularly where this involves the use of previously developed land, and* *(f) in other locations, subject where relevant to the considerations in Strategy Policies 6, 7 or 9.* *Strategy Policy 3B: Suitability of Land for Development* *In considering the suitability of land within the context of Strategy Policy 3A, the following criteria will also be taken into account:* *(i) the actual or potential accessibility of sites by non-car modes, including pedestrian, cycling and public transport links to central areas and district or local centres;* *(ii) the actual and potential capacity of existing public transport, utilities and social infrastructure to support further development;* *(iii) physical constraints on development, including ground contamination and stability and flood risk;* *(iv) the impact of development on natural resources and environmental and cultural assets;* *(v) the cost of development, the economic viability of sites and the availability of public and private resources to bring forward land and* *buildings for development;* *(vi) the need to secure a balance of land uses within the area, including by mixed use development; and* (vii) the contribution that development could make towards the strengthening of a local community, supporting local services and meeting local needs, particularly within Rural Centres designated in local plans.	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 2.15 to 2.32) subject to the following: In considering which settlements should be designated as Main Towns it is important to have regard to the local context in terms of the character of the area and the relative sustainability of settlements for development. While Uppingham is smaller than Oakham it clearly possesses the characteristics of a market town. Uppingham has performed a major role in Rutland as an important focus for local services in a highly rural area, far greater than those provided by settlements in Rutland, previously and currently designated as rural centres. While planning policy has accorded Oakham and Uppingham similar status in the past, it has consistently been successful in ensuring that the distribution of growth between the two has reflected the differences in their respective sizes and their suitability for sustainable development. The suitability of Uppingham, as the second most sustainable settlement in Rutland, to accommodate a limited amount of future development, should therefore be acknowledged in the Plan. Splitting criterion (c) in the Panel recommendation. RPG8 policy on the locational priorities for development has been redrafted to give a higher priority to locations within urban areas than those adjoining urban areas. It is considered that criterion (c) should be split accordingly, to ensure consistency with RPG8; Deleting criterion (ii) in the Panel recommendation. The addition of criterion (ii) relating to transport nodes within good transport corridors as recommended by the Panel was at the time in line with both national and regional policy. However, this criterion is not included in RPG8. It is also considered unnecessary, as criterion (i) takes into account the actual or potential accessibility of sites by non-car modes. Deleting criterion (iv) in the Panel recommendation. The addition of criterion (iv) relating to warehousing and distribution recognises the special locational requirements of such uses. However, there are a number of other uses which have special circumstances that require exceptions to the sequential approach. Whilst the principles included in the criterion are generally accepted, such circumstances would be more appropriately dealt with in specific policies relating to that development, rather than as an exception to this generic policy (see Proposed Modification to Employment Policy 8). This is the approach adopted by RPG 8. This modification builds on the Pre-EIP Change proposed for this policy.
	*Strategy Policy 3C: Rural Centres* Rural Centres may be designated in local plans, which serve a rural hinterland and contain all or most of the following functions: *(a) a primary school;* *(b) a post office;* *(c) a general store;* *(d) a general medical practice;* *(e) a pharmacy (if not within the general medical practice);* *(f) community and leisure facilities;* *(g) additional employment to that provided by (a) to (f) above;* *(h) a regular, six day a week return bus service.*	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 2.28 to 2.29) subject to the inclusion of an additional clause, in relation to community and leisure facilities, to provide a more appropriate list of functions for a settlement to perform the function of a rural centre.
Strategy Policy 3: Re-use of Brownfield Sites	Delete Policy.	In accordance with the Pre-EIP Change proposed for this policy
Strategy Policy 4: Strategic Greenfield Sites	Strategy Policy 4: Strategic Greenfield Sites *Greenfield Development* ~~Most greenfield development should take place on Strategic Greenfield Sites.~~ ~~Strategic Greenfield Sites should be of a significant scale and size, be of an appropriate form and character depending upon location and should:~~ ~~a) incorporate good quality mixed use development;~~ ~~b) provide for Strategic Employment Sites, where appropriate;~~ ~~c) incorporate open space and contribute to existing and proposed green networks;~~ ~~d) be large enough to enable significant contributions to be made by developers towards transport and other infrastructure provision; and~~ e) be capable of being developed in a phased sequence that enables new residents to have access to employment, public transport and other facilities in close proximity from early stages of the development. Where, after applying the sequential approach in Strategy Policy 3A and the criteria in Strategy Policy 3B, it is necessary to consider new development on greenfield land, such land should generally be identified as urban extensions and allocated for development in local plans. *Any site thus identified should, unless exceptional circumstances dictate otherwise:* *(a) be of significant size and scale;* *(b) be of a form and character appropriate to the surroundings;* *(c) incorporate good quality mixed use development including employment uses, or be capable of integration with existing development to the same end;* *(d) incorporate open space to prescribed standards, and contribute to existing and proposed green networks;* *(e) be large enough to enable significant developer contributions to be made towards transport and other infrastructure provision;* *(f) be phased within the local plan period consistent with the principle of previously developed land being developed first; and* *(g) be capable of development in a phased sequence that enables new residents to have early access to local employment, public transport and other facilities.*	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 2.33 to 2.38) subject to a rewording of criterion (f), relating to phasing of greenfield sites. It is considered that the alternative wording is clearer than that suggested by the Panel.
Strategy Policy 5: Development and the Transport System	~~Accessibility And Transport Policy 1: Priorities~~ *Strategy Policy 5: Transport Objectives and Priorities* Integrated and sustainable *travel and* transport *provision* will be ~~further developed~~ *made* in order to: (a) improve road safety and the environment and contribute to improving the quality of life; (b) minimise the need to travel; (c) maximise people's accessibility to facilities, services, opportunities and resources; and (d) support the local economy The following measures will be taken in order of priority: firstly, providing for, and promoting, walking and cycling; secondly, providing for the development of public transport; and thirdly, providing for other road users *Provision for and the promotion of walking, cycling and public transport will generally be given greater priority than provision for private transport. Travel demand management measures will be introduced wherever appropriate* in order to help meet the objectives of this policy.	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 7.2 to 7.10). This includes an adjustment to the policy to give walking, cycling and public transport equal priority conceded at the EIP and accepted in principle. The general provisions of Accessibility and Transport Policy 1 have been transferred to Strategy Policy 5 and those of the latter policy to Accessibility and Transport chapter.
Strategy Policy 6: Land Uses in Green Wedges	Strategy Policy 6: ~~Land Uses~~ in Green Wedges *Green Wedges may be designated in local plans in association with planned urban extensions proposed in such plans. The purposes of Green Wedges are:* *(a) Protecting structurally important areas of open land which influence the form and direction of urban development;* *(b) Ensuring that open land extends outwards between the existing and planned development limits of the urban areas;* *(c) Preserving strategic landscape and wildlife links between the Countryside and urban open spaces;* *(d) Preventing the coalescence and maintaining the physical identity of settlements adjoining the main urban areas;* Within Green Wedges uses will be encouraged that provide appropriate recreational facilities within easy reach of urban residents and promote the positive management of land to ensure that the Green Wedges remain or are enhanced as attractive contributions to the quality of life of nearby urban residents. ~~The open and undeveloped character of Green Wedges will be protected, and wherever possible, enhanced.~~ ~~Only~~ The following land uses will be acceptable in Green Wedges, provided the *operational* development associated with *such* ~~these~~ uses does not ~~permanently~~ damage the open and undeveloped character of the Green Wedge: (a) agriculture, including allotments and horticulture not accompanied by retail development; (b) outdoor recreation; (c) forestry; (d) footpaths, bridleways and cycleways (e) burial grounds ~~(f) mineral uses~~ ~~In addition~~, The following ~~land uses~~ *development* will only be acceptable if appropriate measures are also taken to minimise severance and adverse effects on the amenity of the Green Wedge: *(f) mineral extraction;* (g) road proposals *or dedicated public transport routes referred to* in the Development Plan, *or where there is no alternative route available outside a Green Wedge; ~~(h) dedicated public transport routes (in exceptional circumstances where there is no alternative route)~~ (h) park and ride facilities, if no suitable site outside a Green Wedge is available. Provision will be made in Green Wedges for the retention and or creation of green linkages between urban open spaces and the Countryside, and for* the retention and enhancement of public access *facilities, particularly* ~~especially~~ for recreation.	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 3.6 to 3.7) subject to: inserting the word 'strategic' in criterion (c) to ensure that links are of a strategic rather than local importance. the exclusion of (e) and (f) as purposes of the Green Wedges as they are not considered to be purposes of a Green Wedge including (e) and (f) as a preamble to the second part of the policy retaining the wording "damage the open and undeveloped character" in the preamble to the second part of the policy as opposed to the wording recommended by the Panel for this part of the policy. The wording suggested by the Panel would weaken an aspect of the policy that is considered to be clear and unambiguous.
Strategy Policy 7 The Location of Green Wedges	Strategy Policy 7: ~~The Location~~ *Review* of Green Wedges ~~The detailed~~ *defined* boundaries of Green Wedges ~~will be defined~~ in the following general locations *will be reviewed as part of local plan reviews, and such reviews shall have regard to the sequential approach to new development in Strategy Policy 3A and to the criteria in Strategy Policy 3B: In and around Leicester: a) Leicester (Beaumont Leys)/Birstall/Thurcaston Anstey Cropston ; b) Birstall/Leicester/Thurmaston (Soar Valley North); c) Thurmaston/Syston; d) Hamilton; e) Leicester/Scraptoft; f) Thurnby/Leicester/Oadby g) Oadby/Leicester/Wigston; h) Whetstone/Blaby/Countesthorpe i) Blaby/Glen Parva (Sence Valley); j) Whetstone/Enderby/Glen Parva/Braunstone/Blaby Narborough/Cosby (Soar Valley South) k) Ratby/Groby/Glenfield/Kirby Muxloe/Kirby Fields/~~Kirby~~ Braunstone* Frith; l) Beaumont Leys/~~Glenfrith~~ *Glenfield*/Anstey/Groby; Other Areas: m) Loughborough/Shepshed; n) Loughborough/Quorn o) Loughborough/Hathern; p) Coalville/Whitwick/Swannington; q) Hinckley/Barwell/Earl Shilton.	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 3.2 to 3.5) subject to amending the general locations of Green Wedges to correctly reflect settlement names in response to representations to the deposit draft Structure Plan.
Strategy Policy 8 Separation of Settlements	Strategy Policy 8 - Separation of Settlements In areas to which Green Wedge policies do not apply and which cannot be properly designated as Countryside, development will only be appropriate where it would not result in a reduction in the separation between the built-up area of settlements. Predominantly open land between the defined development boundaries of neighbouring settlements which is not part of a Green Wedge but performs an essential function in keeping the built-up areas of those settlements separate may be defined in local plans as Areas of Separation. Within such areas, development will be permitted only where it would not result in a material reduction in the degree of separation between the neighbouring built-up areas.	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 3.20 – 3.21). This modification builds on the Pre-EIP Change proposed for this policy.
Strategy Policy 9: Development in the Countryside	Strategy Policy 9: Development in the Countryside Land beyond the existing and planned limits to the built-up areas of settlements, ~~and outside defined as~~ *which is not* *land* *comprising a* Green Wedge or areas of separation will be designated as Countryside. In addition, Countryside of local importance may be designated as Areas of Local Landscape Value, and land in the Countryside which is degraded or unattractive may be designated as Local Landscape Improvement Areas. Within Local Landscape Improvement Areas, additional measures will be taken to enhance the landscape. *All development proposals in the Countryside will be considered against landscape character assessments featured in local plans.* The Countryside will be protected for its own sake. Development in the Countryside will only be acceptable if ~~it has no adverse effect on~~ the *general* appearance and character of the landscape *and the countryside* *is safeguarded or enhanced. Built development should be well integrated in relation to existing development and designed sympathetically to fit into the local surroundings. ~~Priority will be given to the re-use of existing buildings and limited to the following uses~~ Existing buildings should be re-used where appropriate. Development will be limited to the following purposes:* *(a)* ~~limited small scale development for employment, leisure, forestry, agriculture (including dwellings essential for agricultural and forestry needs) or renewable energy installations~~ *small scale development for employment or leisure; (b)* ~~agricultural buildings~~.dwellings essential for agricultural or forestry needs; *(c) affordable housing for local needs adjoining villages in accordance with rural exceptions policies in local plans;* *(d)* (c) land-extensive outdoor recreation uses that do not include substantial built development; *and* *(e)agricultural or forestry buildings.* In addition, the following uses may be accommodated if: they cannot be satisfactorily located within the existing and planned limits to the built up areas of settlements; it can be demonstrated that there is an overriding need for the development to be located in the Countryside; and appropriate works of mitigation are to be undertaken: (f) telecommunications installations; (g) energy installations; (h) minerals extraction and waste management development; and (i) transport infrastructure.** ~~Buildings in the Countryside should be well integrated in relation to existing buildings and designed sympathetically to fit into the local surroundings.~~	In accordance with the Panel recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel report (paragraphs 3.22 to 3.27) subject to: deleting the words in the second paragraph "and providing a context for Countryside Design Summaries and Village Design Statements. Existing local countryside designations will be reviewed in the light of such assessments". The wording provides explanation and interpretation of the Policy and would more appropriately be included in the Explanatory Memorandum. amending of criterion (c) to read "affordable housing for local needs adjoining villages and other small settlements in accordance with rural exceptions policies in local plans". To make clear that affordable housing in the countryside would only be acceptable under rural exceptions policies in local plans, rather than general policies on affordable housing and that such development should be located adjoining villages and other small settlements, in accordance with advice in PPG3 Annex B. Reference to Housing Policy 4 should be made in the Explanatory Memorandum. amending of numbering of criteria d)–g) to f)-i). To correct an apparent error. inserting the words "to be located" in the 4th paragraph, the sentence to read "…it can be demonstrated that there is an overriding need for the development to be located in the Countryside…". To clarify the wording recommended by the Panel and to accord with the reasoning in paragraph 3.27 of their report that the demonstration of an overriding need for development in principle goes beyond government policy and that demonstration that a countryside location is necessary is sufficient. changing the reference to "renewable energy installations" to "energy installations" to be consistent with modifications to Resource Management Policy 3. This modification builds on the Pre-EIP Change proposed for this policy.
Strategy Policy 10 : Mixed Use Development	Strategy Policy 10: Mixed Use Development Good quality mixed use will be promoted through the provision and retention of : (a) a mix of compatible land uses that take into account the scale of development proposed, the range of land uses in the vicinity of the proposal and existing need in the area; (b) local character and distinctiveness of recognised importance, *and its protection and enhancement where necessary; (c) convenient, safe and secure walking and cycling networks with priority access; (d) dedicated public transport routes; (e) areas of open space and green linkages; and (f) residential environments which are free from the nuisance of through traffic. Such mixed use development is of particular importance to promote vitality in the regeneration of urban areas.*	In response to representations to the deposit draft and the publication of PPG3.
Strategy Policy 11 : Good Design	Strategy Policy 11: Good Design Good design will be promoted by ensuring that development *provides for the efficient use of land in a manner which satisfactorily acknowledges environmental and amenity interests and: (a) protects and enhances the form and local character and distinctiveness of the built and natural environment ~~of recognised importance;~~ (b) ensures that areas of open spaces and green linkages are reserved and provided in new development; (c) incorporates comprehensive landscaping within and around the development on a scale appropriate to the scale and impact of the development; (d) maximises conservation of natural resources through the siting, orientation, scale and layout of buildings and spaces; (e) incorporates innovative design where appropriate, especially in respect of energy efficiency and* particularly in urban areas: (f) takes account of the access needs of all people, including people with disabilities: (g) minimises traffic nuisance and develops a high quality walking and cycling network; (h) enhances the feeling of personal safety and minimises the potential for crime; ~~and~~ (i) incorporates ecological sites; *(j) incorporates sustainable drainage systems wherever possible*.	In accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraph 6.31) and in response to representations to the deposit draft Plan to make it clear that development will be required to provide for the efficient use of land in a manner which is consistent with the satisfaction of environmental and amenity interests and facilitate drainage in a sustainable manner consistent with the provisions of PPG 25 Development and Flood Risk.
Strategy Policy 14 - The National Forest	Strategy Policy 14 - The National Forest Within the National Forest, provision will be made for the planting of woodlands with public access, subject to environmental constraints. In appropriate locations within the rural area of the National Forest, development will be acceptable which facilitates its use for agriculture or as a sustainable natural resource. Development which involves new buildings, significant structures or other operations, will be required to be accompanied by proposals for creating an appropriate woodland setting. All substantial development proposals will be required to reflect the National Forest context in their accompanying landscaping and planting. Within the National Forest beyond the boundary of the Charnwood Forest, provision will be made for the creation of new leisure and tourism facilities and for public access, subject to environmental constraints. Development will be acceptable which meets the objectives of the National Forest Strategy in: a) providing public access opportunities through the provision of footpaths, bridleways and cycleways; b) providing for appropriate sporting activities within a wooded setting, including golf, fishing and water sports; c) providing for leisure facilities that can only be established in a planned landscape; d) providing landscaped sites to create a mature woodland setting for long-term forest-related leisure development; and e) promoting natural biodiversity and enhancing the wider ecological value of the environment by providing for habitat creation and nature conservation. Restoration of mineral/waste disposal sites will be required to accommodate one or more of those uses.	In response to representations to the deposit draft to clarify that it is not the intention of the Policy to require development to meet all of the objectives listed in the penultimate paragraph.
Strategy Policy 15 - Charnwood Forest	Strategy Policy 15: Charnwood Forest In the Countryside within the Charnwood Forest Landscape Character Area, the conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty and character of the landscape should be given priority over other planning considerations. ~~In the rural area of the Charnwood Forest, provision should only be made for development where:~~ ~~a) it is small scale development essential for the economic or social well being of the Charnwood Forest; or~~ b) there is an overriding proven national interest and there is no other acceptable alternative. Where development is permitted, particular care should be taken to ensure that any development does not damage the natural beauty or landscape character of the area. Development permitted exceptionally because of overriding national interest will be required to be removed in the event of redundancy at a later date. *The defined boundary of the Charnwood Forest Policy Area will be shown on local plan proposals maps.* Development within or which affects the Charnwood Forest Policy Area will be acceptable where it can be demonstrated to conserve and enhance the character of Charnwood Forest, including its landscape, ecology, cultural heritage, built heritage and recreational value. *The siting, scale, design and materials of the development should reflect and complement the character of the surrounding landscape and minimise any harm.* *Where development may adversely affect the special qualities of the Charnwood Policy Area, it will only be allowed where:* *(a) it can be demonstrated that there is a clear and overriding need for the development, and;* *(b) any harm must be adequately compensated for with respect to the conservation and enhancement of the Charnwood Forest Policy area.*	A revised policy is proposed. The version recommended by the Panel is not accepted because it only deals with the Countryside. It is considered that the wording proposed provides a better policy framework, recognising the special qualities of the whole of the Charnwood Forest area, including its countryside and settlements, whilst taking into account the Panel report recommendation.
Strategy Policy 16: Rutland Water	Strategy Policy 16: Rutland Water ~~Limited development of~~ *Proposals for* recreation, sports and tourism ~~facilities of more than local significance~~ *development* will be permitted within the Rutland Water Area, subject to such development: (a) ~~being focussed on existing areas of recreational development, with the remainder of the area remaining largely unchanged~~ *not harming the conservation objectives underlying the designation of the Ramsar site and the Special Protection Area at Rutland Water;* (b) not detracting from the landscape character ~~and the sensitive environment~~ of the ~~Area~~ area; (c) ~~not damaging the ecological value and importance of the Area~~ *being focussed on existing areas of recreational development, with the remainder of the area remaining largely undisturbed; (d) complementing existing facilities; and (e) ~~relating to~~ not diminishing* the use and enjoyment of Rutland Water as a water supply and recreational and ecological resource.	In accordance with the Panel’s recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel’s Report (paragraph 6.30) but subject to the amendment of proviso a) as recommended by the Panel to read "not harming the conservation objectives underlying the designation of the Ramsar site and the Special Protection Area at Rutland Water". The reference in proviso a) to the Rutland Water Area being a RAMSAR site and a Special Protection Area is potentially misleading. The Explanatory Memorandum points out that the Rutland Water Area will be defined in the Local Plan and the current delineation in the Rutland Local Plan includes substantial areas of land beyond both designations. Furthermore, while the Key Diagram is only diagrammatic it too indicates a more extensive area than that covered by the designations. In addition, the second part of proviso (a) from the word "Particularly" provides guidance on the application of the preceding part of the proviso which could be more appropriately included in the Explanatory Memorandum.
Strategy Policy 17 - Junction 23a/24/24a Area	Strategy Policy 17 - Junction 23a/24/24a Area Beyond the boundaries of the Airport around *in the vicinity* of *junctions 23A/24/24A of the M1 further large concentrations of employment development or other travel intensive uses will not be acceptable.* ~~motorway junctions 23A/24/24A land for an additional B1 and B2 prestige employment site should be considered if:~~ ~~I) the future operational development of East Midlands Airport is not prejudiced;~~ ~~II) the regeneration of urban areas is not detrimentally affected, and where feasible could benefit from the development;~~ ~~III) adverse impacts on sustainable development objectives are kept to a minimum.~~ ~~In addition, it will be ensured that:~~ a) increased traffic generated by the development, together with that arising from other proposed and committed development in the vicinity, does not adversely affect local communities or undermine the contributions made by the road network to the regional and local economies, and that any necessary travel demand and mitigation measures are satisfactory; ~~b) the development is accessible by public transport and that at least 20% of employees travel to work by public transport;~~ ~~c) appropriate measures are in place to restrict development (both initially and in the future) to that which would not otherwise have come to the region;~~ ~~d) in consultation with local communities the cumulative impact of development on those communities is assessed and measures to ameliorate detrimental impacts identified;~~ ~~e) any additional housing requirements arising from additional employment development are met within and adjoining existing main urban areas in the travel to work area of the Airport; and~~ ~~f) specific proposals are subject to a sustainability assessment and any environmental impacts are minimised to the satisfaction of local planning authorities.~~ ~~Further B8 storage and distribution development in this area in addition to existing commitments will not be permitted.~~	It is proposed to retain the policy proposed as a Pre-EIP Change, in accordance with Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (Paragraphs 5.59 – 5.69). Retaining the policy will provide greater certainty in policy terms.
	Strategy Policy 18: Green Belt The boundary of the Nottingham and Derby green belt adjoining Leicestershire should be rationalised to include land within the Plan Area lying to the south of the River Trent. This should remain open in order to fulfil green belt purposes. In revising the green belt boundary regard will be given to the need for it to be continuous with that of the adjoining counties and the need for it to follow firm, easily recognisable and defensible features on the ground. Only the following land uses will be acceptable in the green belt: a) agriculture, forestry and mineral extraction; b) outdoor recreational uses; and c) re-use of rural buildings for employment and tourism. ~~Development will only be acceptable provided it is located and designed so as not to adversely affect the open and undeveloped character of the green belt.~~ Green Belt will be designated to include land lying to the south of the River Trent. The detailed boundary should follow clear physical boundaries and be continuous with the Nottingham and Derby Green Belt established in adjoining counties. Within the Green Belt land should remain open in order to fulfil Green Belt purposes. Only appropriate development, located and designed so as not to compromise the open character of the Green Belt will be permitted.	In response to representations to the deposit draft Structure Plan. This was proposed as a Pre-EIP Change.
	*Strategy Policy 19: Strategic River Corridors* The strategic importance for flood relief and biodiversity of the Rivers Soar, Trent, Welland, Wreake, Chater, Gwash, Mease, Eye, Sence (eastern) and Sence (western) and their floodplains will be recognised. Measures will be taken along these corridors through an integrated approach to protect and enhance: *(a) their capacity to function as natural floodplains;* *(b) their linear continuity in the interests of biodiversity; and* *(c) the form, local character and distinctiveness of the natural, historic and built environment.* *Proposals for improving access, recreation and tourism along these corridors will be encouraged where they do not have an unacceptable effect on the above interests.*	In accordance with the Panel Recommendations for the reasons given in the Panel Report (paragraphs 6.19 to 6.29) and to accord with RPG8. This was proposed as a Pre-EIP Change.