Inspector's Schedule of Modifications

Latimer support modification MM12, this being an amendment agreed between Latimer and the Councils in the joint Statement of Common Ground, dated 18 April 2024.

Latimer support and will adopt a sustainable infrastructure first approach at TCBGC – Latimer will work with the Councils to ensure the RTS can be provided alongside a Park and Choose facility from the first residential development parcel phases. MM12 introduces “first residential” rather than “early phases” as there may be a requirement for infrastructure enabling works (for example energy, earthworks etc.) that would fall under the definition of “first phase” but wouldn’t have any homes associated with it.

Latimer have no objection to MM14 in principle, but continue to object to the DPD’s general approach relating to land south of the A133.

As set out in Latimer’s Regulation 19 Representation, and referred to in the Statement of Common and Uncommon Ground (SoCUG) between the Councils (SCG06) and Latimer and the Statement of Common Ground (SoCG) between the University of Essex (UoE) and Latimer, Latimer are concerned that the DPD does not adequately account for the UoE’s projected growth and associated need for priority student accommodation.

Latimer’s view is that the DPD is overly restrictive in allocating land south of the A133 for a Sports and Leisure Park (and Park and Choose), when there is a clear need for student accommodation (as set out in the University representations and Wisher Consulting report). Latimer consider that there is an opportunity for land south of the A133 to forge a stronger relationship with the Garden Community if it were to accommodate a range of uses including, a Sports Hub, student accommodation and University campus expansion (alongside the Park and Choose). Latimer consider that a more flexible allocation of uses within the DPD would allow this to be explored in conjunction with the University.

Therefore, rewording of GC Policy 1 (Parts B and F) and GC Policy 4 (Part H) are requested at Appendix 2 of SoCUG between Latimer and the Councils (references 1C, 1D and 4A). Related amendments are also requested by Latimer at Appendix 3 of the SoCUG to the Policies Map and Strategic Illustrative Framework Masterplan.

It is Latimer’s case that whilst this topic goes to the Soundness of the DPD, there is no ‘fundamental’ lack of soundness to the approach of the allocation – it is, however, an important matter for the implementation of the DPD, including achieving necessary housing delivery and high-quality urban design principles at the Garden Community.

Latimer support modification MM17, this being an amendment agreed between Latimer and the Councils in the joint Statement of Common Ground, dated 18 April 2024. The amendment aligns the policies map with the DPD itself (which has no equivalent policy requirement). Latimer, alongside appointed project ecologists, Stantec, continue to engage with Natural England as part of the forthcoming planning application.

“Before granting planning consent, wintering bird surveys will be undertaken (insert text)*within habitat likely to be impacted by the proposed development. These surveys will be undertaken* at the appropriate time of year to (insert text)*confirm whether significant numbers of SPA birds are regularly present and assess potential functional links with the protected habitats sites at the Essex coast.* (remove text - identify any offsite functional habitat.) In the unlikely event that significant numbers are identified, development must firstly avoid impacts. Where this is not possible, development must be phased to deliver habitat creation and management either on or off-site to mitigate any significant impacts. Any such habitat must be provided and fully functional before any development takes place which would affect significant numbers of SPA birds.”

Latimer object to a very specific part of modification MM21 because it is not clear whether the proposed MM21 text referring to ‘offsite functional habitat’ is requesting surveys offsite to the TCBGC development site or offsite but linked to the habitats sites at the Essex coast.

The MM21 text could be more consistent, as it requires surveys to confirm the presence of “functional habitat” but that mitigation is needed if “significant numbers” are recorded. It is understood that the latter refers to the numbers of individual birds recorded within the TCBGC development site, which are utilising habitats functionally linked to the nearby Essex Coast designated sites. It would therefore be more justified and suitable to require wintering bird surveys to record bird species presence/abundance and the data to be assessed in relation to functionally linked habitat.

It is proposed that this additional text is amended to:

“Before granting planning consent, wintering bird surveys will be undertaken (insert text)*within habitat likely to be impacted by the proposed development. These surveys will be undertaken* at the appropriate time of year to (insert text)*confirm whether significant numbers of SPA birds are regularly present and assess potential functional links with the protected habitats sites at the Essex coast.* (remove text - identify any offsite functional habitat.) In the unlikely event that significant numbers are identified, development must firstly avoid impacts. Where this is not possible, development must be phased to deliver habitat creation and management either on or off-site to mitigate any significant impacts. Any such habitat must be provided and fully functional before any development takes place which would affect significant numbers of SPA birds.”

Latimer are in pre-application discussions with Natural England as part of the hybrid planning application being submitted in 2025. This should mean agreement is reached with Natural England as part of the application determination process.

Latimer support modification MM90, this being an amendment agreed between Latimer and the Councils in the joint Statement of Common Ground, dated 18 April 2024.

Latimer support the GC Policy 2 requirement for the Garden Community to deliver a minimum of 10% measurable BNG across the site. The amendment brings the DPD in line with the Environment Act and paragraph 179 of the NPPF which seeks that plans should “identify and pursue opportunities for securing measurable net gains for biodiversity”. Importantly, removing the reference to the 15% ambition under MM90 would not preclude delivery of a greater than 10% BNG, if achievable, as part of the planning application, given the policy refers to a minimum.

Latimer support MM24, the amendment will provide additional information on the requirements of an air quality assessment. The air quality assessment methodology proposed as part of the EIA scoping for the proposed development is in line with the requirements set out in MM24.

Latimer’s intention to embed healthy principles to support health and wellbeing into the masterplan and design codes, air quality will be considered through appropriate layout design within the masterplan (such as not locating sensitive residential/school uses immediately adjacent to the A133 or A120) so that sensitive users are not exposed to unacceptable air quality.

Latimer support modification MM27, this being an amendment agreed between Latimer and the Councils in the joint Statement of Common Ground, dated 18 April 2024.The amendment will avoid any ambiguity in the DPD and allow the detailed and tailored HRA process to inform appropriate and proportionate mitigation requirements.

It is recommended that MM28 is not accepted and the list at Part D of GC Policy 3 is removed from Policy 3 but that a reference should be included either in policy or supporting text stating that developments should be designed with regard to user safety and seek to achieve relevant local or national principles relating to safety in accordance with good placemaking and design principles.

Latimer object to modification MM28 in that it refers to achieving a secure by design certification rather than to follow Secured by Design principles, as set out in Latimer’s Regulation 19 representations (paragraph 5.3).

Whilst Latimer support the ambition to ensure the Garden Community is a safe place to live, work and visit, as worded, Policy 3 as drafted, and the proposed amendment would be overly prescriptive, and these are ultimately matters of detail that will be addressed within a planning application. Further, some designing out crime principles go against good placemaking so a more flexible application of the requirements should be applied in the round. It is therefore recommended that MM28 is not accepted and the list at Part D of GC Policy 3 is removed from Policy 3 but that a reference should be included either in policy or supporting text stating that developments should be designed with regard to user safety and seek to achieve relevant local or national principles relating to safety in accordance with good placemaking and design principles.

Latimer support modification MM32, this being an amendment agreed between Latimer and the Councils in the joint Statement of Common Ground, dated 18 April 2024. The amendment provides additional clarity and brings the DPD in line with the NPPF.

Latimer support modification MM34 – the Active Design Assessment will be incorporated into the Design and Access Statement for the hybrid planning application, but the principles are embedded throughout the masterplan, prioritising people over cars, promoting active travel and making walking and cycling easier, safer and more convenient than the car.