Inspector's Schedule of Modifications

‘ready during the first residential parcels’ is not proper English. What exactly is it supposed to mean? Also there is no definition of what constitutes the ‘first’ parcels - the plural gives scope to argue about how many constitute the ‘first’ batch.

‘first phase of the development’ in the existing wording presumably means 2026-2033, so meaning that the RTS must be running no later than 2033. (Which was in itself a degrading of the previous ‘from first occupation’ requirement). Now this quasi-dated term is proposed to be replaced by an undefined dateless vagueness.

Latimer have let the cat out of the bag by stating in their SCG that the RTS route only needs to be available ‘early, where possible’, and that the first part of the GC built can have an ordinary bus service instead. Effectively ‘we will start the RTS when we feel like it’. They do not wish to act in accordance with the requirement on DPD p.99 that the RTS should be ‘delivered up first, aligning with the build out of the GC’

Latimer should be required by the DPD to define the alignment of the intra-GC section of the RTS (including the A133 junction position), replacing the current meaningless ‘illustrative only’ route, at a specified point in the forthcoming procedures. If it is not done in the DPD, the next opportunity would be in the outline planning application (which would also really be the last opportunity).

The intermediate section of the RTS has been assumed to involve the RTS buses using the existing A133 carriageway (why one assumes why nothing was sought from HIF on this section). If highways works were to be done, that would presumably fall to ECC? So what is the ‘relevant permission’ that Latimer have to obtain before their first planning application?

Any legal ‘permission’ would have to define where the eastern end of the intermediate section is, i.e. the point where the intra-GC section of the RTS leaves the A133. This remains quite unknown, as does the position of the P&C.