THE LANDSCAPE TREATMENT OFTHE EDGE OF DEVELOPMENT

ADJACENT TO OPEN LAND

GREENING THE BUILT EDGE

Supplementary Guidance No. 25

D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T

This document should be read in conjunction with the Adopted Leeds Unitary Development Plan, to which itprovides ‘supplementary guidance’.

List of Supplementary Guidance Documents.

1 PPG6 – Town Centres and Retail Development 7.10.96 £5

2 Leisure Developments and Other Key Town Centre Uses:Suggested Approach and Applications to Current Proposals 13.10.97 £5

3 Revised Affordable Housing Policy Guidance Note 30.06.97 £5

4 Greenspace Relating to New Housing Development 06.07.98 £5

5 Guidelines for Assessing Developer Contributions toLeeds Supertram 06.07.98 £6

6 Development of Self-Contained Flats 04.05.99 £5

7 Childrens Leisure Centres 13.10.97 £3

8 Rothwell Town Centre Strategy 18.06.96 £4

9 Green Belt Policy for Change of Use of BuildingsSuperseded by Adopted UDP though Para. 5.5.3 Remains useful guidance on procedure. Withdrawn. 16.02.98 £5

10 Sustainable Development Design Guide 30.03.98 £6

11 Section 106 Contribution for School ProvisionDraft for Consultation 15.02.99 £5

12 Holbeck Urban Village Planning Framework 29.03.99 £4.50

13 Housing Densities Draft for Consultation 15.02.99 £5

14 Leeds City Centre Urban Design Strategy 18.09.00 £15

15 Sites of Ecological & Geological Importance – Consultation Draft 30.03.98 (photocopy cost)

16 Bramhope Village Design Statement 12.10.01 £10

17 Bardsey Village Design Statement 28.05.02 £10

18 East Keswick Village Design Statement Awaiting final draft (£10)

19 Pool Village Design Statement (see Nigel Lees tel 2478067)

20 Leeds Supertram – Design Standards Guide (see J Richards) March 2002 £85

21 Leeds Waterfront Strategy 2002 (see Peter Vaughan tel 2478140)

22 Sustainable Drainage (Draft in Preparation Spring 2002)

23 Telecommunications Development 14.5.03

24 Templar Street Planning Brief (draft prepared spring 2003)

25 Greening the Built Edge (supporting UDP Policy N24)

C O N T E N T S

THE LANDSCAPE TREATMENT OFTHE EDGE OF DEVELOPMENT

ADJACENT TO OPEN LAND

GREENING THE BUILT EDGE

1 INTRODUCTION 5

2 AIMS OF THE POLICY 6

3 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 66

4 LANDSCAPE AND LANDFORM 88

5 CHARACTER AND SCALE OFDEVELOPMENT 99

6 BOUNDARY TREATMENT 1111

7 NATURE CONSERVATION 1122

8 GREENSPACE 1122

9 OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENTRESPONSIBILITIES 1133

10 FURTHER CONTACTS 13

3

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

THE LANDSCAPE TREATMENT OFTHE EDGE OF DEVELOPMENT

ADJACENT TO OPEN LAND

GUIDANCE NOTE FOR

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The purpose of this design guidance note is toprovide more detailed supplementaryplanning guidance to support Policy N24 ofthe Adopted Leeds Unitary DevelopmentPlan.

1.2 This policy as amended, states that:

‘‘WHERE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ABUT THE

GREEN BELT, GREEN CORRIDORS OR OTHER OPEN

LAND, THEIR ASSIMILATION INTO THE LANDSCAPE

MUST BE ACHIEVED AS PART OF THE SCHEME. IFEXISTING LANDSCAPE FEATURES WOULD NOT

ACHIEVE THIS, A LANDSCAPING SCHEME WILL BE

REQUIRED TO BE IMPLEMENTED WHICH DEALS

POSITIVELY WITH THE TRANSITION BETWEEN

DEVELOPMENT AND OPEN LAND’’.

1.3 This document aims to give guidance to thedeveloper on what is meant by the policyphrase ‘deals positively‘, and is intendedprimarily for developers. It sets out thecriteria against which any specific proposalswill be assessed by the planning authority.

1.4 ‘Other open land‘, as referred to in the abovetext, encompasses designated areas such asexisting and proposed Greenspace,protected or proposed playing fields, (including school grounds and playing fields),land protected under UDP Policy N11, otheropen spaces without formal designation, (withor without public access), and other rural landnot defined as Green Belt.

1.5 Such open land may also include significantwatercourses and transport corridors.

1.6 The need for development to meet PolicyN24 requirements will be assessed not only inrespect of any formal designation but also inrespect of the visual character of the area,where the impact of development wouldotherwise be unduly intrusive.

1.7 This document has been the subject ofconsultation with developers, amenity interestgroups and others (see page 14), and is nowadopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance.

5

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

6

2 AIMS OF THE POLICY

2.1 The primary aim of the policy is to achieveappropriate integration of new developmentand adjacent open land. This approach issupported by PPG1, para 13, which states:

‘The appearance of proposed developmentand its relationship to its surroundings are ...material considerations in determiningplanning applications and appeals‘.

2.2 The intention is to soften the appearance ofnew development, and to create a sense ofvisual harmony between the built form andthe open land beyond.

2.3 This aim will normally be met through theprovision of an adequate level of landscapescreening, or by some other equal andappropriate means of integrating newdevelopment into the local landscape.

2.4 Every opportunity should be taken to ensurethat nature conservation benefits are gainedby the provision of new or enhanced habitatsfor flora and fauna, in support of UDPnature conservation policies.

2.5 Additional benefits may be sought throughthe provision of new public footpaths andassociated access and amenity benefits,provided that such amenities do notprejudice unduly the needs of the users ofthe adjacent land.

3 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 The landscape proposals should be carefullydesigned, preferably by a LandscapeArchitect or other suitably qualifiedprofessional, to ensure that a wellconsidered, high quality scheme is created.

3.2 A landscape analysis will normally berequired, to be prepared and submitted aspart of the overall development proposals, inorder to inform the design process. Theanalysis should show the site and its contextwithin the local landscape, as well asanalysing the site in its own right.

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

7

3.3 A detailed survey should be carried out,preferably by a qualified professional, toidentify existing features of interest such astrees, shrubs, walls, ponds, etc. Thesefeatures should be retained, whereappropriate, within the new landscapeproposals.

3.4 The survey should extend up to 10 metresbeyond the site boundary in order that dueaccount can be taken of existing off-sitefeatures in the design of the proposedlandscape.

3.5 It will normally be the case that the newlandscape proposals should be locatedwithin the boundary of the development site.It is recognised however, that in certaincircumstances it may be feasible to carry outlandscape works on adjacent open land,with the agreement of the land owner. Thiscould provide a means of ensuring adequatelandscape provision for small development sites.However, the application site boundary will needto be extended accordingly, with landscapeworks controlled by planning condition anda legal agreement, and arrangements forcontinuing maintenance secured.

3.6 It is essential that the proposed landscape issympathetic in character with the widerlandscape beyond the development site.

3.7 Where appropriate, the use of speciesalready existing in the locality can help tostrengthen visual coherence in the widerlandscape, and also help consolidateexisting plant habitats.

3.8 To this end new proposals should seek touse locally-native plant species whereverpossible.

3.9 Opportunities should be taken for thelandscape treatment to link into andcomplement existing off-site features to helpprovide a sense of continuity and coherentstructure within the overall landscape.

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

8

44 LANDSCAPE AND LANDFORM

4.1 Variations in local landscape charactershould be taken into account whendesigning proposals, in order that the newlandscape will develop to be in sympathywith its surroundings.

4.2 It is recognised that differences intopography through the Leeds area willinevitably influence the nature of landscapeproposals.

4.3 In more undulating parts of the Leeds area,much can be achieved by utilising thenatural landform to limit the visual impact ofdevelopment. In such circumstances the useof clumps of planting in conjunction with thelandform, may prove to be a moresympathetic and effective solution thancontinuous screen planting.

4.4 Flatter topography may encouragegreater reliance upon the use ofsignificant belts of planting to soften andscreen new development. Nonetheless, thelayout of new planting should be in keepingwith the existing landscape if it is not toappear alien in character.

4.5 Boundary treatments, such as planting,walls and fencing, should be planned torelate to the natural topography whereverpossible. This will help to lessen the visualintrusion of new development upon theexisting landscape.

4.6 The use of earthmodelling in conjunctionwith planting may increase the effectivenessof screening. However care will need to betaken to ensure that earthworks inthemselves do not become unacceptableintrusions into the landscape. Normally theyshould blend in with the existing contours ofthe wider landscape.

4.7 In most cases it will be unacceptable forarisings from building works to be used inthe construction of any proposedearthworks, because of the variable natureof this material, unless it can bedemonstrated that this will be suitable.

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

9

5 CHARACTER AND SCALE OFDEVELOPMENT

5.1 To a large extent the character and scale ofthe proposed development will determine thelikely visual impact on views from across theadjacent open land, and in consequence, willhave direct bearing upon the design andlayout of the boundary landscape treatment.

5.2 It is likely that, for any given site, the scale oflandscape treatment needed will increase inparallel with the scale of developmentproposed, although the nature of the develop-ment and other factors such as existing vege-tation and local topography will influence this.

5.3 Whilst each development will be consideredon its own merits the level of visual impact orother loss of amenity inherent in theproposals will serve to determine both theextent and design of the boundary landscape.

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

10

5.4 Sympathetic building design is an importantconsideration, being of great significance tothe effective assimilation of newdevelopment into the wider landscape. Anarchitectural style which reflects theestablished character of the area is likely tobe the more effective in this respect.

5.5 Large commercial or industrial buildings willnormally have a greater impact than smallerdomestic or office buildings within a givenarea, although this may be influenced tosome extent by layout, building design,materials used and local factors such astopography.

5.6 Therefore it is unlikely that this type ofdevelopment would be easily assimilatedinto the adjacent open landscape, so thatthe most effective treatment may well be theprovision of a substantial planting screen.

5.7 The intention would be to create awoodland screen adjacent to the open land.Sufficient space would therefore beallocated, to allow for the inclusion of anadequate depth of large-growing treespecies within the planting belt.

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

11

5.8 However, such an approach should not beseen as providing an excuse for poor qualitybuilding design. The assimilation of newdevelopment into the landscape will beimproved through the use of good andinnovative building design, and the use ofvisually recessive materials.

5.9 In proposals for more numerous smaller-scale buildings, such as residential or officedevelopments, as an alternative to theprovision of continuous screening the designsolution might involve a reduction inbuilding density towards the boundary.

5.10 This would allow for the creation of ‘fingers’of planting, extending between buildingswith stands of planting towards the siteboundary to ‘filter’, rather than completelyblock, views of the built development.

66 BOUNDARY TREATMENT

6.1 It will normally be desirable to provide someclear means of identifying the site boundary,both for visual and security reasons, and todefine the extent of land ownership.

6.2 In instances where substantial planting is to beprovided to the edge of development, a timberpost and rail, or post and wire, fenceline willnormally be sufficient to protect the plantingwhilst remaining visually unobtrusive. Whereadditional security or other intrusive boundarytreatment is proposed, this should normally belocated behind planting to ensure adequatevisual screening.

6.3 Where a more limited depth of planting isnecessary, due perhaps to irreconcilablelimitations of space, hedgerow planting mayprovide an alternative solution. Again anacceptable form of protective fencing willneed to be provided.

6.4 Where grazing animals are likely to bepresent it will be necessary to constructstock-proof fencing at a suitable distance toprevent damage to new planting.

6.5 Fencing or walling may, in appropriatecircumstances, be acceptable boundarytreatments either in their own right, or incombination with planting works.

6.6 Every effort should be taken to ensure thatthese are designed to be in harmony withthe character of the local landscape, eitherby replicating suitable existing designs in thearea, or by producing designs whichcomplement these.

6.7 The choice of materials used is of greatimportance to the success of developmentproposals. The use of similar or complementarymaterials to those existing in the locallandscape will normally be encouraged.

6.8 As in the design of buildings, particularattention should be paid to the use of colourin the design of boundaries to ensure thatthese are not visually intrusive.

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

12

7 NATURE CONSERVATION

7.1 New proposals should seek to enhance theexisting nature conservation value of the sitethrough the creation of new habitats.

7.2 The development of significant plantingareas on the edge of open land can providevaluable ‘reservoirs’ for wildlife, or act aswildlife corridors linking other habitatstogether, as part of a wider network.

7.3 However new proposals should seek to uselocally native plant species wherever possibleto enhance the nature conservation value ofthe development.

8 GREENSPACE

8.1 It will normally be the case that Greenspaceprovision for residential development will belocated so as to be surrounded and welloverlooked by the housing that it serves.(Developers should refer to the Council’sSupplementary Planning Guidance No. 4‘Greenspace Relating to New HousingDevelopment’, for further details onGreenspace provision).

8.2 However, exceptionally, Greenspace provisionmay be acceptable on the edge of development.

8.3 Where such Greenspace provision is agreed tobe sited on a boundary with open land, theGreenspace design will need to address therequirements of Policy N24 in addition to theprovision of recreational space (as set out inSupplementary Planning Guidance No.4).

8.4 Nonetheless landscape provision in supportof Policy N24 is only likely to form part of anagreed Greenspace allocation in exceptionalcircumstances.

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

99 OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENTRESPONSIBILITIES

9.1 Development proposals must include detailsof the intended ownership and managementresponsibilities for boundary landscapeareas.

9.2 It is recognised that in most instances,developers will wish to relinquish theirobligations for the retention and upkeep ofthese landscape areas. It will therefore benecessary for the Planning Authority to beassured as to the long-term security andviability of these areas.

9.3 It may be that long-term management couldbe carried out by a separate managementcompany, under a Section 106 Agreementfor the development. The Planning Authoritywould need to be satisfied that such anapproach is acceptable in the particularcircumstances.

9.4 The transfer of ownership to individualproperty owners will normally only beacceptable for landscape works within siteboundaries. It is expected that the obligationfor the retention of such landscape workswill form a part of the deeds of sale. Thisshould also involve obligation to manageand maintain these works in good order.Works external to the site would remain thesubject of a Section 106 Agreement.

9.5 In considering available options, developersshould give due regard to the need toprovide adequate evidence that asatisfactory and consistent level ofmanagement aftercare will be sustained inthe long-term, particularly for planting.

9.6 The Planning Authority will give preference tothe most effective means of ensuring long-term retention and consistent high-qualitymanagement of such areas, in relation to theparticular development concerned.

9.7 Where appropriate, the Council will considerprotecting both existing and proposed treesby Tree Preservation Order.

10 FURTHER CONTACTS

10.1 Further advice and assistance can beobtained from the following officers of theDevelopment Department.

LANDSCAPENigel Lees, TEL. 0113-247-8060, [for central and north-west Leeds]Andrew Pomeroy, TEL. 0113-247-8153, [for east and north-east Leeds]Stephen Robson, TEL. 0113-247-8425, [for south and west Leeds]

NATURE CONSERVATIONJan Belton, TEL. 0113-247-8151

13

G R E E N I N G T H E B U I L T E D G E

14

CONSULTEES

Local Planning Authorities in West YorkshireGoverment Office for Yorkshire and the HumberParish and Town CouncilsCountryside AgencyEnvironment AgencyFRCACPREHouse Builders FederationLeeds Civic TrustLandscape InstituteRIBARTPIRICSTCPA

Designed and Produced by The G

raphics and Com

munications G

roup, D

evelopment D

epartment. Telephone 0113 247 8083.