Trees on Development Sites
Supplementary Planning Guides – A Hymn Sheet for all?

Alister Rankine looks at Supplementary Planning Guides, their place in the planning process and wants these Local Authority-led publications to become more readily available

OK, hands up all those who have heard of a Supplementary Planning Guide (SPG), or more importantly, ever seen any SPG publications …. I thought not. And those who have never heard of let alone seen one … more likely!

So, what is an SPG? I don’t profess to be an aficionado when it comes to Planning legislation (although having worked until quite recently in a local authority planning department helps a bit), so please don’t hold me to this! My take on it is that under edicts handed down form the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) local authorities have to produce ‘local plans’ outlining their vision within national parameters of how their administrative area will develop in the future. A Local Plan is, in simple terms, a Masterplan. You can find reference to, if not versions of, the whole document on most local authority web sites.

The critical elements of the local plan to us mere mortals are the adopted policies. It is these that help to inform the planning system, and are tools to help planning case officers make their decisions.
In most local plans there is a section on landscape design, and usually tucked away in there is a bit about trees. If you’re lucky there may be a specific policy aimed at trees and woodlands, but more probably the subjects of our hearts’ desires are thrown at the coat hanger of a much more general, all-embracing policy – something along the lines of:

‘…development will only be permitted where good standards of site planning and design are achieved….’ – or – ‘ proposals will be required to demonstrate that existing features of landscape (some trees?), nature conservation ( some more trees?), or amenity value ( could be trees) are safeguarded and enhanced through incorporation into development….’

Now this may all be very enlightening to the street wise planning guru, but isn’t guaranteed to grab the vitals of your average developer. So in order to make this all a bit more palatable the ODPM has decreed that local planning authorities should produce a series of supplementary planning guides to translate the above into something akin to:

‘…. this is what we want to see considered and incorporated into the design of your development and submitted with your planning application because if you don’t and we think trees we want to see retained are likely to be damaged we’ll probably recommend refusal… ‘

Beginning to get the message?
In idealistic terms SPG’s should be the proverbial hymn sheet from which all involved stakeholders sing. The SPG that I was instrumental in producing when I was a local authority Tree Officer had at the heading of the front page

‘TREES on Development Sites. The steps you need to take at the planning and design stages, and during construction, to ensure that significant trees are kept healthy and become an asset to your new development’

I don’t think it can be made much clearer than that. A well designed SPG should ‘do what it says on the box’, it should be user friendly, easy to follow, and - above all – compact.
So, what should Trees on Development Sites Supplementary Planning Guide contain?

Background
Include a brief summary of the policies in the Local Plan about trees and the planning process. The average punter doesn’t have to read it, but at least he or she can’t say they weren’t told.

Basic Technical Stuff
We’re talking mainly roots here. As arboriculturalists we tend to forget that professionals outside our sphere frequently have no concept of the spread or depth of tree roots, let alone the damage that can be caused to them through thoughtless actions on a development site. We should not assume anything. A few vital statistics about tree roots will hopefully open eyes to the issues, and may even prompt enough interest to find out more – preferably from the appointed Arboricultural Consultant!

Legal Issues
Let’s not get our developer off on the wrong foot straight away. The worldly wise developer may think he can dispose of any trees on a development site before negotiations with the local planning authority.

However, he may not have anticipated that the worldly wise tree officer could be one step ahead and might have placed a Tree Preservation Order on potentially vulnerable trees. And what about those sneaky little conservation areas?

A bit about legal status and the implications of infringement should be included in the SPG.

Site Planning and Design Process
First off – surveys. Yes, you guessed it BS5837:2005 and all that jazz. Regular readers of my articles will know that this is a cause celebre of mine! I have reason to believe that the message is beginning to get across (do I detect the seed of a future feature here?), but the variation in the standard of surveys indicates that there is a long way to go.

The SPG must emphasise the importance of a good survey. This can only be helped if more local planning authorities adopt a policy of ‘no tree survey, no registration’ on sites where trees are an issue.
Meanwhile, back to the drawing board – or more likely the Apple-Mac flat screen these days. The SPG should include advice about informing the layout design on a development site. Start off with a ‘golden rule’ first, such as ‘ there should be no ground disturbance or new construction under the canopies of trees’, and then flag up other ‘essentials’ such as:

• Position of buildings and other built structures. Distance from tree canopy (more BS5837), depth of foundations, orientation (‘That tree blocks out all my light’). Remember – mature oak trees are seldom welcome companions in a postage stamp back garden.
  
  
• Levels. Trees do not take kindly to having half their roots chopped away or having a shed load of subsoil spread over them
  
  
• Access. Simple rule of thumb – if you can’t do ‘no dig (a la APN 1) – runs, and provide details of methodology if they have to run within the root protection area.

Applying for Planning Permission
Getting it right first time is satisfying for all concerned. A simple ‘Tick Box’ checklist in the SPG goes a long way towards achieving this. Don’t forget the obvious, like ‘Does your Scheme include a Tree Survey?’

Before Construction Starts
Getting planning consent is not the end of the story, and not the end of the job the SPG has to do.
Probably one of the most difficult things to achieve is getting the words into action – horses and troughs come to mind.

The main message here is the importance of erecting protective barriers BEFORE any other works commence on site and after any remedial tree works have been carried out.

The Construction Period
A critical stage as far as any retained trees is concerned. They are at their most vulnerable now. The SPG should provide a list of essential ‘Do’s and Don’ts’ relating to potentially damaging operations, including excavations, compaction, storage, toxic materials, fires, fixing to trunks.

And finally…..
A Supplementary Planning Guide is not designed to be an all singing, all dancing handbook on how to protect trees on development sites for the developer – it is just that – a guide. It should not be read or, more importantly, used in isolation.

So, to emphasise this and point the reader in the right direction the guide should include a list of sources of further information (eg The Arboricultural Association, English Nature, Council Building Control when it comes to accommodating trees on development sites. But how universal and readily available are these guides? I carried out a straw poll of ten local authority web sites. Only one had an accessible version of its SPG on line. The others did not appear to have a ‘Trees on Development Sites’ SPG at all. For all the authorities I checked the pathway to finding if an SPG was available was tortuous to say the least; and I knew what I was looking for.

If we want developers to use these guides they must be more easily accessible! As arboriculturalists, and in particular those who are local authority tree officers, we are in danger of finding ourselves between a rock and a hard place. The onus is on the tree officer to produce the guide. Producing the technical information is only half the battle – the internal bureaucratic process is extremely time-consuming, and places an additional burden on the over-stretched officer. So, we are faced with a vicious circle. As arboriculturalists we want to convince developers and designers of the value of SPG’s, but if they approach a local planning authority and discover that they do not have one, this sends out the message that they are not recognising their importance in the planning process.

Whilst I do not want to advocate putting additional pressure on tree officers, I believe that we have a responsibility to request these guides to indicate our willingness to work together to address and resolve tree issues on development sites. Increased demand from the ‘other side of the fence’ will hopefully provide tree officers with the appropriate ammunition to secure additional resources needed to produce these much needed guides.

I hope my article will stimulate an increased interest in Supplementary Planning Guides. I have been through the process of producing one and would be very pleased to answer any queries from both the public and private sector.

Alister Rankine
Alister Rankine is a fully trained forester and arboriculturalist with more than thirty years’ experience and runs his tree and woodland management consultancy, ‘Hillside Trees’ at Chilcompton in Somerset.
alister@euroarb.eu.com