The back garden – a dramatic transformation!

We first visited this creek-side site near Falmouth in late November 2011 (it was pouring with rain, and blowing a gale then, too).  The garden was part of a much larger project to demolish the existing house and build an entirely new, contemporary style home designed by award-winning Brixham architect Stan Bolt.  We completed the conceptual design in January 2012 and, once the local planning department had confirmed they were happy, we proceeded with detailed design drawings and specifications.  These were completed in June 2012, by which time work on the house was already under way, and the planting plans were completed in November 2012.

The forecourt paving layout complements the asymmetric angular design
(sorry about the poor photo – did I mention it was blowing a hurricane?)

The house build was managed by the client as a self-build project, with one main building contractor, and was sufficiently complete to allow the landscape contractor to start work in July 2013.  The client chose to include all removal of rubble etc., importing of topsoil and re-contouring, and also construction of the hardwood deck, within the building contractor’s scope of work.  This did create some difficulties – the deck was built somewhat smaller than specified, and the levels in the rear garden also proved to be lower than planned, although neither became apparent until the landscape contractor had started work.

Carefully detailed paving and steps replaced the derelict garage.

We placed orders for trees, shrubs and herbaceous perennials in August 2013, with delivery in two batches – the majority in September (subsequently delayed to October), and the trees and balance of shrubs and perennials due in December.

I’ve posted some more photos of the planting on our Facebook page, and the design is described on our website.

Svend

This development, which is now the subject of an application for judicial review, is a perfect example of failure to consider even the most fundamental principles of landscape design.  As University of Oxford Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch wrote in his nomination letter, “Its roofline does what no other recent development on the edge of Port Meadow has achieved, violate the treeline which is the essential boundary of this rural view…..”.

Before – Oxford’s dreaming spires (photo “Protect Port meadow from Oxford University” Facebook page)

After – skyline dominated by 4 and 5 storey flats (photo – Jonathan Bowen)

There seems to have been a trail of either error, negligence or deceit leading up to the granting of planning permission – the Council Heritage Officer’s damning report apparently never reached councillors making the decision, the University claimed “Following careful assessment it has been concluded that the development will not be visible from the majority of Port Meadow”, and the application incorrectly stated the land (former railway sidings) were not contaminated.  This last point is the crux of the application for judicial review since, had the land been identified as contaminated, an Environmental Impact Assessment would have been needed – including a full visual impact assessment.

The Council and University are clearly embarrassed by the whole affair – they even entered negotiations earlier this year to reduce the height by 2 storeys (although this, unsurprisingly, came to naught).  Whatever the final outcome, it will remain an appalling example of failure to understand how the landscape relates to our built environment.

You can read the full Building Design article here (you will have to register, but it is free).  The Protect Port Meadow from Oxford University Facebook page is here.

Footnote (1 Nov 2013): The project was runner-up in the Carbuncle Cup 2013.  Judicial review was refused by Mr Justice Lewis in the High Court in Birmingham, but the council and Oxford university did promise to carry out an environmental impact assessment – a small consolation for campaigners.

There's life in this this old oak yet!

As some of our readers may be aware, most local planning authorities in the UK require that planning applications address the retention of existing trees on and around the site.  There is a British Standard BS5837:2005 “Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations” which covers such things as surveying the existing trees and ensuring retained trees are protected from damage during construction works.

A new edition of BS5837:2012 “Trees in relation to Design, Demolition & Construction – Recommendations” comes into effect at the end of April, and supersedes the 2005 edition.  This includes some significant changes, to reflect the perceived importance of trees in climate change adaptation as well as current practices and building regulations.

Some key changes include:

• soil assessment is considered necessary at the conceptual design stage;
• provisions added to address new planting design;
• it is no longer permitted to displace root protection areas by up to 20%, making tree constraints much less flexible;
• additional limitations on hard surfacing allowed near trees.

There are other changes, too.  Taken as a whole, it seems that getting planning permission for projects where there are existing trees will become more complex right from the design stage.  As such, it’s unlikely to be welcomed by developers, given the continued depressed state of housebuilding in the UK.  (However, it is worth remembering the recommendations apply equally to projects that don’t require planning permission.)

As landscape and garden design professionals, we’re ideally placed to help with the design of sites with trees.