Preparing Design Codes - WordPress.com€¦ · Department for Communities and Local Government: London. ISBN-10 1 85946 260 X ISBN-13 978 1 85946 260 7 ... Design codes are a particularly

Preparing Design CodesA Practice Manual

This manual has been specifically published to show howdesign codes can help deliver good quality places, and toconvey the means by which design coding can be integratedinto the planning, design and development processes thatshape the built environment.

The use of design codes is not mandatory. The key fordevelopers, local authorities and other interested parties is to understand when and why design codes may be the righttool to use, and under what circumstances design codes canstreamline processes, add value and deliver better qualitydevelopment.

This manual addresses these important issues. It forms the‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘who’ guide to preparing and implementingdesign codes.

Further copies available from:

RIBA Publishing15 Bonhill StreetLondonEC2P 2EATel: 020 7256 7222Fax: 020 7374 2737Email: [email protected]: www.ribabookshops.com

£40.00

Pre

parin

g D

esig

n C

odes – A

Practice

Man

ual


Department for Communities and Local Government: London

ISBN-10 1 85946 260 XISBN-13 978 1 85946 260 7

Stock Code

Further copies are available from:


© Crown Copyright 2006.

Printed on material containing 100% post-consumer waste (text), 75% post-consumer waste and 25% ECF pulp (cover).

November 2006

Product code 06 PD 03945

Copyright in the contents, the cover, the design and the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.This document/publication is value added. If you wish to re-use this material, please apply for a Click-Use Licence for value added material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.aspAlternatively applications can be sent to:

OPSI, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQFax: 01603 723000E-mail: [email protected]

This publication has been approved by Ministers and has official status. The contents of this publication may bereproduced free of charge in any format or medium for the purposes of private research and study or for internalcirculation within an organisation. This is subject to the contents being reproduced accurately and not in a way thatimplies official status. Any publisher wishing to reproduce the content of this publication must not use or replicatethe HMG logo or replicate the official version’s style and appearance, including the design, and must not presenttheir publication as being an official publication as this may confuse the public. The reproduced material must beacknowledged as Crown Copyright and the title of the publication specified. HM Government does not accept anyresponsibility for the accuracy and the comprehensiveness of any other versions.

Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Further information can obtainedfrom www.opsi.gov.uk

Contents

Foreword 5

This Guide – Purpose, Structure and How to use it 6

PART A: DESIGN CODES – A tool for delivering high quality environments 8

1. Introducing design codes 10

2. Factors to consider before selecting a design coding approach 19

3. The basis for successful design coding 25

PART B: DESIGN CODES – The process, a practice manual 38

Stage 1: Initiating a design coding process 41

Stage 2: Coordinating inputs into the design coding process 49

Stage 3: Appraising the local context for design coding 57

Stage 4: Designing and testing the design code 65

Stage 5: Formalising the design code 81

Stage 6: Implementing the design code 99

Stage 7: Managing design code compliance 107

Annex 1: Using design codes in conjunction with LDOs 112

Annex 2: The design coding process summarised 114

Annex 3: Glossary of terms 116

Annex 4: Credits 119

ForewordGood quality, inclusive design is essential increating and maintaining places where peoplewant to live and work, now and in the future.Good design is not just about making placesvisually attractive. It has a fundamental role in achieving more sustainable development,helping to create flourishing economies anddiverse, vibrant and attractive local communities.The hallmark of good design is a place that isdesigned around people, with its own identity,that functions well and that creates variety andchoice. To achieve this requires the developmentof creative and innovative solutions that respondto the challenges of modern life, therequirements of a specific location and thathelp tackle climate change and create placessuitable for the changes in climate nowaccepted as inevitable.

Planning has a critical role to play in thedelivery of good design. The Government’srecent reforms have ensured that good designand good planning are indivisible and haveset a policy framework that facilitates thedelivery of good quality places on the ground.

Design codes can play a significant part inimplementing these reforms through helpingachieve consistently better quality development.A three-year nationwide pilot researchprogramme we have carried out with theCommission for Architecture and the BuiltEnvironment (CABE) and the subsequent report“Design Coding in Practice: An Evaluation”confirmed that, when used correctly, designcoding is a very useful and exciting tool to helpraise the design quality of new development.

Design codes are a particularly robust form of planning guidance. Developed and usedeffectively with the right skills and expertise,they will be key to delivering one of thecentral policy objectives for our new PlanningPolicy Statement on housing (PPS3) which isto ensure that all housing is well-designedand built to a high standard.

This guide, which we have produced jointlywith CABE, is intended as a user friendlymanual which provides helpful and practicaladvice to local authorities, developers andother key stakeholders on how design codescan be prepared and used effectively. It setsout good practice drawn from real examplesof developing and implementing design codes across England, and from widerinternational experience.

Design Coding is one option open to localauthorities and designers to achieve highquality, well designed places. Although it is not the only option, it is one which Ibelieve, if used effectively, will present local authorities and designers with greateropportunities to achieve good quality designin a transparent, streamlined and collaborativeway and which is tailored to reflect localneeds and circumstances. I hope that overtime, more and more development teams willadopt this new approach, and will contributeto developing a body of knowledge abouthow best to use this flexible tool to achievethe quality communities we all aspire to.

Baroness AndrewsHouse of Lords Minister for Housing and Planning

5

This Guide – Purpose,Structure and How to use it

Purpose of the Guide

Planning Policy Statement 1: DeliveringSustainable Development (PPS1) makes it clearthat good design is a key element in achievingsustainable development and that it is indivisiblefrom good planning. Positive planning for theachievement of high quality and inclusivedesign is essential for all forms of development.

Design codes are a valuable tool which canhelp planners, designers and developers torespond to this policy context. The value ofdesign codes to help improve the quality,value and delivery of residential developmentfor example is expressly recognised inPlanning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3)and the Government’s response to the KateBarker Review1.

The purpose of this guide is to show howDesign Codes can help deliver good qualityplaces, and to explain how Design Coding asa process can be integrated into the planning,design and development processes that shapethe built environment. The guide complementsgood practice guidance which has beenpublished to help encourage high qualitydevelopment2 and the delivery of good qualityplaces. It directly supports the implementationof PPS3 but it is relevant to all aspects of thebuilt environment and is not restricted to newresidential development. The guide does nothowever set out new policy.

The use of design codes is not mandatory.The decision whether or when to use designcodes will be a local decision made bythose with a responsibility for a site orarea, for example a local authority or aland owner seeking planning permission for the development of a site. The key fordevelopers, local authorities and otherinterested parties is to understand when andwhy design codes may be the right tool touse and under which circumstances codescan streamline processes, add value anddeliver better quality development.

This guide addresses these important issues. It forms the ‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘who’ guide topreparing and implementing design codes, byanswering the following three key questions:

• What are design codes, and why andwhere are they useful?

• How can they be prepared and whatrepresents an efficient and effective designcoding process?

• Who is responsible, and what are theroles of all those involved through allstages of the process from preparation to implementation?

Structure of the Guide and How to use it

The guide is aimed at all those involved inthe planning, design and development of thebuilt environment. It is likely to be useful topractitioners of differing levels of interest andskills – ranging from those with a generalinterest and without a design or developmentbackground, to those considering, or activelyinvolved in, the preparation and use ofdesign codes. Its audience however is widerthan the specialist professions, and it will alsobe of interest to local communities and localauthority elected Members.

Preparing Design Codes – A Practice Manual

6

1 The Government’s Response to Kate Barker’s Review of Housing Supply (HM Treasury & ODPM 2005)

2 These include By Design: Urban Design in thePlanning System: Towards Better Practice (DETR &CABE 2001); Safer Places: The Planning System andCrime Prevention (ODPM & Home Office 2006); By Design: Better Places to Live (DTLR 2001)

The guide has therefore not been written as areport to be read from cover to cover, but hasbeen split into two parts. Part A is relevantto all readers, including non-specialists. Itgives a broad understanding of design codes,setting out the background to the growinginterest in design codes and where they arelikely to be appropriate. Stakeholders whoare involved in commissioning design codesbut who will not be directly involved in theirproduction will find Part A useful to informtheir decision-making. Local politicians andmanagers (public and private) might fall intothis category.

Part B is designed as a practice manual. It isconsequently more technical in nature and ismainly intended as a practical guide whichcan be referred to throughout the design codingprocess. Part B sets out a recommended‘optimum’ methodology for preparing a designcode, although those involved in producingthe design code may wish to adapt thismethodology to take account of their ownparticular local circumstances. Those who arealready experienced in the production anduse of design codes will be able to critiquetheir current approaches in the light of thewider experiences reflected in this guide.

Some of this guide is about design codes –the product. In particular Stages 3 and 4 ofPart B advise on the scope and content ofdesign codes and how they should bestructured. However, much of this guidehighlights the processes and practice of designcoding – the steps that will need to beundertaken if codes are to be robust andproperly implemented. Whatever approach isused to prepare a design code, it is essentialthat they reflect and seek to implement thecentral tenets of good urban design. Withoutthis, design codes will fail to deliver highquality environments. Those preparing codeswill therefore need to have careful regard topublished good practice on design qualityand place-making to which this guide refers.

This Guide – Purpose, Structure and How to use it

7

PART A

PART A: DESIGN CODES

A tool for delivering high quality environments

Part A of the guide introduces design coding as an approach to achieving improved quality development. It has three sections:

Section 1: Introducing design codes

• Introduces design codes and presents evidence for their use and value

• Explains a number of misconceptions about design coding.

Section 2: Factors to consider before selecting a design coding approach

• Discusses how design codes relate to other forms of detailed design guidance andallows the reader to decide when the use of design codes will be appropriate

• Presents an overview of how design coding as a process fits within the developmentprocess and recommends the stages that should be undertaken to achieve an‘optimum’ design coding process.

Section 3: The basis for successful design coding

• Introduces the key stakeholders, their roles and relationships

• Sets out seven fundamental factors that characterise a successful design codepreparation process.

1. Introducing design codes

.

Introduction

No one sets out to design and create poorlylaid out, characterless places. Yet too much of what we build today continues to displaythese characteristics. Extensive testing recentlyundertaken in England has found that designcodes have considerable potential to assistin overcoming these problems by helpingto deliver better quality neighbourhoods in amore efficient and effective manner. Some ofthe potential benefits of design codes include:

• Better designed development, with lessopposition locally and a more levelplaying field for developers.

• Enhanced economic value that a positivesense of place and better quality designcan bring.

• A more certain planning process and linked to this, a more certain climate for investment.

• Streamlined development control, savingtime and money for developers and localauthorities alike.

• A more coordinated development processwhich is built on consensus instead of conflict.

What are design codes and where canthey be applied?

Design codes are a distinct form of detaileddesign guidance. A design code is a set ofwritten and graphic rules that establish withprecision the two and three dimensionaldesign elements of a particular developmentor area – and how these relate to one anotherwithout establishing the overall outcome.

A design code’s aim is to provide clarity overwhat constitutes acceptable design quality fora particular site or area, and thereby providea level of certainty for developers and thelocal community alike. Design codes set outdesign principles aimed at delivering betterquality places, for example the requirementsfor streets, blocks, massing and so forth, orthey may focus on landscape, architectural or building performance issues (for example,increasing energy efficiency). However, unlikemany generic urban design guidelines or localdevelopment standards, design codes do notsimply repeat policy or guidance found inother national or local policy or guidancedocuments. Instead, codes provide a positivestatement about the particular qualitiesof a place. Codes are focussed around thosedesign characteristics that are important toachieve, and they establish and firmly fix the‘must have’ design elements. In so doingcodes help to provide continuity in qualityand consistency over time.

To achieve this aim, design codes often buildupon a design vision in a masterplan, or othersite or area-based vision. Sometimes they mayevolve out of a design and developmentframework. In both circumstances the set ofdesign instructions which make up the designcodes will reflect the particular requirementsof the place.


10

• Design codes are a new approach to deliveringimproved quality development. They help toproactively plan for better design, investingresources upfront to help streamline later processes.

• Design codes are a distinct form of detaileddesign guidance comprising a set of written andgraphic rules that establish with precision the twoand three dimensional design elements ofa particular development or area.

• The provisions within design codes are technical and precise. They instruct (andsometimes advise) the user upon the physicalcomponents of a place.

• Design Codes are delivery tools. To be effectivethey need to be based upon a specific designvision for a site or an area.

• Extensive evidence supports their potential todeliver improved design quality, and a morecertain, streamlined and coordinateddevelopment process.

• Design codes support the culture change inplanning and the transition to a spatial approachto planning.

Design codes may be appropriate in othercircumstances as well. They may, forexample, be appropriate for thematic designcoding to guide the design of repetitive minorhouseholder planning applications such ashouse extensions, alterations, and the like ina particular locality. However, these forms ofdesign coding are not the focus of this guide.

Many of the development standards used toguide the design of buildings and the urbanenvironment could be described as havingcharacteristics of design codes – of sorts. The building regulations, highways designstandards, and the density and open spacestandards used by many local planningauthorities in England fall into this category.Most of these are however limited in theirscope and technical in their aspirations andare not generated out of a physical vision orunderstanding of a particular place. Instead,these types of guidance are about achievingminimum requirements across a wide area.In many cases, the slavish adherence to suchdevelopment standards has led to the creationof bland and unattractive places.

Historical examples of the use of design coding

Design codes are not new. Research hasshown that in the past forms of design codinghave been used to set standards to improvesafety, health or sanitation – such as the 1667‘Act for Rebuilding London’ following theGreat Fire. Elsewhere they have also beenused to ensure urban form reflected the

‘enlightened’ culture of the times – such as in Georgian Bath or New Town Edinburgh.Some of the world’s most beautiful cities,such as Siena in Italy, have used forms ofdesign coding over many centuries to givethem their distinct and unified form andappearance. Today, design codes in variousforms are used internationally, for example in Germany, France, the Netherlands,Australia and the United States, as a means to focus on the delivery of high qualitycontemporary urbanism.

Coding through historyCodes were introduced into the 1667 Act for theRebuilding of the City of London and, amongstother design requirements for new buildings, theyrelated building types to street types.

Design codes and relationship to zoning

Design codes are different to conventionalland use zoning regulations which underpinmany planning systems in Europe, the UnitedStates and elsewhere. Zoning regulations, intheir most basic form, are not informed byurban design considerations which relate toplace-making. They typically relate tomapped land uses which are supported byformal site-specific written regulations relatingto permissible uses and developmentdensities, building heights, floorspace ratios,building lines, parking provision and theproportions of the types of space on a site. In many countries, zoning regulations are also linked to building regulations.


11

Design codes – a definition

A design code is a set of illustrated design rulesand requirements which instruct and mayadvise on the physical development of a site or area. The graphic and written components of the code are detailed and precise, and buildupon a design vision such as a masterplan or otherdesign and development framework for a site or area.

Source: Annex B to Planning Policy Statement 3:Housing (DCLG, 2006)

Part

A

1

Coding in Europe todayIn a number of European countries today, such asGermany and the Netherlands, codes form a keycomponent in the control of development throughthe planning system.

Delivering sustainable communities – promoting a changing culture in planning

The principles of sustainable development as delivered through the new planning systemare at the heart of the Government’s visionfor sustainable communities3. An importantrole of the Planning and Compulsory PurchaseAct 2004 has been to make the planning systemmore proactive, transparent, and effective. Asa result, a key change has been for planningto become more ‘spatial’ in nature4 – movingaway from operating in a vacuum, divorcedfrom notions of space and place. Localcommunities now have real opportunities toinfluence how they want their areas to develop. PPS1 requires that spatial planning should beused to embody a community’s aspirationswithin local policy, setting out a vision forfuture patterns of development, with clearobjectives for achieving that vision andstrategies for delivery and implementation.

In this respect design codes are a key proactivetool. They can help embed the aspirationsfor a place, and assist in proactively takingforward and implementing local visions withgreater consensus, transparency, speed,quality and certainty.


12

3 Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future(ODPM, 2003)

4 PPS1 advises that spatial planning goes beyondtraditional land use planning to bring together andintegrate policies for the development and use of landwith other policies and programmes which influencethe nature of places and how they can function.

Translating aspirations into delivery

Good design is about more than how buildingslook – it is also about creating sustainableplaces that function well. Although nationalpolicy in PPS1 sets out a positive policyframework for improving the quality of new development, extensive audit workundertaken by CABE has demonstrated thatthere is a need to further improve the designquality of much of what is built, residentialdevelopment in particular5. CABE’s findingspoint to a number of failings, but in particularthat, with respect to residential development,there is often a failure to translate aspirationsfor good urban design into implementationand delivery.

Research evidence on the use and applicationof design coding has shown that design codescan be a powerful tool to help overcomethese design quality issues (see below). Byunderstanding what the important designcomponents for the development of a site orarea are, design codes can set detailed andtransparent requirements on delivery and helpdeliver a step change in the quality of bothresidential and non-residential development.In essence design codes are delivery toolsthat require an early investment of time andresources in the planning of a developmentor area in order to deliver an enhanced processand product: they ‘operationalise’ the visionfor a site or area, securing higher qualityoutcomes for all.

Delivering Design Quality


13

Planning Policy Statement 3 and design codes

To facilitate efficient delivery of high qualitydevelopment, Local Planning Authorities should draw on relevant guidance andstandards and promote the use of appropriatetools and techniques, such as Design Codingalongside urban design guidelines, detailedmasterplans, village design statements, sitebriefs and community participation techniques.

Source: Planning Policy Statement 3:

Housing (DCLG, 2006)

5 Housing Audit, Assessing the Quality of New Homes,London, the South East and the East of England(CABE, 2004); Housing Audit. Assessing the DesignQuality of New Homes in the North East, North Westand Yorkshire and Humber (CABE, 2005)

Part

A

1

The evidence – adding value throughdesign coding

Following the launch of the SustainableCommunities Plan, the Government, workingin partnership with CABE and EnglishPartnerships, instituted an action researchprogramme that ran throughout 2004 and2005 to allow design codes to be testedin practice in England. This work, whichincluded a stocktake of the historic andcurrent use of design codes, provided asound basis upon which to understandhow design codes operate in England. Thefindings from the programme are publishedin full in Design Coding in Practice: AnEvaluation (DCLG, 2006).

The research concluded that design codes are – in appropriate circumstances – valuabletools to deliver a range of more sustainableprocesses and outcomes from development. It confirmed that as a particularly robust formof design guidance, design codes can play a major role in delivering better qualitydevelopment. They also have a significantrole to play in delivering a more certaindesign and development process, and – ifproperly managed – can provide the focusaround which stakeholders can integrate theiractivities, delivering in the process a morecoordinated and consensus driven process.


14

The action research programme:building on an evidence base

The design codes action research programmeencompassed the detailed monitoring andevaluation of nineteen development projects ofthree types:

• First, a series of Pilot projects were ‘enabled’by CABE to produce design codes as anintegral part of seven evolving developmentprojects.

• Second, the retrospective evaluation of eight advanced design coded projects wasundertaken, where design codes had alreadybeen prepared and used independently of thepilot programme. In these cases, designcoded schemes had already been built.

• Third, four non-design code projectcomparators were evaluated which usedother forms of detailed design guidance.

The projects were chosen to reflect ageographical spread, a range of differentdevelopment and physical contexts, as well asvariety in size, ownership and patterns ofstakeholder engagement.

Delivering quality and valueDevelopment built according to design codes cancreate high quality places in terms of urban design,architectural design and/or the quality of details and materials.

To achieve this however, they require asignificant early investment in time andresources from all stakeholders, althoughthe evidence confirmed that for commercialinterests, this is compensated by the enhancedeconomic value that better design and a strongersense of place can deliver6. The process ofapplying for and obtaining planning permissionis also likely, over time, to become morestreamlined and predictable which will helpto offset the front-loading of time andresources that design coding requires.

Delivering certainty and coordinationDesign codes can help to provide landowners anddevelopers with more certainty, as at West Silvertownwhere they also had a role in co-ordinating thedevelopment of private and affordable housing bydifferent developers. Codes can also ensure thatparcels built by different housebuilders areconsistent, for instance at Fairford Leys.

Misconceptions and reality

Arguments against design codes focus on concerns that are based on a range ofcommon misconceptions. Like other forms ofdetailed design guidance, if design codes arethemselves poorly prepared, or inappropriatelyapplied or implemented, then they may be partof the problem not the solution. However,international experience, and increasingly the evidence from the UK, suggests that these misconceptions have little basis in fact.Research evidence also demonstrates thatwhen used correctly design codes can play a key role in helping to deliver design qualityin contexts where it has typically been lackingin the recent past; particularly in large-scalepredominantly residential developments.


15

6 This finding from the action research programme issupported by a body of research published by CABE:The Value of Urban Design (2001), The Value of GoodDesign (2002), The Value of Public Space (2004).

Part

A

1


16

Myths and facts about design codes

The myths The facts

Design codes Design codes focus creative input to making places suffocate the Codes identify the key design elements that will be vital to get right in a creativity of particular place. In this sense, they encourage the creative input of architects designers and urban designers to work positively to address those requirements identified as

crucial to that place. They therefore focus creativity rather than stifling it, and mayencourage more architects to become more involved in the design of certain typesdevelopment, such as for example new housing development.

Design codes are Design codes clarify the regulatory process rather than complicate itexcessively Design codes are primarily tools to convey the various design components of a bureaucratic particular development. By clarifying design requirements, design codes reduce

uncertainly and the discretion available to regulators, and streamline regulatoryprocesses.

Design codes Design codes are style neutral. They can equally deliver innovativeare concerned contemporary or traditional design solutionswith delivering Experience in places such as Greenwich Millennium Village, Hulme and Newhall traditional in the UK, and in Germany and the Netherlands demonstrates that creativity and architectural innovative design solutions need not be constrained by design codes.solutions and stifle innovation

Design codes are Design codes need considerable up-front investmentcost-cutting Although design codes have the ability to streamline planning processes and leaddevices to time savings during implementation, they cannot be prepared without a

significant up-front investment in design time, skills and resources, and the positiveengagement of key stakeholders.

Design codes The relative prescription of design codes varies considerably are excessively Local circumstances and the vision of those responsible for the code’s design will prescriptive and determine the precise character of each design code. Each is different, but typicallyrestrictive some aspects may be highly prescriptive e.g. building lines, whilst others will be

more flexible e.g. architectural treatments.

Design codes Design codes encourage a sense of place and varietygive rise to They seek to capture the specific requirements of a place and provide an formulaic design opportunity to break away from developments typified by crude local developmentsolutions standards. Codes encourage stakeholders to think together about each development in

its entirety as a unique place.

International experiencesCodes have been used in the Netherlands, inexamples such as Borneo Eiland and BorneoSporenburg in Amsterdam, to create a placewith a contemporary urban form and character. In the USA, codes are generally associated with New Urbanism, which promotes a traditionalneighbourhood form and character in reaction to the sprawl of low density suburbs, for example at Kentlands, in Maryland.

As used in this guide, the distinguishingfeatures of design codes can be described as follows:

• They are set of graphic, and to a lesserextent, written, rules that are technical in nature.

• They establish with precision the designconsiderations of a development or area.

• They are based on a design vision such as a masterplan or other form of designframework for a site or area.

• They are three dimensional in scope, and focus primarily on urban designconsiderations.

• They focus on the essential and mandatorydesign characteristics of a particulardevelopment.

• They can also include provisions whichare advisory or optional.


17

Part

A

1

There are a wide variety of possible approachesto the content and presentation of designcodes (see Part B, Stage 4).


18

Cirencester – code setting out architectural standards Fairfield Park – coding for building types

Hulme – coding for landmarks, vistas and focal points Rotherham – code for specific street character

Ashford – coding for urban structure and massing Hastings – coding for roofscape

2. Factors to consider beforeselecting a design codingapproach

Why choose design codes?

PPS1 advises that planning authorities should plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design for alldevelopment and to have positive policiesbased on a good understanding of localcircumstances and objectives. PPS1 asksdecision-makers to apply a high policy testto the design quality of new development,namely that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take theopportunities available for improving thecharacter and quality of an area and the wayit functions, should not be accepted7. It alsoadvises that in planning for the achievementof high quality and inclusive design, planningauthorities should have regard to otherpublished good practice.

In the past some applicants for planningpermission have taken an adversarialapproach to presenting their proposals tolocal authorities for consideration, particularlyon issues relating to the design of theirdevelopments. Based on mutual conflict andmistrust, this approach often ended up beingresource intensive for both local authoritiesand applicants but was in part influenced bythe national policy framework which limitedthe consideration of design issues in theplanning process8.

There is now considerably more dialoguebetween applicants and local authorityofficers prior to planning applications beingsubmitted and indeed during the considerationof such applications. Indeed the Governmentnow actively promotes pre-applicationdiscussions because they benefit both developersand local planning authorities in ensuringa better mutual understanding of objectivesand the constraints that exist in implementinga proposal. In such cases, when planningapplications get submitted they can now be dealt with in a more certain and speedymanner and the quality of decisions can bebetter assured. This is particularly so in thecase of large development schemes wherelocal authorities and developers often look to jointly develop detailed design guidance tocreate the confidence that design quality, andtherefore planning permission, will beforthcoming.

A number of forms of detailed designguidance are often considered appropriate insuch circumstances – a detailed masterplan,character area statements, a developmentframework followed by a detailed developmentbriefing process for each phase of development,or perhaps a combination of these. Althoughdifferent, each form of guidance can havemany of the same benefits as design coding –and also similar costs – namely the up-frontinvestment in resources that is required toproduce them.

19

• Design codes are an ‘operating system’ fordelivering development and provide a centralcoordinating tool for design, development,planning and adoption processes.

• Design codes coordinate design outcomes acrosslarge or complex sites to deliver a coherentdesign vision.

• They are most valuable when sites are large, inmultiple ownership and where development is tobe phased and where more than one developeris involved.

• Design codes are a versatile tool that can beappropriate for a wide range of developmenttypes and in a wide range of contexts.

• Design codes fit within a hierarchy of policy andguidance, and their role and relationships withinthis hierarchy need to be understood.

7 Paragraph 34, Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1):Delivering Sustainable Development

8 See for example Planning Policy Guidance Note 1:General Policy and Principles (1988 and 1992) andDoE (1980), and DoE Circular 22/80: General Policyand Principles.

2

Part

A

Other forms of detailed design guidanceDetailed design guidance and/or detailedmasterplanning that is not coding has also beenused successfully to achieve similar benefits, as forinstance at Ingress Park, Greenhithe or Port Marine.

The final choice as to which form of designguidance to use will be dependant on localpreference. However, research shows thatdesign codes can be distinguished from otherforms of detailed design guidance because oftheir particular ability to:

• Establish high quality design aspirations in a manner that allows their consistentapplication across a site or area.

• Provide a robust form of design guidancethat can be more difficult to challenge (for example, at appeal).

• Establish the key development-wide designparameters around which individualdevelopment phases can be creativelydesigned and delivered.

• Test, develop, and deliver a design visionfor a site or area.

• Establish a more certain and efficientplanning process.

• Create a level playing field for developmentinterests, based on their willingness andability to deliver high quality design.

When is the use of a design codeappropriate?

A key strength of design codes is their abilityto coordinate design across the successivedevelopment phases of large sites in orderto deliver a coherent design vision. Designcodes are usually of less value for small siteswhere a single developer and design teamis responsible for the whole development.Research shows that they are most valuablewhen sites possess one or more of thefollowing characteristics:

• Large sites (or multiple smaller relatedsites) that will be built out in phases overa long period of time.

• Sites in multiple ownership, where co-ordination between the parties is desirable.

• Sites likely to be developed by severaldifferent developers and/or design teams.


20

The figure below sets out a simple decision-making path which code promoters canfollow to determine whether design codes areappropriate in different circumstances. It also

acknowledges that where design codes arenot appropriate, other forms of detaileddesign guidance should be considered.

2. Factors to consider before selecting a Design Coding approach

21

Design coding: To code or not to code?

* Guidance and advice, can be found in:By Design – Urban Design in the Planning System: towards better practice (DETR, 2000)Planning & Development Briefs: A Guide to Better Practice (DETR, 1998)Creating Successful Masterplans: A Guide for Clients (CABE, 2004)Urban Design Guidance – Urban Design Frameworks, Development Briefs and Masterplans (Urban Design Group, 2002)

Potential to usea design code(alongside asite-specificdesign vision)

Consider usingother site-specific designguidance*

Is detailed site-specific guidance required?

Is the site(s) large enoughto justifya code?

If adequateguidance already in place or noguidancerequired

Design schemeand apply forplanning permission

No

If likely tobe built outquickly, too small to be phased

No

Yes

Yes

Does the pattern ofownershipjustify a code?

If there is single owner or consortiumacting together

NoYes

Does the process ofdevelopmentjustify a code?

If there is a singledeveloper and/or design team

NoYes

START

OR

2

Part

A

What types of development would designcodes apply to?

To date, design codes have largely been prepared for residential development. However, thisdoes not preclude their application to otheruses or types of development. Internationalpractice and limited UK experience indicatesthat design codes can be effectively appliedto all types of development. Commercial and mixed use developments and theredevelopment of parts of town or city centrescan, for example, be coded in the same wayas residential developments. Indeed, giventhat residential developments often haveimportant linkages to public spaces and othercommercial areas and districts, design codingcan provide an opportunity to consider thespecific design requirements for the properintegration of different uses. Where suchcircumstances exist, it may be appropriate to establish a set of development-wide designcodes or a ‘town code’ before breaking a codedown to deal with the specific requirementsof different land use combinations and mixes.

Other applications of design codes can include codes dealing solely with open space,landscape or public realm requirements ofparticular places. Design codes can also deal with design across the range of possibledensity profiles in urban, suburban and rural settings. In the United States, forexample, design codes (or ‘smart codes’) are increasingly being used as a means to establish the character of developmentalong a ‘transect’ or cross-section spanningfrom urban centres to rural outskirts. Thisexperience illustrates the diversity andflexibility of design codes as a tool and theirvalue as a means to guide development ofall types.

Design codes and mixed use developmentsThe Rotherham Town Centre River Corridor pilotproject shows that design codes can be applicable tomixed use developments in urban centres as well asto residential-led sites, where they have moregenerally been used until now.

Where do design codes fit withindevelopment and planning processes?

Delivering new development entails a seriesof linked but often disparate processes.

• Design processes – design codes canset the detailed urban design parametersof projects across the different scales ofdesign intervention, from street and blocksizes and layouts to landscape andarchitectural concerns, in order to helpachieve a co-ordinated vision for a place.

• Development processes – designcodes provide a means through whichstakeholders can explore and negotiatedetailed design options, and allow theseconcerns to feed into costing models anddevelopment options from an early stage.

• Planning processes – design codes providea ready means to consider, establish andformalise design parameters in a moreobjective manner, and then to regulateand monitor design solutions through thedevelopment control process.


22

• Adoption processes – design codes allowadoption considerations such as highways,open space and drainage, to be coordinatedat an early stage with design, developmentand planning matters, and set out specificstandards for rigorous enforcement, where necessary.

Design codes have a potential role to playin each of these processes. More importantly,they can bring these processes and thosestakeholders involved in them together,requiring an early engagement in detaileddiscussions to resolve issues that mayotherwise cause tensions.

The policy framework

It is important when choosing a designcoding approach to understand where codesfit within the wider hierarchy and frameworkof planning policy and the various forms ofdesign guidance and information which exists.

At national level Government prepares nationalpolicy and issues guidance and advice toplanning authorities within the context of primaryand secondary legislation. At this level, PPS1and accompanying practice guidance such asBy Design9 and Safer Places10 are particularlyrelevant to the preparation of design codes.

At regional level, regional planning bodiesprepare and produce regional spatial strategies(in London, the Mayor prepares a SpatialDevelopment Strategy). Regional SpatialStrategies can include policies relating to thearea, or part of an area, of more than one local

planning authority, allowing for sub-regionalstrategies, where appropriate. In many casescounty level authorities prepare designguidance for local authorities at sub-regionallevel. A good example of this is the updatedEssex Design Guide11 and the Urban PlaceSupplement12 published by Essex County Council.

At the local level, local authorities preparelocal development frameworks13 which includelocal development documents comprisingdevelopment plan documents (DPDs) and,where appropriate, supplementary planningdocuments (SPDs). These documents can applyat various different levels, from authority-widepolicy and guidance (and, in the case of jointDPDs, between two or more local planningauthorities) to area-specific policies andguidance, and to design visions and developmentbriefs for specific sites. The design of individualproposals for sites and areas, and associated

2. Factors to consider before selecting a Design Coding approach

23

Design Codes as an integrative tool

Planning

Adoption

Design CodeDevelopment Implementation

Design

Development

9 By Design – Urban Design in the Planning System,Towards Better Practice (DETR, 2000)

10 ODPM & Home Office 2006

11 Essex Design Guide (Essex County Council, 2005)12 Essex Design Guide: Urban Place Supplement (Essex

County Council, 2005). The Supplement is currentlyout for public consultation through Essex DistrictCouncils and is to be adopted in early 2007

13 Further detail is set out in Planning Policy Statement12: Local Development Frameworks (PPS12).

14 Circular 01/2006: Guidance on Changes to theDevelopment Control System (DCLG, 2006)

2

Part

A

Design and Access Statements as advised inCircular 01/200614 – together with detailedplans and drawings – form the lower part ofthe hierarchy as they relate to specificproposals for development.

Typically proposals for development onspecific sites will be subject to policy andguidance across a number (although notnecessarily all) layers of the hierarchy, withthe lower layers progressively setting out amore detailed policy and guidance frameworkwhich is set in the context of the overarchingpolicy and guidance. DPDs typically comprisea Core Strategy, Site Specific Allocations ofLand and, where needed, Area Action Plans.SPDs may cover a range of issues, boththematic and site specific, which may expandpolicy or provide further detail to policies ina DPD. SPDs may take the form of designguides, local development standards, urbandesign strategies, area appraisals, area or site-

specific development briefs and master orregulating plans. They may have area wideapplication or can be specific to individual sites.

Design codes are typically site or area-specificand build upon a vision such as a masterplanwhich is informed by the strategic policy andguidance context. Design codes can beadopted as part of a DPD or as a SPD byfollowing the formal preparation proceduresof these documents. Design codes can alsoform part of area or local authority-widepolicy and guidance.

Given their detailed and advisory nature,other forms of design guidance are moreappropriately adopted as SPDs but in somecases can form part of a DPD where moredetailed guidance is needed15.

Part B, Stage 5, of the guide advises on howdesign codes can be successfully formalised.


24

The hierarchy of design guidance and information

LDF CoreStrategy

Regional SpatialStrategies

National Policy/PPSs

SubregionalStrategies

GovernmentGuidance

Area ActionPlans

Urban DesignStrategies

AreaAppraisal

Site-specificAllocations

Designand AccessStatements

County DesignGuidance/Standards

Local DesignGuides

LocalDevelopment

Standards

DesignFramework Masterplan

DesignCodes

RegulatingPlan

DevelopmentBrief

DesignDrawings

SPD

DPD

Strategic Policy/Guidance

National Policy/Guidance

Authority-wide Policy/Guidance

Area-wide Policy/Guidance

Site-based Vision

Site-specific Guidance

Scheme Design

Key: Potential for inclusion in the localDevelopment Framework (LDF)

Development PlanDocuments (DPDs)

Supplementary PlanningDocuments (SPDs)

15 See also paragraphs 2.19 and 2.43 of Planning PolicyStatement 12: Local Development Frameworks (PPS12)

25

3. The basis for successfuldesign coding

Planning for success

Design codes have several important benefitsover other forms of guidance, includinggreater success at securing improved designquality, certainty of process, the coordinationof stakeholder objectives and enhancedeconomic value. However, to be successfulthey need to be supported by a range ofother important factors:

• Stakeholders with access to the rightdesign skills.

• Developers who are committed todelivering design quality.

• Planning and highways authorities who are committed to place-making.

• A consensus between key stakeholdersconcerning the vision for the site or areaand the strategy for its implementation.

Several pre-requisites are necessary forsuccessful implementation of design codes.These relate to three factors that are discussedin this section of the guide:

1. Getting the process of design coding right.

2. Getting the right design code preparationteam in place.

3. Understanding and acting upon a range of fundamental success factors.

Towards an ‘optimum’ design codingprocess

It is possible to identify a common set ofstages that underpin successful design codesand to set out an ‘optimum’ design codepreparation process. This forms the structureof the manual sections in Part B of this guide.In summary the key stages of the process are:

• Successful design coding is underpinned by a setof common stages which make up an ‘optimum’design coding process.

• The process of preparing a design code is closelyrelated to and positively influences the widerdevelopment process.

• Selecting the right team is an important pre-requisite for successful design coding.

• A network of stakeholders and organisations willbe involved in design coding, and it is vital tounderstand their interests, roles and motivations.

• Design codes should be underpinned by acommitment to design quality and to settingappropriate design quality thresholds based onsound urban design principles which reflect theunifying elements of ‘place’.

• Design codes require an up-front early investmentof time and resources, a firm foundation in a robust design vision for a site or area,commitment to collaborative working betweenteam members, strong leadership and a multi-disciplinary set of design skills throughout the process.

Stage 1: Initiating the design code –thinking through and defining an agreedprocess for preparing and operating thecode, and establishing leadershiparrangements.

Stage 2: Coordinating inputs into the designcoding process – bringing together theskills, financial resources, and the rolesand relationships that will create andimplement the design code.

Stage 3:Appraising the local context fordesign coding – assessing the existingpolicy and guidance framework and anyconsents already covering the site or area,its character, and any existing physicalvision such as a masterplan.

Stage 4: Designing and testing the designcode – devising, structuring, writing anddesigning the content and expression ofthe design code, and then testing itsrobustness – including its market viability,likely capacity to deliver quality and its easeof use to all users.

3

Part

A

In essence the design coding process is linearin nature, although it may be necessary toreturn to and refine the design code once ithas been prepared in the light of laternegotiations and decisions.

The recommended ‘optimum’ process hasemerged from analysis of a wide range ofdesign coding case studies, but some aspectsof the design coding process adopted locallymay differ in the light of local circumstances.It will be based on a number of key issuesthat will need to be resolved early on, for

example, whether to prepare the design codebefore or after the design vision for the site,whether to use the design code as the basisfor public consultation, whether to preparethe design code before or after any outlineplanning consent is obtained, and so forth.

The preparation and implementation of adesign code cannot however be undertakenin isolation. It will need to inform and beinformed by the development process towhich it relates. For example the appraisal inStage 3 of the design code process will needto be informed by the masterplanning andcommunity engagement stage of thedevelopment process, where applicable.Similarly, once prepared, the design code will feed into and inform later developmentstages such as, for example, parcel design or detailed approvals. It should be notedhowever that in practice every developmentprocess is different and the stages do notalways follow in a neat sequential manner.Some processes may not include every stage (for example partner selection or theselection of parcel developers), or mightinclude others. Sometimes stages will also be reversed or need to be replicated duringthe course of a development. However it isrecommended that the design coding anddevelopment processes are consideredtogether to understand how the design codecan potentially inform and be informed bythe wider processes of development.


26

An ‘optimum’ design code process

Stage 1:Initiate

Stage 2:Coordinate

Stage 3:Appraise

Stage 4:Design and

test

Stage 5:Formalise

Stage 6:Implement

Stage 7:Manage

Stage 5: Formalising the design code –giving the design code status by adoptingit for planning, highways or otherpurposes, or by formalising it throughother means such as through developmentcontrol powers or control over freehold rights.

Stage 6: Implementing the design code –using the design code to select design anddevelopment teams for individual landparcels, to inform the parcel design processitself, and for the assessment and regulationof the proposals coming forward.

Stage 7: Managing design code compliance –monitoring and enforcing design codeimplementation; evaluating the success ofthe design code to refine it; and, using thedesign code for project aftercare.

3. The basis for successful design coding

27

Design coding and its links with the development process

Design Coding Process Parceldeveloperselection

Outlineapplication

Community engagement

Master-planning

Partnerselection

Inception

Dev

elo

pm

ent

Pro

cess

Feedbackloop

Drawing from

Feeding into

Developmentparcel design

Detailedapprovals

Constructionon site

Monitoringand evaluation

Stage 1:Initiate

Stage 2:Coordinate

Stage 3:Appraise

Stage 4:Design and

test

Stage 5:Formalise

Stage 6:Implement

Stage 7:Manage

3

Part

A

The stakeholders and their roles

The preparation of a design code is acollaborative process that brings together abroad range of individuals and organisationswhich play a role in delivering development.These can be divided into two broad interestgroups: the ‘design coding team’, which typically

comprises the full range of technical stakeholders(professionals) involved in preparing andusing the design code, and ‘wider interests’,such as the local community. The keystakeholders, their roles and how they relate to the two interest groups are summarisedin the Figure below. Further details are setout in Stage 5 of Part B of this guide.


28

The potential roles of key stakeholders in a typical design coding process

Groups Interests Stakeholders Potential key roles include

Design Land Landowner Establishing aspirations from the start for a high qualityCoding interests development, using freehold rights throughout to guarantee Team delivery against the design code

Master- Initiating the design vision for the site and code design developer process through appointment of experienced designers, and

subsequently assessing parcel development proposalsagainst the design code

Funding Using land ownership and funding powers to deliver the agency requisite skills, resources and know-how for a high quality

design coding process, and effective assessment andenforcement

Design Masterplanner Preparing the masterplan or development framework as interests /design and a strong vision for the long-term development of a site(s),

development reflecting any existing policy and guidance, local consensusframework on the vision and the client’s briefdesigner

Design code Coordinating different interests as a basis to prepare the designer design code to implement the essential principles contained

in the masterplan/vision

Development Parcel Developing proposals and achieving consents to deliver on interests developers site a development parcel which is consistent with the

masterplan/vision

Registered If involved, developing proposals and achieving consents social for the delivery on site of a development parcel – or part landlords thereof – which is consistent with the masterplan/vision (RSLs)

Parcel Creatively interpreting the design code and masterplandesigners to prepare high quality designs for individual land parcels

and their constituent buildings, spaces and areas


29

The design coding team

The design coding team can be broken downinto four sets of stakeholder interests:

1. Land

2. Design

3. Development

4. Public

Understanding the overlapping roles and themain motivations of these interest groups iskey to forging a successful design codingprocess and establishing successful workingrelationships. The key roles of each of thesestakeholder interest groups is set out at thestart of each of the seven stages of the codingprocess described in Part B of this guide.

The potential roles of key stakeholders in a typical design coding process continued

Groups Interests Stakeholders Potential key roles include

Public Planning Establishing aspirations from the start for a high qualityinterests authority development, initiating or playing a role in initiating the

masterplan/vision and design code, and administering thedevelopment control and any enforcement processes on thebasis of the design code

Highways Playing a role in design code preparation, revising and authority updating existing highways standards as necessary, and

assessing and adopting the infrastructure that results

Environment Approving discharge from drainage facilities (eg. SUDS),Agency and advice on incorporation in the design code

Building Approving parcel proposals against the building regulations,control and advice on incorporation and adaptation for the

design code

Wider Private Utilities Adopting service infrastructure, and providing advice on interests interests providers incorporation of requirements in the design code

(including water)

Community Local Championing design quality locally and establishinginterests councillors design aspirations in advance of development interest,

approving masterplan/vision and design code and delegatingauthority to officers to manage the delivery

Existing Engaging in the masterplanning/vision making community process through serious and significant involvement

Future Involvement through normal planning processes andoccupiers engagement in long-term management and maintenance

processes on the basis of the design code

3

Part

A

Although the role and prime motivations of each group will vary, several collectivemotivations for preparing a design code can be identified:

• The delivery of high quality design tosupport the creation of better places – the primary objective.

• Optimising investment returns – anecessary pre-condition of development.

• Creating a certain and efficientdevelopment process – to facilitatethe necessary investment and satisfycommunity expectations.

• Delivering planned development capacitiesin a sustainable way – e.g. numbers ofhousing units and associated uses.

• Fully meeting key technical designstandards and parameters – whilst ensuringthat they don’t undermine the quality of place.

• Establishing consensus over design anddevelopment – by delivering on all of the above.

To succeed, design coding processes willneed to address these collective motivations.However, not all identified stakeholders arelikely to be involved from the outset in thedesign coding process. Although key landand public interests (eg. planning) willusually be involved in one way or anotherfrom the start of the process, others, such asparcel developers or highways authorities, are only likely to be involved later on in theprocess. It is therefore imperative that thosestakeholders who are involved from the outsetestablish a firm basis upon which to workwith other parties as they join the process ofpreparing the design code. This is best achievedif all parties involved collectively embrace the full range of motivations for preparing adesign code from the start of the process.


30

The design coding team and their involvement in the key stages of a typical designcoding process

Design Coding Team Key stages in Design Coding Process

1 2 3 4 5 6 7Initiate Coordinate Appraise Design Formalise Implement Manage

and test

Land Interests ■ ■ ● ● ■ ■ ■

Design Interests ▼ ■ ■ ■ ● ▼ ▼

Development Interests ▼ ■ ■

Public Interests ■ ■ ● ● ■ ■ ■

Core Role ■ Potential Role ▼ Support role ●


31

It is important to note that the roles of keystakeholders and the amount of input theyprovide will vary depending on the stageswhich a design code follows during its courseof preparation. Not every scheme that issubject to a design code will follow thesame process. For example, whether publicor private sector stakeholders lead the processmay determine who takes which role withinthe coding team. Certain roles can also becombined and applied to individual stakeholders.For instance, local authorities with appropriatein-house skills may wish to take on the roleof design code designer. Similarly, landownersmay act as the master-developer or, themaster-developer may subsume the role ofparcel developer. Various alternatives arediscussed in Part B.

Design roles can also be combined. Providedthe rights skills are on board, the designer ofthe design vision may also be the designer ofthe code creating efficiency and consistencyin approach.

Selecting the right team

An early and vital role will be to put togetherthe right design coding team with the rightskills, resources and commitment to engagein a design coding process. The fundamentalfactors for the successful preparation of adesign code which are set out below canbe used as a simple checklist for gaugingcommitment to a design code approach, andcan assist with the selection of potential teammembers. The effective use of design anddevelopment procurement processes to assistin choosing the right team is set out in furtherdetail in Stage 6 of Part B of this guide.

The fundamental factors for the successfulpreparation of a design code

In addition to the need for the right designcoding team, and the correct preparationprocess, seven factors can be identified whichare fundamental to the success of designcoding projects. All seven factors contributesignificantly to success, and begin and endwith a commitment to design quality. Althoughdesign coding can be undertaken even ifthese factors are not in place, without themthe process is likely to be more resource-intensive, time-consuming and confrontationalthan it need be. In short, it will lead to a lessthan optimum process and is likely to affectthe quality of the design code that results.

Checklist for selecting design codingteam members

Does the potential design coding team member have:

1. Commitment to an urban design-led approach to development?

2. A demonstrated positive approach to design quality and place-making?

3. Willingness to make the necessaryinvestment to develop the design code?

4. Commitment to delivering the design vision that already exists?

5. Acceptance of a team-based approach to delivering development?

6. Leadership capability or the willingness to work positively within the existing project management structure and leadership arrangements?

7. Ability to bring the necessary design skills to the team?

3

Part

A

1. Urban design first

The achievement of sustainable developmentand good urban design are intimately boundtogether and their delivery should be the primaryobjective of all involved in the preparationand use of design codes. Increasingly nationalpolicy and guidance on design fromGovernment16, CABE and others has advocateda compatible range of design principles. Theselook beyond narrow considerations relating toarchitectural aesthetics whilst rejecting purelytechnical design solutions. The goal ofsustainability in particular needs to inform almostevery aspect of design code production, from considerations of density and mixed-usethrough to the use of particular materials inbuilding or the choice of species in landscapedesign. It also implies a concern for socialand economic sustainability, where goodquality urban design has an important role toplay in promoting social inclusion and, whereappropriate, lasting economic regeneration.These issues are further explored in Stage 4of Part B of this guide.

Design coding for urban design

The design code for Ore Valley, Hastings, one of

the government’s Millennium Communities,

concentrates on urban design and sustainable design

principles, but does not define other architectural

design principles.


32

16 See Planning Policy Statement 1, paragraph 33.


33

2. Setting quality thresholds

Design codes need to establish the essentialunifying elements of ‘place’ and translatethese into a set of precise design instructions.Design codes can influence design quality intwo main ways. First, they provide a ‘safetynet’ below which quality must not fall. Theydo this by providing the quality thresholdsagainst which the quality of proposals can be judged. These should be comprehensiveand provide a clarity for objective assessments to be made. Second, design codes can establish a ‘springboard to excellence’ by focussingcreativity, and inspiring those who designagainst them to strive for better design than they would otherwise do. Just as theconstraints and opportunities of the site or theclients’ brief provide a focus around whichdesigners will creatively develop proposals,so should the content of the design code leadto the raising of design standards.

3. Investing up front

The preparation of design codes will involvea significant up-front commitment of time andresources by all stakeholders involved in thedesign coding process. Today, design code orno design code, such an up-front investmentis to be expected for the types of majordevelopment proposals for which designcodes are typically used. For developers andlandowners, the enhanced sales values andincreased land values that design codedschemes can deliver will more thancompensate for the additional resourcesrequired during the design process. For thepublic sector, many potential ‘sticking-points’can be satisfactorily resolved during thedesign coding process that would otherwiseneed to be tackled during the planningapplication process. Design codes simply re-distribute the time and resources requiredfrom both the public and private sectors –effectively front loading them – rather thansignificantly adding to them. This investmentin design is critical if the poor and mediocredesign solutions of the recent past are to beavoided.

Variety within a theme – releasing creativeendeavourVauban, the development of a former FrenchBarracks in Freiburg, Germany, shows that designcodes do not stifle design creativity or innovation.The local authority land owner wished to promoteboth a sustainable pattern of development and self-build, through the sales process for plots of land.

The code controls matters such as the buildingheights, the plot widths, the building line relative tothe street, along with environmental requirements,such as the use of photovoltaics. Vauban todayshows how architects have responded to the code to create an attractive place with a distinctcharacter and a wide variety of architecture.

3

Part

A

4. Rules for delivery that build upon aspatial vision

Design codes are delivery tools to help interpret,articulate and deliver the place-based visionexpressed in sustainable community strategiesand other plans, programmes and guidance.Design codes therefore need to be built upon the firm foundation of a robust designvision such as a masterplan or developmentframework that has been tested for itstechnical and financial feasibility. Usuallysuch a vision will be prepared for a particularsite, and therefore is usually referred to in thisguide as the design vision, but it can equallyapply to a wider area containing a number of development sites. Design codes arevaluable delivery tools in both cases. Designcodes can also vary considerably from thosethat significantly develop a set of core urbandesign principles of a conceptual vision foran area or site, to those that express (in atechnical sense) the core principles alreadyestablished in a detailed vision. Design codesare equally valid for a variety of othercircumstances, although the level of designand technical detail is always a matter forlocal decision.

The continuum of design codingDifferent codes may deal with similar urban designprinciples in different ways and with different levelsof detail and prescription. Some codes focus ondefining the urban design principles that developmentshould follow, for instance in Hulme. Others, as atSwindon, set out in detail the technical designrequirements and options available for achieving the masterplan vision.


34


35

5. A collaborative environment and apartnership of interests

A single design code for a site or area canproduce designs of very different characterand quality. Successful and efficient designcoding therefore requires strong commitmentand collaboration between all members of thedesign coding team (and their organisations).Critical to the success of such a partnership is a core three-way relationship between thekey public sector interests (the planning andhighways authorities), the main land interests(landowner/master-developer), and the design interests (masterplanner/design codedesigner). If a strong three-way relationshipcan be forged early on in the process, then acommitment to the design coding process canbe developed and maintained across thesestakeholders, helping to resist externalpressures later in the process.

6. The importance of clear and effectiveleadership

Clear leadership is also critical to effectivedesign coding, for maintaining momentumand making decisions. More often than notsuccessful examples of design coding arecharacterised by one party or another beingstrongly motivated to achieve quality, andacting in effect as a design champion. Thisleadership can come from landowners,master-developers, local authority officers,funding agencies or design code designers, or a combination of these.

Political leadership is also required. Involvinglocal elected members early in the designcoding process, for example, can help to gain political support and lead to a smootherplanning process. Early involvement in theprocess will also enable elected members todelegate reserved matters decisions to officerswho will need to determine proposals onthe basis of design codes which electedmembers have signed up to. The delegationof decisions to officers where a design codehas been prepared and formalised is stronglyrecommended as good practice to streamlinethe code implementation process and maximisetime savings.

The core three-way partnership of interests

LandLandowner/

master-developer

PublicPlanning and

highwaysauthorities

DesignMaster-

planner/codedesigner

Corepartnership

3

Part

A


36

Creative design and development processes compared

Spatial vision Code design Parcel design

Typical development process (e.g. volume housebuilding)

Detailed masterplanning process

Masterplan followed by designcode process

Note: Creative design input indicated by the size of the circle

7. No substitute for skills – the need for amulti disciplinary approach

Design codes require the exercise of advanceddesign skills throughout the process of theirpreparation and implementation. Unlikeother processes of development, designcoding distributes the creative input acrossthree phases of design. The quality of thedevelopment is dependent upon the qualityof the design vision for a site or area (andthe skills of the vision designer), the qualityof the design code itself (and the skills of thecode designer), and the quality of the parcelor scheme design (and the skills of the parceldesigner). This compares favourably with

other design intensive approaches such asdevelopment based on a detailed masterplanwhere the design is typically split betweentwo design phases. It also marks a majoradvance on what has in the past been thedominant approach for large-scale residentialdevelopment for example, where applicantsestablish the basic design parameters to gainoutline planning permission after which aspecialist layout designer prepares an applicationfor approval of reserved matters based onstandard units and technical developmentstandards. Used correctly, design codes alsohave the added benefit of engaging highwaysauthorities directly in the design process.


37

3

Part

A

PART B

PART B: DESIGN CODES

The process, a practice manual

Part B of this guide comprises a technical reference manual for those who areundertaking the process of design coding. It also provides an overview for the wholedesign coding team of what is expected of whom, and when.

The manual breaks the process down into the seven stages which together form an‘optimum’ design coding process as identified in Part A of the guide:

For easy reference, each stage of the design coding process is discussed followingthe same structure. Each begins by briefly introducing the Who, What and How ofthe stage:

• WHO is responsible? – which of the stakeholders from the four main interests in thedesign coding team will be active at this stage and whether they are likely to play acore role or whether the role is more peripheral.

Land – Landowner, Master-developer, Funding Agency

Design – Masterplanner, Design and Development Framework Designer, Design Code Designer

Development – Parcel Developers, Registered Social Landlords, Parcel Designers

Public – Planning Authority, Highways Authority, Environment Agency, Building Control

• WHAT does this stage entail? – a brief outline of the key objectives of the stage

• HOW is it done? – the key decisions and processes needed to successfully completethe stage.

The rest of each section then sets out these ‘How’ issues in greater detail in the form of practice guidance. This establishes how the stage can be delivered and howit contributes to delivering the design coding process as a whole. Where appropriate,practice-based examples are used to highlight key issues and decisions. Finally,watch-points are provided at the end of each Stage to assist the design coding team to create a more streamlined design coding process.

Stage 1:Initiate

Stage 2:Coordinate

Stage 3:Appraise

Stage 4:Design and

test

Stage 5:Formalise

Stage 6:Implement

Stage 7:Manage

41

Who, what and how?

Who is responsible?

Land* – Landowner, Master-developer,Funding Agency

Design† – Masterplanner/Framework Designer,Design Code Designer

Public* – Planning Authority*denotes core role †denotes potential role

Team members involved in initiating a designcoding process will in the main be those withland interests – such as the landowner, master-developer or funding agency – and/or publicinterests, usually the planning authority. Whereconsidered appropriate, consultant advisorsmay be commissioned at this early stage toadvise on the potential for design codingto be of benefit in relation to a particular site, and to assist with the establishment of a project management plan to guide the process.

What does this stage entail

The first key decision to make will be whether,for a particular project, design coding is the right way forward. This should include an assessmentabout whether, given the circumstances of theproject and stakeholder motivations, designcodes are the right tool? In particular this willinclude an assessment of the scale, timeframesand anticipated delivery arrangements for theproject. A positive decision to use designcoding will require the team to establish aleadership structure for the project, and afterthinking through the dynamics of the projectfrom initiation to implementation, to starttaking key decisions about the process to be adopted.

It will be particularly important that these earlydiscussions set the right context for trustfuland supportive relationships to developbetween the key stakeholders. It may beworth considering a formal or informalpartnership arrangement as early as possible.At the very least, discussions should help toestablish consensus early on between public andprivate parties that a design coding approach ismutually agreeable and will be supported byall parties.

How is it done?

1Stage 1: Initiating a design coding process

• Consider whether design coding is theappropriate tool for the project in question.

• Think through key design coding processoptions, including how it relates to the designvision, community engagement, planningconsents, developer selection and availableoptions for finalising a design code.

• Agree and fix the design coding process in a project plan.

• Prepare a commissioning brief.

• Set up leadership arrangements, reflectingpublic and private roles, resources andaspirations.

• Establish a design code champion.

Part

B

Stage

1

Introduction

The first critical decision in adopting a designcoding process will be for those stakeholdersdriving the project to satisfy themselves thatdesign codes are suitable for what is beingproposed. The factors that will affect thisdecision, including the types of developmentproject suitable for design coding and themotivations of the key stakeholders, were setout in Section 2 of Part A of the guide. Teammembers should satisfy themselves that theirobjectives in embarking on design coding areconsistent with the types of benefits of designcoding outlined in Section 1.

If the answer is yes, and a design code is technically the appropriate tool for the project, the next task is to consider theprocess to be adopted in order to deliver it.

Thinking through the process – aproject plan

The recommended ‘optimum’ design codingprocess introduced in Section 3 of this guideis explained in greater detail in the sectionsthat follow. This process can readily beadopted for teams new to design coding,although local circumstances may dictate avariation on the approach. Whatever processis adopted, those responsible should:

• Identify clear aims and objectives, andhow they will be achieved through design coding.

• Consider the collaborative workingenvironment that needs to be created and sustained (see Stage 2).

• Determine how the code will fit withstatutory processes – for example the preparation and review of the LocalDevelopment Framework.

• Decide on the nature of the design code:in particular this should include initialthinking on

– the key design considerations – those key elements of the design vision that will be stipulated as rules orrequirements within the design code.

– the level of prescription/flexibilitywithin the code, which components and to what extent the code will beinstructing upon precise solutions or advising upon a range ofrecommended options.

– the time frame over which the designcode will be applicable, and potentialarrangements for its review.

• Determine how the design code will beformalised and then implemented – this will affect the type, structure andexpression of the design code.

• Secure agreement amongst keystakeholders concerning the process to be adopted.

By these means it should be possible to avoidmisunderstandings caused by a lack of clarityat the start (and throughout) concerning whatthe sequence of design coding should be,how it relates to the broader developmentprocess, and who is responsible for decidingthese matters in the first place.

Getting the process rightLightmoor, on the edge of Telford, is a developmentpromoted by English Partnerships and BournvilleVillage Trust, who established and agreed with their advisors, consultants, local authority and otherstakeholders, a clear process for preparing and usingthe design codes from early on in the project.


42

Stage 1: Initiating a design coding process

43

Key decisions and the design coding process

Key decisions Issues for consideration

Before or after To be effective design codes should be developed in response to an existing designthe design vision? vision. Although codes can be prepared prior to a design vision for a site or area,

this can be problematic and should be avoided as it is difficult to design and agreethe detail until the bigger picture (the vision) is fixed. If developed in isolation,design codes are more akin to other forms of generic local design guidance, toolsthat typically have an advisory role and concentrate on generic principles for largeareas. It is however important that lessons from the design coding work inform and,where possible or appropriate, refine the design vision.

Masterplan or Design codes are typically used with a three dimensional masterplan, which other design provides a valuable combination of vision and detail17. For particularly large sites,vision? or sites being developed over extended periods of time, a more strategic and

flexible development framework may be more appropriate. These are typically two-dimensional tools, focusing on establishing the key strategic infrastructure,landscape structure, character areas and movement patterns, rather than on thedetail of the built form and public realm, as is the case in a masterplan.

Before or after Community involvement in development projects provides a vital means to raise community design quality and establish widespread local support for development (by fully engagement? reflecting local needs and aspirations). It will help establish the basis for streamlining

planning processes later. Given that design codes are technical documents, it isunlikely that they will provide the best vehicle through which to engagecommunities in the design process. Community involvement is therefore bestundertaken when the design vision is being developed, preferably involving the localcommunity and other stakeholders in the design process itself, for example though acollaborative design exercise (see Stage 3). Engagement on the written and graphiccomponents of the design code itself should be technical, involving the range ofprofessional stakeholders with an interest in the content of the design code. Ifdesign codes are formalised through the planning policy framework the adoptionprocess will provide a final means to elicit wider views (see Stage 5).

Before or after Design codes can be prepared at different stages in the planning process, although outline planning the timing will influence their content. If prepared prior to the grant of outline approval? planning permission for example, design codes are likely to be more strategic and

contain less technical detail. This will reflect the risk associated with undertakingvery detailed design work prior to planning permissions being granted. Because theyare less detailed, such design codes can, where appropriate, be supplemented bymore detailed “mini codes” or other development briefs on a parcel by parcel basisor to deal specifically with particular topics such as detailed public realm design.If this is the case it is recommended that outline permission includes a planningcondition requiring the submission of additional design codes at the reservedmatters stage, and should clearly identify what additional information is required.If a code is produced after the grant of outline permission (which is likely to be themore conventional route) matters of technical detail should be included in thedesign code. The latter route may be a more streamlined process, and reduces therisk of abortive work as the key principles of development would have already been established.

17 See Creating Successful Masterplans, A Guide forClients (CABE, 2004)

Part

B

Stage

1


44


44

Key decisions and the design coding process continued

Key decisions Issues for consideration

Before or after Not all large developments involve the selection of parcel developers. For those parcel developer that do, the decision whether to prepare a design code before or after the selection? selection of the parcel developer will determine the stakeholders who need to

be involved in the design coding process. Typically however large sites are brokendown into manageable parcels of land on which developers tender for the right todevelop. Selling the land too soon and then deciding to prepare a code can lead to conflict, as parcel developers may attempt to influence the content of the code in a manner that fits in with their own development preferences, rather than in adirection that is optimum for the site as a whole. Conversely, having a design code inplace prior to developer selection and land disposal can greatly aid the delivery of ahigh quality development. In these circumstances the design code can be included inthe land disposal and design procurement process (see Stage 6).

To adopt as Formal adoption of a code as part of the local planning and/or highways policy planning/highways framework gives the code status which increases certainty in relation to future documents, or not? planning applications and highways approvals, reduces the likelihood of non-

compliant schemes being successful if challenged on appeal, and has the benefit oftying a greater range of stakeholders – public and private, including local councillors– into the content of the design codes. It is therefore generally recommended thatdesign codes are formally adopted. However, the decision also depends on how thedesign codes are to be used and what other means are being used to give themstatus. Therefore, in some circumstances, the decision may be not to formally adopta code, for example if it is primarily to be implemented through a developmentagreement (see Stage 5).


45

Masterplans, design frameworks and regulating plansCodes, or other detailed design guidance, shouldbe based on a spatial vision, whether this is adevelopment framework as at Aldershot, or a threedimensional masterplan, as at Cambourne. A codemay include one or more regulating plans, whichlocate or define certain of the coded requirements,as at Fairfield Park.

Once the process to be followed in preparingthe code has been agreed, alongside the keyaims and objectives of the design codingprocess, these should be fixed within aproject plan against key dates for each stageand intermediate milestones. In this wayprogress in producing the design code can be monitored, and the contributions ofstakeholders can be held to account.

The commissioning brief

An early priority will be to produce acommissioning brief to appoint a codedesigner where no appropriate skills exist inhouse. For those writing the commissioningbrief, the advice contained within CABE’sCreating Successful Masterplans: A Guide forClients, on commissioning a masterplanningteam may prove valuable.

Where a design vision already exists, itscontent and status should be summarised aspart of the commissioning brief for designcoding, and copies of relevant documentssetting out the detail of the vision shouldaccompany the brief. If, on the other hand, adesign coding team is to be commissioned atthe same time as the team undertaking themasterplan or development framework, it maynot be possible to define the commissioningbrief for design coding in detail. Where this isthe case, consultants should not be asked toprovide a full fee proposal for design coding.However, an indication of the approach,scope of work and fee budget for designcoding should be requested, to ensure thatthe division of work between the vision anddesign coding is reasonable.

Without a design vision in place, thecommissioning brief for the design codeshould include assumptions about those keyaspects of the design coding process that arenot yet fully defined for consultants to commentupon and to allow them to provide anindicative fee budget. These initial assumptions about design coding should then be keptunder review and the commissioning briefrefined and then finalised to form the basisfor a separate fee agreement.

Part

B

Stage

1

Establishing leadership arrangementsfor the project

A key decision that will need to be made earlyon is who, or which organisation(s), will leadthe process. The team member(s) taking onthis role will need to provide clear strategicdirection and focused decision-making, butmust be sensitive to the partnership of interestsin order to deliver a successful design codingprocess. One key decision is whether thisrole is undertaken by a public or privatesector partner, and by an individual orconsortium.

Public or private sector-led?

Both public and private sector-led approacheshave been used successfully to deliver designcodes. Roles will depend on a range offactors: whether the site is in private or publicownership, how early it is in the developmentprocess (i.e. whether developers are involvedyet or not), the skills capacity of the localauthority and other stakeholders, andresource availability.

Benefits of a public sector-led approach (mostlikely the local planning authority) can include:

• A closer relationship between designcoding and regulatory processes.

• The building of long-term capacity andskills within the public sector.

• Potential for a streamlined adoption.

• Greater political buy-in and confidence to delegate detailed decision-making.

• Local knowledge.

• Possibility of extending the design code’sapplication beyond the confines of aparticular site to a wider area.

Potential drawbacks include lack of skills,capacity and know-how and, sometimes, alack of market awareness.

Benefits of a private sector-led approachmight include:

• Increased resources to generate the desiredskills capacity.

• Greater market awareness.

• Delivery know-how.

• Project management/design coordinationskills.

Drawbacks might include a tendency to focuson generic development approaches ratherthan on the distinct qualities of particular sites and development opportunities, and adisconnection from local political, communityand policy issues.


46

Commissioning the design code

The commissioning brief for a design code shouldinclude the following information:

1. The aspiration to prepare a design code andobjectives for the code

2. Relevant background and contextualinformation(see Stage 3)

3. Details of the management and organisational arrangements envisaged for design coding, and the role of and scope of work for members of the design team(see Stage 2)

4. Identification of the skills that the design team will be required tobring to the design coding process

5. Experience of collaborative working andpreparing design codes that the team will be expected to have

6. Budget and programme for design codepreparation, including key milestones

7. Output and presentational requirements for the design code

8. Criteria for selection

9. Programme for selection

10. Output and presentational requirements for the design code

It should be possible to specify the items listedabove, although some clients may wish to requestan initial stage of work to refine and agree in detailthe brief for the design codes themselves.


47

The leadership alternatives: public or private?The Urban Design Strategy for Fairfield Park, nearLetchworth, which included both masterplan anddesign code, was led by officers of the local planningauthority who appointed a consultant and worked in

partnership with the landowner/developer. Incontrast, the design code for Ashford Barracks wasled by the consortium of housebuilders who weredeveloping the site, again appointing a consultant to prepare the code.

Single organisation or consortium?

A single organisation or individual will bring a clear and focussed source for decision-making, communication and action, and amomentum generated by the presence of adedicated ambassador for the design code. A danger however is that other stakeholdersmay feel marginalised and therefore lackcommitment to the project.

By contrast, a consortium places leadershipand responsibility in the hands of a numberof key stakeholders working together as asteering group. This approach provides avaluable discussion and decision-makingforum, and can help to deliver consensus andcoordination across project partners. On thedownside, decision-making can be slower

and lines of responsibility between meetingsless clear-cut. The approach may also lack the momentum provided by a dedicatedindividual or organisation, and could lead to ‘design by committee’ if driven by the needto compromise, rather than by a desire todeliver a single strong vision.

Each approach brings potential benefits anddrawbacks. The ideal will be to achieve thepositives from each without the negatives.One answer may be a joint public/privateconsortia-led approach, with a clearlyidentified project manager empowered tomake key decisions between meetings.

Part

B

Stage

1

The leadership alternatives: individual orconsortium?In some cases an individual acts as code designchampion. At Fairford Leys, this role was taken by themasterplanner and code designer, on behalf of thelandowning trust (for whom the pursuit of qualitywas a priority).

In others, decisions are made by a group ofrepresentatives drawn from different interests orstakeholders – the consortium approach – as atUpton where English Partnerships established aSteering Group that brought together all the keystakeholders.

Appointing a champion

To oversee the design coding process, aproject steering group with a project managerwill need to be established (see Stage 2). To be effective it will be that the projectmanager has appropriate design skills, or a strong sensibility to the importance ofdesign. This person can effectively act as thechampion for the design code, driving theproject forward, and enlisting the support ofkey individuals and organisations at everystage of the process. Experience shows thatsuccessful design code champions haveincluded representatives from the planningauthority, landowner, the masterplanner, oreven professional project managers.


48

Watch points to achieve astreamlined process

• Do not use a design code unless the projectjustifies it.

• Start as you mean to go on, buildingconstructive relationships between parties.

• Keep the design coding process simple.

• Write it down and agree it.

• Establish a timeline and key milestones earlyon and fix them in the project plan.

• Consider the leadership options and establishclear lines of authority.

• Consider using a professional projectmanager or design coordinator to act aschampion for the design code.

• Fill knowledge-gaps with specialist advice asearly as possible.

49

Who, what and how?

Who is responsible?

Land* – Landowner, Master-developer,Funding Agency

Design* – Masterplanner/Framework Designer,Design Code Designer

Public* – Planning Authority, Highways Authority*denotes core role

The responsibility for coordinating inputslargely falls on those stakeholders which wereincluded in the core three-way partnership of interests, namely land, public and designinterests (see Section 3 of Part A of the guide)who should prepare the design code together.Stakeholders that are prepared to investresources in the process of preparing a designcode will have the greatest say in how theprocess will be managed and by whom.

What does this stage entail?

Following the decision to prepare a designcode, the next stage involves marshalling andcoordinating a wide range of inputs to theprocess of preparing the design code. Key tothis will be establishing the correct roles andrelationships between stakeholders, andorganising the necessary skills and resourcesto deliver the design code. A managementstructure will also be required, building onbasic decisions already made about how theproject will be led.

Because skills are rarely wholly vested in one stakeholder group or organisation, andbecause the power and means to implementdesign codes are spread across interests, itwill be a mistake to adopt a process that fails

adequately to involve all key stakeholders. Toa large degree, time spent getting the approachto design coding right at this stage will berewarded in time saved later in the process.

How is it done?

Stage 2: Coordinating inputsinto the designcoding process

2

• Establish a robust management structure,including a Design Code Working Group to focuson the day to day management of the process.

• Embed organisational arrangements within theproject plan, including allocating key roles andworking arrangements, and setting timelines and milestones.

• Reflect all key public and private interests at alllevels in the management structure.

• Use a development team approach to coordinatepublic sector inputs.

• Develop a clear strategy for managing resources,be realistic, and plan to front load staff time.

• Consider using private sector resources to plugpublic sector time and skills gaps.

• Establish a team with the required multi-disciplinary skills, covering all key generic,disciplinary and specialist design coding skillswithin the design coding team.

Part

B

Stage

2


50

Introduction

Underpinning this stage of the design codingprocess are the related issues of relationshipsand resources. Getting these right will to alarge degree determine the success, orotherwise, of the design coding process.

The question of relationships reinforces one of the fundamental themes discussed inSection 3, namely the need to build a strongcommitment to partnership working as a meansto encourage the full range of stakeholders tobuy in to the design codes.

Establishing a robust managementstructure

Different layers of management will berequired for development projects adopting a design coding process. As is common withlarge-scale development projects, a ProjectSteering Group will be concerned with keystrategic decision-making for the developmentproject as a whole. As part of this role thisgroup will be responsible for checking thatproper account is taken during the designcoding process of the outputs from otherstages of the development process, includingfrom the stages of masterplanning, communityengagement and land disposal. The designcode champion should sit on the ProjectSteering Group as the overall co-ordinator ofthe design coding project. The Project SteeringGroup should include key representativesfrom the land, design and public authorityinterest groups.

It is recommended that a Design CodeWorking Group (DCWG) also be establishedto focus on the day-to-day production andimplementation of the design code. TheDCWG should consist of a focused team oftechnical experts able to give advice to theProject Steering Group. It is important that theworking group includes a representative fromthe local planning authority’s DevelopmentControl Division who can input into the codepreparation process and who may be chargedwith administering the design code when it is formalised. Consideration should also be given at the outset about how the groupwill manage later parcel procurementarrangements and to what extent they mightplay a role in the administration of detaileddesign (see Stage 6).

Where possible, the DCWG should includerepresentatives from key public/private sectorinterests and as a minimum should seek theviews of such interests at key stages in thecode preparation process. Such arrangementswill allow for clear, efficient decision-making,and should aim to facilitate the process ratherthan complicating it.

Stage 2: Coordinating inputs into the design coding process

51

Clarifying relationships, managing the design code process

Legal advice

Housing

Highways

Urban Design

Planning:Policy and DC

Local authority

development team

Consortia

Master-planner/ framework

designer

Land interests

Design interests (roles may be public or private,

combined or separate)

Public interests

Man

agem

ent

stru

ctu

re

Development interests

Code designer

Design Code

Working Group

Parcel designer

Parcel developer

Planning Commitee

Developmnet Project

Steering Group

Design Code Champion

Part

B

Stage

2


52

Committed to partnership workingThe redevelopment of the Hulme estate in Manchesterinvolved rehousing a significant number of residents.The commitment to partnership working, with boththe RSLs (who were to develop the new affordablehousing) and with the existing community that wasto be rehoused, contributed significantly to thesuccess of the code.

Taking a Development Team approach

Local authorities should adopt a developmentteam approach which encourages streamlineddecision-making and supports collaborativeworking within and between the various publicsector organisations and services involved inthe design coding process. Such an approachenables key public sector representatives tocome together in order to overcome ‘sectoral’approaches to development projects. Theseregular meetings of suitably senior publicsector decision-makers will enable a commonline to be agreed as a feed into the DCWG,resulting in more efficient and effectivecommunication between the public andprivate sector stakeholders involved in thepreparation of the design code.

For design coding, a Development Teamapproach suggests including representativesfrom the local authority’s planning department(from both policy and development control,the latter to advise at the earliest opportunityon implementation and enforcement concerns), conservation and urban design (if separate),highways, landscape, parks and recreation,and, if appropriate, from the housing authorityincluding the local authority’s estate managementteam. The inclusion of the local authority’s legalteam as an occasional member in thesearrangements may help to streamline processeswhen, for example, planning conditions oroccasionally Section 106 planning agreementsare being negotiated (see Stages 5 and 7). Whenlarge sites involve more than one local authorityit is advisable that representatives from eachauthority are included in the Development Team.

A clear strategy for managingresources

All design coding projects require the front-loading of resources with the aim ofstreamlining inputs later in the process. It will be vital therefore to marshal resourcesfrom the outset to ensure that this up-frontinvestment happens, and the project planshould reflect both this and how resourcescan be redirected to streamline the process.Although a design coding process may varyaccording to local circumstances, it isimportant not to underestimate how muchtime will be necessary. It is important to berealistic at the project planning stage aboutthe resources that design coding will entail,bearing in mind that all major projects, designcoded or not, will require a similar investment.The key question is where do the resourcescome from?

The public sector contribution

Where local authorities are actively engagingin the delivery of positive planning services, a key requirement will be the re-distributionof resources. This will mean moving resourcesfrom reactive development control work to a proactive engagement in pre-applicationnegotiation and the preparation of policy andguidance. Design codes fit well into this newmode of working as the up-front investment


53

will be re-paid by a reduction in time spentagreeing and processing planning applicationsfurther down the line.

For this is to happen, dedicated officer timewill need to be found so that these activitiesare not merely added to the range ofresponsibilities already carried by local authorityofficers. Substantial enthusiasm exists for thisto happen in most local planning departments.A similar switch in emphasis and resourceswill also be necessary in highways authorities,where, instead of simply applying predeterminedstandards, engineers will have to find time toconsider the innovations and departures fromthose standards that design coded schemes arelikely to present. Such an open-minded andconstructive approach will come if the processis adequately resourced. This represents a keychallenge for local authority executives.

An up-front investmentPreparing the code for Newcastle Walker Riversidewithin the local authority has involved new ways ofpartnership working between planning and highwaysofficers, which has brought benefits for thoseinvolved, despite a lack of resources overall.

The private sector contribution

Despite best endeavours, there will always becases where the resources cannot be foundfor a positive engagement in design coding bythe public sector. In such cases, and wheretrust and commitment exists, landowners/master-developers can help to plug the gapby funding dedicated staff within localauthorities or an external consultant. AuditCommission research explicitly recommendsthis form of cooperation18.

Whether funding gaps within local authorities,or directly financing the preparation and useof design codes themselves, private interestswill provide the second key source of funding.These interests will only be prepared to makethe necessary investment up-front if theyare confident that such work will deliver the permissions that they seek. In suchcircumstances the continued involvement of the public sector directly in the codepreparation process will be one means toincrease certainty that planning permissionswill be forthcoming. However, the fact thatcompliant schemes are likely to receivepermissions without delay whilst non-compliant schemes will be held up anddelayed, should itself provide a ready incentivefor the private sector to invest in design coding.

18 The Planning System, Matching Expectations andCapacity (Audit Commission, 2006)

Part

B

Stage

2


54

Occasionally funding may come in whole orin part from a further land-based interest, from a public sector funding agency. EnglishPartnerships, for example, are committed to fund design coding in all their residentialprojects over four hundred units. Suchinvolvement will tend to be limited to more challenging or strategically importantdevelopments, and will always be made on the basis of coordinating local interests and resources.

Establishing a team with the requiredrange of multi-disciplinary skills

A clear priority will be for design codingteams to ensure they have at their disposalthe right balance, quantity and quality ofskilled personnel. Not all design codingprocesses will require the same profile ofknowledge and skills.

In general an optimum process requiresknowledge and skills across three key groups:

1. In the landowner/master-developerconsortium, to raise aspirations and inspirequality-led procurement.

2. In the local authority, to establish the localaspiration for quality and to enable andenforce its delivery.

3. In the design teams, to deliver a creativeand contextually appropriate design codeand related material.

When considering the make up of a designcoding team it may be appropriate to map therange of knowledge and skills available withinthe team, based on team members’ previousexperience of design coding or alliedtechniques. By this means, gaps in the teamcan be filled as the full team is put together.

The essential design coding skills and knowledge checklist

Generic skills Disciplinary skills Specialist knowledgeand knowledge

leadership urban design masterplanning

creative vision architectural design sustainability

consensus building highways local markets

collaborative working landscape design place-making

negotiation and diplomacy planning construction

visualisation development consultation approaches

communication marketing ecology and energy efficiency

foresight for long-term projects cost management community engagement

presentation project management enforcement

legal building economics


55

Addressing skills gaps

An ideal situation would be for a codepromoter to have urban design skills on allsides of the development process. For a localauthority, the benefits of possessing in-housedesign capacity include:

• A more proactive and central role in thedevelopment and design code productionprocesses.

• Potential for closer working relationshipsbetween planning officers and highwayengineers.

• Greater awareness of design.

• Greater commitment to the resultingdesign code.

However, for smaller authorities the task ofproducing a design code in-house may not be viable or worthwhile.

Those local authorities without the necessaryurban design skills should look to engageexternal consultants to fill design skills gapseither by buying in or seconding a dedicatedresource, or, commissioning a team ofconsultants. It may be that the landowner/master-developer can either assist with fundingfor this arrangement, or alternatively request thattheir urban design team work closely with theplanning team. Inevitably such arrangementsraise the issue of whether communityinterests are appropriately safeguarded, but ifcarefully managed by local authority officers,such arrangements can usefully addressimmediate skills deficits. Consultants can:

• Produce the design code.

• Provide pre-application advice.

• Advise on reserved matters applications by parcel developers.

• Negotiate with other statutory authorities(e.g. highways).

• Act as a design code champion.

• Monitor implementation and compliance(see Stages 3 and 7).

Filling the skills gap

Local authorities have filled the skills gap in a

variety of ways. These include appointing consultants

to prepare a code (sometimes together with a

masterplan) with public or private sector funding.

At Rotherham, the RDA, Yorkshire Forward, funded

the appointment of consultants, whereas at Fairfield

Park in Letchworth, funding was secured through a

developer contribution.

Part

B

Stage

2


56

Knowledge managment

The collective knowledge built up by thedesign coding team over the course of theproject will be invaluable. Any change inpersonnel during the lifetime of the designand implementation of the design codewill require this knowledge to be transferred,and new players, whether individuals ororganisational stakeholders, must be thoroughlyappraised of the design coding process todate to ensure a continuity of interpretationand commitment. It may be that designcoding teams will wish to establish formalprocedures to ensure that this happens.Documents such as the Project Plan shouldbe updated as the project progresses. Theplan could detail the way in which collectiveknowledge and project information is to becaptured and retained across the life of theproject and beyond.


• A strong partnership approach is the key to astreamlined design coding process.

• Take time to establish a robust managementstructure for the delivery of design codes.

• A development team approach amongst localauthority partners ensures an inclusiveapproach and efficient use of seniorrepresentation.

• Consider involving legal and housing officersin the development team.

• Establish clear lines of communication anddecision-making.

• Be realistic from the start about the resourceimplications of design coding.

• Establish dedicated time for officers toengage in the design code productionprocess.

• Map skills and knowledge within the designcoding team to ensure all the key areas are covered.

• Ensure a thorough handover to new teammembers to ensure continuity ofinterpretation and commitment.

• Keep a minuted record of decisions taken andkeep a file of key issues emerging as theprocess develops.

57

Who, what and how?

Who is responsible?

Land* – Landowner, Master-developer, Funding Agency

Design* – Design Code Designer

Public† – Planning Authority, Highways Authority,Environment Agency

*denotes core role †denotes support role

The responsibility for preparing suitablecontextual information is wide ranging, althoughthe responsibility for pulling it together andusing it to inform the preparation of thedesign code falls largely to the code designer.Nevertheless, land and public interestswill provide a supportive role, not least inappraising the code designer about decisionsmade up to this point, and in making availablebackground source materials. Sometimes thisinformation will pre-date the production ofthe design code, for example existing policyand guidance, but that should not undermineits value in setting the scene for designcoding. Other contextual documents such asthe masterplan or design and developmentframework, should, where possible, beupdated to fully reflect market conditions and local aspirations.


Inception of work on the actual design codewill start by appraising the local contextualfactors that should guide its preparation, andform the evidence for the code rationale. This will begin with an understanding of theexisting physical factors relating to the site or area, to any existing local policy, and toany community engagement that has beenundertaken regarding future developmentopportunities. It will include any currentguidance that will need to be reflected withinthe design code, and, most importantly,

should take account of the developing (ordeveloped) design vision for the site such as a masterplan or other vision document.

Where contextual information is out of dateor incomplete, time should be allowed to up-date the work (e.g. by taking account ofany changes to the national policy context),or to seek specialist advice in order to fill any gaps. Without an adequate contextualunderstanding and basis for design coding,the resultant design code will not be asrobust as it could and should be and theprocess may be delayed later.

How is it done?

Stage 3: Appraising the local contextfor design coding

3

• Ensure adequate contextual analysis andavailability of information on local character and physical factors across different scales:settlement pattern, urban form, urban space,block structure, built form, public realm,landscape and green space. Commission newdetailed local character analysis to fill any gapswhere necessary.

• Develop understanding of how contextualinformation will inform the various elements of the code.

• Have regard to existing national, regional andlocal policy and guidance.

• Have regard to community engagement and thelocal sustainable community strategy.

• Recognise the design and development frameworkor masterplan as the critical contextual factor forinforming the preparation of the design code.

• Identify and resolve conflicts early, for examplewith existing highways standards.

• Consider how the code may impact for exampleon utilities provision, flood risk management,transport linkages and infrastructure requirements.

Part

B

Stage

3


58

Introduction

Design code processes should be designedspecifically to accommodate the particularitiesof local policy/guidance, the site and thestakeholder context in which they are to beused. They also need to build on and reflectthe background assessments, and anyprinciples enshrined in a design anddevelopment framework or masterplan.

Relating to policy framework andrelated guidance

Design codes will need to take account of thepolicy context and any relevant guidance andadvice which exists for the site or area. Part Aof the guide sets out the hierarchy of designguidance within which design codes areprepared. It is critical that full regard andreference is made to these sources when thedesign code is being prepared. This will beimportant for a number of reasons:

• Existing policies and guidance, authority-wide to site-specific, should provide animportant statement about which designprinciples are important locally, and whichconsequently have local political andcommunity backing. As such they providethe starting point for detailed design.

• Reference to government policy and/or toother relevant policy and guidance, as wellas to relevant analytical or consultativework can help to legitimise particulardesign requirements, and thereby clarifythe basis for their inclusion in a designcode, and help justify when alternativesare acceptable.

• Early and proper regard to existinginformation can help to identify conflictsbetween design coding aspirations andexisting policy/guidance approaches (e.g.between planning and highways guidance),as a means to seek solutions as early inthe design coding process as possible.

Because the hierarchy of policy and guidancevaries from place to place, it is important tobe clear about the role and status of differentforms of policy and guidance, and where designcodes fit within the local hierarchy. It shouldbe clear within the design codes when thecode takes precedence, and in whatcircumstances other policies and guidance apply.

Highways policy and standards are decisiveinfluences on design code preparation, anddesign codes provide a key opportunity toimprove highways design that takes accountof urban design considerations and helpscreate quality places. The preparation of adesign code can provide a ready opportunityto work closely with highways authoritiesto review any outdated local highwaysstandards. Further guidance on the use ofdesign codes in the context of highways willbe set out in the Manual for Streets19.

The local context for design coding

Stakeholdercontext

Policyframework and

guidance

Site andarea

context

Designvision

Local contextfor design coding

19 Manual for Streets (DfT and DCLG, forthcoming)

Stage 3: Appraising the local context for design coding

59

Design codes, challenging the highways rulebookAt Upton the existing highway standards were out of date and have been superseded by the code.Highway officers now regularly apply the genericprinciples agreed for Upton to other sites.

The site and stakeholder context

The stakeholder context will vary fromdevelopment to development, and will affect decisions on leadership, management,and skills.

Prior to the preparation of the design code,analysis of the site and its immediate area will be vital. This will be supplementary local knowledge collated through communityengagement. Together they will provideinvaluable contextual information that will be an important feed into the design codepreparation process. The local sustainablecommunity strategy will be a key part of this.It is most likely that this information will be gathered during the process of preparingthe design vision, but should also be madeavailable to the code design team. The UrbanDesign Compendium20 for example, providesguidance on character and environmentalappraisal, whilst the Enquiry by Design21

process offers one option for a participatorydesign process to engage local communities.Others are discussed in By Design andelsewhere22. Questions of communityengagement with regard to formal adoptionprocesses are addressed in Stage 5. Part

B

Stage

3


60

Enquiry by designAn Enquiry by Design event was held for a large area of surplus MoD land in Aldershot. This 5 dayinteractive workshop, facilitated by the Prince’sFoundation, raised aspirations and generated aninitial vision for the development. Although thisvision proved to be overly simplistic, the processsuccessfully created an enthusiasm for co-operativeworking amongst those who took part. It formed thestarting point for further masterplanning and coding.

Information from area and site-based characterassessments will be particularly important in understanding how design codes shouldrelate to existing local character. In suchcases, if earlier character analysis is notsufficiently detailed or robust, it may benecessary to undertake new work. This willhelp to justify and underpin design codingthat, for example, seeks to define built form,materials, colour palette, or the choice ofspecies in planting.

20 The Urban Design Compendium (English Partnerships& The Housing Corporation, 2000). See also Section2 of this guide.

21 Sustainable Urban Extensions: Planned ThroughDesign (English Partnerships, 2000)

22 See for example By Design, Urban Design in thePlanning System, Towards Better Practice (DETR and CABE, 2000) and relevant sections in this guide;see also Community Consultation Handbook (NickWates, 2000)

From settlement pattern to urbanform – Importance of characteranalysis for Design Codes

How a place will feel and look is determined byits underlying structure and form. An analysis ofmorphology and character at different scales –including landscape, settlement pattern, urbanstructure, urban spaces and built form – will helpprovide a clear understanding of a place. A strongcomprehension of the components of the widercontext within which the design code is to beprepared – including districts, streets, plots, builtform and materials – allows for development of arobust rationale and design approach for theprovisions expressed in the design code. Crucially,by clearly understanding the relationshipsbetween the different scales and components, thecode writer will be clear about where in the codean emphasis on variety should be introduced.This need not tie the code down to a traditionalpattern or vernacular, but instead can allow a better understanding of how to introducevariation and, where appropriate, a morecontemporary pattern or built form.


61

Underpinning design coding with analysisAt Newhall, Harlow, local distinctiveness wasaddressed through an analysis of the colours andminerals found in the locality. Based on this analysis,a series of colour palettes were defined as part of thedesign code for the new development.

The importance of the design vision

Reflecting the fundamental principle thatdesign codes are tools for delivering thedesign vision (see Section 3 in Part A), thevision itself becomes a critical contextualfactor informing the preparation of the code.It is therefore essential that the design codeand vision work together. Whilst codesinvariably contain detailed rules for deliveringthe vision, they should also develop thevision further by, for example, establishingprinciples concerning the form and characterof various types of buildings, streets, blocksand open spaces.

The close relationship between masterplanand design code means that provided the teamused to prepare the vision have the requisiteskills for writing codes, there may be benefitin retaining the same team to ensure acoherent relationship between the two andavoid duplicated work. As a minimum, codedesigners need to work within the principlesset out in the design vision as the basis fortheir design coding work.

Design coding, interpreting the visionThe code for Greenwich Millennium Village wasprepared when a different architect was appointedby the developer consortium to design the secondphase of the development. The code was intended tomake sure that the principles of the masterplanvision would continue to be implemented in thefuture development.

Part

B

Stage

3


62

The balance struck between what is in thevision document such as the masterplan or a design and development framework and what the design code contains will be a matter for local decision. Design codes area flexible tool in this regard. Mapping thepotential location of different design elementsin, for example, a masterplan and its related design code, shows that each has a contribution to make across four scales of action – settlement pattern, urban form,urban space and built form. Design codesincreasingly dominate towards the moredetailed end of this continuum, and withregard to technical considerations.

Design objectives and their treatment indesign codes, particularly as they relate tosustainability, are discussed in the followingsection.


• Before coding, ensure that adequatecontextual information exists, including athorough morphological analysis, and have a sound understanding of key developmentconstraints.

• Always base design coding on either a preprepared, tested and fully agreed designvision, or a design and developmentframework.

• Don’t reinvent the wheel, use existing urbandesign appraisal and community engagementmethodologies.

• Avoid abortive work by having full regard to the existing policy and guidance framework.

• Avoid over-complicating matters withoverlapping and inconsistent policy andguidance.

• Consider using the same design team toprepare the design vision and code providedthe right skills exist.


63

Masterplan and design codes compared: Possible design elements

Scales of action Masterplan Design code

Settlement pattern Major infrastructure Major roads, bridges, public transport network, design principles for wasterecycling facilities or, for example, combined heat and power systems

Structure planting Continuity, species, relation to topography

Water management Drainage, recycling, reed beds, water features

Road and cycle network Road types, hierarchies, dimensions, capacities and characters, cycle networkcontinuity

Open space network Standards, open space typology and features, connectivity

Character areas Centres and sub-centres, neighbourhoods, walkable catchments, parcel sizeand sub-divisions

Urban form Connections Edge treatments, boundaries

Street network Urban grain, grid types, connectivity

Block pattern Block form, privacy distances

Building lines Frontage continuity, set backs

Plot form Plot size, width, adaptability

Building location Orientation, position on plot, overlooking and overshadowing, natural surveillance

Density contours Dwellings per hectare, plot ratios, intensification nodes

Views and vistas Relation to topography, corridors, backgrounds

Urban space Open space Standards, types, forms, layout, access, landscape, planting, management

Public space Patterns, types, enclosure ratios, forms, layout, connection, uses, management

Carriageways Junctions, road specifications, traffic calming, services routing, servicing

Cycle and footpaths Footpath specifications and cycle path specifications, paving, kerbs, gutters,road markings, other details

Public /private space Principles for courtyards, mews, cul-de-sacs, covered streets, arcades, colonnades

Private gardens Standards, back gardens, front gardens, roof gardens, landscaping

Play spaces Standards, types, equipment, management

Parking Standards, car parks, parking courts, on-street types and treatments,overlooking, lighting, landscaping

Built Form Building forms Bulk, massing, heights, storey heights, building envelopes, adaptability

Building types For residential development detached, semi-detached, terraced / town house,flats, fronts and backs

Building frontage Active frontage, entrance frequency, architectural styles, features, proportions,rhythms, expression, window / wall ratios, materials, colours, balconies,porches, signage, shopfront design

Mix of uses Distribution, proportions, mixing – vertical and horizontal

Townscape features Eave lines, rooflines, chimneys, corner treatments, landmark / backgroundtreatments, focal points, advertising

Heritage assets Integration, preservation, management

Street trees Species, numbers, placements

Soft landscape Standards, planting species, biodiversity, lawns and verges, planting beds andareas, planters

Public realm Street furniture, bollards, boundary treatments / materials, public art, fountains,paving materials, colours, utilities equipment, street lighting, amenity lighting,bus shelters, CCTV, public toilets, cycle storage and parking

Technical Environmental standards and energy efficiencyconsiderations Access standards and disabled parking

Refuse storage and recycling

Tenure mixing (eg. affordable housing)

Management and maintenance issuesNote: It will not always be necessary to include all these elements in a particular masterplan or design code. It should also be noted that a design and developmentframework will have less detail than a masterplan

Part

B

Stage

3

Who, what and how?

Who is responsible?

Land‡ – Landowner, Master-developer, Funding Agency

Design* – Design Code Designer

Development† – Parcel Developer, Property Agents

Public‡ – Planning Authority, Highways Authority,Environment Agency, Building Control

*denotes core role †denotes potential role

‡denotes support role

Responsibility for writing the code will fall tothe code designer, who will need to pursue the design through a collaborative approach thatengages key team members, including theland and public interests who will sign-off the final design code. At this point it is vital the design team acquire and takeadvantage of commercial expertise relating to the local market, for example by obtainingmarket intelligence information fromlocal property agents about what is likely tobe economically feasible. For these reasons, it may be valuable to involve potential parceldevelopers at this stage.


An understanding of the overall design visionand context for design coding, together withany assumptions and objectives, will be animportant pre-requisite for embarking on thedesign of a code. This stage of the codepreparation process involves the design of the actual content of the design code (inother words, the design aspirations beingcoded for), how it is structured, expressedand illustrated to make the code fit forpurpose for its users. Importantly this stagewill also entail the thorough design andmarket testing of the code.

Although the code design phase can be timeconsuming, when undertaken by a skilleddesign team and based on a clear designvision and partnership approach, it need notbe. Draft design codes can be designed andagreed in as little as two to three months. If,however, the conditions are not correct, theprocess can take far longer.

How is it done?

Stage 4: Designing and testingthe design code

• Establish the core design objectives to underpinthe design code’s content.

• Decide on the scales and the elements the codeneeds to cover for any specific situation.

• Decide which elements of the code will bemandatory or discretionary, but seek to balanceprescription with flexibility across the design codeand for each element within it.

• Base any detailed provisions of the code onan in-depth understanding of local character and context.

• Consider the limitations imposed by the differentregulatory regimes that impact on design, as well as the skills and resources available forimplementation, and express the design code accordingly.

• Structure, express and present the code so thatit maximises understanding, accessibility and the use of illustrations.

• Test the design code to assess its viability and(where necessary) refine its content.

4

65

Part

B

Stage

4

Introduction

Just as the design vision will vary betweenplaces, so should the content of design codes.This is both desirable and appropriate as no two contexts will be the same, and that the site and local socio-economicenvironment, as well as the aspirations ofthose involved, are likely to differ from place to place. Although each design code, just likeeach design vision, needs to be preparedindividually, if prepared and implementedproperly, the process offers the opportunity forhigher quality more sustainable places to emerge.

The content of design codes

Guidance on good urban design can befound in a range of practice guides, some ofwhich have already been referred to in thisguide23. It is however possible to identify fivecommon design objectives that design codesare particularly suited to help deliver, andwhich should be reflected in the content ofall design codes: place creation, continuityand coordination, public realm quality,creative interpretation and sustainable design.


66

Common design objectives and their treatment in design codes

Design objectives Treatment in design codes

Distinctive places One attribute of design codes is they can help create places with a distrinctiveidentity that can respond positively to a particular context. This can be donethrough a combination of design coding at each of the four scales of actionidentified in Stage 3 – settlement pattern, urban form, urban space and built form– each making a contribution to the creation of an identifiable sense of place.

Continuity and The ability of design codes to provide continuity and coordination betweencoordination areas (new and existing) is one of the key benefits. Design codes can help to

tackle issues of how development can be successfully integrated with theimmediate surroundings such as any historic buildings and built form, and thecreation of good linkages through and beyond sites.

Public realm quality By focusing first and foremost on urban design concerns (see Part A), designcodes should have as a critical concern the delivery of a high quality public realm. The public realm provides the common thread that knits together thedevelopment, and it is here that a continuity of quality is most required. Criticalin all design codes, therefore, is the need to establish clear quality thresholds forthe design of the public realm.

Creative interpretation Whilst being clear about levels of quality across the four scales of action(see Stage 3), design codes should always encourage the creative interpretationof their design principles by experienced designers. Again, this should be reflectedboth in how the settlement and urban form are laid out, as well as in the wayindividual spaces and buildings are designed.

Sustainable design Rather than being dealt with as an added extra, or necessarily as a dimension tobe coded in isolation separate to other factors, sustainability should be treated asan integral overarching theme running through the design coding process, acrossthe different scales of action. Sustainable design implies both a broad agenda,beyond simple energy and resource efficiency issues and is based on a clearagenda which extends beyond generalised policy aspirations.

23 See for example Better Places to Live, By Design(DETR and Cabe, 2001)

High quality design is a key element in thedelivery of sustainable communities, and designcodes can play a full role in determining thephysical, social, economic and environmentalwell being of places. Alongside the designvision, codes can help embed requirementsfor factors as diverse as affordable housing(provision and location), land use mix,environmental resources, the provision ofsocial infrastructure and so on.

Sustainability and design codesThe Lightmoor code requires that all dwellingsshould meet the ‘Excellent’ energy efficiency rating,as does Upton. Upton also codes for the provision of SUDS, which has been implemented by EnglishPartnerships, who are providing infrastructure in the role of a master developer.

Lightmoor also coded for the provision of a mix ofhouse types in all development parcels, and a mix ofuses in the Village Centre. Affordable housing isrequired in each parcel, at a rate of 25%, to reflectthe overall mix of that parcel, and to be pepperpotted.

Sustainability and the consideration of climatechange should be reflected in the overarchingobjectives of the design code, informing allaspects of design. Although it is not expectedthat design codes will necessarily cover everyaspect of this increasingly wide agenda, it isnevertheless possible to map a number ofoverarching sustainable design objectivesagainst the four scales of action set out inStage 3, namely settlement pattern, urbanform, urban space and built form. In reality,many of these issues will be addressedand delivered through a combination of thedesign code, the design vision and throughdetailed scheme design in the context ofseveral regulatory regimes such as planning,highways and transport and the buildingregulations.

Stage 4: Designing and testing the design code

67

Part

B

Stage

4


68

Sustainable design – issues mapped by spatial scale24

Spatial scale Settlement Urban form Urban space Built formpattern

Sustainability objective

24 Adapted from inset 25 in From Design Policy toDesign Quality (Thomas Telford Publishing, 2002)

Resource Efficiency

Diversity and Choice

Human Needs

Resilience

Pollution Reduction

Invest in public transportinfrastructure

Utilise existinginfrastructure efficientlybefore extending it

Consider sustainableurban drainage (SUDs)

Consider combined heatand power (CHP) systems

Integrate travel modes

Connect route networks

Promote a centrehierarchy to boost choice

Offer variety in servicesand facilities betweencentres

Overcome ‘edge’ barriersto accessibility

Enhance legibility throughneighbourhood identityand organisation

Promote equitable accessthrough land usearrangement

Build settlement image tofoster sense of belonging

Build a robust web ofinfrastructure to last andenable the integration ofnew technologies overtime

Recognise changingpatterns of living andwork and provideaccordingly

Question ‘end-of-pipe’solutions to water /sewerage disposal

Provide for on-site foulwater treatment

Revised parking standards

Urban block depths thatallow sun and naturallight penetration andnatural ventilation

Provide local access topublic transport

Mix uses withinneighbourhoods

Design a fine grainedstreet and space network

Support diversity inneighbourhood character

Localise facilities andservices

Design visually interestingnetworks of open space

Enhance legibility throughlandmark and spacedisposition

Encourage social mixwithin communities

Traffic calm via urbanform

Design to allow finegrained changes of useacross districts

Design robust urban blocklayouts

Design for revitalisation ofexisting areas andheritage assets

Match projected co2

emissions with treeplanting

Clean and maintain the place

Tackle light pollution

Give public transportpriority

Design spaces appropriateto regulated vehiclespeeds and circulation

Design spaces that reducewind speeds and enhancemicroclimate

Use local, naturalmaterials

Provide bicycle parkingand storage facilities

Mix uses along streetsand in blocks

Design for walking andcycling

Resist privatisation of thepublic realm

Remove barriers to localaccessibility

Provide quality, humanscale public space

Combat crime throughspace design andmanagement

Enhance safety byreducing pedestrian /vehicle conflict

Design for social contactand for safe play

Allow personalisation ofspace

Design robust spaces,usable for many functions

Design spaces able toaccommodate above andbelow groundinfrastructure requirements

Design serviceable space

Reduce hard surfaces andwater run-off

Design-in recyclingfacilities

Design well ventilatedspace to prevent pollutionbuild-up

Use passive (and active)solar gain technologies

Design for energyretention

Reduce embodied energy– local materials and lowenergy materials

Use recycled andrenewable materials

Provide opportunity tomix uses within buildings

Mix building types, agesand tenures

Build accessible, lifetimehomes and buildings

Mix home sizes

Mix home specifications

Support innovation andartistic expression indesign

Design to human scale

Design visually interestingbuildings

Support active frontagesand entrances on tostreets

Design for naturalsurveillance

Design for easymaintenance

Build extendible buildings

Build adaptable buildings

Build to last

Use resilient materials andfully test new buildingtechnologies before use

Reuse and recycle wastewater

Insulate for reduced noisetransmission - verticallyand horizontally


69

Sustainable design – issues mapped by spatial scale continued

Spatial scale Settlement Urban form Urban space Built formpattern

Sustainability objective

Climate change is the greatest long-termchallenge facing the world today. Designcodes can play a key role in addressing theimpact of climate change. It is very importanttherefore that design codes are formulated toreflect Government’s expectations on climatechange as set out in PPS1 and the forthcomingPlanning Policy Statement on climate change.Wherever possible, consideration should begiven during the development of design codesto reducing emissions and stabilising climatechange (mitigation) and to taking into accountthe unavoidable consequences (adaptation),and they should be continually monitored toensure that they respond to this agenda.

Code designers should ensure that, where thecontent of design codes cuts across differentregulatory regimes, codes avoid setting standardswhich exceed the provisions of other statutoryregimes such as the Building Regulations unlessthere are clear policies in the development

plan document to which a code relates andonly where there are demonstrable locallyspecific reasons for doing so. These couldinclude, for example, where there is significantlocal opportunity for major development tobe delivered at higher levels of the forthcomingCode for Sustainable Homes.

On the question of architectural design, it should be noted that design coding forarchitectural issues is possible and has to date been popular. However, care should be taken not to impose architectural styles orthe particular tastes of the design coding teamwithout good reason. Doing otherwise runsthe risk of stifling innovation, originality andinitiative. Therefore, where particulardevelopment styles are pursued they shouldbe fully substantiated by robust analysis andunderstanding of local character and contextand be informed by appropriate design skills.

Concentration

Distinctiveness

Biotic Support

Where possible encourageurban containment andreduce green field use

Intensify along transportcorridors

Link centres of high activity

Protect any positiveregional identity andlandscape character

Positively utilisetopography

Preserve archaeologicalinheritance

Link public (and private)open space into a network

Green urban fringelocations

Integrate town andcountry through landscapetreatments

Intensify around transportnodes

Where appropriate, raisedensity thresholds andavoid low density building

Build at densities able tosupport a viable range ofuses and facilities

Reflect distinctivemorphological patterns

Identify and reflectsignificant publicassociations

Consider neighbourhoodidentity and qualities

Set generous public openspace standards

Provide private openspace such as gardens

Create new and enhanceexisting habitats

Respect natural featuresand resources

Reduce space designatedfor roads and parking

Increase vitality throughactivity concentration

Actively design for privacyneeds rather than relyingon distance criteria

Reflect local townscapeand site character in design

Retain distinctive sitefeatures

Design for sense of place

Retain important buildinggroups and spaces

Design in robust softlandscaping

Plant and renew street trees

Encourage greening anddisplay in private gardens

Encourage local foodproduction i.e. allotments

Design compact buildingforms to reduce heat losseg. terraces

Bring derelict buildingsback into use

Consider high buildingswhere appropriate

Where appropriate,respond to surroundingarchitectural character in design

Enhance locally distinctivebuildings and their settings

Provide opportunities forgreening buildings

Consider buildings ashabitats

Support indigenousspecies and habitats

Part

B

Stage

4


70

How are elements typically design coded?

Elements at the four scales are coded in a variety ofways, using drawings, diagrams and tables, often incombination.

Settlement pattern

Table of appropriate building types, densityand locations

Urban form

Detailed requirement for ‘key grouping’

Code for office block: height, materials andform, parking and use

Street hierarchy

Regulating plan forbuilding lines

Illustrative parcel layout and street hierarchy

Code for parking courts

Code for linking elements: garages andboundary treatment


71

Urban space

Code for street character and on-street parking

Built form

Coding for local character using examplesfrom the area

Code for proportioning the public realm

Open space requirements

Coding for building massing

Coding for bounday treatment

Coding for bounday treatment

Coding for building on slopes

Coding for window types

Part

B

Stage

4

Expression and presentation

Most design codes will be robust workingdocuments, primarily written for a professionalaudience of parcel developers, designers anddevelopment control officers. However, ifwell written and presented, design codes canalso be used as promotional tools to help marketthe developments to which they relate. A key lesson is that design codes need to beconceived and expressed in the light of the skillsand resources available to those who will becharged with implementing them. Consequently,this guide does not set out a recommendedformat for design codes although they should be structured to be appropriate tolocal circumstances, taking account of therecommendations set out below.

Adopting clear structure, layout and cross-referencingCode documents should have a simple structure that leads in a systematic way from strategic designissues down to matters of detail. They should bepresented as reference manuals, with concise text,clear illustrations and cross referencing whereappropriate, and with graphic design to support ease of reference.

These factors will be determined to someextent by whether the design code is embedded in another document (such as for example a Development Plan Document), or whethera freestanding design code is produced. Stage5 sets out more detailed considerations onhow design codes can be formalised.


72

Structuring design codes:

Presentation issues begin by getting thestructure of the design code right:

• Begin with a succinct guide to the use andstatus of the code.

• Include an explanation of how the designcode relates to the design vision for the site or area.

• Develop a straightforward documentstructure.

• Gradually break down elements of the builtenvironment for users.

• Move from strategic to detailed concernsacross the scales of action.

• Deal systematically with different designelements and /or topics at each scale.

• Adopt consistent page layouts and formats.

• Ensure thorough cross-referencing betweendifferent sections.

• Include clear numbering of pages andsections.

Expressing design codes

Rather than repeating information alreadyexpressed in the design vision, a design code should shape and develop the vision byadding a further layer of detail that sets outhow it is to be realised. Of critical importancewill be the manner in which design codes are expressed.

Mandatory requirements are generallycharacterised by the verbs ‘to’, ‘will’, ‘shall’ or ‘must’. Discretionary requirements aregenerally characterised by “should”, “may” or “can”. Requirements may either be withoutoptions (if there is no choice as to how theyare met) or with options (if there is a choiceas to how they are met).


73

To ensure that a design code is as accessible tothe code users as possible, it is recommendedthat the following six practical pointers are followed:

• Carefully distinguish mandatory fromdiscretionary components (design codesshould always include mandatory elements to ensure they are followed and providecontinuity across the development).

• Avoid ambiguous aspirational statements,excessive description and analysis.

• Write clearly, concisely and precisely.

• Avoid unnecessary jargon and define keytechnical terms.

• Justify all design codes against their role indelivering the vision.

• Never use words when an illustration will do.

Part

B

Stage

4

Mandatory and Discretionary components compared


74

Mandatory

With “Top storey to be brick, rendered options or coloured cladding board”

Without “Windows to be vertical in proportionoptions and windows of principal rooms to

align vertically.”

Mandatory

With “Window openings should have oneoptions of the treatments indicated.”

Without “Brick buildings should have theoptions windows recessed at least 85mm.”

Mandatory

With “It is required that houses be linkedoptions by walls hedges, gates, garages or

other devices to maintain continuity of the street line. Examples are given.”

Without – options

Mandatory

With – options

Without “Where indicated an additonaloptions storey may be provided to emphasise

key street corners and intersections inorder to create visually distinctivemassing or local landmarks”

The importance of illustration

Design codes are design rather than policydocuments, (although they may form part of apolicy document) and where possible diagrams,tables of requirements, detailed plans, sketchesand precedent illustrations will be moreappropriate than written text. Collectivelythese should deal with projects in threedimensions, providing design codes for the key elements that make up the whole.However this need not imply complex three-dimensional images. Depending on the project,it may be that a series of two-dimensionalillustrations combining annotated plans andsections (especially sections of street types),can achieve the same ends.

Any photographs of precedents should beclearly marked as illustrative in order to avoidthe impression that slavish repetition is beingadvocated, particularly with regard toarchitectural style.

A common language of design coding in GermanyIn Germany a legally binding development plan, theBebauungsplan (B-Plan) is prepared for developmentsites, generally by the local authority or by adeveloper on behalf of the local authority.

A B-Plan is a form of coding and comprises aregulating plan setting out mandatory requirementsin plan and text, supported by a written justification.3-d drawings may accompany a B-Plan but they donot form part of the legal document.

The form and content of a B-Plan is regulated bylaw although the degree of control and detail canbe varied from case to case. A common notation isprescribed in terms of scale and symbols, for exampleparticular colours and hatchings for certain landuses and particular line types for where buildingslines must or may be located. The advantage of thisapproach is that B-Plans are easily understood.


75

The importance of the Regulating Plan Although design codes guide the developmentof a site or area in three dimensions, it isimportant that they include a two dimensionalRegulating Plan. The Regulating Plan enablescode users to locate where the provisions of thecode will apply. The Regulating Plan will expresshow the code relates to plots, land parcels ordifferent character areas. The Regulating Planwill have a fundamental influence on the design of the street scene and its character.

Plot Passports – the importance of thinkingthrough procurement as part of the codewriting process (also see Stage 6)Design codes offer considerable scope forstakeholders to look at new ways of deliveringdevelopment. An example would be to take aplot-based approach to delivery such as iscommon in some countries abroad – for examplein Germany or to a lesser extent in Holland. Onepossibility will be to use the code to operate asystem where the aim will be to dispose of theplot and then encourage the owner tocommission an architect or to procure his ownbuilding for the plot. In Germany this approachis common in the context of residentialdevelopment. A system of ‘plot passports’ maybe used which, for example, create a frameworkwithin which to design a house for the plot.

Part

B

Stage

4

Experiments have been conducted with web-based design codes that allow users tointeract with the different combinations ofelements included in a design code, and thismay be the future of design coding tools.

‘Process’ issues can also be included in a design code, for example guidance onsubmission requirements for reserved matters applications, establishing roles andresponsibilities within the design codingteam, laying out evaluation or stakeholderengagement procedures, identifyingrelationships to other design policy/guidanceand so on. These elements can also oftenbe expressed diagrammatically, in flowcharts,tables and relationship diagrams.

Flexibility and prescription – gettingthe balance right

The balance between flexibility andprescription is a difficult one to strike. Thecomplexity of some design codes, for example,can mean that they are very difficult to updateover time, particularly if the original designcoding team is no longer involved. Veryprescriptive design codes can also be veryinflexible during design code implementation(see Stage 6). Conversely, design codes thatare too succinct tend to be open to greaterinterpretation. In general, design codes arechosen because of their robustness as tools for delivering high quality design and wheresignificant flexibility is required other forms of detailed design guidance, such as designbriefs, may be more appropriate.

Enough detail is required to give the desiredlevel of clarity and certainty and to protectthe delivery of a coherent and coordinateddesign solution. However, precision to legalstandards is unlikely to be necessary. Tobalance the levels of prescription, a degree of flexibility can be provided within designcodes in a number of ways:

• Including a menu of alternative designcoding solutions for particular elements.

• Focussing on performance-based designcoding, rather than highly specifiedoutcomes.

• Identifying clearly which elements of thedesign code are mandatory and which arediscretionary, with flexibility built in toillustrate how the latter can be interpreted.

• Paring down the design code to itsessential requirements on which there is nonegotiation, and then simply design codingfor those elements (e.g. building line andsetbacks). In this solution, other elementsare left entirely open for interpretation, or subject to other forms of guidance.

Not only will the relative balance betweenprescription and flexibility need considerationfor the design code as a whole, but also foreach individual design coded element. Asimple four quadrant framework can be usedto help decide whether a design codedelement should be discretionary or mandatorydetailed or not detailed.


76

Skills of a code writerIt is not necessarily the case that a goodmasterplanner will translate his skills into aneffective writer of codes, and the project teamshould be clear about the distinctive set of skillsthat will be needed to write a code. The keydifference is that where a masterplanner mightput together a three dimensional vision for aproject, the code writer will be responsible fortranslating that vision. This is a skill in its ownright. In particular the writer will need tounderstand the dynamics of how the codeworks as a delivery tool – ensuring theinstructions deliver the right results, both interms of instructing a parcel designer on designand allowing smooth and easy administrationthrough the planning process.


77

Discretionary Mandatory

Detailed Elements such as building Complex yet critical elements forcolour, requiring careful which a range of alternativejustification but not critical solutions are possible, such asto delivering the overall the position and type of activedesign vision. frontage.

Not detailed Aspirational elements such Critical elements that are as ‘lifetime homes’ standards nevertheless straightforward tofor which other sources of prescribe, such as building lineguidance are the primary on a plan.sources of advice.

Positioning design coded elements – prescription vs. flexibility

Unpicking some key terms – uniformity, innovation, flexibility and prescription As indicated in Part A of this guide, a number of myths have grown around the use of design codes – often relatingto the terms above. It is vital to unpick some of the meanings and implications behind the use of such terms in orderto ensure that provisions of the code effectively direct the desired outcomes in relation to these attributes:

• Uniformity – often mistakenly understood as synonymous with being dull or bland, in manycircumstances the aspiration for design to have a uniform character will be highly desirable.

• Innovation – almost always taken to be a positive aspiration, innovation for its own sake can bemindless, and destructive to a coherent outcome. In particular, it is often taken as a green light to rejectstandard house types which are often economic and efficient ways of building, and provided plans can betranslated properly into built form they can deliver high quality solutions.

• Flexibility – while it is often interpreted as crucial to leave an element of flexibility within the code, thismay not necessarily be appropriate – especially where the code is trying to direct a specific response thatis important to the urban outcome. The code writer must understand where flexibility is desirable –perhaps creating the potential for market viability over the life of the code perhaps, and where it is not so– where it invites an incoherent response.

• Prescription – often assumed to mean inflexible, but may be better understood as directing theappropriate solution for the place.

In particular the idea that prescription is the enemy of creativity can be wide of the mark. In this respect it is essential that a code writer understands how to translate vision for a place into instructions for delivery.For example, where a design vision demands a highly variable streetscape, it might be assumed that the code should be written with high levels of flexibility to achieve this. In fact this can often give scope for arespondent to default to a bland, one dimensional response. The way to achieve highly variable responsesmay be to specify precisely how to achieve the variation – for example how plots are to be varied, where thevariation in setback or frontage is to occur. This will leave a respondent to be creative about those elementsthat can add value to the streetscape rather than undermine the intention to create variety.

Part

B

Stage

4

Process-based solutions

It is possible to build flexibility into the designcode, something that is critical for a tool thatis likely to be used over long-term projecthorizons. Two process-based solutions providealternative means of ensuring flexibility. First,agreeing procedures at the start of the designcoding processes through which departuresfrom the design code’s provisions will be allowed.Second, building in formal opportunities toreview the content of design codes into theagreed design coding process. Stages 6 and 7provide further advice in this regard.

Testing the design code

After the code has been designed, a key stepbefore the completion of this stage will be totest the code’s viability and to examine if it willoperate in the manner that the coding teamset out to achieve. A testing exercise is stronglyrecommended as this will help refine thecontent and the expression of design codes andensure that jargon does not undermine clarity.

Design teams can be commissioned for ashort period of time (perhaps a day or two) to design hypothetical sketch proposals usingthe design code. The solutions might then befed to the local authority’s developmentcontrol team so that they can test the efficiency of the assessment process through relating the design proposal back to the code. An action plan should then be created to ensureall lessons are fed into the design codepreparation process to further refine thedesign code’s content and expression beforeany formal design procurement processes begin.

There are number different tests which canbe applied to determine whether a code is fit-for-purpose. For example its ease of use to all users, its market viability, likely capacityto deliver quality and its efficiency as anadministrative tool that can help streamlinethe planning process.


78

Some key tests

1. Operability – is the code usable and readable?

• Is there an introduction that makes thepurpose of the code clear and instructs uponhow to use it.

• Is the structure of the code clear, and is thecontent easily navigable for each user?

• Does the code contain a Regulating Plan, andis the plan easily relatable to the detailedprovisions of the code?

• Are the instructions clear (both written andgraphic), and can they be related tojustifications where necessary?

• If discretionary elements are specified, is itclear what the range of options are?

• Where the user can stray from theinstructions, is it clear how this should bedone, and the level of explanation required?

2. Outcome – will the code provisionsdeliver what the team want?

• Does the code have gaps which would enableinappropriate development to come forward?

• Will the levels of prescription and degrees offlexibility deliver the required outcomes?

• Does the code have the right balanceof strategic to detailed content, takingaccount of how the code may be formalisedin the planning system?

• Does the code convince the differentstakeholders and secure appropriate buy in?

Cracking the codeCode testing can take the form of an in-house designexercise using a team who are not familiar with thecode to interpret it in use.

Particularly where a code is intended to be prescriptive,as at Swindon, code testing may be extended toinclude 3rd parties being commissioned to test acode, and to make sure that its requirements areinternally consistent. Those testing codes mayinclude local architects, urban design consultants, or the regional arm of a housebuilder.


79

• Start with the structure and broadaspirations, get that fixed and prepare thecode from there.

• Prioritise – the design code cannot addressevery eventuality.

• Don’t repeat information already adequatelydealt with elsewhere, in the masterplan forexample.

• Integrate sustainability into the broaderdesign objectives, it should not be an add-on.

• Covering ‘process’ issues within the designcode can help to clarify requirements andtherefore speed up the process.

• Develop a protocol for non-design interests tofeed into the code preparation process.

• A testing exercise during the preparation ofthe code will save time in unnecessary coderevisions later.

• Get the pre-conditions for successful designcoding right first, and then start to design the code.


Part

B

Stage

4

81

Who, what and how?

Who is responsible?

Land* – Landowner, Master-developer

Design‡ – Design Code Designer

Development† – Parcel Developer

Public* – Planning Authority, Highways Authority



Public and land interests will have theprimary responsibilities for leading on theformalisation of the design code. It is likelythat when a code is to be adopted within theLocal Development Framework the processwill be led by local planning and highwaysauthorities, while the intention to formalise acode through the development control processmay place more onus on land interests tolead the way. Either way necessitates closecollaboration between the two interestgroups, as well as a wider range of interestedstakeholders (including the community). Analternative (or sometimes additional) methodof giving the code status is to create a legalagreement which relates to land ownership –based on either publicly or privately ownedfreehold rights.


The preparation of design codes andconsultation with stakeholders requires earlyinvestment in time and resources. A key aimwill be to ensure that early investments arereflected in streamlined processes later on inthe process. Codes will need to be formalisedand given status in a way that they can beeffectively implemented. Options must beweighed up and the most appropriate routeto formalise the code needs to be chosen.The most appropriate route will be one thatgives certainty to all parties and that has thepotential to offer efficiency savings for thelocal authority administrating any resultingdevelopment.

Once formalised a design code can become anefficient and robust decision-making tool.

Where the local planning authority is taking a central role in the design code preparationprocess, it is likely that such design codes willbe formally adopted as part of a LDF. Wherea local authority’s role is more marginal, landinterests may prefer to retain control of thedesign code implementation process using a development agreement instead. Ultimateinvolvement and control will come fromcombining formalisation processes.

How can design codes be formalised?

5Stage 5: Formalising thedesign code

• The work entailed in formalising the code willdepend on which route the coding team decideshould be pursued.

• Consider the options for giving the design codeformal status. Two main routes are to adopt the code within the LDF, or to formalise it through the planning application process indevelopment control.

• Consider linking the code to a Local DevelopmentOrder (LDO) to streamline subsequent decisionmaking.

• Consider the merits of using a landowner orfreehold agreement to give the code status.

• Be clear about formal requirements for appraisingsustainability and environmental impact set out inthe Environmental Impact Assessment Regulationsand the Strategic Environmental AssessmentRegulations and at what stage in the preparationprocess a formal assessment may be required.

• From the outset, aim to formally adopt the designcode for both planning and highways purposesand consider carefully how it relates to thebuilding regulations.

• Be mindful of the need to refine the code throughtechnical engagement.

• When a draft of the final design code is available,conduct formal consultation as part of theadoption process.

Part

B

Stage

5

Introduction

The use of design codes should be motivatedby improving the quality of development,creating greater certainty for all about theoutcomes, and importantly, the potential tostreamline delivery processes for deliveringnew development more quickly. In this respect,it is vital to build upon the work that hasgone into preparing the code throughensuring that it has the requisite status tooperate as the stakeholders intended.

How the code will be formalised should havebeen a consideration from the outset of thedesign coding process, and the project planshould have been developed to secure theinput of the various partners and stakeholdersat the requisite points in the process. Actionsundertaken in respect of code preparation,and any milestones set out in the projectplan, must ensure a fit with the sometimescomplex processes required to formalisecodes within the planning system. In addition,the design coding team should be fully awareof all statutory processes with regard toenvironmental and sustainability appraisalsand stakeholder engagement.

The choice of a particular approach dependson the particular circumstances in which adesign code is prepared and the aims andaspirations of the promoter of the code interms of how it should be implemented. Thedecision about how to adopt a design coderests with the code promoter – in discussionwith the local planning authority if a code is promoted by a developer, landowner oranother stakeholder. A key consideration in this choice is how it should relate to theplanning process and how much weight thedesign code should have in the decision-making process.

There are broadly four main ways in whichdesign codes can be formalised:

1. Formal adoption, principally through the LDF

2. Development control, as part of theplanning application process

3. Local Development Orders

4. The exercise of freehold rights

Adopting within the LocalDevelopment Framework

Where a design code is intended to beadopted as a public document that will, forexample, be a material consideration in thedetermination of planning applications, then it is recommended that it should be formallyadopted through incorporation as part of aLocal Development Document (LDD) in aLocal Development Framework. Experienceon the adoption of design codes to datesuggests that where local authorities havebeen closely involved in the code preparationprocess they are generally supportive ofadopting design codes in this way in order to give them greater weight in the planningprocess. Design codes are also capable ofbeing adopted for highways purposes in this way.

Where design codes are adopted as part of a LDF, it is recommended that whenplanning authorities determine planningapplications against such codes that they use the opportunity to link the code to anyplanning permissions through a planningcondition. Further consideration of the use of conditions is set out below.

Guidance on the processes related to thepreparation of LDFs is set out in PlanningPolicy Statement 12: Local DevelopmentFrameworks (PPS12). Where design codes areformalised through a LDF the guidance inPPS12 will apply.


82

Stage 5: Formalising the design code

83

There are essentially four routes by which adesign code may be formalised within the LDF:

1. Development Plan Document (DPD)

2. Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)

3. Development Control Guidelines

4. Highways Standards

Experiences of formal adoptionCurrently some codes are intended to be adoptedas SPD, with approval as Development ControlGuidance in the meantime, as at Hastings. At WalkerRiverside, the code will be adopted as SPD toaccompany a masterplan which will be an AreaAction Plan. In the past, where codes have beenadopted, it has generaly been as Council policy fordevelopment control purposes, as at Hulme.

1. Development Plan Documents

The DPD, together with the relevant RegionalSpatial Strategy, provides the essentialframework for planning decisions. DPDscomprise a Core Strategy, Site SpecificAllocations of land and (where needed) AreaAction Plans. A proposals map illustrating thespatial extent of policies must also beprepared and maintained to accompany alldevelopment plan documents.

DPD policies can be a valuable way to requirethat a code be prepared for sites or areas, forexample by including a policy requirement toprepare a design code for a large site for whichan Area Action Plan will need to be prepared.The adoption of a design code as part of aDPD will give the code primacy alongside otherDPD policy in the determination of planningapplications, affording it this weight by virtueof Section 38(6) of the Planning andCompulsory Purchase Act25.

There are two key types of DPD identified in PPS12 which might be used to formalise a design code in the LDF. These are:

• Site specific allocations of land; or

• Area Action Plans.

A further DPD, the core strategy, is lesssuitable for the inclusion of a design code asit is more strategic in nature. However, theremay be benefit in including policies in thecore strategy which set out the approach todesign coding that will be required forparticular sites and/or areas.

25 The statutory Development Plan is the starting pointin the consideration of planning applications for thedevelopment or use of land, unless materialconsiderations indicate otherwise.

Part

B

Stage

5

Where it is decided to adopt a design code as part of a DPD, it should be consistent withthe policies of the development plan as a whole.Design codes can be prepared and adoptedfor sites not allocated in a development plan,as long as the code is linked to a clear policyin the Plan. It is however not recommendedthat a design code be adopted as an amendmentto a development plan, where the plan is outof date or requires comprehensive review.More information on the relationship betweendesign generally and planning policies inLDDs is set out in Making Design Policy Work26.


84

26 Making Design Policy Work, How to Deliver GoodDesign Through Your Local Development Framework(CABE, 2005)

27 Although design codes which are formalised through a DPD would need to have undergone a sustainability appraisal, this would not exemptplanning applications coming forward under suchcodes from needing to comply with the Town andCountry Planning (Assessment of EnvironmentalEffects) Regulations 1999.

How to adopt a code in a DPD – some keyconsiderations

• PPS12 sets out the adoption process that adesign code would need to follow if it isdecided to formalise the code through a DPD.

• The principle of ‘soundness’ will be animportant consideration and there should becommunity consultation, involvement andparticipation in accordance with the localauthority’s Statement of CommunityInvolvement.

• A key consideration in deciding whether toformalise a design code through the DPD routewill be the time required to adopt the code or to amend it. This includes fulfilling theminimum requirements of sustainabilityappraisal27.

• Although the time taken to formalise thedesign code through a DPD may take longerwhen compared to other potential adoptionroutes, this should be seen in the context of theincreased certainty that a design code willprovide for developers and landowners, and thatit will give the planning authority a morecertain basis against which to decide planningapplications which are affected by the design code.

• The potential to speed up decision-makingonce the code is adopted will be a keyconsideration.

• The local community is likely to be fullyengaged in the preparation of such designcodes and the decision-making process will bemore open and transparent.


85

2. Supplementary Planning Documents

SPDs expand upon or supplement thepolicies in DPDs. They must also conform tothe relevant DPD. PPS12 advises that wherethe policy requirement is set out for landallocated in a DPD, greater policy detail maybe included in a SPD, for example adevelopment brief.

Given the detailed nature of design codes,they are suitable documents to include oradopt as SPDs as they help amplify andimplement DPD policies. The formalisation of a design code through a SPD is a fasterroute to having a design code adopted as aDPD. It is important to recognise howeverthat SPDs do not have the status of thedevelopment plan and therefore carry lessweight in the process of determining planningapplications. They are however a materialconsideration and can therefore form a reasonfor refusal should a development not complywith a design code adopted in this way.

There are two broad ways of including adesign code as part of a SPD:

• The design code could be adopted as aSPD without any specific policies in theSPD, as long as it is linked to a policy in a DPD.

• The design code could form part of a SPD.For example, the SPD may contain policiesto which a detailed design code isannexed or linked.

If the intention is to adopt as part of a SPD, it is not recommended that a design code isproduced as a separate stand alone annex tothe SPD as the code should be subject to thesame consultation arrangements as the rest of the SPD. It is also not recommended thatdesign codes are formulated as a SPD wherea plan is out of date or where no DPD is in place.

3. Development Control Guidelines28

Design codes are also capable of adoption as guidelines to assist in the developmentcontrol process. However, unless adopted as SPD with an appropriate level of publicconsultation they are likely to carry limitedweight in the determination of planningapplications. This route is not recommended.

How to adopt a code in a SPD – some keyconsiderations

• There is no requirement for an independentexamination or the preparation of optionswhen preparing a design code through SPD.

• The principle of ‘soundness’ will be animportant consideration and there should becommunity consultation, involvement andparticipation in accordance with the localauthority’s Statement of CommunityInvolvement.

• The SPD route may be quicker and moreflexible when compared to a DPD but anyamendment of the code would have to beconsulted upon again.

• A Sustainability Appraisal will usually beneeded, although it is not mandatory ifsufficiently covered by the SustainabilityAppraisal for the DPD to which the SPDrelates. The judgement as to whether aSustainability Appraisal is needed will dependon whether the design code develops the DPDpolicy further or in greater detail.

28 Note, development control guidelines should not beconfused with Generic Development Control Policieswhich can be adopted as a DPD – see PPS12.

Part

B

Stage

5


86

Formalisation routes compared

Area Action Plan(AAP)

OtherDevelopmentPlan Document(DPD)

SupplementaryPlanningDocument (SPD)

DevelopmentControlGuidelines

Revisedhighwaysstandards

Supplement tohighwaysstandards

Status andtransparency

High and public –primacy given topolicy within thedevelopment plan

High and public –primacy given topolicy within thedevelopment plan

Medium andpublic – amaterialconsideration, andformally part ofthe LDF

Low and semi-public – amaterialconsideration

High and semi-public – providesthe basis forformal adoptionof roads andfootpaths

High and semi-public – providesthe basis forformal adoptionof roads andfootpaths

Responsibilityfor adoption

Local planningauthority




Highwaysauthority

Highwaysauthority

Pre-requisites

Many – requires apolicy link in theCore Strategy ofthe LDF; asustainabilityappraisal; needsto be subject to publicconsultation; andto examination inpublic

Many – requires apolicy link in theCore Strategy ofthe LDF; asustainabilityappraisal; needsto be subject topublic consultation;and to examinationin public

Some – requirespolicy link toDPD; requirespublicconsultation andwill usuallyrequire asustainabilityappraisal

None – may be a less open andtransparentprocess if noconsultation

Significant – mayrequire anadequateevidence base toovercome safetyconcerns relatingto departuresfrom tried andtested standards

Significant – may require an adequateevidence base toovercome safetyconcerns relatingto departuresfrom tried andtested standards

Ease of revision

Low – requiresformal DPDadoption processto be gonethrough andcould lead to theneed to reviewother parts of theAAP

Low – requiresformal DPDadoption processto be gonethrough. But if itis a free-standingcode, it is unlikelyto lead to theneed to reviewother issues

Medium –requires publicconsultation andformal councilresolution

High – simplyrequires a formalcouncil resolution

Medium – maynecessitaterevisiting the full range ofstandards

High – simplyrequires a formalcouncil resolution

Decision-making certainty vs.flexibility

High certainty,low flexibility,althoughdiscretion stillavailable toconsider plandepartures

High certainty,low flexibility,althoughdiscretion stillavailable toconsider plandepartures

Medium certainty,medium flexibility

Low certainty,high flexibility

High certainty,low flexibility

High certainty,low flexibility

Speed (of formaladoption phase)

Slow – about twoyears, but canincrease long-term speed ofdeterminingplanningapplications

Slow – about twoyears, but canincrease long-term speed ofdeterminingplanningapplications

Medium – aboutone year

Fast – can be onemonth, but lowcertainty mayreduce long-termspeed

Medium – about6 or more months(depending on theextent of revision)

Fast – about onemonth


87

4. Highways standards

It is strongly recommended that design codesbe adopted for highways purposes where a design code relates to a pubic highway.Formal recognition of design codes in this way can help to overcome highwaysand drainage adoption problems later on. Codes for specific sites and areas provide anopportunity to revise or supplement existinghighways standards to, for example, includeurban design considerations, reduce roadwidths, traffic speeds and promote safer andbetter designed environments for pedestriansand cyclists.

Formalising through development control

Design codes can also be formalised throughthe development control process and relatedlegal powers to ensure a development isdesigned and built in accordance with a designcode. To formalise the code in this waythe design code must form part of a formalapplication for planning permission. This maymean the code being attached to an outlineplanning application, a reserved mattersapplication or a full (detailed) application.

The mechanisms that might be used toformalise the code in this way are:

1. Planning conditions.

2. Approval as part of a planning application.

3. Planning obligation, where appropriate.

Experiences of development control approachesThe Swindon code has been prepared following theresolution to grant outline planning permission forthe development. It is required to be approved bythe Council to satisfy a planning condition.

At Lightmoor the code was submitted as the Design Statement in support of the outline planning application. Planning conditions required minoramendments to the code for its approval and thatall development should be in accordance with theapproved design code.

Design code attached to a planning condition

The use of planning conditions to formalise a design code may be a particularly attractiveoption for both applicants and local authorities.Two options exist:

1. To submit the design code as part of aplanning application and condition itsapproval to require the development tocomply with the code.

2. To issue a planning permission thatrequires the submission of a design codeand which specifies the content of thecode and the process by which it willneed to be prepared.

Conditioning a code provides a considerabledegree of certainty for applicants over theacceptability of proposals to the local planningauthority. It also affords local planning authoritiesgreater control by securing adherence of aproposal to the development plan’s designpolicies and objectives and/or is capable of securing the preparation of a designcode for a site by the applicant as part ofa detailed permission.

How to adopt a code for Highways StandardsCodes can be adopted by a local highwayauthority either as free-standing documents intheir own right, superseding or supplementingexisting highway design standards within theconfines of the coded site or area, or can beadopted as a generic document to replace orsupplement outdated highway standards for awider area. The latter is likely to be a slowerprocess but will have the added benefit that therevised standards will be available for use onother sites in a highway authority’s area. Furtherguidance on the use of design codes in thecontext of highways will be set out in theManual for Streets29.

29 Manual for Streets (DfT and DCLG, forthcoming)

Part

B

Stage

5


88

Design code as part of a planning application

Design codes are capable of being attachedas a condition to both outline and detailedplanning consents. Codes submitted as part of a reserved matters application are likely to be less strategic in nature when comparedto codes which might accompany an outline

application. In some cases a ‘mini code’ maybe prepared to support a less detailed pre-existing strategic design code which is part of a DPD, perhaps for a wider area, orrelated to an existing planning permission.

A design code which is related to a detailedapplication is likely to be more detailed innature when compared to a code attached toan outline application and therefore increasesthe level of certainty for the applicant. Adrawback of this option is that any proposedvariation of the code to accommodate designchanges is likely to need a new planningapplication as there is no related reservedmatters application.

When design codes are intended to beformalised through a planning application,consideration should be given to how theyrelate to a Design and Access Statement. Adesign and access statement is a short reportaccompanying and supporting a planningapplication to illustrate the process that has ledto the development proposal, and to explainand justify the proposal in a structured way.Circular 01/200630 sets out when Design andAccess Statements will be required before theycan be registered by the planning authority,and the detail they should contain31.

The inclusion of a design code as part of aDesign and Access Statement, either as part of an outline or detailed planning application,increases the level of certainty about the design of the proposal for both the planningauthority and applicants. By including the designcode with the Design and Access Statementthe planning authority is able to betterunderstand the design principles and visionupon which it is based and how the plans willbe translated into the proposed built form ofthe development. It also enables the planningauthority to link any planning permission tothe exact content and wording of the proposedcode and consider whether the code is capableof being formalised by planning condition if the local planning authority is minded togrant permission for the proposal.

Using conditions to prepare a design code– some pointersLocal planning authorities may choose to add a condition to a planning permission for a sitefor which a design code already exists, whichwould typically require that developers complywith such a code. Such conditions requirecareful wording to provide the appropriate levelof flexibility or firmness required in terms ofcompliance with such a design code.

A local authority could also condition an outlineplanning permission to require the applicant toprepare a design code for a site or particularphases of a development, depending on localcircumstances. Research has shown that this isa particularly useful route available to localauthorities where in-house resources are limited.This process would operate in the same way ascurrent practice where conditions to a planningpermission require the preparation of a masterplanor other form of detailed design guidance for asite. Such conditions should be specific aboutwhat the design code should contain and howit is to be prepared. If a condition is not specific,it is likely to be unlawful and unenforceable.In all cases it is important that any conditioncomplies with the tests set out in Circular11/ 95. Namely that a condition should benecessary, relevant to planning and to thedevelopment and be enforceable, precise andreasonable. It is however important to note thatwhere a design code is part of a planningcondition, the test in Circular 11/ 95 would notapply to the design code itself.

Further guidance on conditions is set out inCircular 11/ 95.

30 See Paragraph 69 of Circular 01/2006: Guidance on Changes to the Development Control System(DCLG, 2006)

31 See also Design and Access Statements, How to Write,Read and use Them (CABE, 2006)


89

Design code attached to a PlanningObligation

Planning obligations are usually made in the form of negotiated agreements known

as Section 106 Agreements, usually in thecontext of planning applications, betweenlocal planning authorities and persons withan interest in a piece of land, and intended tomake acceptable development which wouldotherwise be unacceptable in planning terms.Obligations can also be secured throughunilateral undertakings by developers.Circular 05/2005 sets out further guidance on the use of planning obligations.

Although design codes which are formalisedthrough planning obligations can provideconsiderable certainty in the planning process,Circular 05/2005 advises that where there is a choice between imposing conditions andentering into a planning obligation, theimposition of a condition is preferable33.

Planning conditions afford greater flexibilitywhen compared to planning obligations, given the right of appeal by applicants againstconditions and when considering that theCourts would not need to be involved if abreach of condition needed to be enforcedby a local planning authority.

Code promoters should therefore fully explorethe opportunities to formalise a design codethrough conditions before considering tying adesign code to a legally binding agreementunder Section 106 of the Town and CountryPlanning Act 1990 (as amended). The use ofSection 106 to formalise a design code shouldonly be contemplated when planning conditionscannot be used. This is clarified in ParagraphB2 of Circular 5/2005.

Approving a design code through a reservedmatters planning applicationWhere it is intended that a design code besubmitted as part of a reserved mattersapplication it is recommended that, before such acode is prepared, discussions take place betweenthe applicant and the local planning authority.

If the proposed design code supports a higherlevel design code or a code which has beenadopted through the LDF, or responds to aplanning condition to an outline permission,then all parties should ensure that the code isconsistent with the higher level design code towhich it relates, and that it fully meets the termsof any planning condition.

It is not recommended that local authoritiesrequire any statements of compliance of adevelopment to a design code as part of anyplanning application. Code promoters, particularlya local authority, should avoid additional burdenson business, staff time and resources. Applicantsshould be able to secure planning permission if they build to the code or have a planningcondition imposed which will be discharged bythe local authority if a code is complied with.There should therefore be no need for anyseparate mechanism to seek compliance.

Note that design codes which are part of aplanning application would not in themselvesrequire an Environmental Impact Assessmentunder the Town and Country Planning(Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (as amended) (the EIA Regulations). This principle also appliesto design codes which are formalised throughplanning conditions. This would not howeverexempt planning applications from needing anEnvironmental Impact Assessment (EIA)32, whererequired under the above relevant Regulations.

Attaching a design code to a planningobligation – a cautionWhere a planning obligation is used toformalise a code the obligation should include a specific clause which refers to the design codewhich should be annexed to the agreement.

However, it should be noted that planningobligations offer less flexibility to amend adesign code unless specific provision is madewithin the agreement to amend the code. Thereis also no right of appeal to an obligation andthis route provides a less open and transparentmeans to implement the code. The Courts wouldalso need to be involved if a breach in the codeneeded to be enforced.

32 Generic term used to describe environmentalassessment as applied to projects. In this Guide, ‘EIA’is used to refer to the type of assessment requiredunder European Directive 337/85/EEC.

33 Paragraph B51 of Circular 05/2005: PlanningObligations (ODPM, 2005)

Part

B

Stage

5

Local Development Orders

Local Development Orders were introducedthough the recent changes to the developmentcontrol system in England. They are a newdiscretionary planning tool available to localauthorities and are intended to support aculture change in planning which seeks earlyproactive engagement to establish designquality and the parameters of development,and allow a streamlining of regulatoryprocesses later on.

A Local Development Order (LDO) grantsplanning permission for the type ofdevelopment specified in the LDO andremoves the need for a planning application.A LDO can relate to all land in a localauthority area or only part of it.

Certain types of development are alreadypermitted without the need for planningpermission, and these rights are set out in the Town and Country Planning (GeneralPermitted Development) Order 1995 asamended (the GPDO). The GPDO grants ageneral permission for various types of relativelysmall-scale and normally uncontentiousdevelopment without the need to make aplanning application to the local planningauthority. LDOs therefore effectively alter or extend on a localised basis the GPDOprovisions.

Similar mechanisms have been used withsuccess overseas – for example in Australia.


90

Development control approaches compared

Option

Linked toPlanningCondition

Part of planningapplication

Part of Designand AccessStatementaccompanying aplanningapplication

Linked toPlanningObligation

Status andtransparency

High and semi-public –compliance onbasis of normalenforcementpowers

High and semi-public –compliance onbasis of normalenforcementpowers

High and semi-public –compliance on basis of normalenforcementpowers

High and semiprivate –compliance on basis of formal legalcontract

Responsibilityfor control


Land /developmentinterests

Land /developmentinterests

Local planningauthority anddevelopment /land interests

Pre-requisites

Typically anoutline planningapproval

Depending on type ofapplication, mayneed reservedmatters planningapproval

Depending on type ofapplication, mayneed reservedmatters planningapproval

Planning approval

Ease of revision

Low – is likely torequire a newplanningapplication andpermission withnew conditions

Low – is likely torequire newplanningapplication andpermission

Medium – is likelyto require revisedor new statement,possibly withrevised or newapplication

Low – legalagreement

Decision-making certainty vs.flexibility

Variable flexibilitydepending on wording of condition,medium certaintyas still subject to appeal

Medium certaintyand flexibility assubject to appealand open to localplanning authoritydiscretion

Medium certaintyand flexibility assubject to appealand open to localplanning authoritydiscretion

High certaintyand low flexibilityas a legalagreement withno right of appeal

Speed (of formaladoption phase)

Potentially fast –13 weeks



Medium – varyingtimescales butcan be more than6 months


91

Extending permitted development rightsQueensland, in Australia, introduced a code basedplanning system in 1998 with a new set ofapprovals processes, including:

• development that does not require approval:broadly similar to permitted development.

• self assessable development, which an applicantmust determine satisfies a code: broadly similarto the situation that would arise in Englandwith an extension to permitted developmentrights where an LDO is in force.

• development requiring approval: broadlysimilar to applications for planning permissionin England.

In effect, in different locations, there may bedifferent approvals regimes in operation, dependingupon whether there is a code in force or not.

Codes are generally based on performance criteria(the standard to be met) together with acceptablesolutions that are deemed to satisfy thoseperformance criteria. For self assessabledevelopment, the code must be clear andinternally consistent, allowing at least onedesign solution to satisfy its requirements.

LDOs are not restricted to specific types ofdevelopment and it will be for local planningauthorities to decide on the extent to whichthey wish to use them. They are capable ofbeing used for large scale development butalso offer considerable potential to be used topermit small scale householder development.It is important to note however that LDOs donot need to be site-specific. A LDO with a codeattached could be used for a site not yet allocatedfor development in the DPD although the LDOmust relate to a policy in a development plan.

Where a design code is attached to an LDO,compliance with the code will effectively be granted rights to develop a site. Thisremoves the need for a planning applicationto be made and for its administration indevelopment control. To create propersafeguards, an LDO must implement policy

established within a DPD, and checkingcompliance is likely to be an importantfunction of the local planning authority.

If used alongside design codes, LDOs offerconsiderable potential to deliver high qualitydevelopment with considerable certainty to applicants and speedy implementation of development. When linked to a LDO,developments in accordance with the design code would effectively be permitteddevelopment for which no planningapplication would be required.

Given that LDOs amount to a form ofplanning permission, they are capable ofbeing adopted subject to conditions. Thisincludes the ability to link the LDO to anArea Action Plan or other form of DPD, aswell as SPD, or indeed to other developmentcontrol guidelines or highways standards.Annex 1 provides a summary of somepractical pointers on how design codes canbe used in conjunction with LDOs.

Benefits of using the LDO route to formalise adesign code include:

• For local planning authorities:

– Refocussing the staff time and resources byinvesting up-front in the preparation of thedesign code (perhaps overcoming design skillsshortages by commissioning or secondingconsultants to work for or in the authority).

– A means to encourage development intereststo fund the preparation of design codes.

– Delivery of a proactive approach to securemore certain outcomes.

• For land and development interests:

– A streamlined implementation process, with aclear and agreed framework for design quality,but avoiding the need for multiple planningapplications or amendments.

– A more certain context within which to planand deliver development.

– A guarantee that design quality standards will remain consistent throughout successivephases of development.

– Less exposure to changing local authoritypriorities.

Further guidance on preparing and using LDOs is setout in Circular 01/2006.

Part

B

Stage

5

Using freehold rights

Design codes can also be formalised by otherlegal means outside of formal planning andregulatory processes. Experience to date inthe use of design codes, both in the UK andUSA, has shown that this may be anotheroption available to code promoters, particularlyprivate landowners. Landowners such asEnglish Partnerships have used their positionto more effectively implement design code inthis way.

Two key mechanisms exist to formalisedesign codes by using freehold rights:

• Development agreements.

• Covenants.

Development agreements in particular haveproven to be a highly effective means ofensuring that design codes are implemented.Through such means, parcel developers can be prevented from exercising their freeholdrights and selling their developments on topotential purchasers if they are not compliantwith the design code. In such cases theeffectiveness of the approach relies on thewillingness of landowners to take such action.In reality, the mere possibility of such actionnormally ensures that design codes have beenimplemented correctly.

Experiences of freehold rightsAt West Silvertown, the code was tied to thedevelopment agreement between the LDDC aslandowner (and planning authority at that time) andthe developer. In the case of Fairford Leys it was acondition of sale that the development should be inaccordance with the code. At Newcastle Great Parkthe potential of using covenants to control the use offront gardens/car parking spaces was considered,although this was not implemented.


92

Status and Responsibility Pre-requisites Ease of Decision- Speedtransparency for approach revision making

certainty vs.flexibility

LDOs High and Local A relevant Low – requires Once in place, Mixed – likely to public – planning adopted DPD re-adoption of provides high require a highintroduce authority and possibly LDO following certainty but front-endlocal permitted an EIA consultation potentially investment in development and publicity little flexibility preparing a rights unless built detailed design

into the code, but content of compensated forthe design by a streamlinedcode itself development

implementation process

Local Development Orders


93

Although covenants are capable of formalisingdesign codes, experience of using them to implement design codes has been morerestricted to date. Where covenants have beenused in this way, they have so far been limitedto implementing particular aspects of codes,for example helping to guarantee in perpetuitythat off-street parking can, as an alternative,be used as garden space. It is clear howeverthat covenants offer a possible means toimplement other aspects of design coding, and,just as development agreements can be writtento be binding on third parties. Covenants arebinding on all future owners of a site.

A key drawback to using such mechanisms is that design codes that are formalised in thisway effectively become a private tool whichis removed from the public scrutiny process.Like planning obligations, these legal approachesoffer considerable certainty to landownersand developers, but lack flexibility. Unlikeplanning conditions and obligations, theirinitiation and enforcement is entirely theresponsibility of the landowner.

Status and Responsibility Pre-requisites Ease of Decision- Speedtransparency for approach revision making

certainty vs.flexibility

Development High and Landowner Land Low – High certainty Fast – months, butagreement private – and parcel ownership requires and low little impact on

compliance developer and an new legal flexibility, long-term speed,based on legal identified agreement especially if and potentially agreement and parcel binding on drawn-out in the potentially tied developer third parties case of conflictto transfer of and based onfreehold rights landowners

being willingto enforce

Covenants High and Landowner Land Very low – High certainty Fast – one monthprivate – ownership once land and low compliance transferred, flexibility,based on requires although legal application based on agreement to the Lands willingness

Tribunal of landowner to enforce

Freehold rights approaches compared

Part

B

Stage

5

Comparing the approaches

Each approach described above has differentcharacteristics and particular strengths andweaknesses, and when weighing up theirmerits, coding teams should fully considerthese relative to one another. Importantly,individual approaches need not be used in isolation, and various combinations ofapproaches are possible.


94

Loca

l Dev

elop

men

t Ord

er

Deve

lopm

ent A

gree

men

t

Plan

ning

app

licat

ion

Plan

ning

Obl

igat

ion

Plan

ning

Con

ditio

n

Revi

sed

high

way

sta

ndar

ds

Deve

lopm

ent C

ontro

l gui

danc

e

Supp

lem

enta

ry P

lann

ing

Docu

men

t

Area

Act

ion

Plan

or o

ther

DPD

Area

Act

ion

Plan

or o

ther

DPD

Supp

lem

enta

ry P

lann

ing

Docu

men

t

Deve

lopm

ent C

ontro

l gui

danc

e

Revi

sed

high

way

sta

ndar

ds

Plan

ning

Con

ditio

n

Plan

ning

Obl

igat

ion

Plan

ning

app

licat

ion

Deve

lopm

ent A

gree

men

t

Loca

l Dev

elop

men

t Ord

er

Key approaches

Approaches and their characteristics

YES Checklist of questions NO

(Key: ▲ applies fully ● partially applies)

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ● ▲ Is high status required? ● ▲

▲ ● ● ● ▲ ▲ Is transparency in ▲ ● ● ▲ ● ▲

process required?

▲ ● ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ Should responsibility ● ▲ ▲

be public?

▲ ▲ ● Can responsibility ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ● ▲

be private?

● ▲ ● Is ease of revision ▲ ● ● ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

important?

● ● ▲ ● Is flexibility important? ▲ ● ▲ ● ▲ ● ▲ ▲

▲ ▲ ● ▲ ● ▲ ● ▲ Is certainty important? ● ▲ ● ●

▲ ▲ ● ▲ ● ● Is initial speed to ▲ ● ▲ ● ● ▲

adoption important?

▲ ● ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ● ▲ Is long-term speed ● ▲ ●

important?


95

Approaches compared – some strengths and weaknesses

Key approaches to formalising a design code

Area Action Plan or other DPD

Supplementary Planning Document

Development Control guidelines

Revised highway standards

Planning Condition

Planning obligation

Planning application

Development agreement

Local Development Order

Strengths

• Provides certainty for both local authoritiesand applicants

• Code given primacy alongside other DPDpolicy in determination of planningapplications

• Full community engagement in preparationof codes

• Faster when compared to DPD process

• Potential for detail in SPDs is well suited todetailed nature of design codes

• Quick to prepare but not a recommendedroute

• Can help overcome highways and drainageadoption problems later in process

• Provide opportunity to revise or supplementexisting outdated highways standards toinclude urban design considerations

• Considerable degree of certainty forapplicants

• Greater control for local authorities tosecure compliance to plan policies andachieve improved design quality

• Provides flexibility to amend code and forapplicants to challenge on appeal

• Provides certainty, although use ofconditions is preferred

• Code capable of being attached to outline,reserved matters and detailed applications

• Increased certainty for applicant if designcode attached to detailed application

• High certainty and fast to implement

• Provides another option to code promoters,particularly private landowners

• No need for local authorities to be involvedif landowners are private

• Speedier implementation of code-compliantdevelopment as no planning applicationrequired

• Can save local authority resources whenimplemented

• Considerable potential to deliver highquality development with considerablecertainty

• Guarantee that quality standards willremain consistent throughout successivephases of development

Weaknesses

• Not suitable if plan is out of date orrequires comprehensive review

• Longer time needed to formalise designcode when compared to other options

• Do not have status of development planand therefore carry less weight indetermining planning applications

• Unless adopted as SPD with an appropriatelevel of public consultation, they are likelyto carry limited weight in determiningplanning applications

• Engineers may be resistant to revisestandards

• If condition is not specific, it is unlikely tobe lawful and enforceable

• Less flexibility to amend code unlessspecific provision made within agreementto amend code

• No right of appeal – less open andtransparent means to implement code

• Any significant variation of code toaccommodate design changes likely toneed a new planning application

• Initiation and enforcement responsibility oflandowner

• Private tool which is removed from publicscrutiny process

• Lack flexibility

• May require longer code preparation andtesting processes to ensure that thedevelopment delivered is what is deemedacceptable

Part

B

Stage

5


96

Stakeholder Engagement

A related issue to the formalisation of adesign code is the question of engagementwith stakeholders outside of the core codingteam. Three types of engagement typicallyoccur during the course of a large developmentproject of the type that would normally justifya design code:

1. Community engagement.

2. Technical engagement.

3. Formal consultation.

Community engagement

The most appropriate time to engage the localcommunity in the design coding process is priorto the preparation of a design code (during stage3 of the process). This is when the physicalvision for a site or area is being created orduring the plan making process if the code is to be formalised through an LDF, whendifferent design options are being appraisedand before the overall shape and nature of the development has been fixed. This will ensure that the community’s input ismaximised and that the consultation exercisehas the greatest impact. At this stage, communityplanning events with a focus on establishing a broad physical vision are valuable tools inhelping to build a consensus around the ideaof design coding and in establishing momentumtowards the preparation of a specific design code.

Given the technical nature of design codes,community consultation on the technicalaspects of a draft design code is both difficultand experience shows that consultation isoften less productive, given that it can bedifficult to convey technical planning andarchitectural concepts to a local communitywho may not be familiar with the issues. Thisdoes not mean however that there should beno contact with the community during thepreparation of a design code. Where possible,code promoters should seek to keep communitiesinformed during a design coding exercise, forexample by email/website updates, publishingregular information leaflets or perhaps havinga regular exhibition and by providing localpeople with an opportunity to contact thecode promoter.

Although not recommended, design codes canbe used to assist in engaging the community.In such circumstances it is important that thecodes are presented in an accessible formatwith illustrations about the built form whichis promoted and that they are not expressedin technical language. In such circumstances,the core principles of design codes can beconsulted on as the critical ideas underpinningthe physical vision of the place which isbeing created.

Consulting on the design codeThe Hulme code is simple and concise, setting outin plain English the key aims and principles for thenew development. The coding process took place inparallel with the proposals for the redevelopment of the area, consultation with tenants and the widercommunity and with the design of the first phasesof replacement housing by the RSL partners ofHulme Regeneration.

Technical engagement

Engagement with technical stakeholdersoutside of the core design coding team will beessential during Stage 4 of the process whenthe design code is being prepared. Failure toengage all key technical stakeholders canquickly undermine trust in the work of designcoding teams and in the design code itself.If not included within the core team then thehighways authority in particular will need to


97

be a key technical stakeholder who shouldbe involved throughout the design codingprocess to ensure that key layout and publicrealm specifications are acceptable. Other keytechnical stakeholders are likely to include:

• Building control.

• Police authority.

• Fire authority.

• Housing authority.

• Local town and parish councils.

• Local Strategic Partnerships.

• Key local amenity organisations.

• Neighbouring land interests.

• Neighbouring local authorities.

• Utilities providers (including water).

• Environment Agency.

It is recommended that these stakeholders and,where appropriate, other relevant technicalstakeholders be provided with the opportunityto input once a full first draft has been prepared(if not before). This will provide an opportunityfor meaningful engagement with these interestsat a stage when the design code is stillrelatively malleable. It will also leave a furtheropportunity for input as part of the formalconsultation processes as part of any formaladoption or development control processes.

Formal consultation

The majority of the approaches to formalisinga design code will include an opportunity forformal consultation with stakeholders. Formalconsultation will provide an important finalopportunity to engage the interests of allstakeholders and enable, where necessary, itsfurther refinement. However, it is important tonote that by the time a design code reachesits formalisation stage the code will be fullyformed and changes will be more costly andproblematic. This emphasises the criticalimportance of securing stakeholder engagementas early as possible in the coding process to ensure that community and technical views have been fully considered and – ifappropriate – reflected in the content of thedesign vision and design code.

Opportunities for engagement

Stage 3:Appraise

Community engagement– on the design vision

Stage 4:Design and

test

Stage 5:Formalise

Formal consultation

Technical engagement

Part

B

Stage

5


98


• Use the Local Development Scheme of the LDFas an opportunity to establish a strict timetablefor design code adoption.

• Consider using a Planning Delivery Agreement(PDA)34 to agree a timetable for formalising adesign code.

• Get the highways authority to formally adoptthe design code to avoid needless repetitivenegotiations later.

• Investing time early on in the process shouldsave time later.

• Formally adopting the design code in the LDFwill save time when planning applications areconsidered.

• LDO processes can provide the surest route toa streamlined process over the long-run.

• Appropriate stakeholder and technicalengagement at the right time should reducepublic opposition and technical problems at theformal consultation stage.

34 Planning Delivery Agreements (PDAs) are timetableagreements which commit local authorities anddevelopers to an agreed set of milestones for thedevelopment of very large sites. PDAs can help aplanning application progress smoothly and providegreater certainty and transparency to a complexdevelopment process. PDAs are ideally suited tomanaging the design code preparation process.

99

Who, what and how?

Who is responsible?

Land* – Landowner, Master-developer, Funding Agency

Design† – Masterplanner/Framework Designer,Design Code Designer

Development* – Parcel Developer, Parcel Designer

Public* – Planning Authority, Highways Authority,Building Control


Responsibilities for the implementation of the design code will be shared across the full design coding team. At this stage, parceldevelopment interests will become fullyengaged with the project, with appropriateprocurement processes helping to ensure thatthese players are both sympathetic to theapproach and enthusiastic to help deliver thevision. The assessment processes that followwill be based on parcel designs produced bydevelopment interests, whilst the assessmentitself should ideally rely on land and publicinterests working together to deliver theirshared objectives.


Delivery of actual development on the groundinvolves scheme design, development andother formal regulatory processes. Thesedelivery processes will be intimately tied to,and are dependent for their success upon, thestages of code design and formalisation andthe processes of stakeholder engagementearlier in the coding process.

When design coding reaches this stage in theprocess towards realisation of the project onsite, the time, energy and resources expended

at the start of the process should begin to pay dividends in delivering a process basedon partnership and trust rather than thedisagreement and discord that has often beenthe case in the past. Moreover, as successivephases of development come forward throughthe design code the regulatory process willincreasingly become more streamlined withassociated benefits to all parties.

How is it done?

6Stage 6: Implementing thedesign code

• Use the design code to guide design /development procurement, placing clear qualitybenchmarks at its core.

• Design / offer and conditional sale of thedevelopment can be a quality-led process ifbased on a design code.

• As alternatives, consider a design competition ora joint venture partnership based on the designcode and vision.

• Encourage open dialogue and feedback from onetender process to the next, refining the processas successive parcels are brought forward fordevelopment.

• Integrate assessment processes for regulatoryand other purposes, particularly highways and planning.

• Consider means to streamline assessmentprocesses such as devolving responsibility,self assessment and delegation.

• Establish a clear process and criteria fordepartures from the design code.

Part

B

Stage

6

Introduction

Perhaps even more critical than the way adesign code is produced is the way it isimplemented, as it is on this basis that realdevelopment on the ground will be delivered.Implementation of any design guidance canall too easily be undermined if processes arenot in place consistently to focus on deliveringhigh quality outcomes. This stage of thedesign coding process begins with selectingdesigners and parcel developers who will usethe design code to develop and eventuallydeliver development. A second group of users will be those using the design code in a regulatory capacity; the developmentcontrollers and other regulators on whosedecisions will hang the necessary developmentconsents. These groups will be the keyconsumers of the design code.

Design and development procurement– the alternatives

Where parcels of land are being marketed,generally by a public or private landowner,design codes help to set quality thresholdsthat not all parcel developers and theirchosen designers will be able to meet. In sodoing they will weed out underperformingplayers from the start. This is one of the keybenefits of design codes and an importantreason why the quality of design is enhancedby their use.

Design codes can establish the brief for parceldesigners and developers to work to, andprovide a measurable means against which toassess whether potential teams can meet thechallenge. Used in this way, design codes can:

• Help to deliver a culture change in the importance attached to design bydevelopment interests.

• Assist developers to cost units (and therebydevelopments) with more certainty throughthe degree of standardisation that designcodes imply.

• Provide greater certainty for developerswhen applying for planning permissions,as long as their schemes are design codecompliant (while for non-compliant schemesthe opposite is true).

• Reduce the time taken to obtain planningconsents, saving resources for developersand local authorities alike.

• Reduce the likelihood that local planningauthorities will change their view of thedesign of a scheme as developmentprojects commence.

• Help to establish a level playing field fordevelopers when tendering for projects,enabling an efficient tendering processbased on clear quality benchmarks.

Establishing the procurement briefThe Upton code is included in the developerprocurement brief for each parcel of land to bereleased. Initially, potential bidders submit anexpression of interest. Shortlisted bidders thensubmit a design and financial offer, with the designsubmission being assessed against the code. In theoverall tender assessment, the relative weightings for design: financial offer are 70:30.


100

Stage 6: Implementing the design code

101

Part

B

Stage

6

Design competition

To optimise the use of design codes it isimportant to set the right procurementprocesses in place. One approach is to use thedesign code as part of the brief for a designcompetition, either as an open competition,or, following an initial pre-selection process(see below), for a limited competition. Thebenefits of such an approach is the immediateemphasis on outcomes that it generates.

Because competitions of this nature require aninvestment of considerable time by participants,it may be appropriate to limit the requirementsby focusing on key design ideas, and on howthe design code would be interpreted insample areas rather than requiring a detailedand fully worked up set of proposals. Moredetailed proposals can then be worked upwith the winning design team to form thebasis for a parcel brief. This can then be usedas the basis for a development tender process.

A competition approachFor the third phase at Newhall the landowner’s teammoved away from the conventional process ofreleasing parcels to housebuilders. Instead, the codewas used as a brief for the selection of an architectthrough a mini-competition. A joint venturedevelopment partner was then selected on the basisof the landowner’s concept design proposals. Thejoint venture retained the services of the architectthrough to completion.

Design, offer and conditional sale

A more conventional approach will be adesign/offer and conditional sale of land,leading to the selection of a developer/designer combination, with the design codebeing used as the basis for the parcel briefingpackage. A number of variants can be usedwith this approach, including one-stage andtwo-stage tender approaches. An intermediateapproach is recommended in this guide, with a pre-selection process followed by a full tender on the basis of design andfinancial proposals.

This approach is favoured because a pre-selection process prior to full tendering canhelp to cut down the significant resourcesdevelopers are required to invest in preparingdesign code-compliant bids. Whilst notprecluding the potential for variations, theinitial stage can help to determine whetherdesign and development teams are sympatheticwith the content of the design code and designvision. At this stage potential tenderers mightbe asked to submit:

• Company profiles.

• Examples of work and previous projectsthey have successfully delivered.

• Proposed team and managementarrangements.

• Answers to the checklist for selectingdesign coding team members (see Section 3).

A short list would be prepared based on thepre-selection submissions with short-listedteams asked to prepare full tenders in thenormal way, including worked up designproposals and a financial bid. The outcomesof these processes should:

1. Be subjected to separate and independentassessments of the design and financialcomponents.

2. Use a pre-determined design evaluationmatrix derived from the design code toassess the design.

3. Be weighted in a pre-determined manner,for example 70:30 (design : financial bid).


102

Selecting the parcel design /development team – a possible approach

Teams prepare andsubmit pre-tender

documents

Interview teamsbased on

documentation

Teams prepareand submitfull tender

Weight outcomesi.e. 70:30

Select preferred bidder

Feedback for future parcels

Designelaborationand delivery

Issue parcelbrief including

code

Shortlist

Assessfinancialproposal

Assessdesign

proposal

Joint-venture partnerships

Instead of selling the parcel outright, analternative is the creation of a joint venturepartnership, with the parcel developerbecoming the partner of the landowner and/or master-developer for the purposes ofdeveloping the parcel. In such cases, careshould be taken that any new partner is fully aware of, and signed-up to, the designprinciples contained in the design vision anddesign code. The potential benefits of such an approach are that the design code initiators – the landowner, master-developer or localauthority – will remain partners throughoutthe development process, and in this positionwill be able to directly influence deliveryagainst the design code.

Used in these various ways, design codes can aid the selection of development partnerswith greater certainty that aspirations will becompatible, and that subsequent negotiationswill be smooth. As part of the process ofprocuring design and development partners,the design code will be tested and re-tested.The result may be that problems are raisedwith the design code, with the design vision,or with the process of procurement itself.Consequently it will be important to encourageopen dialogue and feedback from one tenderprocess to the next, refining the process assuccessive parcels are brought forward fordevelopment.

It will also be important to encourage dialoguethroughout the processes of detailed parceldesign that follows, with technical supportprovided from the Design Code WorkingGroup (see Stage 2) to design/developmentteams on how they should interpret the designcode. In this role, the clearer the design code,the less assistance will be required.

Assessment and regulation ofdevelopment against design codes

As detailed proposals begin to come forwardthe next key test for the design code will be how they are assessed and regulated.Although formal regulatory roles will remainthe responsibilities of the statutory authorities,

the assessment of schemes against the designcode can be undertaken by others, for exampleif freehold rights are the prime means toformalise the design code (see Stage 5), or if skills are lacking in the public sector.

Practice to date has demonstrated thatassessment of schemes against a design codecan be undertaken by local planningauthorities, landowner/master-developers,design code designers, and by other designadvisors. Key issues will be the rigour,transparency and skill with which assessmentoccurs, and therefore that due process is builtinto the design code implementation stage toallow this to happen.

Assessment of schemes against design codescan occur in four ways:

1. Separated assessment, by each organisationwith an interest in delivering the designcode – the local planning authority, thehighways authority, and the landowner/master-developer.

2. Integrated assessment, with each organisationcoming together to jointly assess compliancewith the design code (within the publicsector only, or together with private sectordesign coding team members).

3. Devolved assessment, where assessment isentrusted to a third party – typically thedesign code designer – to assesscompliance and to report back to the otherinterested parties.

4. Self assessment, with parcel developersassessing their own compliance with the design code; and, perhaps, submitting aStatement of Compliance along with theirplanning application (see below).

Each of these options has advantages anddisadvantages and may be combined (e.g.integrated assessment, devolved to anexternal party). The decision regarding which to adopt will be a matter of local preference.


103

Part

B

Stage

6


104

The benefits of integrated assessment

Although the time commitment for partiesinvolved in making the assessment can besignificant, integrated assessment can help to create a streamlined single process forparcel developers. Although appropriateconsents will in most cases still be necessarybefore a developer can proceed with adevelopment, the design code can play a vitalrole in helping to bring these organisationstogether and in ensuring compatibilitybetween the various responsibilities.

As a minimum, the integration of highwaysdesign and adoption considerations alongsideplanning considerations via a developmentteam approach is strongly recommended (seeStage 2). If highways issues are consideredseparately to planning and other design codingissues, tensions can arise, for example overthe adoption of higher specification publicrealm materials and features, including streettrees and public art. Such factors are bestconsidered and agreed during the designcode design process, with agreement flowingthrough to inform the design code assessment.

Assessment approaches compared

Strengths Weaknesses

Separated assessment • Efficient for parties involved • Parcel developers can feel trappedin assessment in the middle of separate

• Ensures stakeholder priorities uncoordinated processesare uncompromised

Integrated assessment • A one-stop-shop approvals • Can be time consuming and resourceprocess intensive for parties involved in

• One coordinated set of the assessmentcomments

• Encourages on-going dialoguebetween key stakeholders

Devolved assessment • Ensures consistency of • If funded by land-interests, dangerassessment that schemes may be sold on,

• Can overcome skills and leading to an absence of knowledge gaps responsibility

• Allows some on-going • May create a disconnectionadaptation of the design code between stakeholders and the through the way it is design codeinterpreted

Self assessment • Encourages parcel developers • Danger of a less rigorousto focus directly on the design assessmentcode in order to determine • Some stakeholders will want an their own compliance additional compliance check

• Will be valuable when codes • Will focus on achieving minimumare formalised through a LDO standards, not on higher objectives

Making assessment processes more effective

Requiring prior self assessment can bevaluable as a means to focus minds andensure that material is presented in a waythat allows quick and efficient assessment. In such cases a standard Statement ofCompliance can be provided for completionby parcel developers although these are notnormally encouraged (see Stage 5). Whenused, it is important that Statements ofCompliance are seen as ‘light-touch’ toolsdesigned to build confidence, and not as an additional layer of regulation.

For development control staff, appropriatechecklists within the design code, andadequate training in its use, can greatlyfacilitate their role, as can the automatic useof delegated powers.

Given the resources invested up-front in thepreparation and agreement of design codes(by all stakeholders), and the level of designinformation required to comply with designcodes, it is strongly recommended that thedetermination of planning applications againstany design codes are delegated for decisionby officers in the local planning authority andnot referred to Council committees unlessabsolutely necessary. Although this is a matterfor each local planning authority to decide,delegated decisions will assist in speedingup decision-making. A formalised design code is likely to have been previously agreedby elected members and therefore thereshould be no reason why a code compliantdevelopment should need to be referred to aCouncil committee. By these means, land anddevelopment interests can be encouraged toinvest in the design code process, safe in theknowledge that a streamlined approvalsprocess will result.

The process of land interests assessing thecompliance of parcel designs with designcodes prior to the formal planning process canalso be very effective, as is the practice ofdevolving primary responsibility to a designatedrepresentative to make the assessment.As a means to ensure compliance and quality,

such a process requires significant trust betweenparties, but can be particularly valuable ifskills and resources in local authorities are in short supply.

Assessment practices comparedFor Upton, English Partnerships established anintegrated process of assessment. A co-ordinatedresponse is provided to tender design submissionsand then to the preferred bidder’s pre-applicationproposals. Each response is based on an assessmentmade by a group that includes representatives fromEnglish Partnerships, the code designer, the localplanning and highway authorities.

At Fairford Leys, the masterplanner and codedesigner has vetted all proposals on behalf of thelandowning trust, prior to planning applicationsbeings submitted. As neither the masterplan nor thecode have formal planning status, there has beenan informal reliance on the code designer’s‘policing’ of the vision.

Flexibility in assessment

The difficult question of flexibility andprescription has been addressed earlier in thisguide (see Stage 4). Any design guidance thatallows too much interpretation may simplyencourage uncertainty and conflict that needsto be resolved through time-consumingnegotiations. However, stakeholders shouldbe willing to engage in discussions withdevelopers to vary the design code if soundand reasoned justifications can be made. Itmay be, for example, that specific proceduresare agreed in advance and written into the


105

Part

B

Stage

6


106

design code to allow exemptions in certaincircumstances. Legitimate reasons might include:

• Outstanding innovative design.

• Demonstrated changes to the local market.

• Changes to the policy framework (forexample, national policy).

• Technical improvements.

• Experience in use (for example whereknown problems exist).

• Unforeseen factors for which the designcode does not provide.

In such cases local elected members may wishto be involved in the decision-making process.

Prematurity

Local Planning Authorities are advised not to refuse planning applications simply on thegrounds that the preparation or review of adesign code will be prejudiced. Where thereis a concern about prematurity, the nature of the design code and how it is to beformalised will be a key consideration. TheGuidance in The Planning System: GeneralPrinciples, which accompanies PPS1, sets outfurther considerations with regard to issues ofprematurity. The imposition of a ‘developmentfreeze’ on sites or areas where a design codeis being prepared is not possible.


• Use delegated powers when determiningplanning applications against a design code.

• Build in processes that identify and excludeunsympathetic development interests early inthe process.

• Experienced designers can creatively interpretdesign codes and reduce the need for timeconsuming negotiations.

• Integrate assessment processes and provide a single informed point of contact for thedeveloper.

• Agree highways adoption matters to avoidsuccessive developers repeating the samediscussions.

• Use a dedicated sub-committee where planning applications need electedmember consent.

• Development interests should considersponsoring dedicated planning officers tostreamline assessment of proposals against adesign code.

107

Who, what and how?

Who is responsible?

Land* – Landowner, Master-developer

Design† – Design Code Designer

Development‡ – Parcel Developer

Public* – Planning Authority, HighwaysAuthority, Building Control



This final stage of the design coding processwill be the preserve of the various regulatoryauthorities, and those responsible for initiatingand preparing the design code. This will includethe local planning and highways authorities,and also the various land interests. Designinterests may be involved if explicitly retainedby either of these authorities to monitor the design code or to evaluate its success.Development interests will not have primaryresponsibility for this stage, but the designquality of the development will largelydetermine whether enforcement by the localplanning authority is needed.


As projects are built out, design codes canretain an important role in delivery processesthrough managing the delivery of high qualitydesign during construction, and thereafteraiding management and maintenance processes.These roles represent a natural continuationof the procurement and regulatory processes.They include monitoring, enforcement (wherenecessary), design code evaluation and on-going aftercare.

Although this final stage in the design codedelivery process may seem a long way offwhen starting out, like all the other parts of the process, this stage should be fullyconsidered from the beginning to avoidproblems later. Design coding is of little valueif it cannot be delivered, and monitoring andenforcement, as well as a willingness to refinethe design code over time, will be critical toits long-term success.

How is it done?

7Stage 7: Managing designcode compliance

• For effective design code monitoring andenforcement, a proactive, adequatelyresourced, process is needed.

• Retaining the code designer to monitorcompliance, or appointing a dedicatedcompliance officer, will provide the optimal solution.

• Private funding of monitoring compliance,either direct or indirect, can bring benefits to all stakeholders.

• Provision for regular code evaluation andamendment should be written into designcodes, or incorporated in the design codingprocess e.g. the use of parcel-basedsupplementary or “mini” design codes.

• Consider options for design code-basedaftercare of completed development projects.

Part

B

Stage

7

Introduction

It is critical that sufficient attention is paid tothe actual delivery of the design vision on site,as judged against the design code.

Monitoring and enforcement

Reflecting the alternative options to formalisedesign codes and of assessing the design of parcel proposals (see Stages 5 and 6),monitoring and enforcement can be undertakenby both local authorities and private stakeholders(or a combination of both). Monitoring andenforcement of design codes by privatestakeholders has proven particularly effectivein practice to date. However, as designcoding becomes more widespread, localauthorities are increasingly taking on this role,mainly through exercising normal planningcontrol and highways adoption powers. Thedecision about which option to use shouldtake account of the relative strengths andweaknesses.

Making the process more effective

Unless design codes are supported byappropriate enforcement, their effectivenesswill be significantly undermined. To deliver amore effective local authority monitoring andenforcement service, a proactive, adequatelyresourced approach needs to be taken. Anumber of options should be considered:

• A dedicated officer can be appointed to monitor compliance against the design code.

• A tick-box approach to compliance can bedevised, with elements design coded in amanner that facilitates their monitoring on-site.

• Training and additional resources can betargeted on the enforcement team to raiseawareness of the design code and its use.

• The original code designer can be retainedto ensure compliance with the design code.

Enforcement is a skilled and time-consumingactivity, and unless problems are identifiedduring construction and before the sale ofany built elements of the scheme, then it isunlikely that breaches will be enforced.Where the original code designer is retainedor a dedicated officer appointed for thisfunction, it is recommended that frequent siteinspections are undertaken (e.g. weekly or bi-weekly) to identify inconsistencies as they arise and to ensure that they can be efficiently rectified. However, this can be an expensive activity and may be beyondthe resources of some local authorities.

In such cases, one option is for the landowner/master-developer to fund a compliance officerwithin the local authority, perhaps as part of a Section 106 planning obligation, or forparcel developers themselves to make acontribution. If a planning obligation is used


108

Monitoring and enforcement approaches compared

Strengths Weaknesses

Public • Open and transparent • Lack of resources in enforcement• Encourages greater public sector • Lack of commitment can fatally undermine

interest in the preparation of the design codethe design code and its • Lack of skills for detailed monitoringimplementation

• Non-adoption of street works is a highly effective sanction

Private • Greater access to resources Threat • Lacks transparencyto withhold freehold rights is a • Danger that schemes may be sold on,powerful incentive for compliance leading to a reduction in commitment

• Possible on-going involvement and/or an absence of responsibilityof the original designer

for this purpose, it is important to note thatlocal authorities cannot themselves requiresuch a contribution, although, throughnegotiation, developers can offer to provideone. The benefits will be a smoothercompliance checking process, and avoidanceof the time and expense (for both parties)associated with retrospective enforcement.

Monitoring and enforcement – a public responsibilityAt Ingress Park in Greenhithe, the local authority is responsible for formally monitoring compliancewith the design guidance, through both its planningand highway roles. However, the developer checksthe reserved matters applications prepared byconsultants before submission to the planningauthority. Any issues of non-compliance on site have generally been picked up through thehighways adoption process and fed back to theplanning department. These have generally beenminor issues relating to materials.

The sanction held by highways authorities to refuse to adopt street works is extremelyeffective at ensuring code compliance, notleast because monitoring of compliance isregular, rigorous and sustained. Because thisactivity already happens as a routine and on-going part of the highways adoption process,a further option may be for officers from thehighways authority to feed back designcompliance issues to the planning department.In such circumstances it will be important fora formal agreement to be reached betweenthese two authorities (where they are not thesame authority), and perhaps some cross-funding of the activity. This will ensure thatthe timetable and focus of the monitoringaddresses the different requirements of bothstatutory functions.

Private approaches to enforcement

Where private sector arrangements are madefor monitoring by landowners for example,enforcement will need to rely on the termsand conditions of a development agreement.In such cases, landowners or their agentsneed to monitor final completed schemesbefore signing over freehold rights, theultimate sanction for non-compliance beingthe withholding of these rights from theparcel developer. In the interim, developerscan be granted a licence to complete thedevelopment.

Monitoring and enforcement – a private responsibilityAt Newhall, Harlow, the masterplanner and codedesigner monitors compliance with the code onbehalf of the landowner. It is important to identifyany non-compliance swiftly as, in practice, it isunlikely to be possible to enforce the condition of sale through the courts unless the breach issignificant. Another reason for prompt action is the added complication once a dwelling has beensold to a third party householder.

This practice raises the question of when tosell the land, at parcel developer selection orafter delivery on site. The latter requires thata development agreement be established, whilethe former will rely on other mechanisms forenforcement, such as planning enforcement,or the threat that parcel developers will notbe considered for future parcel allocations.

A combination of both public and privatesector monitoring and enforcement providesthe surest means to accurately deliver thedesign vision.

Stage 7: Managing design code compliance

109

Part

B

Stage

7

Evaluating and amending design codes

Given that the circumstances in which codesare used change over time, they should becapable of evolving throughout their life.Most design codes tend to evolve throughouttheir use, being either formally or informallyevaluated and revised. Reasons to review thecontent of design codes will vary, but willbroadly reflect those in Stage 6 which sets out legitimate design code exemptions.

A willingness to update design codes isparticularly important at an early stage in theiruse, as it is then that unexpected problemstypically arise. Design coded principles shouldnot be seen as set in stone but be capable ofbeing reviewed. This is particularly true onlarge sites with long-term developmentaspirations. It is therefore recommended thatprovision for evaluation and amendment bewritten into design codes – initially followingthe experience of their use to deliver the firstparcel/or phase of development.

Reviewing the design codeProvision was made for the code at Upton to bereviewed and the first review was carried out afterthe first phase of development. A review at this earlystage has allowed the code to be refined in responseto its use in practice. It is envisaged that the code willcontinue to be reviewed at periodic intervals.

Mini-design codes

The use of supplementary or “mini” designcodes or design code “overlays” which add to the main/master design code can avoid the need for a complete review of the designcode. Such supplements can address particularsubjects such as public realm issues, or canbe prepared for each parcel of land or phaseof development as it comes forward fordevelopment. In such circumstances themaster design code should reflect the broadstrategic design principles that are unlikely to change (e.g. settlement pattern and builtform issues), whilst the mini-design codesmight focus on more detailed issues (e.g.architectural limitations and landscaping).These latter issues are more likely to change,and may benefit from variation in order toemphasise the distinctive qualities of differentparcels (see Stage 4).

It may be appropriate for a local authority to place a maximum limit on the size ofdevelopment for which single detailed designcodes should be prepared and adopted. For example 1,200 housing units if the coded scheme involves a residential element.Such an approach would allow for strategicdesign codes to be prepared for a site as awhole and then detailed design codes to be prepared for respective parcels or phases.For very large sites, built out over extendedtimescales, this would ensure that thestrategic design requirements are consistentacross the entire site, whilst detailed coderequirements are able to reflect changingcircumstances.

Project aftercare

Design codes can have a role over the long-term in the on-going management andmaintenance of completed developments. The advantages of this are two-fold. First,managing on the basis of a design code can help to ensure that the original visioncontinues to be respected over time asincremental ad hoc developments begin to have an impact (e.g. extensions, alterationsand infill developments). Second, everydaymaintenance responsibilities and routine streetworks can also be undertaken in a mannerthat preserves the qualities that the designcode helped to deliver.


110

It is recommended that ongoing managementand maintenance principles are built into a design code from the outset. Variousmechanisms are possible:

1. Turning the design code into amanagement and maintenance guide forthe control of minor works throughdevelopment control.

2. Using the same guide or the originaldesign code to guide the highwaysmaintenance and urban managementfunctions of local authorities.

3. Creating a local management company ortenants association to become the guardianof the design code, and to offer advice on rebuilding or replacing materials tomatch existing.

4. Introducing restrictions on new residents atthe point of sale through covenants, tocontrol, for example, alterations.

5. Introducing restrictions on the rights ofoccupiers built into leases, for example nosatellite dishes, sheds, or the paving overof front gardens.

6. Removing permitted development rights,so that new minor development proposalsare consistently judged against theprinciples contained in the design code.

7. Using an LDO and simplified design codeto extend permitted development rights byprescribing what is, and is not, acceptablein a particular development.

Each of these will need careful thought priorto implementing as some may have undesirableunintended consequences. For example,removing permitted development rights maymake it harder for “lifetime homes”35 to adaptand change along with the life stage of theiroccupiers. Nevertheless, it is important thatthe initial investment in design quality thatthe use of a design code represents isadequately protected over the long-term.

Stage 7: Managing design code compliance

111

35 See www.buildingforlife.org


• Taking monitoring and enforcement seriouslyfrom the start will avoid delay andmisunderstanding later on.

• Consider appointing a dedicated complianceofficer.

• Design the code in a manner that facilitatesmonitoring on-site.

• Consider sharing the monitoring role acrossauthorities – planning and highways.

• Use design code supplements such as “mini”design codes to cut down on initial designcoding time and the need for early review.

• ‘Keep going’ – Increased familiarity of teamswith design coding will increasinglystreamline design code preparation.

Part

B

Stage

7


112

Annex 1: Using design codes in conjunction with LDOs

Using design codes in conjunction with LDOs – some practical pointers

Linking a code to a LDO• Process: Where a design code is proposed to be formalised through a LDO, the code will need to follow

the same preparation, approval and implementation process (including, if required, any EnvironmentalImpact Assessment (EIA) and public consultation) as other typical LDOs. There is no difference to thepreparation process if a design code is attached to a LDO.

• Relationship to development plan: LDOs have to be tied to a policy in a DPD. Although local authoritiesare encouraged to prepare LDOs in parallel with the preparation of a development plan, there is noabsolute requirement for this and a local authority may introduce a LDO at any time after a developmentplan document has been adopted. However, it is recommended that the appropriate time for preparingthe LDO is when the Design Code is at a final draft stage. This is to ensure that the local authoritypreparing the LDO thoroughly considers the extent of the provisions contained within the Code.

• Environmental Assessments and Appraisals: Although highly unlikely in practice, an LDO cannot be made for EIA development under Schedule 1 of the EIA Regulations. A code linked to a LDO for suchdevelopment would therefore not be possible. If the LDO with a design code attached includesdevelopment listed under Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations then local authorities must must issue ascreening opinion as to whether an EIA is required before the LDO is granted development consent.Where EIA is required this must be done before development consent is deemed to be granted throughan LDO. The EIA Regulations set out the relevant procedures. Sustainability Appraisal or StrategicEnvironmental Appraisal regulations do not apply to LDOs because LDOs have to be tied to a DPD which would have already undergone such assessments.

• Consultation: Consultation arrangements would be the same as any other LDO although it isrecommended that the local authority should consider carefully the scope for specific early consultationarrangements when developing the design principles and / or vision underpinning a code to be attachedto a LDO. Consultation would also be necessary for a Code if it is attached to it via a condition.

Conditioning a LDO• Scope of condition: A LDO can be made with conditions to ensure that it can deliver the objectives

for which it is made. Conditions should set out clearly what development is permitted. Conditions couldalso require the developer to carry out an action in relation to the development, for example, notifyingneighbours prior to commencement of works. When seeking to impose conditions in a LDO, a localauthority should consider their suitability in the same way as they would for an ordinary planningpermission. In other words any imposed conditions would need to comply with Circular 11/ 95 onPlanning Conditions.

• Condition linking a design code: It is recommended that a design code which is proposed to be linkedto a LDO is attached via a condition. This should make clear that code compliant development does notrequire planning permission if it is in accordance with the relevant Design Code. Any non-compliance orbreach of the LDO would be subject to the normal enforcement powers for planning permissions, under a local authority’s policies and procedures.

Annex 1: Using design codes in conjunctioin with LDOs

113

Using design codes in conjunction with LDOs – some practical pointers continued

Checking development is code compliant• Compliance checks: Some local authorities may want to require as a condition of the LDO that there

is some type of design code compliance /validation check carried out before development is deemed to be permitted. Local authorities may want to introduce such a process to remain informed aboutdevelopments coming forward on a site or in an area. Such a process is not however encouraged. Anyincreased certainty this might potentially deliver for the local authority is likely to reduce the certaintyand speed that a LDO is intended to deliver. Local authorities should instead consider whether closer inhouse working relationships between planning and building control services are possible, for examplewhere building control applications are routinely copied to the planning service for monitoring thecompliance of a development against a design code.

Where code compliance checks are used, it is recommended that local authorities do not require ascheme to be subject to such checks before permitted development rights take affect.

• Requests for submission of further details: Local authorities should avoid seeking further details to be submitted and approved by the local authority where a design code is attached to a LDO. Such an approach risks undermining the potential benefits of LDOs and is not recommend. Preference should be give to the full use of conditions linked to a LDO which specify what development is allowed and not allowed.

• Monitoring LDO and code compliance: Local planning authorities will wish to monitor on-goingcompliance with the LDO to ensure it is meeting its objectives and in order to notify the Secretary of Stateof its relative success as part of the Annual Monitoring Report process. This can be done through site visits,setting up notifications arrangements (see Stage 6), monitoring against building regulations submissions,or through consulting other bodies, such as town or parish councils. Whichever approach is used, thisshould be done with a light touch and not be used as a means to re-assert formal development controls retrospectively.

• Other mechanisms: Developers may seek a Lawful Development Certificate based on the LDO or forconditions to confirm that their development is lawful for planning control purposes.

Level of detail• Flexibility or prescriptive: It is for the local planning authority to decide how flexible or prescriptive a

design code attached to a LDO should be. However, because a LDO effectively grants planning permission,a design code attached to a LDO needs to ensure that the code is clear about the design qualitythresholds expected. Such codes, therefore, will need to be more prescriptive to ensure the developmentdelivered is what is deemed acceptable. This may lead to a longer code preparation and testing processthan might otherwise be expected but these initial investments will be offset when the LDO takes effect.

• Small scale developments: In principle, LDOs and any related design codes are ideally suited toregulate small scale householder development.

Amending an LDO• Timing: If at any time the LDO is considered not to be working effectively the planning authority can

amend or revoke it, although this should only be done if the LDO can be demonstrated to be workingagainst the relevant DPD policies to which it is tied and meant to be delivering. Normal enforcementprocedures would apply to LDOs, should the LPA consider a development to be in breach of thepermission granted by a LDO.

Annex 2: The design coding process summarised


114

Stage 1: Initiate

Stage 2: Coordinate

Stage 3: Appraise

Stage 4: Design and

test

Stage 5: Formalise

Stage 6: Implement

Stage 7: Manage

■ Consider whether design coding is the appropriate tool for the project in question.

■ Think through key design coding process options, including how it relates to the design vision, community engagement, planning consents, developer selection and available options for finalising a design code.

■ Agree and fix the design coding process, in a project plan.

■ Prepare a commissioning brief.

■ Set up leadership arrangements, reflecting public and private roles, resources and aspirations.

■ Establish a design code champion.

■ Establish a robust management structure, including a Design Code Working Group to focus on the day to day management of the design coding process.

■ Embed organisational arrangements within a project plan, including allocating key roles and working arrangements, and setting timelines and milestones.

■ Reflect all key public and private interests at all levels in the management structure.

■ Use a development team approach to coordinate public sector inputs.

■ Develop a clear strategy for managing resources, be realistic, and plan to front load staff time.

■ Consider using private sector resources to plug public sector time and skills gaps.

■ Establish a team with the required multi-disciplinary skills, covering all key generic, disciplinary and specialist design coding skills within the design coding team.

■ Ensure adequate contextual analysis and availability of information on local character and physical factors across different scales: settlement pattern, urban form, urban space, block structure, built form, public realm, landscape and green space. Commission new detailed local character analysis to fill any gaps where necessary.

■ Develop understanding of how contextual information will inform the various elements of the code.

■ Have regard to existing national, regional and local policy and guidance.

■ Have regard to community engagement and the local sustainable community strategy.

■ Recognise the design and development framework or masterplan as the critical contextual factor for informing the preparation of the design code.

■ Identify and resolve conflicts early, for example with existing highways standards.

■ Consider how the code may impact for example on utilities provision, flood risk management, transport linkages and infrastructure requirements.

■ Establish the core design objectives to underpin the design code�s content.

■ Decide on the scales and the elements the code needs to cover for any specific situation.

■ Decide which elements of the code will be mandatory or discretionary, but seek to balance prescription with flexibility across the design code and for each element within it.

■ Base any detailed provisions of the code on an in-depth understanding of local character and context.

■ Consider the limitations imposed by the different regulatory regimes that impact on design, as well as the skills and resources available for implementation, and express the design code accordingly.

■ Structure, express and present the code so that it maximises understanding, accessibility and the use of illustrations.

■ Test the design code to assess its viability and (where necessary) refine its content.

Annex 1: The design coding process summarised

115

Stage 1:Initiate

Stage 2:Stage 2:CoordinateCoordinate

Stage 3:Appraise

Stage 4:Stage 4:Design andDesign and

testtest

Stage 5:Formalise

Stage 6:Implement

Stage 7:Manage

■ The work entailed in formalising the code will depend on which route the coding team decide should be pursued.

■ Consider the options for giving the design code formal status. Two main routes are to adopt the code within the LDF, or to formalise it through the planning application process in development control.

■ Consider linking the code to a Local Development Order (LDO) to streamline subsequent decision making.

■ Consider the merits of using a landowner or freehold agreement to give the code status.

■ Be clear about formal requirements for appraising sustainability and environmental impact set out in the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and the Strategic Environmental Assessment Regulations and at what stage in the preparation process a formal assessment may be required.

■ From the outset, aim to formally adopt the design code for both planning and highways purposes and consider carefully how it relates to the building regulations.

■ Be mindful of the need to refine the code through technical engagement.

■ When a draft of the final design code is available, conduct formal consultation as part of the adoption process.

■ Use the design code to guide design/development procurement, placing clear quality benchmarks at its core.

■ Design/offer and conditional sale of the development can be a quality-led process if based on a design code.

■ As alternatives, consider a design competition or a joint venture partnership based on the design code and vision.

■ Encourage open dialogue and feedback from one tender process to the next, refining the process as successive parcels are brought forward for development.

■ Integrate assessment processes for regulatory and other purposes, particularly highways and planning.

■ Consider means to streamline assessment processes such as devolving responsibility, self assesment and delegation.

■ Establish a clear process and criteria for departures from the design code.

■ For effective design code monitoring and enforcement, a proactive, adequately resourced, process is needed.

■ Retaining the code designer to monitor compliance, or appointing a dedicated compliance officer, will provide the optimal solution.

■ Private funding of monitoring compliance, either direct or indirect, can bring benefits to all stakeholders.

■ Provision for regular code evaluation and amendment should be written into design codes, or incorporated in the design coding process e.g. the use of parcel-based supplementary or “mini” design codes.

■ Consider options for design code-based aftercare of completed development projects.


116

Annex 3: Glossary of termsTerm Meanings

Area Action Plan A Development Plan Document used to provide the planningframework for areas where significant change is anticipated orwhere conservation is needed.

Building envelope Possible site and massing of a building.

Character areas Areas of distinct and identifiable character within a largerdevelopment or area.

Planning Condition A means of establishing a particular requirement (the planningcondition) in relation to the decision granting planning permission.

Delegated Powers Powers delegated from the formal planning committee to theirofficers, for example to determine certain types of permissions.

Design and Access Statement A statement accompanying a planning application that sets outthe design principles on which a development proposal is based.

Design Code A set of illustrated design rules and requirements which instructand may advise on the physical development of a site or area.The graphic and written components of the code are detailedand precise, and build upon a design vision such as a masterplanor other design and development framework for a site or area.

Design guidance Guidance on how development can be carried out in accordance with the design policies of a local authority or other organisation.

Development agreements Legal agreements between the landowner/master-developer andparcel developers laying out the terms under which a licence fordevelopment is being granted, and including – potentially – theprinciples on which freehold rights to develop will be granted.

Development brief A document, prepared by a local planning authority, adeveloper, or jointly, providing guidance on how a site ofsignificant size or sensitivity should be developed. Site-specificbriefs are sometimes known as planning briefs, design briefsand development frameworks.

Development Plan Documents Spatial planning documents that are subject to independent (DPDs) examination, and together with the relevant Regional Spatial

Strategy, will form the development plan for a local authorityarea for the purposes of the Town and County Planning Act.They can include a Core Strategy, Site Specific Allocations ofland, and Area Action Plans (where needed). OtherDevelopment Plan Documents, including generic DevelopmentControl Policies, can be produced. They will all be showngeographically on an adopted proposals map. Each authoritymust set out the programme for preparing its Development PlanDocuments in the Local Development Scheme.

Annex 2: Glossary of terms

117

Term Meanings

Design framework Design guidance for large sites establishing the broad two/three-dimensional form of development, including all key structuralelements.

Enquiry by Design A methodology of collaborative design promoted by the Prince’sFoundation.

Environmental Impact A procedure that must be followed for certain types of project Assessment (EIA) before development consent can be granted, which assesses the

likely significant impacts of a development on the environmentand serves to inform both the public and decision maker.

Lifetime Homes Homes that incorporate a series of key features that together ensure that housing is accessible and adaptable in any setting.

Local Development Framework The name for the portfolio of Local Development Documents. (LDF) It consists of Development Plan Documents, Supplementary

Planning Documents, a Statement of Community Involvement,the Local Development Scheme and Annual Monitoring Reports.Together these documents will provide the framework fordelivering the spatial planning strategy for a local authority area.

Local Development Order An order made by a local planning authority granting automatic (LDO) planning consent for the form of development specified in the order.

Masterplan A three-dimensional spatial vision for a site establishing keyurban design relationships but not necessarily the architecture.

Mini design codes More detailed design codes for the different character areas of asite or area already covered by a design code.

Natural surveillance The discouragement to wrong-doing by the presence of passers-(or supervision) by or the ability of people to be seen out of surrounding

windows. Also known as passive surveillance (or supervision).

Parcel A sub-area or phase of a larger site divided and sold off fordevelopment to a parcel developer, often chosen on the basis of atender process.

Perimeter block The traditional means of developing urban areas, with buildingssurrounding urban blocks and protecting private space within thecentre of the block and facing onto public streets and spaces around.

Procurement process The process of procuring design or development services.

Outline planning consent Planning permission given subject to reserved matters, e.g.detailed design.

Regulating plan A two dimensional plan locating and setting out the designcoded development parameters of a site – building lines,frontage widths, block and street dimensions, active frontages, etc.

Reserved matters Matters held over for future consideration following the grantingof an outline planning consent, and subject to a further reservedmatters application.

Section 106 agreements An agreement negotiated between the local planning authorityand persons with an interest in a piece of land (or “developers”).

Term Meanings

Statement of compliance A statement submitted by a parcel developer to alandowner/master-developer or local authority, formallyconfirming compliance with the design code.

Strategic Environmental A generic term used to describe environmental assessment as Assessment (SEA) applied to policies, plans and programmes. The European ‘SEA

Directive’ (2001/42/EC) requires a formal ‘environmentalassessment of certain plans and programmes, including those inthe field of planning and land use’.

Street hierarchy The hierarchy of street, road and footpath types used in an area

Supplementary Planning Guidance which is part of a Local Development Framework,Document (SPD) produced to expand or supplement the policies set out in a

Development Plan Document.

Sustainable Community Local authorities are under a duty under the Local Government Strategy Act 2000 to prepare a Sustainable Community Strategy. The role

of the Strategy is to set out the strategic vision for a place. Itprovides a vehicle for considering and deciding how to addressdifficult cross-cutting issues such as the economic future of anarea, social exclusion and climate change. Building these issuesinto the community’s vision in an integrated way is at the heartof creating sustainable development at the local level.

Sustainable urban drainage A form of drainage designed to collect and recycle water and (SUDS) drainage on-site.


118

Annex 4: Credits

Project TeamThis document was commissioned from the Bartlett School of Planning, UCL (Matthew Carmona) and Tibbalds Planning and Urban Design (Jane Dann), and advised by Andy Karski and Quentin Stevens.

Steering GroupThe project steering group included: Daniel Bridger, DCLG; Alastair Donald, CABE; Helen Eveleigh, English Partnerships; Lee Scott, CABE; Sylvia Short, English Partnerships; Patrick Wetter, DCLG; and, Mario Wolf, DCLG.

Pilot Projects

Documentary sources (including drafts and documents in progress):

AldershotEntec, Alan Baxter Associates for Defence Estates (undated) Aldershot Urban Extension Design Code

Ashford BarracksEDAW (October 2004) Ashford Barracks Design Codes

CirencesterJohn Thompson and Partners, Berkeley Community Villages (undated) Kingshill Design Code Berkeley Community Villages

Hastings, Ore ValleyUrban Initiatives for Sea Space, Hastings Borough Council (July 2005) Ore Valley, Hastings Millennium Community Urban Design Codes

Newcastle Walker RiversideNewcastle City Council (November 2005) Walker Riverside Draft Design Code

Rotherham Town Centre River CorridorRoger Evans Associates for Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, Transform South Yorkshire, Yorkshire Forward (September 2005) Design Code for the Rotherham Town Centre River Corridor

Swindon SDAJohn Simpson and Partners (July 2005) Swindon Southern Development Area Design Code: Introduction and Planning Background; Book 1 Design Code for Urban Areas; Book 2 Westlecott Village; Book 3 West Leaze; Book 4 South Leaze

119

Other documentary sources

Alfred McAlpine, Terry Farrell & Company (May 1995) Cambourne Design Guide (unpublished)

Crest, Tibbalds Monro (February 1999) Greenhithe Waterfront Character Area Study – Design Statements (unpublished)

English Partnerships, Northampton Borough Council, Princes Foundation (March 2005) Upton Design Code version 2

Hulme Regeneration Limited (June 1994) A Guide to Development, Rebuilding the City, Hulme, Manchester

John Simpson & Partners (updated April 1993) Masterplan Design Criteria for the Coldharbour Farm Development (unpublished)

Newcastle City Council (November 2000) Newcastle Great Park Design Code (unpublished)

North Somerset Council (1997) Development Framework for Portishead Quay at East Portishead Supplementary Planning Guidance

Roger Evans Associates for New Hall Projects Ltd (November 2000) Newhall Land Parcels ID (+IE) Planning and Design Information (unpublished)

Tetlow King (October 2002) Urban Design Strategy Fairfield Park Consultation Draft (unpublished)

Tibbalds Monro, LDDC, Wimpey Homes (undated) The Urban Village Design Codes, West Silvertown Urban Village, Royal Victoria Dock South (unpublished)

Tibbalds Planning & Urban Design, English Partnerships, Bournville Village Trust (January 2004) Lightmoor Telford Design Guidance (unpublished)

Other credits for illustrations

Other images used throughout the document are by the research and pilot project teams and alsoby kind permission of the following: Tim Crocker; English Partnerships; EDAW; Alan BaxterAssociates; Northampton Borough Council and The Princes Foundation; Forum Vauban e.V.;‘Fotograf H.G. Esch’ VISTA; Gardner Stewart Architects; John Simpson & Partners; ManchesterCity Council; Mid Beds District Council; Newcastle City Council and Ordnance Survey 100019569;North Somerset Council; Prince’s Foundation; Proctor Matthews Architects; Roger Evans AssociatesLtd; Graham Paul Smith; Tibbalds Planning & Urban Design; Milton Keynes Partnership.


120


This manual has been specifically published to show howdesign codes can help deliver good quality places, and toconvey the means by which design coding can be integratedinto the planning, design and development processes thatshape the built environment.

The use of design codes is not mandatory. The key fordevelopers, local authorities and other interested parties is to understand when and why design codes may be the righttool to use, and under what circumstances design codes canstreamline processes, add value and deliver better qualitydevelopment.

This manual addresses these important issues. It forms the‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘who’ guide to preparing and implementingdesign codes.

Further copies available from:


£40.00

Pre

parin

g D

esig

n C

odes – A

Practice

Man

ual