Evo 6

Summer 2012Sharing knowledge, building best practise

Large trees

The forgotten heroes of the built environment.

Asbestos

The hidden hazard on brownfield sites?

WSUD

The role of Water Sensitive Urban Design in the UK

BIM – One Year On Challenges and progress aChieved to date

Comment

Since the move towards mandatory Building Information Modelling (BIM) for government projects was announced, the industry has become increasingly engaged with unlocking new, more efficient and collaborative ways of working. BIM is central to the ambitions laid out in the Government’s Construction Strategy of 2011 and a year after the launch is a good time to take stock of the progress to date and challenges remaining. We were delighted to interview Paul Morrell (Chief Construction Advisor, HM Government) and David Philp (Head of BIM Implementation, Cabinet Office) for this issue of Evolution. I hope you enjoy reading the interviews – or watching them on www.youtube.com/cirianews

We certainly felt a real buzz about BIM at our short series of events on the topic, which attracted a great deal of interest from construction professionals across the industry. If you missed the short series please join us at the next event on 18 September to find out how BIM can make your business more productive and profitable.

Our Road to Rio+20 event series proved equally popular with CIRIA members and non members alike. At the time of writing the Rio+20 Summit in Brazil has generated much scepticism, yet the mood at our Rio+20 series was more positive, with delegates determined to make a difference through understanding and adopting sustainable practices. Our thanks go to Lafarge for supporting the series, and an overview can be found on page 14.

Somewhat ironically, our publication on Retrofitting to manage surface water (C713) was published during the wettest April for 100 years. The guide challenges many of the current conventions employed to manage surface water run-off and explores how the principles of urban design can integrate with surface water management. With the wet weather continuing for much of May and flood alerts abounding, it is clear that the UK needs to embrace innovative and imaginative ways to integrate water within our built environment. CIRIA’s new Water Sensitive Urban Design project (RP796) will examine how to deliver improved water cycle management in developments (see pages 24–27).

Details of how to get involved in our projects and events can be found throughout this issue of Evolution and also on our website www.ciria.org. I look forward to meeting and working with you in the coming months.

Bill Healy Chief Executive

““

1

Contents

All events are free to attend for CIRIA network, core and associate members. Please note that event dates and locations are subject to change.

Water

Sustainability

Technology

Productivity

Infrastructure

Feature event

Premier event P

June 2012

19th Concrete washout water on site - review of current practice and future developments CIRIA Suite, London WORKSHOP

16th Assessing hazardous ground gas: a new approach Free to CIRIA members WEBINAR

July 2012

23rd Future research agenda (Arup, KTN) SEMINAR

October 2012

November 2012

21st to 23rd

Responsible sourcing in ACTION Loughborough Discount for CIRIA members CONFERENCE

December 2012

22nd SAFESPUR Forum: The benefits of research and innovation in nuclear and defence decommissioning CIRIA Suite, London SEMINAR

13th Validating innovative solutions for hazardous ground gas, London Free to CIRIA members SEMINAR

4th Carbon focused event SEMINAR

13th Lean and BIM – synergies and opportunities CIRIA Suite, London SEMINAR

17h Lean and sustainability – synergies and opportunities The Building Centre, London SEMINAR

14th Using BIM to win! London SEMINAR

18th How can BIM make you more productive and profitable CIRIA Suite, London SEMINAR

10th Asset management focused event SEMINAR

25th Joining up the water cycle SEMINAR

September 2012

20th & 21st

EMSAGG conference: The crossroads for new marine sand and gravel developments Oostende, Belgium CONFERENCE

6th Christmas networking reception London NETWORKING

3rd Geotechnical issues in construction 5th CIRIA Ground Engineering Advisory Group conference discussing topical issues.

London SEMINAR

tbc SAFESPUR event SEMINAR

10th LANDFoRM event: Managing surface water from highways Royal Statistical Society, London SEMINAR

6th

P Collaborative construction – can the sector show what it can deliver? Keynote speaker details Location PREMIER

tbc Sustainability focussed event SEMINAR

2

14

24

11

16

7

15

28

12

20

Events Calendar

Develop skills with CIRIA training

SustainabilityLarge trees: the forgotten heroes of the built environment

Member Survey Results

InfrastructureAsbestos: the

hidden hazard on brownfield sites?

CIRIA Road to Rio event series

WaterThe role of WSUD in the UK

TechnologyBIM – one year on

PublicationsLatest CIRIA guidance

ProductivityThe National Planning

Policy Framework

”

2

TechnoLogy

1. It is just over a year since the Government Construction Strategy was published. Which aspects of the strategy have made good progress?

It is encouraging to know that we are doing what we said we would do. Working to several timescales, in the short-term we have tried to cut out waste through the way we now go to the market, through procurement systems and pre-qualification.

Here we have introduced a standard for pre-qualification, mandated for use across government. There are now better means of procurement, through benchmarking and by finding out where the money is going in government projects and using that as a way of leading the market in a more open-handed way. The private sector clients knew what they could invest and that became a clear part of the brief, so benchmarking to set targets is important as well as departments committing to cost reduction to save the taxpayer money. It has been a success too, and is an example of government using its buying power to influence the market place. Long-term it is about integration and reform of the industry, which we knew would be slow. We are starting to question the market place so as to incentivise integration across a broad spread of activities. There is still plenty to be done, but a lot has been achieved in one year given the scale of the agenda.

2. Do you think that industry BIM adoption is happening quickly enough?

Yes – there is a lot of pressure from some quarters to go faster, but that would be a mistake. We are trying to move the whole of the industry forward, not just the leaders. To achieve this you have to give it time – to understand, to invest, to train and so on. And there have been so many technology disasters in businesses there is a certain caution. It needs to be progressive and with a five year plan in place, it should not be too daunting to those who are a long way from adopting BIM.

Paul Morrell, Government Chief Construction Advisor

Interviews with Paul Morrell, Government Chief Construction Advisor and David Philp, Head of BIM Implementation - Cabinet Office

Twelve months on from the publishing of the Government’s Construction Strategy, and the much publicised requirement that public sector projects will require the use of Building Information Modelling (BIM) by 2016, we talk to the Government Chief Construction Adviser, Paul Morrell, to understand the challenges and progress achieved to date.

In a separate interview with Cabinet Office Head of BIM Implementation, David Philp, we explore the Government’s BIM implementation plans and the challenges ahead.

BIM – ONE YEAR ON...

3. What more could be done to encourage a single team environment?

Single team integration is the great win here, so that the whole team works around an alignment of interests in finding value for a client. The most important thing is how we ask the question of the market place. Integration means design: with the management of construction, the execution of construction, the manufacture of products and then the management of the facility. The other great driver is the way we procure and how we encourage industry to take this up – to move businesses you must move their drivers. This means clients should behave in a different way – and government is the industry’s biggest client. The main forms of procurement are all designed to encourage integration at best, and to get out of its way if the industry is inclined to integrate.

4. How can we improve the performance of the supply chain using the transparency of the data within BIM?

The first thing is that everybody is on a common platform so within a digital environment (which is one part of BIM) you all have access to the same data. That kind of transparency of information will allow people to work collaboratively and reduce errors. There is a clear audit trail so that although the insurance industries are worried about an integrated team sharing collective responsibility (and ultimately they will look to insure the whole of that team), it will be transparent where something went wrong if it did. The main thing is for people to be working on a shared platform.

5. Will BIM help drive the “safe by design” agenda?

BIM will help encourage safety in design, in construction and in the management of the asset and its use. There are so many ways that you can use BIM as a hypothetical exercise to look at what will happen in a virtual environment when the building exists in reality. I am sure there will be apps developed. They won’t be £1.99 apps, but they might be £1,199 apps where people can start thinking “what’s the optimum way of laying out tower crane coverage on this site”, “how much material will I need to build that wall tomorrow” etc. Also, it will encourage safety, for example access for cleaning and maintenance, and to give people a means of escape etc to ensure the safety of occupants. All of those things will start to follow from having reliable 3D data of what it is that is being built.

6. How will we ensure a BIM legacy beyond 2016?

If “we” is the industry then it will have a legacy. BIM is and will be the way of doing business and the gains will immediately

become apparent. Even in the early stages of taking some government departments through the change in their practices that they need to operate in BIM, they are instantly seeing the gains through the re-design of the processes. The sustainability of the proposition beyond 2016 is the least concerning. It is getting enough of the industry there by 2016 that is the challenge.

7. How important is BIM know-how and efficiency to UK sector growth?

BIM is important to growth, and beyond that it is important to international competitiveness. The global industry sees this as something that it needs to get to. The US is already further along, although from the client side it is not always making a wonderful job of it. The US is leaving it as a sector-led operation. In the UK we have set as a policy that we will leave choices of system and the complexities of BIM within the supply chain. But if we miss this boat we will lose competitive position overseas.

Government is persuaded that by using its influence as a major customer, it can motivate change, encourage adoption and set clear protocols. This will give people the confidence they need to invest. We can be prepared in terms of international competitiveness. Phil Bernstein, strategic head at Autodesk, complimented the strategy here as having an elegance around the needs of moving the supply side forward in a reasonably coherent way, but without being so prescriptive that we force out innovation. It’s not just necessary for growth but for international survival for those who operate in the competitive market. Also, it will be essential in dealing with imported construction propositions. BIM know-how and efficiency is vital to growth.

8. How big is the BIM prize post-occupancy?

It’s huge! It’s a cliché that both value and cost increase during asset use rather than during creation – and that is government’s greatest interest. We are interested in motivating industry to reforms and to improve and to be more productive in the interests of taxpayer value. However, the government’s real reward will be in the management of their assets – something that the public sector has not been good at.

It has an insufficient understanding of what it owns and sometimes regards buildings as liabilities rather than assets. However people who have assets should care for them and BIM will give them the information to do that. In taking government departments through the preparation for BIM one of the big attractions has been the data that they need to manage the asset post-completion.

9. It has been said that the preconditions for BIM have existed for many years. Is it just Government impetus that is driving BIM adoption?

Hopefully not because that would not be sustainable. This government isn’t going to change its mind about BIM and neither will future ones. You can’t force an industry to do something it doesn’t want to do or that isn’t right for it in its own market place.

The government’s announcement has attracted a huge amount of attention so that people who have wondered what BIM is have quickly seen that this is a place they have to get to.

BIM adoption is a coming together of things, ie better technologies, coupled with an inclination by parts of the industry (certainly at the leading edge) to want to integrate and asking “what are the tools” and then trying to change procurement practice so that those things are motivated. Government’s intervention has been valuable, but probably more so in terms of getting people to the place that they had to get to – and sooner. Ultimately we are looking at a convergence of forces that have combined to make this the right thing to do now.

10. Finally, are you personally convinced by the business case for BIM?

Yes – but it’s not surprising that some small businesses worry about the cost without knowing what it is they have to purchase. For software the cost is not huge. The financial returns in terms of cutting out waste, not having to re-input data, of easier data transfer between team members, the elimination of error downstream and the ability to optioneer quickly and look at things through to the full 3D model without a huge amount of work – this is all money back. Unfortunately we are good at seeing cost but not at seeing return.

However (a) the returns will greatly outweigh the cost, and (b) it will become the only way of doing business. Questioning it will becoming like questioning the business case for email. Nobody will talk to you if you are not in that environment. However, hesitance is understandable and it’s often been said that for SMEs it is quite a challenge. One example was when a major architect told me at a round table discussion how difficult this all is – then the leader of a small eight man architectural practice said “anything you can’t handle just send it to us - because we already operate in this environment”. Small businesses that are agile and find it easier to re-direct their businesses see the business case strongly. And certainly the biggest ones are already making huge investments. So yes I am utterly convinced.

BIM – ONE YEAR ON...

3

TechnoLogy

1. Please give an overview of your role as Head of BIM Implementation for the Cabinet Office

The key part of the role is working with each of the Government departments, mobilising them for their BIM journey towards 2016, and building a strategy and programme for their departments. We want to make sure each department can start to be self-sufficient (BIM indigenous) and we can then take a step back from the process. A big part of the role is also co-ordinating the work packages for this initial mobilisation phase. We have 20 work packages to start building the protocols and guidance in the standard round, about Level 2 BIM. Level 2 BIM in the Government Strategy is about public sector working alongside the private sector, supply chain, academia and especially SME.

2. What is being done to raise awareness of the BIM programme?

Some mileage has been covered in the last year getting around the country and socialising the programme. We are working alongside several stakeholder groups such as the United Kingdom Contractors Group, and institutions via the Construction Industry Council (CIC), the Technology Alliance etc. We are trying to get everybody working together, ensure they understand the programme and moving everything on. Also, we have a series of private sector partners as well (BIM for retail and BIM4Rail UK). It is vital that our micro-site, which is a repository of all

our information, is used effectively (www.bimtaskgroup.org). We also use twitter to communicate anything new that we have done (follow @BIMgcs). We will be using regional BIM hubs (facilitated by the *CIC) to get a consistent and contextualised message out to the regions and start to develop frameworks, build upon the frameworks that are already there and get the Level 2 message out across a new digital Britain.

3. What are the key challenges facing the BIM programme?

We have a whole sector approach to BIM, which is a challenge as it tests many of our traditional conventions as to how we design, construct and operate our assets. The Government Construction Strategy is a change programme, probably one of the biggest government interventions in terms of construction since the last war. We know that at the end of the day the prize is big, not just for us as a client, but for the whole industry. You can divide it into three sectors: digital technology, understanding the end-to-end life cycle process and mobilising, which is vital in terms of people and organisational change. Last year was about trying to win the hearts and minds, helping people understand what BIM is and what the value proposition is. One year on, we are starting to see things changing, it is more about the process and technology, but the important thing is people are starting to look beyond how much BIM will cost. Now they are looking at where the return on the investment for doing this is, they are starting to change the way that they work with the models, and they are starting to think more about collaboration, looking at new and efficient ways of working using the technology.

4. How scalable is the BIM programme and is there a minimum value threshold for a BIM public sector project to be triggered?

Scalability is crucial to our BIM programme –it is not just for the “mega” projects. We want to make sure that the SMEs and the product manufacturers are involved in terms of what we are doing. What we

don’t want is two tranches where there is a protocol for the main contractors and large designers and a separate one for the SMEs. We want to make sure that the value proposition is understood and that the programme is scalable. How are we going to do that? The regional BIM hubs that we are now creating are fundamental, and ensuring that we can deliver a dependable and understandable message to each of these regions. In terms of the threshold, it started off at projects over £50m, then £15m, before it came down to £5m, and now it’s any (centrally procured government) project of any value, ie any project where there is a positive return on investment from doing BIM.

5. What is the pay-off of BIM adoption on the client side other than cost and carbon?

Cost and carbon are the main focus along with better efficiency. Alongside that BIM gives us better understanding and surety about the asset we are going to be procuring. The data within the model lets us make better decisions about investments. What we can do with that data is look at asset rehearsal and rapid optioneering and life cycle analysis at the start using fedback “in-use” data. Also, it helps us to look at the risk management profile, and to manage risk in terms of that end term process. Ultimately it is about getting optimal asset performance and better business outcomes for our assets, which should lead to better social outcomes as opposed to better BIM models.

6. What does level 2 BIM compliance actually look like?

Compliance with Level 2 BIM is about managing data. We are not asking for more information but we are asking for it electronically and in a structured manner. We are still asking for 2D reviewable design data that’s cut from the model and we are asking for the models in their native format. We did not specify any software platforms as we are software agnostic, and our main deliverable is a COBIE UK 2012 dataset, the Construction Operation Building Information Exchange.

7. How important is BIM to UK PLC?

Very – we are starting to see BIM becoming the metaphor for transitional change within industry. It is important that the UK is “best in class” in terms of BIM. We need to be at the vanguard of BIM know-how to be able to start to export our skills, at consultant level, main contractor level and product manufacturer level. If we can do that we will start to get growth, which will trigger more projects as well. The fact is that each time we start to work more efficiently we’ll have more money going

David Philp, Head of BIM Implementation - Cabinet Office

Note: the *Construction Industry Council is in the process of establishing Building Information Modelling (BIM) Regional hubs in partnership with the Government’s BIM Task Group. 11 regional BIM hubs will be launched in autumn 2012 to raise awareness and the benefits of BIM to the industry as a whole and to help the early adoption of BIM processes and working methods throughout the UK’s construction industry.

4

back to actually trigger more projects, but there is also an international agenda in terms of growth. We can start to sell these skills internationally so it is about the whole digital agenda, how we start to unlock it and how we can exploit these skills in that worldwide marketplace. Our whole sector approach to BIM should help position the UK as the worldwide leader in this space.

Working with BBCN, on behalf of Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council, in partnership with the local LEP, Capita Symonds provided the full range of multidisciplinary design services including architecture, structural engineering, mechanical and electrical engineering, all using BIM.

The three storey building was designed in just eight weeks in the summer of 2010. Chris Boyce, project director, Capita, said that by using BIM the co-located design team were able to halve the time forecast to prepare a planning application.

During engagement with the school and community 3D images were developed and environmental data supplied on class spaces and the external appearance of the school was modelled. Daylighting and overshadowing were all simulated in the first two weeks to allow the impact of the design on both the surrounding streets and the classroom spaces to be assessed. The design is complex in layout and section, whilst simple in form. BIM made the process of explaining the school design, including the details of materials and structure, simple. Overall the team met a demanding programme enabling the school to move in

during April 2012 from a design start in June 2010.

Other BIM tools employed included clash detection, the integration of FF&E schedules, planning (sequencing), visualising temporary works and site operations, and design analysis packages.

The head of the school Hillary Hinchcliff, said: “because we have been able to see exactly what it looks like we were able to order the furniture in advance, which we would never have been able to with the use of flat plans.

Peter Trebilcock, Director for Design, Balfour Beatty and Chris Boyce, Director, Capita Symonds discuss the use of BIM in the construction of the modest sized £5.4m St Silas Primary School in Blackburn, Lancashire - a first for Balfour Beatty Construction Northern (BBCN). It is the first BIM project to be handed over since Balfour Beatty adopted a strategy to use BIM on all new projects.

BIM Case study: St Silas Primary School

Watch the BIM interviews now

The CIRIA BIM interview with Paul Morrell http://bit.ly/MB6w6d

The CIRIA BIM interview with David Philp http://bit.ly/LxrHtL

See more videos at www.youtube.com/cirianews

All images for the BIM case study and the cover image were supplied courtesy of Nick Guttridge (photographer) and Capita Symonds

5

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE5041749C31F7024&feature=view_all

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5D6EDBD5CE437422&feature=view_all

6

TechnoLogy

A lot of consultation has gone on, I certainly feel more confident because we could actually see what it was going to look like”. The team used the BIM model to help her understand how to “keep the school looking good”., knowing how much it’s going to cost, aspects of sustainability, knowing how long things will last, all of those have been within the conversations we have had and very much built into the planning”.

The development of the packages for the contractor and sub contractor for pricing were both accelerated and refined information in the form of 3D element modelling to help with understanding the scheme.

Where possible, Balfour Beatty and its supply chain have worked in BIM to supply site and shop drawings and to develop methodology for construction. ; the model was for instance used in skeletal steelwork format and then clad to explain

the sequence of construction to parents and community representatives. The whole school modelling meant that surprises were avoided and the number of requests for information formally received from site was less than traditional methods of communicating design. Staff at BBCN were given training in BIM software and were quickly able to produce some useful outputs. One planning manager was able to prepare his first simulated construction sequence of the project within 3 hours of access to the software.

From BBCN’s perspective, with the site being surrounded by public highway, public safety, access for site operations and technical criteria made BIM an ideal tool to employ. Its effect on the project has been significant:

smoother construction through clash detection (not one M&E clash due to all services being modelling virtually before installation)

programme savings through rapid design iterations and client approvals due to the closer integration of all parties (50 per cent saving on pre-planning application design time)

improved on site quality through the closer integration of supply chain-less rework

increased safety – all operations accurately planned and executed “virtually” before reaching site including temporary works

better planning for maintenance as access to plant and services has been verified by 3D work

reduced RFIs (only 25 RFIs were issued throughout the entire process due to the accessibility of the models to the project team)

Balfour Beatty are realising these benefits on 50+ BIM projects as their BIM programme gathers pace across all sectors and project types.

7

Trees are an elemental component of some of the finest urban landscapes in towns and cities in the UK where they bring human scale, beauty and seasonal change. They have a stature that can match and soften the architecture, infrastructure and hard spaces of town and city environments (Figure 1).

But why are large trees so special?Large trees, ie those that can attain over 15 m in height, have extended benefits beyond ornamentation to town and city places (Figure 2). They are vital parts of ecosystem services with significant economic, social and environment values (Figure 3).

Urban heat island effect, reduced wind speed and climate change: as urban areas expand due to the construction of new buildings, roads, and other infrastructure, open land and vegetation is replaced by hard surfaces, some of which may be impervious and dry and tend to absorb and trap heat. This is why many cities and towns are warmer than their rural surroundings, forming “urban heat islands”.

Trees with large canopies cast more shade than smaller ornamental species. They provide a big leaf area and cooling effect due to evaporative cooling, while occupying relatively small ground area, as they form “natural umbrellas” (Trees and Design Action Group, 2008).

A study on a hot summer’s day in Manchester city centre found surface temperatures in a paved public open space reduced by 13°C under a large canopy, compared to full sunlight (Gill et al, 2007). Provision of shade through large trees not only reduces temperatures, but also filters, blocks radiant heat and reduce other harmful effects from direct sunlight.

THE FORGOTTEN HEROES OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

SUSTAinAbiLiTy

Joanne Kwan, CIRIA and Mark Job and Tom Armour, Arup, explain what benefits trees bring to the built environment

Figure 1 Community gathering in Fitzroy Square, London – surrounded by mature trees (from Armour et al, 2012)

Figure 3 Ecosystem services matrix

Figure 2 Tree size comparisons

8

Figure 4 Urban heat island diagram (from Armour et al, 2012)

Trees have long been used as windbreaks as they form a physical obstacle and inhibit wind speed and turbulence. This then can provide shelter for buildings, helping to reduce the amount of air that infiltrates into buildings through windows, doors, vents and other openings. Because of their size and stature the most effective windbreaks are formed by large trees. This is particularly important in winters.

Figure 5 Large trees as wind break (from Armour et al, 2012)

Carbon sequestration: trees can contribute to reducing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by the process of photosynthesis, capturing and storing carbon dioxide. It has been demonstrated that an acre (0.4ha) of trees can generate enough oxygen each day for 18 people, and on average a single tree stores 13 pounds of carbon annually (McAliney, 1993).

Large trees are more effective in absorbing atmospheric carbon dioxide than smaller trees as they have a greater surface area for photosynthesising. Also, they have a larger biomass, live longer and are better at storing CO2 and retaining it for longer, as well as a more effective carbon sinks than smaller trees.

Flood risk: large trees help to reduce the risk of flooding by attenuating water. With a higher density of branches and large area of foliage, they are more effective at participation interception making rainfall reaches the ground more slowly. For every five per cent of tree cover area added to a community, water runoff is reduced by about two per cent. In addition, up to 47 per cent of surface pollutants can be removed in the first 15 minutes of a storm, and this includes pesticides, fertilisers and biologically derived materials and litter with large trees.

Figure 7 Water attenuation benefits of trees (from Armour et al, 2012)

Reducing ambient noise levels: research has shown that noise can cause anxiety, tension and illness, with prolonged exposure potentially leading to hearing loss (NHS, 2011). Continued exposure to high levels of traffic noise has been known to have an adverse effect on health, in particular increasing the risk of heart disease (Ising and Michalak, 1998, and Babisch et al, 1994).

Large trees and other vegetation can play an important role in attenuating noise through reflecting and absorbing sound energy. One estimate (Coder, 1996) suggests that 7dB of noise reduction is achieved for every 33 m of forest, while other reported field tests (Cook, 1978) show apparent loudness reduced by 50 per cent in the presence of 30 m wide belts of tall dense trees and soft ground.

Figure 8 Noise attenuation benefits of large species trees belts (from Armour et al, 2012)

Aesthetic benefits: while it is true that trees act to mitigate the effects of pollution, another primary reason for planting trees in the city is for their unrivalled aesthetic appeal. Trees provide a general softening of the urban environment and also provide a counterbalance for the larger elements of the built environment. Some unsightly areas can be quickly transformed by the introduction of several species of tree (Figure 9).

The aesthetic of tree lined streets and green spaces have been shown to have positive psychological benefits including lower rates of mental illness, violence and crime. Trees have huge symbolic value, they humanise the city, acknowledge an affinity for the natural world and provide a focus for community participation in landscaping the urban environment.

While all trees are beneficial to an urban environment it is the larger species that are the particularly significant elements that can match and compliment the architecture of the city in scale and create great city places. The tree-lined canals of Amsterdam, the boulevards of Paris, lime allées of Berlin or many of the London squares clearly demonstrate that it is the trees that help create memorable city environments.

Now let’s talk about money Many people think large trees are expensive to plant and maintain. With good planning and management, trees should cost very little.

In America, tree benefit calculators have been developed to help people understand the values of trees. The work of the US Centre for Urban Forest Research has highlighted the greatest economic benefits can be gained from large trees (Geiger et al, 2004):

SUSTAinAbiLiTy

Figure 6 Carbon sequestration rates of different tree sizes in Brooklyn (from Armour et al, 2012)

9

Table 1 Net benefits of mature trees (from Geiger et al, 2004)

Many cities are beginning to recognise the value of their existing trees. The New York City Parks Department planted 600 000 large trees in its five boroughs and have provided an annual benefit of US$122m — more than five times the cost of maintaining them.

As already discussed, large trees via their effect on urban heat islands can lower temperatures in buildings. With changing climate, this could bring significant savings in heating and cooling costs. A study in Chicago shows that a large tree can reduce annual air conditioning cost by two to four per cent (McPherson et al, 1994) and acting as windbreaks, they can reduce a further of 10 to 30 per cent (Dewalle and Heisler, 1988, and Heisler, 1991).

Trees can also add financial value. Several international studies have demonstrated that large trees can potentially raise property prices by five per cent to 18 per cent (CABE Space, 2005, and Morales et al, 1983). In a high income are of London, this may equate to £25 000 to £90 000 on a £500 000 dwelling. Other financial benefits include:

decreasing sales time encouraging inward investment and growth

encouraging an increase in retail sales improving the prospect of gaining planning permission

reducing energy costs of buildings

increasing the price people are willing to pay to visit amenity spaces

economic gain from selling products derived from large trees.

Why a call for action? It is no doubt that large trees are keys to creating climate-proof, happy and healthy cities for the future. So why aren’t there more large trees being planted instead of the small “lollipop” species being planted along city streets (see Figure 10)?

After several droughts, particularly in the 1970s, high moisture demand trees was known to cause movement to foundations, with resulting damage to buildings, and could disrupt services, roads and pavements. This is exacerbated by a lack of consistency in the way that trees are managed and maintained in public and private areas. So there are concerns on insurance claims and fear of issues like structural damage and subsidence.

Because of this, many local authorities in the UK have adopted an over-cautionary approach to new plantings of large trees – several older established trees have been removed for spurious reasons and replaced with small ornamental varieties.

Also, many of the UK’s finest urban large trees are a living legacy from the Victorian era and a substantial number are also now nearing the end of their lives. The importance of protecting and planting new large trees in urban areas has never been more critical.

Figure 10 Upright trees providing minimal shade and diminished ecosystem services

A great deal of work has been undertaken through reports such as by CLG (2008), guidance for local authority tree strategies, and organisations such as the Trees and Design Action Group (TDAG), Natural England, CABE and Forestry Commission.

Also there is extensive technical and planning guidance including relevant British Standards, codes of practice and building research digests relating to trees, landscape and the avoidance of the potential damage to foundations and services associated with trees and subsoil desiccation.

Recently published guidance by Armour et al (2012) shows how large species can be accommodated in a cost effective way into towns and cities – in a time of climate change and global warming urban environments need large trees more than ever.

But more needs to be done. The right message needs to be spread, ie modern horticultural techniques together with careful planning can resolve many problems when planting and maintaining large trees in urban environment. More importantly is the need to demonstrate, particularly to those who are wary that it makes sound financial sense to have large trees and they are a vital part of the integral urban ecosystem in towns and cities.

Figure 9 Recently planted large species trees incorporated into the recent commercial development at Chiswick Park, London (from Armour et al, 2012)

Get involved

Building on Armour et al (2012), CIRIA will be starting the TREECOM project. This will create tools including online resources and events, which will aim to change the “mind set” of construction professionals and ultimately, ensure better planting and maintenance of large trees in the built environment.For further information please email: [email protected]

Order copies of CIRIA Large trees in the urban environment – a design and management guide (C712) from www.ciria.org.

Small trees (<7.5m height)

Medium trees (7.5–12m height)

Large trees (>12m height)

Benefits per annum US$23 US$33 US$55

Costs per annum US$14 US$17 US$18

Net benefits US$9 US$16 US$37

10

SUSTAinAbiLiTy

References

ARMOUR, T, JOB, M, CANAVAN, R (2012) The benefits of large species trees in urban landscapes: a costing, design and management guide, C712, CIRIA, London (ISBN: 978-0-86017-712-2). Go to: <www.ciria.org>

BABISCH, W, ISING, H, KRUPPA, B and WIENS, D (1994) “The incidence of myocardial infarction and its relation to road traffic noise: The Berlin case-control studies”. Environment International, Vol 20, No 4, Elsevier BV, UK, pp 469–474

CABESPACE (2005) Does money grow on trees? Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, London

CLG (2008) Trees in Towns II, Communities and Local Government, London (ISBN: 978-1-85112-889-1)

CODER, R D (1996) Identified benefits of community trees and forests, University of Georgia, Georgia, US

DEWALLE, D R and HEISLER, G M (1988) “Use of windbreaks for home energy conservation”, Agriculture. Ecosystems and Environment, Vol 22–23, Science Direct, UK, pp 243–260

COOK, D I (1978) “Trees, solid barriers, and combinations: Alternatives for noise control”. In: Proceedings of the National Urban Forestry Conference, New York, pp 330–339

GEIGER, J R, KING, C and HARTEL, D (2004) The large tree argument. The case for large stature trees vs small stature trees, Centre for Urban Forest Research Pacific Southwest Research Station USDA Forest Service. Go to: <www.fs.fed.us/psw/programs/uesd/uep/products/cufr_511_large_tree_argument.pdf>

HEISLER, G M (1991) “Computer simulation for optimizing windbreak placement to save energy for heating and cooling buildings”. In: Proc Trees and sustainable development. The third international windbreaks and agroforestry symposium, 2–7 June 1991, Ridgetown, Ontario, Canada. Ridgetown College, USA, pp 100–104

GILL, S E, HANDLEY, J F, ENNOS, A R and PAULEIT, S (2007) “Adapting cities for climate change: The role of the green infrastructure”. In: Built Environment, Vol 33, No 1, pp 115–133

ISING H and MICHALAK R (1998) “Stress effect of noise in a field experiment in comparison to reactions to short term noise exposure in the laboratory”, Noise and Health, Vol 6, No 24, Medknow Publication, India pp 1–7

MCALINEY, M (1993) Arguments for land conservation: documentation and information sources for land resources protection, Trust for Public Land, Sacramento, C A

MCPHERSON, E G, MOWAK, D J and ROWNTREE, R A (1994) Chicago’s urban forest ecosystem: results of the Chicago urban forest climate project, General Technical Report NE186, Northeastern Research Station, Forestry Service US Department of Agriculture, USA

MORALES, D J, MICHA, F R and WEBER, R L (1983) “Two methods of valuating trees in residential sites”, Journal of Arboriculture, Vol 9, No 1, International Society of Arboriculture US, pp 21–24

NHS (2011) Traffic noise implications in stroke risk, NHS Choices Department of Health, UK

TREES AND DESIGN ACTION GROUP (2008) No trees no future. Trees in the urban realm, Forestry Commission, UK

Further reading

BROWN, R D and GILLESPIE, T J (1995) Microclimatic landscape design: creating thermal comfort and energy efficiency, John Wiley and Sons, UK (ISBN: 978-0-471-05667-6)

HOUGH, M (2004) Cities and natural process as basis of sustainability, second edition, Routledge, London (ISBN 978-0-41529-855-1)

NOWAK, D J, CRANE, D E and STEVEN, J C (2006) “Air pollution removed by urban trees and shrubs in the United States”, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, Vol 4, Elsevier BV, UK, pp 115–123

Get involved in CIRIA projects and proposals

Remedial and mitigation options for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (RP783) This project will provide contaminated land professionals with a comprehensive and overall approach for the remedial and mitigation treatment selection with particular emphasis on VOCs from hydrocarbon contaminated land for both new build and existing buildings.

Business improvement through Ecology (BITE) (P2865) CIRIA will develop a website-based toolkit of practical resources for the enhancement of ecology using a range of business improvement techniques.

Risk assessment for asbestos found on contaminated sites (P2855) Poor disposal practices, demolition and other anthropogenic processes has resulted in asbestos often being present in the ground, particularly on brownfield sites.

Good practice for brownfield land asset management in UK (P2861) This project will help land owners, real estate sellers and land vendors to manage the risk and price their land assets and negotiate with potential purchasers for their sites.

Gas membrane and other plastic barriers in land affected by contamination (P2767) CIRIA is planning to develop an application guide that can be used by the industry to help optimise costs when using plastic membrane and other plastic barriers in contaminated land. The guide will pull together and package information that is currently available into an easy to understand document.

To find out more and to get involved contact CIRIA on tel: +44 (0) 20 7549 3300 or email [email protected]

11

Large trees in the urban environment – a design and management guide (C712)

The UK’s urban trees are special and have played an important role in combating the effects of growing urbanisation for many years. It is impossible to imagine towns and cities without them, yet they are in decline. This guide is intended to encourage action to reverse this trend.

While all trees are beneficial to an urban environment, larger species are particularly significant as the most important single elements of urban green infrastructure (GI). Large species trees convey the greatest financial, social and environmental benefits, and make a fundamental contribution to the well-being of almost 80 per cent of the UK population.

This guide aims to highlight the vital importance of large species trees, including the retention and improvement of existing trees and carrying out new planting in streets, squares and parks for new and existing developments.

Price: £100 (£50) ISBN 978-0-86017-714-2

Forthcoming titles Transport infrastructure drainage:

condition appraisal and remedial treatment (RP941)

Remediation and mitigation of VOCs generated from land (RP938)

Environmental good practice on site - pocket guide (RP928)

How to order Visit: www.ciria.org Tel: +44 (0) 20 7549 3300 Email: [email protected]

CIRIA publications

With over 600 titles on offer, CIRIA has been and continues to be at the forefront of good practice guidance in the construction industry. While many back catalogue publications are still widely regarded as the best available, more recent publications are quickly being established as authoritative in their own right.

CIRIA has recently published two important industry guides, available through our bookshop and at a discount for our members.

FeaTUreD TITLeRetrofitting to manage surface water (C713)As urban areas develop, natural drainage processes are changed. Paved areas are constructed and piped drainage systems built. Yet they deprive communities of the many benefits of natural drainage processes. A different approach is needed to managing surface water run-off to sustain communities that are pleasant and vibrant places to live in. This guidance sets out a process to achieve this. It challenges many of the current conventions employed to manage surface water run-off. To do this it integrates the principles of urban design with surface water management.

As well as dealing with the engineering aspects, the guidance covers the organisational and statutory aspects of drainage, the need for adequate funding, appraisal approaches, how different agencies can work better together, how public expectations can be better managed and why incentives and disincentives are important.

Price: £180 (£90)ISBN 978-0-86017-715-9

12

At the start of 2012 CIRIA conducted its latest survey, aimed at gauging Core Member satisfaction with the range of services and benefits provided by CIRIA. Over 180 participants completed the survey, with responses received from client organisations, consultants, contractors, universities and government agencies that make up CIRIA’s industry wide membership. The findings provide statistically reliable and actionable insight, which will be used for strategic development of CIRIA’s services.

Our Members say...Please indicate how often CIRIA publications are used within your organisation?

More than once a month 61%

Once a month 15%

Quarterly 9%

Bi annually 5%

Annually 4%

Very rarely 5%

Never 1%

Response percent

Is CIRIA a leader or a follower?

Leader 89%

Follower 11%

Response percent

How do you rate CIRIA publications?

Value 28% 69% 3%

Quality of contant 51% 48% 1%

User friendly style 40% 56% 4%

Excellent Good Poor

13

How do Members describe CIRIA? An overwhelming 94% recognised CIRIA as “providing useful technical guidance reports”. The majority also acknowledged the crucial role that CIRIA plays in providing professional development and training opportunities, as well as informative newsletters and web resources.

“CIRIA contributes an outstanding suite of independent, best practice guidance that is both informative and reliable”

Respondents were also asked what contribution CIRIA makes to the construction industry. Reponses were overwhelmingly positive and are best summarised by the following comments:

“Their technical publications are a highly regarded and useful resource for construction professionals”

“Provides an independent and authoritative focus”

“Identifying and addressing technical needs”

“Production of meaningful technical guidance on specific topics where previously none or concise data was available”

The relevancy of CIRIA’s work 79% of respondents felt that CIRIA excelled at research activities and a large majority of those aware of CIRIA’s research projects, felt they were relevant to their needs.

74% of respondents felt that CIRIA needs to maintain the current balance of work and not focus too heavily on specific topics.

89% felt CIRIA to be a leader rather than a follower, providing valuable guidance where needed.

CIRIA publications 61% of respondents indicated that CIRIA publications are used more than once a month in their organisation, hinting at a longevity and relevancy that lasts well beyond the year of publication.

CIRIA publications also rated highly in terms of the quality of the content (99% said excellent/good), value for money (97% said excellent/good) and user-friendliness (96% said excellent/good).

Benefits awareness From a list of 20 Core Membership benefits, the following scored over 50% awareness:

opportunity to join project steering groups and task groups

opportunity to engage in research projects

receive significant discounts on CIRIA training and events

free access to all CIRIA publications online

member e-News

discounted CIRIA training and CPD courses.

CIRIA will look at new and innovative ways of increasing the awareness of the full range of benefits available to Core Members.

CIRIA’s communications 89% felt that the frequency of communications from CIRIA struck the right balance, with just 5.5% citing “too much” and “too little” in equal measure. The most recalled communications were Evolution (CIRIA’s bi annual magazine) at 75% recall, Highlights at 71 % (monthly news roundup) and Member News at 69% (monthly briefings). Highlights was the most read communication with 83% of respondents reading it on a regular basis and 59% rating the quality as above average.

The CIRIA website (www.ciria.org) 80% of respondents could find what they were looking with 93% recommending the CIRIA website as a useful resource. However, CIRIA is planning to make improvements to the visual presentation, user journey and navigation so that information (especially research information) is even easier to find.

What can CIRIA improve? In addition to web improvements, two other areas were identified for improvement:

1. Research activity awareness: only 46% of Members were acutely aware of the current research projects and proposals, so CIRIA must develop ways to keep Members up–to-date with activities, perhaps through improvements to the website, more targeted opt-in email alerts, RSS feeds and expansion of social media activity.

2. e-publishing: 54% of Members want CIRIA to develop e-books and applications (apps) for use on mobile devices. CIRIA has started to explore application development, particularly for site based guidance.

A final thought… Daniel Bailey, CIRIA’s Membership Services Director said “We are thrilled that so many Members responded and delighted that the majority feel so positively about CIRIA Membership. However, there is no room for complacency and I will be working with the team to review and improve our activities to offer even greater value for our Members in the coming months. CIRIA must continue to focus on the quality and breadth of research and dissemination activities and must continue to seek news ways to deliver value to our Members”.

Our Members say...

14

In 1992, the United Nations brought together the world’s leading government figures to discuss the looming environmental crisis. 20 years on, the Earth Summit has contributed greatly to widespread public awareness of sustainability. The summit set the benchmark for sustainability and countries across the world started to develop strategies for sustainable development.

Rio+20, the third international summit on sustainable development, will take place in Rio in June, marking the 20th anniversary of the first summit. The occasion is of particular significance for construction owing to the effect the industry has across the the three pillars of sustainable development – the economic, the social and the environmental.

To mark this landmark CIRIA ran a series of events across the five themes set out in the UK Government’s Strategy for Sustainable Construction: climate change mitigation and adaptation, water, biodiversity, waste and materials. Each event included expert speakers from the topic areas to discuss the progress made and future challenges, with the aim of highlighting best practice in the industry while also focusing on what still needs to be achieved. The speakers came from a range of organisations across the construction industry including Climate UK, Environment Agency, Morgan Sindall, Mott McDonald, Waterwise, WWF, Balfour Beatty, Kier and Lafarge. The events were attended organisations from the private and public sector and included clients, contractors, consultants, government organisations and suppliers.

The first event in the series was climate change mitigation and adaptation. The speakers from this event highlighted how mitigation has been the main focus within the construction industry in the last 20 years. Best practice on carbon reduction is being achieved by the leading clients, consultants and contractors, but it still needs to become normal practice throughout the industry. The event highlighted the opportunities of climate change adaptation and how the existing built environment can be designed and managed to cope with future pressures. However, a greater focus on adaptation is still needed.

The water event covered a range of issues from securing water resources through to managing water efficiency on construction sites. Water is a broad topic involving flooding, water quality and supply. During the event it was thought that the security of water resources is going to become a more prevalent global issue due to the increasing population and climate change, and also that embodied water will be a greater issue in the future. From a construction perspective the event highlighted the work on water efficiency on site by the Strategic Forum for Construction. The Forum explained where efficiencies can be achieved on site by demonstrating the greatest uses including dust suppression and on site washing facilities.

Figure 1 Water Sensitive Urban Design

At the biodiversity event it was noted that although progress has been made, biodiversity loss has not been halted. There has been legislation and sources of information published on biodiversity, but the main focus has been on protected species and habitats and this needs to be explored further if loss is to be stopped. A more integrated and landscape scale approach is needed. The landscape approach is demonstrated through the biodiversity planning toolkit and provides a visual source of information on how to improve biodiversity on a range of scales.

Figure 2 Pictorial meadows, Edinburgh

The construction industry has made clear progress on waste, but there is still more to do. This includes increasing awareness and improving communication across all parties involved in projects. The presentations at this event highlighted the evolution in the industry’s thinking of waste, the commitment organisations have to become more resource efficient and that it does not always take complex tools and lots of time to identify and deliver real savings. The main consensus was that site waste management plans still have a role to play and should be retained and improved.

Louise Clarke, CIRIA provides an update from CIRIA’s recent Road to Rio+20 event series

CIRIA ROAd tO RIO EvENt sERIEs

CIRIA is currently undertaking a scoping study on Water Sensitive Urban Design, which encompasses all aspects of water management and aims to create a more comprehensive approach to its management in the urban environment. This year CIRIA also published guidance on retrofitting to manage surface water, which promotes the use of more sustainable methods of water management.

BITE (Business improvement through Ecology) will be an online web-based tool that will highlight the sources of information available for biodiversity and provide useful tools to encourage the enhancement of biodiversity in our urban environment. To find out more about BITE contact Louise Clarke at CIRIA on tel: +44 (0) 20 7549 3000 or email [email protected]


Water

Sustainability

Technology

Productivity

Infrastructure

Feature event

Premier event P

June 2012



July 2012


October 2012

November 2012

21st to 23rd


December 2012










September 2012

20th & 21st




London SEMINAR



6th




Water

Sustainability

Technology

Productivity

Infrastructure

Feature event

Premier event P

June 2012



July 2012


October 2012

November 2012

21st to 23rd


December 2012










September 2012

20th & 21st




London SEMINAR



6th




Water

Sustainability

Technology

Productivity

Infrastructure

Feature event

Premier event P

June 2012



July 2012


October 2012

November 2012

21st to 23rd


December 2012










September 2012

20th & 21st




London SEMINAR



6th




Water

Sustainability

Technology

Productivity

Infrastructure

Feature event

Premier event P

June 2012



July 2012


October 2012

November 2012

21st to 23rd


December 2012










September 2012

20th & 21st




London SEMINAR



6th



15

16

What is the National Planning Policy Framework? The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) represents the Government’s effort to achieve its stated aim of reducing the complexity of the planning system and encouraging the inclusion of people and communities while also encouraging “positive growth”. Published as a draft in July 2011, the consultation document received significant criticism. The final version was published on 27 March 2012, and was effective from that date. It replaces the former Planning Policy Guidance documents (PPGs) and Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) except on waste (PPS10, CLG, 2011), and a parallel policy document on traveller sites sits alongside it. A technical guidance document on flood risk and minerals was also issued in support of the NPPF, as an interim measure pending a wider review of guidance. The Minister for Planning Greg Clark refers to this as “reducing over 1000 pages of often impenetrable jargon to around 50 pages of clearly written guidance” (Clark, 2012).

What was the “jargon” that needed replacing? The jargon referred to by Greg Clark was the more detailed elements of the specific PPG and PPS policy documents (and the equivalent for minerals planning) that had developed under the preceding planning regime. They were considered by the current Government to be inaccessible to anyone other than specialists, but

it has also been suggested by others that they contained valuable guidance on methodologies to ensure consistent practice, and common standards, which may now need to be reinvented by individual local authorities.

The new NPPF cannot possibly contain all this detail in its slimmed down form. If there isn’t any detail, what does it set out as policy?

The NPPF establishes 12 “core planning principles” and interprets them through 13 topic areas it sees as essential considerations in achieving sustainable development, which is the stated main aim of the new framework. The NPPF introduces a “presumption in favour of sustainable development”. This was criticised in the consultation process for being too focused on economic development, and for potentially overriding other considerations. The published version of the NPPF rectifies this by making clear that the planning system should simultaneously seek economic, social and environmental gains, and that the development plan remains the starting point for the determination of planning applications (as a matter of law).

Where will the detailed requirements be? Specific details of requirements previously obtained from national planning policy will be set out in local plans. These plans will be founded on a locally developed

PRoDUcTiViTy

thE NAtIONAl PlANNINg POlICY FRAMEwORk

Owen Peat, CIRIA and Corinne Swain, Arup, discuss how the newly

released National Planning Policy Framework seeks to deliver the

Government’s planning aims, how these might apply to projects and

where the uncertainties lie.

Figure 1: Economic growth must be appropriately balanced with environmental and social objectives in the NPPF

Figure 2: Planning policies should plan for biodiversity at a landscape-scale across local authority boundaries

evidence base, including relevant technical studies. New neighbourhood plans are an option that can provide even more detailed requirements at a neighbourhood or parish level. It is considered likely that further technical guidance will become available from the Department for Communities and Local Government following an ongoing review process. Industry guidance may also take a greater role in the planning process, but the weight given to such best practice guidance has yet to become clear.

Issues focus: environment Environmental protection has been a key concern in the creation of the NPPF and notably, the presumption in favour of sustainable development caused alarm during the consultation period. The published framework has addressed some of these concerns, notably referencing (but not applying) the UK Sustainable Development Strategy principles (including “living within the planet’s environmental limits”), acknowledging for the first time the importance of ecosystems services, minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains to biodiversity where possible, promoting the use of brownfield land that is not of high environmental value (although without national targets), and recognising the importance of ecological networks and planning for biodiversity “at a landscape-scale”.

The NPPF directs local planning authorities to “adopt proactive strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change” and to support the move to a low carbon future. This support includes planning for new development in a way that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and actively supports energy efficiency improvements to existing buildings. When setting local standards for sustainability, these need to be consistent with the national zero carbon buildings policy. While these are included as aims, the lack of guidance on climate change mitigation and adaptation approaches could be seen as problematic for these particular issues.

Flood risk and coastal change are singled out for special attention, with flood risk representing one of the two topics in the accompanying technical guidance, as previously described. The sequential test, and if required the exception test, aimed at minimising new development in areas at greatest risk of flooding, and associated guidance, are carried forward from Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 25 (CLG, 2009), which in practice means little has changed.

Green Belt protection receives its own section of the NPPF sustainable

development aims. It reiterates the Government’s strong support for protection of the Green Belt, maintaining currently established Green Belt extents and their protection from inappropriate development. Inappropriate development is explicitly stated to include renewable energy projects, although “very special circumstances” can be cited as a justification for those developments usually considered inappropriate.

Issues focus: infrastructure The relationship of the new NPPF with National Policy Statements (NPSs) for major infrastructure is an important question. The NPPF explains in its introduction that it does not contain specific policies for nationally significant projects that are determined under a separate decision making framework. The NPPF could be a consideration in this process if judged to be important and relevant.

In preparing local plans, the NPPF stipulates that local planning authorities should work with other organisations in the plan making process to assess the quality and capacity of infrastructure and take account of the need for strategic, including nationally significant, infrastructure. In this context, “infrastructure” is listed as transport, water supply, wastewater and its treatment, energy (including heat), telecommunications, utilities, waste, health, social care, education, flood risk and coastal change management.

With reference to the preparation of local plans in the framework document, local planning authorities are also directed to “plan positively” for green infrastructure, although without much detail.

Part 4 of the NPPF on promoting sustainable transport has a devoted section under the aims of delivering sustainable development. Here, the NPPF sets out requirements for transport statements or transport assessments and travel plans along with support for prioritising pedestrian and cycle movements, high quality public transport, minimising user conflicts and incorporating facilities for charging plug-in vehicles. Safeguarding of routes for transport infrastructure is also promoted, which again amounts to little change from the previous process.

Supporting high quality communications infrastructure also has a dedicated section as part of delivering sustainable development. Here, the framework emphasises the importance of high speed broadband and new telecommunications development, and takes a strong line in emphasising that local planning authorities

should not prevent competition or seek new health safeguards in determining applications.

Is viability taken into account in the new Framework? The NPPF requires that “careful attention" is given to viability and costs in plan making and decision taking in pursuing sustainable development. The likely sources of costs over and above the costs of development and mitigation include affordable housing, (quality) standards, and infrastructure contributions.

In allocating sites and in setting obligations, the framework states that a development should provide “competitive returns” to a “willing landowner and willing developer”, although a definition of what constitutes competitive is not provided.

This will affect Section 106 planning obligations and community infrastructure levy considerations, also separately referenced in the Framework and directed to be flexible and take account of market changes, to prevent the stalling of planned development.

Implementation: will this be the basis of a planning decision today? Yes. Transitional arrangements have been developed to reduce uncertainty during the introduction of the new Framework. The weight given to the NPPF will depend on the location of the application and whether there is a local plan for that area. If there is an adopted local plan with policies from 2004 onwards, the local planning authority can continue to make decisions based on these policies for the first 12 months of the NPPF, even if there is “a limited degree of conflict”.

For those local planning authorities without an adopted local plan since 2004, pre-existing policies will be accorded weight in the planning decision according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF. It has been suggested (Hope, 2012) that this leaves these local planning authority areas open to applications that, in the absence of a local plan and with a presumption in favour of sustainable development, would be difficult to refuse even if unpopular.

The 12 month period allows for a review of the current plan, or preparation of a new plan. During and after this 12 month lead-in period, local planning authorities may rely on policies in emerging plans, but the weight accorded to them will vary with their stage of preparation, the level of objection remaining unresolved and their degree of consistency with the NPPF.

17

18

What about the Big Questions? The new Framework has some big aims and objectives to deliver:

“A new, simplified planning framework that better supports growth and helps creates the homes and jobs that the country needs, puts unprecedented power into the hands of communities, and helps protect and enhance our natural and historic environment” (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012)

The evidence for whether this statement is accurate will no doubt be a long time coming, but in the meantime, here are some of the potential opposing views:

1 Is it simplified?

Positive: it is shorter. The removal of PPG and PPS documents reduces the word count and specific requirements that may seem less daunting to non-specialists, as intended.

Negative: there is more to simplification than the word count. The removal of specified guidance leaves more issues open to interpretation. Case law will take some time to establish and an increased dependence on local plans will introduce more variability between locations. Projects will still be subject to other requirements, such as for environmental impact assessment, and where these apply they will still require specialist input.

2 Will it support growth, creating new homes and jobs?

Positive: aiming to simplify planning requirements and increase the number of approved planning applications are all seen to be good things to encourage development. Greater certainty over decision outcomes and the presumption in favour of sustainable development should be seen as reducing the risks taken by developers in the planning process.

Negative: The NPPF is unlikely to unlock much new development in the short term given the transitional arrangements previously mentioned. Commentators also note that changes to the planning process alone are not sufficient to drive growth, and the right economic conditions for development are also needed.

3 Will it put power into the hands of communities?

Positive: according to Eric Pickles, Communities Secretary: “these reforms go a step further and make it clear that local communities have the responsibility

PRoDUcTiViTy

Box 1 Changes listed in National Planning Policy Framework impact assessment

From PINS (Planning Inspectorate) Note 10/2012Annex D

introduction of presumption in favour of sustainable development

removal of small scale rural office development from “town centre first” policy

for major town centre schemes where full impact will not be realised within 5 years, impacts should also be assessed for a period of up to 10 years

removal of the maximum non-residential car parking standards for major developments

removal of national brownfield target for housing development

require local planning authorities to allocate and update annually a 5 year supply of housing sites with at least 5% buffer (moved forward from later in plan period) and 20% buffer (moved forward from later in plan period) where a record of persistent under delivery

removal of national minimum site size threshold for requiring affordable housing to be delivered

increased flexibility for delivery of rural housing to reflect local needs

increased protection for community facilities

minor technical changes to the detail of Green Belt policy

provide more flexibility regarding manner in which local planning authorities meet local requirements for decentralised energy supply

encouragement for local planning authorities to map areas for commercial scale renewable and low carbon energy development opportunity, and then to apply these criteria to other applications

requirement on local planning authorities to take strategic approach in local plans to creation, protection, enhancement and management of networks of biodiversity and green infrastructure

recognition of designation within local plans of locally designated sites of importance for wildlife, geodiversity or landscape character

clarification of which wildlife sites should have same protection as European sites

removal of requirement to set criteria and select sites for peat extraction.

and the power to decide the look and feel of the places they love”. The NPPF is based on local plans, with the provision for neighbourhood plans (along with the Community Right to Build Orders and Neighbourhood Development Orders). Despite needing to be aligned with the local plan, this local level tool (for parishes and neighbourhood forums) can set the local planning policies and be used to determine planning applications.

Negative: it has been noted (McCann, 2012) that when local communities are invited to become involved in the development agenda, a significant proportion of those communities will be either apathetic, or will actively oppose new development. The localism agenda, applied to the planning process, should work to ensure that communities are involved in a representative way and that they see the benefits of a pro-active approach to planning.

4 Will it protect and enhance the natural and historic environment?

Positive: following the consultation period, amendments to the draft NPPF

included a more explicit elaboration of the meaning of sustainable development that encompassed the environmental role, explicitly stating the planning system should be “contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment”. Specific policies for both the natural and historic environment are part of the NPPF, setting out their importance and the need to carefully consider impacts upon them with a view to protecting and enhancing where possible.

Negative: the NPPF has been accused of not being robust enough to protect the loss of, or damage to, the natural environment as it does not provide local planning authorities with strong, clear guidance (WWF-UK, 2012). Adding to this, it has been noted that damage to these environments is often irreversible and so a reduction in perceived protection, especially during the uncertain implementation phase, and is overly risky.


Setting-out for modern methods of construction - a companion guide (CON170) This project seeks to develop an additional companion guide to deliver the next in a series of ‘Setting-out’ procedures with regard to modern methods of construction /offsite manufacturing to maximise the benefits and minimise tolerances associated with these methods of construction. Greater accuracy of measure-ment on site will enable construction projects to more effec-tively exploit the potential benefits of off site manufacture and synchronised, lean construction.

Engaging with risk in construction (P2847) CIRIA’s new guide will raise awareness of good practice in the approach to risk management in construction projects and programmes.

Sustainability on site – reducing risk through ensuring competence (P2831) The aim of this project is to develop a means of assessing, in a consistent manner, the understanding and confidence of a range of individuals in a particular topic area.

Learning from others’ mistakes (P2813) Design oversights and over-adherence to standard design solu-tions can, respectively, lead to buildability problems, or constrain innovation that might offer more cost-effective solutions. Both of these will hold back industry’s desire to develop “leaner” ap-proaches to construction.

Over time, individuals and teams will develop the skills to spot such risks and opportunities, gained through training, mentoring and work on specific projects. However, this proposal provides a means of accelerating this learning by creating a series of powerful case studies that will emphasise key principles leading to effective designs. The examples will be presented in a way that encourages understanding and promotes innovation.

To find out more and to get involved contact CIRIA on tel: +44 (0) 20 7549 3300 or email: [email protected]

References

CLARK, G (2012) Hansard – House of Commons Debates, Statement to the House of Commons 27 March 2012, cols 1337–1340. Go to: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201212/cmhansrd/cm120327/debtext/120327-0001.htm#12032752001027

CLG (2009) Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 25: Development and flood risk - practice guide, Department for Communities and Local Government, London, London (ISBN: 978-1-40982-055-0)

CLG (2011) Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 10: Planning for sustainable waste management, Department for Communities and Local Government, London, London (ISBN: 978-0-11753-950-1)

HOPE, C (2012) “Planning reforms: councils have 12 months to defend land against development”, The Telegraph, London, 27 March 2012. Go to: www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/hands-off-our-land/9169250/Planning-reforms-councils-have-12-months-to-defend-land-against-development.html

DCLG (2012) Planning reforms will deliver local growth with community support, press release, Department for Communities and Local Government, London. Go to: www.communities.gov.uk/news/newsroom/2115423

MCCANN, K (2012) “Round up: will the NPPF deliver growth?”, The Guardian London, 6 April 2012, Go to: www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2012/apr/06/round-up-nppf-growth

WWF-UK (2012) Reaction to National Planning Policy Framework statement today. press release, WWF-UK, Godalming. Go to: www.wwf.org.uk/what_we_do/press_centre/?unewsid=5845

The Planning Inspectorate (2012) PINS NOTE 10/2012, to All Inspectors; Customer Services; All Staff (England), The Planning Inspectorate, Bristol

CLG (2012) National Planning Policy Framework, Department for Communities and Local Government, London, Available at: www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/nppf

Figure 3: Local planning

authorities should reduce risk from coastal change

by avoiding inappropriate

developments in vulnerable areas.

19

20

infRASTRUcTURe

Asbestos – how bad it is? “Asbestos” commonly describes three different minerals: the Serpentine chrysotile (also known as white asbestos), and two amphiboles: amosite (Brown asbestos) and crocidolite (blue asbestos).

Once thought to be a safe, durable, fire proof and a cost-effective material, asbestos was widely used throughout the UK for many decades.

asbestos: the hidden hazard on brownfield sites?

Figure 1 Asbestos fibre

21

Box 1 An outline of asbestos related disease and regulations

1906 First case report of death related to “asbestos disease” in UK

1924 First medical paper in UK on fibrosis of the lungs due to the inhalation of asbestos, Cooke (1924)

1930 Publication of first comprehensive health survey of effects of asbestos dust on the lungs and dust suppression in the asbestos industry in UK, Merewether and Price (1930)

1931 Asbestos industry regulations requiring dust suppression measures in dustiest parts of asbestos factories

1955 Dolls in 1950 published a paper linking asbestosis with lung cancer, (including comment that the risk was largely eliminated with the asbestos industry regulations)

1960 Paper linking crocidolite with mesothelioma in SA, Wagner, Sleggs et al (1960)

1969 Amended asbestos regulations banning use of crocidolite in UK

1983 Asbestos licensing regulations requiring workers with Asbestos containing material (ACM) to be checked for health every two years

1987 Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 extended the requirements for medical examinations

1990 ICRCL (1990) Asbestos on contaminated sites

1999 Asbestos (Prohibitions) (Amendment) Regulations 2003 banning new use of asbestos in UK

2003 House of Lords case of Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services relaxing rules on causation for mesothelioma claimants

2006 Updated Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 combining previous coltrols and aimed at workplaces UK

2006 Compensation Act to enforce Fairchild decision above

2012 Revised Control of Asbestos Regulations for UK to comply with implementation of European Directive 2003/18/EC

Asbestos containing materials (ACM) may have been buried on site intact, broken up or mixed with other demolition wastes and soil. Asbestos and ACM may have been imported as recycled aggregates/made ground materials. Over time, asbestos in the ground will break down and release fibres that can then become airborne (Figure 1).

Asbestos has long been known to cause serious illnesses such as lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis (Figure 2 and Box 1). Scientific knowledge on the health risks of asbestos has been increasing exponentially over the last 80 years, although they have been known for millennia. Shorter periods of even lower levels of exposure have been linked with terminal illnesses between 10 to 40 years later.

asbestos: Joanne Kwan, CIRIA, Paula Whittell, Berrymans Lace Mawer and Paul Nathanail, University of Nottingham and Land Quality Management Ltd discuss the issues of asbestos in relation to brownfield sites.

Figure 2 Asbestos related disease. Chest x-ray of the lungs. The right side looks whiter because of extensive malignant mesothelioma

Tightening legislation Asbestos in soil is a current concern for the construction and redevelopment industry as there are many legal pitfalls for the unwary landowner, consultant, contractor/developer, regulator, or even resident. Asbestos can remain in soil even after remediation for many reasons. Caches from historic disposal or demolition, previous uses of the site, former landfilling or poor removal practices may have gone undetected during site investigation.

Brownfield redevelopment is carried out within the legal context of the planning regime. In relation specifically to asbestos, there are also concurrent legal liabilities in civil law in the torts of negligence and nuisance that have come to the fore in recent court judgements, and in criminal law under statutory and regulatory liabilities relating to the management of contamination and management of asbestos.

Regulatory duties Regulation 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 states that every employer shall prevent or, where this is not reasonably practicable, reduce to the lowest reasonably practicable level the spread of asbestos from any place where work under their control is carried out. This has obvious implications for the reclamation sector of the construction industry. Asbestos is also a concern under the Construction Design and Management Regulations (CDM) 2007 and the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 both during ground investigation and ground engineering activities.

Regulatory occupational exposure levels Asbestos handling is a licensed and regulated activity. Material containing more than 0.1 per cent is categorised as hazardous waste (Environment Agency, 2011). The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 specify a limit for worker exposure to all types of asbestos of 100 000 fibres per m3 averaged over four hours. This “control limit” is described as not a “safe” level, and exposure from work activities involving asbestos should be reduced to as low as reasonably practicable.

Currently there is neither a standard method for determining the amount of asbestos present in soil or even an agreed minimal risk level or generic assessment criterion for asbestos in soil. This means that the legal and practical position is unclear on what steps should be taken and to what extent to remove the asbestos.

The civil duty of care Under common law, there is a duty of care so as not to cause foreseeable injury or loss by any act or omission made.

Determination of land as contaminated under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 can be evidence of a breach of duty or be evidence of damage, but non determination does not remove the potential for civil litigation.

The timing of exposure to airborne asbestos fibres is critical to establishing liability. Breach of the duty of care will be assessed by comparing exposure (source, fibre levels, environment and exposure time) with the state of knowledge of the defendant at the time of the exposure. Unless the risk is foreseeable at the time of the exposure, the defendant cannot be found liable. Once negligence (breach of a duty of care) has been established, the Compensation Act 2006 enforces joint and several liability, which means that someone responsible for even a small proportion of the total exposure can be liable for damages in their entirety. In any event, exposure only slightly over the ambient levels will attract liability.

What the claimants have to prove in civil law Someone seeking damages has six years from the date of damage or loss to make a claim for damages in tort or breach of contract. This can be extended for commercial claims in tort (ie if the damage becomes known later than within the first six years after the work) for three years with a cut off point of 15 years. In cases of personal injury, this period is three years from the claimant’s date of knowledge of the injury without time limit with respect to when the negligent exposure or tortious injury occurred.

In negligence, the claimant has to prove that they were owed a duty of care by the defendant, which was breached so as to cause them foreseeable damage. In private nuisance, which is the interference of an individual’s property rights, the claimant has to prove that there is a general duty on the defendant who in the course of using their land has caused interference to his/her neighbour’s/the claimant’s, and that he/she has to remove or reduce the interference however it has arisen. The claimant has to prove that the defendant was aware of the problem and did nothing to stop it, even though they could have done.

How likely is the risk of civil litigation? There is a risk that such claims will be brought by contentious claimants’ solicitors in the field, as a group action in nuisance/negligence. The claimant’s solicitors are not live to this issue yet having concentrated on planning challenges, but a short internet search might inform them. Many defendants’ solicitors working in this field are not litigators, and few have experience in asbestos issues.

To date, the Corby Group Litigation (2009) is the only case on airborne contamination arising out of remediation of contaminated land and sets an unfortunate precedent by its harsh judgement. There is no other case law to act as a guide save for employers’ liabilities, and some environmental litigation. One of the surprising issues in the Corby case was that little effort to understand or model the exposure by inhalation to fugitive contaminants seems to have been presented to the court by the claimants, and the court would not hear evidence on modelling based on weather data.

The future of the case law is uncertain at present. There will be a lot for a claimant to prove, because of the complexity of evidence relating to the assessment of contamination, but this might not be a deterrent.

State of knowledge for a civil duty of care to arise Asbestos is a contaminant that should not be taken light heartedly. Over six million tonnes of asbestos has been imported into the UK since the late 1800s and still used in many construction projects until 2000. It is the largest single industrial killer in the UK causing over 4000 deaths per year.

As discussed here, there is likely to be more litigation related to asbestos from ground in the next few years. Compliance with good and up-to-date industry guidance as the first and best place to start when considering the discharge of the duty of care is the easiest and most economical defence to mount. Indeed, the clarity of a code will go far to reduce the risk of litigation. Ideally, the code should be updated as the scientific knowledge progresses and as experience grows.

Some guidance is available in the USA, Canada, the Netherlands and Australia about assessing risk from asbestos found in ground investigation. In the UK, guidance published over 15 years ago still provides valid information to help professionals identify ubiquitous presence of asbestos (Steeds et al, 1996). However there is lack of more recent information. The Environment Agency did commission work on this subject a years ago but the publication was later suspended.

Without an industry standard, it has been difficult to be certain of good practice. Although such a standard may not be a full response to legal liabilities, it is a good first base. A defendant can rely on a “good established practice” to mount a defence in negligence but the same logic also applies to “established practice” unless:

infRASTRUcTURe

22

23

the practice is a bad one when examined objectively

later information has come to light about the risks involved

a particularly specialised defendant has greater than average knowledge of the risks.

Baker vs. Quantum Clothing Group Ltd, 2011 (UKSC 17) In December 2011, CIRIA took the lead to solve the problem with the start of its project Guide to managing and understanding the risks of asbestos in soil and on brownfield sites (RP961). This is the first project in UK that will provide practical guidance on assessing asbestos risk from ground and improve understanding of the dose-response relationship between exposure to asbestos fibres and mesothelioma. The report is due to be published in late 2012.

With increasing awareness of this topic, more work has also started recently by organisations such as CL:AIRE, EIC, the Heath Safety Executive, UK Accreditation Service and Society of Brownfield Risk Assessment.

With this collective effort, hopefully better practice in dealing with the UK’s biggest industrial killer will arise.

Statutes The Asbestos (Prohibitions) (Amendment) Regulations 2003 (No 1889)

Compensation Act 2006 (c.29)

Construction Design and Management Regulations 2007 (No 320)

The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (No 632): Regulation 16: Duty to prevent or reduce the spread of asbestos

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 (c.19)

Directive 2003/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 March 2003 amending Council Directive 83/477/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work

Environmental Protection Act 1990 (c.43): Part IIA Contaminated land

Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (c.37)

Useful websites Brownfield Briefing Awards: <www.brownfieldbriefing.com>

References

COOKE, W E (1924) “Fibrosis of the lungs due to the inhalation of asbestos dust”, BMJ, BMJ Publishing Group Limited, London, No 2:147

DOLLS, R (1950) “Smoking and carcinoma of the lung: preliminary report”, Br Med J, 2(4682), pp 739–748. Go to: <www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/dec/08/cancer.uk

HOUSE OF LORDS (2002) Judgments – Fairchild (suing on her own behalf ) etc. v. Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and others etc: <www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldjudgmt/jd020620/fchild-1.htm>

ICRCL (1990) Asbestos on contaminated sites, second edition, ICRCL 64/85, Inter-Departmental Committee on the Redevelopment of Contaminated Land and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Defra Publications, Surrey

MEREWETHER, E R A and PRICE, C W (1930) Report on effects of asbestos dust on the lungs and dust suppression in the asbestos industry.

H M Stationary Office, London. Go to: <www.worldasbestosreport.org/ articles/asbestos-history/effects-of-asbestos-dust.pdf>

STEEDS, J E, SHEPHERD, E and BARRY, D L (1996) A guide for safe working on contaminated sites, R132, CIRIA, London (ISBN: 978-0-86017-451-6). Go to: <www.ciria.org>

THE CORBY GROUP LITIGATION (2009): <www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2009/1944.html&query=corby+and+group&method=Boolean>

UKSC (2011) Baker vs. Quantum Clothing Group Ltd: <www.supremecourt.gov.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2009_0108_Judgment.pdf>

WAGNER, J C, SLEGGS, C A and MARCHAND, P (1960) “Diffuse pleural mesothelioma and asbestos exposure in the North Western Cape Province”. Brit. J. Indust. Med. No 17, pp 260–71


Deterioration and degradation modelling of infrastructure assets (P2730) CIRIA is undertaking scoping of a proposed project on deterioration and degradation modelling of infrastructure assets.

Update of manual on scour at bridges and other hydraulic structures (P2827) This project will update the 2002 CIRIA manual and will incorporate advances made in the understanding and application of the science, engineering and hydraulics of scour at bridge sites, hydraulic structures and pipeline crossings.

Management and interpretation of data for risk assessment on contaminated land (P2672) This CIRIA project will provide more comprehensive guidance on data interpretation and management.

Guidance on EC7 Part 2 (P2852) This project requires support by the practitioners within the supply chain some of which have independently been writing their own in house guidance.

Dam and Reservoir conduits (tunnels, culverts and pipes) – inspection, monitoring, maintenance and repair (P2870) The need was identified to produce comprehensive guidance on the safety assessment of conduits through dams as defects can results in erosion, leakage and ultimately failure. Two recent CIRIA projects (Tunnels C671 and Culverts C686) provide a good starting point for these asset types but do not meet the needs of the dam and reservoir safety inspection regime.

Checking and approving advanced numerical modelling (P2895) This project aims to provide a simplified guide as to what measure can be undertaken or requested to provide design assurance.


24

Water is vital to life, embracing water within our developments provide many opportunities to improve the quality of spaces and places for people to live and work. Within the UK, there is a tendency to focus on the challenges of water management rather than the opportunities posed by innovative and imaginative ways to integrate water within our built environment.

The challenges of delivering effective, efficient and reliable water and wastewater services are well practiced and understood. Urbanisation, climate change, environmental protection, expectations from the public and the quest for cost effective infrastructure delivery and operation are some of the potential dilemmas that trouble the UK water industry.

Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD), originally an Australian concept, recognises and attempts to overcome these challenges by integrating water into urban development and planning from the earliest stages to maximise the opportunities for sensitive water cycle management.

WSUD can be synonymous with sustainable urban water management and integrated water cycle management, which encourages “big picture” holistic thinking about the water cycle. This includes managing potable (drinking) water, surface water, wastewater (sewage and greywater), as well as natural watercourses. It is this integrated approach and the consideration of water supply and wastewater that differentiates WSUD from how sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) are defined in the UK.

WSUD is a seductively simple concept, but complex in delivery as it focuses on the relationship and synergies between urban design and development, liveability, ecosystems, landscape, and the urban water cycle. It challenges our traditional approach to water management by recognising that community values and sustainability should inform urban design decisions and water management practices. They should be an integral part of urban planning processes, not simply “tagged-on” at the end. The objectives of WSUD are to:

protect and enhance natural systems within urban environments

manage the effects of surface water on watercourses

control the generation and treatment of sewage

consider opportunities for daylighting culverts and urban channels

manage water resources and abstractions to maintain groundwater levels and surface water flows

promote and deliver water conservation reduce the use of potable water promote the harvesting of rainwater promote the use of greywater and

effluent recycling

integrate surface water management into developments protect water quality manage flood risk improve biodiversity and urban design

protect public health by providing liveable, resilient and adaptable urban developments.

WATeR

The rOLe OF WATeR SenSITIve UrBan DeSign In The UK

Figure 1 Urban water cycle (Hoban and Wong, 2006)

25

Why WSUD? The urban water cycle is under increasing social, environmental and economic pressures. Recognising this there are numerous policy and regulatory drivers that relate to climate change, water quality, flood risk management, the natural environment, public health and general sustainability.

The challenges of managing the water cycle are demonstrated by the droughts experienced in parts of the UK in 2006, the flooding in some of the UK in 2007, and the combined flooding and water shortages recently experienced in many parts of the country. WSUD can also help overcome some of the wider challenges being faced by the water industry that include:

climate change – will alter the seasonal weather patterns. Summers will tend to be hotter and drier, while winters will become milder and wetter. It is also likely that there will be greater variability and extremes in the weather

reducing carbon and embracing innovation – like other infrastructure providers the water industry is increasingly under pressure to innovate and reduce the amount of carbon and energy used during the delivery and operation of its infrastructure

environmental pressures – the UK’s environmental regulatory framework is becoming more stringent, eg Water Framework Directive, Bathing Water Directive and Habitats Directive

population growth and distribution – the UK’s population is projected to increase. Much of this population growth is likely to be in the water-scarce south-east

effectively managing water networks and assets – due to challenges like urbanisation, climate change and an ageing infrastructure the water industry has to improve its management and provision of capacity in its clean and dirty water networks and related assets

delivering multi-functional infrastructure – with finances being constrained water management needs to be cost effective and deliver multiple benefits and broader ecosystem services

consumer expectations and welfare – consumers are becoming more sophisticated with rising expectations of the services they pay for and increasingly extravagant lifestyles that the water infrastructure needs to maintain

societal and economic pressures – there is increasing focus on local accountability and delivery of infrastructure (localism) within a more cost and resource efficient competitive framework. In England the Cave (2007) and Walker reviews (2009) will affect the future delivery of services in the forthcoming Water White Paper

aging infrastructure – much of the UK’s infrastructure was built over 100 years ago and has reached its capacity. Ofwat considers some of the traditional approaches to water management as being no longer affordable and alternative approaches need to be explored as existing networks and assets are refurbished and replaced.

Traditionally these challenges have been managed with grey infrastructure (hard engineered sewers, treatment systems). However, in recent years it has been recognised that there are more sustainable approaches to respond to these environmental and regulatory pressures.

The requirement for sustainable water management will increase in response to environmental and legislative plans. WSUD will become crucial in providing an inclusive approach to spatial planning, urban design and water management, helping to overcome the challenges of delivering more sustainable developments within a changing climate.

The rOLe OF WATeR SenSITIve UrBan DeSign In The UK

Paul Shaffer, CIRIA explores the role of Water Sensitive Urban Design in delivering improved water cycle management in developments

Figure 2 Urban water management (courtesy Alan Hoban)

26

Progress in the UK In the UK there is yet to be delivery of WSUD or integrated water management in housing developments. Building Regulations provide a baseline compliance for water efficiency and some developers are striving for better performance by using the Code for Sustainable Homes (CLG, 2006) and comparable initiatives like BREAAM and LEED for commercial buildings to assess (and improve) environmental performance.

For sustainable drainage the adoption of Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act (FWMA) in England and Wales should improve the delivery of SuDS. There is also growing interest in how far the Water White Paper will promote retrofitting SuDS and WSUD. However, it is likely that the benefits of the FWMA and the White Paper will not be realised for some time to come. Despite, this there are several developments that have already recognised the opportunities and delivered SuDS (Lamb Drove, Cambridge, Elvetham Heath, Hampshire, Blashfield Place, Leicestershire). It is similar with water efficiency, where only a handful of large developments have adopted water efficiency (Millennium Green, Nottinghamshire, Gallions Ecopark, Thamesmead). While Lamb Drove and the Gallions Ecopark may be exceptions to the rule, the use of rainwater harvesting systems, water efficiency and SuDS are seldom delivered on the same development and very exceptionally do they include innovative wastewater treatment and recycling. When these technologies are integrated they are often as part of a showcase eco-house or eco-development (eg Hockerton Housing Project, Nottinghamshire and Bedzed, London). Some of these systems are pioneering and so are more experimental and temperamental than acceptable for mainstream developments.

Water cycle studies may offer a chance to promote WSUD. Around 80 water cycle studies have been produced in partnership by local planning authorities to determine the timing, location and requirement

of sustainable water infrastructure and integrate it within the local planning framework. A water cycle study will tend to flag the requirement for integrated water management, rather than provide guidance on delivery but combining these with development master plans provides a strong evidence base and framework. This combination is a pre-requisite for eco-towns, where the master plans set a vision to manage water more holistically. WSUD and its general approach to master planning, detailed design, delivery and management will be important for delivering sustainable drainage, water efficiency and water infrastructure to create fantastic places for people to live, work and play while reducing the impacts on the natural and built environment.

It is accepted by a growing number of disciplines that WSUD is appropriate and required in the UK. By working in partnership and using more imaginative and innovative thinking better water cycle management and water sensitive developments can be delivered in the UK.

Building on its guidance on sustainable water management, CIRIA is working with Arup and Aecom, to explore the role of WSUD in the UK. CIRIA has started work on a scoping study and has obtained support from Defra, Environment Agency Wales, South West Water, Yorkshire Water, Wessex Water, Thames Water, United Utilities, Welsh Water, Scottish Water, Glasgow City Council, Micro Drainage, Halcrow, Richard Allitt Associates, Jeremy Benn Associates, Environmental Gain, ACO, Hydro International, Polypipe and Formpave. CIRIA is looking forward to working with these organisations and the industry to champion WSUD in the UK. The scoping study will be available early 2013.

WATeR

Figure 4 SuDS at Lamb Drove

ReferencesCAVE, M (2009) Independent review of competition and innovation in water markets, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London (ISBN: 978-1-84532-568-8). Go to: <http://tinyurl.com/5uf4z9m>

CLG (2006) Code for Sustainable Homes. A step-change in sustainable home building practice, Code 06 BD 04224, Communities and Local Government, London. Go to: <www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/code_for_sust_homes.pdf>

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY (2009) Water cycle study guidance, Environment Agency, Bristol. Go to: <http://tinyurl.com/5tutudv>

HOBAN, A and WONG, T (2006) “Water Sensitive Urban Design for Resilience to Climate Change”. In: Proc 1st Australian National Hydropolis Conference, Burswood Entertainment Complex, Perth, Western Australia, 8–11 October 2006

VERNON, B and TIWARI, R (2009) “Place making through water sensitive urban design”, Sustainability, 1, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia, pp 789–814

WALKER, A (2009). Independent review of charging for household water and sewerage services, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London. Go to: <http://tinyurl.com/624t2hb>

WATER SENSITIVE CITIES STUDY TOUR (2009) Vision for a water sensitive city, Water Sensitive Cities, Australia. Go to: <http://tinyurl.com/69ekm4s>

Statutes Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the Habitats Directive)

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy (the Water Framework Directive)

Directive 2006/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006 concerning the management of bathing water quality and repealing Directive 76/160/EEC (the Bathing Water Directive)

Flood and Water Management Act 2010 (FWMA) (c.29)

For further information on CIRIA’s work on sustainable water management and the Water Sensitive Urban Design proposal please contact Paul Shaffer or Louise Clarke, CIRIA, on tel: 020 7549 3300.

27


The International Levee Handbook (RP957) The International levee handbook will give an overview of the approaches in the different existing national and international codes, standards and guidance. It will also offer a ‘decision support’ framework for competent engineers, rather than a prescriptive ‘decision making’ code of practice looking at specific challenges during the life cycle of levees.

Structural design of modular geocellular drainage tanks - a review of practice (RP962) This project will produce updated guidance reflecting a natural evolution in the understanding of the design, proof testing, and performance of geocellular drainage tanks taking into account international progress in the development of design and testing standards.

Susdrain (RP979) CIRIA is developing best practice guidance (a website and community) to provide up to date guidance, support case studies and photos as well as discussion forums and networking opportunities.

Water Sensitive Urban Design (P2763) CIRIA is developing guidance to help introduce water sensitive urban design (WSUD) into UK practices. This will develop aspirational and visually engaging guidance demonstrating the benefits and practicalities of an integrated approach to sustainable water management using the concepts of WSUD.

Guidance on communicating local flood risk (RP975) This project is to collate research, evidence, case studies and practical experience to develop easy to use good practice advice for all flood risk management authorities involved in communicating with and engaging the public on local flood risk management.

Design of flood storage reservoirs (P2902) This project will update CIRIA Report B14 first published in 1993. Governmental drivers and issues associated with flooding and catchment areas together with relevant advances in the science make it timely to produce an update.


Figure 3 Stamford and Lamb Drove

(photo courtesy of Roger Nowell)

Figure 5 SuDS at Lamb Drove

28

CIRIA delivers a range of informative and engaging training courses, covering topics from sustainable drainage, culvert design and operation, environmental good practice on site through to construction management.

Training is delivered by industry experts either as open courses or in-house (where courses can be customised to suit specific needs). Course content includes up-to-date experience with practical examples and group work to deliver first class learning outcomes.

Why train with CIRIA? CIRIA is a not-for-profit, independent

and authoritative organisation

true to our mission, CIRIA training aims to help improve performance in the modern built environment

course content is developed from CIRIA’s good practice guidance and reviewed and updated regularly

training is delivered by industry experts.

Courses available SuDS foundation

Designing SuDS

SABs facilitation workshop

Culvert design and operation

Environmental good practice on site – IEMA approved

Working with wildlife

Lean in construction

Sustainable procurement or construction

Control of water pollution from construction sites.

In-house training CIRIA also delivers a range of comprehensive, informative and accessible in-house training courses. Topics covered come from CIRIA’s best selling guidance such as environmental good practice on site (IEMA approved), working with wildlife, SuDS and culvert design and operation.

Online training CIRIA’s online training course in contaminated land was launched in 2010. The course provides useful information built on CIRIA’s extensive contaminated land guidance. Delegates will gain a foundation level understanding of brownfield and contaminated land legislation, liabilities and technical details. The online format provides a flexible approach to learning, allowing you to learn at your own pace and at a time that suits you.

How to book Visit: www.ciria.org Tel: +44 (0) 20 7549 3300 Email: [email protected]

Peter the associated pic files – you can use any that you feel add interest to these 2 pages…I have cre-ated 2 pages for TRAINING THIS TIME. I can pro-vide additional case studies if you need to fill space on another course.

dEvElOP skIlls WITh CIrIa TraInIng

29

SABs facilitation workshop – Somerset County Council

The organisation The Flood Risk Management Team of Somerset County Council organised the event that was attended by County and District flood and drainage engineers, Environment Agency officers, Highway Authority engineers (maintenance, asset management and highways development control and supervision), County and District planners, ecologists, Internal Drainage Board engineers, the Water Company, and neighbouring local authority flood risk managers.

The need To raise awareness and understanding within the Council and its external partner organisations of the proposed role of the SAB. In particular, the effect these changes will have on their working practices and the need for their involvement of duties to be effectively adopted and integrated. The event also served as an opportunity to promote a better understanding of the benefits of SuDS and to challenge some misconceptions about their implementation and operation facilitated by the experts in this field – CIRIA.

The solution CIRIA is recognised as one of the leading proponents of sustainable drainage and offered an understanding at the strategic and practical level for all aspects of SuDS. Their involvement in establishing national design standards meant that they were best placed to outline the upcoming duties, what this may mean for the attendees and to assist discussions about how to make the new role work in Somerset. Many of the delegates commented on how valuable they found the event.

Designing SuDS – Bracknell Forest Council

The organisation Bracknell Forest Council is a Unitary Authority in Berkshire. It is the SuDS Approving Body under the Flood and Water Management Act. The new role as a SAB has been placed within the highway adoptions team and building control sections of the Council.

The need To prepare for the adoption of the Act, it was felt that training was required for officers within the Council. Those who were likely to be involved in dealing directly with sustainable drainage, or whose work would be affected by the implementation of the Act.

Sustainable drainage techniques are relatively new, and the requirements of the Act will affect many disciplines across the Council. The officers who attended the training course were drawn from planning policy, urban design, building control, landscape architecture, highway maintenance, highway adoption, together with engineers dealing with the design of capital projects.

The solution The course was well received and generated a lot of discussion. It led to questions that needed to be addressed, as well as answers to misconceptions about sustainable drainage and its maintenance in particular.

The CIRIA course was chosen because it was able to engage with officers who had different levels of expertise, knowledge and professional backgrounds. The trainers were very knowledgeable and able to adjust the course content over the two days, to meet the individual requirements of the attendees as well as facilitating the overall needs of the Council.

Environmental good practice on site – Brookfield Multiplex

The organisation Brookfield Multiplex is a global organisation committed to the sustainable development of buildings. Through early engagement with clients and consultants and full communication with contractors’ right to the end users a sustainable development philosophy is attained, which is then developed and realised.

The need In Brookfield Multiplex, training the staff is part of its culture. It aims to maintain high awareness levels of all staff on current and emerging environmental obligations and best practice on site. This is paramount for delivering the best results for its clients and also ensuring that it does its bit for the environment as well as the local community and wider society.

The solution CIRIA was chosen as the environmental training provider as they provide a construction-specific course. Staff can identify with the content from their daily working lives and they built on their knowledge and confidence on environmental management on site, with the help of CIRIA’s trainer. The trainer was very experienced, an excellent communicator and brought a wealth of knowledge through case studies and interaction with the delegates that make the topics come alive.

CASE STudIES FRom In-HouSE TRAInInG

Evolution is printed with vegetable inks on paper comprising 75 per cent post-consumer waste and 25 per cent ECF recycled paper.

© CIRIAEvolution is published by

CIRIAClassic House174-180 OId StreetLondon, EC1V 9BP, UKTel: +44 (0) 20 7549 3300Fax: +44 (0) 20 7253 0523

ISSN No. 01402817

Evo 6

Documents

event series

surface water management

surface water c713

surface water runoff

short series of events

th concrete washout

ciria members webinar

event dates