ROUND TABLE REVIEW 35
engineers, and its technical director, Steve Wilson, is, like Sue, a long-standing purveyor of practical SuDS solutions in a host of developments; they both train construction industry professionals including housebuilders on SuDS design. From the housebuilder side, we were delighted to have Chris Carr return from our previous round table on Part L; in the meantime he had been elevated to FMB National President! He was forthright in advocating for SME builders grappling with several acute business challenges currently, of which SuDS is just one. Our other housebuilder in attendance was Matt Clutton from Cameron Homes, a ediusied fir buildin uality developments across the Midlands and north; Matt combines engineering expertise with a housebuilder’s business outlook, and so offered crucial insights. Martin Shaw is senior operations anaer fro eadeet, an oen sace anaeent fir which acts as ‘landscape partner’ for housebuilders across the UK. He views SuDS from the operational side and helps residents engage with and understand what are potentially unfamiliar features in their developments.
From our sponsors we were pleased to welcome Ruth Clarke, innovation manager at Innovyze, which provides design modelling software to engineers and consultants working on SuDS schemes. Jamie Gledhill, technical engineering manager from Brett Landscaping advocates strongly for permeable paving, and Charlotte Markey, green urbanisation innovation manager at Polypipe, donated her expertise as PhD researcher and promoted a wide-ranging ‘systems’ approach.
THE DEBATE
The Government’s ‘Plan for Water’ has a stated aim to see “nature-based solutions used, where appropriate.” But what are the best SuDS strategies for housebuilders to take, in order to create the most appropriate schemes in each setting? Collaboration between architects, landscape architects, engineers, housebuilders and planning authorities is the key, but is achieving this an obstacle in itself?
The round table focused on the general obectives and benefits of u, but quickly saw delegates delving into some of the obstacles (some of which may be imaginary!) for achieving holistic schemes. The attendees began by looking at the Four Pillars of SuDS, CIRIA’s core benefits as well as the usthaves for installations to be deemed a success. Firstly, water quantity – tackling stormwater via slowing its progress as close to the source as possible, rather
than removing water quickly from site using pipes. As SuDS expert, landscape architect Sue Illman told the group, “the whole point about SuDS is to have a multiplicity of features, and that each one, particularly where they’re on the surface and involve planting, slows that ow because the water will be interceted as soon as it hits the ground.” The second pillar is water quality – natural SuDS can in themselves clean the water coming off a site. “For example,” Sue explained, “a swale is a wet-dry system, the water goes through it, then it dries out, and this process metabolises the hydrocarbons from roads.” This is augmented by planted systems whose roots help to control silts and sediments, further cleaning the water supply. Those cheicals which cannot be filtered by planting remain trapped in the soil, rather than entering groundwater reserves. The final two illars are enity and iodiversity two interrelated benefits of u, firstly the ability of u to provide a whole new public area within developments for residents to see, and use. Nature-based SuDS schemes are a proven way to produce species biodiversity on sites, and thereby help meet the January 2024 requirement for a 10% uplift in Biodiversity Net Gain.
AMENITY & RESIDENT BUY-IN We asked all of our attendees to provide a question or comment for the group to tackle. Steve Wilson of EPG suggested that how SuDS contributes to biodiversity was a key issue to assess. artin haw fro eadeet ade the case for including SuDS as not just a functional necessity, but as an amenity in housebuilding schemes, and how features such as swales, filter stris and of course trees add value to residents’ lives. He told the delegates: “As the SuDS systems mature, the visual amenity is far greater than having a concrete basin or channel; we get our ecologists involved to improve the site’s biodiversity, in one example in Epping we have linked a balancing pond with a woodland, with native trees planted around it.” He continues: “It’s matured into a lovely place where families spend a day out. SuDS can become a massively valuable part of the development.” Martin added that wetland margins around such a feature further slow the water, soaking into the ground rather than running straight into the pond.
Developments can look different to what has traditionally been expected by residents, with longer, wilder grasses which can suggest a lack of maintenance, and lead to a stigma against them. Delegates asserted that education was essential to combat pushback against
“PLANNERS REQUIRE AN AMOUNT OF PUBLIC SPACE IN SCHEMES, BUT THEY DON’T INCLUDE THE SUDS
FEATURE IN THAT AREA,” MATT CLUTTON, CAMERON HOMES
WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84
