34 SOLUTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN & NUTRIENT NEUTRALITY IN NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
How much has your investment been in pursuing these solutions? Less than £5k £5k to £10k £10k to £25k £25k to £50k £50k to £100k Over £100k
While avoidance is the preferential option, only 20% of respondents selected this – highlighting that while the more favoured option, it is also unfortunately the most diffi cult. This is however perhaps not surprising given that avoidance can often mean avoiding a particular site altogether if its biodiversity value is high, which will not always be a realistic option if a proect has already had signifi cant time and money invested in it. Minimisation was selected by double that number of respondents . inimisation can again be somewhat disruptive to projects depending on how far along in the planning process they are, with solutions including the adaptation of site layouts, changing construction materials, or using different machinery for development. ts therefore positive that almost half our respondents are actively pursuing minimisation, and demonstrates the need for schemes such as B is not only taken seriously, but also achievable. Rehabilitation & restoration was the most selected option at . This generally sees new habitat areas created to replace those that have been lost, or the enhancement of existing ones. iven that development is almost guaranteed to cause a certain amount of disruption, its unsurprising that many housebuilders are actively pursuing this, likely having little choice but to replace at least some habitat lost to their proect. t is nonetheless encouraging that this is, according to our fi ndings, likely being pursued in conjunction with more favourable options such as minimisation.
PRACTICAL MEASURES oving on to more specifi c solutions, our research demonstrates that housebuilders dont necessarily need to think too outside the bo or eplore entirely new solutions. atural sustainable drainage solutions (SuDS) are known to be a useful means to supporting BNG, helping manage surface water, improving water quality, reducing the risk of fl ooding, and creating diverse habitats for wildlife. ith u having previously had a somewhat disappointing uptake, due in part to a lack of legislation and planning policies, its encouraging that of our respondents said they are combining BNG solutions with u.
There are also product solutions that can also help housebuilders with BNG onside, many of which – like SuDS – are not necessarily new or innovative, but rather require consideration that they perhaps hadnt before. e asked respondents which product solutions they are using to support and benefi t B onsite, selecting all that apply. The top three choices were wildfl ower meadows , artifi cial nesting
WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK
boes , and hedgerows or native tree planting . These are all solutions that not only promote biodiversity, but also offer benefi ts to – and therefore make a development more attractive to – future homeowners, providing inviting outdoor spaces and planting, and encouraging an abundance of insects and birds to the site. ildfl ower meadows and hedgerowtree planting are also effective means of replacing any potentially lost habitat.
et on the list were green roofs or living walls and ponds or wetland creation, both selected by of respondents, before wildlife corridors and habitat structures, which were selected by . ther less popular choices were rain gardens or permeable paving , biodiverse grasslands , and soil improvement techniques . While some evidently currently have a low uptake, each solution is being utilised by at least some housebuilders, suggesting that all options are possible, even if only on certain developments.
CONCLUSION
Theres no denying that the aims of the B scheme are honourable, and that there is absolutely a need for schemes that encourage – and enforce – developers to better consider biodiversity and the impact of their projects on local habitats. That said, our research shows that there are also a number of challenges facing housebuilders in meeting these new requirements.
While the majority of our respondents understand the requirements of 10% BNG, a high percentage also said they are currently fi nding it diffi cult to achieve it. ts clear that the usual barriers relating to additional costs, and administrative and logistical complications, such as the training of staff, are impacting housebuilders and adding complications. There are a variety of solutions for achieving BNG success onsite, and our research showed that all of these are being utilised by at least some developers, including a good percentage pursuing u approaches. hile uptake of actual biodiversity additions is perhaps not as high as Defra and Natural England would like, the ratio achieved between onsiteoffsite and purchasing B credits is still reasonable, especially given the number of developers who are struggling with B.
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
