40 WORKING TOGETHER TO STREAMLINE SUDS SCHEMES ROUND TABLE REVIEW


maintenance burden.” She added however that the industry was “still in a mindset of reactive maintenance, and trying to almost overmaintain certain things,” and this needed to change.


Markey said that “what we really want is to use smart to even out the peaks and the troughs – we don’t need ‘all systems go’ 100% of the time. We can let the ecology do some of the work for us, and I think using that intelligence is going to help us.” However, when it came to maintenance schedules, she said “appropriate” practice should be the goal.


BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN


EDUCATION, EDUCATION, EDUCATION Steve Wilson of the Environmental Protection Group insisted that a “massive public education campaign” was needed to explain why SuDS features had to be installed


the eample of Wales which successfully implemented Schedule 3, but this still led to challenges in terms of upskilling. Wee got Ss, ut noody nows what they are and how to deliver them – merchants need to be enabled through the supply chain to eplain what those different components are, I think that’s the major gap in delivery.” Glen Westmore said that clarity of language was part of the solution for ensuring that everyone is on a level playing fi eld, and cautioned against using engineering jargon with residents and the wider supply chain. Steve Wilson said that there was a stigma attached to natural SuS features, but that education of residents was fundamental to helping understanding, and avoiding perceptions of danger. “The Government needs a massive public education campaign to eplain why these things are so important.” And Paul Shaffer of CIBSE added that eing oerly solutions-led was unwise, advising “trying to make sure there’s an understanding of the philosophy and principles around good drainage before we jump to the products and solutions.” He said “there has historically been a dependency on the products out there, rather than the process and philosophy of managing rain where it lands; people miss the basic elements of drainage design and place making around it.” aid wen from aylor Wimpey pushed back against criticism of deelopers deliery on SuS, and


WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK


Anglian’s Matt Moore’s call for a change of mindset away from a tic o approach. Owen said responsibility needed to rest with LLFAs as “they pass our designs,” and also questioned how schemes’ design could be revisited once approval had been obtained.


RESPONSIBILITY


While collaborative approaches informed y design epertise could een e cost-neutral, planning authorities needed to become more engaged in driving them forward, despite resource challenges. ur ndustry iewfi nder research among housebuilders found patchy levels of awareness of SuS methods across the country, and Burdens’ representatives said that ownership and therefore maintenance responsiility for SuS features was a huge problem remaining to be solved. Andrew Taylor of Burdens drew attention to the fact that with a lack of clarity on who was responsible came issues around designing schemes for proper future maintenance. He told delegates: “I see lots of drawings with an attenuation tank with no way of accessing and maintaining it once built. Over time, it’s going to get full of silt and not do the job properly.” He said that because inspection points “aren’t on the drawing, they’re not considered.”


Charlotte Markey said that trials of a particular smart solution – smart gullies – had failed until now, but the industry would keep trying to “ integrate smart in a cost-effectie way to reduce the


Chris Carr of Carr & Carr Builders said that using SuS as part of the  package” was a crucial part of success for houseuilders looing to mae SuS installations viable. Steve Wilson said that one of the things that distinguished ‘good SuS was achieing iodiersity net gain its a win-win situation, ut you need ecologists to design it. You can’t just put a bit of grass in a swale.” However, Charlotte Markey said that sometimes harnessing the power of SuS for  compliance could lead to confl icts that have to be resolved: “The water company might want to store as much water as possible within a component, or remove as much as possible, and you’re trying to hold some back to support vegetation; there’s often a challenge to create products and innovations that deliver all those four pillars in one solution, ut one sie fi ts all doesnt necessarily always work.”


SOLUTIONS


In the second session we turned the focus to SuS solutions and design approaches, led by our sponsors who posed a series of points and questions to the group. One solution to many issues proposed was for housebuilders to ensure early design engagement with the SuS part of their plans – before it reaches product selection – when currently it wasn’t always given enough attention.


Burdens representative Mark Gillies ased why SuS was not featuring more in early stage design thinking, when there is ample opportunity to design out waste, reduce carbon and disruption to communities, but moreover, reduce cost. And by implication, whether innovative solutions such as geosynthetics were being overlooked.


hey shared eamples of success including using geotetiles to replace the large volumes of stone typically specifi ed for drainage in houseuilding proects, with signifi cant caron saings alongside reduction in site disruption. However there were barriers to making


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