Page 2 of 2

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 8:38 am
by henpecked
Didnt work too well in Zummerset :p

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:26 pm
by Tony McC
You have to choose what level of event is to be 'controlled' or attenuated by a SUDS scheme. To attenuate what has happened in The Underwater Kingdom of Zummerzet, or in the Thames Valley, an attenuation chamber the size of Devon might be needed, which is completely impractical, so we usually design to cope with,, say once-in-50 year events, or once-in-20 year events.

SUDS will never give a watertight guarantee (see what I did there?) against every event. We'll still get occasional flooding, but the aim is to minimise such events, keeping water levels as low as possible for as short a period as possible, and, ideally, avoid putting critical buildings in vulnerable areas. However, places such as the Levels will continue to flood occasionally, just as they have done since time immemorial (which means pre Norman Conquest, legally). What we should aim to do is ensure that such flooding only ever happens as a last resort.

SUDS can offer significant attenuation potential, but it needs widespread implementation. Just the one sandal-wearing, lentil-munching, bearded middle-class eco-warrior (weekends only) on each street installing permeabvle paving will not do it, but whole streets, whole estates, retail parks, hotels and conference centres, industrial areas....the default planning position should be for developers to come up with sound and solid reasoning why permeable surfacing CANNOT be used.

I keep saying it: if I can get a grant to stuff the loft with fibreglass and have a new boiler hung in the kitchen for free, why can't I get a grant towards the cost of permeable or suds-compliant surfacing on my driveway? Think of the boost that would provide not just for the nation's hydrological environment, but also for the paving trade.

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:42 pm
by lemoncurd1702
Ok, so its recently been introduced in Wales for front gardens but has been in place for some time for new developments.
What I see time and time again is absolutely zero understanding of how pp works.
Sites of four or so new houses are laying pp on the same base as they have been trafficking during building works. I can understand this from a profit point of view of the developer. The extra expense of excavating a perfectly sound base and bringing in more material. If they can get away with it, and they do, then who can blame them. The BC's know F'all about this or turn a blind eye.

Whats more I had a spec recently to tender for parking areas in new sports centre and stated permeable paving on type one, bedding layer of sharp sand and jointed with kiln dried!
This passed through planning.

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 8:50 pm
by lutonlagerlout
I dont want to sound like a complete twit but why arent houses on flood plains built 1200 mm out of the ground?
problem solved methinks
LLL

Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2014 12:41 pm
by Tony McC
There was some footage on the BBC during the worst of the floods (most opf us have forgotten all about them now, because Ukraine has knocked our rain off the top of the telly news) showing some smug sods somewhere in the Thames Valley who had built their own homes with floor levels 1.2m above highest previous flood level.

Huge flight of steps up to the front door, which looked out-of-kilter in the dry season, but boy! were they chuffed about standing proud above their neighbours once the river burst its banks!

Lemon's point about the complete failure of BCOs and planners to understand permeable surfacing and SUDS in general happens all too often. The abject lack of knowledge, absence of any training, and general can't-be-arsed-ness anmong local authorities is little short of a scandal.

The training is out there, if you look for it. Abertay Uni runs regular SUDS appreciation courses at various locations (I've been on one) and some of the CBP manufacturers offer installation training, but the take up is very poor.

Just a little over 2 years ago I looked at an 11,000m² installation of permeable paving, all claimed as suds-compliant and passed by the local authority, where the supervisor had left uni with a 2nd class degree in Civil Eng just 6 months earlier and freely admitted he had no experience at all of permeable paving, so he relied on the contractor, a sodding landscaper, tell him what was and what wasn't right.

And then there was all round surprise when it turned out to be a complete FU!

In my report, I highlighted the fact that there is a permeable paving training course available for just 75 quid. The repair bill for this job will now run to 6 figures.