Consultation: Submitted to Deadline: Introduction 24,000 members 200 nature reserves 8,000 hectares or retrofitted

Transcription

1 Consultation: Implementation of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) on new developments Submitted to: Deadline: 11 th August 2017 Introduction This response is submitted by Wildlife Trusts Wales (WTW), representing the six Wildlife Trusts in Wales Brecknock, Gwent, Montgomeryshire, North Wales, Radnorshire and South and West Wales (hereafter referred to as the Wildlife Trusts ). The Wildlife Trusts work together in partnership to achieve common aims. We collectively speak on behalf of more than 24,000 members and manage over 200 nature reserves, covering more than 8,000 hectares of prime wildlife habitat, from rugged coastline to urban wildlife havens. The Wildlife Trusts strive for Living Landscapes and Living Seas, recognising this as an aspirational end where our environment, society, and economy coexist for the benefit of wildlife and people. We firmly believe that Green Infrastructure, including wildlife friendly SuDS, play a significant role in helping to achieve this aspiration, particularly through provision of multiple benefits 1. It is important to recognise the value of the natural environment in planning for our future, not least because of the crucial role it plays protecting our homes from flooding. The natural environment delivers essential ecosystem services (life-support systems) such as the recycling of air and water; capturing and storing carbon in peat, woodland and soil; flood protection; and waste purification along with many others. Maintaining the resilience and capacity of the natural environment to cope with climate change is vital to ensure a sustainable environment for future generations and to protect and increase species and habitat richness. The natural environment is fundamental to human well-being. A well-planned and managed natural environment, including Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) is key in shaping the character and quality of places in which people live and work. Contact with nature and active recreational use of natural green spaces contributes to people s psychological wellbeing and physical health and so helps to reduce sick days, increasing business productivity and staff retention. Nature is a valuable resource for the whole community, providing opportunities for learning, artistic expression, spiritual refreshment, research, outdoor education, exploration, recreation, exercise, and play. The Wildlife Trusts welcome this consultation on the implementation of SuDS on new developments and offer the following recommendations: the implementation of Schedule 3. SuDS should be designed or retrofitted and managed as part of core infrastructure to deliver multifunctional benefits, leaving hard engineering solutions to make up any infrastructure shortfall 1 Wildlife Trusts Wales (2016): Green Infrastructure: A Catalyst for the Well-being of Future Generations in Wales 1

2 Question 1 - Do you agree with our proposals? Please include an explanation with your reply. We strongly support the implementation of Schedule 3 and the policy objective to deliver effective, multi-purpose SuDS in new developments that will be maintained for the lifetime of the developments they serve as long as the SuDS are designed in such a way that it benefits biodiversity. We are also supportive of the need for provision of clarity, certainty and consistency to establish comprehensive arrangements, around the use of SuDS on new developments and around adoption and funding arrangements for ongoing operation and maintenance. We believe the integration of SuDS more fully in all stages of the local development planning process would be hugely beneficial for both people and wildlife. Maintaining and restoring the natural environment in our towns and cities plays a fundamental role in sustaining our collective future. People s connection with nature can increase their health and well-being, one of the range of social, economic and environmental services provided by the natural environment without which society could not function. Planning for new and existing communities provides real opportunities to protect and enhance the intrinsic and practical value of the natural environment while responding to specific challenges posed by climate change within one single area of land, SuDS can provide this multi-functionality. SuDS create places that are more resilient to climate change, that have distinct local character, and in which people want to live, work, and visit; places that promote well-being, productivity, educational benefits and crime reduction; and places where communities can actively engage with their local environment. Figure 1 (left)- Street planters are an example of SuDS. Reproduced from Welsh Water s Vision 2050 Consultation document Figure 3 and 4 (right) Some biodiversity associated with SuDS, kingfishers and an otter Figure 2 (above) A SuDS designed for multifunctional use. Reproduced from Town and Country Planning Association/ Wildlife Trust Good Practice Guidance for Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity 2 2 TACP/ Wildlife Trust Good Practice Guidance for Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity 2

3 Whilst there is broad understanding and acceptance of the multiple benefits of SuDS, there is currently little provision. Section 1.3 of the consultation confirms this as it states local authorities report that their non-mandatory status and the lack of a clear pathway to adoption have limited their effectiveness. The economic argument for implementation of SuDS is indisputable and is similar to that for Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES), which are strongly encouraged by Welsh Government policy including the Environment (Wales) Act (2016) and SoNaRR (2016). PES involves the beneficiary of an ecosystem service (e.g. flood prevention) paying the provider (i.e. builder) for the service. Otherwise, flooding creates externalities which we all pay for, including economic, social and environmental costs, increases in insurance premiums and water bills via Welsh Water prices rises to implement RainScape. The economic justification for SuDS is clear. Welsh Water states it would cost 1.9 billion to roll out RainScape through Wales 3 and mandatory National Standards could save Wales nearly 1 billion in capital construction costs and generate benefits of over 20 million per year (page 9 of the Implementation of Sustainable Drainage Systems on New Developments consultation). Thinking about nature should be the starting point of good planning, and is an essential component of delivering sustainable development. By ensuring that SuDS are part of every development, Welsh Government are fulfilling their duties under both the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 (it has been shown that green infrastructure delivers against all seven Well-being Goals 1 ) and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 (Part 1 of the Act indicates that SuDS will make a significant contribution to the ecosystem approach). This new legislation offers an opportunity to promote and strengthen SuDS in Wales. They should help all public bodies and the Welsh Government to look at issues in an integrated way. We believe SuDS should be designed or retrofitted and managed as part of core infrastructure to deliver multifunctional benefits, leaving hard engineering solutions to make up any infrastructure shortfall. Case studies Case studies taken from Wildlife Trusts Wales Green Infrastructure: A Catalyst for the Wellbeing of Future Generations in Wales 1 1. Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust: Severn Farm Pond Nature Reserve was built to alleviate flooding of the Welshpool bypass and neighbouring industrial estate. Without this wetland, the industrial estate would flood, harming the local economy. It is now an urban nature reserve with meandering boardwalks to allow visitors to enjoy the wildlife. It provides a relaxing and stress free environment where local businesses can hold open-air meetings, employees can take their lunch, or just take a stroll. Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust also use the site as an outreach centre for local youths and people with mental health issues. It also provides an open-air classroom for local schools and a canvas for local artists. 2. Dŵr Cymru/Welsh Water (DCWW): confronted with urban creep due to demographic change, and increased intensity of rainfall due to climate change, DCWW will reduce the risk of sewer flooding and pollution through sustainable urban drainage systems. Their RainScape approach is a range of new, innovative solutions to manage the amount of surface water entering sewers. They are using 3 Page 91 Welsh Water

4 basins and planters, swales, filter strips and grass channels to manage water. Through this approach, local environments will become more attractive, new habitats will be created and communities will become more resilient to climate change. DCWW see this approach as more sustainable and cheaper than traditional methods and this helps to keep customer bills low. Llanelli was prioritised due to the impact of flooding on customers and the need to prevent economic development. The total cost of the RainScape in Llanelli is 55 million. To date, Welsh Water have removed 30,000m 3 of surface water from the sewer, reducing spills of storm sewage into the sea, freeing capacity for new development, and addressing the risk of flooding at six Llanelli properties. 3. Marks and Spencer (M&S): the Cheshire Oaks store is Biodiversity Benchmark approved 4. This is a standard for assessing and certifying biodiversity protection and enhancement and can complement existing environmental management systems such as ISO At this new store, M&S installed its biggest, most diverse green wall and planted more than 200 native trees along with wildflower meadows. A pond area was established, complete with dipping platform, and birds benefitted from bird boxes and new native hedgerows. Through the scheme, the site has developed relationships with the local community and schools which are now able to benefit from the diverse habitat at the site. 4. Greening for Growth: this project in London s Victoria Business Improvement District (BID) involved a green infrastructure audit which identified the potential for 25ha of green roof space as well as other significant new or enhanced greenspace areas. A major environmental issue in the BID area was surface-water flooding, which has led to the temporary closures of Victoria Rail and the underground stations in the past. The green roof can absorb 80,000m 3 of rainwater each year. In addition, the new greenspace areas aim to: boost the local economy improve visitor experiences of the area and enrich the sense of place increase property values and workforce satisfaction reduce the risk of local businesses incurring costs as a result of flooding 5. Green Roofs: in urban areas, roofs account for 40-50% of impermeable surface area. The rainfall retention capability of green roofs on a yearly basis may range from 45% to 75%. Therefore, creating or retrofitting green roofs presents a major opportunity to decrease urban run-off, especially as no additional land-take is required. Green roofs are also known to absorb greenhouse gases and reduce air pollution, reduce energy costs, reduce noise, create local jobs, improve the marketability of and reduce opposition to new developments and are good for wildlife. Good practice examples include: In France, the rooftops in all new buildings in commercial zones must have a green roof or solar panels New York City s policy-makers employ an incentive scheme (the Green Roof Tax Abatement programme) to increase the uptake on private property 4 Run by the Wildlife Trusts, Biodiversity Benchmark is the only award for business to recognise and reward continual Biodiversity improvement. The Biodiversity Benchmark provides a framework within which an organisation can ensure that its impact is as positive as it possibly can be by providing robust, independent verification of planning and implementation of land management practices. Biodiversity Benchmark is a standard for assessing and certifying an organisation s systems for achieving continual biodiversity protection and enhancement on its landholdings and their implementation. Biodiversity Benchmark can complement existing environmental management systems such as ISO14001 and EMAS by integrating biodiversity into the systems of an organisation. Alternatively it can operate as a standalone system 4

5 In Switzerland, new developments receive detailed instructions on how to maximise the nature conservation value of properties. Government funded advice from a green roof expert is also made available. In Basel, this has led to 23% of all flat roofs being green in 10 years (over 1,700 green roofs have been installed) In Portland, USA, the benefits of green roofs equated to $101,660 after five years from reduced storm water management system, improvements in operational and maintenance costs, carbon reduction, improved air quality, and habitat creation. Question 3 - Do you agree with the existing definition for sustainable drainage? If not, please give suggestions for any changes with your reasons. We do not agree with the current definition for sustainable drainage given in the Act. Protect and improve the environment is too generic and could be taken to mean the built environment. In order to maximise its contribution to achieving each of the well-being goals of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act and deliver against the biodiversity and resilient ecosystem duty in the Environment (Wales) Act, the description should be protect and improve the natural environment including enhancing biodiversity. Question 5 Do you agree with the principles for sustainable drainage contained in the recommended non-statutory national standards? If not, please give additional or alternative suggestions. We agree with the principles set out and have some suggestions for additional principles to be included. We particularly support the following principles: Ensure pollution is prevented at source, rather than relying on the drainage system to treat or intercept it; Manage rainfall to help protect people from increased flood risk, and the environment from morphological and associated ecological damage resulting from changes in flow rates, patterns and sediment movement caused by the development; Take account of the likely future pressures on flood risk, the environment and water resources such as climate change and urban creep; Seek to make the best use of available land through multifunctional usage of public spaces and the public realm. One principle we feel needs to be amended is Maximise the delivery of benefits for amenity and biodiversity. We feel that biodiversity benefits should be separate from amenity benefits of SuDS as these are two very different areas requiring different implementation. We have the following recommendations regarding the principles. We recommend that commercial sustainable drainage systems should look to obtain the Biodiversity Benchmark 4. We also recommend that any guidance should be more accessible and inspirational, and therefore more visually appealing. For example, Recommended non-statutory standards for sustainable drainage (SuDS) in Wales designing, constructing, operating and maintaining 5

6 surface water drainage systems 5 is not inspirational, appealing and thus less likely to be read. Wildlife Trusts Wales are happy to work with Welsh Government on creating a more visually inspirational document an example of which is the Wildlife Trust s acclaimed Green Infrastructure brochure 1. In order to achieve multiple benefits, we also recommend some additions to the list of principles set out in the Recommended non-statutory standards for sustainable drainage (SuDS) in Wales designing, constructing, operating and maintaining surface water drainage systems 5 that would go alongside current principles: Principle 1 Water is a valuable resource and this should be reflected in the way it is managed. Surface water runoff should be used as a resource to contribute to water sensitive urban design (WSUD) and the philosophy of integrating the water cycle within the built environment. Rainfall is likely to be even more valuable in the future, as water becomes more scarce as a result of climate change, rising population and urbanisation Principle 2 - SuDS require wide partnership buy-in: The strategic planning and implementation of SuDS requires a co-ordinated approach from a multi-disciplinary, crossorganisational, team of partners. Local authorities and their ecologists are advised to work in consultation with the developer (engineers, landscape architects, ecologists), NRW, Welsh Water, environmental NGOs (such as the Wildlife Trusts) and communities to achieve this. We have experience of this partnership working. The Wildlife Trust of South and West Wales (WTSWW) teamed up with Swansea Council s Vale Resource Centre to install SuDS at a facility to improve the way they deal with rainfall and inspire the community to be more sustainable. The Trust also worked with New Horizons (a support organisation for people with disabilities) to build the rain garden, and NRW helped identify the area. Principle 3 SuDS need to demonstrate multi-functionality : The integration and interaction of different functions within a single site is sought where appropriate. Multi-functional SuDS can also be viewed as application of an ecosystem approach. Principle 4 SuDS creation and maintenance need to be properly resourced: Planning for resource needs should be undertaken from the outset and should consider costs for purchase, design, implementation, monitoring and management of SuDS. Principle 5 SuDS need to be central to the development s design and must reflect and enhance the area s locally distinctive character: The SuDS should be fully integrated within the design of a development, reaching into the built environment and incorporating gardens, green roofs, open space, extensive corridors, and improvements that connect with the wider countryside and reflect and enhance local distinctiveness and landscape character. Detailed planning for SuDS at the initial stages of the development proposal will help to make both the SuDS and the development as a whole more successful and will contribute most significantly to a sense of place. Principle 5 SuDS should contribute to biodiversity gain by safeguarding, enhancing, restoring, and creating wildlife habitat and by integrating biodiversity into the built environment: Existing designated sites and irreplaceable habitats of international, national and local importance should be protected, both directly and indirectly, from development. In addition, habitats and features should be created, restored, connected and managed for biodiversity - using native plants that are beneficial for pollinators see the Wildlife Trusts 5 6

7 leaflet 6. If the development is near a designated site, including Local Wildlife Site, the SuDS should be over-designed in order to avoid any detrimental impact (i.e. pollution) entering the designated site. Question 6 Do you agree with the need for applicants to establish the maintenance requirements of their proposed drainage system and identify how this will be funded at an early stage? Please give reasons for your response. Is the proposed addition to the principles adequate? The establishment of maintenance requirements of proposed SuDS will help ensure that these systems are sustainable in the long term. We support the addition of the principle In addition, a maintenance plan should be developed and the means of funding it for its design life identified and agreed. This principle should be flexible to allow for self-sustaining SuDS using natural processes where this is possible. The maintenance requirements included in SuDS applications should not only cover the maintenance of the drainage function, but should also consider maintenance to achieve maximum benefits of the other functions of the SuDS, including wildlife. We feel that in order for this to be effective, the application must identify the mechanism by which they will ensure the ecological value of the SuDS is maintained, for example as part of a management plan. The management plan should have a formal, fixed monitoring and review period and the process should include a mechanism to penalise those who do not adhere to the plan. Question 7 Do you agree with our view on the need for Local Authorities to work in partnership to exercise and discharge the SAB function? Please provide suggestions on how this can be achieved? We feel that the local authorities, working in partnership, would be well placed to perform the SAB function as local authorities already review planning applications. Sharing of best practice, knowledge and skills would facilitate this partnership between local authorities. However, in order for this to be effective, local authorities will need to ensure they have dedicated capacity, specifically ecological capacity. We are aware that many local authorities no longer have a county ecologist and we would therefore be concerned that the benefits of SuDS would not be maximised. Having a Green Infrastructure officer within each Local Authority planning department would help achieve this partnership working. In addition to having a dedicated officer to oversee installation and retrofitting of SuDS, it will be crucial to ensure the Local Authorities have a clear understanding of what multifunctional SuDS are. Some Local Authorities still significantly downgrade the role of biodiversity and have failed to grasp the importance for delivering on biodiversity under their environment duties. To some Local Authorities, environment is seen only as waste and amenity greenspace, and for SuDS to be truly effective and achieve all their potential, it is vital that the post responsible for SuDS is given sufficient power to enable their recommendations to be taken forwards. There is a risk that some Local Authorities may feel that by just having the post in place they are meeting their duty, even when they ignore all the suggestions made by the post holder

8 Question 8 What, if any, alternative body should be appointed to approve and undertake adoption of SuDS? Please give reasons. As the internal drainage board and the champion of sustainable management of natural resources in Wales, NRW could be appointed to approve and undertake adoption of SuDS. NRW, through their internal drainage board duties, have an interest in limiting excessive overland flow into surface water. As the statutory environmental conservation body for Wales, this organisation is also ideally placed to advise on whether the SuDS meet the biodiversity requirement set out in the principles. In addition, NRW would be able to approve large scale projects which cross several Local Authority boundaries, such as roads and railways (see question 9). However, for this to be effective, NRW will need to ensure they have dedicated capacity, specifically ecological capacity. Question 9 Do you agree with our proposals about what should require SAB approval and what we propose to exempt? Please give reasons. Current exemptions in Schedule 3 are single-property systems and publicly-maintained roads. We agree with these exceptions. The proposed exceptions listed in the consultation document include: Trunk roads and motorways managed by Welsh Government in Wales, Construction work carried out by Natural Resources Wales as the internal drainage board in exercise of its functions under the Land Drainage Act 1991 Construction of a railway We do not feel that roads and railways should be exempt from requiring SAB approval as both these structures can create significant areas of impermeable surface which affect the ability of the land to absorb rainwater and would require SuDS to alleviate any potential problems. All SuDS should be subject to SAB approval to avoid any dereliction of duty. In this situation, there is a clear benefit to having NRW as an approving body for SuDS as Local Authorities may not operate at the scale necessary to review and consider large scale projects. Question 10 Do you agree with our proposals to set time limits for the SAB to give statutory consultees 21 days in which to respond? If not, please give reasons. We agree with the proposal to give 21 days for consultees to respond. However, we feel that the current list of consultees is not inclusive enough to ensure that the SuDS meet all the aspects set out in the definition and the principles, namely protecting and improving the natural environment and maximising amenity and biodiversity. We feel that interested parties, such as local community groups and NGOs, should be permitted to respond to consultations. 8

9 Question 20 Do you agree that a maintenance plan should be submitted by the developer with the SAB application? Will these proposed arrangements deliver effectively maintained sustainable drainage? Please give reasons We strongly agree with the need for developers to submit a maintenance plan with the SAB application and we are pleased to see that this maintenance plan must be negotiated with communities and partnerships. We are also supportive of the need for the plan to clearly identify who is responsible for the maintenance. We would be keen to add the point that the funding must also be sufficient to ensure the SuDS remain at the same or a higher quality as time goes on to deliver against the new definition (specifically protect and improve the natural environment and enhance biodiversity). We feel that the maintenance plan put forward by the developer must be long term to avoid SuDS being abandoned over time. It is important for the purpose of the SuDS to be held in mind throughout any application, installation and maintenance process. We note that the consultation documents states that to realise the full benefits of SuDS, new models of funding are required and these should be informed by a fuller understanding of who benefits from the SuDS, so that incentives for treating SuDS as assets rather than liabilities may be realised. We fully support the need for SuDS to be recognised as assets rather than liabilities, but they should be thought of as part of a development s duty rather than an added extra. These assets are mitigating damage caused by the development. It is important that the messaging around SuDS is clear that, although SuDS do have lots of benefits, ultimately they remain a duty on the developer due to the presence of the development, which would otherwise cause harm to water quality, water quantity, etc. 9

10 Your name: Your organisation (if applicable) Your address Responses to the consultation will be made public in a report on our website. Would you prefer your response to remain anonymous? Which one of the following organisations and sectors best describes you? Local Authorities Developers and home builders Water and sewerage companies Non-government organisations and the third sector Consumer bodies Academia Sector professionals Member of the public Wildlife organisation James Byrne Wildlife Trusts Wales Baltic House, Mount Stuart Square, Cardiff Bay, CF10 5FH No Non-government organisation and the third sector and Wildlife organisation 10