Another dumb SuDS question.

[Pocster]

Just now, Dave Jones said:

 

planners dont design SUDS so it begs the question who come up with your design and who put it to the planners.

Absolutely no idea .

[Alan Ambrose]

So that's two government departments and three quangos including BRE ... why do I think this isn't going to go well?

 

https://www.local.gov.uk/roles-and-responsibilities-relating-suds

 

[Arrenite]

On 07/07/2024 at 16:35, saveasteading said:

Don't agree. It all adds up.

Plus it is easy to do and so an easy win for society.

It’s often not easy to do, and very expensive to boot. It’s a ludicrous requirement for a single dwelling like mine that in the middle of a 2 acre plot.

[Kelvin]

Planning made it a condition for us to put in a large soakaway but it was never checked. One of the folk onsite suggested we just take a pipe right down to the burn because that’s what a lot of folk do because it’s never checked. That’s fine but way below us down in the valley where the water all ends up suffers from flooding a few times per year so I didn’t want to add to that so we put in a large soakaway. Cost very little and was easy to do. 

[FarmerN]

On 08/07/2024 at 15:53, Dave Jones said:

dump them into the foul with suitable crateage as a buffer ? or no mains sewer either ?

Does that not just increase the load on the sewage system , that can’t even cope with current load, especially in very wet weather?

I never  had to face these questions ,being in a rural area with plenty of land to soakaway too. I suppose I’m lucky and so have a different perspective.

We were however required to have a permeable drive way , which we did, with a good sub base of clean stone to allow water to soak through to the sub soil.

Again lucky in having plenty of space to loose soil we had to dig out, rather that pay to have it taken away.

[saveasteading]

1 hour ago, Kelvin said:

suffers from flooding a few times per year so I didn’t want to add to that 

Bravo.

I'd give more than one heart if I could.

.❤️♥️💙

There you are.

 

Unfortunately I haven't yet met a Planner who remotely understood that it all adds up to a flood further down. I suspect their skillset is procedure and doesn't include this sort of thing.

 

2 hours ago, Arrenite said:

very expensive to boot

It can be, but on an appropriate plot with skilled design it is easy enough.

Unfortunately the non-expert designers tend to throw bought 'solutions' at it, at the clients expense of course.

 

On a tiny plot it can be near impossible, so planning permission perhaps was misguided.

 

The cost should come off the plot purchase price, but not enough people will know that, and the agent won't  be saying.

Edited November 7 by saveasteading

[Kelvin]

48 minutes ago, FarmerN said:

Does that not just increase the load on the sewage system , that can’t even cope with current load, especially in very wet weather?

I never  had to face these questions ,being in a rural area with plenty of land to soakaway too. I suppose I’m lucky and so have a different perspective.

We were however required to have a permeable drive way , which we did, with a good sub base of clean stone to allow water to soak through to the sub soil.

Again lucky in having plenty of space to loose soil we had to dig out, rather that pay to have it taken away.

It can do. Case in point is in the town near us. New houses poorly thought through drainage was going into the sewerage system. As soon as we had any sustained rainfall it couldn’t cope so would flood the road at a dip with sewerage right in front of a primary school and houses. This has gone on for several years until Scottish Water eventually addressed it a few months ago. 

[saveasteading]

2 hours ago, Kelvin said:

couldn’t cope so would flood the road

Extreme storms seem certain to increase and the drains were never designed* for them. Add extra housing and roads and it becomes a real problem.

 

* quite a job surveying then calculating flow capacity all the way from thousands of sources to outfall. 

 

I've argued with planners that allowing 5% flow off a new development is still too much compared to the field that was there before, and the reason that rivers flood....but they don't get it, and the developers are happy-ish.

For some reason the water companies don't object either. That may be government pressure as we "need the houses".

 

@FarmerN if you are indeed a farmer, do you know the recommendation that fields be ploughed along the slope, to retain rain? I see many fields  where that is not done And rain will rush doen ghe slope.  Is it a practicality issue?

 

 

[FarmerN]

15 hours ago, saveasteading said:

Extreme storms seem certain to increase and the drains were never designed* for them. Add extra housing and roads and it becomes a real problem.

 

* quite a job surveying then calculating flow capacity all the way from thousands of sources to outfall. 

 

I've argued with planners that allowing 5% flow off a new development is still too much compared to the field that was there before, and the reason that rivers flood....but they don't get it, and the developers are happy-ish.

For some reason the water companies don't object either. That may be government pressure as we "need the houses".

 

@FarmerN if you are indeed a farmer, do you know the recommendation that fields be ploughed along the slope, to retain rain? I see many fields  where that is not done And rain will rush doen ghe slope.  Is it a practicality issue?

 

 

 

More or less retired , hence the new build.

Yes , I am aware. Particularly important for potatoes where ridge and furrow is in place for a season.

Most , but not all, ploughed fields are worked down soon after ploughing to create a seed bed , so then not an issue.

 

Re 5% runoff, all land I have had anything to do with, has land drains in, many going back 100 years or more so there will always have been drainage of rainfall, attenuated by the water holding ability of soil. Drainage pretty fast once soil has reach field capacity in winter. Once at full capacity, rain will run off , it has nowhere else to go.

Most historic drains are 11 yards apart in my part of the world, so once you have found one you can normal find more.

The problem in many areas appears to be there is only one drainage system, so clean and foul get mixed. I can’t believe any one putting a treatment plant in would put roof water into it, so why put clean water into sewers on any new build?

 

[saveasteading]

10 minutes ago, FarmerN said:

why put clean water into sewers on any new build?

Because it's cheap. It's easy. The planners have an overview policy but trust the water authority to advise, and they accept the 5%.

Because there is pressure to maximise units* on a plot, so there is little room left for lagoons, crates or soakaways.

 

* housing needs, local preference for fewer new estates, and the value of a plot depending on maximum coverage. In the latter case, the landowners maximises profit and the rest of us pay for infrastructure in the rates.

[ToughButterCup]

Our SUDS offering is very simple. 

 

Duct all the roof water into two rain gardens.

 

Overflow from the rain gardens goes into a pond.

 

Overflow from that leaches into a bog garden.

 

Any LPA official even slightly interested?

 

Yawn.

 

Newts, toads,  frogs, dragonflies, mayflies, midges, swallows, flycatchers, grandchildren all love it.

[saveasteading]

The LPA loves to hear nice things about newts. Other than that they are seldom skilled enough to know good from great, from greenwash. Unfortunately they are confronted with loads of the latter.

Do it anyway.

[Alan Ambrose]

>>> grandchildren 

 

Shhh, don't tell them - otherwise your LPA might add them to the protected species list.