Sustainable built environment development

Definition: Development that meets the needs of current generations without

compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs and aspirations.
Sustainability is the goal and Sustainable Development is the process by which we
may progress towards more sustainable living
Why: Dynamics between 4 aspects
Environment (physical surrounding and conditions that affect peoples lives): flora,
fauna/ air, land, water/ natural processes/ built and natural environment/ impact,
mitigation, conversation, enhancement
Natural resources (materials or conditions in nature and can be exploited
economically): water/ natural materials, rock, soil, minerals/ air, natural gas, oil/
pollution/ waste management/ legislation
Economics (science of the production and distribution of wealth):
employment/regeneration and re-development/funding/revenue/capital and
operational efficiency
Social
*For Engineers:

Engineering design and decision-making impact directly and indirectly on the

objectives and actions for SD
Improving Resource efficiencies
Reducing waste and Pollution
Projects and Procurement on Whole Life Costing
Applying SD principles
Consider Climate Change
Individual ethics, attitudes and values

Aspects:
Sustainable development must be environmentally friendly, socially acceptable and
financially viable. It is widely agreed that progress towards sustainable development
requires the integration of these three elements.
Actions:

effective protection of the environment

prudent use of natural resources
social progress that recognises the needs of everyone
maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment

The impact of climate change on buildings and

infrastructure
The climate is changing. Extreme events are becoming more common
We can reduce but not eliminate the changes
Lifetime of buildings is comparable to timescales of climate change

Impacts:

Internal Environment (energy & ventilation)

External Fabric (durability and service life of components)
Structural Integrity (wind & snow loading, ground movement)
Construction Process (disruption due to weather)
Service infrastructure (drainage)

Ex:
Considerations that need to be looked at when designing
for sustainable buildings or infrastructure
Internal Environment (energy & ventilation)
External Fabric (durability and service life of components)
Structural Integrity (wind & snow loading, ground movement)
Construction Process (disruption due to weather)
Service infrastructure (drainage)

British Standards
Design Codes
Building Regulations
Local Practice
Guidance, e.g. BRE Publications

Design mitigation of climate change in buildings and

infrastructure
Storm damage (Return period for extreme storms will decrease.)

Structural damage (Dislodged tiles, (Flat) roofs removed, Gables sucked out, Falling
trees and chimney stacks collapse)
*Solution:
o New buildings - through design and construction quality. Stronger,
especially to west, More aerodynamic, Stronger frames
o Existing buildings - options are limited, targeted adaptation. Retrofit -
stronger and more aerodynamic elements, e.g. new roofs, Complicated
by materials degradation
Driving Rain penetration

Wetter facades - Algal growth - Frost attack? Wetter insulation and structural
timber? Rain penetration around openings, joints etc Risk for some cavity fill
insulation
*Solution:
o New buildings - higher driving rain accommodated through design
o Existing buildings - maintenance and external protection (e.g. rendering)
Durability of all construction materials,

Masonry, Timber, Metals, Concrete, Plastics will respond differently to climate

change. The overall impact will vary depending on the material and its end use.
Some impacts may be beneficial, others detrimental. Further research needs to
be carried out in this area

Flood damage
More intense precipitation, More common storm surges, Rising sea levels will
combine to make flooding of buildings more common. River flooding currently
causes 100-200 million of insured losses each year.
*Solution:
o Avoid developing on flood plains
o Design of new buildings in vulnerable locations
o Provide approved flood defences and ensure their maintenance where
viable. Responsibility of the Environment Agency and SEPA.
o Insurance industry is actively interested and is considering adjusting
premiums to reflect local flood risk.
Coastal erosion

Increased rate of erosion due to sea surges, sea level rise and storms. Difficult to
predict, but catastrophic consequences for buildings.
*Solution:
o Coastal defences could be increased, but this can have consequences for
adjacent areas of coastline
o Economic costs of coastal defences may prohibit protection of some areas,
other options may include a managed retreat
o Socially and politically sensitive issue

Subsidence and Soil Movements

Increased evapo-transpiration dries shrinkable clays Movement of foundations

Cracking of walls Sticking of doors and windows Disruption of service pipes
Collapse Alteration of terms of insurance policies?

*Solution:
o In existing buildings - Underpin and Fell trees (!)
o In new build - Improve foundation design, Minimise water demand from
trees (oak, willow, eucalyptus high demand: beech, birch, mulberry low
demand)
Other Important Building Impacts: Construction process Energy Use Ventilation
(occupant comfort) Internal conditions - mould growth Water resources

Environmental impact assessment in the mitigation of

environmental problems in relations to buildings and
infrastructure
The principles, design and modeling of a separate
sewerage network
Separate sewerage consists in the separate collection of municipal wastewaters
(blackwater from toilets, greywater and industrial wastewater) and surface run-of
(rainwater and stormwater).
Design of the sewers and the (semi-)centralised treatment stations only needs to
consider the volume of the wastewater while surface run-of and rainwater can be
reused (e.g. for landscaping or agriculture) after a simplified treatment.
Recent trends have been for the development of separate sewerage systems:

Prevent the untreated overflow of sewer systems and treatment stations

during rainy periods.
Prevent the mixing of the relatively little polluted surface run-of with
chemical and microbial pollutants from the municipal wastewater.
Residents in low-lying areas will avoid having flooded from overflow during
extreme rain events. If happen nonetheless, its rainwater and not unsanitary
sewage
Eliminates the risk of sewage getting into the environment. Sewage will be
carried on to the treatment plants via a closed system, storm water can be
led to detention basins and watercourses
However, sewer separation is often said to be too disruptive, costly (construction,
maintainance 2 systems separately, replacing existing combined system), and may
increase in pollutant loading to receiving waters as a result of the increased
discharge of untreated surface run-of as storm water drains in heavily urbanised
areas may receive a variety of pollutants from rooftops, lorry loading bays, industrial
sites and even from illegal connections to the surface water system. Publicity and
inspections are needed to prevent unexpected pollution. Incomplete sewer
separation efforts can also result in poor sanitary sewer system performance,
including basement flooding and sanitary sewer overflows.
Pollutant loads discharged from urban storm water drainage systems vary
depending on the urban structure, and the variety of materials entering the
sewer network, local rainfall patterns and the mixing and degradation
processes of the sewers. Hence, careful planning of the sewerage network is
required to address these problems. Various modelling tools, such as rainfall
modelling, sewer and sewage treatment modelling and river quality modelling, are
now available to assist in this planning process

The principles, design and modeling of a combined

sewerage network
The conventional gravity sewer system is designed with many branches. Typically,
the network is subdivided into primary (main sewer lines along main roads),
secondary and tertiary networks (networks at the neighbourhood and household
level). This system is mostly found in urban areas.
The main line runs through the centre of the system, and all lines empty into it. It
then carries wastewater to a semicentralised or centralised treatment facility.
Empties into a one another: Main lines(D200 to 300 mm) branch lines(D100 mm)
extend from them like branches from a tree The sewage from one or more
buildings are house laterals, (<D100 mm ). All sewer pipes are laid out in straight
lines whenever possible and generally meet at right angles ( connection may be
curved to ease the flow).
Conventional gravity sewers normally do not require onsite pre-treatment, primary
treatment or storage of the household wastewater before it is discharged. The
sewer must be designed so that it maintains self-cleansing velocity (i.e., a flow
that will not allow particles to accumulate. A constant downhill gradient must be
guaranteed along the length of the sewer to maintain self-cleansing flows, which
can require deep excavations. When a downhill grade cannot be maintained, a
pumping station must be installed. Primary sewers are laid beneath roads, at
depths of 1.5 to 3 m to avoid damages caused by traffic loads. The depth also
depends on the groundwater table, the lowest point to be served (e.g., a basement)
and the topography. The selection of the pipe diameter depends on the projected
average and peak flows. Commonly used materials are concrete, PVC, and ductile
or cast iron pipes.
Access manholes are placed at set intervals above the sewer, pipe intersections
and changes in pipeline direction. Manholes should be designed such that they do
not become a source of stormwater inflow or groundwater infiltration.
Discharge of highly polluted wastewater (e.g., industry or restaurants), onsite pre-
and primary treatment may be required to reduce the risk of clogging and the
load of the wastewater treatment plant.

Sewer overflows are required to avoid hydraulic surcharge of treatment plants during rain events.
However, combined sewers should no longer be considered state of the art. Rather, local
retention and infiltration of stormwater or a separate drainage system for rainwater are
recommended. The wastewater treatment system then requires smaller dimensions and is,
therefore, cheaper to build, and there is a higher treatment efficiency for less diluted wastewater.

The primary network requires robust engineering design to ensure that a self-cleansing velocity
is maintained, that manholes are placed as required and that the sewer line can support the traffic
weight. Furthermore, extensive construction is required to remove and replace the road above.

Grey, blue and green city approaches, research and

impact
Restores the water cycle back to a natural balance while improving the citys
amenities by effectively managing water and promoting green infrastructure
City Authority and Community Communications
Overcoming barriers to Innovation

Understanding Citizens Behaviours

Local People are the local experts-with useful knowledge

People value Blue-Green assets if they understand them
People will help maintain the Blue-Green assets they value
People need to feel ownership to make B-G solutions work
People must be engaged prior to and throughout implementation of B-G

Model Existing Flood Risk Management

Simulates surface + subsurface urban drainage networks
Flood map modelling

Options for Hard/Soft Measures

Blue-Green Options: Environmental performance
Social performance
Evaluate Multiple Flood Risk Benefits
Flood Footprint
Blue-Green Benefit Mapping
 fundamental change in view of flood management: flood defence (protect
ourselves) resilience flood management, living with and making space for
water and the opportunity to get more from less by seeing all forms of
water as providing multiple benefits.

Flooding and rivers management

The City Resilience Framework

Cities are subject to a wide range of natural and man-made pressures that have the
potential to cause significant disruption.

Building resilience in cities requires an understanding of both what contributes to

resilience and how it can be measured.

City Resilience is a critical urban development agenda the capacity of a city to function,
so citizens survive and thrive no matter what stresses or shocks they encounter.

To address this gap, Arup has developed the City Resilience Framework and the City Resilience
Index with support from the Rockefeller Foundation. To articulate urban resilience in an
accessible, evidence-based and measurable way that can inform urban planning,
practice, and investment pattern

Resilience Framework provides a holistic, practical and evidence-based definition of urban

resilience. It identifies 12 goals or outcomes which contribute to the citys immune system,
across four critical dimensions of city resilience:
People: The health and well-being of everyone living and working in the city:

Basic human Needs: Indicated by the extent to which everyones basic needs
are met
Livelihoods & employment: Facilitated by access to finance, ability to accrue
savings, skills training, business support and social welfare
Health & emergency services: Relying on integrated health facilities and
services, and responsive emergency services.

Organisation: The systems within the economy and society that enable urban populations to live
peacefully, and act collectively:

Identity & mutual support: Observed as active community engagement,

strong social networks and social integration.
 Social stability & security: Including law enforcement, crime prevention,
justice , and emergency management.
Finance and funds: Observed as sound financial management, diverse
revenue streams, the ability to attract business investment, adequate
investment, and emergency funds.

Place: The quality of infrastructure and ecosystems that protect, provide and connect us

Protective infrastructure: Indicated by environmental stewardship;

appropriate infrastructure; effective land use planning; and enforcement of
planning regulations.
Critical services: Indicated by diverse provision and active management;
maintenance of ecosystems and infrastructure; and contingency planning
Mobility & communication: Indicated by diverse and affordable multimodal
transport systems and information and communication technology (ICT)
networks; and contingency planning.

Knowledge: Appropriate leadership and strategy enabling the city to learn from the past and take
timely action

Leadership & management: Involving government, business and civil

society, and indicated by trusted individuals; multi-stakeholder consultation;
and evidence-based decision-making
Stakeholder empowerment: Indicated by education for all, and access to
up-to-date information and knowledge to enable people and organisations to
take appropriate action
Development planning: Indicated by the presence of a city vision; an
integrated development strategy; and plans that are regularly reviewed and
updated by cross departmental working groups

The City Resilience Index provides a comprehensive and technically robust basis for
measuring city resilience that is globally applicable. It comprises 52 resilience
indicators which are assessed through 156 questions, drawing upon both qualitative
and quantitative data. Responses to these questions are aggregated and presented
according to the 12 goals of the Framework.

Reflective: Reflective systems are accepting of the inherent and ever -

increasing uncertainty and change in todays world.
Robust: Robust systems include well - conceived, constructed and managed
physical assets
Redundant: Redundancy refers to spare capacity purposely created within
systems so that they can accommodate disruption
Flexible: Flexibility implies that systems can change, evolve and adapt in
response to changing circumstances
 Resourceful: Resourcefulness implies that people and institutions are able to
rapidly find different ways to achieve their goals or meet their needs during a
shock or when under stress.
Inclusive: Inclusion emphasises the need for broad consultation and
engagement of communities, including the most vulnerable groups.
Integrated: Integration and alignment between city systems promotes
consistency in decision - making and ensures that all investments are
mutually supportive to a common outcome

The evaluation of different assessment frameworks, their

advantages and disadvantages

The appropriateness of these frameworks for the

sustainability assessment of buildings and infrastructure

The (your) development of a sustainability framework for

buildings and infrastructure, principles, stages,
considerations, weighting and measurement.

Sustainability assessment European standard, reasons,

stages, and regulations

Multi-criteria decision support system for assessing

sustainability
Sustainable planning has become complex due to the involvement of multiple
benchmarks like technical, social, economic and environmental. In such cases,
decision analysis plays a vital role for designing such systems by considering
various criteria and objectives and finding optimal results in complex scenarios
including various indicators, conflicting objectives and criteria.

All criteria values are usually displayed in a decision matrix/performance tab

Provides a method to compare and analyse multiple (usually conflicting)
decisions/assessment criteria in an equitable way.
Criteria values are usually normalised to be represented on 0-1 preference
scale by applying various mathematical algorithms/functions.
Implemented at Stage 5 within the DMP defined for assessing NRDs
sustainability
Recommended sets of MCDM tools that could be used to assess the multiple
sustainability assessment criteria defined for NRDs in an equitable way: select a
single MCDM tool, triangulate results.
Shortlisted based on the high prevalence within the literature. Recorded track
history of being practically implemented by Decision Makers (DMs) to solve real
decision scenarios. Many MCDM tools available:

SAW(Simple intuitive approach and not time consuming)

SMART (Simple approach and not time consuming)
AHP (Simple approach but slightly more difficult and time consuming than
SMART and SAW/WS)
TOPSIS (Slightly more difficult and time consuming than SMART and
SAW/WSM)

MCDM tools evaluation: Easy to follow method, No complicated calculations, Results

are easy to understand, Able to visually represent results
Three MCDM tools were selected to triangulate the results for the purposes of this
study SAW, PROMETHEE, and ELECTRE 3
Selection of criteria were driven by the availability of data for the sustainability
assessment of the two case studies