Sustainable Urban Drainage November 2016

SuDS in London - a guide
November 2016
Contents
3 Introduction 2.13 Archaeology 125 Implementation
I. Background 2.14 Crime and disorder 6.1 Implementation
II. Who is the guidance for? 2.15 Highways and planning 6.2 SuDS design team
III. Surface water and SuDS 2.16 Inclusive design 6.3 Drainage hierarchy
IV. A SuDS approach
V. How should I use the guidance? 29 SuDS components 131 C
ost benefit
VI. Structure of the guidance 3.1 Which SuDS components are 7.1 Cost benefit
suitable for London? 7.2 Methodology
7 Principles of SuDS 3.2 Structures 7.3 Design life
1.1 Planning for SuDS 3.3 Infiltration systems 7.4 Cost comparison
1.2 Wider benefits 3.4 Filter strips 7.5 Best value
1.3 The four pillars of SuDS 3.5 Filter drains
1.3.1 Water quantity 3.6 Wet swales and dry swales 137 Appendices
1.3.2 Water quality 3.7 Rills, runnels and Further information
1.3.3 Amenity channel systems Glossary
1.3.4 Biodiversity 3.8 Bioretention systems
3.9 Trees
16 The London context 3.10 Permeable paving
2.1 What is unique about London? 3.11 Detention basins
2.2 The Thames River Basin 3.12 Attenuation and storage
2.3 London’s geological conditions 3.13 Ponds and wetlands
2.4 London’s chalk aquifer 3.14 Management and maintenance
2.5 London’s soils
2.6 Streetscapes of London 65 SuDS on London’s streets
2.7 Townscape 4.1 SuDS and the urban realm
2.8 Retrofitting 4.2 Street scenarios
2.9 London’s green infrastructure
2.10 Trees 75 Case studies
2.11 Working with London’s utilities Case study index
2.12 Contamination
Introduction
1 Background
The risk of flooding in London increases
year on year, with more frequent and
intense storms and significant quantities
of surface water runoff. (This is the
movement of rainwater over the surfaces
of the city, including the ground, streets,
footways and roofs.)
London’s existing network of sewers and

drains is at or near capacity in many areas and
the issue is exacerbated by a rapidly increasing
population. This has already exceeded
London's previous peak and is reflected in Potters Fields Park
the scale of development in the city.
Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) can

help address flooding risks by managing
surface water runoff in a way that mimics
natural processes, slowing down the
runoff rate while providing wider benefits,
such as public realm improvements. This is
consistent with TfL's overarching 'Healthy
Streets' programme.
This guidance seeks to show how SuDS

can be incorporated into London’s streets
and wider public realm. It highlights potential
opportunities and constraints and aims to
encourage the relevant authorities across
London to consider their streetscape and the Broken kerb detail for bioretention
possibilities of successfully integrating SuDS.
4 Introduction
II Who is the III Surface water IV A SuDS approach
guidance for? and SuDS “SuDS are designed to maximise the
opportunities and benefits we can secure
Primarily aimed at a non-technical The Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation from surface water management”.
audience, with advice for those who Strategy (GLA 2011) identified surface CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual 2015, p6
design, build, operate and maintain water flood risk as the greatest short-
London’s streets and public realm, this term climate risk to London. This occurs A SuDS approach will:
guidance also aims to bring SuDS to a when the rate of flow exceeds what can
wider audience, such as design be absorbed either by drainage systems • Manage surface water runoff in a
professionals, academics, road user (the sewers) or open ground, and is called way that mimics natural processes
groups, local communities, politicians surface water exceedance.
and other stakeholders. • Deliver multiple benefits from
When the sewer network is full and rainwater, based on the four
The Construction Industry Research rainwater cannot get into it fast enough, pillars of SuDS. These are:
and Information Association (CIRIA) has flooding occurs (pluvial flooding). This can
produced a more comprehensive and occur independently or simultaneously • water quantity
technical document: C753 The SuDS with fluvial flooding (where rivers and • water quality
Manual 2015 and reference is made to this streams are surcharging). The resultant • amenity
document throughout. flooding has a significant impact on • biodiversity
communities, property and the highway.
This guidance should not be an alternative SuDS help reduce the speed and quantity • Work with the natural hydrological
to the SuDS manual; it is a companion of surface water flow to the drainage cycle to re-use, reduce and change
which seeks to inform and inspire those system. They include above-ground and the flow and quality of runoff
interested in delivering SuDS in the below-ground elements and many of the
Capital. Although London has its unique above-ground elements are discussed in • Use a holistic, catchment-
challenges, the content will hopefully also Chapter 3. This guidance is concerned with based approach
be seen as relevant to other UK towns the integration of such measures into the
and cities. public realm and therefore looks mainly • Engage with stakeholders and
at above-ground measures. communities to share knowledge
and change attitudes
• Help address climate change-related issues
5 Introduction
V How should I VI Structure of Chapter 5: Case studies
Case studies from London, the UK and
use the guidance? the guidance overseas show how these principles can
be put into practice. The 24 studies identify
The guidance should be used to gain a Chapter 1: Principles of SuDS the SuDS teams, set out project objectives,
basic understanding of SuDS and how they Sets out the SuDS planning policy illustrate the components and describe the
can be applied in London. It should be read environment, the four pillars of SuDS, benefits and lessons to be learned.
alongside CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual the SuDS management train, and the
2015, which provides industry standards in relationship between surface water and Chapter 6: Implementation
this area, and other street-related TfL and urban realm. Explains how to form a SuDS design team
Greater London Authority (GLA) guidance and develop SuDS designs according to
which give a wider understanding of Chapter 2: The London context CIRIA guidance.
London’s public realm, including: Identifies the unique London context,
including geology, landscape, townscape, Chapter 7: Cost benefit
• Streetscape Guidance 2016 heritage and utilities. Reviews cost benefit of SuDS when
compared to traditional drainage designs.
• London Chapter 3: SuDS components
Cycle Design Outlines the surface components of SuDS Appendices
Standards 2014 and the design requirements, benefits and Further information relevant to each
maintenance implications. Case studies chapter, including references and a glossary
• London of SuDS components and links to further of terms.
Sustainable guidance are provided.
Drainage Action
Plan 2016 Chapter 4: SuDS in London’s streets
Illustrates how different SuDS components
and designs could be integrated and
retrofitted into typical London streets.
CIRIA C753 The SuDS

Manual, 2015
6 Introduction
1 Principles of SuDS
1.1 Planning for SuDs The London Sustainable Drainable Action Ideally, SuDS need to be delivered
Plan (LSDAP) also seeks to reduce surface in a coordinated and integrated
Controlling stormwater quantity and water water flows into the sewer network manner, subject to the constraints and
quality to mitigate flooding and the risk of through a series of wide-ranging actions. considerations set out in this document.
pollution respectively are the main drivers
for SuDS. SuDS are crucial to help achieve this; The additional benefits that can arise from
they also reduce risk and address policies SuDS in the public realm and streetscape
Potential flooding is not limited to large dealing with current and future flood are discussed throughout this chapter.
one in 100 year storms; flooding in urban issues in a sustainable and cost effective They can contribute positively to the
areas often results from the more frequent way (London Plan Policy 5.12). character of the streets, open spaces and
and intense rainfall we are experiencing in parks in the Capital, as well as address
the Capital as a result of climate change. flood risk and pollution concerns.
When localised flooding happens, it is

usually linked to surface water flows
exceeding the capacity of the drainage
system. It is therefore important to
slow down the flow rate or hold the
rainfall back, whether that be within
developments or the public realm.
The aim for the reduction in flow rate

– or ‘betterment’ – is to achieve levels
that emulate a greenfield site which is
supported by the London Plan (Policy
5.13). Although greenfield rates are not
always achievable, the London Sustainable
Design and Construction SPD reports
that ‘most developments referred to the
Mayor have been able to achieve at least
50% attenuation of the site’s surface water
runoff at peak times’. Surface water flooding is the greatest short-term flood risk to London
8 1 Principles of SuDS
1.2 Wider benefits An important principle which influences
the planning and design process is the
The ambition for SuDS in London is not preference that SuDS components are at
based solely on reducing water runoff or near the surface. This provides new
rates; it is also about the multiple benefits opportunities to integrate SuDS into the
that ensue. SuDS can play a significant role urban realm, which can include:
in enhancing health and quality of life via
better air quality, improved surroundings • Creating and enhancing a sense of place
and other attributes embedded in TfL’s
Health Action Plan. • Water management using the natural
hydrological cycle as a baseline
SuDS are made up of a sequence of
components that: • Enhancing catchment permeability
and reducing surface water runoff
• Control surface water flow rates
• Improving resilience to the
• Control flow volumes effects of climate change
• Regulate frequency of runoff • Adaptability in managing rainfall events
• Reduce contaminants to • Improving air quality

acceptable levels
• Mitigating urban heat island effects
CIRIA calls this sequence the SuDS
management train and this terminology • Long-term and effective upstream
is widely used in the water source control measures
management industry.
These contributions are encompassed
within the four main principles, or
‘pillars’ of SuDS.
SuDS can provide multiple benefits
1.3 The four pillars
Images courtesy of Jess Bastock

of SuDS
SuDS should be based on the four pillars
of SuDS design as set out in CIRIA C753 The
SuDS Manual 2015. These are:
• Water quantity
• Water quality
• Amenity
• Biodiversity Quantity: permeable paving, grit jointing Quality: reed bed planting
By managing quality and quantity to meet

requirements on the surface, the benefits
of amenity and biodiversity generally
follow, assuming the SuDS components
are well designed.
However, where retrofitting SuDS, or

where circumstances are particularly
constrained or challenging, permeable
paving, attenuation tanks and other
below-ground features may be the only
intervention possible. Of course, in these
cases, biodiversity and amenity benefits
will be limited.
The following pages describe these four Amenity: community planting Biodiversity: reed bed habitat
pillars in more detail.
1.3.1 Water quantity
SuDS mitigate the impact of everyday
rainfall and high-intensity storms by
dealing with the same quantity of water
over a longer period. This process is
called attenuation.
Attenuation aims to limit the rate of

runoff to the rate which would have
existed before the area was developed
(that is a greenfield rate). Structures, such
as inlets, outlets, weirs and spillways can
be used to regulate flow.
Water quantity refers to the volume

and flow rate of surface water runoff.
Restricting the flow of surface water
before it can pass through to the next
stage of the system alleviates pressure
on the sewer system.
A comparison between greenfield and

urban environments which demonstrates
this point on the next page.
Quantity: Attenuation, Bo01 Malmö
Comparison between runoff rates for greenfield and urban environments
Evapotranspiration Evapotranspiration
Surface flow
Interflow
Baseflow
Surface flow
Interflow
Baseflow
Greenfield Urban
Higher and more
rapid peak discharge
Flow in river (m3/s)
Flow in river (m3/s)

Steeper
Lower and less
recession
Higher baseflow rapid peak
Lower
Gradual recession baseflow
Rainfall event Time Rainfall event Time
1.3.2 Water quality Improvements to water quality can also
contribute to amenity and the potential for
Surface water is often polluted. Runoff for biodiversity. Reed beds, for example,
from roads, for example, includes which naturally slow and treat water,
contaminants from tyre abrasion such provide an active edge to water features
as rubber and soot, nickel and chromium and attract a wide range of birds and
from brake pad linkings and oil, silt and insects.
iron oxide from general traffic use.
Designing for water quality must take
During warm, dry periods, these account of:
substances build up on sun-warmed
surfaces and heavy showers can wash • Interception and treatment methods
them into the drainage system. This creates to meet CIRIA standards
a warm, contaminated, low-oxygen
water mix, which flows into watercourses • The quality of surface water and
and groundwater. groundwater receiving run-off
Managing the quality of runoff helps • The extent of existing pollution

protect the natural environment from control systems in the catchment
pollution and SuDS can be crucial in this Reed beds can contribute to water quality
respect. The risk of pollution in a SuDS • The extent to which risk management
scheme must be assessed and a mitigation measures for spillages of contaminants,
strategy proposed to determine the such as oil, are in place • The extent to which the design of
required number of treatment stages to the system incorporates sediment
ensure water is clean enough to flow to a • The proportion of permeable retention, such as forebays or
watercourse. surfaces, green roofs, and/or surfaces hydrodynamic separators
discharging to a rainwater harvesting
SuDS can also improve the quality of system or soil-based feature • System resilience to cope with future
water entering combined sewers, reducing demand, including allowances for
pressure on sewage treatment plants. • The proportion of the surface water climate change and urban intensification
management system that is on or near
the surface to facilitate treatment
1.3.3 Amenity By including surface drainage as part of an
integrated urban design approach, SuDS
The way London’s public realm looks and can make a major contribution to the
feels has a direct effect on people’s quality look and feel of streets and other spaces
of life. As London’s population grows, this throughout the Capital.
becomes increasingly important.
SuDS may enhance the amenity of

London’s public realm in a range of
different ways, including:
• Contributing to integrated
green infrastructure
• Enhancing character/sense of place
• Improving the quality of space
• Providing a backdrop to existing

buildings and streetscape
• Supporting biodiversity
• Reducing air temperature
• Improving air quality
• Reconnecting people with

the natural water cycle
• Supporting community involvement and

knowledge-sharing though education, Amenity: Thames Path, Richmond
engagement and participation
1.3.4 Biodiversity Although streetscapes can lack the
vegetation to absorb and release water
London’s natural habitats, catchments and slowly into the drainage network, a key
river ecosystems have been disrupted by priority in London is to integrate more
urbanisation and intensification. SuDS can green infrastructure into development and
address this by incorporating and creating a the transport network and opportunities
range of habitats that benefit water quality to to this are explored in Chapter 3).
and urban wildlife.
Aspects of biodiversity that can be

addressed by sustainable drainage include:
• Habitat creation, including the

significant existing and potential
urban forest resource of street
trees and parkland trees
• Connectivity and the ability of fauna

and flora to move through the city,
especially along linear infrastructure
such as road, rail and canal corridors
• Source control with living roofs,

green walls, trees and other green
infrastructure, which can also help
intercept rainwater and mitigate
the urban heat island effect
• Improvements to air and water quality
Biodiversity in pond Biodiversity at roof level
2 The London context
2.1 What is unique As London develops and grows, its public The opportunities for SuDS, both above
realm needs to work much harder. Not and below ground, will vary across
about London? only will it be more intensively used, it London. For instance, in conservation
will also need to fulfil multiple demands, areas designated for their landscape,
This chapter explains some of the including drainage. architectural and historic interest, there
conditions particular to London, although may be more limitations than in an area of
some may also be found in other Responsibility for London’s public realm is redevelopment, where a comprehensive
metropolitan areas. Some are unique, divided between TfL and 33 local planning approach to water resource management
others less so, but all will influence the authorities, plus other private landowners. may be designed and implemented.
integration of SuDS into the public realm.
Like most UK cities, much of London’s For the former, and significant areas of
London is by far the UK’s biggest drainage infrastructure consists of piped central London, this might involve the
metropolitan region, occupying an networks. Climate change, population need to retrofit SuDS into the streetscape
area four times that of Birmingham, increase and densification all contribute which is addressed in more detail later in
and is experiencing a period of rapid to surface water runoff and increase the this chapter.
intensification of use and development. pressure on the network. If our drainage
The Capital sits within the Thames network is not to exceed capacity or need Other factors also highlighted in this
River Basin and contributes the largest total replacement at significant cost and chapter, include archaeology and geology.
share to the 17% of the Basin’s area which disruption, a long-term approach to surface These can both define the scope and
is urbanised. water runoff management is needed. appropriateness of the scheme and where,
with the former, there is over 2,000 years
Hand in hand with urbanisation has come The Thames Tideway Tunnel is addressing of history in the heart of the city.
population growth. London’s population some of these issues at a strategic level,
exceeded its pre-war peak of 8.6 million particularly in relation to events of intense Well-designed and maintained SuDS can
in 2015 and is forecast to grow by 100,000 rainfall. Nevertheless, many local SuDS make a major contribution to public realm.
per year to 2030. Much of this growth interventions are needed to manage the They can help reduce flood risk, improve
is expected to be accommodated in the process effectively. water quality, and create a sense of place.
existing built-up area, putting increasing This guidance shows how this can be done.
pressure on the available water supply and
drainage infrastructure in the Capital.
17 2 The London context

2.2 The Thames The Thames River Basin Management Plan Further information:
also provides further information on the Thames River Basin Management Plan
River Basin catchment-based approach and London’s British Geological Survey
local catchment partnerships.
London sits in the Thames River Basin
District catchment which covers an area of
over 16,200km² and where over 15 million
people live. The Thames basin includes
all water sources including rivers, lakes,
groundwater and coastal waters.
Within London there are 32 London

boroughs, plus the City of London,
eight areas in which catchment-based
partnerships operate and 897 sub-
catchments.
Reference should be made to the

‘Thames River Basin Management Plan’ to:
• Understand local context
• Target and coordinate interventions
• Identify or access funding for

improvements within the catchment
• Ensure objectives of the Thames

River Basin Management Plan and
local plans are being achieved.
Thames River Basin

Hampstead Ridge Valley
Essex Plateau
Lea Valley
North Thames Terraces Essex Plateau
Lea Valley Essex Plateau
Lea Valley
North Thames Terraces North Thames Terraces Essex Plateau
Lea Valley North Thames Terraces
North Thames Terraces North Thames Terraces
North Thames Terraces
2.3 London’s North Thames Terraces North Thames Terraces
North Thames Terraces Further information: Engineering Geology of British Rocks and
CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 29 Soils – Lambeth Group Aquifer: Status
geological conditions North Thames Terraces
British Geological Survey
Lower Thames Floodplain
Report 2015, Environment Agency
Geology Lower Thames Floodplain(2012), Royse et al
of London
Greater London is situated in the London
Management ofFloodplain
Lower Thames the London Basin Chalk
Basin. This isLower
madeThames Floodplain
up of layers of deposits
of chalk, clays, sand, and gravel.
Understanding the geological condition of

South London Pebbly Sands
the ground is vital to the implementation Finchley Ridge

of SuDS features, as different ground
Lea Valley
Barnet Plateau
conditions indicate how SuDS will interact

Finchley Ridge
Wandle Essex Plateau

Essex Plateau
Valley South London

Wandle
Wandle
with their
Clays andlocal
Gravels environment.
Ravensbourne Ruislip Plateau
Valley South London Colne

River Valley
Roding
Valley
Wandle South
Clays London
and Gravels
Valley
Hampstead Ridge Valley
Ravensbourne River
Clays and Gravels
Barnet Plateau
Valley South London Ravensbourne

River Valley
For example, some of London’s geological
Barnet Plateau
Cray
Clays and Gravels River Valley
Ravensbourne River
Valley
Essex Plateau
Lea Valley
River Valley River

Cray
formations may present risks including: Cray

River
Valley Hampstead Ridge
Valley
Cray
compressible deposits, collapsible Valley
Brent Valley
deposits, shrink-swell clays, running sand, Colne

Valley
Hayes Gravels Hayes Gravels

London soluble rocks and landslides.

All London Green Grid
d Gravels South London Pebbly Sands
South London Pebbly Sands Upper Thames
London
All London
London Green Grid
London
d Gravels South London Pebbly Sands
Ecological
All / Lands
Green Grid
d Gravels
London The British Geological Survey (BGS) can Hounslow Gravels

Ecological
Ecological // Lands
d Gravels Wandle
provide useful preliminary information.

South London
Lands
Valley
South Thames Clays and Gravels Ravensbourne
Lower North London Heaths and Commons River Valley

River
Ecological / Lands
Upper Thames Cray
Downs Dip Slope
Geotechnical surveys confirm site specific
Valley
Lower North London

Lower
DownsNorth
Dip London
Slope Chalk soils
geology. Such information on geotechnical Downs
Lower Dip London
North Slope South London Pebbly Sands
Chalk
Chalk soils
South London
soils
Gravel and Sandy hilltops
Clays and Gravels
Downs Dip Slope

Lowerproperties,
North London such as permeability,
Lower North London porosity Ecological / Landscape Zon
Downs Dip Slope Downs Dip Slope Lower North London
Chalk soils
Chalk soils
Lowerand soakage, should be gathered as Gravel andsandy
Sandy hilltops
Downs Dip Slope
Lower
North London
North
Dip London
Lower
Lower
North London
North
Dip London
Clays
Gravel and
Chalk soils
hilltop
Downs Slope
Downs Slope Lower North London Lower North London
baseline
Downs Dip London
Slope data for anyLower
SuDS
Downs
project.
Dip London
North Slope
Clays
Downs Dip Slope Downs Dip Slope
Lower North Clays Clays
Downs Dip Slope Downs Dip Slope Clays

Loams Loams
Upper North London Clays
Loams
Loams
Low level Gravels
Loams
Low level gravels
Gravels
Downs Dip Slope
Flood Plain soils
Upper North London Upper North London
Downs Dip Slope Low level
Loams
Downs Dip Slope
Upper North London Low
Low
Floodlevel
Floodlevel
Plain
plainGravels
Annotated
Gravels
soils
soilsNatural Signatures - Natural England
Upper North
Dip London
Upper North London
Downs
Downs
Upper
Slope
Dip London
North Slope Low level Gravels
Flood Plain soils
Downs Dip Slope Downs Dip Slope Flood Plain soils
Upper North London
Upper North
Dip London The geology of London, All London Green Grid, GiGL Flood Plain soils
Downs
Downs
Upper
Slope
Dip London
North Slope Annotated
Downs Dip Slope
Annotated
Natural
AnnotatedSignatures - Natural En
Natural
Natural Signatures
AnnotatedSignatures -- Natural
Natural EnEn
19 2 The London context Natural Signatures - Natural En
2.4 London’s • In areas with high groundwater levels, 2.5 London’s soils
water can enter the SuDS component
chalk aquifer and reduce its storage capacity London’s soils are derived from the
underlying geology. Across London there
Beneath London is a large chalk aquifer. • There is a risk of flotation and increased are variously clays, sands and gravels
This was substantially depleted during the loads imposed by groundwater which are often found in a river
19th and 20th centuries due to extraction environment. Soil management is
by industrial activities. This resulted in • High levels of groundwater can reduce fundamental to the successful
the aquifer being depleted to 88m below the infiltration rate of SuDS features functioning of SuDS components.
sea level. However, in the last 60 years,
as industrial activities moved away from • Groundwater can change the stability of SuDS should be designed according
central London, the chalk aquifer has underground structures and foundations to the geology and soils of the area.
started to rebound by as much as 3m Designs should consider the availability
per year. Further information: and properties of existing soils, the
CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter surrounding ground and the requirements
Some geology in London is susceptible 26 Management of the London Basin Chalk for imported soils. Soils should not be
to shrink-swell movement, caused by the Aquifer: Status Report 2015, imported unless this is unavoidable.
presence or absence of water. This can Environment Agency.
have a substantial effect on underground Soil properties typically influence:
structures and foundations.
• Water quantity: the physical properties
Since 1992, the General Aquifer Research of soil affect the attenuation
Development and Investigation Team capacity as they dictate its drainage
(GARDIT) has licensed the removal of and water-holding properties
groundwater from London’s chalk aquifer.
The aim is to control and eventually • Water quality: the filtration capacity
stabilise the rise in groundwater levels. of soils influence water quality by,
for example, affecting the amount
The SuDS designer should take account of of elements such as nutrients or
the chalk aquifer because: contaminants, taken up by the
soil or dissolved into the water
Exposed chalk

• Amenity/biodiversity: the nature Further information:
and availability of soil affects plant CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 29
species selection. Plants’ nutrient or BS3882:2015 Specification for Topsoil
pH values can vary considerably BS8601:2013 Specification for Subsoil and
Requirements for Use
Soil specification should be bespoke
Soils and the design process Suitably qualified soil scientists, engineers and
to the project in hand. A suitably environmental consultants should be appointed at the
experienced soil scientist, engineer and feasibility stage to inform the design process
environmental consultant should be

Consider key soil properties:
sought early in the design process. - Geotechnical
- Horticultural
- Environmental
Soils in new schemes should be tested for Strategic
contamination. Testing schedules should Baseline investigation:
include parameters from the groups - Assessment of existing ground conditions
- Tests
listed below (as appropriate): - Presence of underground services
• Geotechnical: permeability; bulk Consider soil requirements for the scheme:

- Are existing soils available and do they have potential
density; porosity; plastic/liquid Concept for re-use?
- Are imported soils necessary?
limit; shear strength; California - Is a load bearing system required?
bearing ratio (a strength test) - What landscape types are desirable / feasible?
Produce a soil strategy:

• Potential contaminants: heavy - Utilising the site’s existing soils (if available)
metals; hydrocarbons; asbestos - The soil requirements of the scheme; including
number of soils types required
Outline Design - In soft landscape; the soil requirements of each
• Horticultural: soil texture; pH value; planting type and species
- Imported soil and drainage media requirements
fertility status; salinity, phytotoxic - Requirements and selection of load bearing systems
in hard landsape
(toxic to plants) elements for - Management / maintenance requirements
SuDS schemes with planting
Detailed Design
Construction requirements;
- Produce a detailed specification
• Invasive species, seeds and propagules
Soils and the design process

2.6 Streetscapes In some parts of central London, where throughout central London. In outer
space is at a premium, a more innovative London, opportunities for SuDS tend to
of London approach is needed to incorporate SuDS be far greater.
into the public realm. For example,
London’s streetscapes vary considerably opportunities may occur where buildings The relationship between streetscape and
across the city, reflecting the city’s size, are set back, where historical remnants SuDS elements is examined in more detail
historical development and the variety exist and in the open spaces scattered in Chapter 4.
of structures and land uses that define it.
Streetscape generally consists of natural
and man-made elements. The opportunity
for introducing natural elements can be
limited, if not missing, in intensely urban
areas, but greater in suburban areas. SuDS
need to be designed to take account of
these constraints.
Depending on specific conditions,

streetscape can impact footfall,
accessibility, local economic performance,
air quality, public health and sense of
place. Designed right, SuDS can contribute
positively to all of these.
Streets are often the most resilient feature

of the urban fabric. While street
patterns may remain unchanged for
centuries, streetscapes evolve and respond
to new demands and requirements.
SuDS can be a part of that process.
In parts of central London, more innovative SuDS solutions will need to be explored

2.7 Townscape SuDS interventions need to progressively
complement and enhance the townscape
Townscape is the mix of physical and and become a fundamental part of the
social characteristics that make up the character of London.
urban environment. This includes its
buildings, landscapes, and the way those Historic England has produced a useful
characteristics are perceived. Townscape guide called ‘Streets for All: A guide to the
directly contributes to people’s sense of management of London’s streets’ which
place and identity. reviews many of these assets.
London has a complex townscape that When working on London’s streets there
reflects its rich and diverse history, culture are several statutory consultees that
and built form. London’s Roman origins need to be engaged. A recommended, but
are still visible in the City’s street pattern. not exhaustive list, is contained within
Further waves of expansion were created Appendix A.
by trade, population growth, industrialisation
and transport infrastructure. Having Further information:
absorbed formerly separate towns and Historic England (2000), Streets for All:
villages, London’s character is inherently A guide to the management of London’s
polycentric, with its many separate centres streets, Historic England, London, UK
each having their own identities. Jones, E. and Woodward, C. (2013), Guide to
the Architecture of London, Weidenfeld &
London’s history and character is also Nicolson, London
reflected in its streetscape. Paving, pillar
boxes, street furniture, stone drinking
troughs, telephone boxes, sculpture,
memorials and other heritage assets all
contribute to a strong sense of place. This
is enhanced by the Capital’s green and blue
infrastructure; its many parks, squares and
gardens, the canals, the River Thames and
its many tributaries. Borough Road: Victorian street tree planting

2.8 Retrofitting • Integrated as part of development,
redevelopment or regeneration
Many of the potential SuDS opportunities
in London are retrofits, ie, installing the • As part of investment in the
components into the existing streetscape public transport network,
and public realm. Depending on the such as station forecourts
available space and prevailing condition,
existing streetscapes can be adapted or • Improving London’s cycle route
retrofitted with a variety of interventions, infrastructure, eg, Mini-Hollands.
improving the quality of the public realm
where possible. • As community initiatives,
addressing private households,
When retrofitting SuDS, it is important to including front gardens
consider how the space will be used. If
wheeled goods handling, for example, is The opportunities – which will be
expected, the design will need to address determined above and below ground
this in terms of smoothness, access and – and constraints are illustrated in
potential obstruction. Chapter 4. Retrofit initiatives, such as
Twenty 4 Twenty, Greenstreets, SuDS for
The following may offer opportunities to Schools and Life+ Climate Proofing for
retrofit SuDS: Housing Landscapes, offer partnership
opportunities to design and deliver SuDS.
• During annual road maintenance works
• During road reconstruction

or resurfacing
• As part of road drainage improvements
• As part of planned road modernisation

Road closure, permeable surfacing and tree
planting in Waltham Forest Mini-Holland

2.9 London’s green • space for walking and cycling 2.10 Trees
infrastructure • enhancing biodiversity/ London benefits from a legacy of Victorian
ecological resilience tree planting that contributes significantly
London is one of the greenest cities in the to its canopy cover while intercepting
world with 47% green space and 22% tree • creating a sense of place rainfall. These trees were established in
canopy cover. much more favourable, less engineered,
Many of these benefits overlap with the conditions than today’s high-performing
The green and blue infrastructure of the aims of SuDS interventions. It is therefore pavements where space above and below
Capital includes commons, parks, gardens, vital to protect London’s existing green ground is often at a premium. Tree planting
fields, street trees, woodlands, green roofs, infrastructure when designing SuDS in has, however, continued in London with
green walls and water bodies, including the the Capital. initiatives such as the Mayor's Street Tree
River Thames and all its tributaries. Initiative, where over 10,000 trees were
planted in 28 boroughs from 2012 to 2015.
Together, these assets define much of the
character of the city. Their environmental, SuDS schemes in London should retain
economic and social benefits include: existing trees where possible. Specialist
advice should be sought at an early stage.
• intercepting rainfall
Further information:
• attenuating surface water flow Greater London Authority (2015), Natural
Capital: Investing in a Green Infrastructure
• maintaining soil permeability for a Future London, Green Infrastructure
Task Force, London, UK.
• reducing urban heat island effect Landscape Institute (2013), Green
Infrastructure: An integrated approach to
• improving air and water quality land use, Position Statement, London, UK.
Treeconomics London (2015), Valuing
• flood mitigation London’s Urban Forest: Results of the
London i-Tree Eco Project, London, UK.
• providing amenity space Trees in the public realm of the All London Green Grid SPG 2012.
Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park TDAG (2014) Trees and Hard Landscape:
A Guide for Delivery

2.11 Working with 2.12 Contamination
London’s utilities In London, contaminated soil and
groundwater is likely to be found when
Footway and carriageway space in London installing SuDS components because
is limited and often highly congested there are few places that have never been
below ground with utilities that supply subjected to some form of development or
London’s gas electricity, water, sewerage industrial activity. However, contamination
and telecommunications. Much of this should not preclude SuDS. Early in the
infrastructure, which was installed in the Below ground infrastructure
process, a specialist should be appointed
late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries to identify contamination risks and sources
is ageing, poorly documented and so an integrated remediation strategy can
maintained, although its exact location is be explored. Designers should consider:
often difficult to pinpoint.
• The risk of mobilising contamination
SuDS designers should work closely with through increased infiltration
utility providers because utilities can be
expensive and disruptive to divert. During • Risk of contamination entering SuDS
feasibility and option appraisal stages features and contaminating relatively
of SuDS design, the team should apply clean rainwater runoff; this could have
to each utility owner for information on adverse effects on vegetation and
their assets or associated assets. This materials used within SuDS components
information should be validated.
• Excavation and disposal of contaminated
During feasibility studies and option soils is likely to be expensive
appraisal stages of design, it is
recommended that high quality surveys • SuDS should not compromise
are obtained to identify services and remediation systems in place to protect
avoid abortive works later in the project. users from the contamination
Underground assets should be recorded
and this information given to the relevant Further information:
highway authority or landowner. Contaminated soil CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 26

2.13 Archaeology 2.14 Crime
London’s history covers millennia of and disorder
settlement, with layers of archaeology
which can be encountered when All designs should seek to provide safe and
excavations occur. secure environments, as outlined in s17 of
the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.
When working in Greater London, it is
advisable to contact Historic England’s TfL’s transport community safety
Greater London Archaeology Advisory managers located in the Enforcement &
Service (GLAAS) – or in the case of On Street Operations Directorate (EOS)
Southwark and the City of London, provide advice to design teams on meeting
their own borough archaeology officers their duties under the Act.
– as early as possible to understand
what policy and consent requirements During design development, contact a
are in place for sites of archaeological police Crime Prevention Design Advisor
interest and their settings and designated (CPDA) to understand existing crime
archaeological priority areas. All local patterns early in the design process and
authorities maintain a record of their ensure risks are mitigated.
archaeological priority areas.
Historic England (2015), Guidelines for
Archaeological Projects in Greater London.
Greater London Archaeological Advisory
Service, London, UK.
Communities and Local Government (1990),
Planning Policy guidance 16: Archaeology
and Planning, UK.
National Planning Policy Framework,
Department for Communities and Local Well-designed streets provide passive
Government, March 2012 surveillance and feel safe

2.15 Highways Each highway authority has its own 2.16 Inclusive design
restrictions (such as working hours,
and planning noisy working, etc). Special consideration Any SuDS measure which influences
should be given to works planned near the public realm should be inclusively
When developing a SuDS scheme on a Underground, Cycle Superhighway or designed. Design teams should consider
London road or street, contact the borough rail systems. specific measures, such as raised edge
and TfL as appropriate, in their capacity as protection, when the following features
the local planning and highways authority. SuDS measures must be designed to are proposed:
ensure that maintenance and vehicle
The implementation of works which affect access requirements can be met without • Rain gardens
infrastructure below ground level are compromising the operation of the
subject to the New Roads and Street network in terms of safety and disruption • Swales
Works Act 1991, which sets out a code of to all road users.
practice for the coordination of works. This • Open rills and runnels
is administered by all highways authorities,
including TfL. • Gravel filter strips
Under the Traffic Management Act 2004, • Detention ponds

traffic authorities must ensure road
networks are managed effectively to • Other features with steep
minimise congestion and disruption to or sudden drops
vehicles and pedestrians.
This is necessary to protect vulnerable
When working on the TfL Road Network people, including children and visually-
(TLRN) or on any borough roads, there impaired pedestrians. Each place must
are requirements relating to a range of cater to the needs of all and not restrict its
issues, including the extent of the road use by any group or individuals. The design
works, the code of conduct, lane rental process must consider the needs of people
schemes (in case of TLRN) and highway under the Equality Act 2010.
licences/permits.
Accessible environments are inclusive to all

3 SuDS components
3.1 Which SuDS
components are
suitable for London?
SuDS are a combination of components
on and off-site that make the most of
the benefits described in Chapter 1. This
chapter explains the SuDS components
that may be appropriate for use in London.
SuDS use a variety of components to

manage water quality and volume and
deliver amenity and biodiversity. An
understanding of topography and local
surface water discharge options are
critical in identifying the most suitable
combination of components, with
particular attention to:
• Where the rainwater lands and

how it is collected (source)
• Identifying conveyance options (pathway)
• Determining the most appropriate

discharge points (receptor)
In general, SuDS should ‘think upstream’

and take advantage of specific upstream
source control measures. Integrated SuDS components: wet Integrated SuDS components: dry
30 3 SuDS components
A number of case studies illustrating the • Bioretention systems or bioretention • Pools, ponds, canals, rills and runnels
application of various components from rain gardens, including a filtration can be integrated into formal or informal
a variety of sources and locations are layer that provides required treatment urban landscapes, depending on design,
incorporated within this chapter. and detention before the rainwater and used to store and treat water
is discharged at a controlled rate to
SuDS components in the street, whether a watercourse or drainage network • Surface water drainage soakaways and
TfL or borough-owned, could include any infiltration systems; these depend on the
of the following depending on the context, • Filter drains to collect water stability of ground conditions, proximity
opportunity and site constraints: and treat pollution, particularly to foundations, below-ground structures
effective in combination with grass and infrastructure and protection of
• Permeable pavements with robust filter strips that trap silt before ground water quality and geology
surfaces which allow rainwater to water reaches the filter drain
pass through them. Attenuated in Some of these components are
granular sub-base material or below • Detention basins to attenuate in shallow, illustrated in indicative street settings in
ground structures, this can replenish grassy depressions. These are mostly dry the following chapter.
groundwater or discharge at a controlled but can store and treat water at shallow
rate into the drainage network depths with vegetation when it rains
• Tree planting to intercept rainfall within • Hard ‘basins’ or lowered areas of hard
the tree canopy, beneath which the landscape. These provide attenuation
ground surface may be impermeable. and temporary storage of runoff before
Trees naturally manage rainwater slow release to the next component
through transpiration, increasing in the SuDS management train. This
soil permeability and enabling water may be particularly appropriate in
to infiltrate into the subsurface combined sewer areas where water
treatment is less important
• Tree trenches connecting below
ground rooting zones. This maximises • Swales provide linear attenuation
the accessible water and soil that is particularly versatile for
volume to rooting systems and highways and the rail network. They
is beneficial to the long-term can be designed as a ‘storage swale’
sustainability of trees and planting and/or for water conveyance Rainwater interception over the highway
Some SuDS components are linked to • Water butts and tanks to intercept • Rainwater planters to attenuate
buildings and structures that help define and harvest rainfall by disconnecting in above ground planters, with
the public realm. These may include: and diverting downpipes integral storage and slow release
• Living roofs’ (green, brown or blue • Rain gardens to create temporary Other SuDS components can be
roofs) to provide source control localised ponding for roof runoff, delivered by better management of
allowing plants and trees to existing assets, including:
benefit from that ponding
• De-paving, bioretention and street tree
planting, retrofitted as part of already
planned annual highways maintenance,
repair and improvement programmes
• Re-purposing linear green infrastructure,

such as verges and embankments
along roads, railways and waterways
• Decompacting existing parkland soils
• Repurposing existing green space

for swales, rain gardens and
bioretention components
• Protecting existing assets that are

already providing a SuDS function,
including street trees, parks and gardens,
verges and infrastructure corridors
The SuDS components are described in

more detail in the order found in
CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual.
Retrofit cycleway and SuDS in Lyon
3.2 Structures be proprietary systems with irrigation, or
formed over time by planting climbing
Roofs and walls can provide the first plants into the ground that are more
point of interception as part of the SuDS self-sufficient.
management train.
Benefits
Living roofs are an effective way to Living roofs and green walls provide
integrate green infrastructure, no matter multiple benefits and contribute to the
how intense the development. The term Green Infrastructure Vision for London.
living roofs include ‘green’ (planted), ‘blue’ They reduce rainwater runoff rates,
(water attenuation) and ‘brown’ (recycled offset the urban heat island effect and
substrate) roofs. The three types of living filter air pollution.
roofs can be characterised by:
Benefits include:
• Extensive roofs: these have
varying substrate depths and • Water quantity: living roofs
vegetation that generally includes intercept and attenuate rainwater. Proprietary green wall system
grasses and wildflowers, creating They allow a reduced discharge
minimal loading on structures rate through evaporation and
transpiration. Green walls can use an educational and urban farming
• Intensive roofs: these typically recycled water for irrigation resource. Green walls soften the
have deeper substrates supporting hard city environment, reducing air
a range of vegetation. This puts • Water quality: living roofs treat temperatures while being space efficient
larger loadings on the structure water through a variety of physical,
biological and chemical processes • Biodiversity: Living roofs safeguard,
• Blue roofs: these attenuate within the soil and root uptake zones. enhance, restore and create habitat
through vegetated substrate They regulate surface water runoff with no additional land take. They
specification and drainage design temperature that could adversely provide important habitat stepping
affect ecology of local water bodies stones and contribute to London’s
Green walls are vegetated walls that are natural capital. In particular, they
supported on cables, cellular systems or • Amenity: living roofs can improve provide refuge for rare invertebrates.
self-clinging and unsupported. They can the look of roofscapes, while Green walls provide vertical habitats
rooftop parks and gardens act as for nesting and food for pollinators
Design considerations • Vegetation: living roofs support a variety • Roof conditions are often hostile,
Living roofs can be retrofitted or designed of plants for amenity, biodiversity and with high winds, extreme temperatures,
as an integral part of a new development. food growing. The species selection, periodic rain and drought. Diverse dry
The following aspects of design need to whether seeded, self-seeded, pre-grown meadow mixes, that are naturally
be considered: or planted, should be adapted to self-sustaining in exposed environments,
microclimate and substrate specification can be used. Natural windblown or
• Exceedance: design roof drainage bird-borne self-seeding is a viable
to cope with excessive rain and economic alternative, naturally
adapted, rather than off-the-
• Irrigation: rainwater should be shelf, imported monocultures
intercepted for irrigation, where possible
• Access, safety and edge protection:
• Structural resilience: living roofs add outlets and drains should be
additional loading to a roof structure, easily accessible for inspection
depending on the material used,
in the form of a dead load. This is Maintenance
typically around 0.7 to 5.0 kN/m, Living roofs require periodic maintenance,
with imposed loads up to 10 kN/m including for irrigation, inspection of
outlets and removal of invasive plants.
• Fire resistance: fire risks can be managed Frequency depends on the type of system.
through the use of appropriate materials Green walls formed by climbing plants
and design. Vegetation should be kept a may need to be periodically attached
minimum distance away from vulnerable to supports. Proprietary products
areas such as openings and vents require maintenance of plants and
irrigation systems and may require
• Substrate: varying depths of substrate, occasional replanting.
together with dead wood and aggregates
within a single roof landscape, create Useful design guidance:
different microclimates and the CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 12
potential for habitat diversity. Soils CIRIA C644 Building Greener BS 120563:
and growing media can be formed 2000. Rainwater outlets gutters
of recycled material, which support Living roof: Copenhagen BS EN 13252:2001
different potential for flora and fauna
Case study 1 – The roof area was divided into two by an
impermeable barrier, creating two
Structures separate sub-catchments. This allowed
rainfall runoff measurements on the green
Location roof and the existing control roof. The
London Wall living roof was better at attenuation than
City of London the grey roof.
Images courtesy of University of East London

Date
2011
Water attenuation performance of the Museum of
SuDS components London green roof
Living roof
Objectives
• Attenuate rainfall
• Improve biodiversity
Outcome
As part of a sustainability initiative at the
Museum of London, a series of living roofs
were installed on the museum’s roof as
part of waterproofing works.
This installation included a range of

roofs, including wildflower and sedum
mat systems. The variety of scale, levels,
shading and aspect produces a biodiverse
urban habitat.
The University of East London has monitored Water attenuation performance of the
the living roof’s attenuation performance Museum of London green roof
Case study 2 – Outcome
The green wall contributes to a biodiversity
Structures network that delivers a range of economic
and health benefits, encourages wildlife
Location and reduces the risk of flooding; 200
Goods Way linear metres of green walls have been
London Borough of Camden planted since 2012. As part of a Living
Landscape strategy, these green walls –
Date together with the living roofs – minimise
2012 the urban heat island effect by increasing
air-plant exchange and contribute to the
SuDS components SuDS strategy for the area by intercepting
Green wall rainwater. Their contribution to the sense
of place is also significant.
Objectives
This new neighbourhood is being built
around a green framework where 40% of
the 27 hectare development is given to
open space. More than 400 new trees are
being planted and walls and roofs greened
Planting detail Kings Cross green wall
3.3 Infiltration
systems
London’s parks, gardens and green space
provide large scale SuDS infiltration in the
open soil, coupled with the interception
that parkland trees provide. Infiltration
systems also exist at a smaller scale, for
example, kerb inlets, grass verges and
permeable paving.
Designed infiltration systems can include

the following sustainable drainage
components:
• Soakaways: pits that temporarily

provide storage before infiltration
• Trenches: linear soakaways and strips

of grass that are predominantly dry, but
in heavy rainfall, fill up and store water
for a period of time before infiltration
• Infiltration basins: depressions

performing the same
function as trenches
• Blankets: open, flat areas of grass,

allowing infiltration over a wider
area than a trench or basin. St James' Park: London’s parks allow water to infiltrate. Soil compaction through high footfall
may reduce permeability
These components are designed to A minimum of 1m from the base of the Maintenance
promote infiltration where capacity and infiltration component to maximum This can usually form part of the wider
permeability of soils and the depth of groundwater level is required. Upstream routine landscape maintenance.
groundwater allows. However, infiltration pre-treatment may be needed to remove Control structures require periodic
systems may not be appropriate in many sediment and silt. inspection. Existing parkland, particularly
parts of London due to groundwater in critical drainage zones that are
extraction issues (see Chapter 2). Performance of SuDS components may subject to intense use, should be
be compromised if surface soils become periodically decompacted.
Benefits compacted, so should be designed to
Infiltration components allow groundwater withstand high intensity pedestrian use. Useful design guidance
to be replenished. They can incorporate Performance depends on the capacity CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 13
marginal and wetland habitat. Planting of the soils surrounding the component.
slows the flow rate by improving the When rainfall rate exceeds the design
drainage properties of the soil, creating capacity, a flow route or temporary storage
a more effective SuDS component. should be provided.
Infiltration can be used to manage overflows
from rainwater collection systems, such as Soil infiltration can be enhanced by:
water butts and runoff from small areas
(for example, drives and roofs). • Managing construction traffic to prevent
compaction during construction
Design considerations
Infiltration components can be retrofitted, • Mixing sand with soil to retain
designed as a series of small linked its drainage properties
elements, or as a single larger one.
• Adhering to tight construction tolerances
Runoff flow to be directed to a SuDS
infiltration component can be collected • Soil decompaction
laterally along the edge of an impermeable
surface. Kerb openings and roadside lateral • Reusing existing topsoil to allow the
inlets help to direct, control and reduce inherent seed bank in the soil to
flow velocities. regenerate quickly, reducing erosion and
enhancing the potential for infiltration
Case study 3 –
Images courtesy of Owen Davies

Infiltration systems
Location
Streatham Common South
London Borough of Lambeth
Date
2013
SuDS components
De-paving
Tree planting
Kerb inlets Before
Objectives
Streatham Common South falls within the
Streatham Critical Drainage Area (CDA).
The project included implementation of
a rain garden to alleviate flood risk and
was completed within a standard highway
maintenance scheme.
Outcome
Pavement SuDS, where inserted with
verges, replaced concrete dished channels.
These slow surface water drainage into
the sewer system. Modeling undertaken
has shown that the grass verge can
theoretically remove 6m of surface
water runoff in a one in 100 year, six-hour After Kerb inlet and de-pave detail
storm event.
Case study 4 –
Images courtesy of Ann Bodkin

Outcome
The paving over of front gardens in
Infiltration systems London is a major issue and contributes
collectively to the risk of surface water
Location flooding. Permitted development rights
50 & 60 Reedworth Street have recently been withdrawn for
London Borough of Lambeth homeowners wishing to pave a garden
with impermeable surfacing.
Date
2012 This project highlighted how hardstanding
can be removed without affecting parking.
SuDS components Residents were supported in changing
Permeable paving materials and provided with tools,
technical advice and practical assistance.
Objectives The initiative has increased the
To increase the permeability of permeability of front gardens and
front gardens. improved streetscape aesthetics.
De-paving of private front gardens After with gravel and planting
3.4 Filter strips Design considerations
Filter strip efficiency depends on
Filter strips are uniformly graded, gently length, width, vegetation cover and soil
sloping areas of grass that allow water specification. Considerations include:
to flow as a sheet towards a swale,
bioretention system or filter drain. They • Soil permeability
provide a simple form of source control
through pre-treatment of water, to protect • Vegetation specification
swales or filter drains from clogging up
with silt. • Height of vegetation and flow depth
Filter strips are effective at intercepting • Peak flow velocity in relation

rainwater where the soil is sufficiently to particulate settlement
permeable. The grass and vegetation slows
the water, allowing it to soak into the • Time of travel of runoff
ground. The plants help evaporate water across the filter strip
and filter out pollution.
• Protection of the strip from vehicular
Benefits run-over and development
Filter strips create soft open space next
to impermeable areas. They can either be • Designed for management by standard Filter strip: Parkway retrofit
seeded with amenity or meadow grass and landscape maintenance machinery
managed as long or short mown grass to
support biodiversity by providing: Filter strips should be more than 2.5m Maintenance
wide, and ideally laid to a 1% slope. This can form part of the wider landscape
• Foraging for birds and invertebrates Small filter strips that are 1-2m long maintenance operations, to ensure
create effective connections between the feature meets design performance
• Habitats for invertebrates broken kerb lines and the side slope standards. Measures to prevent soil
of a swale. Lengths of greater than 5m compaction are particularly important.
• ‘Stepping stone’ habitats, particularly help improve water quality performance.
in the urban environment Filter strips should be shielded with Useful design guidance
a kerb or low-level barrier when they CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 15
are next to a road or car parking.
3.5 Filter drains
Filter drains are deep, narrow, gravel-filled
trenches that collect and move water
from the road. They often include a
perforated pipe at the base to help
drainage. Water flow through the gravel
can removes some pollutants.
Benefits
Filter drains provide:
• Long and short term water

storage during a storm between
the aggregate particles
• Silt removal, by eliminating

suspended sediment in the water
Filter drain: open gravel filled joint
• A material that enhances biodiversity
by hosting micro-organisms
and providing a breeding ground Filter drains can be protected from silt on the highway. Equally, they can be
for insects and amphibians by an adjacent filter strip (see 3.4) or integrated as an architectural feature in
flow spreader. the public realm.
Design considerations
Filter drains must be able to accommodate Filter drains are usually 1-2m deep, with a Maintenance
high return periods (ie, one in 100 year minimum depth of filter medium beneath Filter drains require routine maintenance
events) without suffering damage. A any inflow and outfall (0.5m) to ensure to ensure vegetation or debris is removed
geotextile (not a geomembrane) below reasonable levels of pollution removal. from the surface.
the surface of the aggregate traps silt to
prevent it clogging up the drain, while These components can be placed at the Useful design guidance
allowing permeability. bottom of embankments to intercept CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual,
surface water runoff or with filter strips Chapter 9 and 16
3.6 Wet swales Benefits Erosion: swales convey and/or retain
Conveyance: swales are a simple and flowing surface water where soft
and dry swales effective means of collecting and landscape is likely to erode. Reducing
distributing runoff, or as a means of the velocity of water flow limits erosion
Swales are linear components that provide conveying runoff on the surface, through the use of measures such
slow water conveyance. They provide while enhancing open space or the as weirs, check dams, erosion control
filtration, attenuation and storage of roadside environment. matting and planting.
surface water runoff from relatively small
catchment areas. They can be designed to Filtration: engineered soils can Design considerations
accommodate a range of rainfall events. help neutralise contaminants and Swales should be designed to suit the scale
sedimentation caused by runoff. Designs and character of the specific location, taking
Generally, swales are sloping sided, flat- can include submerged anaerobic zones to into consideration orientation, aspect and
bottomed, vegetated open channels, promote nutrient renewal. proximity to other landscape or townscape
constructed at a gentle gradient. Steeper features. The design of soft or hard edges
gradients can be accommodated through Attenuation: swales are typically designed depends on the urban design context.
the use of check dams. Swale design is to capture a one in 10 year storm event
limited by available space and is only by storing water within and on top of
effective when close to catchment areas. the filtration media where the water can
Swales can be dry or wet. disperse over time.
Dry swales allow surface water to infiltrate Amenity: swales provide shallow linear
and include a filter bed with an underdrain planted features in the landscape that are
to prevent waterlogging. They can be lined space-efficient and adaptable to location.
or unlined depending on groundwater levels. They integrate well alongside highways,
cycleways or pathways. They allow
Wet swales retain water, behaving like bridging structures to enhance spatial
a linear wetland. They are best located experience, creating places for play and
where sites are level and soils are poorly contact with nature.
drained, where they can deliver amenity
and biodiversity through specific wetland Biodiversity: swales can be designed
planting. During intense storm events, with a variety of marginal planting and
water is retained in the swale before being wildlife meadow that contribute to habitat Dry swale: Upton, Northants
conveyed to a downstream outlet. creation and connectivity.
Mini swales can manage small events with Contamination: Where there is ground The selection of vegetation should be from
overflow to other SuDS components. contamination on brownfield sites, native species that provide appropriate
incorporate a liner, unless leaching can habitat for indigenous species. Where over-
Ground conditions: Examine existing be managed to an acceptable level. The the-edge drainage is required, the grass
ground conditions and hydrology to liner level should rest above the level of level should be 25mm below the edge of
determine the use of either a wet or dry seasonal high groundwater level. the hardstanding to be drained, to ensure
swale. The volume of water to be stored, effective surface flow.
or infiltration capacity of the soils, Edge protection: as a component that
allow the designer to establish the basic typically sits below pavement surface Trees: swales can accommodate trees
swale dimensions. levels and can hold standing water, within their design, provided conditions
consider the edge detail. needed for growth and the hydrological
effects are considered. Swales should
Image courtesy Robert Bray Associates
Exceedance: swales are designed to respect the presence of existing trees and
provide a level of storage that can ensure root systems are not compromised.
accommodate a one in 10 year storm event. Proposals should accord with BS 5837:2015
The storage capacity of a swale depends and take account of tree preservation
on its size, which depends on the available orders and conservation area designations.
space. A swale can overtop during severe
storms, so build in contingency flow paths Maintenance
and/or provide outfalls. Swales require routine maintenance to
ensure efficient operation. Different
Health and safety: swales are shallow swale construction and operation affect
surface features and should not present maintenance prescriptions.
a danger to the general public. However,
risks can be mitigated through design to Useful design guidance
address edge conditions or provide shallow CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual,
side slopes and shallow flow depths. Chapter 9.8 and 17
HD 33/06 Surface and Sub-Surface
Vegetation: planting in the swale stabilises Drainage Systems For Highways
slopes, reduces erosion and slows water
flow. Swales provide an ideal location
Dry swale for a variety of planting that can provide
amenity, habitat and foraging.
Case study 5 –
Images courtesy of Camlins

Swale
Location
Mill Pond Road,
London Borough of Wandsworth
Date
2016
SuDS components
Bioretention swales
Kerb inlets
Tree trench planting
Objectives
Mill Pond Road is a new road within a
development at Nine Elms. It is constructed
with a central planting bed acting as a
swale to attenuate surface water.
Outcome
The surface water runoff is collected along
bespoke broken kerb units and fed into
the central planting zone, where it filters
through to an underground collection and
holding tank before being released slowly
into the mains sewer system. Standing
water is not anticipated for more than one
or two days following extreme rainfall
events; plants have been selected to be Bioretention swale Plan
tolerant of these conditions.
3.7 Rills, runnels and Filtration: flow-reducing elements, such
as planting, textured paving and other
channel systems features provide filtration, treatment and
sedimentation from captured surface water.
Rills or runnels are small, open-surface
water channels within paved construction. Attenuation: rills can attenuate surface
They collect water directly from hard water by providing storage and reducing
surfaces and convey water, at a reduced discharge rates.
flow rate, to, from or between other
SuDS components. They come in a variety Design considerations
of designs to suit the urban landscape Edge protection: typically sitting below
and have formed part of the historic pavement surface level, rills have hard edges
streetscape environment for many years. and can hold standing water. Design teams
should consider how pedestrians (particularly
Rills can be planted, with rainwater visually impaired and older people), cyclists
bringing them to life. They provide an and vehicles will interact with them,
alternative to piped drainage, allowing especially at crossing points and in relation
the captured water to remain at the to pedestrian desire lines and vehicle
surface and for easy discharge into other movement, especially in narrow streets.
SuDS components.
Vegetation: rills can provide an ideal
Benefits location for aquatic or sub aquatic planting
Rills are an effective way to provide SuDS, for habitat creation.
including water treatment if planted,
where space is at a premium. Silting: rills can become impaired by silting.
This can be prevented by placing upstream
Amenity: planted rills, interacting with SuDS components to filter sediment.
rainwater, enhance the urban environment.
Outlets: Rills typically discharge into other
Conveyance: rills are effective at collecting SuDS features and the way in which this
and distributing storm water runoff, while occurs dictates the rill’s function. Consider
Runnel enhancing and demarcating open space. ways of restricting the flow at outfall, through
the use of check dams, weirs and orifices.
Maintenance 3.8 Bioretention Bioretention swales are similar to under
Channel systems require routine drained swales with vegetation tolerant
maintenance of inlets and outfalls, debris systems of likely inundation occurrences and
and management of plant material. pollutants. Rain gardens are localised,
Bioretention systems are a planted, soft less engineered systems. They usually
Useful design guidance landscaped low-spot, positioned to serve a single roof or small paved area
HD 33/06 Surface And Sub-Surface Drainage collect, store, filter and reduce surface and can create an attractive addition to
Systems For Highways runoff from frequent rainfall. As a surface the public realm.
water management component they are
CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual versatile and can be integrated into public Benefits
realm environments through altering Filtration: engineered soil or growing
CIRIA publication C698: Site Handbook for street geometry, creative material choices media mixes and filter media can be
the Construction of SuDS and planting. designed to enhance bioretention
treatment performance.
Cambridge City Council, Sustainable Inlets, outlets and control structures are
Drainage and Adoption Guide 2010 used to control and reduce the water Attenuation: water can be stored within
flow rate through the bioretention system. and on top of the filtration and growing
media, allowing rainwater to infiltrate over
Bioretention systems are used to treat and a period of days.
manage storm events by collecting local
surface water. Water accumulates on the Conveyance: bioretention features can be
surface, before filtering through vegetation gently sloped or terraced to allow water to
and growing/filtration media. Here it either be conveyed at a reduced flow through the
infiltrates or is collected via pipe work use of check dams, weirs and/or vegetation
leading to a suitable outfall. to a suitable outfall location.
Bioretention tree pits and trenches can Amenity and biodiversity: bioretention
be incorporated into pavements using features can be integrated in many ways
soils that intercept, dissipate and cool into the streetscape. Integrating planting
rainfall runoff. has multiple benefits, enhancing the
attractiveness, diversity and quality of the
Rill urban environment, while meeting local
Biodiversity Action Plan targets.
contaminants with the use of filtration
mediums, normally sand-based material
with a source of organic matter to provide
nutrients for planting.
Sedimentation: slowing surface water

flow allows fine particles to be removed.
Design should limit excessive sediment
accumulation that could reduce storage
volume, filtration and infiltration rates.
Exceedance: bioretention systems can deal

Bioretention rain garden in Vauxhall with only small catchment areas and are
likely to be overwhelmed during heavy
storms. The design should therefore allow
Design considerations than 350mm. An outfall provides overflow for contingency flow paths and/or
Edge protection: typically, bioretention when heavy rainfall means infiltration into provide outfall.
components are sited below pavement the soil is too slow.
surface levels and can hold standing water. Outfalls: if an outfall is required, consider
It is therefore important that the interface Erosion: bioretention systems aim to catch the location, particularly the relative
with pedestrian and vehicular movement flowing surface water. Soft landscapes level of potential discharge locations, as
is carefully considered. Bioretention can may suffer erosion, so design the feature bioretention system outfalls can be deep
be profiled in various ways, with soft to control the surface water runoff compared to conventional drainage.
edges and gentle side slopes, or hard movement through the use of weirs,
edges and vertical sides. check dams, erosion control matting Maintenance
and planting. Bioretention systems require routine site
Inlets: inlets may be necessary, especially maintenance operations to ensure efficient
when hard edge protection is required. Pollution/contamination: pollution and operation. Inlets and outfalls require
Erosion at inlet points can be prevented by contamination sources affecting surface periodic inspection.
reducing the surface water flow velocity and ground water may affect planting,
via a sediment trap or a reinforced and so the planting specification should be Useful design guidance
textured zone. Protection grilles should not designed to meet the site conditions. CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 18
be used unless the inlet diameter is greater Bioretention systems can remediate water
Case study 6 –
Images courtesy of J & L Gibbons

Bioretention
Location
Swan Yard
London Borough of Islington
Date
2013
SuDS components
Bioretention planter
Objectives
A small office redevelopment has included
SuDS components within a limited space to
intercept and attenuate rainwater.
Outcome
Previously, roof rainwater discharged
directly into the street. The most effective
way to incorporate SuDS has been by
diverting and disconnecting downpipes to
feed rainwater into bioretention planters
and water butts for irrigation.
The planting adds a small element of

self-sustaining biodiversity in an otherwise
hard paved yard.
Before After
Case study 7 – SuDS components
Bioretention planter
Bioretention De-pave
Tree planting
Location
A24 London Road Objectives
London Borough of Sutton To reduce hard paving on a wide
pavement and plant trees and perennials
Date to aid water attenuation.
2014
Outcome
Six areas were de-paved and planted
with birch trees and a variety of hardy
perennials. This has improved the
streetscape and reduced the hard paved
area contributing to surface water runoff.
Each planting area has been mulched with
gravel and contains an outlet. Originally
envisaged as rain gardens, the design was
subsequently amended to limit surface
water runoff into the planting areas by
installing a raised edge. The project had
Local Implementation Plan (LIP) funding
and was delivered by Sutton on the TLRN.
Outlet detail Planting
3.9 Trees
Trees in the hard landscape, parks, gardens
and streets contribute to London’s status
as one of the greenest cities in the world.
Their SuDS functions include attenuation,
interception and soil permeability.
Trees provide multiple ecosystem services

and mitigation from the effects of climate
change, including cooling and improving
air quality. Trees also benefit the urban
environment in terms of heritage, amenity,
and biodiversity. They reinforce a sense of
place and can be used for traffic calming.
Benefits
Attenuation: tree pits can store storm
water runoff through the use of structural
soils or proprietary crate systems. It
is, however, seldom possible to create
attenuation or infiltration areas around
existing trees; this may kill them.
Trees draw water from the ground through

root systems to their leaves, where it is
lost through evaporation.
Interception: trees intercept rainfall and

store it. This reduces the amount of water
reaching the ground, thereby reducing the
volume of runoff. Street trees: biodiversity
Infiltration: soil infiltration rates are A large species tree, such as an oak, can considered. For a more detailed description
improved due to root growth that also host hundreds of different animals, plants of the benefits of large tree species in
enhances soil biodiversity. and fungi, with long-term benefit to urban environments, see CIRIA C712. Tree
pollinators and the urban ecology. specification and soils performance criteria
Filtration: soils and geotextiles that should be developed in parallel as an
make up the construction of tree pits Design considerations integral part of SuDS component design
remove silts and particulates that may Existing trees: existing trees should and long-term vision.
be present in runoff water. Through be retained where possible. Proposals
‘phytoremediation’, trees absorb trace should accord with BS5837:2015 and take By combining trees with other SuDS
amounts of harmful chemicals – including account of tree preservation orders and components, the volume of rainwater
metals, hydrocarbons and solvents – conservation area designations. interception and attenuation can be
and transform them into less harmful significantly increased. The London i-Tree
substances or use them as nutrients. Available space: tree pits require eco project, for instance, demonstrated
space below ground to successfully that the combined canopy cover of
Amenity: street trees are an important accommodate long-term root growth. Tree London produces an avoided runoff of 3.4
component of London’s townscape. pits and trenches (connected pits) should million cubic metres per year.
London’s climate allows for a wide provide adequate soil volume, water and
diversity of native and exotic species. For gaseous exchange to the root system. The Soils: where possible, trees should be
instance, London’s trees remove over 2,000 location of below ground services and established within soft landscape areas,
tons of pollution/ha/year and store 2.3 drainage should be identified to ensure rather than confining rooting zones to
million tonnes of carbon per annum. Tree- root zones, utilities and other below restricted trenches in hard landscape.
lined streets also make cycling and walking ground infrastructure are all coordinated.
more pleasant, enhancing the health and Protection for both long-term root growth Soil depths: the overall depth of soil
wellbeing of Londoners. and below ground infrastructure can be should be appropriate for the tree species.
provided with root barriers. Guidance Excessive topsoil depth increases the
Biodiversity: trees constitute the largest on delivering trees in hard landscapes is risk of anaerobic conditions (oxygen
element of biomass in the city, providing provided by The Trees and Design Action deficiency). Topsoil should therefore only
significant biodiversity value. Trees and Group (TDAG). be used within the upper part of the soil
woodlands provide food, habitat and profile, with suitable subsoil in the lower
shelter for birds, invertebrates and other Tree specification: tree species and layer. The exact depth permissible will be
species, some of which are subject to diversity, provenance, mature size, dependent on soil conditions, the tree
legal protection. clear stem height, root preparation specification and the type of load-bearing
and procurement should be carefully system (see soils: Chapter 2).
Where tree planting is incorporated • through channels or rills as direct
into hard landscape, the use of load- surface water runoff to a tree pit
bearing tree planting systems may be
necessary. New and retrofit SuDS schemes • via depressions or low points
will require these systems, which may directing runoff from impermeable
categorise the street as a zone of ‘special surfaces towards the tree pit
engineering difficulty’. There are several
systems available for planting in hard • via permeable surfaces used to collect
landscape, including: and convey surface water to the tree pits
• Cell systems Outlets: tree pits should be well drained

as waterlogging during establishment can
• Urban tree soil be one of the key reasons for failure.
This is best achieved by infiltration if the
• Raft systems ground properties are suitable. Where
infiltration is not possible then an outfall
• Structural growing media to a surface water drainage network can
be used. The discharge should be deep to
Infiltration rates: the rate of infiltration prevent waterlogging.
of a tree pit dictates the size of the tree
pit required for water storage. Maintenance
The construction of the pit can be Trees require a higher level of management
altered accordingly. during the first five years after planting
because roots need to establish good
Pollution/contamination: pollution and contact with the growing medium before
contamination sources affecting surface they can efficiently extract water.
and ground water influences tree growth.
Certain species are more susceptible than Useful design guidance
others, and species selection should be CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 19
specific to each site and SuDS scheme. CIRIA C712 The benefits of large specie
trees in urban landscapes 2012
Street trees: biodiversity Inlets: surface water can be introduced to a TDAG (2014) Trees and Hard Landscape:
tree in a variety of ways: A Guide for Delivery
Case study 8 – Outcome
The plaza was constructed as a single
Trees rooting zone below granite paving. This
earthen layer consists of an 800mm
Location thick base course of boulders that form
Hyllie Plaza a structural soil, 60% of which is cavities.
Malmö, Sweden Mulch was then watered down into the
voids. Twelve parallel slots were cut
Date into the paving and planted with beech
2010 trees. The soil in the beds was mixed
with pumice, mycorrhiza and charcoal
SuDS components to support effective water and nutrient
Tree trench attenuation cycling and was informed by biological
Tree planting research that determined parameters on
how to successfully establish the trees.
Objectives
To establish a ‘forest’ in the plaza using
a species of beech typical of the area
with fully integrated SuDS. The forest
contributes to regional identity while
intercepting and attenuating rainwater.
Surface water drain to root zone Beech planted in tree trenches
3.10 Permeable products that provide infiltration and Silting: permeable paving becomes impaired
storage (see 3.11). Care is needed in using by silting, oiling or mudding. Silting can
paving proprietary systems as high stresses are be prevented using protective upstream
placed on the units and their performance SuDS components, eg, filter strips and
Permeable paving comes in various is difficult to monitor once paving has swales. Intelligent placement and correct
forms, including block paving, bituminous been laid. construction methods also reduce silting.
materials, grass reinforcement, and bound
or unbound gravels. All promote water Conveyance: permeable paving can be Compaction: over-compaction of the sub-
infiltration, whether through the porous used to convey storm water within its base and subgrade affects the efficient
surface of a paving material or through the construction, removing potential overland function of the paving for conveyance and
joints between the paving units. flow and puddling. infiltration, so take care when installing.
Permeable pavements are used as source Simplicity: conventional below ground Ground conditions: consider the
control as they manage rainfall where it drainage features, such as gullies and pipes, existing ground conditions and
lands. The basic structure of permeable are not needed, thus eliminating cost and hydrology to determine the possibility
paving is similar to that of a standard maintenance requirements. of the sub-base of the pavement
pavement. However, the sub-base contains functioning as a soakaway.
a coarser granular fill and geotextiles that Filtration: permeable paving provides
prevent sedimentation. filtration at either surface level or within Exceedance: permeable paving can deal
the subgrade. This removes or treats with most storm events but could be
Permeable paving can attenuate and sediments, heavy metals, hydrocarbons inundated during big storms (one in 100
convey water to a suitable outfall. In and some nutrients. Paving filtration year). When this happens, and the capacity
London, the potential for permeable capabilities are largely dependent on of the pavement is reached, the paving
paving is significant, provided the the construction, which can have conveys water as a traditional pavement.
underlying geology is suitable. differing characteristics. Design should incorporate exceedance
flow paths and appropriate outfalls.
Benefits Design considerations
Attenuation: increasing the depth of the Catchment area: permeable paving Maintenance
granular sub-base enables storm water provides source control. With careful Maintenance regimes related to design
to be stored beneath the surface, where detailing and design it can manage aspiration and SuDS performance need
it can infiltrate and/or slowly release to a additional storm water, such as intercepted to be clearly established from the outset.
suitable overflow. Geocellular units can be water from adjacent roof structures. Permeable paving can require more care
introduced. These are lightweight modular than traditional impermeable surfaces to
maintain its integrity and function. Over The maintenance regime of permeable to be removed from joints, unless
time, detritus collects in the upper part of paving is largely dependent on the wildflower establishment is part of the
the joint material and surface pores. This construction of the surface course. design concept.
build-up can affect infiltration capability. Brushing and joint material renewal is
The performance and appearance of required, the frequency being determined Useful design guidance
permeable surfacing in areas where buses, by local conditions. The exact type of CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 20
taxis and delivery vehicles stand may be jointing grit will vary depending on the Interpave, the Precast Concrete
affected by leaking engine oil. product system and contractors will need Paving and Kerb Association –
to take account of this. Weeds will need see www.paving.org.uk
De-paving the margins of an existing pathway to increase permeability
Case study 9 – Objectives on each side of the road, with underground
This Thames Water Utilities Limited storage provided by geocellular structures
Permeable paving (TWUL) project aims to trial the retrofit on one side and aggregate on the other,
of SuDS within the highway with a with a flow control outlet to the
Location focus on their flood risk benefits. existing sewer.
Mendora Road Three streets were selected for the trial
London Borough of Hammersmith & as part of the Counters Creek SuDS The scheme is lined to ensure monitoring
Fulham Retrofit Pilot Schemes. data carried out by Thames Water gives
an accurate representation of the scheme
Date Outcome with no infiltration loses.
2016 (under construction) Mendora Road involves the installation of
permeable paving within the parking bays
SuDS components
Permeable paving retrofit
Images courtesy of Atkins

During construction After construction
BS Concret
Order Valu
Case study 10 –
Images courtesy of Marshalls

Outcome
The sub-base was designed to support
Permeable paving Marshalls Priora permeable concrete
blockpaving, using graded crushed rock
Location aggregate to provide structural strength,
London Borough of Newham integrity and voidage for attenuation.
This was placed on a geogrid for additional
Date strength. Creating a void at the joint
2012 (Temporary) between the Priora blocks at the surface
allowed water to pass through the
SuDS components pavement at source. The joint void was
Temporary permeable paving installation filled with 2-6mm clean stone to provide
a permeability rate of 18,750L/s/ha, to
Objectives cope with any storm event. No additional
To provide a coach park that would have a positive drainage was required.
minimal impact on the environment so the
site could be returned to its original use as
sports fields after the 2012 Games.
Installation complete Aerial view of site under construction
3.11 Detention basins
Image courtesy of Urbanstein

Detention basins are generally dry, low
spots within a landscape. They can be
designed as multi-functional spaces
during dry conditions. During storm
events, water is channelled to these basins
where it is ‘detained’ before release at a
controlled rate.
Basins usually require lots of space.

However, as they can be designed to
provide alternative functions, they can be
incorporated into relatively dense urban
environments as a soft or hard
landscape feature.
Benefits
Attenuation: detention basins provide
storage for stormwater before slow release
through a restricted outlet and flow control.
Hard detention basin with multiple functionality for recreation
Interception: detention basins provide a
large surface and depth for holding surface
water runoff. If landscaped with soils that Biodiversity: soft landscaped detention Design considerations
are sufficiently permeable, they provide basins can be planted with marginal and The form, depth and profile of the
interception by infiltration of small wetland vegetation to provide habitat and basin depend on topography and
rainfall events. a source of food for insects and mammals. existing features, such as trees and
Planting that enhances the ecological vegetation. Detention basins’ scale should
Amenity: as a multi-functional space, value also increases the drainage complement the landscape and townscape
detention basins have a variety of uses, properties of the soil to create a more character.
such as car parking, play, public open effective component.
space and habitat.
Sedimentation: fine materials can cause Inlets: inlets into detention basins come
sediment accumulation within a detention in a variety of design forms. At pipework
basin that can affect storage volume, outfalls, a protection grille should not be
filtration and infiltration rates. Designers used unless the inlet diameter is greater
should create upstream features or than 350mm.
forebays that filter out sediments from
stormwater before it enters the basin. Filtration: the primary pollutant removal
mechanism is settlement. Filtration of
Infiltration: consider the existing nutrients can also occur through
ground material and hydrology to see biological uptake by surface and
if the detention basin can function as submerged vegetation.
a soakaway.
Maintenance
Vegetation: when part of a soft landscape, Detention basins require routine site
detention basins allow diversity of planting maintenance operations to ensure efficient
to providing amenity, habitat, foraging operation. Where the detention basin has a
and the potential for community growing. hard surface, additional maintenance may
Aquatic vegetation can be used to provide be needed to preserve the amenity value.
stabilisation, prevent scour and re-
suspension during heavy storms. Useful design guidance
CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 22
Erosion: detention basins can suffer
erosion, especially during heavy storms.
Storm water velocities can be reduced
using weirs, sectioning or graded stone
near the inlet.
Compaction: ensure soils are not over-

compacted during construction. The
compaction of pond soils can negatively
impact infiltration rates and prevent
Detention basis with stepping stones and planting vegetation root penetration.
3.12 Attenuation and • Storm water from between the one
in 10 year and one in 30 year events
storage tanks should be managed within the SuDS
network. No flooding should occur
This is one of the most versatile sets above ground within areas which are
of SuDS components because it is less not part of the drainage system
dependent on the underlying geology.
When the rate of rainfall exceeds the rate • One in 30 year to one in 100 year storms
at which water can leave a surface, street should be managed within the SuDS
or area, the water is attenuated on site. network or within the site. This must not
result in flooding of property, nor should
This may happen at-grade or below ground it impact on the function of the street
and is often done using soil cells and
attenuation tanks, usually located within • Where it is not possible to manage
buildings or beneath the public realm. storm water from the one in 100 year
These must be connected to mains sewers storm at-grade within the streetscape
to provide an overflow. or SuDS network, consider:
Design considerations • below-ground storage in

Designers should follow the guidance below: proprietary crates, tanks or pipes
• allowing an increased
• Rate of runoff from the site discharge rate from the site
should target greenfield runoff
rates where practicable Useful design guidance
CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual,
• Storm water up to the one in 10 Chapter 21 and 24
year storm event should be stored
within SuDS components
Attenuation: soil cells
3.13 Ponds and Benefits
Water quantity: ponds and wetlands
wetlands store a lot of storm water. The more
water there is, the more time there is
Although ponds and wetlands are for sedimentation, biodegradation and
commonly used where runoff cannot biological uptake.
be managed at source, they can also be
used close to source where the benefits Water quality: through the use of
derived can be greater. The opportunity engineered soil mixes and additives,
for such features tends to be where lots filter media can be created to enhance
of space is available; however, there is bioretention treatment performance.
considerable value in small ponds and Designs can include submerged anaerobic
retention features close to and within zones to promote nutrient renewal. Reed
developments. beds are highly effective at bioremediation.
Ponds and wetlands are not limited to Amenity: permanent water features, such
the end of the system, where the demand as ponds and wetlands, offer important
for storage may be greatest; they can aesthetic and amenity benefits. Integrating
have a significant contribution at any point an aquatic bench, to create a shallow zone
in the management train. They provide for wetland planting, increases aesthetic
high value wildlife and amenity benefits value and the potential for biological
to an area and effectively treat polluted filtration and habitat. Ponds can
water naturally. incorporate features such as islands
and shallows that allow greater access
Wetlands do not necessarily hold a and interaction.
permanent pool of water; this is especially
true in dry conditions. The depth of water Biodiversity: design features, such as
increases during storm events, attenuating shallow and convoluted edges, uneven
and treating surface water runoff before surfaces, woodlands, tussock grass areas
outfall at a controlled rate to a suitable and dead wood piles, increase habitat
discharge point. diversity. These can provide shelter, food,
foraging and breeding opportunities for Pond: high in biodiversity and aesthetic value
urban wildlife.
Design considerations vegetation root penetration 3.14 Management
Sedimentation: fine materials cause and establishment.
sediment accumulation within ponds and maintenance
and wetlands, reducing storage volume, Outlets: incorporate a non-clogging,
filtration and infiltration rates. Mitigation variable flow rate control structure, SuDS components require different
measures can be implemented upstream together with an emergency overflow. This inspection and maintenance regimes
or by installing a sedimentation area might be a protected orifice, combined with to traditional drainage systems. Like all
within the catchment. an overflow channel protected with a weir. drainage systems, life cycle management
and maintenance must be considered
Vegetation: ponds and wetlands are ideal Inlets: prevent excessive erosion at from the start of the design process.
spots for planting, which can provide inlet points. Where pipework outfalls, a Construction design and management
amenity and habitat. Native species that protection grille should not be used unless (CDM) must consider the long-term
are resilient to local conditions should be the inlet diameter is greater than 350mm. performance of SuDS components as well
provided. Aquatic vegetation can provide as the need for maintenance vehicle access.
stabilisation, preventing scour and Filtration: ponds and wetlands treat
re-suspension during heavy storm events. surface water runoff by sedimentation Close collaboration with local authorities
that occurs while water remains in the through the feasibility and design process
Edge protection: ponds and wetlands hold pond. Filtration of nutrients can also occur is crucial to successful delivery of SuDS
standing water, so consider passing cyclists, through biological uptake by surface, schemes, particularly on adopted highways.
motorists, and pedestrians. Trees, woodland, submerged and aquatic vegetation, Local authority engagement should
planting, benches or other physical particularly reed beds. inform design decisions and specify asset
obstructions provide natural protection. management and maintenance regimes. This
Maintenance will ensure that site or street management
Erosion: ponds and wetlands are Conduct routine inspection and can deal with SuDS requirements.
susceptible to erosion, especially during maintenance to ensure the efficient
heavy storms. Stormwater velocities can operation of ponds and wetlands. SuDS maintenance can sometimes be
be slowed through planting and low- Maintenance regimes over and above undertaken alongside routine management
tech bio-engineering sympathetic to the routine on-site pond maintenance include of the public realm, particularly landscaping
character of the SuDS component. water quality monitoring and control of requirements. Many developments include
algal bloom. open spaces and many local authorities
Compaction: ensure soils are not already manage such areas. All open
compacted during construction as this Useful design guidance spaces have opportunities to include
can reduce infiltration rates, and prevent CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, Chapter 23 SUDS in some form.
It is helpful to engage the local community Component specific maintenance necessary alongside soft SuDS that interface
in SuDS development from the outset, Green walls: most versions require with pavements. Where edges adjoin
particularly during retrofits. Local irrigation. This must be maintained carriageways or parking bays, high/double
knowledge can help shape the design, rigorously. Failure of an irrigation system kerbs and or >450mm wide paved aprons
while allowing people to appreciate what will result in the death of the green wall, should be provided for access to parked
the SuDS components do. This also reducing the attractiveness of the area cars without walking in the soft feature.
offers potential for the local community and increasing replanting costs. Low-
to take ownership, by helping to maintenance green walls planted directly Salting: where soft SuDS receive runoff
manage and maintain SuDS as part of into the ground can be just as effective. containing de-icing salts, good sub-
their neighbourhood. drainage is essential to prevent salt
Sweeping: detritus and sediment from accumulation from harming plants. Sub-
In London, operational constraints on pedestrian and traffic use can drainage allows most salts to drain through
management and maintenance vary accumulate quickly. This can lead to a during the winter months when plants
between the busiest streets (managed by build-up of sediments to clog systems, are dormant. Salt tolerant plants should
TfL) and the 95% that are maintained by the such as joints for permeable pavements. still be selected and the ground must not
boroughs. Not all SuDS features will meet Sweeping regimes need to support the become compacted.
the criteria of Local Highway Authorities to SuDS components.
adopt maintenance responsibilities, which Geocellular drainage: while useful for
needs to include long-term costs. Geotextiles: Many SUDS components creating below-ground surface water
incorporate specific geotextiles to separate reservoirs or rooting zones for street
Maintenance requirements can be materials to separate materials to some trees, geocells are complex and potentially
simplified by using well thought-out extent. These tend to blind/clog over dangerous. There are various design,
designs. In a rain garden, for example, soil time, reducing infiltration/percolation certification, supervision, testing and
specification and plant species selection rates. There is little long-term test data maintenance issues that require emphasis
should meet the specific demands of the from the UK for public/urban situations; if they are to be used safely
SuDS, site characteristics and geotechnical designers should be aware of the long- and appropriately.
conditions. Maintenance requirements will term maintenance risks that geotextiles
vary depending on the time of year. may pose. Highway structures and geo-technical
structures must be designed, checked and
For a detailed guide to SuDS maintenance, Compacting: for landscaped SuDS to be supervised under relevant eurocodes. Most
refer to CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, effective, they must be protected from Highway Authorities will wish to manage
Chapter 32 (Operation and maintenance). both vehicle and pedestrian overrun. As a this via their Geotechnical and Highways
minimum, structural edges are generally Structures technical approvals process.
4 SuDS in London’s streets
4.1 SuDS and the
urban realm
This section shows how SuDS can be
integrated into the design and management
of some typical London streets. SuDS
should be designed in parallel with other
urban design considerations, reflecting
the unique opportunities and constraints
created by every London street.
Streets account for 80% of London’s

public realm. They are not just corridors
for movement; they contribute to the
city’s sense of place and identity and often
reflect London’s diverse communities.
Well designed streets are essential for

London’s future growth, both in terms of
population level and economic activity.
Their function for pedestrians and cyclists,
as well as other users, is growing and the Streets are places too
design of streets needs to facilitate this.
Improvements to streets can directly SuDS are an important component of across London. Although based on
unlock wider benefits beyond movement, this transformation, addressing surface specific examples of streets in London,
including health benefits for London’s water flood risk, improving air quality and the illustrations are purposefully generic,
growing population. These benefits can be contributing to a higher quality of life. aiming to demonstrate the art of the
realised at a variety of levels, from minor possible in a variety of locations and
interventions to transformations of large Eight street scenarios are illustrated environments, rather than to provide a
junctions and gyratories. below to show how SuDS may be provided strictly applicable set of design criteria.
within the many different street types
66 4 SuDS in London’s streets

4.2 Street scenarios
Street scenario 1
A roadway with large tracts of land
alongside, between slip roads and
interchanges. This expansive leftover
space has great potential to incorporate
extensive SuDS creating and linking
habitats, as well as improving and using
adjacent land.
4
Potential SuDS components 8
1. Wet swale, see 3.6
2. Filter drain, see 3.5
9
3. Filter strips, see 3.4
4. Tree planting, see 3.9
5. Ponds, see 3.13 3
6. Retention basins as overflow, see 3.12 5
7. Infiltration where conditions allow,

see 3.3 2
6 1
8. Living roofs, see 3.2
7

Street scenario 2
A busy road; an important route for buses,
cyclists, pedestrians and general traffic.
Large areas of trafficked sealed surfaces
mean SuDS need to optimise performance
within limited space.
Potential SuDS components

1. Tree planting, see 3.9 1
2. Inlets
3. Bioretention, see 3.8 9
4. Soil and drainage material, see 2.5
5. Permeable paving to parking bays,
where appropriate, see 3.10 5
6. Maintenance access strips

6
7. Utilities 2
3
8. Geotextile 4
9. Structure (green wall), see 3.2
8

Street scenario 3
An important focal point for business and
culture. High pedestrian flows, with limited
motor traffic access. This scenario offers
large areas of public realm for integrating a
variety of SuDS components with existing
mature trees.

2. Structure (green roof), see 3.2

3. Bioretention, see 3.8 11 2
4. Outfall
5. Porous bound gravel, see 3.10 10
3
4
7. Utilities
7
8. Geotextile 5
8 6
9. Existing trees
10. Disconnected downpipe and rain planter
11. Structure (green wall), see 3.2

Street scenario 4
An important local route with high quality
foot and cycle provision. The adjacent
park provides particular opportunities
for linear SuDS components. Other SuDS
features in this street include downpipe 7
2
disconnections from adjacent houses 1
and flats.

1. Green wall, see 3.2
3. Kerb drainage
4. Permeable paving, see 3.10
3
5. Dry swale, see 3.6
6. Adjacent green space used for SuDS
4
7. Existing trees 5
6
8. Infiltration where conditions allow,
see 3.3 8
9. Channels to direct flow from
downpipes to tree planting, see 3.7

Street scenario 5
A well-connected local centre with high
footfall from people accessing shops
and services. A range of opportunities
are illustrated, showing how SuDS can be
integrated to enhance the visual coherence
and identity of the area, improve air quality
and reduce temperature in the context of 2
the street and below-ground structures.

1. Existing trees
2. Tree trenches in median, see 3.9
3. Living roof, see 3.2 3
5
4. Permeable paving acting as an inlet
to tree trench, see 3.10
5. Street furniture aligned with SuDS 4 6
components to reduce clutter
8
6. Slab paving
7
8. Geotextile

Street scenario 6
A traditional, quiet and safe residential
street. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic is
mostly local, with provision for cyclists.
There is potential to integrate many SuDS
components in front gardens, as well as
1
the street.
2

1. Existing trees 7
2. Tree trenches, see 3.9
3. Bioretention, see 3.8
4. Permeable paving to parking bays,
see 3.10
5. SuDS components aligned to provide
traffic calming measures
5
6. De-pave and permeable paving to front
4 6
gardens, see 3.10 3
7. Green wall, see 3.2

Street scenario 7
A local shopping street in a residential area
that mainly caters for pedestrian and cycle
movement. Restricted access for service
vehicles. SuDS components are integrated
into the street furniture and public realm,
creating an attractive and welcoming place.

1. Existing trees
2. Tree trenches, see 3.9
2
3. Bioretention planters to the base of
disconnected downpipes, see 3.8
4. Channel to bioretention, see 3.7 6
1
3
5. Slab paving
7
6. Permeable paving to discrete areas,
see 3.10 4
7. Porous surfaces over existing trees

8. Bioretention, see 3.8 8
5
9. Cell systems, see 3.11
9
10. Soil and drainage material, see 2.5 10

Street scenario 8
A civic square. This is a place of street
activity with a high concentration of
cultural, commercial and entertainment
uses. A place with restricted vehicular
access, providing the opportunity for
a wide range of large and small scale
SuDS components, carefully
considered in respect of the heritage
setting and significance. 1

1. Existing trees
2. Permeable paving where appropriate,
see 3.10
3. Amenity areas acting as detention
2
basins, see 3.12
8
4. Outfall
3
5. Soil and drainage material, see 2.5 7 4
6. Geotextile 5
6
7. Attenuation tanks, see 3.11
8. Bioretention planters to the base of
disconnected downpipes, see 3.8

5 Case studies
Case study index London under 500m²
5.1 Priory Common 85 m²
5.2 Upminster Bridge swale 400 m²
The following case studies include local 5.3 Kenmont Gardens 435m²
and strategic examples of SuDS to show
the versatility of sustainable drainage London under 2000m²
in various contexts. Most are examples 5.4 Derbyshire Street 765m²
from London, but there are also exemplar 5.5 Renfrew Close 900m²
national and international studies which 5.6 Islington Town Hall 1000m²
may have some application in the Capital. 5.7 Rectory Gardens 1000m²
They are described and ordered by size. 5.8 Talgarth Road 1200m²
5.9 Mile End Green Bridge 2000m²
London over 0.2ha

5.10 Queen Caroline Estate 0.23ha
5.11 Bridget Joyce Square 0.26ha
5.12 Crown Woods Way 0.26ha
5.13 Hackbridge 0.27ha
5.14 Goldhawk Road 0.27ha
5.15 Firs Farm 0.48ha
5.16 Salmons Brook 0.77ha
5.17 LuL depot roof, Middlesex 125m²
5.18 Coulsdon Bypass 34ha
5.19 London Sustainable Industries Park, Dagenham 142ha
National & international

5.20 Great Kneighton/Clay Farm, Cambridge 109ha
5.21 Alnarp, Sweden 0.37ha
5.22 Benthemplein, Netherlands 0.95ha
5.23 Rue Garibaldi, Lyon, France15ha
5.24 Bo01, Malmö, Sweden 85ha
76 5 Case studies
5.1 Priory Common rain meadow
Location Summary
Priory Common Green space enhancement and
London Borough of Haringey re-purposing for surface water
Extent interception and infiltration.
85m²
Cost Project description
£48,000 (construction only) Next to Priory Road is a linear green space
Date with mature plane trees planted along
2016 the roadside. The verge is about 75m long
Credits and was highlighted as a site to deal with
London Borough of Haringey surface runoff from the road, via a sewer
Thames21 connection directly to the River Moselle.
Robert Bray Associates This project is part of a suite of SuDS
SuDS components schemes locally that will cumulatively
Filter strip improve water quality.
Infiltration basin
Channels
Objectives
• Intercept road runoff pollutants
at source and use the existing
landscape to allow ‘interception
loss’ (ie, prevent water from reaching
the ground) for everyday rainfall
• Clean and cool runoff during

summer when the watercourse is
most susceptible to the effects of
pollution and water temperature
increases (which inhibit the ability of
Love the Lea campaign, Thames 21 water to carry dissolved oxygen) Priory Common after installation
77 5 Case studies
Actions and results • Surface dressing with topsoil and low • Monitoring will show the extent of
• Runoff is diverted at the surface into a earth banks (bunds) has minimum impact interception loss and the protection
gully in Redston Road and collected in on the trees, with simple wildflower offered to the River Moselle
a five-sett channel that directs water meadow seeding for open soil areas
onto the grass verge along Priory Road Lessons learned
• The river is within the sub-catchment • Importance of contractor selection
• Verge re-profiling carries water for its area of the line and, to a lesser extent,
full length until it reaches the sewer nearby roads. This has implications • The value of expert supervision
both for pollution and bank stability
• Early observations indicate that of the River Ingrebourne as well • How sites, that might otherwise
water flows quickly into the rain as the reliability of the line be considered unsuitable for
meadow but slows as it travels SuDS, can provide benefits with
through the grass, soaking into the • High intensity summer storms will minimum intervention
tree-lined verge before reaching the be diverted from the sewer and
letterbox outfall to a road gully cooled before release to the river
Images courtesy of Robert Bray Associates

• Performance will improve
as the meadow grows
• The client partnership with Thames21

and Haringey Council are considering
monitoring opportunities
Benefits
• This simple SuDS retrofit shows
how an existing urban green space
can bring significant benefits to
unprotected urban watercourses
• Surface collection of runoff

avoids any significant excavation
or spoil for removal Conveyance of water through the scheme
78 5 Case studies
5.2 Upminster Bridge swale
Location Summary
Upminster Bridge Swale construction for increased on-site
London Borough of Havering attenuation and water treatment.
Extent
400m² Project description
Cost Upminster Bridge Station serves the
Trial scheme District Line and is 3.5km west of the
Date M25. The adjacent River Ingrebourne
2015 is vulnerable to flooding and has been
Credits deemed an at-risk river by the
London Underground Environment Agency. The river is within
Environment Agency the sub-catchment area of the line and
Green Infrastructure Agency No disruption to service during construction
to a lesser extent, nearby roads, with
Environmental Scientifics Group
Environmental Protection Group
implications for both pollution and bank
SEL Environmental stabilisation of the River Ingrebourne and
ITM Monitoring reliability of the line.
SuDS components
Swale A London Underground Power Upgrade
Outfall/runoff interception Project, involving the construction of a
new substation, presented the opportunity
to trial an experimental SuDS scheme. This
included two swales with associated tanks
and v-notch weirs. One receives water
from the new substation roof, the other
from adjacent London Underground tracks.
Funding was provided by the Environment
Agency with a London Underground
Limited contribution in kind.
400m2 swale under construction
79 5 Case studies
Objectives • Improved water quality • Any outflow from the scheme is
• Manage water quality by improving conveyed to River Ingrebourne,
remediation capabilities • Reduced waste from building not to rail infrastructure
SECTION AA
demolition through the reuse of
• Mitigate rail infrastructure flood risk waste rubble for swale construction • Enhanced local biodiversity
• Enhance local biodiversity • Enhancement of outlook over rail Lessons learned

infrastructure from residential areas
CRUSHED BRICK • Design required
BENTONITE SEAM
an interface with
Actions and results Ø225MM DRAINAGE PIPE
Depth varies 0.87-1.00m
conventional drainage systems
• Surface water from the railway lines
and from the outflows of the sub- SECTION AA APRON
RAM
Images courtesy of LU Infrastructure Protection

station roof is attenuated. This has
enhanced the site’s flood resilience
EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB
and reduced saturation of the soil on
the slopes by the River Ingrebourne. Ø225MM DRAINAGE PIPE
CRUSHED BRICK
BENTONITE SEAM
Depth varies 0.87-1.00m

Slope stability has improved as a result
RAMP
APRON
• Monthly remote monitoring provides

data on water quantity. DataSECTION
loggersBB
are attached to sampling chambers.
These contain water chambers
which house water level sensors
SECTION BB Ø450MM DRAINAGE PIPE
Depth varies 0.87-1.00m BENTONITE SEAM (FUTURE CONNECTION TO TRACK DRAINAGE)
• Plant establishment is being monitored
Ø450MM DRAINAGE PIPE
Depth varies 0.87-1.00m BENTONITE SEAM (FUTURE CONNECTION TO TRACK DRAINAGE)
• Water quality is being sampled monthly

from five locations and analysed.
Benefits
• Ability to withstand a one in 100
year flood event of 59L/sec
Swale sections
3rd floor Albany House, 55 Broadway Project title Drawn Date Revision
SW1H 0BD, London MM 11/06/2015
UPMINSTER BRIDGE SUBSTATION SWALES
80 5 Case studies 3rd floor Albany House, 55 Broadway
Contact: Melina Kakouratou
Tel: 020 7027 8137| Mobile: 0792 140 3141
E-mail: MelinaKakouratou@tube.tfl.gov.uk
Project title
AS BUILT Checked Scale
1:100@A3
Ref.
Drawn Date
SW1H 0BD, London MM 11/06/201
UPMINSTER BRIDGE SUBSTATION SWALES
Contact: Melina Kakouratou
Tel: 020 7027 8137| Mobile: 0792 140 3141 AS BUILT Checked Scale
5.3 Kenmont Gardens
Location Summary Actions and results
Kensal Green Transformation of highway to • Surface flow is directed towards
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham neighbourhood garden. rain gardens and trees
Extent
435m² Project description • Trees are planted in linked trenches that
Cost The garden was previously a carriageway incorporate below-ground attenuation
£300,000 (total scheme) that had been pedestrianised. The
Date carriageway still existed, but had been • Water flow is held and slowed within
2015 closed off with bollards. attenuation features before passing
Credits through control chambers and into
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham The project is a Neighbourhood and the existing drainage system
Project Centre Ltd Corridor Scheme, developed to incorporate
FM Conway SuDS. It is funded through a combination • Permeable paving allowing infiltration
Green Blue Urban
of TfL LIP Funding and Lead Local Flood
SuDS components Authority Funding. • Community involvement throughout
Permeable paving
Rain gardens
the project, with concept designs
Geocellular storage Objectives sent out for public consultation in
Tree planting • Improve an under-used area through September 2014, from which a positive
public realm works, including planting, response was received and a preferred
paving and lighting improvements option selected. A dialogue was
maintained with College Park Residents
• Incorporate SuDS features Association (CoPRA) and Kenmont
within the design Primary School throughout the process
• Retrofit SuDS to the existing drainage Benefits

system of a deep combined storm • The design restricts runoff to greenfield
and foul sewer, fed by gullies that rate for events up to the one in 10
were formerly in the carriageway year average recurrence interval
(ARI) with exceedance routes
81 5 Case studies
Images courtesy of George Warren
• CoPRA and Kenmont Primary School
were heavily involved in the latter
stages, with pupils of the school
creating clay tiles under the supervision
of a professional potter, which were
then installed in the new space
• Engagement throughout the

process and a planting event
ensured community buy-in
Community planting workshop After
Plan After After
82 5 Case studies
5.4 Derbyshire Street Pocket Park
Images courtesy of Greysmith Associates

Location Summary
Bethnal Green Transformation from roadway into
London Borough of Tower Hamlets community shared space.
Extent
Cost Derbyshire Street is in a densely populated
£120,000 (total scheme excluding officer time) part of east London, next to a park and
Date the Oxford House community and arts
2014 centre. Before the redesign, the street was
Credits a dead-end with parking issues, anti-social
London Borough of Tower Hamlets behaviour and fly-tipping.
Greysmith Associates
Oxford House Before
The potential of the site’s south-facing
Mayor of London’s Pocket Park Initiative
JB Riney
aspect, existing trees and community
The Grass Roof Company involvement helped develop a consensus
Thames Water Utilities for streetscape improvement. A key aspect
RBMP of delivery was the partnership between
SuDS components the local highway authority, the flood
Permeable paving management teams and the community.
Bioretention basins This grassroots approach enabled funding
Green roofs from the Mayor of London’s Pocket Park
Tree pits
initiative.
Objectives
• Improve facilities for community use
• Onsite water management through SuDS
After
83 5 Case studies
Actions and results Benefits
• Green roofs on bike sheds and a bin • Inhibits the flow of storm water runoff
store increases the attenuation storage into the combined sewer system
capacity, improving the streetscape’s
ability to mitigate impacts during high • Community partnerships have
and/or prolonged peak flow events safeguarded future management
and maintenance
• Disconnecting downpipes on Oxford
House increased attenuation storage • New community resource created
capacity by redirecting water away
from the combined sewer overflow • Native and edible plants promote
and conveying it into bioretention biodiversity and a social capital
basins and a new swale
• Able to withstand a one in
• Permeable paving allows water 100 year rainfall event
to seep into the ground. During
high and/or prolonged peak flows, Lessons learned
additional runoff is attenuated by • Active engagement between the
the surrounding SuDS scheme community and local authority
has social and economic value
• A network of rain gardens, swales
and engineered tree pits has • SuDS can help define and enhance
increased the attenuation storage public realm improvements that relate
capacity of the streetscape to pedestrian and cycle routes
• A bespoke information board • Permeable block paving is susceptible to

communicates the streetscape and gathering litter fragments, so the jointing
community benefits of the scheme of paving systems needs consideration
leading to continued community
buy-in to the maintenance and • Connectivity with Weavers Field could
monitoring of the scheme have further enhanced the scheme
Community event
84 5 Case studies
5.5 Renfrew Close

Location Summary
London Borough of Newham Transformation of green space to multi-
Extent functional green infrastructure for the estate.
900m²
£43,000 (construction only) An existing communal green space between
Date residential blocks was retrofitted with a
2015 SuDS scheme. The rain gardens receive water
Credits from hard surfaces at roof and ground level
Groundwork and from soft surfaces at ground level.
Environment Agency
Robert Bray Associates Objectives
Greatford Garden Services • Provide a sustainable drainage
SuDS components function and alleviate flooding
Detention basins
Bioretention basins
• The rain gardens should create
Tree planting
Channels attractive, productive and biodiverse
Downpipe disconnection green spaces for the residents
Swales
Actions and results
• Bioretention basins designed to
take road and roof runoff
• Downpipes and rainwater conveyed

to swales and bioretention basins
• Swale network to accommodate

different sized rainfall events Channel outflow into swale and
bioretention basin
• Visual amenity provided by rain gardens
85 5 Case studies
Benefits
• Can withstand a one in 100
year + 30% storm event
• Runoff from 750m² of roof and 165m²

from roads are attenuated in the scheme
• 12-hour delay between rainfall event

and pressure recording in the basin
• 16-hour delay between peak

rainfall and peak pressure in
rainfall basin for first event
Lessons learned After

• Monitoring system installed and
used to support the design of future
SuDS retrofit projects should try to
direct flows from known problem
areas into bioretention basins
to prevent surface flooding
• Maintenance agreements need

to be in place along with a
clear method of reporting
Channel detail
86 5 Case studies
5.6 Islington Town Hall
Location Summary Objectives
Upper Street Transformation of a car park into a • Enhance the town hall’s setting
London Borough of Islington green public space for community and as a key civic location
Extent ceremonial events.
1,000m² • Provide a high quality public
Cost Project description realm on Upper Street
£100,000 Islington Town Hall is on Upper Street
Date which is populated by shops, bars and • Address car parking issues,
2011 cafes and attracts heavy footfall. Before while maintaining a suitable
Credits the redesign, the forecourt of the town setting for ceremonial events
London Borough of Islington hall was a car park with impermeable
J&L Gibbons surfaces. This had implications for the • Plant large species trees
SuDS components management of stormwater runoff for long-term benefit
Permeable paving onto Upper Street’s carriageway and for
Large specie tree planting combined sewer overflow. Actions and results
De-paving
• Permeable paving surfaces allow water
A political incentive to ‘green’ the town to seep directly into the sub-base,
hall forecourt initiated the scheme as part thereby redirecting excess and polluted
of Islington’s sustainable agenda. water away from the combined sewer
This was coupled with recognition of • Trees and planting provide canopy
the poor presentation of the building to cover, increasing the interception of
the street. These were key factors in the rainwater and enhancing biodiversity
project gaining support.
• De-paved and planted surfaces
It shows how small public realm increases attenuation by
interventions can address car parking maximising areas for infiltration
issues and storm water runoff, while
Before transforming a space and improving the
public realm.
87 5 Case studies
Benefits
• Increased attenuation storage capacity
• Improved water quality
• Enhanced public realm and

green infrastructure
• Enhanced civic function of the forecourt
• Tree-planting for improved air quality
Lessons learned
• Permeable surface treatments
can successfully address shared
space requirements
• An integrated SuDS scheme can have

environmental and economic benefit
After After
88 5 Case studies
5.7 Rectory Gardens
Location Summary • In System B, runoff travels along a
Hornsey Retrofit and transform green space to grass channel, which is planted so
London Borough of Haringey manage road runoff. oils and silts are concealed but is
Extent easily accessible to remove solids
1,000m² Project description
Cost Runoff flows directly to the River Moselle • The ‘source control’ features are
£80,000 via a surface water sewer connection. followed by wildflower meadow
Date basins that can hold significant
2016 An existing local park was identified for amounts of reasonably clean runoff
Credits accommodating SuDS components that to the one in 10 year return period
Haringey Council enhanced amenity and biodiversity value.
Robert Bray Associates • An under-drain below the basins
Thames21 Objectives allows water to leave the site at a
Hugh Pearl (Land Drainage) Ltd
The project aims to collect all the runoff greenfield rate. This flow is governed by
SuDS components from a defined road catchment and show a protected orifice control chamber.
Retention basins
how the full SuDS aspiration of ‘managing
Detention basins
Planted channels quality and quantity aspects of runoff • In larger storms, up to the one in 100 year
while delivering amenity and biodiversity return period, with a 30% allowance for
benefits’ can be met in an existing urban climate change, these basins overflow
park setting. into further grass storage basins. The
second basins are managed as amenity
Actions and results grass so are accessible most of the time
• Runoff from the road is collected in
three bespoke, cast iron inlets that • The wildflower meadow basins
replace gully pots and perform like chute have balance beams so that even
gullies, delivering the dirty surface water when wet or filled with water they
into two SuDS management drains can be used for adventure play
Plan • System A to the west, delivers runoff Benefits

to a silt interception forebay basin
89 5 Case studies
• Retrofit demonstrates how polluted Lessons learned
runoff can be practically managed in an • The project was undertaken with the
existing local park or urban green space, Priory Common rain meadow (case
while enhancing amenity and biodiversity study 5.1) and therefore benefited
from sharing expert site supervision
• The small interception forebays provide and a knowledgeable contractor
a simple way of trapping and removing
pollutants, such as silt and heavy oils • Protecting planted channels where water
entered the SuDS and the relatively flat
• The changes of level in the park basins reduced erosion to a minimum
landscape enhance the quality
of the space, while defining the • Physical protection of the basins was
SuDS and biodiversity features considered but not used for reasons
including visual quality, risk of vandalism
• The under-drain ensures the basins are and cost. It may be necessary to After
dry most of the time, but the rainwater overseed the basins when germination
irrigates both trees and the meadow, of the wildflower seed is inspected
particularly in summer when many
urban park landscapes suffer drought • The client partnership (Thames21
and Haringey Council) are currently
• Water-play in a safe place helps considering monitoring opportunities
the community relate positively to
normal rainfall and to appreciate • It would be useful to estimate natural
the impact of heavy storms in losses at different times of year in
summer when the basins fill different weather conditions
• Signs provide information about • The quality of runoff should be easy

the components and benefits to assess by collecting it as it passes
of SuDS to passers-by through the control chambers
Swale
90 5 Case studies
5.8 Talgarth Road
Talgarth Road Green infrastructure enhancements on the • Some trees along this stretch were
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham highway to improve air quality. in a poor state and needed to be
Extent replaced. Others were removed to
1200m² Project description allow a cycle path to be repositioned
Cost This project saw green infrastructure
£240,000 (total scheme) installed alongside a footway and cycle • A 26m section of the roadside planting
Date path along Talgarth Road between has been designed to accept runoff from
2016 Butterwick and Shortlands, to the the highways and footway, thus reducing
Credits north of the Hammersmith Flyover. The the surface water flow to the combined
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham project intends to reduce the exposure sewer and providing additional capacity
FM Conway of pedestrians and cyclists to the poor within the Counter's Creek Catchment
SuDS components air quality in Hammersmith town centre,
Bioretention basin while incorporating SuDS and providing • The bioretention basin will be deeper
Tree planting a safe and secure setting. The aim is than the other stretches of planting
to replicate this approach elsewhere to provide underground attenuation
in the borough. for the surface water flows, with
a controlled release to the sewer
Objectives
• Improve air quality with integrating SuDS • Exceedance flows, during extreme
events, are directed towards
• Planting Miscanthus (silvergrass) to the existing road gully
act as a filter to traffic emissions.
This grass grows to 1.8m and provides • Roadside bioretention basins
a soft, visibly permeable border, incorporate bespoke roadside inlets
to ensure a sense of safety
• A border of herbaceous groundcover
will be planted between the
Miscanthus and the bicycle path
91 5 Case studies
Benefits
• Air quality monitors, placed on either
side of the grass, measure particulate
matter and nitrogen dioxide levels, to
demonstrate the extent of air quality
benefits from the greening.
Lessons learned
• The bioretention basin will include the
same plant species as the rest of the
roadside planted areas to test how these
species perform when experiencing
runoff from the surrounding area,
compared to conventional planting beds
• Should the species thrive in this

environment, the aim is to repeat
this along other stretches of highway
within the borough to help tackle
air quality and flooding issues
Under construction Complete
92 5 Case studies
5.9 Mile End Green Bridge
Mile End Road Reinstatement of soils and planting on • The soil required de-compacting
London Borough of Tower Hamlets green bridge. and amelioration to increase
Extent its capacity to retain water
Cost The bridge provides a key connection • Soil depths were increased by 250mm
£75,000 within Mile End Park by spanning the Mile to allow for greater root-zone and
Date End Road. better plant establishment
2010
Credits As part of High Street 2012 works, the • Trees were planted at a high
Design for London existing green bridge was rejuvenated to density to improve their resilience
London Borough of Tower Hamlets incorporate more planting. to the shallow soil profile
Mile End Park
muf architecture/art
Tim O’Hare Associates
The proposals had to consider the • The central median was removed
J & L Gibbons requirements of the A11 below. Traffic to create greater openness
flows on this part of the TfL road network
SuDS components
Green roof/bridge could not be impeded during the works Benefits
Tree planting or maintenance operations once planting • The young plant stock established faster
Soil amelioration was established. than previous semi-mature tree planting
Objectives • The dense blocks of planting and mix of

• Enhance park connectivity species provide increased biodiversity
• Increase the impact of the planting from • The planting had immediate impact due
the road below and the parkland above to its density and educational interest
as an emerging ‘upland’ ecology
• Improve soil infiltration
• The bridge is more successfully
• Encourage biodiversity integrated into the park landscape
• The planting creates a distinctive feature

and is more visible from the A11 below
93 5 Case studies
Lessons learned
• Stability of high level planting, achieved
through young stock able to adapt
rooting structure to specific soil depths
• Parapet planting proposals have to

take into account the restricted access
for planting and maintenance
• Early engagement with TfL necessary

to prevent contract delays
• Early engagement of soil scientist

to avoid delays due to soil testing
Before
Green Bridge from the Mile End Road After
94 5 Case studies
5.10 Queen Caroline Estate
Images courtesy of Groundwork

Location Summary
Hammersmith Estate regeneration through integrated
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham SuDS design.
Extent
0.23ha Project description
Cost Queen Caroline Estate is bound by the
£226,000 (total scheme) River Thames and the Hammersmith
Date Flyover. The estate is a mixture of paved
2015 carriageway surfaces for access and
Credits parking, plus grassed areas. The challenges
Groundwork of the site made it an appropriate
London Borough of Hammersmith development for the LIFE+ Climate
& Fulham Garage green roof
proofing social housing project that
Greater London Authority
EU LIFE+ Programme
provides low cost, retrofitted SuDS
to improve community resilience to
SuDS components
Green roofs
climate change.
Bioretention basin
Detention basin Objectives
Permeable paving • Reduce surface water flood
risk and frequency
• Improve the condition of the

estate’s infrastructure
• Address deprivation and vulnerability

to climate change on the estate
After
95 5 Case studies
Actions and results • Run off from 900m² of impermeable
• Green roofs were installed to increase surface has been conveyed into a SuDS
attenuation storage capacity where it
has not been possible to disconnect • A community growing area of
downpipes that run internally. The 32m² has been created
green roofs were installed on bin stores
and pram sheds; these are visible Lessons learned
at ground level and from above • Engaging residents in the development
of proposals ensured a detailed
• A bioretention basin was built to understanding of how the streetscape
attenuate rainwater. This flow comes functioned, thereby maximising
from surrounding impermeable surfaces the reach of project benefits
and from the roof of an adjacent building
• Despite CAT and radar scans, some
• Permeable paving has increased the below ground services were not
volume and rate of infiltration into identified and required designs to
the subsurface, helping to maintain be revised to accommodate them
the effectiveness of bioretention
and detention basins by limiting
the water flowing to them
Benefits
• The works were delivered at the
same cost as conventional landscape
improvement when compared to
other housing estate works
• Landscape has been transformed

into multi-functional space
• 142m² of green roof has been

Paving strip installed, improving biodiversity Bioretention basin outside homes
96 5 Case studies
5.11 Bridget Joyce Square, Australia Road

Location Summary
White City Transformation of the road into a shared
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham ‘urban oasis’ for pedestrians and cyclists.
Extent
Cost Australia Road is in the heart of the White
£950,000 (total scheme) City Housing Estate, in the northern
Date section of Shepherds Bush, south of the
2015 A40 Westway.
Credits
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham This stretch of Australia Road has a school
Robert Bray Associates on one side and playgrounds on the
Thames Water Before
other – potentially hazardous for children
TfL
GLA
crossing the road between parked cars.
McCloy Consulting
F M Conway The street lies within the Counters Creek
SuDS components Sewer catchment, which is exceeding
Permeable paving its capacity, resulting in the flooding of
Bioretention basins properties downstream. Hydrological
Rills modelling of the borough has also shown
Rain gardens that this stretch of Australia Road is
Tree planting
Downpipe disconnection
susceptible to significant surface water
flood risk.
Objectives
• Create a landscape that serves a vital
drainage function in providing flood
resilience against surface water and
sewer flooding issues and that provides After
George Warren – London Borough of
climate change adaption benefits
97 5 Case studies Hammersmith & Fulham

• Instill a sense of pride within • Flow controls are designed to restrict
the local community flows to below 1 L/s (less than the 5 L/s
generally adopted by industry) and retain
• Provide a multi-functional space that flows on site for longer. This is achieved,
could be used for a variety of events in part, by designing drainage outlets
that minimise the risk of blockage,
• Provide educational potential, yet ensure easy access and safety for
while being safe for the children council staff to inspect and maintain
who use the site on a daily basis
• Interpretation boards explain the
Actions and results design; monitoring equipment
• Permeable block paving (1,320m²) provides performance evidence
allowed retention of existing site
levels, negating the need to excavate Benefits
the existing concrete road slab. • Carriageways adaptations have made
The 180mm permeable pavement the use of community assets safer
depth can cater for heavy loads
• Reduction in local and wider flood risk
• The permeable paving and the After
disconnected downpipes from the • The attenuation of water and its
surrounding school and playground associated vegetation have contributed
buildings direct rainwater to heavily to air quality (principally NOx and • Annual flow volumes into the
planted bioretention basins and PM) and water quality (hydrocarbons combined sewer overflow
rain gardens, providing over 55m and total suspended solids) have been reduced by 50%
of additional attenuation
• The ecological considerations Lessons learned
• The scheme uses sculpture to (hydrological and vegetative) have • Supervision of SuDS construction
replace traditional downpipes to provided a site for biodiversity that by designers was essential
make the scheme distinctive. The will increase as the scheme matures, to successful delivery
sculpture also provides an important while providing an educational
security deterrent against those resource and community buy-in • Involvement of the construction
trying to access the school roof to monitoring and maintenance contractors early in the design
process ensures the best outcome
98 5 Case studies
5.12 Crown Woods Way
Location Summary
Eltham Enhanced streetscape and flood risk
London Borough of Greenwich resilience through bioretention.
Extent
Cost Crown Woods Way is a residential street,
£23,000 (total scheme) south of the A2 East Rochester Way and
Date is within a high flood risk area. Narrow
2015 grass verges and a crematorium next to the
Credits site made limited contribution to water
London Borough of Greenwich management. The proximity of a busy
Trees for Cities carriageway also meant the site
SuDS components was subject to high levels of noise and
De-paving air pollution.
Kerb drainage
Bioretention basins
The programme to address these
conditions was fronted by a partnership
between the Royal Borough of Greenwich
and Trees for Cities, who adopted a holistic
approach to improve the function and
quality of the streetscape.
Objectives
• Reduce flood risk
• Address concerns about the

environmental impact of air
and noise pollution
After
99 5 Case studies
Actions and results • Trees were planted within the de-paved Benefits
• Two rain garden bioretention basins rain garden areas. This addressed • Reduces street flood risk by increasing
have increased the attenuation storage the hydrological balance of the attenuation storage capacity
capacity of the streetscape, reducing site and the impact of noise and air
the likelihood of water being conveyed pollution by providing a physical noise • Reduces noise and air pollution
to the combined sewer overflow. barrier and zone for air exchange and
This measure allowed 30% more particulate accumulation. Special • Establishes a new carbon sink
water to infiltrate into the subsurface, consideration was given to the drainage through tree planting
compared with a conventional and growth capacity of each tree
grassed area of comparable size Lessons learned
Modest public realm improvements can
promote partnerships between a range
of stakeholders
After After
100 5 Case studies

5.13 Hackbridge
Hackbridge Transformation of street function • Bioretention basins, including tree
London Borough of Sutton and traffic flow with integrated green planting, provide attenuation for runoff
Extent infrastructure. from the reconfigured streetscape
0.27ha
Cost Project description • Rills and filter drains with flow
£920,000 (total scheme) The public realm around the junction control devices regulate the flow
Date of Hackbridge Road and London Road of water into tree-rooting zones
2014 was previously dominated by busy that provide bioretention
Credits carriageways, with pedestrians confined
London Borough of Sutton to narrow footways fronted with shops. • Permeable paving allows for water
Civic Engineers Traffic on the carriageway was fast-moving, infiltration into the subsurface,
Adams & Sutherland adding safety concerns to those around improving capacity during prolonged
SuDS components noise, air pollution and health and safety. or high peak flow rainfall events. Up
Permeable paving The low-lying topography of the area to 40% of the carriageway has been
Bioretention basins
Tree planting
meant the site was susceptible to surface reallocated to permeable paving
Filter drains & rills water flooding.
Downpipe disconnection • Reduced traffic speeds have also
Objectives improved the pedestrian environment
• Reconfigure the streetscape to make
it safer and better for pedestrians Benefits
• Traffic calming; shop
• Manage water runoff by installing SuDS frontage enhancement
• Mitigate air and noise pollution • Surface water flooding in the

area has not been observed since
the scheme was installed
101 5 Case studies

Images courtesy of Civic Engineers
Lessons learned
• Detailed surveys of underground
services and features are
necessary in retrofit situations
• A project approach that can adapt to

unforeseen constraints makes the
construction process more efficient
• Crossings and parking bays

should be clearly marked
Tree planting along the carriageway Permeable paving
102 5 Case studies

5.14 Goldhawk Road
Location Summary • During heavier rainfall, when the tree
Shepherd’s Bush Tree trench planting for attenuation. pit fills above the weir level, the water
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham flows into a sub-base replacement layer
Extent Project description covering the rooting zone just beneath
0.27ha Street tree planting within the pavement the paving build-up. This distributes
Cost on a busy London high street using a modular the water over the whole rooting zone,
£100,000 (construction only) structural tree soil system, combined with allowing it to infiltrate into the soil
Date kerb inlets and flow-control devices.
2015 • Specialist soil with a 25% void
Credits Objectives ratio allows rainwater storage
London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham To provide SuDS functionality and to
Robert Bray Associates protect the combined sewer. • Perforated pipes in the base of the
McCloy Consulting construction collect water and direct
GreenBlue Urban
FM Conway
Actions and results it to a flow control chamber, which
• Each tree is planted within a 1.8m x 1.8m discharges to the combined sewer.
SuDS components tree pit with tree grille, located within
Kerb inlets
The flow control chamber allows
Tree pit attenuation a much larger soil-filled rooting zone water to build up in the rooting zone
Flow control beneath the pavement, aiming to provide when it rains to be released slowly
between 10-20m³ of soil per tree once the peak in runoff has passed
Image courtesy of George Warren
• Runoff from the adjacent road and • Integrated protected overflows ensure the
footpath flows directly into the tree pit system can discharge freely to the sewer
at road level, via a custom kerb inlet once storage capacity has been reached.
Flow rates are designed to reduce the
• The soil level in the tree pit is lower than risk of combined sewer overflow events
the road. It is surrounded by a raised
polypropylene weir to allow initial water
storage. This ensures the trees get water
Under construction every time it rains and allows sediments
and litter to drop out of the water
103 5 Case studies

Image courtesy of LBHF
Benefits
• Combines benefits of large tree
rooting zones with their ability to
store runoff, with little modification
• SuDS scheme introduced in a

demanding, fully-paved urban location
Lessons learned
• Detailed surveys of underground
services and features and careful
analysis is essential in retrofit situations
Image courtesy of Robert Bray Associates
Tree pit details Plan showing modular soil system Completed scheme
104 5 Case studies

5.15 Firs Farm Wetlands
Winchmore Hill Open space transformation with wetland • Northern and southern branches of Moore
London Borough of Enfield habitats to improve water quality outflow. Brook are diverted from their culverted
Extent courses to three combined wetland cells
Cost The main driver for the wetland creation • Cells channel the water for
£900,000 (total scheme) was Enfield Council’s desire to improve treatment through flow paths
Date water quality in Pymmes Park Lake, where
2016 Moore Brook outfalls before entering • A watercourse downstream connects
Credits Pymmes Brook. Moore Brook is a lost to a fourth cell which is built as a pond,
Enfield Council watercourse within a surface water sewer. before continuing downstream in an
Environment Agency Firs Farm was identified as a space suitable open channel to the original culvert
Thames Water for the creation of a wetland scheme. The
TfL
Sustrans
watercourse was de-culverted and diverted • Surface water is treated at the surface
GLA to a series of open watercourses, wetlands before re-entering the culvert downstream,
Thames 21 and ponds to improve water quality. improving the quality of the water
Friends of Firs Farm which outfalls at Pymmes Park Lake
SuDS components Objectives
Ponds and wetlands • Improve water quality alongside flood • A further diversion to four more wetland
alleviation, habitat enhancement, cells at Pymmes Park upstream of
community space provision the lake provides further treatment
and creating cycleway links
Benefits
• Provide intensive monitoring programme • Water quality improvements
to be carried out by Thames21/Enfield before discharge to river further
Council over next two to three years down the catchment
to determine the impact of wetlands
on reducing diffuse urban pollution. • A surface system allows for issues to be
This data will be used to optimise identified and easily dealt with due to the
future management of the two sites size and location of the SuDS elements
105 5 Case studies

• Transformation of a previously
underused open space to an area
with an enhanced natural habitat and
for the local community to focus
activities. A local ‘Friends’ group
and a waterway charity Thames21
have generated community-based
interest in the site. This included
help with consultation, volunteers
for planting and outdoor learning,
and assisting in future funding bids
• A range of amenity areas,

including seating, an outdoor
classroom and dipping ponds Plan
• Opportunity for many disciplines
Images courtesy of Graham Campbell

to work together across the
council and other organisations
• Provided opportunities to combine

other objectives, such as the provision
of cycleway transport infrastructure
• Biodiversity enhancements
Lessons learned
• Importance of working alongside other
land uses, in this case sports pitches
• Pre-treatment measures upstream

of the wetland would be beneficial Wetland basins and planting Outlet into wetland area
106 5 Case studies

5.16 Salmons Brook Glenbrook Stream
Location Summary • Enable the community to access and
Salmons Brook Transformation of existing green benefit from their local waterway
London Borough of Enfield space into wetlands.
Extent • Assess the impact of the scheme
0.77ha Project description on Salmons Brook and surrounding
Cost Salmons Brook is a tributary of the infrastructure in the catchment
£15.3m (Total scheme) River Lea that flows through wasteland,
Date industrial parks and Deepham Sewage Actions and results
2014 Treatment Works. Salmons Brook receives • Bioretention basins were integrated and
Credits polluted wastewater from misconnected existing features improved. This has
Thames 21 plumbing and road runoff from residential made the existing wooded landscape
Environment Agency and industrial sources within the more efficient at attenuating and slowing
Enfield Council catchment. This jeopardises the quality of the conveyance of water. The wetland
Robert Bray Associates
Maydencroft
the watercourse and those downstream basins also encourage the growth of
and affects the Salmons Brook’s ability to plant and bacterial communities, which
SuDS components
Bioretention basins
alleviate flooding in surrounding streets. helps remediate polluted water
Kerb Inlets
Swale EU water quality standards were not • Weirs allow control of water flow through
Weirs being achieved so the Environment the SuDS scheme and any subsequent
Agency and Thames21 devised a scheme discharge into Salmons Brook.
to improve the watercourse.
Image courtesy of Thames 21
• The base level of the area has been

Objectives lifted to further control flow; this
• Create a wetland system to treat increases the effectiveness of the
and remediate polluted water sub-catchment via the wetland
before it enters Salmons Brook bioretention basin system.
• Promote change through education • By raising the base level, opportunities for
Roadside swale at The Spinney about the urban water cycle stepping stone and weir crossing points
were created. This has improved access.
107 5 Case studies

• Swales slow the flow of water through Lessons learned

the system and ensure that, with • The value of local community
the weirs and wetland bioretention involvement
basin, the higher concentrated
polluted water is discharged into the • Managing woodland structure is crucial
wetland, rather than Salmons Brook in ensuring that light levels are sufficient
for the establishment of vegetation
• Kerb inlets allow rainwater to be
conveyed away from the combined
Image courtesy of Chaoming Li

sewer overflow and into the
swales and through the network
of weirs and wetland basins
Benefits
Weir detail at Grovelands Park • Salmons Brook water quality improved
• Flood risk reduced and road

runoff management improved
• An area of greater recreational

value created
• Reduction in house insurance costs

for surrounding properties
• Public awareness of the reality of waste

and pollution in their environment that
might otherwise remain unnoticed
• A sense of ownership has been

fostered through scrub clearance
Treatment wetland at Grovelands Park and wetland planting days Swale incorporating existing mature trees
108 5 Case studies

5.17 LuL depot roof, Middlesex
Ruislip Depot Retrofit green roof and monitoring • Biodiverse extensive green roof
Middlesex of source control. types, each 18.5m x 3.3m, have been
Extent installed on a section of flat roof
Cost A small-scale trial to evaluate the • One section (south) has a drainage
£30,000 (Trial project) effectiveness of retrofitted green roofs, board with 65mm of extensive
Date for LUL depot environments. From the green roof substrate. The other
2012 results it will be decided whether LUL section (north) uses recycled wool
Credits could benefit from a broader application. fibre instead of drainage board
London Underground Limited
GLA Objectives • Both roofs are vegetated with sedum
University of East London • Introducing environmentally- cuttings and seeded/planted with
GRC
friendly measures to address annual and perennial wildflowers
SuDS components runoff from depot roof
Green roofs
• The two trials are separated by an
• Achieve low maintenance impermeable barrier to facilitate
the measurement of runoff. Total
• Address Mayoral policy for SuDS by saturated loading is less than 100kg/m²
installing a green roof source control
• With the assistance of the University
• Ensure retrofitting on operational of East London, monitoring devices
railway followed the rigorous have been installed in two downpipes
assurance and safety procedures of a green roof and two downpipes
of London Underground, without of a conventional control roof to
interruption of service measure water attenuation
• GLA support has been provided

After Installation through Drain London. A small fund
enables monitoring performance
109 5 Case studies

Images courtesy of LU Infrastructure Protection
Benefits
• LUL will examine the process of
installation, maintenance and
performance and the cost-benefit
analysis in terms of waterproofing
performance and drainage control
for a larger scale application
• LUL will also assess: longevity of the

waterproofing layer; improved working
ambiance and environment; structure
insulation; air quality improvements;
biodiversity enhancements
• The trial will allow better

understanding of the mechanism and
potential areas for improvement
Lessons learned
• The use of wool as a recycled drainage
material was an important outcome
• Monitoring of water attenuation

is complete and will inform
future green roof schemes
• Organic material used as a drainage

board has performed consistently better
than the conventional plastic one
• Maintenance is minimised due to

Programme of monitoring Early green roof growth within 6 months planting selection of wildflowers
110 5 Case studies

5.18 A23 Coulsdon Bypass, Farthing Way
Location Summary • To the west of the new A23, the
Coulsdon Highway runoff attenuation. existing ground rises steeply; being
London Borough of Croydon chalk downland, there is likely to be
Extent Project description significant runoff when it rains heavily.
34ha A groundwater extraction borehole at A separate system, not linked to the
Cost Smitham Pumping Station is located in highway drainage, collects this runoff
£33m (Total scheme) Coulsdon Town Centre. The new section and discharges it into soakaways
Date of A23 between Marlpit Lane and Smitham
2006 Station passes across the inner Source • Non-piped drainage components
Credits Protection Zone (SPZ) for the extraction within the site principally relate to
TfL borehole and has been designed to direct linear soakaways at the bottom of the
Atkins runoff appropriately. embankment adjacent to footways
SuDS components where water is caught at a low point
Kerb drainage Objectives
Soakaways • The drainage design redirects Benefits
Filter strip
Filter drains
runoff flowing from the new • The design maintains the
A23 away from the inner SPZ flow of previously-existing
drains and watercourses
• Attenuation was needed to ensure the
area receiving the runoff can cope with • The design of the drainage components
the volume of water it now receives allows them to be maintained in
a safe and efficient manner
Actions and results
• The new A23 is drained, via a piped • Surface water is able to drain into
system with kerbs and gullies, into soakaways on adjacent land
spillage containment devices and
a full retention fuel/oil separator, Lessons learned
before discharging into soakaways • Localised design changes were
Filter strip gravel necessary, due to the unexpected
presence of services
111 5 Case studies

• The specified kerb drains were made
smaller during construction due to
the high retaining wall footing and
the 600mm wide narrow verge
• Deep-bored soakaways were used

extensively throughout the project.
During the construction of some
soakaways, the piling contractor
met some obstructions. This
was overcome by relocating the
soakaways, but only small changes
in the positions were needed
Carriageway filter strip Surrounding carriageway context Plan
112 5 Case studies

5.19 London Sustainable Industries Park, Dagenham
Dagenham An integrated water management and • Swales and bioretention basins allow
London Borough of Barking and Dagenham infrastructure plan for an industrial park. water to be conveyed from roofs, roads
Extent and other features into a system of
142ha Project description components with a high attenuation
Cost The London Sustainable Industries Park storage capacity. This limits the outflow
£30m (Total scheme) (LSIP) is part of the Thames Gateway of water into Gores Brook at a rate
Date regeneration at Dagenham Dock in East of 12 L/s/ha during prolonged and/
2009-10 London. It is an international exemplar, or high peak flow rainfall events
Credits created with the goal of making Thames
Civic Engineers Gateway the UK’s first Eco Region. • Water quality is improved by allowing
T. R. Collier & Associates The site is south of the A13 and close to suspended solids to settle out and other
Sergison Bates Dagenham Dock Railway Station and the pollutants, such as hydrocarbons, to
Vogt Landscape
Price & Myers
Barking Reach Power Station. The Gores be treated or their discharge limited
URS Brook receives outflow from the site
GHP which then discharges into the River • Attenuation tanks allow rainfall
SuDS components Thames. Consideration of the hydrology to be recycled for use by services
Swales of the site was crucial to achieving a that use ‘grey’ water
Managed wetland and woodland successful scheme.
Bioretention Benefits
Water recycling Objectives • Negates the need for costly remediation
• Install a water management systems, such as petrol interceptors
system for the LSIP
• The volume of low water quality
• Transform the existing infrastructure run off from carriageways and
onsite to create a self-sustaining other built infrastructure on the
exemplar of green infrastructure industrial park has been reduced
design and planning
• BREEAM ‘Excellent’ rating achieved (2010)
113 5 Case studies

• The cost of utilities and
maintenance has been reduced
• Enhanced ecological value
Lessons learned
The installation of an adaptable and
resilient water drainage network can
provide infrastructure for a range of future
uses depending on plot uptake
and industry requirements.
Aerial visualisation
Plan Cross-section
114 5 Case studies

5.20 Great Kneighton / Clay Farm, Cambridge
Image courtesy of Simon Bunn

Location Summary
Cambridge Holistic integration of water management
Extent into major new development.
£45m
109ha Great Kneighton, previously Clay Farm,
Date is former green belt land 4km south
Final phase: 2020 of Cambridge. The site is typical for
Credits Cambridgeshire – flat, low-laying terrain,
Cambridge City Council crossed with brooks and land drainage
Countryside Properties channels. The mixed use development site
Bovis of Great Kneighton suffered from poorly
Cala Homes draining clay soils and a high water table,
Crest Nicholson
Skanska
1m below ground. The site is within the
Aecom catchment of the historic Hobson’s Conduit,
PEP which dictated stringent control measures
BBUK Studio for runoff from the development.
James Blake Associates
Environment Agency Cambridge City Council, along with project
Hobson’s Conduit Trust
partners, wished to install an integrated
SuDS components water management system within a
Soakaways
Detention basins
designated strategic open space that forms Permeable paving and tree planting
Bioretention basins part of the Cambridge Green Corridor.
Swales
Rills Objectives • Withstand one in 100 year
Permeable paving • Control outflow into Hobson’s flood event, with 30% extra to
Rainwater harvesting Brook at 2l/s/ha allow for climate change
Green/brown roofs
• Install a SuDS code of conduct • Provide amenity and ecological

across the development site value to development
115 5 Case studies

Actions and results • Swales increase the attenuation storage Benefits
• Plot-wide rainwater harvesting capacity of the scheme and provides • Impact of development on
system intercepts rainwater, reducing vegetated landscape of hydrological, surrounding drainage infrastructure
the amount being conveyed to the aesthetic and biodiversity value is minimised through the
subsequent stages of the SuDS scheme management of water on site
• Hydrodynamic vortex separators
• Detention basins increase the attenuation inhibit the discharge of sediment • Outflow of water quality
storage capacity of the scheme and and hydrocarbons into the Hobson’s and volume controlled
slows water flow, particularly during Conduit outflow. This is of particular
prolonged and/or high peak rainfall note due to the downstream function • Can withstand a one in
of Hobson’s Conduit in Cambridge 100 year flood event
Image courtesy of Tim Crocker
• Bioretention basins allow water to • Predominantly above-ground nature

be attenuated on the east side of of the SuDS features contribute
Hobson’s conduit, preventing low to the recreational and aesthetic
quality water from discharging into value of the development
the watercourse. Water is conveyed
from the development to the west, • 20,000m² of wetland habitat created
underneath Hobson’s Conduit into the
bioretention basins, creating a series of • Installation of a landscape
ponds and wetlands of hydrological, of multiple benefits
recreational and ecological value
Lessons learned
• Permeable paving increases the • Engaging developers and project teams
permeability on the site, where early in the development process allows
below-ground conditions allow the benefits of SuDS to be shared
• Sub-catchments syphons underneath • Treat each site within the development

the brook discharge into a series individually to capture the variations
of ponds and detention ponds in soil type and topography
Completed residential unit • Pre-cast concrete rills convey water into

bioretention basins in the local square
116 5 Case studies

5.21 Alnarpsgården Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Alnarp Campus courtyard redevelopment to focus • Water from downpipes is collected in
Sweden on sustainable drainage while creating a channels running along the facades,
Extent social hub. then led to a retention basin (a former
0.37ha manure container). At the bottom of
Cost Project description the concrete basin are ‘seams’ in which
£170,000 (construction only Alnarpsgården is a rural campus hosting aquatic plants grow in a strict pattern.
Date the Institution of Landscape Architecture, From the retention basin, water runs
1997 Planning and Management at the Swedish in a ditch towards the Íresund coast
Credits University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU).
Anders Folkesson, Part of a historic estate, it consists of • Grit-jointed granite setts form permeable
Landscape Architect LAR/MSA buildings converted from agricultural paving, over-seeded with wildflowers
Vasajorden AB use and new builds, set within a forested
SuDS components landscape. The focus of the campus Benefits
Ponds and wetlands is the inner courtyard, which has been • The courtyard design repurposed
Disconnected downpipes
Permeable paving
redeveloped with SuDS principles in mind. existing features, such as the
Channels & rills old manure container and dung
Retention basin Objectives grooves, as SuDS features
• Slow water runoff from roofs and
hard surfaces of Alnarpsgården • The redevelopment of the courtyard
has created a social hub, well
• Provide a first step of water cleaning used by students and visitors
• Enhance the appearance of the yard • The success of the SuDS components
of the courtyard make them a
• Demonstrate an open stormwater valuable educational tool
system to the landscape
architect students of SLU
Wildflower seeded joints
117 5 Case studies

Images courtesy of Anders Folkesson
Lessons learned
• Previously, the yard’s ground was slightly
concave, the middle of the yard being
slightly lower than the ground along the
facades. To channel all the stormwater
from the yard to the gutters along the
facades, the middle of the yard was
raised. Adjusting the topography has
affected the quality of the space
Threshold detail SuDS pond acting as a central recreational feature
118 5 Case studies

5.22 Benthemplein (Water Square)
Rotterdam Multi-functional public realm regeneration. • Detention basins increase the
Netherlands attenuation storage capacity of the
Extent Project description site to 1,700m³. Uniquely, the three
0.95ha Benthemplein is in central Rotterdam, detention basins provide a recreation
Cost north-east of Rotterdam Centraal station. space that is transformed as water
£3.175m (Total scheme) It is bounded by major city roads and is attenuated in the basins
Date enclosed by medium rise buildings.
2013 • Rills convey water from the surrounding
Credits The low permeability paving of the site ground surfaces and buildings into
City of Rotterdam meant it was not fulfilling its potential the detention basins. Each basin has
Schieland and Krimpenerwaard of relieving localised flooding in adjacent its own sub-catchment taking runoff
Urbanstein areas. This put pressure on the combined from certain surfaces and buildings and
Wallaard
ACO
sewer overflow of the Nieuwe Maas. incorporates waterfalls, fountains and an
Topcourts outside baptistery for use by the church
Due to the proximity to areas of flooding
SuDS components
Detention basins and the opportunity for restructuring Benefits
Rills of space, the City of Rotterdam and • Water management has the
stakeholders, including church and student added benefit of creating a novel
communities, looked to re-imagine the multiple-use public realm space
function of the square, as part of the
Rotterdam Climate Initiative. • Approximately 4,000m² of existing
parking and street access has been
Objectives kept to allow space for vehicles
• Reduce flood risk
• Interventions such as the baptistery,
• Provide recreational opportunities sports goals and shaded seating has
allowed for a range of stakeholders’
needs to be addressed
119 5 Case studies

WATER SQUARE BENTHEMPLEIN Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Images courtesy of Urbanstein

Lessons learned
• Attention to detail during planning and
design phases and supervision during
construction is crucial in achieving a
scheme with complex sub-catchments
N HANGOUT
• By fulfilling city authority climate
objectives, it is possible to receive
extra funding for similar schemes.
Rotterdam raised an extra £700,000
Overview of completed scheme
catchment area of basin 1 catchment area of basin 2 catchment area of the deep basin 3
Two in one
The water square combines water storage with
Detention basin Catchment areas
the improvement of the quality of urban public
space. The water square can be understood as
a twofold strategy. It makes money invested in
water storage facilities visible and enjoyable.
120 5 Case studies It also generates opportunities to create
environmental quality and identity to central
spaces in neighborhoods. Most of the time
the water square will be dry and in use as a
5.23 Rue Garibaldi
Location Summary Objectives
Lyon Transformation of an urban motorway • Minimise runoff into the
France to a planted boulevard and high quality combined sewer overflow by
Extent civic space. installing a SuDS scheme
15ha
Cost Project description • Improve connection between districts
£19.3m (Total scheme 1st phase) Rue Garibaldi, east of the River Rhine, is bordering Rue Garibaldi by design and
Date a north to south six-lane carriageway, planning consideration, within the
1st phase 2014 constructed in the late 1960s. It is fronted wider green space context of the area
Credits with high storey buildings and features that
Grand Lyon were characteristic of an urban motorway. • Reduce maintenance and utility costs
Atelier des Paysages The environment for pedestrians and by installing a water recycling system
SuDS components cyclists is hostile.
Retention basins • Reconfigure carriageway function
Swales The configuration and high capacity of the by installing separate carriageways
Soakaways
Depaving
streetscape exacerbated the effects of for public transport, pedestrians,
urban heat island. Air (principally NOx and cyclists and other vehicles
PM) and water quality was low (principally
hydrocarbons and total suspended solids). • Improve management of water
quality and mitigate urban heat
Runoff into the combined sewer overflow island effect by planting trees
was high, particularly during heavy or and installing a SuDS scheme
prolonged peak rainfall, considering the
sub-catchment area of 65,000m². Actions and results
• Retention basins were created from
These conditions, coupled with a the redesign of an existing underpass.
carriageway reconfiguration proposal, An automated pumping system was
presented the opportunity to reconsider installed to allow water to be recycled
Integrated cycleway and SuDS hydrological management of the 2.6km for street cleaning vehicles and
stretch of highway irrigation for public realm planting.
121 5 Case studies

This has reduced local authority Benefits
utilities and maintenance costs and • Reconfiguration of carriageway
increased the attenuation storage to align with Grand Lyon’s
capacity of the streetscape. Water sustainability objectives
treatment capabilities also feature,
due to the oxidative capacity and • Provision of extra parking for taxis,
bacterial activity of the retention basin deliveries and public road users
• Swales with 4,500m³ of vegetation • Creation of new green links through Lyon
increase the attenuation storage
capacity. These have been integrated into • Re-purposed existing infrastructure
the reconfiguration of the carriageways
to create vegetated separation between • Peak outflow into the combined
carriageways with different functions. sewer system is 5 L/s/ha
This has significantly enhanced
biodiversity in the streetscape • Monitoring during the first phase of
construction has helped inform the
• Soakaways have increased the infiltration development of phases two and three
rate by aiding conveyance of water into
the ground, contributing to the 1300m • On-site availability of recycled
attenuation capacity of the scheme water for street cleaning
• Trees have mitigated urban heat island • Automated irrigation reduces

effects by increasing the interception maintenance commitment and cost
of solar radiation and increasing
evapotranspiration. Tree planting has • Water and air treatment capability
contributed to the effectiveness of the
SuDS scheme and helped reconfigure Lessons learned
the streetscape by creating a separation • Ensure clear agreement between local
between carriageways and enhancing authority services for management
the sense of place. Sensors have and maintenance responsibilities
Rill and de-paving been installed to quantify the cooling on cyclical and periodic regimes
effect provided by the vegetation
122 5 Case studies

5.24 Bo01 Võstra Hamnen
Location Summary • Use a scoring system to achieve balance
Malmö Transformation of an industrial site to a between development demands
Sweden neighbourhood with integrated off-grid
Extent sustainable water management. Actions and results
85ha • Swales and bioretention basins created
Cost Project description high attenuation storage capacity and
£3.3m (landscape construction only) The city of Malmö has developed SuDS made an off-grid drainage system possible.
Date schemes since the late 1990s. The Võstra
2001 Hamnen area is on a former industrial site • The network of swales and basins
Credits and is in a key strategic location to complement the well-connected
City of Malmö accommodate city growth. The site was streets and spaces that characterise the
Government of Sweden prone to flooding and its soil foot and cycle networks in the area.
Sydkraft AB (E.ON Svergie) contaminated. The international housing
Lokala
Investeringsprogram
exposition, Bo01, framed the first phase • Meadows, woodlands, seashore and
European Union of development and allowed the City marine biotopes serve hydrological
Lund University of Malmö to instigate an exemplar in functions in relation to the SuDS and
SuDS components sustainable urban regeneration. The added a variation in site conditions
3Downpipe disconnection project featured a new housing district for an abundance of species
of 500 apartments, with the public realm
a significant contributor to achieving
sustainability goals.
Objectives
• Manage flood risks with an
open storm water system
• Create an exemplar in
sustainable urban design
Permeable shared surface Rill
• Achieve off-grid sustainable drainage
123 5 Case studies

Benefits
• Off-grid SuDS system – no
pressure on existing drains
• A cross-disciplinary approach
during development allowed for
the revision of planning tools
• Popular contribution to the character

and function of the public space
• Innovative scoring system used

to quantify greenspace factors
and give weight to ecological
and aesthetic considerations
• The scoring system used to

quantify green space factors
works in a UK context
Lessons learned
• Development-wide consideration
of topography crucial to success
• Incorporation of water features such

as fountains can be achieved by
recycling water collected by SuDS
Retention pond
124 5 Case studies

6 Implementation
6.1 Implementation 6.2 SuDS
In Chapter 3, the range of components design team
which can be used in London were
explored, while Chapter 4 illustrated how The SuDS design team must be assembled at
these might be applied to a variety of project inception and operate collaboratively.
indicative street scenarios. Although much The team is likely to include:
of this guidance highlights opportunities
to implement SuDS in London, this chapter • Highways engineer for the planning,
describes the requirements for a SuDS design, construction, operation and
team and recommends the design process maintenance considerations
to follow.
• Landscape, urban design and landscape
Much of the detail can be found in the management to guide the form, shape Meadow planting: low maintenance, high
CIRIA 753 The SuDS Manual, from and long-term sustainability of features, biodiversity, deep rooting erosion control,
which the design process diagram has particularly early in the process less mowing and less compaction
been adapted.
• Drainage engineer to ensure
the proposed design will Multi-disciplinary collaboration is
provide effective drainage fundamental to achieving integrated and
sustainable drainage within London’s
• Ecologist and/or arboriculturist streets. It ensures innovative ideas can
to enable maximum biodiversity be tested and assessed, while minimising
benefit to be delivered impact on the decision-making process and
maximising opportunity and benefits. This
• Soil scientist, in particular to examine requires a range of specialists, technical
the potential of existing soils to staff and stakeholders to work together.
accommodate SuDS infrastructure
and street tree planting. This will also The team can be led by the highway
inform the below-ground specification engineer, landscape architect/urban
designer, or drainage engineer working with
specialist consultants. Schemes that form
part of wider initiatives can be led by a
126 6 Implementation
private developer’s team, working with To start, the design process should
the Highways, Planning and Lead Local consider the various site-specific
Flood Authorities. constraints, as these will be one of the
biggest design drivers. Baseline data will
The Surface Water Management (SWM) be vital, possibly requiring the need to
objectives should be set and commission surveys and investigations.
underpinned by: These will influence design consideration
of source control, pathway and receptor
• SuDS design principles (see Chapter 2).
• Townscape and landscape character Community engagement is a vital part

of a successful project. Working with
• Local planning policy communities through the design, planning
and delivery processes is essential for
Kings Cross LWT: Camley Street • Functional demands of the street finding the best design and building
support for the project. Community
• Evaluation of any existing SuDS features engagement can also act as a catalyst
for partnership, working to benefit long-
• A long-term outlook term management and maintenance
mechanisms, as well as funding regimes.
The planning and drainage design process
should include: The aim should be to achieve the
maximum benefit, accepting that there
• Agreeing with the planning authority the will be practical constraints to consider.
level of detail required and any aspects This is particularly relevant as SuDS
that require a planning condition is an evolving practice, with complex
regulations and potentially high numbers
• Identifying a way to ensure the designs of stakeholders involved.
are delivered according to specification
Refer to CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual,
• Community and stakeholder engagement Chapter 7 for a detailed description of the
A soil scientist is part of the SuDS team SuDS design process.
Design process diagram adapted from CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual
National/local SuDS
Local planning policies
guidance & standards
Environmental Impact
Assessment
Pre-application Set strategic surface water
(directly influencing drainage design)

discussions management objectives
Site Flood Risk/
Stakeholder engagement
Consequence Assessment
Community engagement
Development Conceptual drainage

masterplanning design
Initial data collection &
analysis
Outline planning
Outline drainage design
permission & conditions
Detailed data collection
and analysis
Full planning Detailed drainage
permission design
Key
Building regulators Drainage system approvals Planning process and Drainage design and
approval & construction consents requirements construction processes
Planning processes Drainage design and

and requirements not construction processes
Construction, Satisfactory scheme usually relevant for not usually relevant for
inspection & approval construction small sites small sites
Planning data inputs Data inputs for drainage

and construction
Drainage system Planning data inputs processes
management not always required
6.3 Drainage
hierarchy
SuDS designs should generally be
developed according to the CIRIA process
diagram on the previous page. This process
may vary, depending on local conditions
When working in London, water should be

managed by using the following drainage
hierarchy, as described in the London Plan:
1. Intercept and store rainwater for later

use: examples of this include water tanks 2. Grit jointed permeable paving
and butts, or as well as abandoned and
repurposed subterranean pedestrian
passageways below urban roadways.
2. Use infiltration techniques, such as

permeable surfaces: these offer simple
and relatively low cost surface water 1. Disconnected downpipe to water butt
absorption capacity. Permeable surfaces
collect, store and release water at
different rates, depending on the sort of 3. Attenuate rainwater in ponds, green
soil present. Local geological makeup and or blue roofs or open water features for
hydrology should take account of buried gradual release: ponds, linear wetlands
infrastructure (such as that associated with and basins can create attractive features
London Underground) to ensure chambers that provide ecological habitat as well as
do not become water conduits. amenity. There is also scope to incorporate
SuDS into green space alongside London’s
highways. 3. Attenuation in planted rill
4. Attenuation in tree trenches 5. Discharge to watercourse 6. Surface water sewer outfall
4. Attenuate rainwater by storing in tanks, 6. Discharge rainwater to a surface water

sealed water features, permeable paving sewer/drain: this has traditionally been
and tree trenches for gradual release: London’s default approach to rainwater
Although these systems can be configured management. However, London’s sewer
to suit a variety of below-ground conditions, network is so intertwined with the foul
carefully consider utilities to avoid damaging network that there is a need to segregate
long-term tree-rooting potential. Surface conveyance systems to minimise
water can potentially be re-used in tree contamination and effluent
trench planting. treatment costs.
5. Discharge rainwater directly to a 7. Discharge rainwater to the combined

watercourse: this can offer a low-cost sewer: the economic justification needs to
option for surface water dispersal, be set exceptionally high to mitigate the
provided the surface water is pollutant- commercial demand for such a choice. In
free. Liaise closely with water body retrofit scenarios, the combined sewer may
authorities as they may put limits on how be the only option. If so, control of discharge
much water can be discharged into the rate and water quality will be critical. 7. Combined sewer outfail
conveyancing system.
7 Cost benefit
7.1 Cost benefit for large-scale and widespread excavations Four cost benefit references are:
in many streets, and the need to work in
The Greater London Authority’s (GLA’s) and around other buried infrastructure. • CIRIA’s SuDS Tool (BeST) which
document ‘Natural Capital Investing in a provides monetised values to tangible
Green Infrastructure for London’ highlights Green infrastructure and sustainable and intangible benefits applicable
two key challenges: drainage (as opposed to hard-engineered to the UK’s drainage systems
techniques) have many benefits, such as
1. Unseen value (usually expressed reducing air pollution, reducing noise, • i-Tree Eco, a system related to valuing
environmentally or socially, rather improving biodiversity, reducing summer trees in terms of ecosystem services.
than monetised, typically regarded urban heat island effects and creating This has estimated, for instance, the
as intangible) places with identity and character. economic value of London’s urban forest
2. A lack of a revenue-raising at almost 3.5million m3/annum of storm
mechanism to offset management These benefits can be challenging to water alleviation, worth £2.8m/annum
and maintenance. monetise. Some evaluation tools use
an ecosystem services framework as • TfL’s Valuing the Urban Realm
The emphasis of the London Sustainable a starting point to convert benefit Toolkit. This has identified a positive,
Drainage Action Plan (LSDAP) has been to to monetised outcomes. The City of significant and consistent relationship
‘identify opportunities for implementing Philadelphia, for instance, has identified between the quality of streetscape
sustainable drainage techniques that the net benefit of using surface drainage and benefits for users and property
have limited financial impact’. This focuses techniques at almost $3bn compared owners. For further information,
on situations where other works are to $100m for the piped alternative. The contact urbandesign@tfl.gov.uk
likely to be undertaken. Integrating SuDS $3bn includes benefits such as changes
would therefore be a component of a to property value, green job creation, • The Government’s Natural Capital
wider project. reduction in greenhouse gas Committee which has developed
emissions and reduced crime through an accounting framework. This
The LSDAP also notes that options to an improved environment. is currently being trialled.
increase London’s drainage system capacity
using conventional underground piped
networks, such as the Thames Tideway
Tunnel (under construction), are becoming
increasingly complex and prohibitively
expensive. This is due to the requirement
132 7 Cost benefit

7.2 Methodology • In a conventional drainage system, this • costs are pro rata, therefore
could be provided through provision of would have no bearing upon
Cost benefit estimates have been made approximately 35m³ of proprietary tank the percentage range
based on the eight street scenarios in system (assumes 90% free volume) • costs will vary between schemes
Chapter 4 and, without a specific design,
• The proposed SuDS components a figure could not be applied
Models of conventional drainage and SuDS could provide an equivalent storage
components are considered for each of the capacity and would therefore negate Exclusions apply, including construction
eight scenarios illustrated in Chapter 4. The the need for any conventional overheads, fees, VAT and inflation. Site-
following assumptions have been made: drainage or storage systems specific costs, such as those relating to
statutory costs, utility and below ground
• The scheme constitutes new • Both systems are subject to the same infrastructure works, are also excluded.
development – retrofits are access constraints and require the
generally more expensive same amount of traffic management
• There is no upstream source control • Surface water flows to a surface

water sewer
• The total area under
consideration is 1,000m² • The ground is unsuitable for infiltration
• A single gully will typically • The same number of trees, where the
provide adequate drainage SuDS option counts for an integral tree
capacity for an area of 200m² pit providing 30% water attenuation
capacity, and the conventional is
• The volume of attenuation required based on a proprietary tank system
to achieve 50% improvement, as
defined by CIRIA, for the one in 100 • The SuDS technologies under
year event, plus climate change storm consideration are dry swales, permeable
event for an area of 1,000m2, would paving and bioretention components For
be approximately 31m³ of water the direct cost comparison some other
costs have been excluded, because:
133 7 Cost benefit

7.3 Design life 7.4 Cost comparison • Density of planting and trees
including existing trees, which
Delivering Benefits Through Evidence – Designing and constructing surface might require specific attention
Cost estimation for SuDS’ was published drainage systems involves a lot of
by the Environment Agency in 2015. It variables, all of which have a bearing on • Specific utility requirements and
examines the design life of SuDS. cost, including: other below ground structures
This shows that most SuDS have a long • The site, whether retrofit, re- • Proximity to receiving
design life. However, their component development or new development watercourse or sewer
parts, such as control mechanisms and
infiltration surfaces, need replacing • The location and geotechnical context • Amenity, public education
between five and 50 years. Specific to which the solution is being applied. and safety requirements
maintenance, such as decompaction, may
also be required. Replacement depends on Each scenario within a given streetscape Rates applied to the components are
site characteristics, system design and the will be bespoke, considerations being: presented as a range. This is due to
degree of maintenance undertaken. the variances of procurement, ie, type,
• Scale and size of development contract, market conditions, location
There is relatively low risk of structural and time. It also takes into account
failure occurring. This contributes • Hydraulic design criteria, ie, volume of the differences of each street scenario
significantly to the SuDS design life. storage, impermeable catchment area where relevant, ie, size and economies
of scale, bespoke nature of the location,
• Inlet/outlet infrastructure, ie, volume and surrounding infrastructure, buildings and
velocity of anticipated flows, capacity ground conditions.
of the drainage system beyond site
The comparison between conventional
• Water quality design criteria drainage systems and SuDS is expressed as
an indicative percentage range, rather than
• Soil types, ie, permeability, absolutes. The figures on the next page in
depth of water table, porosity, red brackets show potential percentage
load bearing capacity savings in implementing SuDS over
conventional drainage; black text indicates
• Materials potential percentage cost increase.
134 7 Cost benefit

4.4 LANDSCAPEWATER MANAGEMENTSTRATEGY
Street scenario 1 (55%) – (49%) Nine Elms linear park: SuDS as part
4.4.1 WATER MANAGEMENT
Street scenario 2 (32%) - (5%)
of wider development proposals
Street scenario 3 (20%) – (4%)
4.4 LANDSCAPEWATER MANAGEMENTSTRATEGY
Image courtesy of Camlins

An in tegrated approach to water management in Nine
ElmsParkside could realise signi cant environmental
bene terms of water conservation, waste
minimization and pollution control. The purpose of the
strategy is to establish a hierarchy of interventions
that optimises the conservation and management
of water within h t e wider environment, and future
community. The key interventions to be incorporated
are as follows:

Podium Level Courtyards - Potential permeable
paving using drainage mats (indicative)
4.4.1 WATER MANAGEMENT
Permeable Surface/ Planting area - Rain
water will be absorbed, no water to enter into
underlying controlled waters
Swale - Water collected locally from roads and
This analysis indicates that paths

theand connecting into wider drainage
system
An in tegrated approach to water management in Nine
ElmsParkside could realise signi cant environmental
implementation of SuDS is Attenuation
potentially Basin - Overflow storage system bene terms of water conservation, waste
more cost-effective than conventional
for rainfall event in excess of 1 in 30 year storm minimization and pollution control. The purpose of the
strategy is to establish a hierarchy of interventions
drainage in construction cost terms
Underground Storm Cell - Attenuating rainfall that optimises the conservation and management
alone. The range in the percentages iscandue
from roof and paving before water enters the
drainage system. This reduce peak runoff
of water within h t e wider environment, and future
community. The key interventions to be incorporated
primarily to variables in the costs of paving
flows to the allowable green field run-off rate
are as follows:
specifications.
Podium Level Courtyards - Potential permeable
Many schemes within London will require paving using drainage mats (indicative)
retrofitted design solutions. In these cases, Permeable Surface/ Planting area - Rain
costs may be incurred in removing or water will be absorbed, no water to enter into
underlying controlled waters
adapting existing infrastructure.
Illustrative Scheme Masterplan, 201 6
Swale - Water collected locally from roads and
paths and connecting into wider drainage
SuDS projects often form part of
60 system
wider development proposals, where Attenuation Basin - Overflow storage system

the cost of sustainable drainage would for rainfall event in excess of 1 in 30 year storm
be integrated from the start and

economies of scale apply. In all situations, Underground Storm Cell - Attenuating rainfall
from roof and paving before water enters the
adjacencies create variability when dealing drainage system. This can reduce peak runoff
with different ownerships and boundaries. flows to the allowable green field run-off rate
135 7 Cost benefit

7.5 Best value
Natural capital is defined by the Natural
Capital Committee (NCC) as ‘those
elements of nature which either directly
provide or underpin human wellbeing’.
Liveability and wellbeing influence how
value for society is perceived.
CIRIA Research Project RP993 states that

best value is not about cheapness. It is
the opportunity to seek and obtain best
overall value.
A SuDS approach can be cheaper than

piped solutions; it can also deliver
considerable wider benefits, as this
guidance illustrates. Sustainable surface
water management can contribute to a
step-change in the resilience of London’s
drainage infrastructure and the quality of
its urban realm.
London Sustainable Drainage Action Plan
CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual Chapter 35
Ashwin Street: SuDS components contribute to the quality of the urban realm
136 7 Cost benefit

Appendices
Further information Defra (2010) Environmental Permitting GLA (2010) Mayor’s Transport Strategy
Guidance: Water Discharge Activities para 528, 555, 62
B Woods Ballard, et al CIRIA C698 Site (England and Wales) Regulations
Handbook for the Construction of SuDS GLA (2011 updated 2015) London Plan Policy 6.2
Defra (December 2011) National Standards
Bartens et al. (2008) Can Urban Tree Roots for sustainable drainage systems, GLA (2011 updated March 2015) London Plan
Improve Infiltration through Compacted Designing, constructing, operating and
Soils for Storm Water Management?: http:// maintaining drainage for surface runoff GLA (2012) All London Green Grid SPG
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18948457
Defra / Environment Agency (October GLA (2015) London Infrastructure Plan
British Geological Survey, Natural 2013) Delivering Benefits through 2050, Consultation report
Environment Research Council: Evidence, Rainfall Runoff Management for
https://www.bgs.ac.uk Developments Report SC030219 GLA (2015) London Sustainable Drainage
Action Plan Draft Consultation
Cambridge City Council, Cambridge Drain London: https://www.london.gov.
Sustainable Drainage Design and uk/what-we-do/environment/climate- GLA (2015) Natural Capital Green
Adoption Guide changeweather-and-water/drain-london
Infrastructure Task Force Report
Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (1999 Environment Agency (2009) Thames
updated May 2016) Flood Estimation Catchment Flood Management Plan GLA A Barry, Letter to Defra, Consultation
Handbook of National Standards for SuDS
Environmental Agency (2013) Groundwater
CIRIA (2015) CIRIA C713 Retrofitting to Protection: Principles and Practice GP3 GLA Economics (June 2003) Valuing
Manage Surface Water Greenness, Green Space House Prices and
Flood & Water Management Act 2010 Londoners’ Priorities
CIRIA (2015) CIRIA The SuDS Manual C753
Forestry Commission, Forest Groundwork Climate Proofing Housing
CIRIA (October 2013) CIRIA Research Research(2010) Benefits of Green Landscapes: http://www.groundwork.org.
Project RP993, Demonstrating the multiple Infrastructure. Hydrological Benefits. uk/Sites/london/pages/lifeplus-lon
benefits of SuDS – A business case URGP Evidence Note 005
(Phase 2) Draft Literature Review City of Highways Authority and Utilities
Philadelphia, City of Philadelphia Green GLA (2009) London Regional Flood Risk Committee (HAUC) Advice Note 2009/07,
Streets Design Manual Appraisal Special Engineering Difficulty Section 63
and Schedule 4
138 Appendices
i-Tree Eco Project (2015) Valuing London’s Old Oak and Park Royal Development TfL (October 2012) Code of Practice
Urban Forest: http://www.forestry.gov.uk/ Corporation (February 2016) Integrated Fourth Edition, New Roads and Street
Water Management Strategy Works Act 1991
International Institute for Sustainable
Development, Water Quality Monitoring RSPB / WWT (December 2012) Sustainable TfL response to Roads Task Force (July
Systems Design (2015) Chapter 6: http:// Drainage Systems, maximising the potential 2013) Delivering the vision for London’s
www.iisd.org/library/water-quality- for people and wildlife: http://www.rspb. Streets and Roads
monitoringsystem-design org.uk
TfL Roads Task Force (April 2015)
Interpave (May 2014) SuDS Permeable Paving Susdrain (Fact Sheet January 2015) Designing progress report
Attenuation Storage for Redeveloped Sites
J D Phillips (2007) Fluvial Sediment Storage Thames Water Wastewater services: http://
in Wetlands no. 89007 Water Resource Bulletin T Armour et al (2012) CIRIA C712 The www.thameswater.co.uk/developers/592.
benefits of large specie trees in urban htm Thames21 SuDS Highway (formerly
K V Heal and S J Drain (2003) Sedimentation landscapes: a costing and Greenstreets): http://www.thames21.org.uk/
and Sediment Quality in Sustainable Urban management guide greenstreets/
Drainage Systems
TDAG (September 2014) Trees and Hard UK Groundwater Forum:
Kennedy et al. (2005) ‘Psychological’ traffic Landscape A Guide for Delivery: http:// http://www.groundwateruk.org
calming, TRL Report TRL641 www.tdag.org.uk
United States Environmental protection
Landscape Institute (2014) Technical Thames Catchment Based Agency (EPA 832-F-99-012) Storm Water
Guidance: Management and maintenance Approach Group: http://www. Technology Fact Sheet Bioretention
of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) catchmentbasedapproach.org/thames
landscapes Interim Technical Guidance Water UK (2013) Sewers for Adoption
Note 01/2014 TfL (2015/16) Surface Transport Plan 7th Edition
Liu Jia et Al (2014) Review and Research TfL (2016) Streetscape Guidance Third Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT)
Needs of Bioretention Used for the Edition V1 Environment Agency Thames Water, SuDS
Treatment of Urban Stormwater for Schools Project: http://sudsforschools.
TfL (March 2014) Roads Task Force wwt.org.uk/theproject/
NHBC (November 2015 | Issue 19) progress report
Technical Extra
139 Appendices
Glossary A ground depression acting as a flow A site that has been previously developed.
Amenity control or water treatment structure that
is normally dry, but is designed to detain Catchment
The quality of a place being pleasant or
storm water temporarily. The area contributing surface water flow
attractive, ie, its agreeableness. A feature
to a point on a drainage or river system.
that increases attractiveness or value,
Benefit cost ratio (BCR) Can be divided into sub-catchments.
especially of a piece of real estate or a
The net present value divided by the costs
geographic location.
(normally the capital and operational CIRIA
costs). The Construction Industry Research and
Anaerobic
Information Association.
An absence of oxygen
Biodiversity
The diversity of plant and animal life in a Combined sewer
Anthropogenic soil profile
particular habitat. A sewer designed to carry foul sewage and
Where the upper profile of soil is changed
surface runoff in the same pipe.
by human intervention and activity.
Bioretention area
A depressed landscaping area that collects Contaminated ground
Appraisal period
runoff and percolates it through the soil Ground that contains substances that,
The agreed time over which the costs and
below the area into an underdrain; this when present in sufficient quantities or
benefits are assessed and then discounted.
helps remove pollution. concentrations, can have detrimental
Attenuation effects on the surrounding area.
An intervention to reduce peak flow and Blue infrastructure
Describes all waterways, both natural and Control structures
increase the duration of a flow event.
man-made, in and around towns and cities. Components of a SuDS scheme which
Attenuation tank control the rate at which water flows along
A vessel which retains excess water and BREEAM and out of the system.
slowly releases it in a controlled discharge The Building Research Establishment’s
Environmental Assessment Method. Conventional drainage
to a combined drain or watercourse.
It sets best practice standards for the The traditional method of draining surface
Base flow environmental performance of buildings. water using subsurface pipes to remove
The normal level of subsurface water. water as quickly as possible.
Brownfield site
Basin Conveyance
140 Appendices
Movement of water from one location Detention pond/tank Environment
to another. A pond or tank that has a lower Both the natural environment (air, land,
outflow than inflow. Often used to water resources, plant and animal life) and
Depositional environment prevent flooding. the habitats in which they live.
Describes the combination of physical,
chemical and biological processes Diffuse pollution Erosion
associated with sediment. Pollution arising from land use activities The group of natural processes, including
(urban and rural) that are dispersed across weathering, dissolution, abrasion,
Design codes a catchment, or sub-catchment. This is corrosion, and transportation, by
Detailed guidance to influence the designs different from process effluent, municipal which material is worn away from the
of building and public realm; may be sewage effluent, or an effluent discharge earth’s surface.
enforced as a planning condition. from farm buildings.
Evapotranspiration
Design criteria Drain London The process by which the earth’s surface
A set of standards agreed by the developer, London Mayoral programme which helps or soil loses moisture by evaporation of
planners and regulators that the proposed to predict and manage surface water flood water and by uptake and then transpiration
system should satisfy. risk in London. from plants.
Designing for exceedance EA Everyday events

An approach that aims to manage The Environment Agency. Events with a return period of less than
exceedance flows during periods of heavy one year (100% chance of occurring in any
rainfall, eg, the use of car parks during Ecology one year).
extreme events. All living things – such as trees, flowering
plants, insects, birds and mammals – and Exceedance
Detention basin the habitats in which they live. When heavy or extreme rainfall causes a
A vegetated depression that is normally flow that is greater than the capacity of
dry except following storm events. Ecosystem the drainage system.
Constructed to store water temporarily to A biological community and its
attenuate flows. May allow infiltration of physical environment. Extreme events
water to the ground. Events of greater than 30 year return
Ecosystem services period (3.3% chance of occurring in any
The resources and processes that are one year). Can often lead to major flooding
supplied by natural ecosystems. with substantial damage.
141 Appendices
Filter drain Geocellular structure degree of retention, attenuation and
A linear drain consisting of a trench filled A plastic box structure used in the ground, treatment of rainwater, and promotes
with a permeable material, often with a often to attenuate runoff. evapotranspiration. Sometimes referred to
perforated pipe in the base of the trench as a green, blue or brown roof.
to assist drainage. Geographical information
A system designed to capture, store, Green space
Filter strip manipulate, analyse, manage and present The ‘green lungs’ of towns and cities, land
A vegetated area of gently sloping ground, data about the planet’s natural and man that is that is wholly or partly covered with
designed to drain water evenly off made features. vegetation.
impermeable areas and to filter out silt and
other particulates. Geotechnical survey Grey infrastructure
Information on the physical properties of Sometimes referred to as hard or
Filtration soil and rock. traditional infrastructure, are man-made,
The act of removing sediment or other engineered components of a system such
particles from a fluid by passing it through Green corridor as drains and gutters.
a filter. A strip of land in an urban area that allows
wildlife to move along it and can support Groundwater
Flora habitats. Typically includes cuttings, Water that is below the surface of the
The plants found in a particular embankments, roadside grass verges, rights ground in the saturation zone.
physical environment. of way, rivers and canal banks.
Gully pots
Flow paths Green infrastructure Part of a surface water drainage system;
The course rain water takes naturally. A network of green spaces, trees and large containers that remove solids
green roofs that is planned, designed from runoff.
Forebay and managed to provide a range of
A small pool located upstream of a larger benefits including amenity, healthy living, Habitat
body of water, designed to act as a buffer, biodiversity enhancement and ecological The area or environment where an
trapping sediment and silt resilience (natural capital). organism or ecological community
normally lives or occurs.
Interception forebay Living roof
A small basin or pond upstream of the A roof with plants growing on its surface,
main drainage component which traps which contributes to local biodiversity.
sediment. The vegetated surface provides a
142 Appendices
Heat island Impermeable Micropool
Describes urban built up areas that are A material that does not allow liquids or Pool at the outlet to a pond or wetland
significantly warmer than surrounding rural gases to pass through it. that is permanently wet and improves the
areas. pollutant removal of the system.
Impermeable surface
Highways Agency A surface that does not allow water to Mini-Hollands
The government agency responsible pass through it, thus generating a surface TfL programme to transform three outer
for strategic highways in England, ie, water runoff after rainfall. London boroughs (Enfield, Kingston &
motorways and trunk roads. This function Waltham Forest) to prioritise walking and
is devolved to Transport Scotland, Infiltration (to the ground) cycling while improving the quality of the
Department of Economy and Transport The passage of surface water into urban realm.
in Wales and the Northern Ireland the ground.
Roads Service. Monetised costs & benefits
Infiltration basin These are easy to understand and measure
Highways authority A dry basin designed to promote financially, eg, the price of
A local authority with responsibility for infiltration of surface water to land or reduced damage (tangible) costs to
the maintenance and drainage of highways the ground. property.
maintainable at public expense.
Inundation Monitoring plan
Hydrodynamic vortex An overwhelming amount of water Sets out the approach, timing and
Storm water management device that uses resulting in a flood. resources to monitor measures adopted.
cyclonic separation to control
water pollution. It uses flow-through Linear assets Multifunctional space
structures with a settling or separation Linear infrastructure such as pipes, roads, An area that has more than one use, one
unit to remove sediment from surface rail, canals, etc. being to manage surface water.
water runoff.
LUL National Standards for
Hydrology London Underground Limited. Sustainable Drainage
The branch of science concerned with A regulatory document providing
the properties of the earth’s water, Media standards and guidance on the design,
and especially its movement in relation Natural topsoils, subsoils and construction and maintenance of SuDS
to land. manufactured soils. for approval and adoption by the SuDS
Approval Body.
143 Appendices
Natural capital The road or car park surface and Pluvial flooding
Natural assets which include geology, soil, underlying structure, usually asphalt, Flooding that results from high intensity,
air, water and all living things within an concrete or block paving. Note: the path extreme rainfall-generated surface
ecosystem. next the road for pedestrians is the water flow.
‘footway’ (the UK colloquial term being
Net present value (NPV) 'pavement'). Pollution
The difference between the discounted A change in the physical, chemical,
costs and benefits over the appraisal period. Percentage runoff radiological, or biological quality of a
The proportion of rainfall that runs off resource (air, water or land) caused by
NOx PM a surface. man’s activities that is injurious to existing,
Oxides of nitrogen particulate matter, intended or potential uses of the resource.
especially atmospheric pollutants as a Permeability
result of fuel combustion. A measure of the ease that fluid can flow Pond
through a porous medium. It depends on Permanently wet depression designed
Opportunistic retrofitting the physical properties of the medium, eg, to retain storm water above the
Where the opportunity to retrofit storm grain size, porosity and pore shape. permanent pool and permit settlement of
water management arises on the back of suspended solids and biological removal of
other drivers, such as regeneration or small Permeable pavement pollutants.
scale improvements. These may occur A permeable surface that is paved and
within a neighbourhood, or locally on a drains through voids between solid parts Porosity
plot level. of the pavement. The percentage of void space in
a material.
Orifice control chamber Permeable surface
A chamber within a drainage system which A surface that is formed of material that Porous paving
controls discharge rates. is impervious to water but, by virtue of Surfacing material that contains voids,
voids formed through the surface, allows allowing water to pass through it.
Pathway infiltration of water to the sub-base through
The route by which potential contaminants the pattern of voids, eg, concrete block paving. Potable/mains water
may reach targets or by which water (and Water company/utility/authority drinking
pollutants) are conveyed either below or Phytoremediation water supply.
above ground. Use of living plants to clean up soil,
air, and water contaminated with
Pavement hazardous chemicals.
144 Appendices
Prevention Rainwater harvesting or rainwater Risk assessment
Site design and management to stop or use system A carefully considered judgment requiring
reduce the occurrence of pollution of A system that collects rainwater from where an evaluation of the consequences that
impermeable surfaces; to also lower it falls, rather than allowing it to drain away. may arise from the hazards identified,
the volume of runoff, by reducing It includes water that is collected within combining the various factors contributing
impermeable areas. the boundaries of a property, from roofs to the risk and then evaluating their
and surrounding surfaces. significance.
Public sewer
A sewer that is vested and maintained by Receptor Runnel
the sewerage undertaker (see s 219(1) of the A location that is subject to an impact, A small river channel or course.
Water industry Act 1991). either through flooding or pollution.
Certain types of measures can be Runoff
Quietways retrofitted at such locations. Water flow over the ground surface to the
Proposed network of radial and orbital drainage system. This occurs if the ground
cycle routes through London, linking key Recharge is impermeable, saturated or if rainfall is
destinations via direct back-street routes, The addition of water to the groundwater particularly intense.
through parks, along waterways or tree- system by natural or artificial processes.
lined streets. Soakaway
Retention pond A subsurface structure that surface water
Rain garden A pond where runoff is detained long is conveyed into, designed to promote
A planted basin designed to collect and enough to allow settlement and biological infiltration.
treat surface water runoff. treatment of some pollutants.
Source control
Rain meadow Rill The control of runoff at or near
A field or drainage reserve that is capable A shallow channel or watercourse. its source.
of flooding to absorb excess rainfall.
Risk Stockholm soil
Rainwater butt The chance of an adverse event. The Soil made from angular rock, specified soil
Small scale garden water storage device effects of a risk is the combination of the mix and water.
that collects rainwater from the roof via probability of that potential hazard being
the drainpipe. realised, the severity of the outcome if it
is, and the numbers of people exposed to
the hazard.
145 Appendices
Storm events Surface water Waste
Events occurring between one in a year Water that appears on the land surface, Any substance or object that the holder
(100% chance of occurring in any one year) ie, lakes, rivers, streams, standing water discards, intends to discard, or is required
and one in 30 years return period (3.3% and ponds. to discard.
chance of occurring in any one year). These
events are typically what urban drainage Swale Water Framework Directive (WFD)
systems (below ground) are designed up A shallow vegetated channel designed to European Community Directive (2000/60/
to, and at which flooding occurs. conduct and retain water, but may also EC) of the European Parliament and Council,
permit infiltration. The vegetation is able designed to integrate the way water bodies
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) to filter particulate matter. Treatment are managed across Europe. It required all
Provides information on areas at risk from improving the quality of water by physical, inland and coastal waters to reach ‘good
all sources of flooding. The SFRA should chemical and/or biological means. status’ by 2015, through a catchment-based
form the basis for flood risk management system of River Basin Management plans,
decisions and provides the basis from which SWM incorporating measures to improve the
to apply the sequential text and exception Storm water management. status of all natural water bodies.
test (as defined in CLG, 2010) in development
allocation and development control process. TfL Watercourse
Transport for London. All rivers, streams, ditches, drains, cuts,
Sub-catchment culverts, dykes, sluices and passages that
A division of a catchment, to allow TLRN water flows through.
runoff to be managed as near to the Transport for London Road Network.
source as is reasonable. Water table
Topographical survey The point where the surface of groundwater
SuDS Used to identify and map the contours of can be detected. The water table may
Sustainable drainage systems; a sequence the ground and show all natural and man- change with the seasons and annual rainfall.
of management practices and control made features on the surface of the earth or
structures designed to drain surface water slightly above or below the earth’s surface. Wetland
in a more sustainable fashion than some Flooded area where the water is shallow
Treatment stage enough to enable the growth of bottom-
conventional techniques.
A component of a sustainable drainage rooted plants.
SuDS management train system that improves the quality of the
The management of runoff in stages as water passing through it.
it drains from a site. This is CIRIA’s
preferred term.
146 Appendices
Team
The guidance has been produced by Kevin Reid, Greater London Authority
J & L Gibbons with Civic Engineers, Robert
Bray Associates, Tim O’Hare Associates, George Warren, London Borough
DWD and Jackson Coles for Transport for of Hammersmith and Fulham
London (TfL). A steering group provided
support, with representatives from Editing: TfL, Robin Buckle and
appropriate parts of TfL and the George Weeks
following external stakeholders:
Additionally, we are grateful to
Nick Ayling, Thames Water, Paul Shaffer and Suzanne Simmons
from CIRIA for their advice and
Owen Davies, Royal Borough support on this project.
of Greenwich
Dave Hobbs, Environment Agency
Peter Massini, Greater London Authority
Neil Monaghan, Environment Agency
147 Appendices
Photo credits
All photographs and graphics by J & L Gibbons, except:
6 CIRIA C753 The SuDS Manual, 2015 CIRIA

8 Surface water flooding Robin Buckle
10 Amenity: community planting Jess Bastock
19 The Geology of London All London Green Grid, GiGL
22 Exposed Chalk Creative Commons licence
24 Waltham Forest Mini-Holland Robin Buckle
28 Accessible environments TfL
35 Museum of London (x2) University of East London
39 Streatham Hill (all) Owen Davies
41 Reedworth Street (x2) Ann Bodkin
44 Dry swale Robert Bray Associates
45 Bioretention swale (x2) Camlins
57 Permeable pavnig x2 Atkins
58 Permeable pavnig x2 Marshalls
59 Hard detention basin Urbanstein
60 Detention basin George Weeks
77 Love the Lea campaign Thames 21
77 Priory Common after installation Robert Bray Associates
78 Conveyance of water through the scheme Robert Bray Associates
79 No disruption to service during construction TfL
79 400m2 swale under construction TfL
148 Appendices
Photo credits
80 Swale sections TfL
82 Kenmont Gardens (all) George Warren
83 Derbyshire Street Pocket Park Greysmith Associates
85 Renfrew Close Robert Bray Associates
89 Rectory Gardens Robert Bray Associates
90 Rectory Gardens Robert Bray Associates
92 Talgarth Road George Warren
95 Queen Caroline Estate (x2) Groundwork
96 Queen Caroline Estate (x2) Groundwork
97 Bridget Joyce Square, Australia Road George Warren
98 Bridget Joyce Square, Australia Road George Warren
102 Hackbridge x2 Civic Engineers
Goldhawk Road George Warren
103 Tree pit details Robert Bray Associates
104 Plan showing modular soil system Robert Bray Associates
104 Completed scheme George Warren
106 Firs Farm Wetlands (all) Graham Campbell
107 Roadside swale at The Spinney Thames 21
149 Appendices
Photo credits
108 All Robert Bray Associates
113 After Installation TfL
114 Programme of monitoring TfL
114 Early green roof growth within 6 months TfL
115 Permeable paving and tree planting Simon Bunn
116 Completed residential unit Tim Crocker
117 Wildflower seeded joints Anders Folkesson
118 Threshold detail Anders Folkesson
118 SuDS pond acting as a central recreational feature Anders Folkesson
120 Overview of completed scheme Urbanstein
120 Detention basin Urbanstein
120 Catchment areas Urbanstein
128 Design process diagram CIRIA
130 Combined sewer discharge TfL
135 Nine Elms Linear Park Camlins
150 Appendices

Sustainable Urban Drainage November 2016

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainable Urban Drainage November 2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SuDS in London - a guide

London’s existing network of sewers and

Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) can

This guidance seeks to show how SuDS

• Help address climate change-related issues

CIRIA C753 The SuDS

When localised flooding happens, it is

The aim for the reduction in flow rate

• Regulate frequency of runoff • Adaptability in managing rainfall events

• Reduce contaminants to • Improving air quality

SuDS can provide multiple benefits

Images courtesy of Jess Bastock

By managing quality and quantity to meet

However, where retrofitting SuDS, or

Attenuation aims to limit the rate of

Water quantity refers to the volume

A comparison between greenfield and

Quantity: Attenuation, Bo01 Malmö

Flow in river (m3/s)

Rainfall event Time Rainfall event Time

Managing the quality of runoff helps • The extent of existing pollution

SuDS may enhance the amenity of

• Enhancing character/sense of place

• Improving the quality of space

• Providing a backdrop to existing

• Reducing air temperature

• Improving air quality

• Reconnecting people with

• Supporting community involvement and

Aspects of biodiversity that can be

• Habitat creation, including the

• Connectivity and the ability of fauna

• Source control with living roofs,

• Improvements to air and water quality

Biodiversity in pond Biodiversity at roof level

17 2 The London context

Within London there are 32 London

Reference should be made to the

• Understand local context

• Target and coordinate interventions

• Identify or access funding for

• Ensure objectives of the Thames

Thames River Basin

18 2 The London context

2.3 London’s North Thames Terraces North Thames Terraces

Understanding the geological condition of

South London Pebbly Sands

conditions indicate how SuDS will interact

Wandle Essex Plateau

Valley South London

Valley South London Colne

Valley South London Ravensbourne

River Valley River

formations may present risks including: Cray

deposits, shrink-swell clays, running sand, Colne

South London Pebbly Sands

London soluble rocks and landslides.

All London Green Grid

provide useful preliminary information.

Lower North London Heaths and Commons River Valley

Lower North London

Downs Dip Slope

Lower North Clays Clays