Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2 The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis,

Revitt and Lundy

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Municipal Engineer 166 June 2013 Issue ME2 Pages 7785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/muen.12.00026 Paper 1200026 Received 29/05/2012 Accepted 21/12/2012 Keywords: drainage & irrigation/sewers & drains/water supply

ice | proceedings

ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas

John Bryan Ellis MSc Professor of Environmental Science, Urban Pollution Research Centre, School of Science and Technology, Middlesex University, London, UK David Michael Revitt BSc, PhD Professor of Environmental Chemistry, Urban Pollution Research Centre, School of Science and Technology, Middlesex University, London, UK Lian Lundy BSc, PhD Reader in Sustainable Water Management, Urban Pollution Research Centre, School of Science and Technology, Middlesex University, London, UK

Water cycle studies have been undertaken in several regional growth points in the UK as a strategic basis to support development planning in terms of assessing the adequacy of the existing water resource infrastructure. In this paper the application of the water cycle approach to the assessment of water and drainage availability for smaller site-based urban developments is evaluated, with an emphasis on the role of the storm-water component. A 170 ha urban regeneration site in the city of Birmingham, UK, is used to illustrate the process by identifying the principal water resource constraints, water usage rates and drainage issues associated with the development proposal. The scaleddown urban water cycle approach provides a valuable initial scoping of the development constraints and opportunities associated with water availability and drainage infrastructure provision. The analysis identifies the positive contributions that the storm-water component can make to other water resource functions and to reducing overall demands for water.

1.

Introduction

The conventional approach to urban water management is through the use of centralised systems involving water treatment prior to large-scale water distribution and waste water collection, followed by treatment prior to discharge to receiving waters. As for waste water, the goal has been to remove storm-water as rapidly and efficiently as possible from urban areas. This so-called all-to-the-sewer approach has been traditionally organised in semi-autonomous operational compartments that are separately managed by a mix of public and private organisations. These variable institutional and governance arrangements, in turn, operate within planning and regulatory frameworks normally structured by national guidelines but frequently delivered at local authority level. This traditional approach to urban water management has become increasingly challenged in the context of recurrent water shortages, the potentials for more frequent and more intense flood events and the increasing pollution of the receiving water bodies. Urban water cycle (UWC) studies provide a route for reexamining these problems through an integrated approach to water management at both centralised and decentralised levels. UWC studies are intended to identify tensions that exist among the bodies that are responsible for development proposals (e.g. planners and engineers) and those wishing to protect the environment (e.g. regulators and the general public) in order to provide a means to address and facilitate potential solutions in

an integrated, sustainable and cost-effective manner. It is also clear that any proposed technological solutions need to be compatible with requirements imposed as a result of political, institutional and social considerations (Brown et al., 2006). The UWC approach primarily aims to confirm that the UWC infrastructure can support the developments identified in regional and local planning strategies at the right time and location. In this respect, the UWC approach provides a guidance framework for identifying how the different urban water components can interact to the benefit of the total UWC and the different stakeholder groups. Such an approach not only requires effective stakeholder partnerships but also requires data-sharing in terms of technical knowledge relating to the urban water resource cycle, which embraces the water supply, waste water, surface water, flood risk and the quality, ecology and amenity of the receiving water body. In the UK the regulatory Environment Agency for England and Wales (EA) (2009) has issued a guidance document outlining the concepts and structure of water cycle study approaches, and the UK government has also issued a consultation guidance document that encourages local authorities to adopt water cycle strategy studies as a preliminary methodology to the development of surface water management plans (SWMPs) (Defra, 2009). At the time of writing, over 39 individual water cycle studies are being undertaken in England at national growth points as part of local development
77

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

framework planning documentation. These studies are aimed at providing a plan and programme for water services infrastructure implementation in future growth areas as a supporting basis for sustainable urban development (EA, 2008). In this context an UWC study can be viewed as essentially comprising a risk-based assessment of the infrastructure and of the environmental capacity in terms of water supply, sewage disposal, flooding and surface water drainage. The same view has been adopted in the promotion of ecotowns where sustainable water management incorporates the same four water resource elements but with the additional consideration of the quality of the receiving water (Town and Country Planning Association, 2009). The existing UK studies have been undertaken in the context of the extended urban region, often up to 1000 km2, and usually closely follow the EA (2009) template. The objective of this paper is to examine how far the UWC template can be adapted to site-based situations and proposed urban developments on a much smaller scale, typically between 100 and 200 ha. In addition, few UWC studies have focused on how the storm-water component of the UWC can make specific contributions to the overall water resource infrastructure. This paper explores some of the issues surrounding potential storm-water run-off contributions to future sustainable urban water resource management through the application of an UWC study approach.

various constraints that may apply to the identification of technically feasible solutions and accept trade-offs between competing or conflicting objectives.

2.2

Specific considerations for storm-water

Although surface water management in the UWC is mainly concerned with identifying and mitigating pluvial flood and the pollution associated with the drainage of urban surfaces of the receiving water body, it can also make substantial contributions to reducing stress on the waste water and water supply infrastructure by controlling surface flows to sewers. In addition, surface run-off can contribute to water recycling processes through rainwater storage and enhanced infiltration to support groundwater recharge. The integration of surface drainage design into green infrastructure (GI) planning in the urban area also offers contributions towards a more natural urban water balance, as well as opportunities for community leisure and amenity, open space and environmental stewardship (Ellis, 2012; Wendel et al., 2011). However, successful implementation requires careful planning and stakeholder consultation as well as supporting costing and institutional arrangements. UWC approaches provide a route to assessing the compatibility between local authority planning (including SWMPs) and regulatory authority catchment management plans in respect of effective surface water drainage. They can also provide an evidence base for setting out priority allocations, development phasing, assessing developer contributions to drainage infrastructure and supporting sustainable drainage systems (Suds) implementation and operational guidance.

2.
2.1

The structure of an UWC study

Carrying out an UWC study

A UWC study normally covers two survey stages, comprising outline and detailed studies followed by an implementation and review stage (Figure 1). The lower level 1 study provides a strategic scoping of the nature and extent of water resource usage and availability and the capacity of the existing drainage infrastructure. The sewer drainage analysis is normally focused on identifying major flooding potential, particularly for zones likely to be at high risk, and their implications for any local development plans. The main purpose and thrust of the upper level 2 study is to address the quantification and mitigation of uncertainties associated with the zones/areas carrying average to minimum risks, as judged by the level 1 analysis (Figure 1). The UWC approach is oriented to the context rather than the system and is an adaptive rather than an optimisation approach, with the emphasis being on process, uncertainties and the identification of a range of potential mitigating solutions. Major aspects of level 1 and 2 studies are concerned with the identification, collation and sharing of relevant data and information, which may be a source of stakeholder tension where sensitive commercial data are involved (Ellis and Revitt, 2010). It is also important that stakeholders recognise the
78

3.
3.1

A UWC study for Birmingham Eastside

Background and context

The Eastside development area (170 ha) represents a major urban regeneration initiative in the Birmingham city centre. It is served by a combination of ageing, large-diameter combined sewers and small-diameter (usually less than 160 mm) separate surface sewers. The high impermeable surface cover associated with the intensity of the built-up area generates large volumes of surface water run-off having very short times of concentration. The low hydraulic capacities of the surface water sewers are readily exceeded, resulting in localised pluvial flooding over the urban surface. This surcharging in the development area is known to occur with storms exceeding the 15 return interval (RI) 60 min duration event (Groundwork Birmingham & Solihull, 2007), with localised flooding being exacerbated by surcharging of some of the combined sewers where their substantial depth does not prevent it. The Eastside initiative intends to promote a new city quarter based on the themes of learning, technology and industrial

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

Initial brief (Provided by local authority/municipality or other steering group, which sets out the need for and scope of the outline level 1 study)

Regional/state or other subregional government spatial development strategy

Outline level 1 study environmental constraints analysis infrastructure constraints analysis sustainability assessment outline urban water cycle strategy

Provides evidence base for core strategy and sustainability appraisal

Local development plans Sustainability of the core strategy

Detailed level 2 study identifies infrastructure needed, where and when it is needed, assesses if the strategy is sustainable, implementation and funding, detailed urban water cycle strategy

Strategic flood & pollution risk assessment

Evidence base and potential site allocation for DPD sustainable construction DPDs area action plans

Development plan documents (DPDs) & site-specific proposals

Strategy implementation monitoring compliance with strategy managing changes/revisions to strategy

Strategy implementation monitoring planning applications against strategy periodic review and revisions to strategy

Planning applications & approvals

Figure 1. Schematic representation of the stages in an UWC study

heritage, creating up to 12 000 new jobs during the lifetime of the initiative. In addition, it will accommodate 3500 new dwellings (occupying 19% of the proposed land-use area) as well as a range of business premises (commercial (32%), retail/ restaurants (14%) and offices (11%)), a 3?2 ha city park (4%) and other public open spaces (2%). The predominance of highly impermeable land-use types dominating the development profile is supplemented by educational premises (13%) and car parking (4%). While the types of proposed buildings present a highly impermeable coverage, most of them also offer considerable potential for green roofs, roof disconnection and associated infiltration systems such as rain gardens as well as storm-water and grey-water recycling schemes. The planned regeneration zone consists of a number of development parcels (Table 1) and the planned staged delivery of these discrete areas militates against an integrated, holistic drainage infrastructure planning approach.

3.2

Storm-water concerns and constraints

Outline planning permission has been granted for the various mixed land-use development parcels of Birmingham Eastside, and initial site clearance and construction for a number of the parcels have already taken place. Full information on the development phasing through to 2015 and on the land-use types and their distribution in the individual development site parcels including the proposed drainage network can be found on the official Eastside website (www.birmingham.gov.uk/eastsidemasterplan). The urban regeneration programme is being driven by Birmingham City Council, which now has prime responsibility for local highway and surface water drainage. Severn Trent Water holds prime responsibility for waste water collection and sewered conveyance, with additional core responsibilities for aspects of surface water drainage. The EA has held responsibility for the regulation of surface water drainage in respect of pluvial overland flooding, although this responsibility and
79

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

Development parcel 1 City Park 2 Curzon Park 3 Curzon Gateway 4 VTP200 5 Birmingham City University 6 Ventureast 7 Masshouse 8 Martineau Galleries 9 City Park Gate 10 Millennium Point 11 Multi-storey car-park 12 Warwick Bar 13 Devonshire House 14 Typhoo Wharf 15 UB40 16 Aston Science Park 17 Aston University Total

Contributing area: ha 4.3 4?1 1?6 N/A 1?4 5.3 6.3 5?5 1?9 4?9 8?5 1?9 N/A 3?7 4?0 9?0 N/A 57 (ha)

Average (peak) water demand: l/s 22?0 5?8 (32?5) 2?1 (6?0) N/A N/A 4?5 (58?0) 3?8 2?5 6?2 1?4 Negligible 1?0 (10?0) N/A 1?1 0?5 3?0 3?5 ,106

Peak waste water discharge: l/s 50 314 120 N/A 105 401 462 407 140 360 63 104 N/A 277 29 659 N/A 3491

Source: after Coyne et al. (2008). (Peak) values derived from developer estimates. N/A, data not available.
Table 1. Summary of peak flow water services data associated with the different development parcels in Birmingham Eastside

associated duties passed to the local authority under the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 (2010). The EA also holds full responsibilities for the receiving water quality in respect of both surface and ground water and in drawing up catchment and management plans under the Water Framework Directive (EU WFD, 2000). The primary planning concerns for surface water drainage infrastructure provision across Eastside, as derived from stakeholder Learning Alliance consultations (Ellis et al., 2008), include
& water demand and usage rates and the capacity to meet

development requirements
& the need for on-site attenuation, storage and/or infiltration

facilities, especially in respect of excess overland flows associated with extreme storm events & the need to maintain and/or extend the drainage infrastructure, including retrofitting it, where appropriate & the timetable for staged and integrated planning and delivery of drainage infrastructure controls across the full development cycle & the operational reliability and sustainability of the drainage network resources being delivered. Stage 1 of the UWC study is essentially a desktop study, drawing on existing technical work and strategic local planning
80

documentation provided by the local authorities and their statutory partners (Figure 1) and identifying the infrastructure constraints to and opportunities for future development growth. In addition, the desktop study takes into account strategic regional and national guidelines for drainage infrastructure controls and management. The stage 1 study also considers alternative strategic resource options in the context of the identified constraints, as illustrated in Table 2, where the associated risk increases as indicated in column 5. Although the presented matrix is generic in nature, the specific service concerns and their severity, as considered by the Eastside stakeholder Learning Alliance, are indicated by the bold text in the table. The constraint matrix approach illustrated in Table 2 aligns with effects-based considerations that to a large extent can be undertaken independently of probabilities of climate change or future urban creep scenarios. It starts by specifying the outcome (i.e. expected performance), which defines an acceptability threshold to manage the impacts and then assesses the likelihood of attaining this outcome as a result of changing drivers. The outcome then provides the basis for an adaptive screening strategy that will be robust under a range of future scenarios (Table 2). This matrix approach enables the identification of relative degrees of difficulty and constraints in providing adequate water-related services and infrastructure to the development

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

Water resources Water resource availability Water resource available to meet planned developments Water supply network Existing network available with spare capacity

Waste water Sewage treatment works (STW)

Sewer network Existing sewer network can accommodate the proposed developments

Surface water drainage and pluvial flood risk Low risk of flooding within sites or downstream

Fluvial flood risk Flood zone 1; low probability of annual exceedance (,0?1%; ,1100)

Existing STW flow headroom can accommodate the proposed developments and there are no compliance issues Existing STW flow Existing sewer Water resource Existing headroom can network may network available but accommodate the need to be may need new available with proposed upgraded no spare source(s) to developments but capacity meet there are compliance developments issues No existing sewer Existing sewer Existing STW flow Existing network cannot headroom cannot network resources not accommodate the accommodate available to adequate to proposed the proposed serve the meet developments developments specific developments development parcel(s)

Medium risk of flooding within sites or downstream

Flood zone 2; medium probability of annual exceedance (10.1%; 110011 000)

High risk of flooding on development site(s) or downstream

Flood zone 3: High probability of annual exceedance (.1%; .11 000)

Table 2. A development constraint matrix for stage 1 of an UWC study

area. Building on the outcomes and findings of the stage 1 study, a more detailed stage 2 strategic analysis should involve further technical studies of specific issues and uncertainties in conjunction with the local development planning process to ensure integrated and timely delivery and the management of water services and associated infrastructure to provide more efficient and sustainable future approaches.

3.3

Water usage and sewer surcharging in Birmingham Eastside

A first-order inventory and benchmarking of storm-water and waste water generation in the Eastside development area has been undertaken by Coyne et al. (2008) and has been used as a baseline input for the level 1 survey. The flow analysis firstly assessed changes in impermeable cover for each parcel resulting from the new development proposals as given in the Eastside master plan. Run-off volumes were then determined using MicroDrainage WinDes, based on a 12 year storm RI in line with current industry practice (WRc, 2012). A working assumption was adopted that all surface water flows would be

directed to the separate system rather than first seeking infiltration and/or local receiving watercourse outfalls, as normally specified under the building regulations. Water consumption rates for waste water flow calculations assumed a 120 l/(head d) level for domestic premises, with benchmark rates for commercial, retail, industrial and public buildings based on floor area. A 10% infiltration rate was also assumed. Maximum flows in the combined sewer system (with peak sewer flow rates limited to 2 m s21) were assumed to arrive simultaneously at sewer node points, and a climate change addition of 20%, as well as an 80% limitation to run-off, as required by the EA from each development parcel, were applied to the analysis. These requirements might serve to add to the amount of local attenuation (and/or storage) that could be needed for outflows generated at each site. Peak run-off volumes associated with a 130 RI event to fulfil the higher standard EA requirement of no flooding were also considered in the analysis. Estimates of water demands in respect of the development sites are essentially based on mean values, as Severn Trent Water
81

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

Pipe capacity Sewer node A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Contributing parcel(s) 1, 4, 6, 11 1, 2, 4, 5, 711 112, 14, 15 4, 11 1, 411 6 7 8 8, 9 1, 4, 6, 10, 11 11 1, 2, 412, 14, 15 13 14 1, 2, 411, 15 Minimum: m3/s 0?9 0?9 5?1 0?1 0?9 0?6 0?1 0?6 0?4 0?9 0?1 8?3 0?07 0?1 0?9 0?9 Maximum: m3/s 1?8 1?7 5?1 0?1 1?7 0?6 0?1 0?6 0?4 1?8 0?1 8?3 0?08 0?1 1?7 1?8 Total peak flow in 3 pipe: m /s 0?5 2?3 2?8 0?06 1?9 0?4 0?5 0?4 0?5 0?8 0?1 2?7 0?04 0?3 2?3 0?7 Surcharge potential

Unlikely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Probable Unlikely Probable Unlikely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Probable Probable Unlikely

Source: after Coyne et al. (2008)

Table 3. Predicted peak flows and potentials for surcharging in Birmingham Eastside surface water sewer systems

are committed only to support an average-based water supply network. It will be policy that on-site potable storage is provided to meet peak demands and thus it is difficult to provide firm estimates other than mean levels. However, there can be a reasonable working assumption that demand reduction through use of water efficiency measures will be required for all such new developments (Defra, 2008). Table 1 shows the water usage rates for each of the development parcels together with their predicted peak waste water flows for the modelled 12 RI storm event. Table 3 shows the predicted peak flows at various nodal points in the surface water sewer network and the likelihood of surcharging for the same storm event. The tabled data are based on information supplied by the developers, who may well be overestimating some of the pipe capacities for individual sites, as most surface water sewer pipes are of small diameter (,160 mm). Irrespective of these reservations and the working assumptions of the modelling approach, it is evident that pluvial surface flooding can be expected for storm events exceeding the 15 RI, with substantial flooding associated with the higher 130 RI event (Table 3).

discharge levels. A 1D2D modelling study of surface water flood potential for one of the development parcels in Eastside indicated that anything between 7560 and 58 680 m3 of instantaneous temporary attenuation storage would be required for extreme event (130 RI and 1100 RI) flow control (Ellis et al., 2011). This assumes that all impermeable surface run-off (but excluding highway drainage) occurs to the separate sewers. It is highly likely that the gross storage requirement will increase as a result of multiple outfalls from each development parcel, delivering a total peak run-off rate of 7150 l/s. One 2 ha site indicates unlimited 120 and 1100 flow rates of 407 l/s and 499 l/ s, respectively. This compares with an EA peak flow limit of 293 l/s. Based on the national guidance contained in the UK government strategy document for future water usage (Defra, 2008), it could be expected that at least a 20% reduction in the estimated combined sewer discharges might be achieved through water efficient fittings to WCs, washbasins and dishwashers, which might reduce overall water demand to about 80 l/(head d). This is a very low daily consumption rate and may well be overly optimistic given the lack of take-up in water efficiency appliances in current (and approved) development proposals. The introduction of recycled grey-water facilities could undoubtedly lead to further substantial reductions in the combined sewer discharges to treatment, as

3.4

Drainage components

The MicroDrainage WinDes modelling suggests that a 40% reduction on overall peak surface water flows would be required across the Eastside sites to meet regulatory post-development
82

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

Rainwater harvesting Land-use sector Single residential Shared residential Public community buildings Hotels Commercial office buildings Retail buildings Industrial buildings Leisure buildings Public open space Mixed use developments 3 33 3 3 3 See Mixed use developments 3 3 33 33 Potential Payback time (years) 16 3?1 6?9 38?4 ? Potential 3 XX XX 3 XX

Grey-water recycling Payback time (years) 44 10?5

? 6?1 ? ?

? 3 XX 33

? 7?8 4?1

Source: after Faber Maunsell (2004). 3 potential; 33 high potential; XX negligible potential; ? not estimated; not available due to negligible potential.
Table 4. The potentials for storm-water re-use and grey-water recycling in Birmingham Eastside

reported in Table 4, which would be in the order of 3540%, according to the household consumption data reported by Defra (2008). One Eastside study claims an 18?6 m3/year greywater recycling capacity for a 350-bed hotel planned for another development parcel with a 10?5 year payback time (Faber Maunsell, 2004). Table 4 indicates the potential for the implementation of rainwater harvesting and grey-water recycling schemes in Birmingham Eastside together with estimated payback times (excluding life-cycle costs). However, such recycling schemes appear to be prohibitively expensive for many developers, given the high upfront implementation and follow-on maintenance costs, as well as the possible requirement for the implementation of a third labelled supply system. These considerations mean that it is highly unlikely that greywater recycling will be introduced in the Eastside developments, even for non-potable use (Table 4). However, the greatest savings and contributions to the Eastside UWC lie with the storm-water component of the drainage infrastructure. A modelling analysis for a pilot 4?5 ha sub-catchment in the Eastside area has indicated that the strategic placement of green roofs and porous paving could reduce total storm run-off volume by up to 32% (Viavattene et al., 2010). A further estimation for a 1?1 ha Eastside development parcel of residential/apartment roofing suggested that water savings of 8700 m3/year could be achieved through rainwater harvesting with a payback time of only 3 years (Faber Maunsell, 2004). A study of green roof provision for a

2?6 ha area in the Eastside site has shown that a strategically located 100150 mm roof substrate could attenuate peak flows to achieve a 40% reduction and enable the full development parcel to meet required EA post-development run-off rates (Foster, 2007). Extensive green roofing would essentially eliminate storage requirements up to the 130 RI event. The implementation of this storm-water source control at this site would limit the 1100 RI discharge to the 12 RI equivalent and require a 55 m3 storage compared to 118 m3 without the control in place. Substantial reductions in storage requirements in the order of 20% could be achieved through the introduction of green roofs and limited source infiltration controls, both of which could be readily included in the drainage design of the retail/commercial premises that feature prominently in the regeneration proposals. The systematic introduction into the site development design of not only green roof technologies but also a range of soakaways, infiltration systems, swales and porous paving was initially envisaged as giving vital sustainable elements to the drainage infrastructure (Eastside Sustainability Group, 2002). Unfortunately, little of this vision has been realised. For example, suggestions for rainwater harvesting and infiltration recharge to re-use storm-water to supply the ornamental ponds, fountains and water features of the 2?7 ha city park development parcel have not been adopted, on the basis of their potential public health issues. Direct infiltration, soakaways and porous paving have been discouraged on the basis of prevailing high ground83

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

water levels and dangers of mobilising contaminated brownfield groundwater flooding. Severn Trent Water estimate their water supply-demand balance will remain positive up to 2020, although with only marginal surpluses (,3 Ml/d). Severn Trent Water consider that water re-use might be feasible only for limited open space and park irrigation, fire-fighting and for supporting receiving water flows, particularly for the local canal network. This latter re-use would require the installation of oil interceptors and solids settlement prior to canal discharge and is opposed by British Waterways. Severn Trent Water intend to address their water resource issues primarily through leakage control, demand management and targeting sewer misconnections, placing little reliance on water redistribution in the operation of the UWC to achieve future neutrality (Halcrow Group, 2010).

4.

Conclusions

of developers. There is no clear indication at the time of writing that the Eastside regeneration will exploit storm-water as a resource. However, the implementation of recent UK planning legislation and environmental regulation in relation to urban pluvial flood risks and diffuse pollution may become a driver in the reconsideration of existing thinking on this issue, particularly if the ambitions of water-sensitive urban design are to be successfully achieved at the level of the development site. Service infrastructure planning generally occurs on a businessas-usual basis, with separate negotiations taking place between planning development teams, regulators and service providers for each site parcel as it comes up for approval. The decisionmaking process lacks both retrospective and prospective integration in terms of the overall development area drainage and across the full range of associated UWC issues. In this respect, the provision of drainage infrastructure is considered as presenting a difficult problem, which inhibits the achievement of a successful and integrated sustainable agenda for the development site UWC and for the growth area as a whole.

The study has shown that the UWC approach can be successfully scaled down to the assessment of small urban (re)development sites, providing a valuable initial scoping study of the constraints and opportunities associated with the water resource and drainage infrastructure of the planned development. The scoping study can also serve as a basis for the further development of SWMPs as well as facilitating compliance analysis with regulatory directive requirements and with local development planning policies. In addition, the scoping study provides a structured information framework for stakeholder engagement and collaboration. Although the supplydemand and usage analysis of the UWC study incorporates uncertainties, it is clear that there are opportunities for the future redistribution of water resources in the Birmingham Eastside developments. Management of surface water flows during extreme events in the development area will undoubtedly require the introduction of further attenuation or storage controls that could be used as a (re)source to meet demands elsewhere in the UWC, including onsite amenity lakes and fountains, lawn and garden irrigation and groundwater recharge, in addition to possible emergency supplies for fire-fighting purposes. There is an opportunity to examine how integrated planning and design of green space in the Eastside developments could simultaneously benefit Suds management, urban biodiversity and public amenity. Such objectives would need to ensure that site drainage proposals, as approved by the local authority Suds Approval Board, coordinate with GI planning. Unfortunately, there are no current forward planning arrangements for the Eastside developments to ensure future-proofing of water supply and drainage with subregional GI strategies. The realisation of such surface water redistributions to other components of the UWC is largely dependent on both the political will of the city planning authorities and the motivation
84

Acknowledgement
This study has been carried out in the framework of the European research project Sustainable Urban Water Management Improves Tomorrows Citys Health (SWITCH). SWITCH is supported by the European Commission under the 6th Framework Programme, contract number: 018530-2 and contributes to the thematic priority area of Global Change and Ecosystems.
REFERENCES

Brown RR, Sharp L and Ashley RM (2006) Implementation

impediments to institutionalising the practice of sustainable urban water management. Water Science and Technology 54(67): 415422, http://dx.doi.org/10.2166/wst.2006.585. Coyne R, Last E, Mackay R and Sharp P (2008) Birmingham Eastside Utilities Report. SWITCH Learning Alliance report. See http://www.switchurbanwater.eu (accessed 24/ 01/2013). Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) (2008) Future Water: The Governments Water Strategy for England. Cm 7319. Defra, The Stationery Office, London, UK. Defra (2009) Surface Water Management Plan Technical Guidance, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Living Draft Version 1, HMSO, London, UK. EA (Environment Agency) (2008) Water Services Infrastructure Guide: A Planning Framework. EA, Bristol, UK. EA (2009) Water Cycle Study Guidance. EA, Bristol, UK, pp 1 80. See http://cdn.environment-agency.gov.uk/ geho0109bpff-e-e.pdf (accessed 24/01/2013). Eastside Sustainability Group (2002) Sustainable Eastside: A Vision for the Future. Groundwork Birmingham & Solihull, Birmingham, UK. Ellis JB (2012) Sustainable surface water management and green

Municipal Engineer Volume 166 Issue ME2

The urban water cycle approach in small development areas Ellis, Revitt and Lundy

infrastructure in UK urban catchment planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 56(1): 2441, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.648752. Ellis JB and Revitt DM (2010) The management of urban surface water drainage in England and Wales. Water and Environment Journal, 24(1): 18, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1747-6593.2009.00203.x. Ellis JB, Scholes L and Revitt DM (eds) (2008) Database showing threats/uncertainties to storm-water control which exist in selected demonstration cities together with their predicted major impacts. Deliverable 2.1.1b of the Sustainable Water Management in the City of the Future (SWITCH) project. See http://www.switchurbanwater.eu/outputs/pdfs/W21_GEN_RPT_D2.1.1b_Database_stormwater_control.pdf (accessed 21/02/2013). Ellis JB, Viavattene C and Chlebek J (2011) A GIS-based integrated modelling approach for the identification and mitigation of pluvial urban flooding. In Proceedings of Conference of Computing & Control for the Water Industry (Savic D, Kapelen Z and Butler D (eds)). Centre for Water Systems, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK, pp.271276. EU WFD (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000. Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy. See http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri5OJ:L:2000:327:0001: 0072:en:PDF (accessed 22/04/2013). Faber Maunsell (2004) Greywater Recycling and Rainwater

Harvesting at Birmingham Eastside. Groundwork Birmingham & Solihull, Birmingham, UK. Flood and Water Management Act 2010 (2010) Elizabeth II. The Stationery Office, London, UK. Foster L (2007) Green Roofs for Eastside. Hyder Consulting, Report no. 5001-BM01303-BMR-03. Groundwork Birmingham & Solihull, Birmingham, UK. Groundwork Birmingham & Solihull (2007) Green Roofs for Eastside. Report January 2007. Hyder Consulting, Birmingham, UK. Halcrow Group (2010) Warwick Sub-regional Water Cycle Study. Final Report. Halcrow Group, Swindon, UK. Town and Country Planning Association (2009) Sustainable Water Management: Eco-towns Water Cycle Worksheet. Town and Country Planning Association, London, UK. Viavattene C, Ellis JB, Revitt DM, Seiker H and Peters C (2010) The application of a GIS-based BMP selection tool for the evaluation of hydrologic performance and storm flow reduction. Proceedings of the 7th Inernational Conference on Sustainable Techniques and Strategies for Urban Water Management (NOVATECH7), GRAIE, Lyons, France, CD-ROM. Wendel HEW, Downs JA and Mihelcic JR (2011) Assessing equitable access to urban green space: The role of engineered water infrastructure. Environmental Science and Technology 45(16): 67286734, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es103949. WRc (Water Research Centre) (2012) Sewers for Adoption. 7th edn. WRc Swindon, UK.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as discussion in a future issue of the journal. Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineering professionals, academics and students. Papers should be 20005000 words long (briefing papers should be 10002000 words long), with adequate illustrations and references. You can submit your paper online via www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals, where you will also find detailed author guidelines.
85