neil_smith_presentation construction.ppt

C&D management

1. Case Study:
University of Southampton
Dr Neil Smith
Environment Manager
16
th
October 2007

2. Aims
Resource v waste management
Big v small projects
Share experience to date
What’s next

3. Resource v waste
Key project
phases
Pre-design
Design &
procurement
Pre-construction
Construction
Post-
construction

4. Estates & Facilities
Kevin Monaghan
Neil Smith PMU Steve ParkerIan Carroll
(Environment (Buildings Programmes (H&S Manager)
Manager) manager)

5. Capital programme
Programme Management Unit
£234M programme
Mountbatten
Boldrewood
IfLS
Faraday
 Sustainable Buildings Policy
 Sustainable Buildings Briefing note
 Guidance to Project Managers on waste
 Route map

6. Framework
Sustainable Buildings Policy:
5.2 Promote and adopt best practice:
5.2.2Ensure the specification for new build, refurbishment and maintenance
projects… sets targets for key performance indicators, such as energy
and water use and waste production.

5.2.7 Ensure waste produced during building projects is minimised and
that all projects have a site waste management plan that
incorporates the requirements of the Demolition Protocol.
5.2.8Ensure materials have a minimal impact on the environment and set a
target of at least 10% of the materials value of projects is derived from
recycled content.
5.2.9Set a target for all new buildings and major refurbishments to achieve an
“Excellent” BREEAM rating with a minimum rating of “Very Good” where
there are good and explicit reasons why an excellent rating could not be
achieved.

7. Framework
Sustainable Buildings Policy:
5.3Maintain and develop the University in a
sustainable manner:
5.3.4Ensure there are sufficient recycling facilities
available and they are clearly marked.
5.3.5Ensure there are adequate storage and
collection facilities for other wastes, such as
chemicals, and clinical, radioactive and other
hazardous wastes.

8. Case Study: Mountbatten
• ECS/ORC
• Major fire (Nov 05)
• Completion date:
Summer 2008
Site management:
• Costain
 Demolition (about 5,000 t reused on site)
• Bovis
 Environment management plan
 Environmental Aspects & Impacts Register
 KPIs
 Considerate Contractors Scheme
 Site audit

9. Mountbatten
Purpose KPI TargetScore
Waste To measure the amount
of waste removed from
site during the
construction process
so that we can target
reductions in wastage
Construction:
Waste
Removed
(m3) / £100k
spent
<107.6
KPI
Targets also for:
• Energy use (Amount of CO2 Produced (kg) / £100k spent)
• Water use (Amount of Water Used (m3) / £100k spent)
• Timber use (% FSC Timber Used)
• Commercial vehicle movement (Total Number Commercial
Vehicle Movements / £100k spent)
• CCS (Average Score)

10. Mountbatten
Score
per
section
Score referencesScore
per
section
Score references
1 Major non-
compliance
4 High level beyond
compliance
2 Minor non-
compliance
5 Exceptional
measures taken
3 Compliance
Environment (4/5)
• Noise restriction
• Hoarding
• Risk assessments & induction
• Waste monitored & segregated
• Environmental policy working well
• No energy saving measures on site (although corporately
energy use is well controlled)
Considerate contractor scheme audit

11. Case study: Faraday
• 1950s iconic building
• £20M refurbishment
• School of Civil Engineering
& Environment
• BREEAM ‘Excellent’

12. Faraday
Gentle Associates
• Decant
• Asbestos strip out
(Windsor waste mgmt)
LA Moore
• Enabling works
(?)
Morgan Ashurst
• Main contractor
(?)

13. Faraday

14. Faraday: BREEAM
Management Commissioning (9):
M4 – Considerate Contractors (2)
M5 – Construction site impacts (4)
- monitor construction waste
- Sort & recycle construction waste
M12 – Users guide (1)
Materials (12):
MWI – Material spec (4)
MW5 – Reuse of façade (1)
MW6 – Reuse of structure (1)
MW7 – Recycled aggregate (1)
MW8 – Responsible sourcing of materials (3)
MW12 – Storage of recyclable waste (1)
BREEAM rating % benchmark
Unclassified <25
Pass ≥25 - <40
Good ≥ 40 - <55
Very Good ≥ 55 - <70
Excellent ≥ 70

15. Faraday
Post completion recycling:
• Heelis Building
• George Thomas Building

16. Small(er) projects
Faculty Building Managers
Annual budget: £5M (LTM & Client projects)
Distribution of FPM project budgets, 2006/07
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Value (£)
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
 Preliminary feasibility report
 Guidance to contractors
 Selection (approved contractor database)

17. Framework
Guidance to contractors:
Selection of contractors
Environment policy, EMS etc
Sustainable buildings
Planning, design etc
On-site management
Site RA, waste etc

18. SU Shop refit
£150k refit in summer 2007
Flair shopfittings Ltd
Select-A-Skip UK Ltd

19. SU Shop refit
Total Waste & Recycling Summary for Southampton University (SUSU)
All weights are approximate.
Weight
(Tonnes)
% Materials
Incineration
(Flair)
0.8 6 Timber, MDF
Landfill 2.7 20.3Flooring
materials,
rubble
Recycling
(re-condition &
Re-use)
6.5 48.9Card racks,
Refrigeration,
Shelving
Recycling
(Environmental
disposal)
3.3 24.8Refrigeration,
metalwork
13.3 100

20. University Road car park
£230k
Demolish building & provide 65 car park spaces
PT Contractors
Pollution prevention procedure
Site environmental risk assessment
Waste management procedure
SWMP

21. University Road Car Park
Type of
Waste QuantitiesHaulier
Carrier
Licence No.Location
Waste
Licence
No.
Green
Waste
(compost)30m3 PTC HAM/406524
Eco @
Hurn WML/296
Excavated
Material 320m3 R&W HAM/409392
Marchwood
AggregatesW01024/05
Marchwood
Quarry Exempt
% to be
recycled
House No.
37
90%
Recycled
Comley &
Son
HAM/406449Transfer
station
HR078
10% Waste
Comley &
Son
SWMP

22. Sources of information
• WRAP
 www.wrap.org.uk/construction/index.html
 www.wrap.org.uk/construction/materials_recycling/index.html
• Netregs
 www.netregs.gov.uk
 www.netregs.wastedirectory.org.uk/Index.aspx
• Considerate contractor
 www.ccscheme.org.uk/
• BRE
 www.bre.co.uk/
• Smartwaste
 www.smartwaste.co.uk/
 www.bremap.co.uk/bremap/about.jsp

23. What’s next?
Influence capital/FPM colleagues
Audit & verification
FPM workshop
Finalise FPM SWMP
Work with term contractors
Review guidance

24. Review & Any questions?
Resource v waste management
Big v small projects
Share experience to date
What’s next
Any questions?