08 - Land Use and Ecology - BREEAM Knowledge Base

Flood resilience – Third party feature acting as flood defences - KBCN1022

There are many landscape feature defences, owned by third parties, which due to their location act as a flood defence by default, e.g. motorway, railway embankments, walls etc. It can be assumed that such embankments will remain in place for the lifetime of the development, unless the assessor or project team have reason to believe otherwise. For walls, assurance must be sought that the wall is likely to remain for the design life of the building.

Flood risk – Site situated across numerous flood zones - KBCN0532

Where a site is situated across more than one flood zone, the flood zone with the highest probability of flooding, i.e. the worst case scenario, must be considered for the purpose of the BREEAM assessment. An exception to this would be where the areas in the higher probability zone include only soft landscaping and it can be demonstrated that access to the building will be maintained in a flooding event. This is to ensure that the site has adequately managed the worst case scenario level of flood risk associated with the site's location.

22/07/2022 Applicability to HQM One confirmed
07/03/2018 Updated to include circumstances where an exception may apply.

Land reclaimed from the sea - KBCN0558

Land reclaimed from the sea cannot be considered as previously developed land. It has not been occupied by a permanent structure and any associated fixed surface infrastructure (please refer to the Additional information section).

Landscape and Habitat Management Plan – SQE involvement - KBCN0564

Even if not stated explicitly, it is implied and expected that the Suitably Qualified Ecologist (SQE) does verify the content of the Landscape and Habitat Management Plan to ensure that it is consistent with the whole site ecological strategy.

19 Nov 2021 Applicability to UK NC2018 confirmed

Low or no ecological value to manage and maintain - KBCN1383

The purpose of the criteria is to recognise projects that are positively contributing to local ecological value by managing and protecting it as part of the site being assessed. If there is no ecological value to maintain or manage on the site, the purpose of the criteria is not being met and credits cannot be awarded by default. For sites with low ecological value to begin with, the criteria encourage projects to consider ways to create ecological features that support local biodiversity as part of the development (e.g. habitat creation as part of the ecology issues focused on ecological enhancement).

Minimising watercourse pollution – Green roofs - KBCN1026

Rain that falls onto the surface of green roofs can contribute to this requirement. Evidence,however, still needs to demonstrate that the 5mm rainfall from all impermeable surfaces on-site is being dealt with.

Previously developed land – temporary structures - KBCN0659

The presence of concrete and hardstanding areas established as temporary structures for enabling works are not considered to be previously developed land on a site. The nature of enabling works are temporary; with the purpose of enabling the delivery of a development and are not constructed to be permanent. Temporary structures of this kind are not included in the definition of previously developed land no matter how long they have been present on a site.

Previously occupied land – Fixed surface infrastructure - KBCN1140

Car parks and other hard-landscaped areas often incorporate small pockets of soft landscaping. Where these are integral to the hard landscaping and constitute a small proportion of the total area, these areas can be considered as part of the fixed surface infrastructure.

Previously occupied land – multi-use games areas (MUGAs) - KBCN1464

For education assessments, playing fields are considered previously occupied land if an equivalent area of playing field is reinstated on land of low ecological value within one year of completing the construction works. Multi-use games areas (MUGA) or similar are also acceptable as replacements for playing fields.

Previously occupied land – multiple assessed buildings - KBCN1093

For sites with multiple assessed buildings, where it is not possible to clearly define separate development footprints for each building, the assessment can be done on a site-wide basis. In this approach, the boundary of the development footprint is considered to be the whole site. This overall result is used to assess compliance for each included BREEAM assessment.

20-Oct-2022 Title amended for clarity. Wording clarified. Scheme applicability updated.

Relating green roofs to multiple assessments in the same building - KBCN1195

A green roof on top of such buildings can be used to award credits for each assessment for which the Land use and ecology Issues apply. The benefit can be applied to to all assessments undertaken for the building provided all are completed within the appropriate time-frame of a valid ecological survey.

Risk to Ecologist’s safety - KBCN0704

In some situations a significant safety risk may prevent a suitably qualified ecologist from attending the site to undertake a site survey. In these cases a desktop study can be used to demonstrate compliance, where the ecologist confirms that it is an acceptably robust substitute. In these cases, the assessor must provide evidence to confirm the type of significant safety risk present.

Role of the SQE in planning and measures on-site - KBCN1372

The main role of the Suitably Qualified Ecologist for 'planning and measures on-site' is to make recommendations in their Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. It is important that these are incorporated into the project’s scheduling, management and resources and that ultimately, they are implemented in practice. The person coordinating this does not need to be the SQE, as long as this individual has the appropriate level of authority to take the relevant actions and the methodology is followed. At post-construction stage, evidence needs to demonstrate these measures are implemented in practice, through site visits and appropriate evidence. In some cases, the SQE may need to be involved themselves in checking their recommendations are implemented for certain measures, if they consider this is required. However, if this is required, it would be up to the SQE to confirm in their Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.

Shared ecological enhancements - KBCN0656

A site-wide approach to ecological enhancements can be used on sites where multiple buildings share areas of soft landscaping. The enhancement benefits are applied to the individual building assessments within the site. Similarly, where a building comprises more than one assessment, eg different floor assessments, a green roof on top of that building can be used to award credits for each assessment for which the Land use and ecology issues apply. The benefit can be applied on a site-wide basis provided all developments are completed within the appropriate timeframe of a valid ecological survey.

Site wide approach to ecological enhancements - KBCN1194

A site-wide approach to ecological enhancements can be used on sites where multiple buildings share areas of soft landscaping. The enhancement benefits are applied to the individual building assessments within the site. The benefit can be applied on a site-wide basis provided all developments are completed within the appropriate timeframe of a valid ecological survey.

Surface water run-off – discharge to a tidal estuary or the sea - KBCN1023

The peak rate of run-off and volume run-off criteria can be deemed to be met if the site discharges rainwater directly to a tidal estuary or the sea. The site run-off must discharge directly into the tidal estuary or the sea. Typically, drainage pipes would only carry run-off from the site and would not need to cross privately owned land outside the boundary of the development before reaching the sea. A definition of tidal estuary is in the technical manual.

Surface water run-off – Highways and impermeable areas - KBCN1035

Where new non-adoptable highways are built, all new impermeable surfaces must be included in the calculations to demonstrate compliance with the peak rate of run-off and volume of run-off criteria. Where buildings are built beside existing highways or where adoptable highways are built, the impermeable area of the highway does not need to be included in the calculations.

Timing of Ecological survey/report - KBCN0292

If the ecologist's site survey and/or report is completed at a later stage than required, the assessor would need to be satisfied that it was produced early enough for the recommendations to influence the Concept Design/design brief stage and leads to a positive outcome in terms of protection and enhancement of site ecology.

21/02/2017 Wording clarified.

Verification of an ecology report / information - KBCN1192

If the appointed ecologist does not meet the definition of a ‘suitably qualified ecologist’ (SQE) the report / information submitted to support the assessment must be verified by an individual who does. 1. The individual verifying the report must provide written confirmation that they comply with the definition of a ‘suitably qualified ecologist’. 2. The verifier must provide signed confirmation that they have checked and approved the report. This must clearly reference the report and can be in the form of a signed letter or their printed name and signature on a completed pro-forma. In doing so, they are deemed to confirm that the report: a. represents sound industry practice b. is correctly, truthful, and objective c. is appropriate given the local site conditions and scope of works proposed d. avoids invalid, biased, or exaggerated statements Such confirmation from the verifier must be provided in addition to all other information required by the relevant technical manual and referenced as part of the evidence submitted to demonstrate compliance. It can take a number of years for an ecologist to meet the SQE definition. Verification of information by an existing SQE supports the practical application of the assessment criteria and is in line with industry practice.

13/08/2019 Updated to clarify, in practical terms, what evidence of verification will be considered acceptable.

New Construction / NOR / V6 /

08 - Land Use and Ecology