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 SmithPMU 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: 5.2Promote 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 PurposeKPITargetScore WasteTo 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 1Major non- compliance 4High level beyond compliance 2Minor non- compliance 5Exceptional measures taken 3Compliance 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)  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) 0.86Timber, MDF Landfill2.720.3Flooring materials, rubble Recycling (re-condition & Re-use) 6.548.9Card racks, Refrigeration, Shelving Recycling (Environmental disposal) 3.324.8Refrigeration, metalwork 13.3100

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 WasteQuantitiesHaulier Carrier Licence No.Location Waste Licence No. Green Waste (compost)30m3PTCHAM/406524 Eco @ HurnWML/296 Excavated Material320m3R&WHAM/409392 Marchwood AggregatesW01024/05 Marchwood QuarryExempt % 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.htmlwww.wrap.org.uk/construction/index.html  www.wrap.org.uk/construction/materials_recycling/index.htmlwww.wrap.org.uk/construction/materials_recycling/index.html Netregs  www.netregs.gov.ukwww.netregs.gov.uk  www.netregs.wastedirectory.org.uk/Index.aspxwww.netregs.wastedirectory.org.uk/Index.aspx Considerate contractor  www.ccscheme.org.uk/www.ccscheme.org.uk/ BRE  www.bre.co.uk/www.bre.co.uk/ Smartwaste  www.smartwaste.co.uk/www.smartwaste.co.uk/  www.bremap.co.uk/bremap/about.jsp 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?