How to build flood resilient homes
using concrete and masonry
D H Chisholm BE(Hons), CPEng, IntPE(NZ)
Introduction
The threat of surface water flooding and flooding
from rivers or coastal waters has always been with
us. However in recent times the increase in
frequency and severity has been linked with climate
change. Between 1998 and 2003 insurance claims
for flood damage have doubled and these are
expected to triple again before 2050.
Availability of prime land for residential expansion,
particularly in the South East, has been restricted,
resulting in development on more land that is prone
to flooding. New buildings in these areas need to be
designed appropriately to handle a flood and
maintain their function following the event. Flood
resilient construction uses methods and materials
that reduce the impact from a flood, structural
integrity is maintained, and the drying out and
cleaning required following inundation and before
reoccupation, is minimised.
This guide provides practical details using concrete
and masonry in the design and construction of
wall and floor solutions for new housing to combat
flooding. It also covers the use of concrete
sustainable urban drainage systems to reduce
surface run-off from paved areas, and alleviate
flooding around the home.
Flooding and flood risk
Forms of flooding
There are a number of different forms of flooding and these present a
variety of risks. The boundaries of flood risk areas cannot be defined precisely
because floods with similar probability can arise from different combinations
of weather, water sources, rainfall patterns, local topography and patterns
of development. Flooding can come from rivers and the sea, directly from
rainfall on the ground surface, or from rising groundwater exacerbated by
overwhelmed sewers and drainage systems. Failure of a man-made structure,
such as an overtopped coastal flood defence, blocked storm water drain
or, in the extreme, a riverbank flood defence breach, can cause a sudden
catastrophic event. Hence every flood will have a different impact on people,
property and the environment. The consequences of flooding also depend
greatly on land use, whether urban or rural. For example run-off may be
polluted with hydrocarbon residues from road surfaces and a range of other
chemicals from hard surfaces in industrial or agricultural sites.
Impact of climate change
Whatever the cause of climate change, its presence is real and the expected
impact on the probability of future flooding is significant. Effects include
higher winter rainfall resulting in surface and groundwater flooding and a rise
in sea level that will increase the risk of inundation, particularly in the south of
the country. The evidence of climate change to date has proved compelling
enough for the international community, the UK Government through building
regulations, the Environment Agency and the Association of British Insurers to
make plans based on predictions of future change.
Probability of flooding
The probability of a specific level of flood can be described in two main ways:
■■ As a 1 in (say) 100 years return period flood, i.e. the maximum flood which
can be expected to occur only once every 100 years.
■■ As a percentage chance per year. For example, a 1 in 100 year risk =
(1 x 100/100) = 1.0 % chance of the maximum flood occurring in a
particular year.
Both these figures describe the chance of flooding each year, so if a 1 in
100 year flood occurs in any particular year then there is the same risk of it
occurring the following year.
The Environment Agency maintains a map of England and Wales that shows
whether a property or locality would be affected by a 1 in 100 year river flood
or a 1 in 200 year sea level flood. Flood maps covering the UK are available
from www.environment-agency.gov.uk. However these maps do not cover
flooding from other flood events, such as groundwater flooding, burst
water mains, run-off from hillsides or sewer overflows.
Flood risk management
Flood risk is a combination of the probability of the flood
occurring and the consequence of the flood on people, property
and infrastructure. The consequences of flooding can be reduced
by managing the flood risk. This should be done by adopting a
hierarchical approach as set out below:
■■ Avoidance – consider building outside or above flood risk areas.
■■ Resistance – use measures to prevent water from entering
a building.
■■ Resilience – use appropriate construction techniques and materials
so as to reduce the impact of flood damage to a building.
The use of resilience measures on their own is not suitable for areas
with the potential combined risk of high flood discharge rates and
rapidly rising flood levels. In such a situation flood warnings should be in
place to allow for evacuation of properties and removal of valuables.
The planning system
A key role of the planning system is to ensure that flood risk is taken
into account when siting a building and to regulate any matters taken
to reduce the flood risk. There are some differences in planning policy
and flood risk management at a regional level in the UK. Table 1
provides the primary sources of flood planning information applicable
to different regions of the UK1,2,3,4,5. Figure 1 shows the main parties
in England and their responsibilities in the planning system (as it
relates to flooding). The local planning authorities who possess all
the localised information on a particular property are responsible for
planning permission and they consult the Environment Agency on
specific flooding matters.
A developer may be required to supply a site-specific flood risk
assessment (FRA) to support a planning application1 for all sites in
Flood Zones 2 and 3 (medium and high probability of flooding) and
sites over 1 hectare in Zone 1 (low probability). Developers are also
advised to contact insurance companies regarding the protection
Table 1
National advice on planning and flood risk
Region National planning document Source
In UK
England PPS 251 Planning Policy Statement 25 www.communities.gov.uk/
– Development and flood risk planningpolicystatements
Scotland SSP 72 Scottish Planning Policy – www.scotland.gov.uk
Planning and flooding
PAN 693 Planning Advice Note
– Planning and building standards –
advice on flooding
Wales TAN 154 Technical Advice Note 15 www.wales.gov.uk
– Development and flood risk
5
Northern PPS 15 Planning Policy Statement 15 www.planningni.gov.uk
Ireland – Planning and flood risk
2
Figure 1
Key parties' responsibilities in the planning process relating to
flooding in England
Department for Communities and Local Government
Government Planning Policy Guidelines
Flood Defence Agency
(normally the Environment Agency)
National/Regional indicative flood plain maps
Catchment Flood Management Plan
Local Planning Authority
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment
Developer
(who has right of appeal to Planning Inspectorate)
Develop specific Flood Risk Assessment (FRA)
Insurance companies
(in instance of high flood risk)
Will assess risks on a case-by-case basis and may impose
restrictions as a condition of insurance
required in the event of flood to a development. Insurance providers
have no official role in the planning system, but in practice their risk
assessment may play a key role in the viability of a development,
particularly in Flood Zone 3.
Design approaches
Design strategies for managing flood risk
The first stage in a design strategy is to determine the types of
flooding and the characteristics that are most likely to impact the
development site. The second step is to calculate a design flood
depth for a given return period and to set a practical design floor
level. Ideally the finished floor level should be above the flood level;
however, this is not always practical. If the floor level is below the
predicted flood level, the flood protection strategy adopted should
follow one of the three following approaches:
Avoidance strategy
Avoid building in the flood risk area or protect the property against
flood using measures, including local bunds that are designed to
protect individual or groups of houses from flooding. Concrete
boundary walls or timber fencing can also be effective in deflecting
water for short duration floods. If, as the result of using such measures,
flood storage capacity is reduced, compensatory storage provision
elsewhere may be required. Locating living areas at first floor level
whilst providing garaging and temporary storage at ground level can
also be a viable flood avoidance solution using concrete or masonry.
 How to build flood resilient homes using concrete and masonry

Resistance strategy (water exclusion)
Resistance measures aim to prevent floodwater entry into a building
and give more time for occupants to relocate ground floor contents.
This strategy will be most effective for short durations and low
flooding depth.
Resilient strategy (water entry)
For higher flood depths, it is necessary to use resilient materials and
construction methods which will suffer no (or limited) damage from
floodwater entry, will dry out quickly and be straightforward to clean
up. This water entry strategy recognises the fact that water enters a
building by many routes and it may be impractical to keep
higher floodwaters out of a dwelling. Consequently the impact of
floodwaters on materials used in the construction at ground floor level
needs to be limited, so minimising the time before occupants can
return home.
deformation from a flood. The water entry strategy, for flood depths
greater than 0.6 m, acknowledges that structural damage could
occur in standard construction due to excessive differential pressures,
in which case water should be allowed into the building. The key
consideration is the use of materials that allow the passage of water
but retain their structural integrity and durability.
For flood depths between 0.3 m and 0.6 m either the water exclusion
strategy can be used up to 0.6 m, or if structural integrity is of
concern, water entry should be allowed above 0.3 m.
The code for sustainable homes7 allows two credits for building in a
low flood risk Zone 1 or one credit if building in the higher flood risk
Zones 2 and 3, provided that the construction materials used are
flood resilient or resistant and that the floor level is at least 600 mm
above the 100 year design flood level.

Table 2 is from the Communities and Local Government publication
Improving the flood performance of new buildings – flood resilient
construction6 and summarises the rationale behind a simple flood
design strategy based on three bands of design water depth. The
water exclusion strategy for predicted depths less than 0.3 m and
of short duration, aims to keep water out by building walls and floors
with low permeability materials, so resulting in minimal damage or
Flood resistant and resilient construction
In addition to the design strategies outlined above, the CLG publication
on flood resilient construction6 gives guidelines on materials and
construction details for flood resistance and resilient measures.
Table 3
Flood resilience characterises of building materials

Table 2 Material Resilience characteristics

Rationale for flood design strategies
Water Drying Retention
Strategy Design Approach Mitigation measures penetration ability of pre-flood
water dimensions,
deptha integrity

Resilienceb Above Water entry • Use materials with low Bricks

0.6 m strategy Allow permeability up to a
water through height of 0.3 m Engineering bricks Good Good Good
property to avoid (Classes A and B)
risk of structural • Accept water passage
damage. Attempt through building at Facing bricks (pressed) Medium Medium Good
to keep water out higher water depths
for low depths of • Design to drain water Facing bricks (handmade) Poor Poor Poor
flooding away after flooding
• Provide access to all Blocks
spaces to permit drying
and cleaning Concrete (3.5 N, 7 N) Poor Medium Good
From Attempt to keep • Use materials with low Aircrete Medium Poor Good
0.3 m water out, in full or permeability to at least
to in part, depending 0.3 m Timber board
0.6 m on structural
assessment. If • Use flood resilient OSB2, 11 mm thick Medium Poor Poor
structural concerns materials and designs
exist follow water • Provide access to all OSB3 18 mm thick Medium Poor Poor
entry strategy spaces to permit drying
and cleaning Gypsum plasterboard
Resistance Up to Water exclusion • Use materials and Gypsum plasterboard Poor Not assessed Poor
0.3 m strategyc Attempt construction with low 9 mm thick
to keep water out permeability
Mortars
Avoidance Remove building/ • Land raising, landscaping,
development from raise door thresholds Below damp proof course Good Good Good
flood hazard
1 : 3 cement : sand
Key
a Design water depth should be based on assessment of all flood types that can impact Above damp proof course Good Good Good
on the building 1 : 6 cement : sand
b Resistance/resilience measures can be used in conjunction with avoidance measures
to minimise overall flood risk
Note
Resilience characteristics are related to the testing carried out and exclude aspects such
c In all cases the water exclusion strategy can be followed for flood water depths up
as the ability to withstand freeze/thaw cycles, ease of cleaning and mould growth.
to 0.3 m

3
Standard specifications do not require the use of materials that
can withstand long term immersion in water. The building material
recommendations contained in the CLG publication are based on
laboratory investigations including seepage and drying tests, carried out
by HR Wallingford in 2006, published by CIRIA8. Table 3 ranks the flood
resilience characteristics of building materials for water penetration,
seepage characteristics, drying ability, integrity and dimensional stability.
The study concludes that building materials effective for a water
exclusion strategy include engineering bricks, Aircrete blocks, and
cement-based materials including concrete. For block walls, the mortar
joints are likely to dictate water leakage rates rather than the blocks
themselves, unless the joints are adequately formed so as to render
them watertight. Building materials that are effective for a water
entry strategy include facing bricks, concrete blocks and sacrificial
or easily removable external finishes or internal linings. The CLG
publication states that suspended timber floors are not recommended
in flood-prone areas as most timber swells in contact with water and
deforms or cracks on rapid drying. Similarly timber-framed walls are not
recommended in a flood risk area.
Concrete cannot generally be regarded as ‘waterproof’ as even dense
concrete will transmit water vapour over time, which is why vapour barriers
and damp proof course are detailed for use in conjunction with concrete.
The term ‘water-resistant’ is often used to refer to concrete that is
made more impervious to water vapour. This is achieved by lowering
the water : cement ratio, which effectively reduces the pore size
for passage of water vapour. A designated RC 40/50 mix would be
suitable. This can be enhanced further by the use of cements containing
fine pozzolanic materials such as fly ash, ground granulated blastfurnace
slag or silica fume. The use of hydrophobic pore-blocking admixtures,
which have a history of application in basements and swimming pools,
complement the reduction in pore size by putting an impervious lining
on the inside of the pore. Specifiers should be aware that ‘waterproofing’
admixtures are often designed only to repel incidental rain.
However, improving the specification of the concrete itself can be
undermined if insufficient attention is given to adequate vibration of
in-situ concrete and preparation of the joints to ensure that the structure
is watertight and structurally sound. Figures 2a to 2d show typical
construction details for a residential ground floor/wall junction showing
concrete options categorised as following either a water exclusion or
water entry strategy.
Water exclusion strategy details
Foundations
Any concrete blocks placed below ground-bearing concrete floor slabs
provide a potential path for groundwater entry into the wall cavity.
The use of in-situ concrete foundations, or sealing of the foundation
blocks with an impermeable material, or encasing them in concrete is
an appropriate solution. A 1200 gauge damp proof membrane should
be placed as shown in Figures 2a to 2d. Joints should be sealed with
mastic with a 50 mm overlap, or welted joints used. The provision
4
of basements in areas susceptible to flooding is subject to special
guidance9 on the use of tanking. Ingress of floodwater through entry
points above ground into the basement can be prevented by using
temporary flood gates, boards or doorstops. It is not advisable to design
sleeping accommodation in basements where there is a risk of flooding.
Floors
Water ingress from the ground has the potential to affect the
structural integrity of a ground floor slab due to uplift pressures.
Ground-supported concrete slabs at least 150 mm thick are the
preferred option. Suspended floors will be necessary over shrinkable
or expanding soils. The sub-floor space will require access after a
flood and should slope towards a purpose-built access location to
ease cleaning. Suspended timber floors are not a desirable option; if
used they should be placed over a 150 mm thick concrete slab with a
ventilated void between.
Floor insulation should be of the closed cell type, which is less affected
by water. The placement of insulation above the slab (Figure 2c) and
underneath the floor finish will minimise the effect of the floodwater
on the insulation properties and, if necessary, it could be more easily
replaced. However, the use of closed cell insulation below the floor (Figures
2a and 2b) allowing the thermal mass of the concrete floor to contribute
to the building's thermal performance can be a more sustainable solution.
Suitable floor finishes include ceramic or concrete-based floor tiles, which
should be bedded on a cement-based adhesive or bedding compound.
Alternatively, sand : cement screeds can be used, but it is advisable to
avoid concrete screeds above polystyrene insulation as they hinder the
drying of the insulation material following a flood.
Walls
Cavity masonry walls with insulation in the cavity have poor flood
resilience as they are slow drying and the insulation is difficult to
replace if damaged. A single-skin masonry wall with external closed
cell insulation protected by a render coat will provide better flood
resistance (Figure 2a). In a very exposed situation, where a cavity is
specified to provide additional weather protection, external insulation
should still be used protected by a render coat. Mortar joints are
the weak link in water penetration so must be thoroughly filled and
pointed. A lime mortar incorporating a waterproof admixture will
provide additional protection. However, to provide certainty against
flood leakage of a masonry wall, a waterproof membrane is required.
The flood resilient characteristics of wall elements based on the HR
Wallingford8 investigation for CIRIA is given in Table 4. For masonry
walls, use engineering bricks up to a height of the predicted flood
level plus one course of bricks. Application of an external render based
on 1 : 4 : 1/2 cement : sand : lime will improve the water resistance in
brick and block walls. Aircrete blocks are more waterproof than denser
concrete blocks but take longer to dry out, so they are preferred for
the water exclusion strategy.
Provided they are correctly detailed to avoid cracking and potential
leakage, the use of reinforced concrete walls and floors is a good form
of construction for flood-prone areas. Timber-framed walls are not
recommended in a water exclusion strategy, particularly those
 How to build flood resilient homes using concrete and masonry

containing construction materials that are affected by water contact,
such as orientated strand board and mineral fibre insulation.
Plaster coatings containing lime that are well bonded onto internal
linings are effective in reducing flood water leakage into a building and
assist rapid drying of the internal surface of the wall. These should be
taken at least up to 200 mm above design flood level. Avoid standard
gypsum plasterboard which is likely to disintegrate when in contact with
water for any period.
Water entry strategy details
Floors
Concrete ground floor slabs at least 100 mm thick are the preferred
option. The water exclusion recommendations on damp proof course,
insulation and floor finishes also apply to the water entry strategy.
Sacrificial floor finishes such as a floating timber floor or carpets are
appropriate, depending on the frequency of flooding and replacement costs.
Walls
Figure 2d shows a suspended floor and masonry cavity wall with
internal insulation. This wall option is less favoured than the single-
skin wall shown in Figure 2a. Concrete blocks dry more quickly than
Aircrete blocks; hence for the water entry strategy concrete blocks
are preferred. Stainless steel wall ties should be used to minimise
corrosion and consequential staining. Fixings should be of stainless
steel or copper.

Figure 2a Figure 2c
Water exclusion strategy - block wall, external insulation Water exclusion or entry strategy - insulating concrete formwork wall

External render Aircrete External and internal render

proprietary blocks (proprietary reinforced)
reinforced
Internal render 1 : 6 : 1 80/130/50 ICF wall using
XPS insulation and water
resistant concrete

150 mm
unreinforced
100 mm
concrete floor
unreinforced
concrete floor

Figure 2d
Figure 2b Water entry strategy - cavity block wall, cavity insulation,
Water exclusion strategy - brick and block wall, cavity insulation suspended floor

Internal render 1 : 6 : 1 Concrete Internal render

Brick external blocks 1 : 4 : 1/2
wall Aircrete block
internal wall

External
render 1 : 4 : 1/2
Ventilation Beam and
Engineering 150 mm to sub floor block floor
bricks up to unreinforced
design flood concrete floor Slip 150 mm Minimum
level block minimum clearance
150 mm for access
minimum

Internal render to u/s slab Sub-floor space

to slope to
accessable area

Key Insulation 1200 gauge damp Ceramic tiles on screed 30 mm sand : cement 100 mm Hardcore bed
proof course screed blinding layer
Notes
1 Minimum thermal resistance of perimeter insulation = 0.75 m2K/W 2 Wall insulation requirements dictated by required thermal envelope.

5
Table 4 run-off, whereas this rises to 80% or above on developed land. Not
Flood resilience characteristics of building materials used in only is the amount of surface water increased by development, but the
wall construction peak flow increases tenfold as the vegetation and landscape that store
water and block its flow are missing from developed areas. The effect of
Material Resilience characteristics
development on water drainage is to make a developed area far more
Water Drying Retention sensitive to rainfall events. Development compounds run-off problems,
penetration ability of pre-flood
dimensions, resulting in the following:
integrity
■■ Increased risk of flooding due to blocked drains.
External face
■■ Increased risk of localised flooding due to channelisation of water
Engineering bricks Good Good Good
(Classes A and B) into a drainage system of finite capacity. (Temporary storage of
water in the landscape is not available.)
Facing bricks (pressed) Medium Medium Good
■■ Streams and rivers are at increased risk of not being able to
Internal face
cope with sudden and large surface water flows.
Concrete blocks Poor Medium Good

Aircrete Medium Poor Good Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS)

Insulation material Sustainable urban drainage systems aim to mimic as closely as
Mineral fibre Poor Poor Poor
possible the natural drainage of a site in order to reduce the impact
of a development on flooding and water pollution. This means that
Blown-in expanded mica Poor Poor Poor SUDS have the potential to reduce surface run-off volume, increase
Rigid foams Medium Medium Good water storage in the landscape, reduce peak run-off flow, and increase
Render/plaster
infiltration of water flow to aquifers. A SUDS system can isolate
polluted water and direct it for treatment prior to discharging it into a
Cement render, external Good Good Good
1 : 6 cement:sand natural waterway.

Cement/lime render Good Good Good

external
1 : 1 : 6 cement : lime : sand
Gypsum plasterboard Poor Not assessed
Lime plaster (young) Poor Not assessed
Note
Resilience characteristics are related to the testing carried out and exclude aspects such
as the ability to withstand freeze/thaw cycles, ease of cleaning and mould growth.
Avoid internal cement plasters on plasterboard as these can prevent
effective drying out. Standard gypsum plasterboard can be used as a
sacrificial material up to just above the height of the predicted flood
level. Sheets should be placed horizontally with appropriate dado level
treatment to minimise the material wastage after a flood.
Upgrading existing homes
The replacement of existing timber floors with more flood resilient
concrete floors is an option that is recommended by insurers and
could become a condition of ongoing insurance. The insulation level
of the new floor will need to meet current Code requirements. The
cost of replacing a timber floor on piles with a ground-supported
concrete slab will vary, depending on the ground conditions. However,
under current policy, insurance companies will normally not pay for
upgrading to more flood resilient solutions.
SUDS have a number of components that are designed to be used
together, as appropriate to each particular site. Concrete plays a
Poor significant role in storm water control systems, as can be seen from
Table 5, which lists the categories of SUDS components and highlights
Poor
those where concrete products contribute to a solution. The use of
pipes to transport storm water some distance has been the standard
method used to control run-off. However more localised pavement
systems that deal with the water at source are now favoured, and the
use of large flow attenuation and flow control structures is no longer
recommended. PPS 251 confirms that SUDS can deliver improved
surface water management and requires that planning authorities
promote SUDS to attenuate run-off and improve water quality and
amenity value. It states that both rates and volumes of run-off from
new developments should be ‘no greater than the rates prior to the
proposed development, unless specific off-site arrangements are made
which result in the same net effect.’
An incentive is also provided to homeowners by some water
companies via a reduction in their water charges for the
implementation of an approved SUDS system. The Interim code of
practice for sustainable drainage systems10 provides model maintenance
agreements and advice on sustainable drainage systems in England
and Wales.
In The code for sustainable homes 7 (in category 4, surface water

Control of surface water run-off), there are mandatory elements to be achieved based on
calculation of run-off rates in accordance with PPS 25, and two
additional credits are available for using SUDS to improve the water
How land development influences quality of the rainwater discharged. The code requires that the SUDS
surface run-off holding capacity needs to prevent discharge into the watercourse for
Land development has historically had a large impact on land drainage. rainfall depths up to 5 mm. Also an allowance needs to be made for
It is estimated that on undeveloped land 15 – 20% of rain ends up as climate change based on guidelines in PPS 25.
6
 How to build flood resilient homes using concrete and masonry

Two concrete-based SUDS systems are available: concrete block
permeable pavement and pervious concrete.
Concrete block permeable pavement
Concrete block permeable pavements11 are a type of pavement
surface suitable for trafficking that also act as a drainage system.
They effectively reduce run-off characteristics and replicate closely
run-off from greenfield sites. For a permeable pavement system, the
flow of water from the surface is managed and released more slowly
in a controlled manner either into the ground, to a pipe system, or to
the next stage of a SUDS scheme.
Permeable pavements deal with water close to where the rainfall hits
the ground, known as ‘source control’, and are a fundamental part
of the SUDS philosophy. With concrete block permeable pavements,
the time of entry is the time that it takes the droplet of rain to hit
the block and move to the joint or void between adjacent blocks. In
contrast, for standard impermeable surfaces where the distance from
the farthest point to a gully inlet may be 20 – 30 m, the time of
entry into the drain will be a matter of minutes. The permeable paving
system therefore provides more certainty in control of run-off.
A study12 by HR Wallingford has confirmed that permeable paving is
one of the most space-efficient SUDS components available, as no
additional land is required.
Table 5
Summary of main SUDS components (adapted from Interim code of
practice for sustainable drainage systems10
SUDS component Description
There are various types of concrete block designed for permeable
paving. These designs incorporate enlarged joints created by larger
than conventional spacer nibs or voids generated by geometric block
shapes. Joints or voids are subsequently filled with a special single-
sized crushed rock jointing material that is coarser than conventional
jointing sand and is free draining.
There are different types of permeable pavement systems. The total
infiltration type does not rely on a pipe drainage system, and some retention
of water occurs temporarily in the permeable sub-base material before it
seeps into the subgrade, Figure 3. This is the preferred solution to comply with
the Building Regulations Part H313, which requires rainwater from roofs and
paving around buildings to be discharged into an infiltration system.
However, in many areas where the ground is relatively impermeable, this
solution is not feasible. Where the existing sub-grade cannot absorb all the
water resulting from the ‘design’ rainstorm, a partial infiltration system
can be used. Outlet pipes are connected to the permeable sub-base to
allow excess water to be conveyed to other drainage devices such as swales,
storage ponds, soakaways or watercourses.
Where the existing sub-grade is of low permeability and its stability
may be compromised by the introduction of additional water, a
modification of the system illustrated in Figure 4 is used, where
an impermeable flexible membrane is placed on top of sub-grade
level and up the sides of the permeable sub-base. This is particularly
suitable for contaminated sites.
Figure 3
Total infiltration permeable pavement system

Preventative The first stage of the SUDS approach is to prevent or

measures reduce pollution and control run-off. Measures may Jointing
include good maintenance to prevent spills and leaks, material
80 mm
storage in water butts, rainwater harvesting, and use Laying
of alternative roofs (green or brown). course
50 mm
Upper geotextile
Pervious surfaces Surfaces that allow flow of rainwater into the (optional)
underlying construction or soil
Determined
Permeable
Filter drains Linear drains consisting of a trench filled with by design sub-base
permeable materials, often with a perforated pipe in Lower
the base of the trench to assist drainage and to store geotextile
and conduct water; they may also assist infiltration. Subgrade
Filter strips Vegetated areas of gently sloping ground designed to
drain water evenly from impermeable areas and filter Figure 4
out silt and other particles Partial infiltration permeable pavement system
Swales Shallow vegetated channels that conduct and retain
water, and may permit infiltration; the vegetation
filters any solid matter.
Jointing
Basins, ponds Areas or structures that may be used for storage of material
and wetlands surface water run-off. 80 mm
Laying
course
Infiltration Sub-surface structures to promote infiltration of 50 mm
Upper geotextile
devices surface water into the ground. They can be trenches, (optional)
basins or soak-aways.
Determined Semi-permeable
Filters Engineered sand filters designed to remove pollutants by design sub-base
from run-off.
Drainage pipe
Pipes and A series of conduits and their accessories, normally Lower geotextile
accessories underground, that convey surface water to a suitable Subgrade
location for treatment and/or disposal.

7
Pervious concrete
An alternative concrete-based SUDS system is pervious concrete.
This is a special ready-mixed concrete that has a single-sized coarse
aggregate, a low fines content, and typically a 20% voids content. It is
a developing market in the UK but has a long history of use in the USA.
A SUDS system using pervious concrete in the surface layer is designed
in the same manner as a concrete block permeable pavement.
run-off from a site as well as to remove the pollution from the run-off.
The main requirements in The SUDS manual are:
■■ To provide source control allowing stormwater management
(quantity and quality) as close to the source as possible.
■■ To provide interception storage to ensure that no discharge occurs
to a watercourse for rainfall depths up to 5 mm.
■■ To provide long-term storage to reduce the volume of water flowing

Design of SUDS pavements
Concrete block permeable pavements and pervious concrete
pavements should be designed both to support the traffic loads and
to manage the surface water effectively (i.e. provide sufficient storage).
Therefore two sets of calculations are required to determine both the
traffic bearing and water management properties. Studies have shown
that the quantity of run-off from permeable pavements is lower than
that from impermeable pavements. This is because the water soaks
into the surface, laying course and permeable sub-base and then
is released by evaporation after the rain has stopped. The ability of
materials to absorb moisture will depend on how dry they are before
the rainfall.
For water storage design, The SUDS manual 14 recommends a number
of design criteria for the hydraulic performance of SUDS that are
intended to reduce the frequency, peak rate and total volume of
into rivers at critical times. Run-off should be controlled so that it is
similar to the volume of water flowing from a greenfield site.
■■ To provide attenuation storage to reduce peak run-off rates. The
volume of permeable sub-base required for attenuation is usually
calculated using drainage design software based on the Wallingford
procedure15 across a range of return periods and durations. The
excess volume of water requiring storage equates to the volume of
rainfall less an acceptable volume of outflow.
For simple designs, tables can be used to size the depth of permeable sub-
base below a permeable pavement. The tables are based on hydrological
rainfall intensity mapped across the UK. It is quite common to design
areas where the permeable paving is required to handle run-off from
adjacent impermeable areas, including roofs. However it is normal to limit
the ratio of impermeable area to permeable pavement to approximately
2 : 1. Higher ratios risk silting up of the permeable paving surface.

References
1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITIES & LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS 25): Development and flood risk. December 2006.
2 THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT. Scottish Planning Policy 7 (SPP7): Planning and flooding. February 2004.
3 THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT. Planning Advice Note 69 (PAN 69): Planning and building standards - Advice on flooding. February 2004.
4 WELSH ASSEMBLY GOVERNMENT. Technical Advice Note 15 (TAN 15): Development and flood risk. July 2004.
5 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT. Planning Policy Statement 15 (PPS 15): Planning and flood risk. December 2006.
6 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITIES & LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Improving the flood performance of new buildings: Flood resilient construction. May 2007.
7 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITIES & LOCAL GOVERNMENT. The code for sustainable homes – Technical Guide. April 2008.
8 CIRIA. Improving the flood resilience of buildings through improved materials, methods and details. Report No. WP5C Final Report – Laboratory tests. July 2006.
9 CIRIA. R139: Water resisting basements – A guide: Safeguarding new and existing basements against water dampness. 1995.
10 NATIONAL SUDS WORKING GROUP. Interim code of practice for sustainable drainage systems. NSWG, July 2004.
11 INTERPAVE. Permeable pavements – guide to the design, construction and maintenance of concrete block permeable pavements 5th edition. BPCF, 2007.
12 Kellagher, R, Woods Ballard, B & Weisgerber, A. Modelling of pervious pavements. In Proc. 2nd Nat. Conf. on Sustainable Drainage, Coventry
University, 2003. pp. 91–99.
13 BUILDING REGULATIONS 2000. Approved Document H3: Drainage and waste disposal: Rainwater drainage. 2002 Edition.
14 CIRIA. C697: The SUDS Manual. March 2007.
15 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT. Wallingford procedure for design and analysis of urban storm drainage. 3 volume set (CD ROM). 1981.

Published by The Concrete Centre

Riverside House, 4 Meadows Business Park,
Station Approach, Blackwater, Camberley,
Surrey GU17 9AB
For details of other publications from
Tel: +44 (0)1276 606800
The Concrete Centre please visit
Fax: +44 (0)1276 606801
www.concretecentre.com/publications.
www.concretecentre.com

Ref: TCC04/06 All advice or information from The Concrete Centre is intended only for use in the UK by those who will evaluate the significance and
limitations of its contents and take responsibility for its use and application. No liability (including that for negligence) for any loss
ISBN 978-1-904818-70-0 resulting from such advice or information is accepted by The Concrete Centre or its subcontractors, suppliers or advisors. Readers
should note that publications from The Concrete Centre are subject to revision from time to time and they should therefore ensure
Published February 2009
that they are in possession of the latest version.
© The Concrete Centre™