Southwark Council procured partners to form a Multi Utility Services Company (MUSCo) to integrate the delivery of sustainable utilities infrastructure across 30 hectares of mixed-use development in Elephant and Castle and Aylesbury development areas, and surrounding estates in south London.
The MUSCo will plan, finance and operate the infrastructure required to deliver carbon-neutral heating, cooling, electricity, non-potable water and data connectivity services to the area, with the aims of reducing carbon emissions, improving water efficiency, and providing open-access ICT networks.
The MUSCo comprises Dalkia, Veolia Water and Independent Fibre Networks Limited. It will work with Southwark Council and the master developer for the Elephant and Castle. The MUSCo takes on all commercial risk for the development, devising a model of investment and taking ownership of the commercial vehicle. The Council will recover the land value of the sites in its ownership which are required by the MUSCO for energy centres and other operations.
Having a single body responsible for a range of elements can provide good opportunities to integrate services in new and innovative ways. It can also minimise capital investment, reduce disruption by utilising shared ducting, and limit the need for multiple duplicate networks. In delivering and managing the infrastructure upgrades together, the MUSCo partners
expect to save on the capital investment required for infrastructure deployment and to be able to offer a saving for developers who would otherwise need to interact with a number of different utilities providers. Agreements and co-ordination with planners, housing associations, the Highways Agency and other public actors ensure further savings on cost and efficiency. The MUSCo will deliver the following services:
replacing the existing community heating network
•
with a more efficient common district heating/ CHP network, for which import/export agreements have been made with energy supplier EDF, as the CHP plants will export to the grid with a preference for providing the new electrical infrastructure required for development areas
dual water services to all buildings within the core
•
development area, so that non-potable water is delivered to toilet cisterns and wash facilities, reducing the requirement for mains supply of (potable) water by 30 per cent with the intention of seeking an inset appointment for all water services
an open-access optical distribution network,
•
charging service providers for access, encouraging entry from multiple providers and maintaining low costs. External developers will install fibres within the buildings themselves.
these, it noted, would make a key contribution towards meeting national and international carbon reduction targets. The approach, heading towards a closed loop system, has been adopted in several new developments. In Hammarby Sjostad in Stockholm, Sweden, the new neighbourhoods have been linked to existing city-wide infrastructure to maximise resource efficiency. Taking an integrated, area-based approach to planning and delivering neighbourhood infrastructure upgrades allows a step change in resource efficiency towards zero carbon, zero waste, water-neutral communities. This cannot be achieved by taking a piecemeal approach.
Integrated design is about more than making resources work more efficiently. It must also be about achieving
better outcomes. For example, if there is a need to dig up roads to re-lay pipes, consideration should be given to refitting the infrastructure elements both below and above ground. It is not just about coordinating upgrades to underground services, but also looking creatively at how those above ground could be reconfigured. As a minimum, consideration should be given to re-laying permeable paving to help lower the risk of flooding. There is also potential to introduce new cycle lanes, create priority lanes for public transport or install traffic-calming measures. Coordinating underground services (by grouping and routing under streets) can improve access for maintenance, provide opportunities for new ICT infrastructure and minimise utility disruption from improvements such as planting street trees.
The Hammarby Model (above) integrates energy, water
and waste management in a closed loop system. This urban extension has its own recycling model and a local sewage treatment plant. Renewable fuels are used to generate energy in the district heating plant. By the time the development is completed, it is estimated that residents will produce 50 per cent of all the energy they
need, via district-wide systems which recover energy from liquid and solid wastes. Combustible waste is re-used as heat. The remaining heat demand is met by extracting waste heat from the wastewater treatment plant. Waste collection costs are reduced through use of a vacuum-based underground waste collection system.
Buro Happold’s study highlighted the importance of understanding these interdependencies during the design process, thereby maximising opportunities. For example, recycling collection points need to be planned to make it ‘easy’ for people to recycle. This may in turn have implications for pedestrian routes linking individual dwellings to the collection points, requiring them to be secure, well-lit and well-maintained. The enhancement of pedestrian routes needs to be coordinated with green space upkeep and other non-vehicle transport routes, such as cycle ways, to ensure appropriate links with other community centres.
Making existing resources work better to achieve better outcomes lies at the heart of the Total Place approach being piloted by CLG and the Treasury. These pilots are reviewing the delivery of public services in an area, looking at themes such as children’s health and wellbeing, services for older people, and alcohol and drug abuse. Service providers are working together to understand how delivery can be made more efficient while improving outcomes. Evidence from the Total Place60 review has found that outcomes can be integrated effectively if works are planned and delivered at local scale, through area-based programmes. It also finds that significant financial savings could be achieved
from these approaches.61 The review of lessons learnt from Total Place62 concludes that examining multiple causes and connectivities could help to unlock solutions to some of the ‘wicked issues’ – complex problems that require different
public services to act together. Delivery of neighbourhood retrofit projects would benefit from a similar integrated approach.
We identified a number of active community groups with climate change as their main driver. However, a strong and consistent message from our case study research and Community Task Group was that it is far more effective to engage communities through a discussion about improving their quality of life and their neighbourhood, than it is by talking about carbon reduction and climate change.
Taking a holistic approach to an area allows communities to address issues of immediate concern to them. These might include addressing traffic and nuisance parking, reducing high levels of crime and unemployment, or improving play opportunities. It also helps to create a critical mass, making it easier for people to engage and promoting the idea of upgrades as being socially acceptable. This echoes previous SDC research which found that leading with a positive story about how a low carbon, climate change-adapted economy might look is an effective way to engage communities – especially if it made locally relevant.63
Target issues will vary between neighbourhoods and individuals so it is important to identify these ‘routes in’ at the outset of any engagement process. The UKGBC report on Sustainable Community Infrastructure64 found there is strong consumer interest in water efficiency measures and using waste as a source of energy. From our discussions with experts, and from wider research, it is clear there is strong public support for upgrading green infrastructure (food growing has proved popular in recent years), reducing traffic speeds in residential areas, and initiatives that improve quality of place. From this starting point, it is easier to engage communities in wider, infrastructure upgrades that generate less public interest or support. It can also provide a forum for discussion of those issues that have historically been contentious but provide potential revenue streams, such as wind turbines or waste infrastructure (as illustrated in figure 2).
Galvanise communities into action
Figure 2 Engaging communities and generating income through an integrated approach
Direct market value/ Communty interest
e.g. Feed in tariff/ Renewable Heat Incentive, Car clubs, Energy and water efficiency, Building retrofit, Local food production.
£
No direct market value/ Communty interest
e.g. Green infrastructure upgrades, Improved cycling and pedestrian routes, Flood prevention, Improved biodiversity.
Direct market value/ No communty interest
e.g. Wind turbine, Energy from waste.
No market value/ No communty interest.
£
Government should support an integrated, area- based approach to upgrading local infrastructure as a cost effective way of achieving maximum sustainable outcomes in an area.
This would be supported by: ensuring existing and new polices and delivery programmes (such as the new obligations on energy companies post-2012) are flexible in operation to support integrated delivery; improving the evidence base to assess the economic, environmental and social benefits of this approach; and developing pilot projects which test integrated delivery.