At Robert Bird Group, we are continuing to strengthen the way we support clients through the earliest and often most uncertain stages of development.
With the addition of Adam Linnell, a geoenvironmental engineer with 18 years of experience in contaminated land and geotechnical consultancy, we’ve bolstered our ability to advise on ground-related risk from the outset of a project.
From initial site assessments before acquisition through to investigation, remediation, validation and sign-off for occupation, our geoenvironmental capability can support clients throughout the full development lifecycle.
The risk beneath every project
“Understanding ground conditions is responsible for around 50% of cost overruns on construction projects.”
– Adam Linnell, Associate Director
Ground conditions are one of the most significant, but least visible risks in construction. Before a site is opened, much of what lies below the surface is still unknown, and those unknowns can shape everything that follows.
This is particularly significant on brownfield land, where historic uses may have left behind contamination or buried structures that are not obvious from the surface. Without a clear understanding of those conditions, project teams can find themselves making early decisions based on incomplete information.
Uncertainty is costly. Research shows that ground conditions are one of the biggest contributors to cost overruns on construction projects. Reducing that uncertainty as early as possible can have a meaningful impact on commercial outcomes.
Why ground conditions drive cost and programme risk
Ground-related risk influences planning, design, procurement and construction, often in ways that only become clear once works are under way.
A site with industrial history may require further investigation before it is suitable for redevelopment. Unexpected contamination can trigger remediation measures, affect earthworks strategies or alter how material is handled and disposed of.
Project teams must identify risks early enough to inform the right decisions. That includes understanding the nature of the site, the proposed end use, the regulatory context and the potential implications for programme and budget.
The earlier those questions are addressed, the more options a client has. The later they emerge, the more likely they are to become constraints.
Reducing uncertainty through a phased approach
There’s no one-size-fits-all approach to managing contaminated land risk. It is a phased process designed to build understanding progressively and proportionately.
This often begins with a preliminary risk assessment, drawing together the site history, available records, environmental setting and potential sources of contamination to establish an initial view of risk.
Where required, this can be followed by intrusive investigation and a more detailed quantitative assessment. On more complex sites, further modelling may also be needed to understand pathways, groundwater behaviour and likely impacts in greater depth.
A relatively low-risk site may need only an initial assessment to confirm that there is low or minimal risk, while more complex or heavily constrained sites might require a more comprehensive sequence of investigation and remediation planning.
The value of early-stage insight
“More ground knowledge for developers equals more certainty when going out to tender.”
– Adam Linnell
One of the key benefits of our geoenvironmental capability is the clarity it provides before major commercial decisions are made.
For some clients, that means due diligence. If land is being acquired, sold or financed, there may be a need to demonstrate that it is suitable for its current use or to understand whether historic activities could create future liabilities. For others, it means pre-purchase advice on a development site, helping to identify likely contamination risks and their implications before a transaction proceeds.
A better understanding of ground conditions gives developers confidence when testing viability and preparing for tender. It can reduce variation in contractor methodologies, create better opportunities for value engineering and support more robust cost planning.
In short: more ground knowledge = more certainty. That certainty has real value, especially on complex sites where hidden constraints can quickly become commercial issues.
Planning with confidence
Geoenvironmental advice also plays an important role in the planning process, where the level and timing of information can influence both strategy and submission.
The scope of work required will vary depending on the nature of the application, the client’s appetite for risk and the likely constraints associated with the site. An outline planning application may not require the same level of detail as a full application, but many clients still choose to investigate ground-related risks early to understand what they may face later on.
Rather than treating contaminated land as a technical issue to be addressed only when requested by planners or regulators, it can be used as part of a wider strategy to de-risk the project. A clearer understanding of the site can support more confident planning assumptions and reduce the chance of unexpected issues emerging later in the process.
The hidden risk: when soil becomes waste
“As soon as it’s in the bucket of the excavator, it becomes waste.”
– Adam Linnell
One of the most misunderstood aspects of geoenvironmental work is soil waste management. On many projects, excavated material is still viewed simply as soil that can be moved, reused or redistributed as needed. In regulatory terms, the picture is far more complex. Once material is excavated, it may be classified as waste, and that distinction has legal and commercial consequences.
Reusing excavated soils on site without the appropriate permits, exemptions or management plans can result in activity being classed as illegal landfilling. That can come as a surprise to project teams, particularly on sites where material is only being moved short distances or reused within the same development boundary.
Waste classification, reuse strategy and documentation all need to be considered early, not after excavation has begun.
The cost of getting it wrong
The consequences of poor soil waste planning can be far-reaching. There are financial risks, including landfill tax liabilities and penalties, but there are also programme implications. Where permits are required, approval times can be lengthy. If those requirements have not been identified at the right point in the project, works can stall while the necessary regulatory route is put in place.
Geoenvironmental advice helps ensure that materials are understood before they are disturbed, that the correct compliance route is identified and that project teams are not caught out by avoidable delays or unexpected costs.
When risks are understood and explained clearly from the beginning, they can usually be planned for. When they are discovered too late, they are much harder to manage efficiently.
Designing better outcomes through integrated ground engineering
A key strength of our geoenvironmental capability is its synergy with our established geotechnical capability.
Ground conditions do not divide themselves neatly into environmental and engineering categories. A single site may present contamination challenges, earthworks issues, foundation constraints and remediation requirements that all need to be considered together. Our integrated approach allows those factors to be assessed in the round, rather than in isolation.
That creates tangible benefits for clients; remediation strategies can be considered alongside ground improvement and design requirements, technical advice can be better coordinated across disciplines, and opportunities to improve efficiency and deliver buildable solutions can be identified earlier.