Mr. Pat Barry:

On the nature-based solutions, I do not think there are any real barriers to the adoption of nature-based solutions, apart from the guidelines from local authorities. We need to review the infrastructure guidelines and perhaps look at things such as whether we still require certain widths, for example 6 m wide access roads to housing estates and whether we need certain widths of paving. Could we create more optimal solutions? There is a very good example in Copenhagen where they have built a very dense extension to Copenhagen. They have minimised the use of hardstanding within the scheme. They have put the cars off to one side in separate car parking areas, which enables nature to be brought in right through the development. There are solutions we could look at to minimise the amount of concrete and hardstanding needed.

On the research, I believe the Deputy referred to a study we did with UCD on the potential to reduce carbon and costs within new housing. There was one example with pitched roofs where perhaps the roofs could be designed to be convertible to extend into the roof. There are probably other solutions such as looking at the typology. If we build denser typologies, for example, terraces, we can reduce the embodied impacts over lots of detached or semi-detached housing. There are lots of typologies of housing that can have a lower embodied impact due to the design rather than the materials.