Title: WATER SENSITIVE URBAN DESIGN AND THE DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS PROCESS
1WATER SENSITIVE URBAN DESIGN AND THE DEVELOPMENT
APPROVALS PROCESS
- Identification of Issues Potential Solutions
for Better Implementation - Project facilitated by Shelley Shepherd,
- Essential Environmental Services
- Dr Mike Mouritz
- Department for Planning and Infrastructure
1
2Introduction
- Project initiated as a result of discussions held
at the Swan Canning Catchment Drainage Management
Forum in November 2003 - WSUD is one tool in a suite of mechanisms to
reduce nutrients and sediment entering the rivers - Management of urban stormwater has a significant
role to play in improving water quality - The benefits of WSUD are acknowledged but
implementation is limited for a range of reasons
2
3WSUD Study
- Aims
- Identify the land use and development control
mechanisms available to implement WSUD - Assess their adequacy
- Identify barriers to implementation
- Propose solutions to issues identified
3
4Study Process
- Stage 1 Desk-top Analysis
- Assessment of the WAPC/DPI policy framework and
the local government planning system - Discussions with key players in Local and State
Government and the private sector - Stage 2 Workshop
- Information gathered from Stage 1 used to scope
issues for further discussion and resolution - Attendees at the workshop from varied agencies
including DPI, DoE, Local Government, the water
engineering fraternity and the development
industry - Stage 3 Report Preparation
4
5Findings
- State and local government planning approval
system has the largest statutory role to play in
the implementation of WSUD - The planning tools, both statutory and strategic,
exist to incorporate WSUD into new developments,
BUT have no impact on existing areas
5
6Map of Statutory Approvals Process
6
7Findings
- The existing policy framework provides support
for urban water management and WSUD at all levels
of the process, however, improvements can be made
(and are being made) to strengthen the statutory
basis - The benefits of WSUD are acknowledged but
implementation is limited.why?
7
8Key Overarching Issues
- Institutional arrangements complicate the
implementation of WSUD as no one agency is
responsible for urban water management - Limited technical assessment of on-ground
performance of WSUD Best Management Practices
(BMPs) in Western Australia - Technical information specific to WA is limited
as most BMPs are derived from experiences in the
eastern states. Therefore there seems to be no
agreed approach to best practice that works well
in WA. - Can and will WSUD actually achieve a good outcome
for the Swan Canning Catchment? How much impact
will changing the water management of new urban
areas actually affect the river system?
8
9Development Approvals Process
- The top 5 tools regarded by the Workshop
attendees as having importance for implementation
of WSUD through the development approvals process
are - Design and implementation (construction)
- Maintenance
- Subdivision Approval and Conditions
- Statements of Planning Policy
- Regional Structure Plans
9
10Detailed Design and Implementation (Construction)
- Barriers
- Lack of performance standards for design and
implementation - Lack of criteria for design eg nutrient
stripping, infiltration - Cost/economic implications of complicated
treatment trains
- Solutions
- Develop agreed management practices to achieve
required performance - LG State capacity building to ensure WSUD
standards are enforced/complied with - Set responsibility for monitoring and reporting
of performance against conditions
10
11Maintenance
- Solutions
- Use demonstration projects to inform both LG and
designers - Full cost/benefit analysis of WSUD treatments
compared with conventional treatments is
required. If this information exists, it needs to
be collated and presented in a more effective
manner. - Review funding arrangements and transfer
mechanism to ensure adequate resources for
management over the long term
- Barriers
- Lack of funding (LG)
- Implementation cannot be enforced
- Lack of performance standards with regards to
design - High cost of maintenance to LG
11
12Subdivision Approval and Conditions
- Solutions
- Update conditions
- Set management targets based on receiving
environment requirements (i.e. a range of targets
may be developed for the different biophysical
zones or receiving water requirements it will
be harder in some locations than others). - Assess what is achievable from installation of
individual BMPs. This can be used to back-up
targets in conditions. - Incorporate clear, quantifiable water quality and
quantity WSUD targets in conditions - LG ( State) capacity building to ensure WSUD
standards (ARQ) are enforced/complied with
- Barriers
- The existing standard conditions are inadequate
- Conditions lack specificity/currency
- Clearing of conditions without adequate technical
expertise supported by approved guidelines,
criteria and data - Lack of quantifiable, binding WSUD conditions
that can be imposed (threat of overturing by
TPAT) - On-going conditions (post development) dont
exist
12
13Statements of Planning Policy
- Barriers
- Generic or generalised policy measures - not
specific enough to achieve outcomes on the ground
at subdivision level - ENR SPP contains words like encourage and
where possible. This makes it easy to discount - SPPs are not holeproof as they are only required
to have due regard for may be considered and
dismissed
- Solutions
- Need to be more specific (include water quality
objectives) - Need to ensure incorporation into TPS
- Involve stakeholders in development
- More technical rigor
13
14Regional Structure Plans
- Solutions
- Need to optimise WSUD and water quality
outcomes in planning policy make
targets/objectives clearer and specific - EPA/Water agencies to set targets
- Monitor water quality
- Need investment for monitoring and implementation
identified at regional levels - A prioritised program of developing regional and
sub-regional structure plans to ensure
incorporation of water management plans - Setting appropriate and clear guidelines to
achieve required outcomes (LG, WAPC/DPI, EPA,
SRT) with each party contributing funding based
on its benefit
- Barriers
- Current planning practice and existing RSPs dont
adequately consider the water issues - Lack of knowledge, information and data to
provide the context for an urban water management
strategy - Lack of targets for performance assessment and
monitoring of effectiveness of outcomes
14
15Summary of Findings
- Barriers outside the system
- lack of water quality targets, standards and
criteria - lack of regional perspective with respect to
drainage Need for Regional land/water structure
plans - confusion with regards to who does what within
Government (ie no clear decision to developers - lack of commitment to implementation exhibited
through a lack of effective funding
15
16Summary of Findings
- Key tools for implementation available
- Planning policy framework
- Structure plans
- Subdivision conditions
- Barriers inside the system
- Perceived cost of installation and maintenance
- Lack of data on existing and ongoing performance
of treatments - Lack of effective and agreed detailed
(engineering and planning) design guidelines
16
17Recommendations
- Clarification of the roles and (most importantly)
responsibilities for implementation of WSUD
across Government, focusing on the lower end of
the process, particularly as it relates to the
roles and responsibilities of referral agencies
(ie who makes what decision) - Develop appropriate water quality (and quantity)
targets on a catchment or biophysical unit
basis for key threatened environments such as the
Swan and Canning Rivers - Improve the WAPC/DPI policy framework through the
finalisation of the Water Resources SPP and the
incorporation of water issues more firmly into
Liveable Neighbourhoods review
17
18Recommendations
- Develop new standard conditions (both specific
and general) to enable statutory planners to
impose WSUD conditions more easily - Develop or modify the water quality monitoring
framework to incorporate appropriate feedback
systems to ensure that there is a process of
continuous improvement with regards to
implementation. - Review and consolidate information on
cost/benefit analysis of WSUD treatments in
comparison with conventional drainage structures
and release the information to key stakeholders
18
19Recommendations
- Implement demonstration projects and ensure that
their performance is reviewed over the medium to
long-term The projects must involve monitoring,
assessment, evaluation and extension of results
to ensure ongoing learning within the profession.
- Develop an easy-to-read brief summary of what
WSUD means to a statutory planner to aid in the
imposition of appropriate and effective
conditions. - Undertake work and/or consolidate information on
infiltration and nutrient export rates of WA
soils and nutrient uptake of soils and grasses
19
20Recommendations
- Review the appropriateness of the Australian
Rainfall Quality (ARQ) Guideline for their
applicability to the Western Australian context. - Development of a Communication Strategy for the
new ARQ and training for LG engineers to ensure
effective capacity building - Further develop specific, technical guidance for
local government engineers consistent with the
draft ARQ Guidelines and the up-dated Stormwater
Management Manual
20
21Recommendations
- Increase focus on planning and design of WSUD
treatments particularly the demonstration and
review of Best Planning Practices design
solutions. - Develop a Communication Strategy to raise the
awareness in the general community of the
importance of WSUD in urban areas - Until stormwater is looked at as a resource
rather than a waste, we will be unable to achieve
significant progress.
21