| Water Sensitive
Urban Development
Model Planning Provisions
The source document is here
WORKSHOP SUMMARY
Thursday 25th May 2000
1.Background
In 1999 the Lower Hunter & Central Coast Regional Environmental
Management Strategy engaged Cameron Strategies to prepare model
planning provisions relating to water sensitive urban development .
The potential for applying water sensitive urban
development (WSUD) in the Lower Hunter and Central Coast was explored
in a detailed discussion paper circulated in mid 1999, and at three
consultation workshops held in August 1999. Subsequently,
a set of model planning provisions were prepared that could be incorporated
into development control plans and other planning documents administered
by local councils within the region. Copies of both the Discussion
Paper and the Model Planning Provisions are available from Meredith
Laing, LHCCREMS.
A final workshop on the proposed model planning provisions was held
on 25 May 2000, and was attended by a wide range of interested personnel
from councils within the region. The purpose of the workshop
was to canvas overall responses to the model planning provisions,
identify priorities and missing elements, and guide future directions
in the implementation of WSUD initiatives.
2. What is water sensitive urban development?
Water sensitive urban development (WSUD) describes a relatively
new approach to urban planning and design that highlights stormwater
treatment and use as a primary urban design feature. By integrating
stormwater elements upfront into the design, many environmental
values may be optimised, whilst also providing aesthetic and recreational
benefits.
WSUD incorporates a treatment chain of alternative
design elements that not only addresses flooding issues, but also
water quality, conservation and environmental issues at each point
in the chain.
3.Major emergent points
* Issues raised were predominantly challenges for practical implementation
What is required to make WSUD work?
* There is a need for practical assistance on how to implement WSUD
in day-to-day decisions.
* A primary concern related to bringing a more direct relationship
between the proposed star rating system and the specific hydrological
characteristics/ objectives for the site and its subcatchment.
The need for a relationship with the stormwater planning process
was also identified.
4.Questions raised
The discussion raised a wide range of questions. These need
to be addressed before WSUD can be implemented on a day-to-day basis
through the planning and development control system. A selection
of matters raised are presented below.
Catchment-based implementation
* Should there be performance targets for specific catchments? (defined
by the applicable stormwater management plan).
* Should implementation of WSUD development requirements await commissioning
and completion of detailed catchment and subcatchment studies and
ongoing monitoring programs?
* hould WSUD measures be specified that are appropriate for each
individual site, subdivision or subcatchment? What are the optimum
conditions for each WSUD measure?
Levels in the hydrological system
Do the model provisions place sufficient emphasis on the
subcatchment and subdivision scales?
* Do the model planning provisions fully reflect hydrological relationships
between the subcatchment, estate, street and building allotment
levels? What can be achieved at each of these levels?
Star rating assessment
* s a star rating system appropriate for assessing
development and subdivision proposals?
* Should the proposed star rating system incorporate weightings?
* Can the proposed minimum star rating be achieved on problem
sites that have impermeable soils or geotechnical hazards?
What options are available in the worst case scenario?
* Should the star rating system recognise separate categories for
water conservation, water quality and water balance?
Making the model provisions implementable
* What should be done to road test the proposed requirements?
* How do the proposed provisions relate to existing council requirements?
What needs to be done to adapt and modify requirements relating
to street and drainage design, and to integrate engineering specifications,
standards and private certification?
* What time frame is realistically required for implementation and
public acceptance? (eg took a long time to establish energy conservation
as an issue, despite the monetary advantages).
* What is required to ensure political commitment? (cost implications,
user friendly impact)
* How can adaptive management be applied (alter approach as better
information becomes available)
* What is the best way to provide scenarios for implementing WSUD
at the house, street, subdivision levels?
* Is an interim stage required before proceeding to a star rating
system? (For example, limited mandatory requirements for rainwater
tanks, porous paving, landscaping, analogous to early requirements
for building insulation).
* How should WSUD requirements be applied to redevelopment proposals?
Infrastructure implications
* How will implementation of WSUD requirements affect the planning
of water supply headworks?
Commercial/ industrial
* Are the proposed thresholds for industrial/commercial development
appropriate?
* Should there be specific requirements for commercial/ industrial
development? (eg entrapment of polluted water not infiltration;
litter and waste controls).
Public safety/ liability
* What are the public safety and duty of care implications?
For example, flooding; geotechnical constraints affect large areas
of Lake Macquarie. Installation & maintenance
* What mechanisms are required to ensure effective installation
and maintenance? (eg auditing).
* How can performance at building and street levels be assured so
as to achieve desired outcomes at the subdivision and subcatchment
levels?
Education & demonstration sites
* How should implementation of the model provisions be complemented
by education programs? For developers, designers, planners and the
community generally?
* How should implementation of the model provisions be complemented
by demonstration sites? For greenfield, infill and redevelopment
sites? (Greenfields seen as priority). Incentives
* Is it possible to link the model planning provisions with financial
incentives (eg differential rating, rebates)?
5.Next steps
Implementation of the water sensitive urban development
philosophy on an every-day basis requires policy initiatives on
a broad range of fronts. The issues raised in the workshop
illustrate that planning provisions need to be complemented by a
variety of educational institutional, capacity building, incentive
and financial measures.
The workshop points to the need for the following
four-pronged approach:
1. Refine the WSUD model planning provisions so as to address issues
raised at the workshop.
2. Prepare user-friendly practice notes that outline design, cost,
construction, performance and maintenance details.
3. Continue research into different WSUD scenarios, including comparisons
with existing practice and standards and analysis of relative performance.
4. Undertake education and training program using research scenarios,
demonstration sites and practice notes. |
