regional advisory panel special meeting – … van gasselt – dplh john savell – doc/crcwsc eprg...

Wednesday,23May2018 Confidential Page1of2

Regional Advisory Panel Special Meeting – Western Region

Meeting No. 30 Meeting Minutes

WA Trustees Building, L2, 133 St Georges Tce Board Room @

9:00am 28/03/18

Attendees

Mike Mouritz – CRCWSC Board

Emma Yuen – CRCWSC Regional Manager

Antonietta Torre – DWER/CRCWSC EPRG

Shelley Shepherd – New WAter Ways Inc.

Greg Ryan – LandCorp

Max Hipkins – City of Nedlands

Giles Pickard – City of Subiaco

Emma Monk – DBCA

Jane McCredie– DPLH (proxy)

Sue Martin – DoC (proxy)

Nick Deeks - GHD

Barry Ball - CRCWSC

Apologies

Joanne Woodbridge – EMRC

Sergey Volotovskiy – Water Corporation

Matt Hipsey - UWA

Loretta van Gasselt – DPLH

John Savell – DoC/CRCWSC EPRG

Neil Burbridge – City Of Armadale

Bruce Young – Spatial Property

Allison Hailes - UDIA

Item No. Agenda Topic

1. Welcome & Apologies Mike opened the meeting at 9:00 am.

2. Acceptance of Minutes section 9 should read "Max Hipkins" not "Mac" section 11 should read "search the" not "search he" missing action from previous meeting not in table "Provide text that they can use

in their plans including sustainability approaches and list of WSC Index goal indicators. Work with WALGA to get the key messages out there. Emma Y to use Joanne, Emma M, Max and Adele as a sounding board for this"

3. Actions from previous minutes Meeting 29 – all actions done except 5 which is ongoing Meeting 28 – all actions done except:

- #2, Matt Hipsey to provide written or verbal update on TAP at the next meeting - #6, deferred

Meeting 27 – all actions done Meeting 30 Aug – all actions done except:

- #1, 3, 5, 6, 8,9 to be discussed at next meeting during Matt Hipsey’s TAP session update

New action: “Nick Deeks to circulate out of session the criteria (and likelihood of being used) for TAPs case studies and all to provide suggestions.”

Note: Wanju is no longer a demo project but a TAPs case study.

4. Correspondence None.


Item No. Agenda Topic

5. Executive Update Action:

Barry Ball requested feedback on the Research Adoption Portfolio Action Plan to Emma Y by 11 April.

6. Regional Manager Report

Note: Winsome MacLaurin is the new Project Manager for DWER water sensitive cities.

Action:

Opportunities Policy - Jane, Emma and Barry to work out a process for CRCWSC input into SPPs.

Emma Y to contact Barnaby McIlrath regarding B5.1 “statutory Planning for WSC” and how this should influence the legislation based on findings from other states.

All to provide Shelley Shepherd with comments on the Transition Strategy before Easter. Comments from the Water Corporation and the Department of Planning, Heritage & Lands in particular are being sought.

Christian Ulrich is seeking a new Chair of the PSC All supported a LGA forum that targeted key groups (eg planning directors).

Shelley, Emma M, Emma Y, Giles and Max agreed to form a working group to decide what to do and who would be funded to do it. They will inform the RAP of their decision before the next meeting.

Su to include on next agenda the issue of DWER roles/participation in RAP and CRCWSC.

Mike M to take Regional Manager value proposition to Mike Rowe.

16. Calendar of Events WA CRCWSC

Action:

Su to add CRCWSC conference in Brisbane March 26-28 2019 Su to add 202020 Vision Greenlight tour May 1 2018

17. Other Business

None.

18. Meeting close and next meeting

Next meeting Wednesday, 30 May 2018.


WESTERN Regional Advisory Panel

ACTIONS

Legend

Done

Not Done

Deferred

On Agenda

Actions Description Who When

Actions from Meeting No. 30

1. Barry Ball requested feedback on the Research Adoption Portfolio Action Plan to Emma Y by 11 April.

All 11 April

2. Opportunities Policy – Jane, Emma and Barry to work out a process for CRCWSC input into SPPs

Jane, Emma

& Barry

3. Emma Y to contact Barnaby McIlrath regarding B5.1 “statutory planning for WSC” and how this should influence the legislation based on findings from other states.

Emma Y

4. All to provide Shelley Shepherd with comments on the Transition Strategy before Easter. Comments from Water Corporation and Planning in particular are being sought.

All 30

March

5. All supported a LGA forum that targeted key groups (eg. Planning directors).

Shelley, Emma M, Emma Y, Giles and Max agreed to form a working group to decide what to do and who would be funded to do it. They will inform the RAP of their decision before the next meeting.

Shelley,

Emma M,

Emma Y,

Giles & Max

30 May

6. Su to include on next agenda the issue of DWER roles/participation in RAP and the CRCWSC.

Su 30 May

7. Mike M to take the Regional Manager’s value proposition to Mike Rowe (DG DWER).

Mike M



8. Su to add CRCWSC conference in Brisbane March 26-28 2019 and 202020 Vision Greenlight tour May 1 2018 into the Calendar of Events.

Su 30 May

9. Nick Deeks to circulate out of session the criteria (and likelihood of being used) for TAPs case studies and all to provide suggestions.

All

Outstanding actions from previous meetings

7. Provide text LGAs can use in their plans including sustainability approaches and list of WSC Index goal indicators. Work with WALGA to get the key messages out there. Emma Y to use Joanne, Emma M, Max Hipkins and Adele as a sounding board for this.

Emma Y

2. Matt Hipsey to provide a hands on session in June 2018. Matt to provide written or verbal update on TAP at the next RAP meeting in May.

Matt Hipsey 30 May

1.

WRAP to provide detail on currently known limitations or difficulties of application of existing TAPS to WA conditions to Nick Deeks, Giles Pickard and Matt Hipsey.

All 30 May

2. WRAP to recommend a case study which can be used for beta testing of current TAPs. This should be an existing project so that results of application of the TAPs can be compared with known outcomes. This project could also explore and highlight gaps in the TAPs re consideration of groundwater (including servicing and surface water iterations). Suggestions include Wungong (which has a benefit of re-engaging with MRA) or Byford, as both have pre and post development monitoring information.

All 30 May

3. All to provide suggestions for additional representatives on the project groups for TAP2 and TAP3 if required. Currently Giles and Nick (TAP2) and Matt (TAP3 and overall).

All 30 May

4. Optimise opportunities for IRP3 & 4 case studies to test TAPs. This is built into both project proposals. Will need transparent scopes/budgets to allocate clear responsibilities for budget expenditure and delivery.

Shelley Shepherd, Ben Harvey, Greg Ryan and Geoffrey London

30 May



5. All to think about the value of the urban metabolism model as a component in TAPs acknowledging it is already embedded in IRP4. Then communicate this via the PSC to Christian.

All 30 May

6. Identify opportunities for knowledge transfer and training/testing of beta versions and refined modules in WA. Budget exists for at least 1 workshop per year in WA.

Christian Urich

30 May

Western Region Manager Update

WRAP 30th May 2018

Activity title Outcomes achieved Priority going forward Items for RAP to advise upon

CRCWSC executive

Andra Pradesh first round awarded to Alluvium, next round will be out in early June CRCWSC Commercial Manager position has been interviews but still to make an offer. New Collaborative Activity Project Schedule (CAPS) is used to plan CRCWSC projects

CRCWSC Board Meeting in June with Board, and AC

CRCWSC AC

EPRG Meeting 17th May

Tranche 1

General operations and Regional Manager

Retreat and Regional managers meeting in Melbourne 18‐22 June New CRCWSC meeting protocols * Be Punctual * Be Prepared * Be Present * Be Respectful

Attachment: changes in staff

Adoption ‐ IRP1

Winsome MacLaurin is the new Executive Officer for the TN Various meetings for the TN and subcommittees in past month. Subcommittees have prioritised actions for the Implementation Plan to be finalized June 2018.

On agenda: update on IRP1 and Transition network

IRP2 Benefit Cost Analysis Tool ‐– document to guide the inputs to the spreadsheet tool has been drafted EOI sent for training session on BCA and Non Market Value tool 22nd June. Subiaco WWTP Innovation Hub is progressing

On agenda: update

IRP3 Proposal was circulated out of session On agenda: update

IRP4 Fact sheet developed Build collaboration with Curtin Uni and CRCLCL around Knutsford

On agenda: update

IRP5 Mini brainstorming workshop held March 1 Draft stage 1 report by GHD to be revised by end of May Ideas for Brabham planned for 13/14 June Will not submit the draft proposal for stage 2 IRP5 to the board this financial year Chair of Project steering committee ‐ Antoinette Torre ‐ has taken on a role with the Watercorp Report is being revised by GHD and WaterTechnology by end of first week in June.

Deliver report to PSC in Early June Establish expert panel

On agenda: update

Opportunities – policy

SPP 2.1, 2.9 and 2.10 has established a Stakeholder Group and Shelley Shepherd is the CRCWSC Rep. Coordinated conversation with Barnaby McIlrath, Jane Credie and Shelley Shepherd

Sample text to be developed for councils for use in their sustainability plans

Opportunities ‐ Projects

Regional Project – combining Sediment Taskforce, Green Walls at Bentley and Eric Singleton Wetland Bentley renamed “Bentley 360” METRONET – no update Subiaco Oval – no update Transition Network Policy subcommittee has a list of priorities

Grants Smart cities round 2 released On agenda: funding opportunities

TAP1 ‐ WSC index

Urbaqua is conducting Index workshops for Mundaring on May 17 and Victoria Park May 21. Vincent will follow in July

The second cohort will occur later in the year dependent on demand for Index workshops.

TAP2 – planning scale

Contract agreed to start in June UWA is yet to start component. Nic has progressed the case study

Will provide verbal update at meeting in July.

Information: Update is premature and will be delayed to July meeting. Nic has made process on case studies

TAP3 – detailed

As above for TAP2.

Adoption ‐ WA Research and Adoption Plan

All feedback on Research Adoption was forward to Barry. This will be incorporated into the report for the board

KAT – capacity building and community engagement

Transition Network Technical subcommittee has a list of priorities Transition Network Community Engagement group to develop a list of key messages.

Analysis: Evaluation

No update on Demo projects

Conferences Australian Urban Design Research Centre (AUDRC) ran a session on “What does it really look like to be a Water Sensitive City?” on 24th April. 202020 vision Green light tour workshop held 1 May

Water and Wellbeing session to be held at AUDRC at the social Impact festival potentially 16 or 23 July.

Media

Stakeholder engagement by Regional Manager

Meetings with:

Carmen Lawrence regarding coalition for liveability

Meeting convened to discuss Nyoongar engagement

Damien Pericles REALM involved with the Curtin Plan

Attended UDIA session on:

Lightweight construction

Community titles (coming up)

Re‐engage with UWA (and potentially Curtin) re their campus planning

Information: social impact festival event planned on “Water and wellbeing”

Development sector engagement

State Government has “suspended work” on a long‐running project to create a Green Growth Plan. The decision is supported by both UDIA and Conservation Council. UDIA water committee held a meeting April 6 Opportunities including:

Eric Lumsden sent letter on use the Metropolitan Regional Improvement fund for water sensitive developments.

Alternative water supplies subgroup of UDIA water committee

Smoothing approvals subgroup of the UDIA water committee

Lunch and learn at Cedar woods.

Local Government sector engagement

Agreed that Shelley Shepherd will deliver LGA engagement using RAP budget Met with City of Swan re IRP5 LGA quarterly update has been developed. Waiting on communications to finalise a 2 page brochure on value proposition for LGAs

Possible meeting with Technical Western Suburbs Group in 2018.

On agenda: update

Water utility engagement

Jamie Ewert and Emma Yuen are working with Watercorp on a follow up for Subiaco strategic resource precinct including:

Water Research and Innovation Precinct Partnership ‐ Market Sounding Brief circulated

Organization Current staff departing For new organisation Incoming employee

Organizational roles

DWER Transition Network EO

Antonietta Torre Water corporation Winsome MacLaurin

DWER RAP EO Su Boyd Maternity leave Rose ??

Water Corporation Natasha Ogonowski NEW ROLE ‐ strategy Nadine Riethmuller

Dept of Water – ED planning

Greg Claydon Susan Worley

Retired to Queensland assessment/allocation

Paul Brown > external?

RAP – DPLH rep Ben Harvey NEW ROLE – Director Heritage

Loretta van Gasselt

City of Gosnells Markus Botte Margaret river ???

City of Subiaco Giles Pickard City of Canning Nick Woodhouse??

Committee roles

RAP – UWA Peter Davies Retirement ??

RAP‐ landscape architect role

Giles Pickard City of Canning ??

RAP – UDIA representative

Bruce Young Stockland, Yolk, Peet, Lendlease, MRA??

RAP – DPLH rep Ben Harvey NEW ROLE – Director Heritage

Loretta van Gasselt

Board Simon Biggs

TN rep ‐ UDIA Urban Water Committee

Samantha Thompson NEW ROLE ‐ Planning/LGA/ Development ‐ TN representative

Susan Worley, Emma Yuen

CRCWSC ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR 2017/18

WSC Forum with LGPA, focussing on Planning managers (Budget $1000 – 1 day)

Contact LGPA and meet to discuss opportunity for us to speak at a breakfast function. LGPA to retain all proceeds but co-badge with CRCWSC and NWW

Arrange agenda including speakers and content. Incorporate CRCWSC research and tools in each presentation

Possible agenda and messages

Topic CRCWSC research / tools

Possible speaker

20 mins Alignment of WSC with Corporate goals and business case for WSC

Planning framework and opportunities for enhancing outcomes

IRP2

WSC Index

Shelley Shepherd

20 mins Engineering activities to deliver WSC (approval, design and retrofit – drains & tree pits)

Linkages with decision-making and strategic planning

Value of living stream and trees

20 mins Asset management and parks – strategic planning for parks and value of green infrastructure and maintenance – trees and rain gardens

IRP2

Urban heat & microclimate

Community values??

Martyn Glover

20 mins Panel session with speakers

Half day Forum with IPWEA on Asset management and maintenance for a WSC (budget $2500 – 2.5 days)

Contact IPWEA to discuss opportunity to co-deliver a half day forum. IPWEA to retain all proceeds but co-badge with CRCWSC and NWW

Focus is on Corporate services and asset management. Show case studies of how LGs are valuing WSC assets – not just financial but also TBL economic values. Demonstrate how financial planning can be effective at delivering WSC outcomes. Consider new ways to track assets and forecast expenditure.

Consider linkages with ISCA

High-level pitch to the unconverted Local Governments (budget $1500 – 1.5 days)

Identify 3 or 4 “unconverted LGs” Identify key water issues and barriers to WSC in that LG and identify other LGs who have come up

with solutions and show benefits of their actions Approach one LG to arrange a meeting with CEO, Mayor and Executive. Meeting to be attended

by Josh Byrne and the other successful LG person. Show the level of support that is available for all disciplines at all levels for delivery of WSC (CRCWSC, Index, New WAter Ways, other events etc)

Perth Water Sensitive Transition Network

Meeting Tuesday 15 May 2018

140 William Street

Report back by Subcommittees

Community Engagement & Communication

Technical Capacity & Partnerships

Policy & Governance

Research

Community Engagement Subcommittee

• Aqwest

• Busselton Water

• City of Subiaco

• CRC for Water Sensitive Cities

• Department of Biodiversity, Conservation & Attractions

• Department of Water and Environmental Regulation

• Josh Byrne & Associates

• Perth NRM

• SERCUL

• Urbaqua

• WA Local Government Association

• Water Corporation

• To help build community capital and progress Perth’s transition to a leading water sensitive city in Australia

• Discuss opportunities to enhance the ‘community mandate’

• Share information on current and planned community engagement activities – collaborate where possible to show WSC outcomes

• Seek to develop a program of common messaging to grow water literacy

Community Engagement Subcommittee

Immediate actions and priorities:

• Build common message (definition) and phrases for all to use and educate with – Attachment 3

DISCUSSION

• Improve understanding of the community’s low value of water

• Seek opportunities for trials and demonstrations of engagement or education with common messages ‐ for example, METRONET community workshops, local government vision workshops and key community events

Technical Capacity & Partnerships Subcommittee

Progress on priority actionso Quantification of non‐market values (benefits/risks) tools and training

o NWW draft factsheeto Training being developed (CRCWSC IRP2 and national CB program)

o Funding models and incentives tools and programso Risk assessment and management tools, training and case studies

o LG WSUD and risk workshop conducted 4 April. Next step: prepare a risk assessment spreadsheet

o Maintenance tools, information & trainingo NWW introductory training 8 Mayo NWW maintenance app being trialled with LGso NWW maintenance workshop with LG being plannedo CRCWSC IPWEA maintenance session being planned

o WSUD system performance information & trainingo NWW introductory training 27 Marcho NWW Melville green infrastructure in streets workshop 11 Mayo HIA/MBA/Property Council breakfast 6 Juneo CRCWSC Local Government Planners Association breakfast being planned for Juneo Bus trip/demo tour to Armadale and Serpentine Jarrahdale 26 June


Progress on priority actions contdo Exemplar projects that are ‘helped’ throughout the design & assessment/approval

processo Multi‐stakeholder committee being formed to discuss the approvals process

o Government‐led demonstration projects (MRA/Landcorp/Dept of Communities)o Knutsfordo Bentley regenerationo Subiaco (if WSC/WSUD included as a key principle)o METRONET precincts (if WSC/WSUD included as a key principle)o Waterbank riversideo NWW WSUD training workshop for MRA/Landscorp in June

o Local visioning / benchmarking workshopso Two more Index workshops: Mundaring (17 May) and Victoria Park (21 May)

o Train elected representatives (State & LG) on WSUD/WSCo Provide mentoring via informal networks and through established mentoring

program/s


Immediate priority actions:

o Develop partnerships around projects (on‐ground projects and policies development) as one way to connect a diverse range of stakeholders (including non‐water sector)

o State Planning Policies for Water Resources

o Knutsford project

o Engage Whadjuk Noongar people to gather local water cycle knowledge and water stories

o Aboriginal engagement meeting on 4 May ‐ Rachel Williams will provide more information

o Train water professionals and champions in collaboration, leadership and engagement tools

o National CB training tool being developed

o Next NWW Water Industry Night will help with our collaboration, leadership and engagement

Policy & Governance Subcommittee

Short term (<1 year) priorities1. Water Resource Management Bill (DWER)

2. Suite of State Planning Policies (DPLH)

3. Design WA, including Liveable Neighbourhoods and precinct guidelines (DPLH)

4. Waterwise Perth Strategy (Joint)

Medium term (1‐3 years) priorities1. Climate change adaptation and mitigation (DWER)

2. Environmental Protection Policies (DWER)

3. Better Urban Water Management (DPLH/DWER)

Policy & Governance SubcommitteePotential areas for further consideration

1. LGA local planning policies

2. Drainage governance

3. MAR governance and policies

4. Approval processes for developers to consider WSUD initiatives

5. Data sharing governance

6. Funding models for ongoing research and capacity building

Research Subcommittee

• Priority areas for research

– Social Science ‐ Community mandate for change

– Planning ‐WSUD for infill activity centres

– Economics ‐Maintenance and lifecycle costs

– Engineering ‐ Urban Water Balance at multiple scales – modelling scenarios, water treatment

• Proposed delivery

1

Tranche 2 Project Proposal

1. Project title: Guiding Urban Growth and Renewal to Deliver Water Sensitive Outcomes: An Integrated Urban and Water Planning Framework

2. Summary: Australia’s major cities are experiencing unprecedented population growth which will need to be accommodated through a combination of geographical expansion of urban areas and infill development/densification, placing increasing strain on infrastructure, water resources and the environment. These conditions are further exacerbated by more frequent extreme weather events (drought and flooding) associated with climate change. Collectively, these modern-day drivers pose significant challenges for aspiring water sensitive cities. Achieving water sensitive city aspirations for liveability, resilience and sustainability requires greater integration between urban planning and water planning processes. To embed water sensitive practices, it is necessary to influence a variety of urban outcomes such as land-use, transport, building design, urban design, and landscape architecture; together with water management, supply and servicing options. To do this it is necessary to use and influence the urban and infrastructure planning systems, including the processes and instruments such as planning policy, governance, regulation, legislation, incentives and standards. IRP3 seeks to develop an Integrated Urban and Water Planning Framework to provide targeted guidance on how to deliberately guide and co-ordinate urban development at a range of scales, from precinct to city/metropolitan scale, in different contexts to achieve water sensitive outcomes. Notably, this project intends to address the full breadth of the urban planning process (e.g. from policy and regional planning, through to development approvals). The project aims to achieve this through an action research approach, working with industry stakeholders on real-world projects, in real-time, to explore how government and industry stakeholders can be brought together in collaborative processes and to define the strategies, processes, methods and instruments that can be used to facilitate integrated urban and water planning. This project builds on the findings of research projects from Tranche 1 including research on collaborative planning, governance, regulatory frameworks, statutory planning and others. A prototype of the Integrated Urban and Water Planning Framework, developed during Phase 1 of IRP3 (scoping phase), is presented in Figure 1 below and summarised in detail in Appendix A. Figure 1 also highlights the CRCWSC T1 & T2 research basis for IRP3.

2

Figure 1. Integrated Urban and Water Planning Framework highlighting CRCWSC T1 & T2 research basis for IRP3. Refer to Appendix A for a description of the different phases of the Framework depicted in Figure 1 and an explanation of how these apply using Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area as a worked example. This document should be read in conjunction with Appendix B, which provides a description of the activities undertaken as part of Phase 1 of IRP3 (scoping phase), including development of this Framework.

3. Project leader & deputy: Project Leader: Chris Chesterfield (TBC)

Deputy: TBC (complementary academic background)

4. Project type and activity: IRP (Integrated Research Project) 5. Participating organisations & team structure: Team structure & roles: The table below shows the general team structure and a description of the roles. Table 1. General team structure and role descriptions

Group Roles

Project Management Project Leader (Responsibility for the project delivery. Someone with a reputation and established relationships in the planning sector, water sector and research community, with good coverage/understanding of the different disciplines and urban development processes) Deputy Leader * (Complementary academic or industry background to Project Leader. A strategic role, someone who can bring in experts as needed, with good coverage/understanding of the different disciplines, and able to integrate discipline-specific learnings) Research Assistant * (General admin and research support)

3

* Either the Deputy Leader or RA could have a more substantive role as the Project Manager depending on the candidates Project Management team is responsible for coordinating integration with other IRPs

Research Leadership A group comprising the Project Leader and several Discipline Leads (e.g. research/industry experts in collaborative planning, governance, regulation, planning law, urban planning, water planning) that will oversee (a) the development of guidance in relation to each phase of the Framework (see Work Package 2), and (b) case study activities (see Work Package 3). Discipline Leads will also provide researchers/industry practitioners to undertake relevant project activity (as needed).

Project researchers/experts

Academic support (short-term or part-time roles). Initially sought from CRC Universities (likely Post-Docs), but may involve other institutions if there are capability gaps (e.g. urban planning from RMIT), or industry (e.g. secondment from Victorian Planning Authority). In relation to “water planning”, this can be resourced through in-kind contributions from industry and academic partners.

Industry supports/leads. Industry in-kind contributions or secondments to support industry engagement particularly in relation to urban planning and water planning as part of research case studies (could also be Case study leads).

Case Study Leads Part-time Case Study Leads, based in each case study location, that will guide the development of a research case study, facilitate industry participation, garner local in-kind and cash support, and disseminate outcomes locally etc.

Other Roles Monitoring & Evaluation expert, with involvement peaking at particular intervals. Expertise in social learning, experimentation, evaluation and social impact.

Project Steering Committee (PSC) **

The main purpose of the PSC is to provide a joint leadership forum between industry and research partners with direct interests in the project outputs and subsequent outcomes. The PSC is therefore a resource that is a critical part of the overall project delivery team, and it should provide valuable, constructive and active input into the project to help maximise the value and benefits of the project work and the adoption of project outputs.

Team members: Note the team membership is evolving and still being formed. ** Composition of PSC has been evolving. In parallel with the IRP3 project proposal review and approval process, the re-establishment of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) will be needed to strengthen alignment between IRP3 and IRP4. In general, PSC members will provide valuable, constructive and active input into the project. Depending on the context, PSC members could provide in-kind support for local case studies or specific work packages. However, the unique role and contribution of each PSC member will need to be defined and agreed upon at the commencement of this project. Table 2. IRP3 Team members

Name Title Affiliation Contribution/role

Chris Chesterfield Mr CRC for Water Sensitive Cities (VIC)

Possible Project Leader. Oversee research, engagement, communication and contributes to research.

John O'Dwyer Mr Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) (NSW)

Project Steering Committee member**

Sarah Watkins Ms Melbourne Water (VIC) Project Steering Committee member** Loretta VanGasselt

Ms Department of Planning (WA)


Darren Wilson Mr City of Greater Dandenong (VIC)


John Devine Mr City of Unley (SA) Project Steering Committee member** Shelley Shepherd Ms Urbaqua (WA) Project Steering Committee member** Paul Greenfield Prof. Private Consultant

(QLD) Project Steering Committee member**

4

Andrew Chapman Mr South East Water (VIC) Possible Case study lead for VIC case study Project Steering Committee member**

Sadeq Zaman Mr Inner West Council (NSW)


Shiroma Maheepala

Dr Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning (VIC)


Brian Head Prof. The University of Queensland (QLD)

Possible Discipline Lead. Member of Research Leadership team.

Steven Kenway A/Prof The University of Queensland (QLD)

Support linkages to IRP4

Christian Urich Dr Monash University Support linkages to TAP Barnaby McIlrath Mr Maddocks (VIC) Project Steering Committee member** Darryl Low Choy Prof. Griffith University (QLD) Project Steering Committee member** Mellissa Bradley Ms Water Sensitive SA Project Steering Committee member** Chris Tanner Mr CRC for Water Sensitive

Cities (QLD) Possible Case study lead for QLD case study

Briony Rogers Dr Monash University (VIC) Possible Discipline Lead. Member of Research Leadership team.

Peter Newton

Prof.

Swinburne University (VIC)

Connect the project to other work nationally (e.g. CRC LCL and CRC Spatial), Connect to the Advisory Committee.

Various TBC Project Researchers TBC Deputy Project Leader TBC Project Manager/Research Assistant

6. Project aim(s) and objectives: Taking an action research approach, this project seeks to answer the overarching research question “How can different types of urban development be deliberately guided, at a range of planning scales, to achieve water sensitive outcomes?” by working with industry stakeholders on real-world projects to achieve the following objectives: Objective 1: Explore how different actors (e.g. government, service providers, community etc.) can be brought together in collaborative governance arrangements, in such a way that influences urban planning processes, and outcomes, towards achieving improved water sensitive outcomes. Objective 2: Develop a new “Integrated Urban and Water Planning Framework” to combine, and communicate, a suite of strategies, planning/governance processes, tools and regulatory instruments that can be used to help optimise water sensitive outcomes across a number of “planning phases”. After building a significant body of research through the Tranche 1 program, the CRCWSC has become increasingly focused on translating research into tangible action and impact. Accordingly, the CRCWSC has set a number of 2020/21 Objectives that seek to mainstream knowledge and adoption with the aim to have an impact on real-world problems. This project will contribute to the achievement of these Objectives, as outlined in the CRCWSC Strategic Plan 2016/17 – 2020/21, with a particular emphasis on the following two Objectives:

● “The rules and regulations by which our cities are planned and developed actively support application of WSC principles”, and

● “WSC best practice is implemented in the practices (tools and techniques) used by urban planning, architecture, water management practitioners, and the development

5

sector to deliver WSC strategies and create the physical, social, and biological form of cities” (CRCWSC 2017, p.12).

7. Identified transition needs: Australia’s major cities are experiencing unprecedented population growth. The national population is expected to reach approximately 35 million by 2050, and 70% of the growth is expected within the major capital cities (Coleman, 2016). In 2016-2017, Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane together accounted for over 70 per cent of Australia’s population growth (ABS, 2018). This growth is occurring not only from urban expansion, but increasingly from infill development. In all major cities the forecast proportion of infill development is 50% or greater, ranging from 50% in South East Queensland to 60-70% in Adelaide and Sydney (Coleman, 2016). To overcome the challenges presented by population growth, the academic scholarship has highlighted the importance of using integrated urban planning to ensure urban areas and cities are sustainable and adaptable to future challenges (Petit-Boix et al., 2017). An integrated urban planning process recognises that all water systems are interconnected with each other and other urban systems (e.g. parks, roads, energy and waste) so that efficiencies and synergies arise from a coordinated approach (IWA, 2016). The table below illustrates why this is necessary in the context of water sensitive cities, using examples for particular water services. The current lack of integration, or disconnect, between water planning and urban planning is considered to be one of the key barriers to achieving water sensitive cities, as identified in the CRCWSC’s Transition Needs. Table 3. Examples highlighting the need to integrate water services into urban planning decisions. An integrated urban and water planning process will deliberately integrate the planning of water sensitive services into key planning processes and decisions about land use and development at different scales (i.e. including spatial planning and general land use, urban form, street layouts, streetscapes, development typologies and the built form) for different development contexts (e.g. greenfield, brownfield, infill).

Water Sensitive Approaches Examples of the need for integrating water planning and urban planning Service Approach

Water supply Fit-for-purpose supply Alternative water supplies Efficiency

Supply diversification results in increasing use of a range of water sources. Water quality is appropriate for use and water efficiency is maximised. Rainwater, stormwater runoff and wastewater generated from urban development is treated as a resource, and is reused at different scales within or beyond the development. This may include use of stormwater or wastewater for groundwater recharge/replenishment and recovery. Space for treatment, storage, distribution and pumping infrastructure needs to be allowed for within the development. Sites can also be co-located with synergistic infrastructure (e.g. energy and waste services).

Wastewater management

Local and precinct scale treatment & reuse

In addition to the above, in some states there is increasing interest in ‘offset schemes’ by which augmentations to reduce discharges from wastewater treatment plants or spills from the sewerage system are offset by urban or rural stormwater quality projects (such as wetlands). Opportunities arise for decentralised solutions which operate at a range of scales.

Stormwater management

WSUD

Lakes, water courses, wetlands, swales, bio-filtration systems, raingardens and other green-blue infrastructure are integral features of the urban landscape and need to be protected, planned and designed within the urban form, and in some cases the built form (e.g. rainwater tanks, green walls and green roofs).

6

Drainage (flood management)

Multi-functional urban spaces

Public spaces are being designed and/or redeveloped into multi-use assets that primarily function as community spaces but also function as retarding basins or detention storage during extreme rainfall events (e.g. Rotterdam’s Water Squares).

Multi-functional assets

For lower intensity rainfall events, ‘smart’ rainwater tanks can be installed at individual properties, controlled remotely, to achieve multiple benefits: capturing and holding rainwater for reuse, with automatic release of stored water in advance of forecast higher intensity/duration rainfall events (e.g. being explored for Fishermans Bend Urban Renewal Area)

Urban cooling Street trees, wetlands, irrigated open space, green roofs and walls

Maximising the cooling effects of green infrastructure to deliver the largest benefits for human thermal comfort depends on the design of the landscape (e.g. tree grouping and spacing), streets (e.g. street orientation, width) and the built environment (e.g. building heights), and to be supported by active irrigation. The Principles for landscape-scale tree management highlight these interactions (Project B3.2).

Integrated Services

Urban water metabolism

Integrated water-energy or water-energy-waste services require integrated planning approaches (e.g. use of insinkerators to increase organise waste in sewage; energy from biogas).

Within Australia the need for integration of urban planning and water planning is identified in key planning documents in various states, including Water for Victoria Plan (DELWP, 2016), Plan Melbourne 2017 - 2050 Strategy (DELWP, 2017), 2017 Metropolitan Water Plan for Greater Sydney (Metropolitan Water, 2017) and the South East Queensland Regional Plan (Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, 2017). Water planning has also been incorporated into planning guidelines for growth areas in Western Australia and Victoria for a number of years. Better Urban Water Management (Western Australian Planning Commission, 2008) was created to support an integrated approach to land use planning and water management, and the Precinct Structure Planning Guidelines (Victorian Planning Authority) require and provide guidance on developing an Integrated Water Management Plan. More broadly, integrated planning is a feature of good-practice planning principles and protocols in Australia (e.g. Infrastructure Australia, 2011, Planning Institute of Australia, 2013). Various government, research and industry groups within Australia and overseas have highlighted the importance of integrated urban and water planning processes, including Water Research Foundation and CSIRO (2010), Water Services Association of Australia (WSAA), the Productivity Commission’s National Water Reform Draft Report (Productivity Commission, 2017), Water Research Foundation (2016) and the International Water Association’s IWA Principles for Water-Wise Cities (2016). This is also evident from the international literature which identifies the importance of integrating spatial or urban planning with water planning and the benefits this brings.1 In 2016, the CRCWSC undertook extensive consultation with its industry partners and stakeholders to understand ongoing industry needs. A total of 17 industry needs, along with some regionally significant opportunities were identified through this process, which provided the basis for designing the second phase of the CRCWSC’s research activities. While this project contributes to a number of needs, two in particular are a key focus of this project, with emphasis on Need 8:

1. Strengthened and aligned policy, legislation and regulation in support of WSCs 1 Particularly water resource planning in the United States and Europe (e.g. Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) 2018; Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR); Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA), Woltker & Al, 2007; Fidelis & Roebeling, 2014); and Green Infrastructure/Stormwater Management Programs in particular cities in the United States, such as Portland and Chicago (WERF, 2010, City of Chicago, 2014).

7

8. Achieving multiple benefits through integrated planning and design of water systems and the urban form

8. Knowledge base and research gaps:

The project builds on several previous CRCWSC research outcomes in Tranche 1 and it will also draw on and integrate aspects of T2 research, particularly linking in with IRP4 and the TAP (Tools and Products) program (specific linkages with T2 are described in the next section in relation to each work package). This is summarised in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2. CRCWSC T1 & T2 Research Basis for IRP3

The review of Tranche 1 outputs revealed a number of research gaps that need to be addressed by IRP3. Notably, no single output or group of outputs addressed all components of the integrated urban and water planning framework. The lack of guidance around the process for undertaking integrated water and urban planning is considered the key gap. A key goal is to bring together T1 resources and other knowledge into an integrated framework that’s useful and useable for practitioners, which will require targeted research translation. A detailed review of all Tranche 1 research and its application to IRP3 is provided in Appendix C.

In addition, a literature review of Integrated Urban and Water Planning was undertaken as part of the scoping phase to help better understand and define the need and objectives for this project (as discussed above), and to identify the extent to which guidance already exists.

8

The literature review is a working draft, however a summary of identified Integrated Planning Frameworks is provided in Appendix D.

9. Research questions and approach:

Research Questions

Taking an action research approach, this project seeks to reach the following objectives: Objective 1: Explore how different actors (e.g. government, service providers, community etc.) can be brought together in collaborative governance arrangements, in such a way that influences urban planning processes, and outcomes, towards achieving improved water sensitive outcomes

What forms of collaborative governance exist, and which forms are most effective at influencing urban and water management outcomes, in which Australian planning contexts?

How can collaborative governance approaches be effectively embedded within various planning processes?

Objective 2: Develop a new “Integrated Urban and Water Planning Framework” to combine, and communicate, a suite of strategies, planning/governance processes, tools and regulatory instruments that can be used to help optimise water sensitive outcomes across a number of “planning phases”

In what ways do current planning/governance processes support or constrain integration between the urban planning and water sectors in each planning phase?

What broad strategies (formal and informal) can be implemented to improve integration between urban and water planning processes, in each planning phase, and across the entire planning process?

What specific processes/tools are required to support integrated planning within each planning phase? How can available CRCWSC and industry processes/tools be best utilised, and what further processes/tools are still needed?

Who is best placed to consider and implement potential recommendations, and what (if any) regulatory/legislative changes are required?

What forms of practical guidance would be useful to which public and private actors (e.g. water practitioners, urban planners, policy makers, development sector)?

Research Approach (Overview) This section outlines the scope of IRP3 work packages, as illustrated in Figure 3 below. The outputs of Phase 1 (see summary of activities in Appendix B) will feed into Work Packages 2 and 3, which involve the further development and refinement of the prototype framework through application to real-world case studies. This is an iterative process that is reflected in the timing of Work Packages 2 and 3, which are concurrent and will require continual feedback. Outputs from Work Packages 2 and 3 will be consolidated into a final integrated urban and water planning framework, which will take the form of a guidance manual (see Work Package 5). This guidance manual will be translated into a user-friendly, web-based package of tools (see Work Package 4) through early and regular coordination with TAP and end-users from the outset of the project.

9

Figure 3. Conceptual representation of IRP3 research design and work packages.

Work Package 1: Project management and stakeholder engagement

This work package is the ongoing project management and stakeholder engagement to support the delivery of each work package, which will include implementation and project quality-related tasks, such as the development of project data and quality plans, communication (internal and external) protocols, stakeholder engagement plan, ethics plan (including data management), and publication plan. Additionally, a plan to coordinate with other IRPs to develop opportunities for joint case study work.

This work package initially involves the recruitment of the project team, including a resourcing plan (e.g. team composition, role clarity and coordination) and project schedule. As most of the members of the project team were not involved in the scoping phase, time has been set aside to ensure that each team member is made sufficiently familiar with the work to date, including the prototype framework; and is able to redefine the scope of each work package, to engender a sense of ownership and responsibility for the delivery of each task; and to ensure that project outputs are tailored to industry needs.

Deliverables 1: Revised work plan that includes an agreed and detailed approach. This will include a project schedule, resourcing plan, project governance plan, project data and quality plans, communication (internal and external) protocols, stakeholder engagement plan, ethics plan (including data management), and publication plan.

Work Package 2: Framework Development

This is the core work of the project involving the testing, validation and refinement of the framework for integrated urban and water planning together with the methods, processes and guidelines for application of the framework. Framework development has a number of stages and elements that are organised into multiple work packages.

10

2.1 Framework Development

This work package will:

a) further refine the scope of the prototype framework (refer to Appendix A); b) ensure team members agree on overarching terminology and guiding principles in

relation to: i. interlinkages between urban and water planning, ii. at different scales (geographic and temporal), iii. for different development/planning contexts (e.g. brownfield, infill, greenfield

and transit-oriented), iv. different types of water sources and servicing, and v. the strategic links between different phases; and

c) engage with potential end users to understand their needs in relation to the nature and form of guidance to be provided.

Deliverable 2.1: Project terminology and guiding principles underpinning the framework.

2.2 – 2.6 Detailed Guidance

Detailed work will be undertaken on the individual phases (collaborative governance, development scenarios, servicing options, evaluation, planning mechanisms), including translating relevant T1 research and insights from national and international literature into practical guidance and processes. Part of this preliminary work will involve an examination of documented case studies that have attempted to integrate urban and water planning processes to achieve sustainable outcomes in order to provide a concrete basis for the definition of guidance within each phase.

This preliminary work will be further tested and refined through application to real-world case studies (as part of Work Package 3) to identify gaps and generate learnings that will ultimately be consolidated in Work Package 5. Specific activities (including relevant assumptions and requirements), research linkages, and deliverables in relation to each phase are described below. The full scope of activities in relation to each phase will be further defined once members of the Research Leadership group are finalised.

2.2 Collaborative governance

Activity Knowledge Translation of existing CRCWSC research and broader academic literature: IRP3 will translate relevant Tranche 1 research for this phase and provide practical guidance on the development of open and participatory collaborative arrangements to purposefully integrate urban and water planning processes and influence decision-making.

Research: Investigate different collaborative planning structures for undertaking integrated urban and water planning at a range of scales.

Research Linkages IRP1, Research Synthesis workshops Assumption/limitations As highlighted in Appendix A, this phase underpins the IRP3 framework and

is the foundation of this project. Accordingly, a significant portion of activity/resourcing will be allocated to the development of this phase.

Skillset required Collaborative planning; Stakeholder engagement; Governance Deliverable 2.2 Documentation of evidence-based processes and guidance for setting up a

collaborative structure to undertake integrated urban and water planning, drawing on lessons (positive and negative) from application in different planning contexts (as part of Work Package 3). This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

11

2.3 Development scenarios

Activity Knowledge Translation of existing CRCWSC research and broader academic literature: IRP3 may translate relevant Tranche 1 research for this phase that falls outside the scope of IRP4 (as it builds upon D5.1).

Research: Investigate processes for integrating urban development scenario planning processes and water planning processes, with consideration of potential synergies with other sectors. IRP3 will have a particular focus on exploring the linkages between urban planning processes (development scenarios phase) and water planning processes (Servicing options phase) and identify optimal intervention points to maximise opportunities for influence.

Research Linkages IRP4 outputs will be relevant in this phase, such as urban design and development typologies (infill, renewal and greenfield), with potential input from IRP4 for select case studies (as part of Work Package 3).

Industry trials of relevant TAP tools in order to generate development scenarios for each case study context (as part of Work Package 3), as well as inform the further development and refinement of TAP tools.

Linkage with CRCSI project and toolkit, e.g. Greening the Greyfields / Envision Toolkit

Assumption/limitations IRP3 will guide the processes and activities within this phase, but any detailed scenario analysis and modelling work for a given case study (as part of Work Package 3) will be undertaken by industry partners (via in-kind contributions).

Skillset required Urban planning Deliverable 2.3 Documented guidance on urban development scenario planning processes

that integrate water sensitivity into the urban form and optimise delivery at various scales. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

2.4 Servicing options

Activity Knowledge Translation of existing CRCWSC research and broader academic literature: IRP3 will provide guidance on the design of collaborative processes to explore different servicing scenarios and generate a set of preferred alternative servicing options/strategies (including when to use various tools) that are widely endorsed by relevant stakeholders, with a particular focus on the interaction with the concurrent urban planning process. TAP and industry partners will provide the tools and user guidance (including case studies) for undertaking water sensitive servicing scenarios/options modelling and assessments, and provide an ability to model the impact on different development scenarios.

Research: Research activities will be confined to application of guidance in different case study contexts (as part of Work Package 3). This will involve detailed modelling of water sensitive/integrated options and scenarios by industry partners.

Research Linkages Potential input from IRP4 (options analyses) for select case studies (as part of Work Package 3).

Industry trials of relevant TAP tools to model water sensitive servicing scenarios/options for each case study context (as part of Work Package 3), as well as inform the further development and refinement of TAP tools.

Assumption/limitations A significant body of work (industry and academic) currently exists on how to develop, model and analyse water sensitive/integrated options and scenarios (which is also a focus of IRP4 & 5), which IRP3 will seek to apply in in different case study contexts (as part of Work Package 3). IRP3 will guide the processes and activities within this phase, but any detailed modelling work for a given case study will be undertaken by industry partners (via in-kind contributions).

Skillset required Water planning (various disciplines); Urban planning Deliverable 2.4 Documented process guidance for collective identification and assessment of

a range of different servicing options in order to determine a preferred

12

servicing approach. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

2.5 Evaluation

Activity Knowledge Translation of existing CRCWSC research and broader academic literature: Knowledge translation will occur via IRP2, with resourcing support from IRP3. IRP2 is expected to develop and provide guidance on economic tools and methods for analysing the full suite of market and non-market costs and benefits of preferred servicing options/strategies.

Research: Research activities will be confined to the application of IRP2 tools to assess the suitability of different servicing options (including any trade-offs) in different case study contexts (as part of Work Package 3) by industry partners. IRP3 will provide guidance on when to use such tools, and how to ensure that the outcomes are widely endorsed by relevant stakeholders and able to influence decision-making processes.

Research Linkages IRP2. Potential input from IRP2 for select case study/s (as part of Work Package 3). This may involve trialled application of relevant IRP2 tools for each case study, which would then inform the further development and refinement of IRP2 tools.

Assumption/limitations As a significant body of work (industry and academic) currently exists on how to evaluate WSC options (which is the focus of IRP2), this phase ideally involves implementation/application of IRP2 evaluation frameworks, rather than the creation of new frameworks. The WP2 (benefit transfer database), WP3 (BCA Tool) and WP4 (Financial model and Policy) of IRP2, which are currently under development, can be used in economic assessments of scenarios for a given case study (as part of Work Package 3). IRP3 will guide the processes and activities within this phase, but any detailed work will be undertaken by industry partners (via in-kind contributions).

Skillset required NA (Economics via IRP2) Deliverable 2.5 Documented application of economic evaluation frameworks in different

planning contexts, with focus on the role/use of economic evaluation or other assessment/evaluation in the urban planning process. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

2.6 Planning mechanisms

Activity Knowledge Translation of existing CRCWSC research and broader academic literature: IRP3 will translate relevant Tranche 1 governance, regulatory, strategic planning and statutory planning and policy research, distilling the key concepts, lessons and recommendations as they relate to guiding urban development at a range of scales. IRP3 will provide both general and jurisdiction‐specific guidance to policy makers and planners on the possible methods, processes, instruments and controls that can be used to embed water sensitive outcomes in the delivery of urban development.

Research: Building on Tranche 1, further investigation of a suite of regulatory tools and mechanisms to influence practice, which includes statutory and non-statutory planning instruments (e.g. codes, guidance, formal rules, economic incentives, institutional arrangements), will be undertaken to identify relevant tools/mechanisms for different types of developments/challenges. Strategies to influence broader policy and governance change will also be explored, particularly as they relate to the implementation of the suite of tools/mechanisms identified.

Research Linkages IRP2 (economic instruments), IRP4 (site governance). Potential for IRP3 to undertake work for IRP4 for Knutsford and Salisbury case studies

Assumption/limitations This is a key focus of this project. Accordingly, a significant portion of activity/resourcing will be allocated to the development of this phase.

Skillset required Governance; Regulatory frameworks; Planning law/statutory planning

13

Deliverable 2.6 Report that summarises a suite of regulatory tools and mechanisms to support the implementation of integrated planning outcomes, including case studies highlighting the applicability of different options in a range of different planning contexts. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

Work Package 3: Case Study Development

Three case studies that involve the testing and validation of the framework in different planning contexts will be progressed as part of this work package. Additional case studies may be possible with additional external funding/co-funding (not currently identified).

Ideally, at least one case study will serve as a test bed for the entire framework, and involve working closely with industry partners to translate research and ideas into practical processes and methods. This will involve experimenting with and fine tuning different phase-specific processes for detailed application in future case studies. In order to facilitate such experimentation, the planning context for this case study must be issue-driven rather than development-driven, i.e. the project would not need to conform to set planning timelines. Ideally, this case study will commence soon after the project begins and will–of the three case studies undertaken as part of this project–run the longest.

The second and third case studies may focus on specific phases of the framework to develop in-depth knowledge and understanding in relation to a particular topic. The exact focus of these case studies will be determined in partnership with Industry partners as part of Work Package 3.1 (see below). Ideally, these two case studies will be undertaken mid-way through the project, one after the other, but after the initial ‘test bed’ case study has commenced. The processes applied in these case studies would be more advanced than that applied in the test bed, as the key role of this initial case study is to experiment with different approaches in order to develop a more refined set of processes and guidance that can be tested and validated in other planning contexts.

All three case studies require industry input and support. If this is lacking or gaps remain in the coverage of the framework, then existing/past examples that delivered positive and/or negative outcomes, or otherwise demonstrate missed opportunities to innovate, will be studied (using qualitative research methods) to draw useful lessons and guidance that will inform the development of the framework and lead to tailored recommendations for the planning system under investigation. This form of investigation is currently embedded within Work Packages 2.2 – 2.6.

3.1 Case Study Selection

Selection of potential case studies, in collaboration with industry partners, according to the following criteria:

External Criteria Internal Criteria

- Representativeness of development typologies and scales (able to yield transferrable results to other sites within the state/s)

- Complementarity of case studies, each addressing a different set of issues/challenges, types of development/planning (e.g. brownfield, infill, greenfield and transit-oriented), and collectively covering all phases of the IRP3 framework

- Number and variety of CRCWSC participants to whom the development is directly relevant

- Willingness and commitment of stakeholders to participate in IRP3 case study activities (e.g. in-kind, financial), achieve better urban planning outcomes and actively champion different ways of doing

- Level of (high quality) data availability, requiring minimal collection of new data

14

- Timing of development (compatibility with IRP3 timelines) and ability to influence planning outcomes

- Importance of the development to the city/state

- Alignment with the work of other IRPs

- Linkages with the work of other CRCs (particularly CRCLCL and CRCSI-3)

Each selected case study will require the development of a case study action plan that outlines specific objectives, key activities, data and resource requirements, and outputs. This will be undertaken in collaboration with potential case study participants to ensure sufficient commitment (in-kind and/or cash) and buy-in to the project, with the aim to formalise relationships through the establishment of partnerships.

Case studies under consideration in IRP3 are presented in the table below. These are presented in detail, including a preliminary assessment against the proposed selection criteria, in Appendix E.

Deliverable 3.1: For each Research Case Study, a case study project plan outlining specific objectives, key activities, data and resource requirements, and outputs.

Table 4. Research case study long list (see Appendix E for additional detail)

Possible case study Development type Assessment Victoria Elster Creek Catchment Infill Preferred

Monash National Employment and Innovation Cluster

Infill Requires further consideration

Dandenong Catchment Infill Requires further consideration Arden and Macaulay Brownfield Not preferred La Trobe National Employment and Innovation Cluster

Infill Requires further consideration

Kalkallo Greenfield Requires further consideration New South Wales Western Sydney Greenfield Not preferred Western Australia North-East Corridor Infill and Greenfield Preferred Canning City Centre Infill Requires further consideration Bentley Regeneration Project Infill Requires further consideration Knutsford Brownfield Requires further consideration Queensland Greater Flagstone Greenfield Not preferred Caloundra South Greenfield Requires further consideration Bulimba Barracks, Brisbane Infill Not preferred Oxley Creek Transformation Project Infill and Greenfield Preferred Norman Creek Infill Requires further consideration Kurilpa Riverfront Renewal Brownfield Not preferred Gold Coast Infill Requires further consideration South Australia Greenhill Precinct Infill Requires further consideration Adelaide’s north western to south western infill Infill Requires further consideration Adelaide’s north eastern infill Infill Requires further consideration Salisbury Infill Preferred

3.2 – 3.4 Research Case Studies

Case study activities will depend upon the scope of each case study. Three case studies are proposed. The activities within each case study will vary depending upon the phases targeted, but will generally involve:

15

3.2 Data collection and review. Analysis/description of the current system/setting (biophysical, infrastructure, water and urban planning process, governance, regulation, etc.), including barriers (direct and indirect) and enablers/opportunities.

3.3 Tailored application of the phase-specific guidance and processes devised in Work Package 2. This will involve conceptual development and agreement of processes as applied to the case study, followed by testing and validation. As per Work Package 2, the research focus will largely be on the collaborative governance and planning mechanisms phases.

3.4 Documentation of learnings and case study-specific recommendations, e.g. planning controls, planning policy, regulatory and governance change.

Deliverable 3.2: Documentation of learnings and recommendations from each case study incorporated within the final guidance manual.

Work Package 4: Monitoring, Evaluation and Adoption

This work package will involve regular monitoring and evaluation activities to facilitate continuous learning and improvement of the framework. The adoption of the framework will be supported through translation of the outputs of Work Packages 2 and 3 into user-friendly, web-based package of tools as part of the TAP program. This work package is critical to the legacy of this project.

4.1 Monitoring and Evaluation

Insights from Project D6.1 “Development of an evaluation and learning framework to inform CRCWSC impact assessment” will be used to develop and implement a learning-oriented monitoring and evaluation plan that will operate over the life of the project. Given the timing of this project, so close to the end of the CRCWSC’s existence, as well as the long timeframes involved in planning, a predominantly process-focussed (as opposed to outcome-focussed) approach to the design of evaluation activities will be adopted. This will primarily involve regular analyses of the framework as it is applied in different case study contexts, with the intent to foster a learning process by capturing evidence of what works and whether improvements are required. Such an approach will enable continual improvements to the design of the framework as it is rolled out, ensuring effective and efficient delivery; as well as support the collection and collation of tangible and intangible impacts achieved by the project.

Monitoring and evaluation activities are likely to be participatory–undertaken in collaboration with project stakeholders and targeted end users–and involve qualitative methods of inquiry to explore a range of factors, such as the effectiveness of the framework in achieving expected or desired objectives, and the appropriateness of particular collaborative governance structures/options within different planning contexts.

Deliverable 4.1: Learning-oriented Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

4.2 Adoption

This task will support the adoption of the final framework through the translation of static guidance into a user-friendly, web-based package of tools. This may, at a minimum, take the form of web-based modules with a training and capacity building focus, similar to European initiatives on the integration of spatial planning and energy (SPECIAL, 2018) and integrative energy planning in urban areas (URBAN LEARNING, 2018).

16

The synthesis of IRP3 outputs into a user-friendly, web-based package of tools will require regular collaboration with the TAP program and ongoing stakeholder engagement, supported by the PSC, to tailor the tools to the needs of end users. As this is a TAP deliverable connected to the Scenario Platform (TAP2), IRP3 will work with TAP2 and the PSC from the outset of the project to support the development and refinement of the tools. This will require early and regular coordination with TAP to ensure TAP2 activities are aligned with the purposes of IRP3, end-user focused, and incorporate the learnings from IRP3 as the project progresses.

Deliverable 4.2: Translation of final integrated urban and water planning framework (which includes methods, processes and guidance) into a user-friendly, web-based package of tools.

Work Package 5: Framework Consolidation

Finalisation of the framework through the integration of the outputs of Work Packages 2 and 3, with a particular emphasis on defining clear linkages between each phase (through, for example, program logic diagrams, decision or options trees). This task of refinement and integration will also build upon the learnings generated through Work Package 4.1 (Monitoring and Evaluation).

Deliverable 5: Final integrated urban and water planning framework that combines and integrates the documented methods, processes and guidance developed in relation to each phase. This will take the form of a guidance manual with individual chapters in relation to each phase.

10. Intended project outcomes and expected project impact:

Through the delivery of the following outputs, this project aims to influence the methods and processes for applying integrated urban and water planning to advance WSC outcomes:

Output Corresponding project deliverable A framework for integrated urban and water planning, for guiding city and catchment scale urban development in different contexts to achieve water sensitive outcomes

Deliverable 5: Final integrated urban and water planning framework that combines and integrates the documented methods, processes and guidance developed in relation to each phase. This will take the form of a guidance manual with individual chapters in relation to each phase.

Deliverable 4.2: Translation of final integrated urban and water planning framework (which includes methods, processes and guidance) into a user-friendly, web-based package of tools.

The collaborative processes and methods to support application of the framework

Deliverable 2.2: Documentation of evidence-based processes and guidance for setting up a collaborative structure to undertake integrated urban and water planning, drawing on lessons (positive and negative) from application in different planning contexts (as part of Work Package 3). This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

Strategic guidance underpinning the elements of the framework, particularly governance (policy, planning, regulation and institutional) functions, instruments and arrangements required to implement water sensitive approaches

Deliverable 2.1: Project terminology and guiding principles underpinning the framework.

Deliverable 2.3: Documented guidance on urban development scenario planning processes that integrate water sensitivity into the urban form and optimise delivery at various scales. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

Deliverable 2.4: Documented process guidance for collective identification and assessment of a range of different servicing options in order to determine a preferred servicing approach. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

17

Deliverable 2.5: Documented application of economic evaluation frameworks in different planning contexts, with focus on the role/use of economic evaluation or other assessment/evaluation in the urban planning process. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

Deliverable 2.6: Report that summarises a suite of regulatory tools and mechanisms to support the implementation of integrated planning outcomes, including case studies highlighting the applicability of different options in a range of different planning contexts. This will take the form of a chapter in the final guidance manual.

Research case studies used to develop, test and refine the framework and supporting guidance

Deliverable 3.1: For each Research Case Study, a case study project plan outlining specific objectives, key activities, data and resource requirements, and outputs.

Deliverable 3.2: Documentation of learnings and recommendations from each case study incorporated within the final guidance manual.

An evaluation of the effectiveness of the framework and supporting methods, processes and guidance

Deliverable 4.1: Learning-oriented Monitoring and Evaluation Plan.

The successful delivery of this project is expected to generate the following outcomes:

● Development of a deeper knowledge and understanding of integrated urban and water planning approaches that can advance WSC outcomes

● Improved capacity of professional stakeholders to understand and employ integrated urban and water planning by equipping industry partners with knowledge and tools

● Policies, planning guidelines and regulatory frameworks and planning practices that support the delivery of water sensitive urban growth in Australia

11. Targeted end-user group(s): Stakeholders across a city or region’s urban water management and planning sectors will benefit from the project outcomes, by either direct participation in the project or by direct use of project outputs. Industry stakeholders will be better equipped to employ effective integrated planning to embed WS outcomes and drive their city’s water sensitive transition agenda as follows:

End-user groups Anticipated benefits

State government (planning and water resources)

Facilitate adoption of key Tranche 1 research outputs (governance, regulatory frameworks and statutory planning)

Inform drafting and review of planning policy Better methods for integrated planning, design, evaluation and

governance. Improved urban planning which optimises water sensitive servicing

options and outcomes Guide best mix of regulatory and planning controls and instruments

Water Utilities Improved integration of water planning with land use planning activities

Local government

Guide best mix of regulatory and planning controls and instruments Better methods for integrated planning, design, evaluation and

governance.

Land and property developer

Provides guidance on integrated planning pathways to achieve more advanced water sensitive development outcomes

18

12. Commercialisation and Intellectual Property (IP):

The integrated urban and water planning framework will include a set of methods and guidance, comprising various forms of Intellectual Property. The commercialisation of this IP is most likely to occur through the TAP Program. As part of the Adoption work package (WP4), this will explore how to integrate the Integrated Urban and Water Planning framework into a ‘City Shaping Platform’ which will include modelling capability, methodologies and participatory processes for application of the framework.

Potentially, the modelling capability in the Platform could be designed to assist evaluation of:

● urban planning functions and instruments that would be necessary to achieving a required set of WSC practices and biophysical outcomes and

● the biophysical outcomes and WS practices that would result from a particular set of urban planning functions/instruments, i.e. the effectiveness of a set of existing or proposed planning functions and instruments.

Figure 4. City Shaping Platform

13. Industry/end-user participation: Industry participants have a comprehensive understanding of the unique urban growth, planning and water issues that each region faces, including the physical, social, and political contexts of each region. Accordingly, active industry involvement is built into the design and delivery of IRP3. Key roles and contributions of industry participants are described below:

Phase 1 (scoping phase): A key part of Phase 1 involved engaging with industry practitioners to seek input on key aspects of the project and to confirm the ongoing need and relevance of the project. The purposes of engagement varied depending upon the particular stakeholder, but broadly these activities sought to test and refine the prototype framework, obtain guidance on research design, identify and evaluate potential case studies, and refine the scope of the project. A summary of consultation activities can be found in Appendix B.

Project team: Industry participants form a key part of the project team, playing critical roles as advisors on the ‘Research Leadership’ team, and undertaking research as

19

‘Project researchers/experts’, as well as supporting the development of research study case studies as ‘Case study leads’ in different regions.

Project Steering Committee (PSC): The PSC is a critical part of the overall project delivery team, providing valuable, constructive and active input to help maximise the value and benefits of the project work and the adoption of project outputs. The PSC will meet regularly throughout the project in order to ensure the project is tailored to the specific needs of each region.

Work package 2 (Framework development): Industry experts will lead the development of targeted guidance in relation to select phases of the Framework, particularly the ‘Development scenarios’ and ‘Servicing options’ phases.

Work package 3 (Case study development): Industry participants will play a critical role in the detailed activities associated with each case study, providing the necessary data, modelling and analyses under the oversight of the Discipline and Case study leads.

Work package 4 (Monitoring, Evaluation and Adoption): A participatory approach to monitoring and evaluation will be adopted, with key activities undertaken in collaboration with project stakeholders and targeted end users. Additionally, the synthesis of IRP3 outputs into a user-friendly, web-based package of tools will require regular and ongoing stakeholder engagement to tailor tools to the needs of end users.

Pathways will be identified for targeted communication and uptake/adoption during the project timeline. The project results (guidelines, case study learnings) will be promoted among key audiences (as identified as part of the Stakeholder engagement plan to be developed in Work package 1) through:

● Direct involvement in the project. Industry partners are already involved in the development of the project and will be active in developing and applying guidance materials to selected case studies.

● Communication of the project outcomes. A set of publications tailored to specific audiences will be made freely accessible. The project team will also communicate regularly through emails, teleconferences, media, workshops in each region, and an annual face-to-face PSC meeting.

14. Translation/adoption pathways: The translation/adoption goals for this project are described below.

Translation/Adoption Goals Description To maximise the translation and adoption of existing Tranche 1 research, ensuring maximum value is extracted from that research

A comprehensive T1 literature review was undertaken to (a) identify the research basis for this project (b) identify all complementary research that can be referenced/incorporated into the framework. Incorporation of this research into the framework is expected to assist adoption.

Project delivered through an approach that demonstrates through research case studies the relevance and potential impact of the research

Case studies are being selected that can have impact (i.e. are in time to influence actual industry outcomes)

To produce outputs that are immediately useable by industry and don’t require further translation

The framework and underlying guidance should be developed for use by industry and not require subsequent research, or translation.

To produce engaging and interactive outputs that will maximise adoption.

WP4.2 (Adoption) will involve liaising with TAP to support the adoption of the final framework through the translation of static guidance into an interactive platform or tool that will consolidate

20

finalised guidance, processes and supporting outputs in relation to each phase of the framework. See WP4.2 for more detail.

Engage with end-users throughout project to build project profile

The project, and project outputs, will be promoted among the key audiences through: (a) Engagement with industry partners, including those already involved in project development; (b) Publications tailored to specific audiences; (c) Presentations at key industry forums.

Building on the above, pathways will be identified for targeted communication and uptake/adoption during the project timeline. Details of the translation/adoption pathways will be provided in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (WP1) and delivered through the Adoption work package (WP4).

15. Work plan, project timelines and milestones:

15.1 Work plan

Refer to Section 9 (Research questions and approach) for detailed work plan.

15.2 Timeline of tasks/activities Note this is a rough timeline. Description of task 2018/19 2019/20 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Work Package 1 Work Package 2 WP2.1 WP2.2 WP2.3 WP2.4 WP2.5 WP2.6 Work Package 3 WP3.1 WP3.2 WP3.3 WP3.4 Work Package 4 WP4.1 WP4.2 Work Package 5

15.3 Project milestone & deliverables Draft milestones provided, which will be revisited when the timeline, resourcing, and approach is more certain No. Milestone/deliverable description Accountable team

members Due date

21

1 Revised work plan that includes an agreed and detailed approach

Project Manager/Project Leader

Q2 FY18/19

2 Integrated urban and water planning framework (draft)

Research Leadership Group

Q3 FY18/19

3 Research case study 1 Case study lead Q3 FY19/20 4 Research case study 2 Case study lead Q3 FY19/20 5 Research case study 3 Case study lead Q3 FY19/20 6 Integrated urban and water planning framework

(final draft with comprehensive guidance) Research Leadership Group

Q4 FY19/20

7 User-friendly integrated urban and water planning tool

Project Manager/TAP Q4 FY19/20

16. Resources:

Draft cash budget provided, which will be revisited when the timeline, resourcing, and approach is more certain. Note, it is expected that Research Fellows will be brought in on a short-term, full time basis as needed, with an average contribution of 0.3 FTE each year.

Project Team Indicative Budget (per year) Time Allocation to each WP

Project Leader (0.2 FTE) $43,400.00 0.3 WP1; 0.4 WP3; 0.3 WPs 2,4,5 [Collaborative planning] Research Fellow/Post-doc (0.3 FTE)

$37,800.00 0.4 WP2; 0.4 WP3; 0.2 WP5

[Governance] Research Fellow/Post-doc (0.3 FTE)

$37,800.00 0.4 WP2; 0.4 WP3; 0.2 WP5

[Urban planning] Research Fellow/Post-doc (0.3 FTE)

$37,800.00 0.4 WP2; 0.4 WP3; 0.2 WP5

Project Manager / Research Assistant (0.6 FTE)

$63,000.00 0.3 WP1; 0.4 WP3; 0.3 WPs 2,4,5

External Evaluator $10,000.00 1 WP4 3 x Case Study Leads To be funded by industry 1 WP3 Case studies (incl. workshop delivery, modelling, design/visual work, labour, travel)

Indicative Budget (per year), excl. Project Team labour

Project Team Labour

1st Research case study ("test bed") $40,000.00 $32,130.00 2nd Research case study $20,000.00 $16,065.00 3rd Research case study $20,000.00 $16,065.00 General Operating costs Indicative Budget (per year)

Project Steering Committee Meetings $6,000.00 Face-to-face team meetings, conferences etc.

$7,500.00

Design/visual work $7,500.00 Total (for 2 years) $661,600.00

17. Risk assessment and management:

Risk Description Control Measures to Minimise or Mitigate Risks

Budget is constrained, resulting in insufficient resources to develop depth in research activities or minimal number of case studies to apply research to

Regarding completeness, research is designed to mitigate this risk, so that case study effort can be tailored to resourcing to ensure that a complete framework will be provided regardless of resourcing level

Regarding depth, project has been clearly defined to exclude from scope any research activities relating to technical work on “development scenarios” or “water servicing scenarios” or “evaluation”. Depth is limited to the collaborative governance process implemented across all phases, and the planning mechanisms phase (regulation, governance, planning).

Opportunities for additional funds are sought, including industry contributions aligned to particular interests/needs or additional case studies, or external grant funding (e.g. Smart Cities and Suburbs Program).

22

Resourcing the project with appropriately skilled staff in all discipline areas, within budget

Exploring institutions outside CRCWSC partners, including RMIT for Urban Planning

Considering role for industry participants where research activities not essential (challenging due to budget constraints though)

Resources (Postdoc/PhD) take a long period to recruit and bring up to speed, or they leave due to uncertainty.

Establish contracts as soon as possible. Focus on post-docs and industry secondments (noting 3 yr timing of PhD’s

unlikely to suit 2 yr project time frame)

Key personnel lost during the project, leading to rework, refocus and impacts on delivery.

Succession planning is considered by Project Leader and Project Deputy Leader, particularly relating to discipline leads and/or case study leads

Communicate expectations and celebrate success.

Scope is too broad, resulting in general guidance without sufficient depth in any areas

Framework development (WP2) designed so that initial guidance is developed and applied to case studies, with sufficient resourcing allocated for WP2 during application of case studies and following case study completion so that detailed guidance can be developed in the appropriate areas.

To guide this, concurrently with WP2 there will be user testing/feedback with different end-user groups as part of WP1.

Additionally, the intention is for WP3 (Case studies) to commence with a ‘test bed’ case study before proceeding to the other case studies.

Case studies selected are not able to be influenced and so impact or ability to test research/ideas is limited

Case study selection criteria to include criterion regarding ability to impact/have influence. Case studies should not be chosen if they can’t influence the urban planning process.

Case studies overwhelm the project leading to a “consulting” outcome with only superficial address of research questions or national impact.

Research designed to avoid this. Sufficient resourcing allocated for WP2 (Framework Development) outside of case studies.

Work with stakeholders to develop clear understanding of what the project will deliver/test.

Follow criteria for choice of case studies.

Expectations of end-users is high but vaguely defined, leading to difficulty focussing the project and frustration

Clearly convey the scope of the project Continually seek input to focus the work (and deepen it in particular areas). End

user testing/feedback with different end-user groups as part of WP1. Invite end-users to contribute in-kind or resources to generate additional outputs

Integrating the work of various disciplines to ensure consistency, collaboration, and avoiding duplication (e.g. collaboration, governance, regulation and statutory planning)

Project leadership/management team should be boundary spanners who can interact with and co-ordinate between all disciplines

Research designed to mitigate this, by having overarching framework development (WP2.1) and consolidation (WP5) covering all disciplines.

Interactions with other IRP’s difficult or expectations hard to manage.

Define expected inputs to, or outputs from IRP1, IRP2, IRP4 and TAP Connect with other IRP’s as much as possible during scoping, including

membership of PSC. Communicate regularly with IRP leaders. WP4 Adoption (including working with TAP) continues throughout entire project

End-users disengage leading to failure of case studies and reduced ability to fulfil project objectives.

Seek support during project development and negotiation. Design project as clearly as possible to meet end user needs, while delivering

research. End-users will be involved as part of the project team, which will help ensure buy-in and enhance uptake of project outputs.

Test outputs throughout project delivery rather than leaving it to the end. Select case studies where participants are highly engaged and this risk can be

minimised. Key research is unavailable Communicate with researchers to identify any outstanding publications

Provide detailed list of resources under Research Basis section of this proposal so additional resources can be identified by PSC and others

Project and/or case studies seen as either threatening or irrelevant

Industry (public/private) involvement will add credibility to project Regular end-user testing/feedback throughout project Project leader and deputy leader combination should have credibility/high

standing across planning industry, water industry and research community. Case studies designed with industry partners to carefully balance risk of

threatening the planning process, whilst still having influence and impact. Difficult to “energise” the entire team as so spread out.

Ensure team has sufficient ‘boundary spanners’ who can collaborate effectively and generate energy amongst team.

23

Engage a research leadership group (likely selected from discipline leads) who are responsible for maintaining momentum

Regular whole of team meetings (e.g. quarterly), with at least one face-to-face meeting each year to ensure the transfer and integration of learnings

Difficult to publish scientifically due to its applied nature.

Develop a publications plan early including industry and scientific publications. Work with multi-disciplinary journals and identify early.

Difficult to understand success / measure effectiveness of project due to long urban planning timeframes and short project timeframe

WP4 includes sub-works package relating to monitoring and evaluation, based on Tranche 1 research. This will be continuous and occur concurrently with project, rather than at completion.

18. References: ABS (2018, April 24). What's driving population growth in Australia's cities? (Media release). Retrieved from

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/latestProducts/3218.0Media%20Release12016-17?OpenDocument ADWR. (2015). Ensuring Water Supply Sustainability: the Arizona Department of Water Resources’ Drought and Water Supply

Planning. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/arizona_water_supply_plan_final_10_28_15.pdf

Bach, P., Rauch, W., Mikkelsen, P., McCarthy, D., & Deletic, A. (2014). A critical review of integrated urban water modelling – Urban drainage and beyond. Environmental Modelling & Software, 54, 88-107.

City of Chicago, (2014). Green Stormwater Infrastructure Strategy. Retrieved from https://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/progs/env/ChicagoGreenStormwaterInfrastructureStrategy.pdf

Coleman, S. (2016). Built environment: Planning for the future. In: Australia state of the environment 2016, Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy, Canberra. Retrieved from https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/built-environment/topic/2016/planning-future

CRC for Water Sensitive Cities, (2017). CRCWSC Strategic Plan 2016/17 – 2020/21. Melbourne, Australia: Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive Cities.

CWCB. (2018). Colorado’s Water Plan - Land Use and Water Planning. Retrieved from https://cwcb.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=8c8f4b394db6407e873d5f8ee43cb0e2

Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning, (2017). Shaping SEQ: South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017. Retrieved from https://dilgpprd.blob.core.windows.net/general/shapingseq.pdf

DELWP. (2016) Water for Victoria: Water Plan. Retrieved from - https://www.water.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/58827/Water-Plan-strategy2.pdf

DELWP. (2017). Plan Melbourne 2017 – 2050. Retrieved from http://www.planmelbourne.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/377206/Plan_Melbourne_2017-2050_Strategy_.pdf

Fidelis, T., & Roebeling, P. (2014). Water resources and land use planning systems in Portugal—Exploring better synergies through Ria de Aveiro. Land Use Policy, 39, 84-95.

International Water Association. (2016). The IWA Principles for Water-Wise Cities. Retrieved from http://www.iwa-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/IWA_Principles_Water_Wise_Cities.pdf

Infrastructure Australia. (2011). Creating Places for People — an urban design protocol for Australian cities. Retrieved from http://infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/policy-publications/publications/Creating-Places-for- People-an- urban-design- protocol-for- Australian-cities- 2011.aspx

Metropolitan Water. (2017). Metropolitan Water Plan: Water for a Livable, Growing and Resilient Greater Sydney. NSW Department of Industry, Skills and Regional Development. Retrieved from https://www.metrowater.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2017%20Metropolitan%20Water%20Plan.pdf

Petit-Boix, A., Llorach-Massana, P., Sanjuan-Delmás, D., Sierra-Pérez, J., Vinyes, E., & Gabarrell, X. et al. (2017). Application of life cycle thinking towards sustainable cities: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 166, 939-951.

Planning Institute of Australia. (2013). Planning Systems Principles. Retrieved from https://www.planning.org.au/policy/planning-systems-principles-0713/planning-systems-principles-0713

Productivity Commission. (2017). National Water Reform, Draft Report, Canberra. Retrieved from https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/water-reform/draft/water-reform-draft.pdf

SPECIAL, (2018). SPECIAL Knowledge Pool. Retrieved from http://www.special-eu.org/knowledge-pool SNWA. (2017). Water Resource Plan 2017. Retrieved from https://www.snwa.com/assets/pdf/wr_plan.pdf URBAN LEARNING, (2018). URBAN LEARNING toolbox. Available at http://www.urbanlearning.eu/toolbox/ Victorian Planning Authority. (2011). PSP Notes: Integrated Water Management. Retrieved from

https://vpa.vic.gov.au/greenfield/psp-guidelines/ Water Research Foundation and CSIRO. (2010). Integrated Urban Water Management Planning Manual. Retrieved from:

https://publications.csiro.au/rpr/download?pid=csiro:EP10449&dsid=DS1 Water Research Foundation (2016). Integrated Land Use and Water Resources: Planning to Support Supply Diversification,

Literature Review Summary. Retrieved from http://www.waterrf.org/Pages/Projects.aspx?PID=4623 Western Australian Planning Commission. (2008). Better urban water management. Retrieved from

https://www.planning.wa.gov.au/publications/741.aspx WERF (2010). Building a Nationally Recognized Program through Innovation and Research. Retrieved from

http://www.werf.org/liveablecommunities/studies_port_or.htm Woltjer, J., & Al, N. (2007). Integrating water management and spatial planning: strategies based on the Dutch experience.

Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(2), 211-222. WSAA. (2014). Urban water planning framework and guidelines. Occasional paper 29. Retrieved from

https://www.wsaa.asn.au/publication/occasional-paper-29-urban-water-planning-framework-and-guidelines

TONKIN FWY

BIKE PATH

BIKE PATH

RYANS

COUR

T

MORRISON STREET

STANTO

N

ROAD

Integrated Research Project 4 — Water sensitive outcomes for infill developments

The aim of the project is to influence more water sensitive infill development in our cities. ‘Infill development’ is development that occurs within existing urban areas, mostly through densification. The project will generate evidence-based guidance on housing design alternatives that can mitigate the adverse impacts of poorly planned infill development, related to increased stormwater runoff and urban heat, while improving amenity and liveability.

What we will deliver

IPR4 project outputs will be:

• An infill development evaluation framework that compiles quantitative and qualitative indicators of performance, to help decision makers assess the impact of planned infill developments.

• A water mass balance tool to generate the quantitative water performance indicators used in the evaluation framework.

• A catalogue of water sensitive design options for different scales of infill development.

• Improved governance arrangements that can help operationalise optimal design outcomes.

These outputs will draw heavily from real world case studies, which will act as experimental test beds. Plus, the project Steering Committee will ensure industry input, via representatives from the sector including Inner West Council, Landcorp, Brisbane City Council, Water Sensitive SA, Flow Systems, among others.

Project synthesis

Most major Australian cities expect significant infill development over the coming decades. But without significant intervention, ‘business as usual’ development is expected to seriously undermine the hydrology, resource efficiency, liveability and amenity of our cities. IPR4 leads the way in tackling this problem, by developing industry focused tools to assess these impacts for infill developments, and the benefits of more water sensitive designs. The outcome will be design alternatives that combine quality/visionary architectural design with good water performance.

One of the future housing typologies

that will be tested to see if it delivers more water-

sensitive outcomes

Typical infill development

(business as usual)

Infill development (BAU)Low-density development

Stormwater runoff

Infiltration Wasterwater discharge

Stormwater runoff


More pervious areas increase infiltration

and decrease runoff

More pervious areas decrease

runoff

Lower wastewater

discharge due to lower water use

Water efficient solutions lower

water demand in spite of population

growth

Higher water demand due to

population growth

Population growth Population growth Population growth

ca. 1990 ca. 2017 ca. 2020Water-sensitive infill development

Lower infiltration due

to higher imperviousness

More pervious areas decrease

runoff

Higher wastewater

discharge

Stormwater runoff


Precipitation Evapotranspi-ration

Water demand Precipitation Evapotranspi-ration

Water demand Precipitation Evapotranspi-ration

Water demand

Three case studies are planned for the project, which were selected in collaboration with industry and local government representatives. They include Adelaide, which is striving for urban sustainability and liveability in an arid climate through effective use of its limited water

Urbanisation alters local hydrology and water resources, with knock on effects to the wider environment and liveability. The increased imperviousness from urbanisation leads to higher stormwater runoff (and flood risks), urban heat and decreased groundwater infiltration. Freshwater imported into urban areas from the surrounding environment depletes stock available for other uses. Good urban design can ameliorate these effects, and IPR4 aims to demonstrate how this can occur.

Dr Marguerite Renouf Deputy project [email protected] 3346 1228

Beata SochackaProject manager/Research [email protected] 3346 1228

resources; Perth, with its ambitious infill targets in a context of groundwater problems and limited rainfall; and Brisbane, with its subtropical climate and flooding risks. The case studies represent a broad spectrum of challenges that water sensitive infill developments aim to address.

Case studies

Influence of infill development on water performance

‘Missing middle’ development scaleThe scales of infill development will range from individual lots through to ‘precincts’. This focus promotes a shift from the current ‘knock down–rebuild’ approach, to more planned and water sensitive precincts up to around 5,000 households scale.

Range of water-related impacts The evaluation framework will aim to capture a range of impacts, which may include water efficiency, natural hydrology, urban heat, water related energy, and amenity.

Brownfield and greyfield developments The case studies will focus on brownfield and greyfield developments, which are the most common forms of infill. The latter is a particular challenge, because it is mostly unregulated.

Impacts at both local and catchment scale The developed tools will aim to assess the impacts of infill in the context of the local development site, but also the implications for the wider catchment.

Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive Cities

[email protected]

@crcwscwww.watersensitivecities.org.au

Level 1, 8 Scenic BoulevardMonash University, Clayton VIC 3800

For further information, visit: https://watersensitivecities.org.au/project-irp4/

mailto:m.renouf%40uq.edu.au?subject=

mailto:beata.sochacka%40crcwsc.com.au?subject=

https://watersensitivecities.org.au/project-irp4/

Table 2: Required Resources and time allocation of the Regional Manager

Key deliverable % FTE

Additional resources required beyond the RM

Implementing CRCWSC programs

IRP1 IRP2 IRP3 IRP4 IRP5 TAP platform KAT Ideas/Synthesis CRC forums

30 Project lead and Chair for IRP5 Executive officer Transitions network

(Winsome) Communications and marketing

materials for CRC forums (CRCWSC coms)

Coordination of the RAP and local events

5 Support from IRP teams Rotating Minutes

Transition network implementation plan and actions

Linking relevant stakeholders and opportunities with Transition network activities

20 Chair and executive officers for Subcommittees

Framework and actions coordinated across subcommittees

Influencing and informing transition and adoption opportunities including

Policies and guidelines

demonstration projects

etc

20 Expert input into new policies (TN) Expert input into new projects (TN)

Regular meetings with participants to influence and inform

10 Translation of T1&2 outputs to industry (Barry)

Targeted (relevant, evidence based) communications materials

CRCWSC social media 5 Training in relevant platforms Influencing and informing all sectors through the sectoral engagement strategies or Ideas for Workshops

10 Support from Jamie Ewert Support from Sectors

ATTACHMENT : CRCWSC Western Region EVENT SCHEDULE 2018

Event Topic Organisation(s) in

charge

2018 2018 2018 2018

14 Dec 17 – 30 Jan 18 WA School Holidays

18 January IRP5 Project Steering Committee Meeting Nick Deeks

25 January Regional Advisory Panel CRCWSC WR

1 February Delivering products and services on behalf of the CRCWSC

Barry Ball

9 February IRP1 Project Steering Committee meeting Katie Hammer

12 – 15 February 10th International Water Sensitive Urban Design

WSUD 2018 & Hydropolis 2018 Crown Towers, Perth

Engineers Aust, AWAStormwater WA

28 February CRCWSC Board Meeting/ Annual EPRG Meeting

Board and Executive Committee Meeting CRCWSC

28 Feb – 2 March Developing WA UDIA State Conference UDIA WA

1 March Brabham Mini Brainstorming Workshop

CRCWSC

8 March Research Projects Update Session

CRWSC

21 – 23 March IPWEA WA 2018 State Conference

“Changing Face of Public Works” IPWEA WA

26 March Water Sensitive Transition Network Meeting

CRCWSC

27 March New WAter Ways 2018 training session 1

Session 1: Planning processes, introduction to stormwater management practices, the decision process and biofilters

New WAter Ways

28 March Regional Advisory Panel CRCWSC WR

6 April AWA Conference 2018 WAter – A State of Extremes AWA WA

11 April UDIA Industry Breakfast What is the future of alternative/lightweight housing construction in Perth?

UDIA WA

14 April – 29 April WA School Holidays T1 WA School Holidays

19 April World Heritage Day

22 April Earth Day

1 May 202020 Vision The Green Light Tour

2 May WALGA Tree Health and Resilience Forum

WALGA

8 May New WAter Ways 2018 training session 2

Session 2: Groundwater management for urban development, local water management strategies, retrofitting for WSUD and maintenance of WSUD assets

New WAter Ways

8 – 10 May Ozwater ’18 (Brisbane) AWA

10 – 18 May World Parks Week

22 May International Day for Biological Diversity

25 May Water Sensitive Cities Speaker Series Talk

Drainage for Liveability – greening our drains for a Water Sensitive City

New WAter Ways

27 May – 3 June National Reconciliation Week

30 May Regional Advisory Panel CRCWSC WR

5 June World Environment Day

6 June CRCWSC Board Meeting Board Meeting CRCWSC

7 June Green Building Day 2018 Shaping the Future State Green Building Council Australia

8 June World Oceans Day

11 June IRP1 workshop Monitoring workshop for IRP1 CRCWSC

12 June IRP1 workshop Policy Influence workshop for IRP1 CRCWSC

13 June Tap in event Tap in results Water Corporation

13 June UDIA Event The Future of Development – Minister Saffiotti; Landgate

UDIA WA

14 June Connecting through Country and Culture

professional development seminar on the importance of Aboriginal leadership in environmental management

Perth NRM Event

tba June Ideas for Brabham Synthesis workshop for IRP5 CRCWSC

17 June World Combat Desertification and Drought

21 – 22 June Parks & Leisure Australia WA State Conference

‘Growing Expectations’ Parks & Leisure Australia (WA)

22nd June IRP2 training BCA and Non Market Value tool. CRCWSC IRP2

30 June – 15 July WA School Holidays T2 WA School Holidays

2 July 2018 Round Two smart cities Closing date for proposals Smart Cities and Suburbs Program

8 – 12 July 8th Singapore International Water Week

Minister for Water and Sue Murphy will be attending

Ministry of the Environment & Water Resource & PUB Singapore

8 – 15 July NAIDOC Week

9‐13 July Presencing Foundation Program

A 4‐day experiential leadership program based on Theory U ‐ a powerful method for driving collective innovation and positive impact.

19‐20 July Social Impact Summit A 2‐day event for collective capacity building and knowledge sharing to ensure we can effectively address complex issues and move towards a bright future for all.

UWA

Tba July Water and well being session Social Impact Summit

Session on social benefits including health benefits of Water Sensitive Cities

UWA

July 2018 ‐ Engaging Leaders Innovating Across Sectors (ELIAS WA) Program

A seven‐month journey for senior leaders across sectors who want to drive profound innovation around our most pressing issues

25 July Regional Advisory Panel CRCWSC WR

27 July Schools Tree Day

29 July National Tree Day

9 August International Day for World Indigenous Peoples

11 – 19 August National Science Week

TBA Keep Australia Beautiful Week?

Keep Australia Beautiful Council

29 August CRCWSC Board Meeting Board Meeting CRCWSC

22 Sept – 7 Oct WA School Holidays T3 WA School Holidays

26 September Regional Advisory Panel CRCWSC WR

12 October 2018 Stormwater Australia National Conference

Stormwater Australia

21 – 27 October National Water Week Theme – Water for Me, Water for All

24 October CRCWSC Extraordinary Board Meeting

Board Meeting CRCWSC

28 November Regional Advisory Panel CRCWSC WR

27 November CRCWSC Board Meeting Board Meeting CRCWSC

3 – 6 December 38th Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium

‘Water and Communities’ Engineers Australia

14 Dec – 31 Dec 2018 WA School Holidays T4 WA School Holidays

2019 2019 2019 2019

1 Jan – 3 Feb 2019 WA School Holidays T4 WA School Holidays

26 – 28 March 4th Water Sensitive CitiesConference (Brisbane)

CRCWSC

CRC Board, Executive or Committee Meeting

CRC Project Event CRC Special Event

CRC Project Team Meeting CRC Synthesis Event National External Event

Regional Advisory Panel Meeting

Capacity Building – Public WA External Event

Capacity Building – Invite WA School Holidays

regional advisory panel special meeting – … van gasselt – dplh john savell – doc/crcwsc eprg...

Documents