2014 Review of urban water planning principles Appendix c detailed comments by jurisdictions


Opportunities for improving the planning principles



Yüklə 145,83 Kb.
səhifə7/12
tarix09.01.2019
ölçüsü145,83 Kb.
#94339
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12

24.5Opportunities for improving the planning principles

24.5.1What recommendations would you provide for improving the Principles?


There appear to be quite general in places. Consider whether there is scope to link the principles with other critical aspects of the national water reform so as to give the principles greater coverage and application.

More critically there could be a fresh consideration of ‘agreed levels of service’ and also on ‘Sustainable limits/levels of extraction’.


24.5.2Could communication of the Principles be improved and if so, how? Would any additional forms of guidance be useful?


Yes – general promotion on Commonwealth websites and related national water reform documents eg water pricing; promotion to national water utility forums eg WSA and AWA.

25.Northern Territory

25.1Overview of planning arrangements

25.1.1Briefly describe the governance arrangements for urban water planning in your jurisdiction.


Power and Water Corporation (PWC) is a government-owned utility that manages public water supply and sewerage services to around 85,000 customers across the Northern Territory (NT).

In relation to urban water, PWC provides water and sewerage services to the NT’s five major centres (Darwin, Alice Springs, Katherine, Tennant Creek and Yulara), as well as water to 13 minor centres and sewerage services to five of those.

PWC provides all planning functions in relation to urban water for these locations, as well as being the water provider.

There are two minor urban centres (Jabiru and Nhulunbuy) which are serviced by a local council and mining company respectively. PWC has no current role in the planning or operation of these systems.

The Department of Land Resource Management (DLRM), as the regulatory agency, administers water extraction licences and Water Allocation Plans under the NT Water Act.

25.1.2Provide an outline of statutory requirements for urban water planning.


Statutory requirements, under NT Legislation, are limited to those under the Water Supply and Sewerage Services Act and relate to the provision of Asset Management Plans to the Utilities Commission, and consideration and reporting of water quality.

25.1.3What (if any) non-statutory drivers inform and/or trigger urban water planning?


Please describe any non-statutory drivers that exist (eg guidelines) and explain their function in urban water planning processes.

PWC, as the water provider, has determined Levels of Service for the main urban supply in Darwin, through an industry benchmarking and system analysis approach. These have been noted by Government through a Cabinet process. Levels of Service have not been formalised for other urban supplies, other than for water quality.


25.1.4What planning documents are currently in operation in your jurisdiction?


The primary planning documents (apart from those developed by the water service provider) are Water Allocation Plans. Water Allocation Plans are being developed on a priority basis in Water Control Districts where there are competing demands for human consumptive needs and/or where natural aquatic ecosystems have significant ecological or social values.

Water Allocation Plans set the extraction limits, rules and security levels for urban water supply. Water Allocation Plans are in place for Alice Springs Water Control District (partial coverage centered on Alice Springs), Ti Tree Water Control District, Western Davenport Water Control District and Daly Roper Water Control District (partial coverage centered on Katherine)

Please refer to Table 1 of the NT Case Study 2 Report for water service providers’ planning documents

25.2Extent to which planning principles are used

25.2.1To what extent are the National Urban Water Planning Principles (the Principles) referred to in planning documents and processes?


Please refer to Section 1.3 of the NT Case Study 2 Report

25.2.2What other guidelines/sources of information are considered in urban water planning processes?


Please refer to Table 1 of the NT Case Study 2 Report

25.2.3If applicable, outline the approach used to promote awareness of the Principles.


Principles not communicated in Northern Territory to date.

25.3Usefulness and relevance of planning principles

25.3.1Have the Principles been useful in guiding urban water planning?


As noted in the Case Study report, PWC was not aware of the detail of the Principles and has not considered them in their planning in the past.

PWC is of the view that the Principles are relevant in guiding urban water planning in general, but that they are not necessarily all relevant to PWC.

PWC considers that the Queensland Government’s Planning Guidelines for Water Supply and Sewerage are more useful because they are more detailed and practical than the Principles.

25.3.2How useful are the Principles as a set of national guidelines?


The Principles should recognise that circumstances may not allow for (or require) an integrated water management approach, for example consideration of stormwater waterway health.

Water providers may not have the resources or capability to consider all aspects of the water cycle in their planning processes.


25.3.3Will the Principles continue to be as relevant as they were when they were introduced in 2008?


Refer to comments in Section 5.

25.4Planning principles’ role in new approaches to planning

25.4.1Please outline any requirements or forms of guidance in your jurisdiction regarding real options/risk or adaptive management planning; and/or water sensitive urban design/integrated urban water management.


No relevant requirements of forms of guidance in general use in Northern Territory to date.

25.4.2Do the Principles provide sufficient guidance on the ‘new’ approaches to planning outlined above? Why or why not?


Principles have not been applied in Northern Territory to date.

25.4.3If you think the Principles do NOT provide sufficient guidance on the ‘new’ approaches to planning, how should they be amended to better support/advance these issues?


Principles have not been applied in the Northern Territory to date.

25.4.4Do you have any suggestions for alternative ways (i.e. other than the Principles) to advance the ‘new’ approaches?


No suggestions from the Northern Territory.

Yüklə 145,83 Kb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©muhaz.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

gir | qeydiyyatdan keç
    Ana səhifə


yükləyin