THE RECENT UDIA PRESIDENTS’ SUMMIT PROVED BOTH INFORMATIVE AND USEFUL WITH DELEGATES AGREEING THAT THERE NEEDED TO BE AN OVERARCHING SET OF STANDARDS FOR ENGINEERING TO ENABLE A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ARE.
Of course these standards can be varied with the agreement of local government and the developer as there are specific circumstances where a different outcome is required. The standards do exist, in the form of the Institute of Public Works Engineers (IPWEA) Guidelines, however they currently are not a recognised instrument in the planning system.
The call came for the adoption of the IPWEA Guidelines after the results of the Local Government Best Practice were released. The survey had been completed by 184 industry professionals and looked at four major approvals activities by Local Authorities: Planning, Engineering, Environment/Landscaping, Built Form. Planning came out of the survey as the strongest activity undertaken by local governments and through the analysis, including written comments, it became clear that the state wide policy framework which includes the R-Codes, Liveable Neighbourhoods plus a hierarchy of strategic planning documents, set the framework for the discussion of projects. The other areas of local government approval activity does not have that common framework and are far more discretionary, which leads to significant delays and often suboptimal outcomes.
One of the key areas where improvement is required is in the management of drainage which became the second outcome of the day: a call for a governance arrangement that manages the drainage “from scarp to sea.” At the moment there are multiple agencies involved with water management, whether it is high water table or drainage, but none have control over a drainage system. The problem arises when a proponent wants to develop but the drainage is “rural.” Converting a portion of the drainage to “urban” is problematic as water does not respect property boundaries, or for that matter, local government boundaries.
For affordable housing this is a serious issue as some developments could have up to thirty percent of their lot yield lost to a very wide rural drain rather than the more controlled urban drain. This pushes up the price of those lots that can be developed. In an ideal world the drainage would move from rural to urban in an orderly manner prior to urbanisation however the upfront cost would be very significant.
The summit was interactive and very successful, but there is a lot of work to do to implement the outcomes that were identified during the day.