Water Sensitive Urban Design Strategies in Melbourne, Australia by Kathia Roman

Water Sensitive Urban Design Strategies in

Melbourne (AUS)

Final Report for Urban Water Cycles (REAP-M-Mod-203) SoSe 2016 Lectured by Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Dickhaut HafenCity Universität Hamburg Department of Resource E⁴捩ciency in Architecture and Planning Lucy Soares Henriques (6020437) Kathia Vanessa Román Reina (6037082) 30th September, 2016

Table of Contents I.

List of Tables

II.

List of Figures

III.

List of Abbreviations

IV.

Abstract

Introduction

1.1.

Background Information about Melbourne

1.2.

Legal Framework

1.3.

Present Situation

1.3.1.

Stormwater treatment

1.3.2.

Wastewater treatment

1.3.3.

Flowing waters

1.4.

Future perspectives

Case Studies in Melbourne

2.1.

Wastewater treatment: Kinglake West Sewerage Project

2.2.

Stormwater Management: Royal Park Wetlands

Conclusions

References

VI.

Annexes

I. List of Tables Table 01

Comparison Water Data between Melbourne and Hamburg

Table 02

Comparison Water Data between Melbourne and Hamburg

Table 03

Melbourne’s Water System Governance

Table 04

Summary of water quality or urban water streams

Table 05

Water quality objectives for reclaimed water treatment

II. List of Figures Figure 01

Melbourne’s location

Figure 02

Rainfall Deciles in Australia (1997-2009)

Figure 03

Rainfall Deciles in Australia (2010-2011)

Figure 04

City of Melbourne’s Water Harvesting System

Figure 05

Greater Melbourne’s water supply system

Figure 06

City of Melbourne progress towards meeting saving targets

Figure 07

Interceptor septic tank for primary wastewater treatment on-site

Figure 08

Kinglake West household servicing con买慍guration

Figure 09

Royal Park Wetland view

Figure 10

Royal Park Wetlands: Schematical stormwater collection system

III. List of Abbreviations CRC

Cooperative Research Centre

GHG

Greenhouse Gas

MUSIC

Model for Urban Stormwater Improvement Conceptualisation

SEPP

State Environment Protection Policy

STEP

Septic Tank E敤⁰uent Pumps

WSUD

Water Sensitive Urban Design

YVW

Yarra Valley Water

IV. Abstract ( Henriques + Román) This report analyses the current situation of water management in Melbourne, Australia, with the goal to understand relevant aspects of the city within water sensitive urban design, as well as the development of historical events and legal framework for supporting the actual situation of urban water management. The city’s stormwater, wastewater and 摴湥owing waters are described and analyzed under the point of view of the goals established in the past, which look forward to transform Melbourne in a city with adequate stormwater retention guidelines, known as “City as Catchment” initiatives, as well as the future perspectives and targets. Considered as a role model city in this topic, during the decade of 2000, Melbourne is currently dealing with aspects that changed this position: fast urban population growth, climate change e浣摮ects, lack of professional education, overlapping and complex governance systems, and technical uncertainties can be highlighted as reasons that contributed for this. In addition to this previous analyses, this report also introduces two case studies that are representative of the actual wastewater and stormwater management in the city. Finally, options for facing the current challenges and to improve the transition process, i.e. from a centralized water system to a decentralized one, are suggested with the change of focus within water management policies, buildup of professional education, create new business models that promote public and private partnerships and integration of research area by improving information provision. Keywords: Melbourne, Stormwater Management, Wastewater Management, Flowing waters, Water Sensitive Urban Design

1.2 Research Questions 1. What were the drivers that transformed Melbourne from being a role model city in the urban water management 买慍eld in the early 2000s? 2. How is it possible to improve the current situation regarding water management in Melbourne?

1. Introduction (Henriques) For being able to understand the current situation pertaining urban water management in Melbourne, this report is structured in three di浣摮erent parts, one building up to another. The 买慍rst part is entitled ‘background information’ and gives information regarding basic features of the region and the city of Melbourne, as well more specialized data related to the water management 买慍eld. This chapter also provides an overview of the legal framework related to water issues, the existent current situation of stormwater, wastewater and 摴湥owing water systems in the city, achievements and future perspectives with regard to water management in Melbourne. The next chapter, namely ‘Case Studies’, explores two projects that are well-representative of the current wastewater treatment and stormwater management in Melbourne and insights with explanation of criteria for the selection of each project is also provided. The last chapter, entitled ‘Conclusions’, brings an overall assessment of the current situation in the city and provides recommendations for further improvement.

1.1. Background information about Melbourne (Henriques + Román) The city of Melbourne, capital of the Victoria State, is located in the southeastern coast of Australia, as seen in Figure 01. Founded in the year of 1835 (Australia. Records and Archive Branch of the City of Melbourne, 1997) the city experienced in the past years the fastest growth in the country, with a population increase of approximately two percent on each year since the last years (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2016). Today, Greater Melbourne total area is 3,735.60 hectare (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2016) and is divided in 13 municipalities. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (2015),

in 2015 the population was

approximately 4.5 million inhabitants and the density, 453 inhab/km2. In the year of 2015, the total area of parks and reserves was of 4,782,600 m2 and the total built space area was of 31,985,000 m2. Regarding land use and built 摴湥oor space, the main use is destinated to residential accommodations (18,9%), followed by o⁴捩ce space (17%) and by car parking (including commercial, residential and private), which correspond to 12,9%. The built 摴湥oor space area increased 8% (2.4 million m2) between the years of 2013 and 2015 (Australia. Census of Land Use and Employment, 2015). The local climate is classi买慍ed as temperate oceanic climate (according to Köppen-Geiger climate classi买慍cation) and due to its geographical location it is prone to unexpected weather conditions. According the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (2016), in the last 160 years, the average maximum temperature registered was of 19.9°C and the average minimum temperature was of 10.2°C. Concerning rainfall, in the same time frame the mean annual

rainfall was of 648.3mm and the mean number of days of rain was of 159. (See Annex 01 for further details)

Figure 01: Melbourne’s location (Source: Henriques and Román, 2016)

The rate of in买慍ltration for the di浣摮erent types of soil varies are: 0,36mm/hour for heavy clay, 3.6 mm/hour for medium clay and loam and 180 mm/hour for sand (Melbourne Water, 2010 ). (See Annex 2 for further information). The rate of evapotranspiration is 688 mm, the Stormwater runo浣摮 coe⁴捩cient is 165 and wastewater runo浣摮 190 (Australian Rainfall and Runo浣摮: A Guide to Flood Estimation, 2016). The rate of evaporation is 1200 mm (Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology, 2016) (See Annex 3). A comparative with data from Melbourne and Hamburg is provided in Tables 01 and 02.

Table 01: Comparison of Water Data between Melbourne and Hamburg (Source: (*) AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2015; GERMANY. Statistisches Bundesamt, 2015 (**) AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2015; GERMANY. Statistisches Bundesamt, 2015 (***) Melbourne Water, 2010; GERMANY. Behörde für Bau und Verkehr, 2003 (****) Melbourne Water, 2011; GERMANY. Behörde für Bau und Verkehr, 2003

Table 02: Comparison of Water Data between Melbourne and Hamburg (Source: AUSTRALIA. Melbourne Water, 2010 / AUSTRALIA. Australian Rainfall and Runo浣摮, 2016)

Greater Melbourne has three main waterbodies: Yarra River, Maribyrnong River and Moonee Ponds Creek, which play important roles in the city due to historic, recreational, aesthetic, environmental and economic reasons. Furthermore, the city is facing climate change e浣摮ects such as increased evaporation; increased wind speed; higher temperatures and heat waves; increased rainfall and intense storm events; 摴湥oods; sea level rise and prolonged drought periods (City of Melbourne, 2015). Increased rainfall and droughts can be highlighted as the turning point concerning water management. Figures 02 and 03 show how the rainfall amount scenario changed in the country in the last few years. Between the years of 1997 and 2009, Melbourne experienced the lowest record of rainfall deciles, however between the years of 2009 and 2010 the situation was the opposite, leading the city to experience the highest record on rainfall deciles.

Figure 02: Rainfall Deciles in Australia (1997-2009) (Source: Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology, 2015)

Figure 03: Rainfall Deciles in Australia (2010-2011) (Source: Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology, 2015)

Since the 1970s, Australia and, more speci买慍cally, Melbourne are experiencing development shifts with regard to environment and urban planning, raising its sustainability awareness with the enactment of a more ecological framework and being a worldwide forerunner with the creation of water sensitive guidelines in its urban design, specially with regard to reduction of stormwater runo浣摮 between years 1990s and 2005. Since almost two decades ago, urban stormwater as, per se, water run-o浣摮 is being perceived as a critical source of pollution of Melbourne’s rivers and estuary, which may be the starting point for raising awareness of inhabitants, media, public stakeholders and research bodies concerning urban water

management, with the triggering for creating a more resilient water-sensitive framework. In addition, this buildup on awareness, apart from being a direct response to waterway pollution, is also a response to counteract the harm caused by climate change, with already mentioned extensive droughts periods, followed by intensive rainfall periods (Brown and Clarke, 2007), which may impair the reliability on the overall water supply system. Today, with regard to urban water management, Melbourne is facing challenges created by climate change and continuous population growth, which may pose a threat to its infrastructure and, in hindsight, resilience capacity. Furthermore, Melbourne is not more regarded as an actual harbinger within water sensitive urban design planning, because even though its legal framework recognizes the importance of implementing water sensitive guidelines, the application and implementation of these concepts are still fragmented, complex and with a traditional approach (Brown and Farrelly, 2009), as its initiatives are much more concentrated in stormwater catchment than on other relevant and adjacent 买慍elds. Subchapters 1.2 and 1.3, namely ‘Legal Framework’ and ‘Present Situation’, o浣摮er further understanding on the legal framework and status quo in the water management in the city, respectively.

1.2. Legal Framework (Henriques) For several years, Melbourne is regarded as the city that took a leading role in the implementation of Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) in its planning. Aiming to understand which legal mechanisms provided the right path for the implementation of WSUD in the city, this section provides an overview of the legislative framework that is relevant for sustainable water management within the city of Melbourne in the macro-, meso- and micro-levels. These policies and guidelines are the result from the collaboration of di浣摮erent governmental spheres and from adaptive governance mechanisms during a long process that promoted change in planning processes to make greater Melbourne more resilient to climate change, improve water management and create positive environmental impact. Introduced in 1970, the Environmental Protection Act is the most important law regarding the protection of the environment in the State of Victoria and has the purpose of creating a legislative framework for environmentally sound measures and the integration of sustainable aspects in the further planning in urban areas of the state. Furthermore, the enactment of this framework in a macro-level is responsible for promoting change regarding the traditional approach in water management, as well for created space for subsequent waterway protection policies in minor scales and serving as a background context for fostering WSUD planning in the area (Brown and Clarke, 2007). Subordinate to this law, the State Parliament approved in 1989 the State Environment Protection Policy (SEPP) Waters of Victoria, which clearly states the intentions and guidelines regarding water management and concerns the use of natural water resources in the State of Victoria.

In addition to SEPP, the State Parliament also enacted in the same year the Water Act 1989, which is the most important law concerning the use of natural water resources in the State of Victoria. Furthermore, this legislation gives details with regard to division of use between private and public stakeholders, as well the allocation of surface and groundwater bodies within the territory of the state and the assessment of long-term water resources. Between 1990 and 1995, the government developed legal structures to promote a better interaction between public and private stakeholders with the creation of a Cooperative Research Center (CRC) Programme for exchanging knowledge and initiating multidisciplinary research between academic research and Melbourne Water, the regional water management authority within the practice of WSUD (CRC Association, 2016; Brown and Clarke, 2007). Moreover, bringing momentum towards climate change adaptation and mitigation and focusing in the implementation of sustainable water management, the local government introduced in 2002 the Zero Net Emissions by 2020 strategy in order to achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and, in 2004, the Total Watermark - City as a Catchment policy, where the critical role of catchments are recognized and, within it, holistic guidelines with regard to urban water management, water supply, stormwater, wastewater, groundwater and their connection to climate change, human health, liveability and positive environmental impact are addressed (City of Melbourne, 2014). Moreover, apart from focusing on the better management of catchments in the city, this policy also contains palpable targets, which aims the reduction of net water consumption through the gradual implementation of more resilient infrastructure, to foster social capital through consumer education by the promotion of several campaigns, to raise awareness with regard the water consumption (Brown and Clarke, 2008) and with the introduction of a nitrogen reduction target to control water pollution. In addition to the aforementioned policies, after the gradual process of simultaneously creating macro and micro scale legislative frameworks, which institutionalized change in development and planning processes, in 2005 the city council enacted the so-called Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) Guidelines, which includes design principles to avoid or minimize the environmental impacts of urbanization in terms of water demand and pollution to natural water bodies in the city (City of Melbourne, 2014). WSUD represents an important shift of the urban planning rationale, where water run-o浣摮 is not anymore seem as an impediment, but 买慍nally perceived as a valuable resource (Roy et al., 2008). In addition to the WSUD Guidelines, the local government also provides diverse guidelines that ensure a more sustainable water management, like the Construction Management Plan Guidelines and Greening Your Building Toolkit - for ensuring best-practices procedures on construction and development sites, as well on buildings. Finally, reports agree that there is room for improvement regarding the legal framework in the city, since the water management is complex, as several governmental agencies have

di浣摮erent responsibilities that can overlap within their tasks to some extent (City of Melbourne, 2014). For better comprehension, Table 02 gives an overview of the roles from di浣摮erent local stakeholders from the water sector in Melbourne. Authority

Responsibilities

City of Melbourne

Acts in a Municipal level with drainage, implementation and managing of alternative water supplies. Moreover, it is responsible for the whole process of water capture, storage and reuse in the municipality operations.

Melbourne Water

Victorian Government o⁴捩ce that manages waterways and drainage systems in the Port of Philip. In addition, treats and supplies drinking water and recycled water, it also manages the city catchments and bulk water supplies and removes and treats most of the city sewerage.

Parks Victoria

Victorian Government o⁴捩ce responsible for the waterways Yarra and Maribyrnong Rivers management, as well a port manager of Port Phillip Bay, Western Port and Port Campbell.

Water Authorities

Victorian Government o⁴捩ces of City West Water and South East Water. They provide to the inner, western and south eastern suburbs and to municipality customers the following water services: drinking water, sewage, trade waste and recycled water.

Water Sensitive They integrate multi-disciplinary expertise to contribute with research in Cities/Universities all water management sectors. Table 03: Melbourne's Water System Governance (Source: City of Melbourne, 2014)

1.3. Present situation (Román)

Historically, the city of Melbourne had a conventional water cycle, collecting water from a catchment area, treating it and delivering it to the 买慍nal user. Afterwards, the sewers took wastewater to treatment plants in a centralized network. After the treatment, the outcome is discharged in the Port Phillip Bay. Concerning stormwater, a separate pipeline network collected and discharged it to the bay and rivers. This centralized urban water cycle is neither sustainable, nor e⁴捩cient managing the urban water 摴湥ows. As an option, Melbourne is moving forward to the concept of Water Sensitive City (as explained in the Legal Framework Chapter). The concept of Water Sensitive City takes into account the relation within and between community values, built form, landscape and the urban water cycle (City of Melbourne, 2014). Based on policies, guidelines, documents and target reviews, community consultation and lessons learnt, Melbourne is working within an integrated approach as well as with several stakeholders to improve their status quo and looks forward to the future. As an example, the Water Sensitive Urban Design Guideline (WSUD) is a tool that tackles these 3 separate water systems (potable water, wastewater and stormwater) in order to promote an integrated, e⁴捩cient and “买慍t-for-purpose” approach, as well as to consider every water stream to be a 10

ressource (City of Melbourne, 2005). According to the City of Melbourne, WSUD adopts several measures that “are designed to avoid, or at least minimise, the environmental impacts of urbanisation in terms of the demand for water and the potential pollution threat to natural water bodies.” (City of Melbourne, 2014). In other words, the strategies focus on local solutions to manage the quality of stormwater runo浣摮, conserve, reuse and recycle water and implementing a better urban planning and design at the same time..

In addition to the 3 main water systems, the WSUD de买慍nes further alternative water sources: rainwater, groundwater, greywater, blackwater and water mining. These supplementary sources must contribute to diminish the amount of wastewater, increase stormwater quality and save water as an overall. For each type of these new alternative water streams, the document also set, the quality, sources, required treatment and recommended use (See table 3). This table exempli买慍ed the concept of “买慍t-for-purpose”, which analyzes the di浣摮erent water sources´ qualities and the city´s demands. As a result, based on the similarities between the water characteristics and the 买慍nal consumer needs, each type of water is classi买慍ed as appropriate for di浣摮erent uses. This practice reduces the treatment required and, therefore, delivers time, energy consumption and cost. According to the city water cycle presented in the Total Watermark - City as a Catchment of 2014, during the previous year the main water streams provided 18,501 ML to the city, from which the commercial sector consumed around 72%. Regarding rainfall, the amount was of 11

19,703 ML and roofs harvested 18,7% of it. A total of 17,600 ML were discharged, 266ML were recycled, 6,890ML were caught by roads and other impervious surfaces and 10,573ML were stormwater runo浣摮 going to the city´s waterways (City of Melbourne, 2014). (See Annex 04 for better visualization)

1.3.1. Stormwater management (Román) As explained in the chapter before, the city is moving forward to the concept “city as a catchment” based on the water sensitive strategies. Stormwater plays an important role in this context, since it is expected that the city´s total rainfall amount decreases. However, heavy precipitation events are expected to increase (City of Melbourne, 2014). The WSUD guidelines promote and enhance strategies to deal with this situation and turn the city more resilient to these scenarios. Stormwater should be captured from parks, gardens, roads and car parkings. In this section, rainwater is included with the water harvested from roofs. In general, the goals of this guideline are: use the water harvested from alternative sources for washing machines, toilet 摴湥ushing, hot water systems and landscape irrigation; remove the amount of pollutants before they will enter the water 摴湥ows; increase in买慍ltration to the groundwater aquifers; reduce the water runo浣摮 to prevent 摴湥ood risks. Several strategies are recommended in the document in order to achieve these goals. They are divided according to the scale, location and size of the project (building level, open spaces, roads and sidewalks), providing a broad number of options and technologies, which should be analyzed case by case to guarantee applicability, feasibility and e⁴捩ciency. On a building level, water reuse strategies include: rainwater tanks, stormwater tanks, aquifer storage and recovery. For open spaces, landscape elements combined with water ponds, lakes, rain gardens, bioswales. wetlands, sedimentation basins, bu浣摮er strips and recreational features can integrate water catchment and treatment. On the urban level, roads and sidewalks are important elements due to the signi买慍cant impervious area, turning them into valuable water sources. The options contain bioretention systems, bioretention swales, bioretention basins, in买慍ltration trenches, sand 买慍lters and porous pavings. With the objective of assisting the stakeholders involved along all di浣摮erent process phases, Melbourne Water o浣摮ers information, fact sheets, speci买慍c guidelines, modelling programs (MUSIC and STORM) and assessment during the project, license and construction steps.

It is important to highlight that the WSUD guidelines mention that di浣摮erent water collection sources need di浣摮erent treatments to ensure the characteristics appropriated for the targeted uses and to improve the quality of the material that will be discharged into the environment. As an example, the main stormwater pollutants harvested from gardens are toxins (pesticides, herbicides and heavy metals), suspended solids and excess of nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen) (City of Melbourne, 2014). In the case of stormwater captured from parking areas and roads, it is necessary to eliminate suspended solids loads and tyre parts. Currently, there is a total of 26 harvesting locations distributed across the city (Figure 04). They are a mix of Council, public or private properties and responsible for harvesting 975,2 ML each year. The public properties collect 468,9 ML, the Council 319,3 ML and the Private 187ML (City of Melbourne, 2014). These numbers re摴湥ect the interaction of the di浣摮erent city actors, as well as how complex the water system is.

The most recent water budget indicates that 70% of the city´s resident demand can be supplied by harvesting stormwater and roof-water (Melbourne Water, 2014).

1.3.2. Wastewater treatment (Román) The city´s sewerage system is mainly centralized and, unlike most European cities, has an exclusive network of underground pipes. This pipeline separation of stormwater guarantees a safe and reliable wastewater disposal. Two main treatment plants (Werribee at the west and Bagholme at the east) treat 90% of all wastewater (Brown, Jackson and Khalifé, 2010: 510), a process that takes around 12 hours. After the treatment, the outcome is discharged to Port Phillip Bay (Werribee) and to Westernport Bay (Bangholme). (City of Melbourne, 2005). Even though technologies for decentralized and on-site wastewater systems are considered proven, their use is currently rare in Melbourne (Brown, Jackson and Khalifé, 2010: 510). Currently, the centralized system is understood as a progressive system of treating Melbourne's wastewater and, at the same time, a lost opportunity for capturing, treating and reusing it before discharging it into the environment. The WSUD guidelines are the city´s main tool to promote a decentralized wastewater system. Greywater and blackwater treatment and subsequent use are addressed as valuable solutions to reduce the wastewater volume entering the treatment plants and to reduce potable water consumption. More bene买慍ts are related too, such as less energy demand and greenhouse gases emissions necessary for the wastewater treatment. The guideline provides a broad part that focuses on the wastewater treatment, outcome quality and the importance to human health and environment. In the case of greywater, the original use will de买慍ne the quality and the amount of organic loads it contains (eg. faecal matter, organic matter, bacterias, detergents). The technologies promoted for treatment include: chemical treatment, biological treatment, screening and settlement in a tank (City of Melbourne Water, 2005). Closed systems are recommended due to better e⁴捩ciency as well as to reduced human exposure and health risks. Greywater can be stored for 24 hours without treatment. If storage exceeded this timeframe, it would needs to be treated or discharged. Regarding water quality standards,

the EPA Victoria’s Guidelines for Environmental

Management: Use of Reclaimed Water (Publication 464.2, 2003) determines the requirements for greywater treatment (City of Melbourne, 2005). Table 04 shows all the speci买慍cations.

In the context of large scales greywater systems, several technologies are promoted in the WSUD guideline: subsurface 摴湥ow wetland, suspended growth systems (e.g. activated sludge systems), 买慍xed growth systems (e.g. trickle 买慍lters, rotating biological contactors), recirculating media 买慍lters, sand and depth 买慍ltration, membrane bioreactor and membrane 买慍ltration (micro, ultra, nano买慍ltration and reverse osmosis) (Melbourne Water, 2005). It is worth to mention that the selection of the strategy will depend on the special facts, such as space availability, feasibility, water quality or water volume. Concerning blackwater reuse, it is named as water mining in the water sensitive design context. Blackwater reuse demands di浣摮erent treatments than greywater reuse. Higher energy consumption, higher investments and speci买慍c treatments for reducing amounts of pathogens must be considered. A blackwater reuse system is a combination of di浣摮erent technologies. The most common options in the market are compact plants that, after the treatment, provide water Class A. All of these systems must include the step of extracting blackwater from the pipelines, treating it, recycling it and 买慍nally disposing the remaining to the city treatment. Buildings are considered signi买慍cant sources for water mining. However, a separate pipeline for delivering the treated water is necessary. In addition to the WSUD, the Total Watermark – City as a Catchment (2014) enhance the importance of this change by setting goals related to the topic. The objectives include reduce wastewater generated in buildings; minimize the overall the amount produced by applying demand management and recycling; treat all the wastewater not harvested previously of being discharged; and promote the use of low energy technology. Moreover, the document showsl the progress achieved by reducing the 摴湥ow (when compared to the baseline) from 22,510 ML/yr to 6424 ML/yr.

1.3.3. Flowing waters (Román) The city has 3 main water bodies (Yarra River, Maribyrnong River and Moonee Ponds Creek), which enter the Port Phillip Bay, and play an important environmental, social, economic and historic role. Along them, several reservoirs were built to guarantee Melbourne's water supply (Figure 05). Melbourne authorities are conscious of the fact that human activity and climate change have been disrupting river´s and creek´s natural 摴湥ow patterns and ecosystems. To control the water that is taken from rivers, Melbourne Water organizes it by local management plans, diversion licences, bulk entitlement agreements and stream摴湥ow management plans. In general, the aim is to provide speci买慍c conditions to be ful买慍lled by inhabitants and companies to acquire the water use right. In addition, a certain amount of water is reserved to protect natural processes, water quality and biodiversity. They are named “environment’s share of water” or “environmental water reserve”.

Figure 05: Greater Melbourne’s Water Supply System (Source: Melbourne Water, 2013)

This process is ensured by the Environmental Entitlements, which is “A right to water granted to the Victorian Environmental Water Holder for the purpose of maintaining an environmental

water reserve or improving the environmental values and health of the water ecosystems and other users that depend on environmental condition .” (State of Victoria, 2015). The

Environmental Entitlements were created by the Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water under the Water Act 1989. The goal is to release part of the water of the reservoirs into rivers to keep them healthy and mimic natural events at the time of the year when they are needed more. The releasings should be controlled according to what experts determine the river´s needs in that special moment to guarantee natural and good conditions to 摴湥ora and fauna. Furthermore, if the 摴湥ows are not occurring in a natural way, water can be released too. The volume released must be small in order to avoid 摴湥oodings (Melbourne Water, 2016). The Yarra River is a good example of this strategy. The Yarra River Environmental Entitlement was created in 2006 and the 买慍rst environmental release was in 2011. According to Melbourne Water, the river increased its quality and ensured good conditions for the species. In addition, other actions are being practiced to protect the river: re-vegetation for land stabilization and erosion control; installation of 买慍sh ways to help 买慍sh to pass man made obstacles and fencing out parts along the river. The document Total Watermark- City as a Catchment- includes strategies to improve the water quality, biodiversity, vegetation, natural habitat, river 摴湥ows and surroundings of these main rivers. Despite these 摴湥owing waters mentioned, groundwater is highlighted as well in this document. It is addressed as a signi买慍cant element of water cycle and geological structure which contributes to water depths in wetlands and to rivers base 摴湥ows. Groundwater aquifers are interconnected and the depth varies along the city. Nevertheless, most of them are saline and there is not precise data regarding water extracted and recharged balance. For this reason, in the past they were considered as low priority elements. The document expects to raise the awareness by showing the potential these aquifers represent as a future water supply source and how the interaction between them and the surface can not be underestimated. There are several shallow and saline water tables that represent an opportunity to a future control extraction, even though additional processes must be necessary, such as desalination. The document´s strategies focus on preventing and protecting the aquifers from contamination and disruption, as well as maintaining or improving the water quality and, when necessary, water re-injection to prevent land subsidence.

1.4. Future perspectives (Román) Looking forward to the city´s future, it is possible to perceive that authorities are concerned with urban growth and the relation with the environment and its components. As an example, the Plan Melbourne, launched by the State of Victoria in 2014, can be mentioned. This document describes a strategy for the city´s growth until the year of 2050. The goal is to guarantee the city's prosperity, livability and sustainability. Some strategies are engaging and consulting the local community; restoring the planning process´s transparency and integrity;

preserving open spaces and existing parks will be tackled. Furthermore, it contains the chapter named Environment and Water, which highlights the importance of reviewing the city planning and managing approach regarding urban development and water services in order to provide “a more comprehensive and innovative approach to using stormwater and recycled water” (Plan of Melbourne, 2014). Another example are the targets for the year of 2020 proposed in the review of the Total Watermark - City as a Catchment from 2014. The goals are organized in 4 major groups: alternative supplies, stormwater quality, wastewater reduction and groundwater quality. The following targets can be highlighted: 50% reduction in potable water consumption per employee; 40% reduction in potable water consumption per resident; 90% reduction in potable water consumption by city Council; 25% absolute water saving; alternative sources must supply 30% of the city Council water demand; 20% reduction in total suspended solids on stormwater; 15% reduction of stormwater´s total phosphorus; 30% reduction municipality wastewater and groundwater recharge with equal or better quality to the water in the aquifer. The baseline for setting these goals was the year of 2000. The Figure 06 exempli买慍es the progress regarding water saving in di浣摮erent city sectors.

Figure 06: City of Melbourne progress towards meeting water saving targets (Source: Total Watermark- City as a Catchment, 2014)

The City Council of Melbourne considers that a valuable progress was achieved until now. Several example can be pointed out: 1200 building owners and managers were encouraged to reduce potable water consumption by retro买慍tting them; reduction of 58% (when compared to the 2000 baseline) of residential water consumption. Furthermore, the water consumption pattern had changed, contributing with this so-called success. Daily water consumption per resident in the area declined on average by 4.2% per annum from 142 litres in 2008-09 to 112 litres in 2012-13 (City of Melbourne, 2015). However, despite all the e浣摮orts, the ideal results have not been achieved, providing the opportunity to improve and review the process as an overall. This challenge includes better governance, community engagement, uncertainties regarding the interaction between the centralized water system and decentralized water systems, educational programs and better compliance between construction and planning phases.

2. Case studies in Melbourne 2.1. Wastewater Treatment: Kinglake West Sewerage Project (Henriques) As already mentioned, Melbourne’s wastewater treatment is considered largely centralized, with rare existing options for on-site wastewater treatment and innovative projects in the sense of implementing technologies that push decentralization of the system are still rare (Brown, Jackson and Khalifé, 2009). The project here chosen, namely Kinglake West Sewerage, began in 2006 as an innovative experiment commissioned by Yarra Valley Water (YVW), the largest Melbourne’s water and sewerage services provider (Yvw.com.au, 2016), within 74 residences from Kinglake West, a municipality located in the outer boundaries of Melbourne. This municipality has areas that were unsewered and quite distant from existing infrastructure wastewater systems, with potable water supply being delivered from local water tanks and septic tanks used for sewage disposal, thus considered optimal for implementing sustainable wastewater measures (Cook et al., 2013). Accordingly to YVW, the main objectives behind the project were to provide a low-cost cost solution adapted to the local context for water management issues through an innovative solution that could serve as an example for implementation of projects that were alike, as well to raise public health and the quality of existent water streams through proper and sustainable resource management. After analysing existing area, studies presented

solutions

implementation

for

the

diverse

arrangements related to water management, such as: individual greywater treatment and storage system for every household in order to provide irrigation water for gardens, as well water for toilet 摴湥ushing and laundry; toilets with mechanisms

for

diverting

and

collecting urine in order to be used as fertilizer in local farms; and the use of septic tank e敤⁰uent pumps (STEP) for solid separation and primary treatment of blackwater in a reticulated sewerage system (Figure 07).

The recycle of wastewater also envisioned the reduction for use of rainwater in aforementioned areas, as well to counteract against shortages in water supply. A scheme with further explanation of the entire system is provided on Figure 08.

Figure 08: Kinglake West household servicing con买慍guration (Source: Cook et al., 2013)

After the implementation and construction of the project, prognostics were optimistic that these arrangements would o浣摮er several bene买慍ts when compared to usual sewerage system, i.e. up to twenty percent of economic savings, increase of the reliability of water supply by 100%, decrease of half the present wastewater disposal, reduction of nitrogen loads into the sewerage system by 80% and 30% decrease of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions (Cook et al., 2013). However, research has shown that results were far from expected, as the project costed 60% above the estimations, mainly due to the fact that the system’s performance did not meet simulations standards, as implementation and operational costs were more than it was primarily expected and even though positive environmental outcomes were found, they did not meet simulations, as the energy expenditure of the system that was greater than previously expected. As a result of the experiment, of all households that opted for using the system during the experimental period, only 30% chose to stay within it (Cook et al, 2013). Even though the dropout margin of the project can be considerable, Kinglake West Sewerage project provides some interesting insights with regard to water management, which can be used for future implementations in other locations countrywide. First, research pointed the need of conducting feasibility studies before actually proposing the implementation, for example, the implementation of greywater recycling equipment just without taking into consideration important factors, i.e. the actual situation of the place, the size of existing sewerage system and the costs of implementation that can easily surpass the actual bene买慍ts

of such system. Furthermore, there is also a need for understanding which type of model is actually suitable for the area and climate, as the original model did not deliver results with its full performance, which in hindsight decreased the con买慍dence of users on the system. Lastly, this system did not consider critical aspects such as user behaviour and population engagement as an essential part for its success, which may be a factor that impeded a better performance of the structure within project. As Cook et al. (2013) re摴湥ects: when implementing more sustainable and innovative systems in households, factors like retro买慍tting an existing area or promoting systems in new settlements may come into question and be critical for the overall performance. In the case of Kinglake West, the retro买慍tting of a system meant that the population who already lived in the area was subjected to a greater change of behaviour with the use a yet-to-be-implemented system than in the case of a population who moves to a new settlement with an mindset prone to greater adaptability. As explained, this area is considered a forerunner in the country for being the 买慍rst existing settlement to invest in toilets that separate 摴湥uids, thus some issues related with the usage and adaptation to this new system and its design were reported by inhabitants, however, even though the intent to continue using diverting 摴湥uids systems are low, they are more optimistic than compared to the greywater recycling system. Moreover, Milne et al. (2014) also re摴湥ects the importance of promoting an economic analysis before implementing such innovative systems, like the urine diverting toilets, since in the case of low-density project like Kinglake West project, the expenditure was higher than predicted, since the equipment’s design required more water and energy than predicted and negatively impacted the costs of the process and the reliance of the users on the project.

2.2. Stormwater management - Royal Park Wetlands (Román) The Royal Park Wetland integrates the “City as a Catchment” network. It was selected as the project to be studied due to the relevance of the city´s history, community, environment and goals in the context of a water sensitive city as well as the achievements reached. The park was inaugurated as a public open space in the decade of 1840 and turned a permanent parkland since 1876. In the year of 1984, the Royal Park Master Plan was developed and, within it, the proposal of turning a part of the park into a wetland. However, the stormwater harvesting system was included in the plan just during 1997. The wetland conceptual design was presented in 2004 and the construction was completed in 2006. During the same year, a testing and commissioning phase was developed. In the year of 2008, the system was upgraded with the construction of an additional tank. This improvement turned possible the expansion of the irrigation network in 2010 (City of Melbourne, 2010). (See Annex 05 for 买慍gures of the construction phases)

Back in the inauguration time, it was located in the city edge as part of a series of parks, an inner suburbs characteristic, which could provide leisure and contact with nature to the inhabitants. Today, it is Melbourne´s biggest inner park, with a total area of 170 hectares of green open space and 187 hectares of catchment area (Australian Department of Environment, 2014). Nowadays, the Royal Park concentrates large open spaces for recreation, historic buildings, monuments, sport areas (golf, baseball, hockey), the Melbourne zoo and native and indigenous vegetation. In addition, besides the bene买慍ts in the water sensitive city context, the park developed an important role regarding environmental education opportunity, community engagement, heritage and aesthetic value, heat island reduction e浣摮ects and maintenance of natural biodiversity. Narrowing to the water sensitive urban design context, the park is the main collector of the city´s water harvesting system and, so far, a good example when compared with the other ones. This position was achieved during the summer of 2006/2007 (Burns and Mitchell, 2008), when most of the systems were not able to work in the expected way. However, the Royal Park managed to catch, treat and supply water satisfactory and complied with the volumes estimated in the project. Figure 09: Royal Park Wetland View (Source: Melbourne Water, 2010)

The objectives targeted in the wetland project, whose name is 'Trin Warren Tam-boore’, provided an integrated and holistic approach of a stormwater system, contributing to consolidate the Royal Park wetland as a successful system. The goals embrace: stormwater runo浣摮 reduction, potable water demand minimization, pollutants reduction, guaranteeing a better quality of the water discharged into the Port Phillip Bay, ecosystem protection, biological process for the stormwater treatment, park sports facilities irrigation with reused 22

water, enhance local biodiversity, engaging local community through public consultations and environmental awareness. Zooming into the water treatment system and process, it starts with the stormwater runo浣摮 collection from the city regular drainage system. Stormwater is diverted from the Brunswick Creek by a pipe in the weir wall. Before being diverted, the water 摴湥ows reduce the speed, settling down sediments, and a trash rack forbids bigger debris to enter the wetland. Afterwards, the water 摴湥ows through two linked ponds. The 买慍rst pond is the treatment pond. It has a total area of 0.8ha, vegetation, a S-shape and depths that varied from 0.15m to 1.5m. The water diverted 摴湥ows by the pond and, at the same time, sediments are eliminated by microorganisms or caught by the 70.000 aquatic plants (City of Melbourne, 2013). The shape and the di浣摮erent depths are essential to increase the treatment distance and the contact to the cleaning e浣摮ects from plants and sunlight (City of Melbourne, 2010). An interesting fact is that community was invited to plant the wetland vegetation. The next stage is the storage pond. It has a capacity of 13.4 ML, a depth of 1.85m and the form of a lagoon (City of Melbourne, 2010). This pond is fundamental to the process of protecting and enhancing the local biodiversity. Regarding its process, the water enters the wetland by underground pipes and, before being transferred to the next step, receives a last disinfection process. During the year of 2008, due to the signi买慍cant increase in the water volume collected, the construction of an underground storage and distribution tank with 5 ML capacity was necessary(Melbourne Water, 2010). After this expansion, the estimated volume of treated water is between 90 ML and 100 ML per year (City of Melbourne, 2010). The outcome is Class A standard water, which mean safe for human contact, but can not be used for drinking. When the amount of treated water exceeds the current demand, the excess is reinjected to the urban drainage system, 摴湥owing into Moonee Ponds Creek. Besides these main features, the project includes an irrigation system. It is composed of smaller tanks and a pipeline network across the park, which stores and delivers the water treated by the wetlands to sport 买慍elds and street greenery. The irrigation just operates during night in order to avoid human health problems. (See 买慍gure 10 for better comprehension) The wetland system is based, as much as possible, on gravity, to guarantee the water 摴湥ows and minimize the needs of pumps as an attempt to reduce energy consumption, costs and maintenance. However, 5 pump stations are still needed to deliver water to the baseball 买慍elds, goalf 买慍elds, hydrants and the irrigation network. The pumps have pH, salinity and turbidity sensors, as well a ultra violet disinfection unit.

Along several project phases, signi买慍cant constraints were faced: it was demanded that the existing open recreational areas needed to be preserved, limiting the wetland footprint, However, the solution was to build it in the same space of an existent sports facility, which was under passed by an existing drain that connected two important creeks. To comply with the environmental preservation targets, it was not allowed to cut down trees. In addition, asbestos was identi买慍ed during the soil contamination test, delaying the construction and increasing the costs. During the testing and commissioning phases, animals were fed with newly planted vegetation of the wetland and, during the 买慍rst year, the water level needed to be lower than it was planned due to the amount of young plants that were drowning. Finally, in 2008. a necessary tank was built under a sport 买慍eld, due to lack of space (City of Melbourne, 2010). Currently, Melbourne Water is responsible for monitoring and maintenance. The centralized control system supervises pumps, valves, pipes, tanks, water 摴湥ow, water quality indicators (phosphorus, nitrogen, total suspended solids, pH, salinity, turbidity) and the irrigation system according to the established schedule (daily, monthly, every six months or annually). Even though this project is largely studied, analyzed and eulogized as a successful case of good design, holistic approach, strong 买慍nancial support and reliable partnerships, there are some criticals points that have to be mentioned. According to Burns and Mitchell (2008), the project´s success is related with the stormwater collection from a permanent waterway. This turns the reuse system less vulnerable to rainfall variations than the systems that collect water from other sources, such as streets or green roofs. Furthermore, Brett (2014) discusses that 24

the “Trin Warren Tam-boore” wetland is promoted as being surrounded with native vegetation. Nevertheless, there are few discussions about this classi买慍cation according to the respective legal framework (Clause 52.17 or the Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines). When the aquatic plant species are analyzed, it is possible to identify that they do not re摴湥ect the state before the local urbanization. The non native species can cause problems to the environment. This situation can be found not just in this wetland, but also in many others across Australia. Besides these issues, Brett argues that the wetland does not develop such a signi买慍cant role regarding bird species protection due to the limited extension, opposite to what is massive state. In addition, the expansion in 2008 is generally assessed as a positive fact once the treatment and storage capacity was increased. However, this can be questioned since the correct amount of water available to catch was estimated wrong in the initial project. Lastly, as pointed out in several researches, inaccuracies and uncertainties related to cost, pay-back, operation, maintenance, water quality standards, modelling methodologies and more speci买慍c legal frameworks that surround stormwater reuse systems in general (due to be considered new technologies), provide the opportunity orf future analyses, more critical assessment and speci买慍c studies of this project.

4. Conclusions (Henriques + Roman) For better understanding the water management process in Melbourne, this report analysed the existing situation in the area, in the meanings of assessing the current water management initiatives, as well as the process within the legal framework in di浣摮erent scales. Furthermore, two case studies were chosen for being representative of the actual situation in the city in two divergent water management spheres: Kinglake Lake West, part of the implementation of an innovative on-site primary wastewater treatment and Royal Park Wetlands, which consolidated as the main project of the “city as a catchment” network initiative. Each project revealed di浣摮erent outcomes, which provide valuable material for re摴湥ection regarding water management in Melbourne. It is clear that Australia and, more speci买慍cally, Melbourne invests on implementing an integrated approach in its water management, however, what it seems to be a comprising e浣摮ort in the legislative and theoretical sphere, is still not well-adapted in the reality. Within its policies, water management in Melbourne seems to focus more on the water supply and stormwater retention technologies than implementing decentralized water management alternatives and some factors may justify this: the existent legal framework in the city is too complex, where the roles of di浣摮erent stakeholders are not clear and, therefore, implementation of more concrete measures may be shaded by the complexity of the whole process; lack of knowledge and reliability on decentralizing technologies, which may impede their implementation; lack of better integration between stakeholders around the

implementation of these technologies; lack of interest from the part of the planning sector on focusing on them; uncertainties related with the operation and maintenance cost, since it is considered a new technology with a relative short timeframe to be evaluated; di浣摮erences between what is planned and estimated in the project phase and in the construction phase. The theory and the goals look forward to a urban water system more sustainable and resilient and, despite the bene买慍ts of using more innovative systems, such as 摴湥exibility and a more secure water supply, uncertainties are inherent to this transition process. There is a gap in the 买慍eld related with the interaction between these two systems (centralized and decentralized), the physical impacts of such change, the quality of the water outcome and the operational process. This demands for further research and better assessment, thus reinforcing the need for an integrated evaluation prior to deciding which system should be implemented. Moreover, statistics show that Melbourne is the fastest growing capital city in Australia, with forecasts predictions of an increase of almost two million inhabitants by 2031, by comparison with 2011 statistics (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2015: 26). Such population growth also comes with demands for better infrastructure in terms of water supply and sewerage network and we believe that decentralizing is an interesting option for complying with these demands. This transition is a signi买慍cant challenge and the city is working to be prepared for this situation and be more resilient, however, despite all the e浣摮orts, there is opportunity for improvements. Therefore, we provide suggestions as an attempt to achieve, in a more e⁴捩cient and holistic approach, the targets. As Brown, Jackson and Khalifé (2010: 510) state, decentralizing and on-site wastewater treatment can play a critical role in the future water and sewerage treatment and can help Melbourne to achieve a greater adaptability in the future, thus a change of focus from not only on stormwater water retention but also to decentralization of sewage systems within the guidelines in the city of Melbourne is paramount to accomplish this. To tackle the low adoption rate of decentralizing systems in Melbourne, we believe that measures that promote changes in societal level within di浣摮erent scales are required, as well fostering corporate education, improving subsidies models between public and private stakeholders and promoting risk management within these new models. Firstly, the City of Melbourne and the Water Industry should emphasize on sponsoring the education of di浣摮erent stakeholders that are active in the water 买慍eld, i.e. planners, architects, managers and potential users, with events such as workshops and demonstrational projects to increase con买慍dence of users on these systems, as well to foster cooperation within di浣摮erent partners. Secondly, the municipality of Melbourne should promote new models for subsidizing projects within the private sphere and create economic incentives for increasing the rate of adoption within 买慍nal users for decentralizing systems, i.e. tax exemptions for acquiring the needed structure or net discounts on the water or energy bill based on recycled water consumption. We believe that this proposal would not only promote a better cooperation and communication between private and public partners through risk sharing, but could also 26

increase the user reliance on these systems and shape a more conscious user-behaviour on the long-term. Finally, we believe that the municipality of Melbourne and its water suppliers should increase the communication and provision of information regarding water management, as even though the information that is provided within their reports and website is an obvious asset for the steer of scienti买慍c research, they are not always provided for free and we feel that this is an impediment for integrating and promoting better research on this 买慍eld.

V. References AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Meteorology. (2016) Average annual, monthly and seasonal evaporation

[Online]

Available

at: th

http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/climate_averages/evaporation/index.jsp [Accessed 25 Aug 2016] AUSTRALIA. Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology. (2016) Climate statistics for Australian locations - Monthly climate statistics - All years of record [Online] Available at: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_086071.shtml [Accessed 8th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Meteorology. (2016) Groundwater information [Online] Available from http://www.bom.gov.au/water/groundwater/index.shtml [Accessed: August 25th 2016]. AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2016). Melbourne our fastest-growing capital. Available

at:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/lookup/3218.0Media%20Release12014-15 [Accessed 20th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2015). Infrastructure Australia: Population Estimates and Projections. Australian Infrastructure Audit Background Paper. Available at: http://infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/policy-publications/publications/买慍les/Background-paper-o n-demographic-projections.pdf [Accessed 26th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Meteorology. (2016) Melbourne: Water rights [Online] Available at: http://www.bom.gov.au/water/nwa/2015/melbourne/contextual/waterrights.html [Accessed 15th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016) Victoria - State of summary [Online] Available

at:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/3218.0Main%20Features252013-1 4?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3218.0&issue=2013-14&num=&view= [Accessed 23th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2016). 2010 - 2014 statistics about Melbourne. [Online]

Available

at:

http://stat.abs.gov.au/itt/r.jsp?RegionSummary&region=24600&dataset=ABS_REGIONAL_LGA &geoconcept=REGION&maplayerid=LGA2014&measure=MEASURE&datasetASGS=ABS_REGI ONAL_ASGS&datasetLGA=ABS_REGIONAL_LGA&regionLGA=REGION&regionASGS=REGIO N [Accessed 5th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (2016) Census of Land Use and Employment Pro㘵⸳le 2015 [Online] Available at:

http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/CLUE-2015-summary-report.pdf [Accessed 5th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (2006) Climate Neutral Water Saving Schemes [Online] Available

at:

http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/climate-neutral-water-summary.pdf [Accessed 20th Aug 2016] AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (2016) Facts about Melbourne [Online] Available at: http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/about-melbourne/melbourne-pro买慍le/Pages/facts-about-melb ourne.aspx [Accessed 5th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (1997). The history of the city of Melbourne [Online] Available at:

http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/history-city-of-melbourne.pdf

[Accessed 10th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (2014) Total Watermark: City as Catchment [Online] Available at: http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/total-watermark-update-2014.pdf [Accessed 22th May 2016] AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (2013) Urban Water: Trin Warren Tam-boore wetlands. Melbourne. AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (2011) Royal Park Wetland: A Walk in the Park [Online] Available at: http://thatsmelbourne.com.au/Documents/Parks/RoyalParkWetland.pdf [Accessed 12th May 2016] AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne. (2005) Water Sensitive Urban Design Guidelines [Online] Available

at:

http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/wsud-full-guidelines.pdf [Accessed 27th Aug 2016] AUSTRALIA. Melbourne Water. (2013). Flooding in Melbourne [Online] Available at: http://www.melbournewater.com.au/whatwedo/manage摴湥ooding/pages/摴湥ooding-in-melbourne. asp [Accessed 01th Jun 2016] AUSTRALIA. Melbourne Water. (2010) Instruction sheet - Building an in㘵⸳ltration raingarden [Online]

Available

at:

http://www.melbournewater.com.au/getinvolved/protecttheenvironment/raingardens/Docume nts/In买慍ltration.pdf [Accessed 29th Aug 2016] AUSTRALIA. Melbourne Water. (2016) River 吠ㄶows - managing water for the environment [Online]

Available

at:

http://www.melbournewater.com.au/whatwedo/protectrivers/improving-river-health/pages/rive r-摴湥ows.aspx [Accessed 10th Sep 2016] 29

AUSTRALIA. Melbourne Water .(2016) Water storages over the years [Online] Available at: http://www.melbournewater.com.au/waterdata/waterstorages/Pages/Storages-over-the-years. aspx [Accessed 12th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. State of Victoria. (2015) Environmental entitlements [Online] Available at: http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/water/governing-water-resources/water-entitlements-and-trade/en vironmental-entitlements [Accessed 7th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. State of Victoria, Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure, 2014. (2014) Plan Melbourne. Melbourne: Impact Digital. AUSTRALIA. Victorian Environmental Water Holder. (2016) What is environmental water? [Online]

Available

at:

http://www.vewh.vic.gov.au/environmental-water/what-is-environmental-water [Accessed 18th Sep 2016] AUSTRALIA. Victorian Water Register. (2016) Bulk entitlements [Online] Available at: http://waterregister.vic.gov.au/water-entitlements/bulk-entitlements [Accessed 26th Aug 2016] BABISTER, M., BALL, J., NATHAN, R., WEEKS, W., WEINNMANN, E., RETALLICK, M., TESTONI, I. (2016) Australian Rainfall and Runo浣摮: A Guide to Flood Estimation, Melbourne: Geoscience Australia), 2016. BAYNES, T., COOK, S., KENWAY, S.J., TURNER, G.

(2008) Water-energy futures for

Melbourne: the eⴠ〠ect of water strategies, water use and urban form. [Online] Available at: http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/waterforahealthycountry/2008/w䌊灡c- WaterEnergyFuturesMelbourne.pdf [Accessed 15th Aug 2016] BRETT, A.L. (2014) East West Link (Eastern Section ) Comprehensive Impact Assessment [Online]

Available

at:

http://www.dtpli.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_买慍le/0008/230003/Brett-Lane.pd-Body.pdf [Accessed 25th Sep 2016] BROWN, R. and CLARKE, J. (2007) The transition towards Water Sensitive Urban Design: a social-technical analysis of Melbourne Australia. Vol. 1, GRAIE - Groupe de Recherche Rhone-Alpes sur les Infrastructures et l’Eau, Villerbanne France, pp. 349-356, International Conference on Sustainable Techniques and Strategies in Urban Water Management, Villeurbanne France. BROWN, R.,. DELETICA, A., FERGUSON, B., FRANTZESKAKID, N., HAANA, F.J. (2013) The enabling institutional context for integrated water management: Lessons from Melbourne. Water Research. [Online] Volume 47, Issue 20, pp. 7300–7314 Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135413007379 [Accessed: Sep 25th 2016]

BROWN, R.R. and FARRELLY, M.A. (2009) Professional perception on institutional drivers and barriers to advancing diverse water options in Australia. National Urban Water Governance Program: Victoria. Australia. BROWN, R.R., FERGUSON, B.C., FRANTZESKAKI, N.,

(2013) A strategic program for

transitioning to a Water Sensitive City. Landscape and Urban Planning, 117, 32-45. BROWN, R., FLETCHER, T., LADSON, A., ROY, A., SHUSTER, W., THURSTON, H., WALSH, C. and WENGER, S., , and (2008). Impediments and Solutions to Sustainable, Watershed-Scale Urban Stormwater Management: Lessons from Australia and the United States. Environmental Management, 42(2), pp.344-359. BROWN, V., JACKSON, D. and KHALIFÉ, M. (2010). 2009 Melbourne metropolitan sewerage strategy: a portfolio of decentralised and on-site concept designs. Water Science & Technology, 62(3), p.510. BURNS, M.J., MITCHELL, V.G. (2008) An evaluation of the design, implementation and operation of 3 stormwater reuse systems across Melbourne [Online] Availa ble from:http://www.eng.warwick.ac.uk/ircsa/pdf/13th/Burns.pdf [Accessed: Sep 27th 2016] CAREW, D., HEMARTI, B., TEMOVSKI, V. (2012) Constructed Wetland Hydrology Review – Real Time Depth Measurement to Assess Design Performance [Online] Available from: http://www.stormwater.asn.au/images/Conference_Papers/Stormwater12/Carew_David_et_al _-_Non_Refereed_Paper.pdf [Accessed: Sep 20th 2016] COOK, S. et al. (2013) Kinglake West Sewerage project: post-implementation project review. Water for a Healthy Country Flagship Report. CSIRO and Yarra Valley Water. Australia. CRC ASSOCIATION. Cooperative Research Centres Association. (2016) About CRCs: An Overview

the

CRC

Programme.

[Online]

Available

at:

http://crca.asn.au/about-the-crc-association/about-crcs/ [Accessed 14 Aug 2016] DELETIC, A, FLETCHER, T., HATT, B. and MITCHELL, G., (2007 ) Reuse of Urban Runo浣摮 in Australia: A Review of Recent Advances and Remaining Challenges. Journal of Environmental Quality.

[Online]

Vol.

No.

5_Supplement,

S-116-S-127

Available

from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51433379_Reuse_of_Urban_Runo浣摮_in_Australia_A _Review_of_Recent_Advances_and_Remaining_Challenges [Accessed: Aug 25th 2016]. MILNE et al. (2014) Decentralized Treatment Solutions for Regional and Remote Water Supplies and Wastewater. In: Australian Water Association. [Online] Available at: http://www.awa.asn.au/documents/043%20NMilne.pdf [Accessed: Aug 25th 2016]. NICHOLS, P. and SHORT, S. (1995) Stormwater Quality Management on Trial. Vol 1, Institution of Engineers, Australia, pp 55-60, Second International Symposium on Urban Stormwater Management 1995: Integrated Management of Urban Environments, Melbourne, Australia. 31

YARRA

VALLEY

WATER.

(2016)

Yarra

Valley

Water

[Online]

Available

at:

http://www.yvw.com.au/Home/Aboutus/Ourorganisation/index.htm [Accessed 23 Sep 2016]

V. Annex Annex 01 - Melbourne Average Temperature and Rainfall Statistics

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Annual

Years

Temperature (°C) Mean Max 26.0

25.8

23.9

20.3

16.7

14.1

13.5

15.0

17.3

19.7

22.0

24.2

19.9

160

1855-2015

Mean Min 14.3

14.6

13.2

10.8

8,7

6.9

6.0

6.7

8.0

9.6

11.2

13.0

10.2

160

1855-2015

58.0

66.0

60.3

59.1

648.3

159

1855-2015

Rainfall (mm) Mean

46.8

48.0

50.1

57.3

55.7

49.5

47.5

50.0

(Source: AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Meteorology, 2016)

Annex 02 - Melbourne’s Soil In买慍ltration Rates

(Source: AUSTRALIA. Melbourne Water, 2010)

Annex 03 - Australia average evaporation

(Source: AUSTRALIA. Australian Bureau of Meteorology, 2006)

Annex 04 - Melbourne's Water Cycle

(Source: Total Watermark - City as a Catchment, 2014)

Annex 05 - Royal Park Wetland construction phase pictures

01 - Storage Pond 02- Treatment Pond 03- Underground Storage (2008 expansion) 04- Treatment Pond (Source: AUSTRALIA. City of Melbourne, 2011 )