Sullivans Creek Catchment Group Inc
Environment, Communications, Information Technology
and the Arts References Committee
Senate Water Inquiry Submission
Sullivans Creek Catchment Group Inc. (SCCG) is well positioned to bring a community
perspective to the Senate Water Inquiry regarding urban stormwater management in the
ACT. SCCG has taken an advocacy, planning and on-ground implementation role to
progress best practice stormwater management in Sullivans Creek Catchment. SCCG has
undertaken these roles through the development and maintenance of an effective and
cooperative working relationship with the ACT Government at all levels. The work on
Sullivans Creek Catchment provides a model that is applicable across all urban subcatchments in the ACT.
For the purposes of this submission, SCCG has focused on the constraints and barriers to
achieving established community goals regarding the best practice restoration of
Sullivans Creek. The barriers and constraints relate to agency institutional arrangements,
the development of (community/government/business) partnerships, existing policy and
the provision of funding for planning and on-ground action. The barriers and constraints
discussed have directly impacted upon SCCG’s ability to plan and implement on-ground
action in Sullivans Creek Catchment.
SCCG has also made some more general observations regarding barriers and constraints
to more broadscale implementation of sustainable stormwater management in the ACT.
SCCG has noted that the new ACT Government appears to have engaged with the issues
around sustainable stormwater management and significant planning progress has been
made over the last four months.
Declarations: Where SCCG is Coming From

SCCG believes that the ACT must take responsibility for minimising stormwater
pollution entering the Molonglo and Murrumbidgee Rivers. The ACT is the largest
urban city in the Murray Darling Basin and located in the upper Murrumbidgee
catchment and therefore has a significant impact on downstream human, flora and
fauna communities.
1

The only major pollution issue in the ACT is stormwater pollution. Stormwater
management should therefore be the highest priority issue on which to focus pollution
minimising efforts in an environmental context.

SCCG believes that active and effective catchment based community groups have a
fundamental role in the planning and implementation of best practice stormwater
management in the ACT. This belief stems from the fact that each individual living
and working in an urban catchment impacts directly on stormwater quality. The
broader community must be engaged adequately enough with the issues and
understand their impacts as an individual to maximise the reduction of stormwater
pollution. Community groups are well placed to increase community action and
individual responsibility to reduce negative behavioral impacts on stormwater quality.

It is impossible for governments to achieve sustainable stormwater management
alone. There are many stakeholders (many of who are notorious for noncompliance)
that will need to embrace sustainability principles voluntarily. The active
participation of stakeholders such as the consultant industry (engineers, architects and
landscape architects), land development and construction industry (developers and
contractors) is fundamental to the success of best practice stormwater management.
Community groups can provide the means to help engage these groups with a
“responsible business / corporate citizen” approach that may work towards
minimising the use of the adversarial “big stick” approach to implementation.

The ACT has the highest rate of volunteerism in Australia and many volunteers
demonstrate a concern for environmental health. Volunteers are a priceless resource
and should be incorporated into the process of achieving sustainable stormwater
management through a variety of participatory mechanisms.

SCCG consider neighborhood wetlands/vegetated channels together with Water
Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) measures incorporated on all blocks (redeveloped
and greenfield) to be an integral component of what constitutes ecologically
sustainable stormwater management in an urban context. These measures meet multiobjectives relating to extended detention, water re-use and conservation, urban
biodiversity, recreational opportunities, community development, and visual quality
of the creek corridors.

SCCG has certain parameters around which it operates regarding planning and
implementation of activities. These are to:
 Involve the community in all levels of catchment management and planning
 Base planning directly on community consultation outcomes
 Coordinate the successful integration of stakeholders in a process of shared
decision making
 Facilitate agreement on objectives and actions
 Incorporate specialists to ensure technical and practical feasibility
 Provide a model for other urban catchments
 Publicise activities to the broader community.
2
SCCG’s Major Achievements to Date
SCCG produced a draft version of the “Sullivans Creek Catchment Management Plan”
(SCCMP) in 2000. The plan outlines strategies and actions to restore Sullivans Creek
Catchment with an emphasis on best practice stormwater management. The plan
envisages the restoration of the concrete lined creek channel through the construction of
strategically located wetlands and vegetated channels. The SCCMP also outlines
strategies to participate in and promote the implementation of WSUD in ACT Greenfield
and re-developments. SCCG is keen to facilitate the development of
Community/Government /Business partnerships. SCCG focus on engaging the broader
catchment community and the private (business) sector to increase the level of
engagement that the urban community has towards the issues raised and implementation
of the SCCMP.
The SCCMP outlines a wetland restoration strategy that identifies 14 sites for tributary
located wetlands in the urban part of the catchment. The first of these wetlands was
constructed on the O’Connor Tributary in 2001. SCCG lodged a Development
Application (DA) and Preliminary Assessment (PA) which were approved by Planning
and Land Management (PALM), Department of Urban Services (DUS).
The wetland was funded largely by the private sector (CIC Pendon and Community
Housing Canberra $165,000) with the remaining funds provided by the Federal
Government (Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) $35,478.30) at a total cost of $200,478.30.
This wetland is the first to be retrofitted into a densely populated and developed urban
area in the ACT. The project was initiated, developed and managed by SCCG. Volunteer
community members were involved in all phases of the project and undertook the
landscaping component.
SCCG is keen to finalise the SCCMP in 2002. To do so, the following components of the
plan need to be developed, agreed upon between stakeholders and documented in the
SCCMP.
 Identification and agreement of priority actions
 Identification and agreement on roles and responsibilities of government agencies and
community and business stakeholders
 Costing of priority actions
 Investigation of a range of ACT and external funding sources to implement agreed
priority actions
 Negotiation with DUS of an agreed program of works, allocated funds and
timeframes based on priority and capacity for implementation.
SCCG has had much difficulty making arrangements for this necessary planning work to
be undertaken. SCCG has also been unable to program further on-ground works for
2002/2003.
3
BARRIERS AND CONSTRAINTS
The break-up of government into business areas has caused fragmentation in capacity to
deliver services to the community and to perform basic functions, for example, protection
of property from flooding. Each agency has decreased ability to appreciate
interdependencies between business areas, and therefore decreased control over
managing ecological systems across a catchment landscape.
There is an apparent lack of coordination and strategic planning across DUS agencies to
enable the department to seek sustainable outcomes through stormwater /waterway
management. That is, urban catchments are generally not managed for water quality or
conservation outcomes. The conventional focus has been on a waterway’s drainage
function that involves ensuring stormwater is removed from residential suburbs as
quickly as possible through hard infrastructure. There has been a significant value shift
in this approach stemming from the ACT community, whereby stormwater is now valued
as a resource to be harnessed and used (and re-used) on site and waterways are now
valued as living systems.
Community Participation in Best Practice Stormwater Management and the
Development of Community / Government / Business Partnerships
“An Integrated Catchment Management Framework for the ACT” (Environment ACT,
2000), is a policy that provides community groups with important principles to guide
their contribution to the implementation of Integrated Catchment Management (ICM).
Community produced sub-catchment plans are given a central role in achieving ICM in
the ACT.
The implementation of ICM focuses on the integration of land and water management on
a sub-catchment basis. That is, recognising the interdependencies between the
biophysical functions of the various natural resources and managing them for the desired
outcome. In an urban area natural resources need to be managed so that a healthy and
safe environment exists for all inhabitants, including endemic flora and fauna.
The ICM Framework provides a foundation for the argument that more integrated
(effective, cooperative and coordinated liaison) between government agencies is required
to meet ICM objectives. It is implied in the ICM framework that a formalised structure
for increased coordination within DUS is necessary to drive the further integration of
natural resource management based activities. That is, the programming of priority
actions, identification of roles and responsibilities, and associated human resources and
budgets.
4
SCCG has attempted to progress this policy approach with the ACT Government to
finalise the SCCMP. It appears that community interest in catchment management is
driving ACT policy, however there is no policy framework to determine for SCCG how
the community produced SCCMP has been received by Government. There have been
verbal statements of in principle support for the SCCMP and comments provided from
Government on the content detail. As is stands, there is no formal indication from
Government of the level of commitment for the SCCG regarding the long-term
implementation of the plan. The ICM framework and its implementation plan fail to
address this fundamental issue.
It is clear that the ACT lacks adequate policy to guide sustainable water resource
management and provide appropriate means for community proposals / participation.
Environment ACT, DUS has indicated that work is currently being undertaken to develop
a comprehensive Water Management Strategy as part of the review of the Water
Resources Act. A statutory mechanism that outlines a framework for the implementation
of a range of sustainable management activities is required. SCCG will welcome this
strategic initiative. SCCG would like to see this policy provide for community
participation through the development of joint projects.
SCCG has also proposed the formation of an ICM government / community coordination
committee (membership from all major DUS agencies and health and education agencies
and community representatives) responsible for overseeing the preparation of annual subcatchment implementation plans. SCCG has managed to produce a catchment plan
through engaging a range of stakeholders to provide technical advice that included
government representatives from all relevant DUS agencies. The capacity for SCCG to
work effectively with government agencies has been reliant upon developing of effective
working relationships with individuals in agencies. It has been difficult at times for
SCCG to arrange access to information regarding plans for redevelopment projects where
SCCG could contribute positively to the water aspects of a development through an
advisory or participatory role. SCCG is in a position to arrange for technical specialists to
advise on appropriate water measures on a site or encourage land developer contribution
to an off-site project such as an urban wetland.
SCCG is keen to implement the SCCMP in partnership with government that will involve
a sharing of the financial contribution. SCCG has proposed that a legislative (or strong
administrative) requirement for the ACT government to produce Implementation Plans
with each budget cycle so that Territory funding is committed through the Capital Works
Program and other specified sources in the budget. A Water Management Strategy may
perform this necessary role.
SCCG would then be in a position to participate as a partner in the implementation of the
SCCMP and draw in external funding from a range of sources including the Federal
Government (NHT) and the private sector on a project by project basis. Projects
undertaken would have a “community face” to draw community participation, build
community capacity, strengthen community development and significantly reduce costs
of projects through attracting in-kind and cash contributions.
5
The ACT Government through the provision of some baseline funding for projects would
be actively supporting SCCG initiatives towards securing corporate funds for on-ground
projects. SCCG has demonstrated how this inclusive approach has worked to achieve the
construction of O’Connor wetland at no cost to the ACT.
The community is leading the way towards sustainable stormwater management in the
ACT. The ACT has provided relatively little support (in terms of funding) for community
activities to date. There is no formal structure for active groups to contribute to decision
making and coordination of government and community activities. Activities need to
prioritised, programmed over time, costed and a proportion of the funds committed.
SCCG believes that a framework for achieving this is required.
The ACT does not appear to be capitalising on opportunities for Federal funding from
NHT. The ACT will be required under the new the NHT administration to provide funds
that will be matched by NHT. Community groups have a major role in delivering natural
resource management in the ACT and therefore need to work closely with Government
regarding funding arrangements. The ACT Government is not working actively with
community groups to identify opportunities to secure private sector contributions to fund
community proposed projects.
The production of community produced sub-catchment plans have many benefits to
Government. SCCG has identified the following benefits. Community plans:
 highlight community values to government regarding protection, restoration and
enhancement of environmental values in one document;
 identify for government, the activities the community view as important to meet
defined objectives;
 provide cost-effective solutions to management problems (provision of services);
 increase communication between government agencies to decrease costs and improve
efficiency of planning;
 stimulate increased contribution of in-kind technical advice to agency planning
processes;
 provide a basis for more integrated and coordinated liaison between agencies for
programming government activities and associated budgets;
 benefit the ACT by community groups securing a non-Territory funding component
from federal and corporate sources;
 provide a means through their development to increase public awareness and
education, sharing of information and trust between community and government;
 provide a basis for agencies to work together to secure political and resource
commitment;
 focus attention on the broader natural resource issues (ie. sub-catchment focus rather
than the narrow focus of “a patch”.
6
SCCG Observations: Constraints to Broadscale Implementation of Best Practice
Stormwater Management in the ACT
There appears to be a lack of strategic planning across DUS to deliver a form of
stormwater management that meets shifting community values. This is particularly
noticeable in relation to Planning and Land Management (PALM) (responsible for
planning) and Roads ACT, City Management (responsible for asset construction and
maintenance) regarding treatment of stormwater in re-developments and greenfield
developments. There is conflict between ACT Roads and PALM regarding the
maintenance costs of currently unspecified WSUD measures and the concern that the
provision of capital funds will not be followed up with associated maintenance funds.
There is also an apparent perception by developers that there is increased liability
associated with WSUD measures due to the lack of specified guidelines and standards for
engineering / landscape structures and their associated maintenance requirements.
PALM is currently in the process of arranging for a consultant to develop standards and
guidelines for broadscale WSUD that will clarify a number of these issues for private
sector investors and government agencies. Once these guidelines are in place PALM will
then be in a position to incorporate WSUD measures into PALM criteria for assessing
DAs and PAs.
The consultant industry (architects/engineers), construction industry (contractors/
developers) and PALM DA assessment officers require training in how to apply WSUD
principles to both redevelopment and greenfield development. WSUD principles need to
be incorporated into DA plans from the beginning to ensure that linkages can occur
between the various uses and reuses of water on a site. SCCG understands that training
seminars are currently being organised for some of the above stakeholders for mid this
year.
From a catchment perspective, the review of PALM’s planning process for greenfield
residential development should include a more integrated systems approach that includes:
 Protection/restoration of waterways and drainage lines
 Incorporation of pollution control ponds/ neighborhood wetlands
 WSUD measures on residential blocks
 Open space reserves, and
 Conservation of endangered communities and threatened species habitat.
Essentially the technical solutions to achieve best practice stormwater management and
integrated catchment management are available and now require documentation of
tailored specifications for the ACT. The approach is relatively cost-effective and meets
multi-objectives. The implementation problems relate to strategic planning and
coordination of people - inter-governmental and across community and business
stakeholders.
7