1 / 35

Programming Meeting Water Consultants 5 th of March 2008 Novotel

Programming Meeting Water Consultants 5 th of March 2008 Novotel. Short-commings of first MPs. Missing or insufficient elements: MP Summary Summary for each chapter (Abstract) => key results No clear separate lists of agglomerations

manju
Download Presentation

Programming Meeting Water Consultants 5 th of March 2008 Novotel

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Programming Meeting Water Consultants 5th of March 2008 Novotel

  2. Short-commings of first MPs Missing or insufficient elements: • MP Summary • Summary for each chapter (Abstract) => key results • No clear separate lists of agglomerations • No clear calculation algorithm applied for main agglomerations following a standard pattern used for data costs base. • No clear CF priority list as a result of options analysis and prioritisation

  3. Short-commings of first MPs • No specific definition of problems • No clear maps for representation of the agglomerations • no clear phasing • no transparent lists of investments • no real options studied • no clear, limited number of prioritisation and selection criteria

  4. What should be improved? • Overall Summary • Summary for each Section (quantify) • Summary of specific information (see next slide) • Two separate lists and maps of agglomerations (water supply and wastewater) • MP strategic options for each county

  5. Specific information and plans summary

  6. What should be improved? • Criteria for investments • Investment phases (templates provided) • Contribution to objectives (Accession Treaty)/model • List of actions needed and prioritised investment (including investment costs => templates) • Unit cost table

  7. Definition of Agglomerations Draft Methodology prepared by MESD

  8. Approach for Definition of Agglomerations • Implementation Plan • Master Plan • Feasibility Study

  9. A) Definition of agglomerations in Master Plan • Identification of all agglomerations at county level (maps and data base) • “Clustering” of Agglomerations based on techno-economic assessment • Options Analysis (central/de-central) • Discussion with stakeholders • Preparation of Long-term investment plan

  10. B) in Feasibility Study • Detailed option analysis • Preparation of final/detailed maps and data base on selected agglomerations

  11. Interpretation of “Definitions for UWWTD”Scenario c): • Legal requirements (compliance dates article 3 and 4,5 UWWTD) defined by P.E. of each individual agglomeration • Treatment standard defined by P.E. Of biggest agglomeration. No legal requirement for tertiary treatment if all agglomerations in the “cluster” are below 10.000 P.E. However, other Environmental Directives to be considered (WFD, Bathing Water Directive)

  12. Interpretation of “Definitions for UWWTD”Scenario b): • Splitting one settlement in two parts (i.e. River crossing the town) is not allowed • Development of future population load to be considered

  13. Scenarios “Definitions of UWWTD”

  14. “Clustering” of Agglomeration

  15. Boundary of Agglomeration

  16. Definition of Agglomerations EXAMPLES for AGGLOMERATIONS Prepared by Consultants

  17. How to define an Agglomeration in practice • Define boarders for all agglomerations in the county (settlements very close to each other might be merged to one agglomeration => consider also future development) • Classification of agglomerations in categories • Below 2,000 p.e. • 2000 – 1,0000 p.e. • Above 10,000 p.e.

  18. Example for Agglomerations – Detailed Definition of Boundaries Example Roman

  19. How to define an Agglomeration in practice • Analyse case-by-case based on the criteria such as: • Distance between agglomerations and topography (altitude) • Population/industrial density (p.e./ha) • Unit costs for investments (sewer, WWTP, etc.) • Specific Investment Costs (in €/p.e.) and specific Operational Costs (in €/p.e.) => NPV • Others (i.e. Recipient water available, land for WWTP extension, existing capacities, etc.)

  20. How to define an Agglomeration in practice • Prepare option analysis for all agglomerationsconsidering criteria above) • One single WWTP versus separate WWTP • Storage tanks for small agglomerations / small WWTP • Etc. • Group individual agglomerations in “clusters” of agglomerations (=> scenario c in Definitions of UWWTD)

  21. Agglomerations – Option AnalysisOption 1 without Nemtisor page 21

  22. Agglomerations – Option AnalysisOption 2 with Nemtisor page 22

  23. Cost Data Base – Wastewater Networks page 23

  24. Agglomerations – Option Analysis and Cost Tables page 24

  25. Agglomerations – Option Analysis Selected: Option 1, Nemtisor and Targu Neamt separate Agglomeration Cluster page 25

  26. How to define an Agglomeration in practice • Prepare map on county level indicating: • all agglomerations (3 categories according to size) • agglomeration boarders (each single agglomeration) • Boarder of “cluster of agglomerations” • Existing sewer network • Existing and proposed WWTP/storage tanks • Existing and proposed sewer trunk lines and pressure mains (interconnection of agglomerations) and main pumping station • Administrative boarders • Rivers

  27. Examples for Agglomerations – County Level Countywide defined agglomerations Agglomeration Cluster

  28. How to define an Agglomeration in practice • Prepare data base for all agglomerations including (at least): • Name of agglomeration • Generated load (p.e.): total, existing, extension • Compliance date • Specific investment costs, operation costs and NPV (€ / p.e.) • Scoring rate for Ranking • Total investment costs for wastewater

  29. Selection of priority investments Two step approach: Step 1: Mandatory criteria • Compliance date 2015 • ROC established Step 2: Ranking • Size of agglomeration (highest weight) • Health improvement • Environmental improvement • Efficiency improvement

  30. Criteria for Ranking Example for criteria and indicators for Wastewater

  31. Investment Scenarios for priority investment • Low Scenario (priority investments up to budget limit given by MESD • Medium Scenario minimum investments to reach compliance until 2015 • High Scenario extended investments including additional agglomerations with compliance date beyond 2015 proposed in phase I

  32. Final Selection of Priority Investments • Discuss with MESD Investment SCENARIO (based on criteria and investment scenario) • Agree on agglomerations to be included in CF project • Prepare priority investment table (template for priority investment costs)

  33. Agglomeration boarders for selected Priority Investment Measures • Preparedetailed map for selected priority investment measures (Scale 1 : 25.000) • Detailed boarders of agglomerations • Cluster boarders • Existing/Proposed Infrastructure (WWTP, main sewers etc.) • Review/confirm option analysis

  34. Phasing of Investment Measures Based on agreed priority investment measures: • Prepare Long-term investment table(template for long term investment costs) • Prepare Map with phasing of agglomerations (categorise in 3 main phases)

  35. Approval by Local Authorities (LA) • Approval of LA on investment list is mandatory!! • Maps of agglomerations should be included in the Urbanism Plan (by LA) • FS might start in parallel with MP approval for the endorsed investments

More Related