Shea Evans - Ind.jpg

Moreland proposed a planning law amendment, C183, however a State-appointed independent planning panel determined council had not adequately conducted surveys and parking plans to understand the consequences of this change. Do you support this proposal to change planning laws that would allow developers to build Zero Car Parking developments in Activity Centres without requiring a planning permit? 

I do not support this amendment - I think that even though the intention behind it is to alleviate the environmental impact of cars, it really doesn't help people make choices and only aims to inconvenience and punish residents. There are people in the community who rely on their car, that reliance might be due to their job, their family, their need to travel or their physical needs. It also gives developers the right to dictate the type of dwelling that the area might need and therefore isn't inclusive or aware of what community needs might be.

A tribunal revealed that a recent Zero Car Parking development in Moreland had 7-9 cars secretly parked on the street. In order to trust these developments, residents need to better understand their impact on local amenity. Are you willing to support an urgent survey of existing Zero Parking developments, to ascertain their impact on parking in adjacent streets?

Zero parking developments only benefit one party - Developers, who want to cut costs. It doesn't help residents looking for housing in the area who may need a car, it doesn't help residents who live close by nor does it help residents (who live in a Zero parking development) who might have a change of circumstance therefore needing a car - Zero parking suggests that they have to move if this is the case. A survey is the only way that Council would be able to determine the impact and therefore allow for a strategy to help all residents involved.

The Zero Parking amendment, C183, failed in part because it did not follow the Planning Minister’s guidelines – the need to conduct parking surveys and understand impact on local amenity, and local input. Would you support that the parking restrictions are not rolled out until the parking survey work is completed, so that the use and needs of proposed restricted areas are better understood?

The fact that it was almost rolled out without a survey shows the lack of respect and concern for the community by the Council. The survey would provide data driven insights into if restrictions were needed and where they would be implemented.

The Moreland Integrated Transport Strategy introduces strict 2hr blanket 8am-8pm parking restrictions across much of Moreland. 2P restrictions Moreland-wide have never been debated in Council Meetings, or had any community consultation. Do you support these Parking Restriction Zones, and would you be open to restrictions going through community consultation for co-design?

 No, this type of blanket approach is lazy at the very least and disrespectful of the community at worst. There needs to be co-design in this, as it affects residents, and the impact on their lives. It affects visitors to Moreland and it affects local business. Different areas have different needs and this has been ignored.

Many residents feel that the needs of Glenroy, are different to the needs of Brunswick, are different to the needs of Coburg. Do you believe in the idea of one parking plan across all of Moreland, or that areas should be evaluated based on their local usage and needs?

There needs to be a different approach in different areas, this doesn't just mean from suburb to suburb, but also means that within a suburb certain streets need to have a different plan to other less used or popular streets. What’s appropriate for Lygon Street isn't necessarily appropriate for Stewart Street and a comprehensive strategy needs to reflect that.

One of the central tenets of MITS is that people ‘choose to drive’, and council should make it difficult and expensive to use a car in Moreland, to discourage car use. Do you think this approach is the best way to discourage car use, or are you open to a less punitive approach?

Punishing people is never a way to bring people on a journey of behavioural change. If Council is wanting to discourage people from driving, then more needs to be done to improve public transport links and infrastructure, Cyclists need to have safe bike paths and lanes and pedestrian amenities need to be upgraded to ensure foot travellers are kept safe. These are encouraging measures that will help people leave the car at home, or make the choice to get rid of their car. One thing of note is that whilst might people choose to drive, the reasons behind this are often complex and bigger than just how people interact with their local area.

Zero Parking developments were constructed and approved on the premise that residents would not impact on local street amenity. This changed in Feb 2020, when council approved ‘Permit A’, which will allow these developments to buy an on-street parking permit. Do you commit to restricting all zero parking developments from obtaining ‘Permit A’?


Given the level of community concern, including our own petition of 1200 signatories, and disregard for the views expressed in community consultations, do you commit to redrafting MITS and the parking restrictions, with an eye to rebuilding the strategy with better community engagement? (Y/N)