A petition was tabled with 63 signatures on ‘parking in Caulfield’. The petitioners stated that they didn’t ‘want 2 hour parking on one side of the street’ only and that council ‘reverse’ this decision because it ‘was done without hearing first’ what residents wanted. They asked council to introduce 2 hour parking on both sides of the street. They listed quite a few streets where this should happen.
Delahunty moved motion to ‘note and accept petition’ plus that officers ‘provide an update on preliminary and final findings’. Lipshutz seconded.
DELAHUNTY: acknowledged that there’s been an increase in parking issues and ‘that no area is safe’ from this. Thought it right that council is petitioned, but that it comes in the middle of a process ‘that we’re undertaking to gather some more thoughts’ and that the public will be ‘updated’ when the process is ‘done’.
LIPSHUTZ: claimed that because of the parking policy at Caulfield Hospital that what is happening is that ‘the nurses who are employed by the hospital are now parking in these streets’. But if there was 2 hour parking on both sides of the street ‘all that would happen is that the parking would shift’ to other local streets. Thus what ‘has to happen is a concerted approach and a total review of parking in the area’. That’s happening through ‘the review’.
TORRES: said that council is ‘reviewing broad areas’ and that ‘car parking can’t be looked at on a street by street basis’ and that restrictions in one street ‘has the potential to displace parking’ in another street’ so the issue has to be seen in a ‘broader area’. Also said that ‘we are going to consult with the residents in this area after one month’ in order to ‘obtain preliminary feedback and findings on the effect of the changes’. After the ‘prelimary findings’ council would ‘continue to receive feedback and engagement’ with residents and then they will have a ‘far more comprehensive review to report’ at the end of February.
LIPSHUTZ: he supports council in reviewing ‘overall parking’. ‘There is a problem, there’s no doubt there is a problem’ for people living on the south side of Glen Eira Road and people are now parking on the north side as well. Thus ‘there needs to be a concerted approach’ and that is ‘the right way to go’.
LOBO: said this is the second petition within 4 weeks – another one from Bentleigh. Agreed that cars might shift from street to street but residents pay their rates and council needs to start thinking about building ‘3 or 4 parking storeys’. Claimed that this ‘is a result of the developments taking place’ and that ‘infrastructure will not be enough if we are going at the rate we are going’. Wanted council to ‘get our wheels in motion’ to have ‘3 or 4 storey’ parking facilities in Bentleigh and Caulfield and ‘particularly 2 or 3 in Carnegie’.
DELAHUNTY: said that in the area of the petition there is the impact of ‘local employment’ and this is something they ‘want to encourage’. But ‘how do you do that in a hospital setting’ when you’ve also got shift workers. Claimed the ‘solution’ was to ‘listen to the residents’ and that the petition ‘forms part of the consultation’. Acknowledged that it is an ‘incredibly difficult’ issue.
MOTION PUT AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
COMMENTS
There is much here that is unacceptable in our view –
- Why weren’t residents consulted first before any action was implemented?
- On what statistical basis were these changes made? Why hasn’t the evidence been provided?
- Torres’ claim that council can’t look at parking ‘street by street’ is surely open to challenge. Moonee Valley Council seems quite capable of investigating its municipality street by street. Why can’t Glen Eira?
FYI – we urge all readers to consider the Moonee Valley approach in terms of direct community input, comprehensive community consultation, and real street by street evaluation. It is also worth taking a look at the links to the documents provided in this URL – http://mvcc.vic.gov.au/for-residents/parking-and-transport/current-transport-projects-and-studies/local-area-traffic-management-plans/buckley-park.aspx
For Residents
Buckley Park Local Area Traffic Management Study
We have been undertaking Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) studies in selected precincts within the municipality in order to manage vehicle movements, review parking restrictions and improve the residential environment.
In 2015/16, we are undertaking a LATM study of the Buckley Park precinct as part of this ongoing LATM program. The study area (pdf, 222KB) is bounded by Keilor Road, Lincoln Road, Buckley Street and Hoffmans Road in Essendon.
The study includes an extensive community consultation process to involve the local community in identifying traffic and parking issues and provide opportunities for community feedback on the developed traffic and parking proposals.
Working group
We have formed a working group comprising 10 community volunteers, Ward Councillors, Council officers and traffic engineering consultants.
The role of community volunteers is to provide local information, act as a contact for the local community and to provide feedback in the development of traffic and parking management plans for the area.
View the Terms of Reference for the working group.
Initial community questionnaire – traffic and parking issues
A questionnaire on traffic and parking issues in your local area was posted to properties in the study area in August 2015.
The closing date for questionnaire responses was Monday, 14 September 2015. Thank you to everyone who responded. The information you provided has helped to identify problem areas and assist us to develop draft traffic and parking management plans for the area.
Draft traffic management plan
A draft Traffic Management Plan (pdf, 1.1MB) setting out recommended solutions to traffic issues has been developed and circulated with a questionnaire to all properties and property owners in the study area for community comment.
The draft plan aims to address the key issues identified by the community in the initial questionnaire on traffic issues distributed to local properties in August 2015, as well as feedback from the Working Group.
The proposal has been considered on an area wide basis to minimise any adverse impacts on adjacent streets.
The objectives of the draft plan are to:
- Reduce the incidence and potential for vehicle and pedestrian crashes in the local area.
- Improve the safety of local streets by reducing traffic speeds.
- Discourage through traffic from using the local area.
- Develop proposals that address traffic concerns raised by the community, while maintaining adequate levels of accessibility for local residents, local businesses and emergency services.
- Maximise the safety benefits with the available funding (with priority given to reported crash locations and those streets with the greatest level of community concern).
The closing date for questionnaire responses was Friday, 1 April 2016. Thanks to everyone who responded.
The community response to the draft plan is being reviewed by the Working Group, prior to presenting a recommended Traffic Management Plan in a report to Council.
Draft parking management plan
As part of the LATM study, the existing parking conditions within the local area have been reviewed. A draft Parking Management Plan (pdf, 340KB) setting out proposed changes to the parking arrangements in the Dean Precinct local area has now been developed.
This component of the project has involved the collection of an extensive set of parking occupancy data in addition to community and Working Group feedback.
Using the parking occupancy data, the streets where parking changes are warranted have been determined based on our Parking Demand Management Framework.
Our Kerbside Road Space User Hierarchy was then used to determine appropriate parking restrictions in each street.
Below are streets which have proposed changes to existing parking arrangements along with the general location of the changes:
| Street |
Location |
| Collins Street |
Queen Street to Market Street |
| Cooper Street |
Spencer Street to Buckley Street |
| Gilbertson Street |
Keilor Road and Market Street |
| King Street |
Collins Street and Lincoln Road |
| Lincoln Road |
Queen Street and Market Street |
| Queen Street |
Lincoln Road to end |
| Spencer Street |
Collins Street to Lincoln Road |
| William Street |
Collins Street to Lincoln Road |
| Keilor Road |
McCracken and Collins Street |
Residents and property owners in the streets that are directly affected by the proposed parking arrangements have been sent a questionnaire survey to seek their views on the proposals. Alternatively, community members can also provide their views on the proposals via an online questionnaire (external link).
The closing date for responses was Friday, 1 April 2016.
The community response to the draft plan is being reviewed by the Working Group, prior to presenting a recommended Parking Management Plan in a report to Council.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We make no comment on the outcome for Moonee Valley – ie how ‘good, bad, poor, inadequate’, etc. their plans are. What we wish to highlight is the PROCESS. How one council can, if there is the will, to involve its community before decision making, rather than after the fact which is what Glen Eira consistently does. That means that ‘consultation’ is nothing more than a token exercise when the decision has already been made. Nor are those councillors who consistently endorse such a top-down approach doing anything to engender real confidence that resident views will be listened to and acted upon. Ultimately, drastic and dramatic change is required!
Glen Eira Debates 