Parking meeting report

Around 120 residents attended our meeting at Alexandria Townhall to put questions to council and the ATP about parking and about the proposed expansion of resident parking restrictions.

The meeting heard that:

Feedback on the survey was above average – more than 400 responses from the 3200 surveys sent. The number of restricted parking places proposed for each street is driven by the number of survey responses from that street that were in favour of parking restrictions.

Whether an individual supported or opposed resident parking does not effect their entitlement to resident parking permits.

Cars with resident parking permits may still use unrestricted places – there is no requirement to prefer a resident parking space.

If more residents from a given street apply for resident parking permits than there are resident parking places, the number of resident parking places may be increased.

The State Government has changed the rules about how close to an intersection cars may be parked – the minimum distance has increased from 6meters to 10meters – approximately two car lengths – except where already signposted. Neither Council nor Rangers have any discretion in this matter.

The Council has no control over parking at the ATP site. The number of parks at the ATP site is capped at 1600 by the conditions in the ATP’s original development approval.

Resident parking is not a cure-all. Competition for parking will still exist, and will increase. The ATP is only 50% of its planned size, and there are developments like Ashmore coming.

One reason given for charging for parking at the ATP is that otherwise employees would be more likely to drive and that those who failed to find on-site parking would park offsite. It was proposed that a trial of free parking be held.

The ATP does offer discounted parking for employees, approximately $180 per month for uncovered parking, or $270 for underground parking. It was asked if residents could be entitled to this offer – answer to be provided.

It was said that having a rollerdoor/etc does not necessarily mean that the property will be considered as having parking for the purpose of calculating entitlement to parking – decision is made on a case by case basis. (But note also that Council’s website says that a potential parking spot is treated as a parking spot.)

Everyone now has the right to change their mind, or not. Council has requested feedback on the proposal, and may adjust the number of restricted parks depending on the result.

Friends of Erskineville will be holding a meeting on the Ashmore Development at 7:30 on the 22nd of February.

Council will be holding a Community Meeting on the Parking Study – probably on the 25th of February – to be confirmed.

Advertisements

One response to “Parking meeting report

  1. MORE PARKING, not less!
    Council forces developers to not build the parking spaces they want… council should force them to build MORE!

    Increased parking could be made by introducing angle parking on Swanson St (near Harry Noble park) and also on Bridge st (beside the railway & school. This could be done by removing the un-used footpath on the railway side)
    These will both help parents toing the child drop-offs, as these areas are beside schools!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s