Melville Times - - Opinion -

I AM se­ri­ously con­cerned with the City’s car park­ing strat­egy, which states: “It may not be pos­si­ble to pro­vide on-street park­ing in ev­ery con­text, but where pos­si­ble on­street park­ing should be pri­ori­tised.”

On-street park­ing, whether on the verge or oth­er­wise, pre­sents a “vari­able haz­ard”.

It ob­structs sight lines and is not as safe as a road oth­er­wise de­void of on-street park­ing. That the City uses such a strat­egy is a trav­esty.

They say that on-street park­ing slows traf­fic and pro­vides a solid bar­rier be­tween pedes­tri­ans and pass­ing traf­fic.

In fact, cars are slowed due to the haz­ard along the road­side, where pedes­tri­ans, par­tic­u­larly chil­dren, are ob­scured from view and re­ac­tion times are min­imised. In such a sit­u­a­tion, even a low speed ac­ci­dent can be fa­tal. ‘Car-door­ing’ of cy­clists is all too com­mon.

If cars are parked on the street, more de­vel­op­ment apart­ments can be built on a site. It ap­pears that the de­ci­sion mak­ers are overly driven to max­imise de­vel­op­ment for, per­haps, the fol­low­ing rea­sons:

■ Max­imised de­vel­op­ment max­imises rate re­turn.

■ Ri­valry and com­pe­ti­tion be­tween lo­cal gov­ern­ments for avail­able de­vel­op­ment work.

■ Salaries and Al­lowances Tri­bunal for lo­cal gov­ern­ment CEOs and elected mem­bers de­ter­mines re­mu­ner­a­tion salary bands an­nu­ally from a broad range of data ex­am­ined for lo­cal gov­ern­ments. Top­ping their list of con­sid­er­a­tions is “ma­jor growth and de­vel­op­ment”.

The strat­egy was ap­proved unan­i­mously by coun­cil­lors on June 17, 2014, with 10 in favour and none against. This is out­ra­geous. MAX FITZGIBBON, Melville.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.