top of page
CamV copy 5.png

1. Review and Plan 

"I spoke to two workers parked on our street this afternoon. Both said separately that they had been told to park there by their superiors. They said there wasn't any onsite parking for workers."

Jo, Cammeray Voice

Planning. It's not just a word right? 

The first major requirement of the Ministerial Conditions for the Project Team in relation to On-Street Parking was to evaluate the current on-street parking arrangements and devise a strategy or plan to fulfill the conditions.  Unfortunately, the Project Team seems to have missed the memo. Maybe they thought the exercise was a mere formality. But here's a newsflash for them: 'Planning' is not just a word, it's an action. And so far, as outlined below, you'll see that their 'efforts' have fallen notably short both of community expectations and ministerial requirements.  

A. What the Ministerial Conditions said the Project Team had to do 

In brief the Ministerial Conditions (see excerpt below) require the Project Team to:

CONDUCT PARKING SURVEYS - of all current parking spaces around construction sites that: â€‹â€‹â€‹

a) were to be "removed" as part of the constrution; ​​​

b) could be "occupied by the [construction] workforce". 

​

ASSESS THE IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION on all current parking spaces that could be "occuppied by the CSSI workforce to determine current demand and identify potential issues. 

​

CREATE A PLAN "to identify and mitigate impacts resulting from on- and off-street parking changes during construction" after the work above has been done 

image.png

Excerpt from Ministerial Conditions. 

B. What the Project Teams have actually done 

The documentation produced by the Project Teams confirms that the Project Teams have in fact: â€‹

x

NOT FULLY  MET the requirement to conduct parking surveys - in that they: 

  • Failed to survey  streets that construction workers could park in, instead only surveying streets designated for parking removal  - meaning they overlooked several areas where construction workers actually park, as shown by the red-lined streets in the area north of Cammeray Golf Course in the map below. 

  • Conducted surveys whilst Covid restrictions were still in place (for Stages 1B and 2) in late 2021 and early 2022, meaning the surveys misrepresent the current parking scenario;

  • Released strategy documents over a year after these surveys were conducted raising questions about the possible exclusion of newer, more unfavorable assessments;

  • Omitted the entirety of the area north of Cammeray Golf Course during the Stage 3 survey phase.

​

​

ParkingSighting.png.png

Map of streets to the north of the Cammeray Golf Course Site 

x

NOT FULLY MET the requirement to properly ASSESS THE IMPACTS OF CONSTRUCTION - in that they: 

  • Used surveys that were fundamentally flawed (as outlined above) to assess the impacts of construction at the Cammeray Golf Course on off-street parking. This means that any subsequent evaluations of impacts will be fundamentally flawed as the data they used was neither comprehensive or up-to-date. 

  • Drew conclusions that failed to guage the true extent of the disruption and inconvenience that was to be caused to the local community.  This continues today - as they continue to focus their monitoring efforts primarily on streets that were surveyed. 

​​

​

REports.png

A sample of the many reports that impact the parking arrangements at the Cammeray Golf Club site. 

x

​NOT FULLY MET the requirement to  CREATE 'A' PLAN - in that they: 

  • Drafted separate plans for each construction stage, rather than a single unified strategy per site. This results in:

    • Three separate but concurrent sets of strategies and three separate but concurrent sets of plans applying to the Cammeray Golf Course site - all taking a slightly different approach, rather than a holistic view of what needs to happen for the site.  (A 'site' plan is mentioned in the  plans for Stage 3B - but it is not on the public portal - and has not yet been provided when requested.) 

    • No single entity being accountable for ensuring adherence to  Ministerial Conditions for each site ; and

    • Fragmented complaint channels, with multiple entities to contact, diluting the voices of the community who are struggling with the problems the inadequacies the Project Team's response to the Ministerial Conditions are causing. 

bottom of page