Byron Council is once again on the brink of introducing paid parking in Brunswick Heads, after a consultant’s review found that parking demand in the town has reached the point where intervention was necessary.
The prospect of parking meters in the town has been a source of bitterness and division since it was first mooted nearly ten years ago, with councillors and townsfolk split over the proposed measure.
Some are calling for local residents to be given free parking permits if such a scheme is introduced.
With the matter coming before this Thursday’s Council meeting for determination, staff have recommended that councillors endorse the implementation of one of the paid parking scenarios set out in the consultant’s report.
This scenario would see parking metres charging $3 per hour introduced in the town.
Revenue pegged at $3.1m
It is not clear from Council documents or the consultant’s report exactly where the meters would be located. However, it appears that they would cover most of the centre of town, as well as the beach-front parking area on the other side of the river.
This scenario would generate $3.1 million in revenue each year if implemented, but incur a higher capital cost for implementation than some of the other plans under consideration.
It would include a paid permit system for local residents similar to that used in Byron Bay.
Staff have also recommended that Council endorse a trial of parking sensors at four separate locations in the centre of the town.
Should the motion pass, Council would start by getting a report from staff detailing the implementation, resourcing and funding to deliver the scheme.
Consultant’s review
The recommendations followed a consultant’s review of the parking management measures that Council has already implemented in a bid to encourage better parking turnover in the town, including changes to the time restrictions.
A key finding from the study, undertaken by Bitzios Consulting, was that during the low season the centre of town is still reaching a ‘trigger point’ for further intervention, namely 72 per cent occupancy.
‘On the day of the surveys which produced [the study], the weather was generally poor from a beach-going perspective,’ Council’ Traffic & Transport Engineer Judd Cornwall, said in written comments contained in the agenda to this week’s Council meeting.
‘This indicates that from a base background parking demand point of view, under poor weather and weekday conditions Brunswick is still approaching capacity in the commercial precinct without the tourist overlay.’
This is a key finding because opponents of paid parking in the town have long argued that such a scheme was not needed during quieter periods of the year.
Byron has had PP for years. It has stoped people hogging premium spots such as beaches, shopping district and so on. However it has forced cars into outlying streets, which is a pain for residents.
Better planning required to manage this issue.
Still waiting on BSC president to fulfil his promise of free parking for rate paying residents.
Hopefully someone in council and state govt is looking at future population modelling for this region, taking SE QLD growth into account too. Otherwise this is a quaint issue before the real storm.
More of Hasting St is dedicated to parking, than shops, and when I was there a few weeks ago, I still couldn’t find a parking spot on a week day. Drove two beaches down, plenty of parking. All of the Sunshine Coast is like that.
I have always strenuously opposed paid parking for the Bruns CBD. But the complete failure of Byron Shire Council to get on top of the illegal camping by dozens of vans every night in Bruns with the associated public defecation and litter from the sheer numbers of these vans is getting ridiculous. At least paid parking would provide a financial incentive for council to do something about. There has been a van living on Tweed Street for six months now, nowhere near any toilet/shower facilities. Why pay rates?
Finally, one may be able to get a park in the town.
Next, Mullum, which is far worse!
Pegged at 3.1m? Why?
And the council wants 6,400+ more houses built in the area… Very wise.
*Slow clap* the logic is stupendous. Flawless. Visionary.