Objection to Proposed Material Amendment No. 9

I am submitting this formal objection to Proposed Material Amendment No. 9 of the Clonburris SDZ Planning Scheme.
This amendment, which seeks to prohibit the allocation of on-street parking spaces to individual residents, represents a fundamental disconnect between planning policy and the lived reality of our communities. It is a punitive measure that disproportionately impacts working families and existing residents, wrapped in the guise of "modal shift and sustainability objectives". While I fully support progressive, reality-based amendments, I refuse to accept theoretical policies drafted without consideration for the daily, practical consequences inflicted on residents.

I urge SDCC to reject this amendment on the following grounds:

1. A Direct Attack on Established Communities

The existing neighborhoods, including estates like Parkleigh, have been built around established, functional parking arrangements that provide security and peace of mind for residents. Attempting to retroactively strip away allocated parking and force residents into a daily scramble for communal spaces is unacceptable. It will inevitably breed localised conflict, overspill parking, and a diminished quality of life. The Council should be supporting community cohesion, not actively undermining it through bureaucratic overreach.

2. Climate Action Hypocrisy and the EV Transition

The national policy outlined compact growth, sustainable transport, and efficient land use. Yet, Amendment No. 9 contradicts this statement. Home charging is the backbone of EV ownership, and it requires a dedicated, guaranteed parking space adjacent to the home. By refusing to allow allocated spaces, the Council is effectively pricing working people out of EV ownership, as they will have nowhere reliable to charge their vehicles and forcing owners to pay a premium for 3rd party charging infrastructure. I cannot accept lip service on climate action while the Council simultaneously blocks the practical infrastructure required to achieve it.

3. Putting the Cart Before the Horse on Infrastructure
It is deeply unjust to penalize car ownership before the promised public transport alternatives are actually delivered and operational. We are repeatedly promised public infrastructure (DART+ Southwest and BusConnects) but these projects remain subject to chronic delays. Until high-frequency, reliable, and dependable public transport is a reality in Clonburris, residents have no choice but to rely on their cars for work, childcare, and basic mobility. Restricting parking now is not visionary planning, it is merely punishing residents for the state’s failure to deliver transport infrastructure on time.

Conclusion and Demand for Action
I am not anti-progression nor anti-climate action, but I am demanding practical planning that works for the community, not against it. Amendment No. 9 is premature, poorly conceived, and fundamentally unfair to the people who actually live here.
I formally call on SDCC to withdraw this amendment. Planning must reflect the real-world needs of the communities.

Yours sincerely,
Kong