Lower Hutt residents ‘gutted’ at controversial parking proposal

Milne Cres residents say they have been harassed for parking on the street. Photo / Melissa Nightingale

Residents of a Lower Hutt suburb are “absolutely gutted” at a proposal to remove on-street parking on some streets - despite council signing off on multiple apartment blocks that did not come with parking spaces.

But one man who started a petition for yellow lines to be painted along his street said it was a matter of safety and that he was at his “wit’s end” trying to get the council to act.

Numerous developments have been popping up around Taita for the last several years, in the form of apartment and townhouse blocks, many of which don’t come with off-street parking.

According to a resource consent from Hutt City Council for one such development, the issue of on-street parking was assessed on Johnston Grove, with council concluding the effects of new residents parking on the road would be “less than minor”.

One resident of Johnston Grove said the on-street parking was 'sought after'. Photo / Melissa Nightingale

Despite this, council last year proposed painting yellow lines on Johnston Grove and the nearby Petherick St and has decided to look at a wider parking assessment.

Other parts of Taita, including parts of Milne Cres, are also being assessed.

One woman, who owns a townhouse on Milne Cres built by Williams Corporation, said when she first moved in there was “absolute resistance” from neighbours in relation to on-street parking.

She admitted there had been a problem in the early days with people parking too close to driveways, but said the issue had improved since then.

But the woman, who does not want her name used, said there has still been ongoing “harassment” from neighbours who would leave notes on people’s cars, confront them in the street, or put cones out on the road to stop people from parking outside their properties.

A suggestion that people move to parking on the nearby Reynolds St was not a good solution she said, noting it was a busier road which could lead to more chance of vehicle break-ins, and pointing out it would be difficult for some drivers to walk the extra distance to their homes.

“We all bought these townhouses being told we would have on-street parking . . . we’ve got young families that need to carry babies, people with their shopping.”

She said she was “absolutely gutted” at the proposal and said she will now be looking at renting her townhouse out and moving somewhere else.

Meanwhile, Milne Cres resident Sean Devitt said he had gathered 37 signatures from other residents in support of removing on-street parking - though he said the yellow lines proposal preceded his petition.

A car and a bus crashed recently on the corner of Milne Cres and Reynold St. Photo / Supplied

“I was trying for over a year to get lines installed. We even have a letter from the fire department saying it’s a matter of life and death.”

Devitt had a copy of an email sent from Fire and Emergency NZ to council stating on-street parking made it difficult at times to bring fire trucks along the street and access properties directly.

Devitt said another safety issue was that too many cars parked along the road caused obstructed views. Last Monday a bus and a car crashed into each other after one of the vehicles had to swing wide around cars parked on the corner of Milne Cres and Reynold St.

“I don’t want to be made out to look like the bad guy. It’s all about making the street safer,” he said.

“Before this was built, my kids played in the street. My kids don’t play in the street anymore.”

He acknowledged there was no good solution as a no-parking zone made it difficult for people living in the townhouses, but said the issue was “out of hand”.

“A lot of people over there are really good. I understand people’s concern about parking and groceries and those sorts of things.”

But he thought it was “unreasonable” for some of the residents to have more than one vehicle, having bought or moved into a property knowing there was no off-street park.

He suggested council introduce a temporary parking zone for people needing to unload groceries and the like.

“I’m at my wit’s end . . . there’s no solution, there should have just been parking put in.”

Over at the Johnston Grove development, one owner who wanted to remain anonymous said she decided to buy a townhouse without parking because prices were going up and she wanted her money to be working for her.

But within about six months of her moving in, someone had complained to the council about the cars parked on the streets, she said.

She organised a collective response to council from herself and other owners and residents in the development, asking them not to add yellow lines.

Part of the issue was that construction workers building another development in the street were often using the on-street parking too, she said, and it would be difficult to know what the real load on parking would be until they were gone.

Another owner, Nigel Alonso-Green, said he was unhappy council was considering this so soon after granting the resource consent for the developments.

He also criticised council’s communication with affected residents and the short timeframe they allowed for responses to the proposals.

Other residents on Johnston Grove who did not live in the developments had varying opinions on the proposal.

One woman, who wanted only to be referred to as Maia, said she could understand the stress it would place on townhouse owners if the parking was removed.

She didn’t understand why developers were building homes without parking outside of the city in an area with poor public transport options.

Stuart Laurence said parking on the street was “very sought after”, and didn’t think the developments should be going up anyway.

Another man said the on-street parking issue was “no good” and it was difficult to access properties sometimes.

“Sometimes taxis can’t get here.”

A council spokeswoman said the feedback to the proposal was not in favour of painting yellow lines.

“As a result, officers have decided that a wider parking assessment is required. This will be considered as part of the 2023/24 work programme, which is currently being compiled.

“The shift to not require car parks is a result of changes that councils have been directed to make by the Government.”

The National Policy Statement on Urban Development came into force on August 20, 2020, directing the council to not set minimum car parking requirements in the district plan, and to remove objectives, policies, rules, or assessment criteria that have the effect of requiring a minimum number of car parks to be provided for a particular development, land use, or activity.

“People can still choose to provide on-site car parking if they want to, and many new developments are still doing this, but council can no longer require that on-site parking must be provided where a development has none.”

Williams Corporation has been contacted for comment.

Melissa Nightingale is a Wellington-based reporter who covers crime, justice, and news in the capital. She joined the Herald in 2016 and has worked as a journalist for 10 years.