NEWS

MARCH 2026

THE RATE IS THE RATE - ERD COURT DECISION ON CAR PARKING IN DESIGNATED AREAS

On 5 March 2026, the Environment, Resources and Development Court handed down a decision in Palma Investments Pty Ltd v Assessment Panel – City of Mitcham [2026] SAERDC 5 granting planning consent to the expansion of a medical centre at 202 Main Road, Blackwood. The case turned on whether it was sufficient for the development to meet the lower parking rates for “Designated Areas” when the actual demand generated by the development would be higher. 

The Appellant had sought approval to add an upper level to accommodate additional consulting rooms for the medical centre. No changes were proposed to the existing on site car parking. The land was located within the Urban Corridor (Living) Zone (UCL Zone), being a “Designated Area” for parking rate purposes.

The proposal was refused planning consent by the City of Mitcham Assessment Panel and went on appeal to the ERD Court, with the Appellant represented by Tom Game. 

The key issues in dispute between the parties on appeal were:

1.     whether there was sufficient on-site parking to accommodate the proposed expansion; and

2.     whether the scale of the expansion was appropriate with respect to intensity of land use in the locality.

The ERD Court held that the proposal satisfied General Development Policies, Transport, Access and Parking (TAP Policy) Performance Outcome (PO) 5.1 having regard to corresponding Designated Performance Feature (DPF) 5.1. Notably, the Court held that:

1.     The on-site car parking requirements for the proposed development are the relevant car parking rates set out in DPF 5.1 of the TAP Policy. Here, the proposal satisfied the prescribed rate, and this was considered sufficient to satisfy corresponding PO 5.1 because:

a.     The purpose of the rates specified as applicable for development within the UCL Zone and other similar “Designated Areas” within the Code represents a conscious decision to allow a lower rate of on-site parking in those areas.

b.     In this sense, “a reduced parking rate… can be utilised as a driver of development and change” where the applicable “car parking policy rises above a purely functional, empirical assessment and performs a more strategic town planning role.”

c.     Further, considering the nature of the locality (being on a main road with a significant base line level of commercial activity and traffic movements) the reduced rate would not “result in a materially detrimental impact upon uses and residents within the locality.”

2.     Whether there was an existing surplus of car parks could be calculated based on the rates specified in the TAP Policy rather than an empirical assessment of actual on-site demand. This meant that the theoretical surplus (with regard to the prescribed car parking rate within DPF 5.1 of the TAP Policy) that existed with the current operations of the clinic could be considered to contribute to the overall parking rate requirements triggered by the proposed expansion.

In terms of scale, the Court held that the proposal was of an appropriate scale and intensity having regard to the context of the UCL Zone and the locality comprising other established larger scale commercial developments.

The fact that the consulting rooms serviced patients from “further afield” than the local Blackwood area did not cause the consulting rooms to become “a regional or district scale facility.” Such patient catchment is very common “for a GP clinic where patients may move outside of the area and still return to the clinic or people who work or study nearby may find it easier to visit the clinic during opening hours than one closer to where they live.”

On this basis, the Court ordered that the decision of the City of Mitcham Assessment Panel to refuse planning consent to the proposed development be overturned and that the application be granted planning consent subject to conditions.

Importantly, this case exemplifies the need to consider the broader planning purpose and strategy behind applicable policies in the Planning and Design Code in seeking to interpret them. Lower than actual car parking rates can be prescribed in the Code to drive other strategic planning outcomes.