One of the most populated and rapidly growing municipalities in Melbourne’s metropolitan area, the City of Casey has recently been overwhelmed by thousands of complaints from residents outraged by the introduction of new regulations on how they use their private land.
Starting this year, the City Council – responsible for suburbs like Cranbourne, Berwick and Clyde - requires its hundreds of thousands of residents to obtain a special permit for parking more than two unregistered vehicles on their property for up to ninety days, storing long vehicles or dismantling and repairing cars.
As part of the application, residents must also submit a site plan indicating where the activity will take place.
Applying for a permit, which must be lodged at least 14 days before the specified date, costs $150 - a non-refundable fee that the City of Casey retains even if the application is unsuccessful.
Meanwhile, the authorisation fee for parking unregistered vehicles or working on one’s car is set at $250.
According to the council, activities conducted on private land are prohibited if they occur “in circumstances that may be detrimental to the surrounding area”.
However, the City of Casey has yet to provide clear guidelines on what constitutes “detrimental” for nearby properties.
The introduction of these permits has sparked outrage among residents, who promptly launched an online petition that has already amassed 15,000 signatures in less than three weeks.
“Our homes are more than just buildings; they are a reflection of our freedom and serve as personal sanctuaries where we should be able to carry out private activities without interference,” the petition on Change.org states.
“From vehicle storage to repairs and maintenance on private land, the permit requirement is being enforced indiscriminately, even for non-commercial purposes.
“This measure contradicts the fundamental principle of private property rights, which allows us to use our land as we see fit without government intervention - provided we are not causing harm or nuisance to our neighbours,” the petition organisers argue, calling on the City of Casey to reconsider the permit requirement.
Marc De Castella, a resident of Gladysdale, also signed the petition, expressing his outrage at what he calls a “gross injustice” imposed on Casey’s taxpayers.
“The imposition of this permit requirement for car storage and maintenance on private property is not only inherently unjust but further demonstrates the [government’s] disregard and ongoing assaults upon fundamental private property rights in Victoria,” he stated.
According to De Castella, Australians should have the right to use and enjoy their private property without government interference.
“This egregious assault and deplorable injustice is intolerable and accordingly, must be resisted,” he added.
In response to the wave of complaints, the Casey Council clarified the conditions of the newly introduced permit in a public statement.
“You do not require a permit when completing minor repairs on your car on your private property, such as an oil change, belt change or water refill,” a council statement explained.
“[The permit requirement is] to protect the health, peace and safety of our community.”
Consequently, the City of Casey’s official website has been updated to specify that a permit fee will be required for using a recreational vehicle (motorbike, scooter, go-kart), storing a shipping container for up to 90 days, storing long and heavy vehicles and using a temporary dwelling (caravan, tent) for more than 14 days.
“The City of Casey investigates 10,000 complaints from the community each year relating to local laws matters,” the council said in a separate statement.
“Permits are a key tool for councils, not just the City of Casey, to ensure activities that may have a detrimental impact on those living nearby are suitably managed.”
Nonetheless, the City of Casey community’s online petition continues to gather signatures.
