Released late last year, this reform goes well beyond updating Clause 52.06; it rethinks how Victoria plans for growth, movement, and the future of our urban centres. We’ve taken a close look at what these updates really mean, and the verdict is clear: this is not just about car parking; it’s about the future of Victoria.
This first article in our series examines the key elements of this amendment, including the principal changes, the policy rationale behind them, and how they’re likely to shape development decisions going forward.
These changes will shift how town planners, transport engineers, developers, councils and the end user (you) will think about car parking.
The primary change is the new benchmark for providing car parking.
Instead of a blanket minimum for the majority of Victoria, car parking requirements are now linked to the Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) – a calculated measure of the current access to public transport and the walkability to these services at any given address.
This PTAL determines which of the 4 new parking requirement categories a site falls into, replacing the previous 2-category system. Here’s how the categories work:
This is a significant shift in the statutory controls. A transition period applies, though not without exceptions.
Car parking maximums are already in effect as of 18 December 2025, while car parking minimums are moving through a 6-month transition period to June 2026.
During this transition period, the lower of the 2 minimum rates is applicable, i.e. if the old scheme requires less parking, then those rates apply.
But, as always, there is an exception!
If your property is controlled by an existing Parking Overlay (PO), then the rates within the overlay apply irrespective of any rates defined in Clause 52.06. This means a number of properties in high PTAL areas, which would otherwise have low car parking requirements, will still need to be assessed against the higher PO rate.
Our understanding is that the Department of Transport and Planning (DTP) will work with Councils over the next 6 months to harmonise POs with the new Clause 52.06 parking rates. Outcomes of this are yet to be clarified.
Ultimately, the more influential part of this change is that car parking provisions are now dynamic.
The historic system applied car parking minimum requirements only, with lower minimum requirements applying for sites covered by the Principal Public Transport Network (PPTN) area (if you were in metropolitan Melbourne), or where another specific policy applied. These parking rates and the PPTN are rarely amended.
The DTP has committed to updating the Car Parking Requirement (CPR) mapping yearly to reflect changes in walkability and public transport provision. This means a site that is currently in Category 1 could move to a higher category should public transport in the area improve and a higher PTAL apply.
However, these changes are retrospective in that the mapping is only updated after a public transport service is provided or improved. By way of example, in the current mapping sites around the new Arden Metro Station are Category 1 and 2 and will remain so despite full Metro train services commencing from next month.
The reforms to car parking didn’t come out of nowhere. They’re part of a broader shift in how Victoria is planning for growth in urban centres, an approach anchored by Plan for Victoria, which was released in early 2025.
Matching Parking to Real Demand
At the core of the reforms is Action 5 of Plan for Victoria: “Match car and bike parking requirements and bike facilities with demand.” The government’s policy documentation notes that requiring car parks where people already have good transport options adds cost to housing and doesn’t reflect actual travel patterns. In fact, it is projected that up to 40% of private car parks in inner Melbourne sit empty.
By shifting to dynamic car parking requirements, the planning controls for transport and car parking seek to deliver location-responsive parking, encourage sustainable transport and lower housing delivery costs.
It is worth noting that whilst the statutory controls may seek to represent real demand, this is still a blanket control that doesn’t respond to all land use types and tenancies. It will become increasingly important to review all land use parking demands in the context of market expectations and what is needed to support vibrant activity centres.
Supporting Activity Centres and Housing Goals
The Victorian Government’s activity centres planning programs aim to boost housing near train, tram and bus corridors, further connecting places where people live with the public transport network. By reforming car parking requirements, the locations with the highest public transport amenity will be focused on reducing oversupply of car parking, as more housing is encouraged closer to jobs, services and high-quality transport.
This reflects an overarching policy intent of Plan for Victoria: “Deliver more homes in well-connected places, reduce dependency on private cars, and better align land use with transport infrastructure.”
It’s Bigger than Car Parking
The reforms go beyond how many car spaces each new development needs. By moving from cookie-cutter provisions to provisions informed by alternative transport accessibility, we’re shifting how we move across the state.
This is best demonstrated through residential and non-residential uses in high PTAL areas (Categories 3 and 4).
In these areas, maximum car parking provisions apply, with dwellings having a maximum parking rate of 2 spaces per dwelling. This is largely consistent with previous controls (generally a minimum of 2 spaces per 3-bedroom dwelling).
Non-residential uses, on the other hand, are controlled by maximum parking rates well below the previous minimums. For example, office car parking in high PTAL areas has changed from a minimum of 3 spaces per 100sqm to a maximum of 0.45 spaces per 100sqm.
So, whilst residential uses in high PTAL areas and activity centres can still access parking at rates consistent with the old scheme, non-residential uses are highly constrained. In effect, this control seeks to limit parking for non-residential uses in activity centres to discourage visitors to these centres from driving and make other transport choices.
The next five months will reveal the benefits and challenges of these car parking reforms across the state. Development applications will be the frontline for understanding how effective these changes are.
In our assessment of the reforms, there is still a lot to unpack, including:
Subscribe to Ratio’s newsletter and stay tuned as we reveal more about our in-depth case studies and real-world applications of these reforms.
