Councillor Jim Parke

‘What is inappropriate development?’’

Councillor Jim Parke November 2012.

On 7th November 2012 after being elected onto Boroondara council, when interviewed by Alison Barclay in "Boorondara Review Local" Councillor Jim Parke responded that he didn't know what the term " inappropriate development" meant (read more http://www.boroondarareviewlocal.com.au/story/744609/meet-your-new-boroondara-council/?cs=2397). Was this a mistake, was Councillor Parke mis-quoted, or does Councillor Jim Parke genuinely not understand the simple concept of inappropriate development?

Inappropriate development is really is a simple concept. People want their council to make planning decisions that don't destroy the character of the suburb and which don't overshadow or dominate neighboring properites.

If we look at two recent planning appliations by Councillor Jim Parke to VCAT, it is clear in fact that he does not understand the concept of "inappropriate development".

Application A

On 4th July 2011, Boroondara council refused Councillor Jim Parke permission to develop land in Boroondara to build three new houses at 335 Doncaster Road, Balwyn North. The council's notice of refusal was based on Councillor Parke's proposal failing to respond to the character of the area due to its significant scale, height and bulk. Other grounds for council's refusal was that Councillor Parke's proposal did not meet several objectives of rescode. Later in 2011, Councillor Jim Parke applied to VCAT to overturn Boroondara council's refusal of his application. On the 30th January 2012, VCAT heard Councillor Parke's application. The tribunal found the deisgn and scale of Councillor Parke's proposed buildings represented an "inappropriate response to the existing and emerging character of the area". The tribunal also found that Councillor Parke's proposal "would result in a built form outcome that is not sympathetic to the character of the area and could not provide appropriate opportunity for on site planting". And that the coustruction of Councillor Jim Parke's new dwellings as proposed "will have a detrimental impact on the character of the area". The tribunal concluded that Councillor Parke's proposal would "represent an unacceptable planning outcome" and the tribunal refused Councillor Parke's application to overturn Boroondara council's refusal to grant him a permit. (read more http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2012/111.html).

Application BIn 2011, Cr Jim Parke applied to VCAT on another of his development applications. In this application, the tribunal noted "the design has failed to respond to its neighbours and will result in significant amenity impacts for the residents of the adjoining properties". And the tribunal refused Councillor Parke's application and refused to grant a permit to him (read more http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2011/605.html).