When is a Planning Permit NOT a Planning Permit

PLANNING PERMIT Permit No.: PA2604213 

Minister for Planning

ADDRESS OF THE LAND: 26-36 Princess Street and 11-15 Brougham Street, Kew

Use the land for accommodation (dwellings)

Construct a building or construct or carry out works

Construct a building or construct or carry out works

Create access to a road in a Transport Zone 2 

Commencement : This permit will operate from the issued date of this permit.

The Planning Permit has been issued entirely as proposed in height and mass.

When we as residents apply for a Planning Permit, everything we propose to undertake is articulated entirely and that is what the Responsible Authority approves.

Not here. Please read for yourself on the Department’s website tomorrow.

The Permit has been approved but still needs the following detail :

·        a reflected glare assessment

·        landscape package/ a planting schedule of proposed vegetation, including common and scientific names, height/width specs, amounts, pot size and location of plants, relevant to works on the subject site only / Detailed drawings for elements such as furniture and planters, showing dimensions (including soil depth), drainage, lining materials and growing media. Volumes of growing media that are adequate for the plant species as well as cultivation depth must be provided. ( !! ??!! )

·        a wind assessment report 

·        waste Management Plan

·        acoustic report  : an assessment of the potential for live outdoor music at the Skinny Dog Hotel (to the extent permitted by Planning Permit PP20/0553) and any additional noise attenuation measures required to ensure noise standards of Clause 53.06-3 (Live Music Entertainment Venues) of the Boroondara Planning Scheme are met. ( the noise coming out of the new development ? )

·        stormwater Management Plan

·        environmental audit

·        a detailed lighting plan

Traffic and parking management plan

Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a traffic and parking management plan must be approved and endorsed by the responsible authority… must be prepared to the satisfaction of the responsible authority and be generally in accordance with the Traffic and Transport Assessment prepared Traffic Engineering Assessment, prepared by Traffix, dated February 2026.

Let’s remember what the Traffix Assessment is :

“ The proposal completed a traffic survey commissioned by Traffix Group at the intersection of Princess Street/Council Carpark, Brougham Street/Council Carpark, Brougham Street/High Street and Woodford Avenue/Princess Street.

The traffic survey took place on Friday 29th August and Saturday 30th August 2025

 A 2-day survey of a limited area and not the traffic movement assessment of the area that is Kew Junction and especially our narrow one-way street.

The survey based on  this 2-day survey states that the level of traffic generated as a result of this proposal “ is acceptable “.

The projection that the proposal will generate an additional 163 vehicle movements during the AM peak hour, 236 vehicle movements during the PM peak hour and 262 vehicle movements during the Saturday peak to and from the site.            

·        This is not acceptable that a proposal of this size and complexity only completed a 

2-day traffic survey.

·        It is not acceptable that a 2-day survey was only completed of a limited area and times. This is not a robust or complete survey.

·        Peak Times like School Holidays / Easter / Christmas / Lunch Time / Saturday Mornings / school pick up / coming home from work – you cannot get into Brougham Street from High Street for a long period of time – to get out of Brougham Street onto High Street the queue is up the road to Woolworths – cars turn out of Woolworths onto Brougham Street and then turn right onto the subject site and then out onto Princess Street.

·        It is not acceptable that the additional vehicle movements proposed are deemed acceptable. Where are all these additional vehicle movements going to go – into the already current high traffic volumes.

·        We expect a comprehensive traffic assessment for the subject site and our neighbourhood and KEW JUNCTION proper. 

Logic will dictate that by even the minimum numbers stated in the proposal, the increased traffic generated will detrimentally impact the widely recognised and acknowledged high traffic volumes and congestion – making the neighbourhood and all of us less and less safe. This proposal deliberately puts us in harm’s way.

·        There must be a no left turn into Brougham Street from the subject site.

·        I believe that Traffic Surveys now, even with Leo’s Supermarket closed, will show that the traffic flow and congestion have not eased or lessen in any way. And this will demonstrate that the traffic projections are undercooked and inadequate.

The new east-west link road proposed between Princess Street and Brougham Street, for site access for residential and commercial vehicles, has been assessed and declared as concerning for the increased traffic volumes on Brougham Street.

The Traffic assessment describes Brougham Streert, “as a residential street, and that it is the wrong outcome for a development of this nature to direct all vehicles, including retail customers through this residential street”.

Brougham Street is considered “not suitable for material intensification”.

There is NO traffic assessment or strategy for the current Woolworths traffic and the site additional traffic impact to it?

Our Council planner believes the pedestrian thoroughfare from the mega development to Atheneum Plan “is positive”. Is that after they try to cross Brougham street ?

And yet this is the current plan. This is not acceptable for all of us as the residents of the immediate area, Kew Junction and KEW. “

Road safety audit 

• Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Road Safety Audit must be approved and endorsed by the responsible authority - must address:  Vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access arrangements. Loading arrangements. Internal circulation and layout.

This is for the new development and the people and cars on that new development – nothing about the existing neighbourhood or congested Kew Junction proper.

In our letter of objection : 

“Princess Street is an arterial road on one side of the proposal. Princess Street has an undivided carriageway with two lanes of through traffic in each direction of travel. One lane will always have a Bus travelling along it and a lane of carparking on each side – so 1 lane moving in either direction is the norm.

The traffic on Princess Street is hideous and congested now at all times of the day and night. There is no perceivable decrease in traffic flow ever. It is just congestion and an ongoing danger and hazard now.

Studley Park Road is a major arterial road leading up to the subject site. Studley Park Road already moves major flows of traffic in cars and buses.

60 Denmark Street was the site of VicRoads and is being re-developed to deliver up to 500 homes. This is another proposal of significant size and impact to our neighbourhood and community. Denmark Street is already a congested and constantly busy major throughfare. All this will add to the overall traffic network.  

High Street  is another major arterial road leading to the proposal – to get into Brougham Street now via High Street is a constant queuing exercise. You never get through the Kew Junction on your first round of lights – ever. Getting through Kew Junction and getting into my Brougham Street is a wait and / or manoeuvre now from High Street- tram/ bus / parking cars / pedestrians, cars turning right into  Brougham Street coming down High Street or Cotham Road. 

The current lived reality of  Brougham Street is that it is always busy, already carrying more traffic than ever anticipated it would ever carry when the neighbourhood was built a 100 years ago.

Again, this situation will only be exacerbated by the Kew Village proposal and the extra people and cars, and especially as there are not car spaces provided for each new dwelling proposed. How is this a robust proposal, we are suburban, people want and need a car to move about – it is not like all these new residents will be all working in Kew and walking to work. 

After all these cars have made their way up our little narrow Brougham Street, then: left only Malmsbury Street into Princess Street, right along Malmsbury and into the peak area around Giant Steps Autism school kids, or continue straight along Brougham street which has cars parked on both sides and only 1 line of traffic at any times – this is already an obstacle course and a danger. “

And now narrow one-way Brougham Street will have all the construction trucks traffic as well. Thank you for not recognising our traffic issues and putting us all in harm’s way.

Affordable Housing

• Before the development of the land begins, excluding demolition, excavation, piling, site preparation works, and works to remediate contaminated land, the owner of the land must enter into an agreement with the responsibility authority under section 173 of the Act, in a form to the satisfaction of the responsible authority, that provides for a contribution towards affordable housing affordable housing contribution by way of either of the following options: a) At least 10 per cent of the total number of dwellings in the development must be provided as affordable housing for sale or lease to a registered housing agency or to Homes Victoria. The details of when and how the affordable housing will be delivered and the total value of the affordable housing contribution must be set out in the agreement. The affordable housing dwellings provided should be representative of the approved dwelling mix to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. b) An alternative contribution towards the provision of affordable housing must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The details of when and how the alternative contribution is to be made and the total value of the affordable housing contribution must be set out in the agreement to the satisfaction of the responsible authority The land owner must pay the responsible authority’s reasonable costs of the preparation, execution, registration and ending of the section 173 agreement (where applicable).

This is not an affordable housing proposal.

Head, Transport for Victoria conditions 

• The permit holder must avoid disruption to tram operation along High Street during the construction of the development. Any planned disruptions to tram operation during construction and mitigation measures must be communicated to and approved by the Head, Transport for Victoria and Yarra Trams….
• The demolition and construction of the development must not disrupt bus operations on Princess Street and Hight Street without the prior written consent of the Head, Transport for Victoria. 
• The primary Princess Street access to have all right out movements banned, access to be clearly line marketed and appropriate signed for left in/ left out/ right in only.
• At Intersection of Brougham Street and High Street, ‘keep clear’ line marking to facilitate the existing left in/ left out/ right in movements. 

Thank you for not recognising Kew Junction’s current traffic congestion and traffic concerns and for not recognising the traffic and safety concerns for narrow one-way Brougham Street and putting us all in harm’s way.

This Kew Village proposal and its fast tracking is a demonstration of the total rejection of our Australian democratic rights, processes and values.

·        Our letter of objection additionally did not receive a reply to :

o   We did not receive sufficient notice to read / review / understand the extent to which this proposal will totally impact us and our quality of life.

This is such a significant proposal in size and impact and complexity and with such permanent outcomes. This proposal would be of interest to the broader community and yet there are no public meetings or communication.

o   The proposal is of a material detriment  

The proposal is a huge detrimental visual intrusion. From front and back yards – it is a huge concrete block, in whatever materials it is covered in, and will be visible from High Street to Princess Street to our Brougham Street and every other angle you look from.

The proposal is too high and too much and overwhelmingly too imposing.

It is a huge visual block where people from these new proposed apartments can overlook us.

o   This proposal will cause a huge block to sunlight and send off shadows in all directions. Kew Junction has progressively become darker and darker as more towers have been built. We need sunlight protected. 

The developer’s own Shadow Assessments state clearly that : The proposal results in significant overshadowing  impacts to High Street, Princess Street and Brougham Street. 

The proposal will plunge our streets and current open space, the Raoul Wallenberg Memorial Park, the Kew War Memorial and overshadow the new proposed new open space.

Why has this Planning Permit been approved ?