State Government + James Packer backed Consortium and NEGLIGENT ? Planning Permit for KEW
State Government Ministerial Planning Permit No : PA2604213
The State Government has bypassed all the established Planning Scheme rules that were established by law in 1987. This was to ensure fairness for all citizens participating in the planning permit application process.
We need to repeal through Parliament this permit and ‘activity centres’. We have sought support through the State Opposition for this motion, and commenced the process :
· To support this process, if you wish, sign Jess Wilson’s petition and share.
https://www.jesswilsonkew.com.au/survey/protect-kews-character-review-the-leos-site-development
Why for us :
· Seek the restoration of democratic planning for housing
· Return the planning permit application process back to the community + council and all the legal avenues of recourse that are built into this process
· Ensure that residents have a say in what happens in their own neighbourhood, so we do not end up with proposals like this State Government + James Packer fast tracked 18 storey mega development.
Why for the State Government :
· The State Government needs to be held accountable for the permanent damage they are causing to our neighbourhood character and landscape and putting us in harm’s way.
Because we have valid objections :
· From the previous updates, our letter of objections, articles in the Herald Sun and The Sunday Age and on the Channel 9 and Channel 7 news and on social media, we have outlined our objections/ concerns to the issuing of the planning permit.
o With all the unresolved and unanswered objections and concerns the Planning Permit has been issued
Because we will all be put in harm’s way and this is just negligence :
From the permit : 600 sqm site of 4 buildings including 194 residential dwellings, a supermarket, retail, and offices uses, landscaping and publicly accessible areas…
4 towers - in height from 3, 4, 14 and 18 storeys.
At the ground level, the development is proposed to contain 3491sqm of commercial area including 1344sqm for a supermarket, 2063sqm for retail and 65sqm of office leasable floor area.
A total of 194 residential dwellings is proposed.
50 x 1-bedroom apartments + 88 x 2-bedroom apartments + 50 x 3-bedroom apartments + 6 x 3-bedroom townhouses.
A total of 419 car parking spaces is proposed to be provided within 3 basement levels and a total of 252 bicycle parking spaces.
· This is a minimum of 424 additional people / with clearly not a car space for all of them and for the shoppers to the Supermarket and shops = this is a traffic and congestion disaster in the making.
· Remember the permit was issued with an “inadequate” and “laughable” traffic survey and traffic projection. No serious or competent traffic and parking management plan.
From the Permit :
Traffic and parking management plan
The application is supported by a Traffic Engineering Assessment report and numerous supporting memos, prepared by Traffix Group.
Traffic Surveys were undertaken on a Friday and Saturday in August 2025 during peak periods.
Review of Traffic Surveys indicates that the intersection of the car park access (Council owned land) and Princess Street is currently operating well within capacity, with manageable delays experienced by motorists as they wait to turn into or out of the carpark, south of the site.
The same is observed at the High Street and Brougham Street intersection.
The development will generate an additional 163 traffic movements during the AM peak hour and 236 traffic movement during the PM peak hour on weekdays and 262 additional traffic during the Saturday peak to and from the stie.
Traffic distribution to and from the site are expected to following the existing operation of the site. The projected movements to and from the site, are well within the identified capacity for all movements in all of the assessed times, and no movement exceeds 36% of its capacity
A comparative analysis of pre and post development traffic volumes using SIDRA indicates that both the car park and Princess Street intersection will continue to operate in a safe and manageable fashion and the Brougham and High Street intersection will continue to operate under ‘excellent conditions.
Based on the above, it is considered the proposal will not have a negative impact on the surrounding road network.
The Head, Transport for Victoria in their response have provided a set of required permit conditions as a Section 55 Determining Referral Authority and a set of ‘recommended’ conditions for consideration.
The ‘recommended’ conditions include a requirement for the primary Princess Street access (e.g. entry to the council car park) to have all right-out movements banned and the access clearly lined marked and appropriate signs installed for left in/ left out/ right in only. .. recommend this because they believe the additional movements this development will generate will significantly impact the operations of the arterial network and public transport services…
Notwithstanding the submit traffic report indicates Princess Street would not be negatively impacted post development, Traffix Consulting have provided a response to the recommended condition which raises significant concerns. Specifically, they note that should right out movements be banned to Princess Street, the only route to the north for departing vehicles from the council land (from both the development and from other adjacent tenancies) would be via Brougham Street.
This is a narrow, ‘low-order’, residential street and vehicle would need to travel around 800m north to Eglinton Street before being able to turn ( into local residential Malmsbury Street ) on to ( congested ) Princess Street. ( significant queuing now to get onto Malmsbury Street and now significant queuing to then get onto Princess Street).
Whilst the above is acknowledged, H,TfV have reviewed the number of additional movements predicted in Princess Street that would be transferred to the Brougham Street exit and have not raised concerns.
H,TfV’s position stems from concerns with gaps and unknowns in the data and the potential risks to the arterial network and public transport service network, beyond the site.
The required and recommended condition from H,TfV are therefore recommended to be included on the planning permit, with a minor variation to the ‘recommended condition. Specifically, it is considered reasonable and logical to require the Transport Impact Assessment report required 6 months after occupation, to also consider the impacts of the left in/left out/right in only requirement at the primary Princess Street access. That way, any issues can be rectified, at the discretion of H,TfV.
We cannot accept that we will put in harm’s way :
· We have discussed in our previous updates the current traffic and safety issues for –
o Princess Street
o High Street
o Denmark Street and the 500 new dwellings being built at the old Vis Roads
o Studley Park Road
o Cotham Road
o The public transport network – we have no trains. The Trams and buses are already full and have no wheelchair /disabled /elderly/ mums with prams access and you have to walk onto the road into the traffic to get onto them.
o And then there is narrow one-way Brougham Street
· The new traffic generated from this site will pour into this already congested traffic network. A network and geography that is suddenly not going to get bigger to accommodate all these people and their movements and their car movements.
The public transport network is not going to suddenly expand ( new tram or bus routes ) or expand at all to accommodate the extra movements.
· The traffic survey with its ‘undercooked’ traffic survey and ‘pretend’ traffic projections state that the traffic will continue with “ excellent conditions”. THIS CANNOT BE A SERIOUS STATEMENT – THERE ARE NOT EXCELLENT CONDITIONS NOW. THIS IS KEW JUNCTION. NEGLIGENCE.
· The traffic survey with its ‘undercooked’ traffic survey and ‘pretend’ traffic projections state that the new additional traffic will be directed up narrow one-way Brougham Street. NEGLIGENCE.
· The traffic survey with its ‘undercooked’ traffic survey and ‘pretend’ traffic projections state this is problematic for Brougham Street and that they had gaps in their data and unknowns in their data.
· BUT knowing this, there will be no real review of the traffic for Brougham Street or the risks for the arterial network. NEGLIGENCE.
· AND a recommendation that a traffic assessment to be done by the developer 6 months post build is beyond belief and cannot be accepted. NEGLIGENCE.
· THIS will be so so too late to reverse or address the situation they will have created. NEGLIGENCE.
We have asked for a ‘real’ traffic assessment from the beginning of this process and all the way through – this State Government and the James Packer backed consortium, have refused.
This is NEGLIGENCE and puts us all in the Kew Junction area in harm’s way.