At a July 7 meeting the plans came before the council again, with changes including a reduction in the number of guest accommodation rooms from 58 to 32 and the removal of a basement car park in favour of ground-level parking, with vehicle access to the site solely via Brunel Street.
The council received seven objections to the revised plans, with objectors primarily concerned with the reduction of on-site car parking, as well as potential impacts on local traffic, amenity and neighbourhood character.
Councillors approved the permit amendment in a split decision: Mayor Karen Hyslop, Cr Jenny Greenberger, Cr Jack Blake and Cr Murray Emerson were in favour, while Cr Justine Hide and Cr Karen Probst were opposed.
Cr Probst said she shared community concerns about the effect the new plans would have on street parking in Great Western.
“Our responsibility is to our community, and what we’re hearing is that our community doesn’t want these changes,” she said.
“Although the changes reduce the number of rooms almost by half, it’s also changing the character of the development.
“Previously entry and exit was via a commercial side road – now it’s going to be via a residential area.
“There’s only 17 car parks on site. The formula they use for car parking says there should be 38.
“There will be 10 offsite, but I think that’s putting an unacceptable burden on the community and the character of the area.”
Cr Greenberger said concerns about parking were insufficient grounds for the council to attempt to block the development.
“There’s been extensive conversations with regards to the issues raised by objectors, particularly to do with car parking,” she said.
“I feel that, Great Western being a fairly small town, there is adequate car parking in the streets in the area.
“Quite clearly the street parking, even though it is counted as part of the application, is still available to all residents and visitors, and anybody using the streets.
“There are disabled car parks allocated within the establishment itself and also within the council facility down the road for people who are unable to walk.
“The other patrons, wherever they’re attending – be it the post office, the cafe, the sports ground, et cetera – are capable of walking that extra distance.”
Cr Greenberger said the council could also leave itself open to legal challenges if it failed to approve the new plans.
“The application has been presented to all of the different authorities the applicants were required to get permission from and there have been no issues coming to council from those,” she said.
“While we as councillors are representing our community, we are also the planning authority for these sorts of matters.
“I think legally we are obliged to follow the recommendations of officers when they have considered all of the implications in terms of the planning scheme and planning law.
“Therefore, while I am sympathetic to the issues raised by objectors, I believe according to planning regulations this permit does meet all those requirements.”
The entire July 15, 2026 edition of The Weekly Advertiser is available online. READ IT HERE!
