Council & Politics
12 July, 2026
Hotel changes approved after split vote
NORTHERN Grampians Shire councillors have approved amended plans for a proposed residential hotel development in Great Western, despite concerns about parking, traffic and neighbourhood character.
Council voted 4-2 on Tuesday to issue a notice of decision to amend the planning permit for 98-100 Main Street, allowing the developer to progress a scaled-back version of the project.
The amended proposal reduces the number of guest rooms from 58 to 32, removes the previously approved basement car park and replaces it with at-grade parking. Vehicle access will also shift to Brunel Street.
Council officers recommended approval, concluding the revised proposal was less intensive than the one previously approved by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and could operate without unreasonable traffic or amenity impacts, subject to permit conditions.
Cr Jenny Greenberger moved the recommendation, saying council had held extensive discussions about the application and the concerns raised by objectors.
“As far as I’m aware, there are no planning rules or regulations that prevent this planning permit going ahead,” she said.
Cr Greenberger acknowledged car parking had been a major issue but said she believed there was sufficient street parking in the area to accommodate visitors.
She said the proposal had been referred to all relevant authorities, none of which had objected.
“I believe that the development is beneficial to the future of Great Western as a tourist town,” she said.
Cr Jack Blake seconded the motion, saying the project was important for Great Western and it was time to resolve the matter.
However, Cr Justine Hide opposed the amendment, saying her role was to represent community concerns.
She said the proposed changes would result in unacceptable impacts on parking, traffic access, amenity and neighbourhood character.
Cr Karen Probst also spoke against the motion, saying the revised plans changed the nature of the development.
“Previously, entry and exit was via a commercial side road; now it’s going to be via a residential area,” she said.
Cr Probst said the parking would also move to the residential side of the development, raising concerns about noise and amenity.
She said the development would provide only 17 on-site car parks, despite the planning assessment identifying a requirement for 38 spaces, with a further 10 spaces proposed off site.
“I just think that’s putting an unacceptable burden on the community and the character of the area,” she said.
In summing up the debate, Cr Greenberger said councillors had to consider their role as the responsible planning authority and the advice provided by planning officers.
“I am sympathetic to the issues raised by objectors, but I believe, according to planning regulations, this permit does meet all those requirements,” she said.
Read More: Great Western