Council has directed the Administration to return with a report following the completion of the Development Application and engagement process, before any further action is taken.
That report must include:
This motion goes directly to matters that were not fully addressed when the proposal was originally presented.
In particular:
The proposal requires a Development Application because it represents a change in land use — from a community hall to a retail-style operation involving the sale of food.
Traffic and parking are not incidental to that change — they are central to it.
Councillors did not have the full picture when the proposal was originally approved in November 2025.
Key information — including the planning history of the site — only became apparent later through the Development Application process and the community session held on 15 March.
That history includes a sustained period of community concern and planning dispute between approximately 2005 and 2012, culminating in proceedings in the Environment, Resources and Development Court.
Once that information became known, the matter was brought back to Council.
A detailed timeline of the site’s planning history was produced by OCW earlier this week — information that had not been provided to councillors when the original decision was made.
This is the second time in recent months that Council has had to pause a decision after identifying it did not receive all relevant information required to properly exercise its governance and oversight role.
This raises a broader question about how decisions are being presented to Council.
Earlier this year, OCW identified this as part of a systemic issue — where access to relevant information directly affects the ability of elected members to scrutinise proposals and understand their implications.
This matter demonstrates that the issue is not historical. It continues to arise in current decision-making, with real consequences for both Council and the community.
This is not about the broader food security strategy.
It is about:
The fact that Council has now paused the proposal to seek that information is significant.
The proposal will not proceed further at this stage.
It will return to Council only after:
At that point, Council will need to determine whether Hastings Street Hall is an appropriate location — or whether an alternative site should be considered.
This issue forms part of OCW’s ongoing Systemic Issues series examining governance, oversight and access to information within Council decision-making.
Earlier pieces in that series explored how limitations on information and scrutiny can affect the ability of elected members to properly assess proposals.
This matter demonstrates how those issues are not theoretical — they continue to arise in real decisions affecting the community.
