“The provision of 188 car parking spaces includes only two for disabled persons. That is a disgraceful treatment of such persons and well outside today’s accepted standards,” they said.

Principal Strategic Planner associated with the project, Michael O’Connell of QED Aurecon, said extensive research into car parking had carried out, and heritage values had been respected.

“We believe the development will be bringing a net benefit to car parking in Victor Harbor,” he said.

“We respect that there is a need for development to occur in a manner which complements and enhances heritage places, and are of the opinion that the proposed development goes to extensive lengths to retain and adapt heritage places in the immediate locality to satisfy this requirement,” Mr O’Connell added.

Landowner in the vicinity of the development Doug McLaren said the development should incorporate much needed conference facilities rather than focusing on residential accommodation.

“A conference facility in the town centre is badly needed. All we have here is more apartments and car spaces. I would have thought that one floor dedicated to function facilities would be much more beneficial to the town than 28 more dwellings on the eight and ninth floors,” Mr McLaren said.

Strongly supporting the development, Albert Place business owner Matt Parry said the benefits of the proposal were enormous.

“I am 100 per cent for the proposal, I see the benefits are huge for the local economy and Victor Harbor as a whole,” he said.

“It will generate employment, provide quality accommodation ... and most importantly attract more tourists to Victor Harbor.

“The main street is lacking retail shops, and the new development will bring that. The money it will bring in will be of huge benefit to the town,” Mr Parry said.

Managing Director of Gunnsta Pty Ltd and owner of the Hotel Crown, Andrew Gunn, said the wage bill for the development was expected to be $100,000 a week.

“The proposal looks at 180 accommodation rooms and will employ 250 people. The wage bill of $100,000 a week will mean the economic flow-on is enormous,” he said.

In supporting the recommendation to refuse the development application, Councillor Kay Ewens said the height of the development was a major issue.

“We all would love to see something vibrant operating on that site, but I have major concerns on the height of the development... the desired character for this area looks to maintain and protect heritage, and I don’t believe this is achieving that,” she said.

Mr Gunn said the decision by DAP to refuse the development had not yet sunk in.

“Over the next week we will decide whether or not to try again, or work out if it is time to move on,” he said.

“A six-storey (development) is not an option, it would maybe mean a three star establishment, but for something that scale it wouldn’t be worth our time,” Mr Gunn added.