At the risk of sounding like a broken record, whether or not you have a bay is up to you, and you alone.
There are examples of bay platforms at many GWR termini, but these are busier stations with regular heavy passenger traffic. If you wish to create the impression of a busy station, then go ahead.
Most GWR branchline termini did not have a bay, but that doesn’t stop you having two trains, and two engines, in the station at once.
You keep referring to “intensive” operation, but haven’t made it clear what you mean. You may not realise it, but there are two (at least) interpretations of this.
Firstly, and what I think you mean, many trains in the station at the same time;
Secondly, and what we usually see on model railways, a regular service without the long pauses between trains that happened on the real railway.
If you keep asking questions you will get many responses, but they will fall into two camps: the Model Railway point of view (it’s your layout, many people do include a bay platform, go ahead) or the Model of a Railway (GWR Branch termini nor this size were unlikely to have a bay platform.
As I said, you take the advice and make your choice, but it seems to me that you have decided to have a bay platform, but feel slightly ill-at-ease with the decision because you are aware that the “justification” with reference to a prototype is weak.
Which will make you happiest and what are you trying to achieve? How far down the path of realism do you want to go? How important to you is it to create a layout plan with the highest possible degree of plausibility, compared to the operational capacity (aka “play value”) of deviating slightly against the most typical arrangement on the prototype?
Were the wagons of the partially made up goods train left in the platform, or cleared into a siding or loop before the passenger train arrived?
They were left in the platform road, blocking the engine release crossover.