06/0823 - Proposed change to development approval · 132006.823.04

Mr Wakefield Sykes
Solicitor :
Sunshine Coast Regional! Council

41 July 2009

 

use those facilities in that way? There seems no practical reason why those shops, bars and
restaurants would be used any differently to shops, bars and restaurants situated close to
residences at Noosa Junction, Noosaville or Tewantin. There is simply no logic to the
proposition that those shops, bars and restaurants would not be patronised in the normal
way. Further, the owners/occupiers of those villas and penthouses are likely to have the
financial capacity to patronise the shops, bars and restaurants in Hastings Street. If the
contrary argument is that those occupants will use their vehicles to go to Noosa Junction or
Noosa Civic to buy food and groceries, etc., then that is no loss to Hastings Street because
visitors using the short-term accommodation units are unlikely to make weekly shopping-type
grocery purchases, and longer term holiday makers staying in the larger self-contained units
are likely to have a car and use it to go to either Noosa Junction or Noosa Civic to buy meat,
seafood and other specialist food products. Similarly they would use their vehicles to go to
other retail outlets for which there is no equivalent in Hastings Street such as the Farmers’
Markets. Hastings Street does not really cater for grocery and food shopping for longer term
holiday makers who prefer to holiday in a self-contained unit so that they do not have to dine
out all of the time.

6. What is the likely percentage of “leakage” of non-grocery/food away from the shops in
Hastings Street? Put another way, how does banning semi-permanent occupancy of larger
villas and penthouses benefit the shops in Hastings Street? The answer is that the impact
on those Hastings Street traders will be negligible and any escape expenditure will be
captured elsewhere in Noosa anyway so there is no loss to Noosa’s tourism economic base.
$o, when all of these factors are analysed it gets down to an argument over a few percent of
a very small pool of dollars which are going to be spent in Noosa anyway. Indeed, the
rigidity currently inherent in condition 23 is probably economically counter-productive in
terms of ensuring that investment in these units is captured, and that there is diversity at the
higher end of the accommodation market.

7. Consequently, | see no basis at all for thinking that the proposed change to condition 23 is
likely to provoke an adverse submission from Hastings Street traders, and if not from those
traders, who would be likely to object? Plainly the Council can form an opinion that adverse
submissions are unlikely and thus support the proposed changes to the condition.

If the Council continues to maintain its opposition to the proposed change to condition 23 and in
effect forces Viridian to make a development application for a new development permit for material
change of use, which would be impact assessable and open to submissions, nothing worthwhile will
be achieved because, on any reasonable view of the facts and circumstances involved here, there
would be no sustainable basis for refusing such a development application. The difference in the
use is merely semantic or definitional. There is, in reality, no actual difference in the use of the land.
In truth, such an application is really about the condition and not about the use, and ought to be
determined in the context of a request to change the development approval rather than through the
process of making a fresh development application. | fail to see how there is any point in the
Council putting Viridian to the expense of a new application when what it is trying to do is attract
investment to Noosa in a very difficult economic environment, and deliver product diversity at the
higher end of the accommodation market, which will benefit the economy of the Noosa sub-region.

Lest it be suggested that if such an application is made it would be in conflict with the Planning
Scheme, let me emphasise that the facts are that the conflict is merely definitional or semantic and
will not be a real conflict in any practical sense. If it is a conflict at afl, which | doubt, it is a negligible
one. As is the case with the vast majority of dwelling units in Noosa Heads and the vast majority of
the units within the Viridian Resort, the 55 villas/penthouses will in the main be occupied by their
owners only for holidays in Noosa, and otherwise will be placed within the letting pool. Condition 23
as it now stands is a disincentive to investment in the units and thus investment in Noosa, for no
corresponding economic benefits either to Hastings Street or Noosa as a whole. As mentioned
above, condition 23 in its current form is economically counter-productive with respect to the large
villas and penthouses which have been designed and approved by Council for independent living.

3082523_1.DOC Page 4 of 5