Original source · versioned page text
2017-10-10 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda
The original of this document is very large (21.6 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 10 OCTOBER 2017
The Housing Needs Assessment also included a review of visitor accommodation. The review
identified that there will be continued growth with regards to visitor accommodation. At page 15
the review notes:
However, in the event of continued ongoing growth in total visitor nights in line with that
over the last decade, there was found still likely to be a further projected need for additional
tourist accommodation and visitor dwellings by 2036 which is unlikely to be able to be met
by dedicated tourism development. Tourism demand may therefore ‘spill over’ into resident
accommodation.
Recommendations from the Needs Assessment regarding Tourist Accommodation include:
Should growth in the tourist market continue as it has been on average over the last
decade, there would be ongoing demand for visitor and tourist accommodation of all types.
Some of this demand may be filled by increasing existing occupancy rates, some may be
filled by secondary dwellings, especially in the hinterland, some is likely to be filled by
retrieving resort units lost to permanent residents and some may be filled by further use of
the residential stock.
The submitted Economic Needs assessment was reviewed by Council’s external consultant.
Review of the economic needs assessment by Council’s consultant identifies that the
development will provide a product both in terms of traditional residential dwellings and short stay
accommodation that is not at the bottom of the current price points but is also not at the higher
end. The review identifies that due to the limited provision of the proposed type of visitor
accommodation, that a boutique accommodation facility will possibly have benefits for the
immediate region. Importantly the review also notes that the applicant has not demonstrated that
the type of low cost accommodation, outlined in the planning scheme as being preferable for the
site, is overwhelmingly deemed surplus to requirements.
Council’s consultant identifies that whilst the proposal is inconsistent with the zoning of the site
that there is assessed to be reasonable demand and limited comparable supply for what is
proposed.
However, the longer term implications for the site and the ability to provide low cost short stay
accommodation in the region are still a possible future concern in terms of a planning argument.
The loss of low cost, short stay accommodation zoned land is not adequately justified.
Importantly the report concludes that overwhelming demand has not been conclusively provided
for the types of facilities proposed on this site. Whilst it is accepted that there is some
demonstrated need and demand, from an economic perspective, the arguments and ability to
provide overwhelming need and demand is limited.
Traffic
The submitted Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Pekol Traffic and transport includes the
following:
the proposed development is not predicted to significantly increase peak hour traffic
generation over the approved use;
the traffic movements associated with the development are not expected to have a
significant impact on the operation of the local road network and no additional upgrade
works would be required to mitigate the impact of the development.
The submitted report and traffic impact associated with the proposed development was reviewed
by Council’s external consultant. The consultant’s comments include:
From an overall traffic impact perspective, the proposed development is consistent with
previous allowances for traffic generated by the accommodation component of the site
The applicant has appropriately demonstrated that a 12.5m HRV (which is an appropriate
design vehicle) is able to satisfactory manoeuvre within and through the site. The proposal
would thus appropriately accommodate delivery vehicles and refuse collection vehicles.
Page 47 of 128
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalVery large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.