The Draft New Noosa Plan allows the provision of short term accommodation (STA) across the shire, so long as the owner is present, and precludes the operation of party houses across the shire. The letting of whole houses for tourist accommodation has been confined to the beachside areas of the shire on one side of an arbitrary line drawn on the shire map, and this is possibly the most contentious issue in the draft plan.
There are both positive and negative implications from short term accommodation (STA). The positives include providing a diverse range of accommodation options for holiday makers and jobs and income for local residents. The negatives include reduced residential amenity, community disruption, risk of over-tourism and the impacts on housing availability and affordability
For Noosa Council the current lack of regulation and transparency presents issues with infrastructure and service planning, resident complaints regarding disruption, and a lack of financial contribution from STA’s towards infrastructure and tourism costs.
It’s hard to see how the solution offered in the draft plan impacts on the negative aspects of STA (except by confining them to specific areas) or how it resolves the issues presented by the current lack of regulation and transparency. What’s being proposed is a free for all, with no regulation, in the most desirable beachside suburbs of the shire. All the attendant problems of transparency and lack of regulation, community disruption, lack of contribution to infrastructure, and the risk of over tourism remain and are exacerbated by the concentration into specific areas of the shire.
The drawing of an arbitrary line sets up a spatial division between tourists and locals, between those who can (let out their house) and those who can’t; between areas that are given over to tourism and areas that are not.
Although it could be argued that this is appropriate market segmentation, such a position accepts that houses in beachside residential areas are commercial commodities and houses elsewhere are not. Is that Council’s intention here? There’s no doubt that, over time, with this demarcation in place, living in the beachside suburbs would become more and more untenable and unaffordable. To give over all the arguably best, and certainly most expensive, residential real estate in Noosa to commercial interests, is to in effect force local workers to live elsewhere, and perhaps, over time, to exclude them from the recreational opportunities living by the beach provides.
“Tourism gentrification, enabled and encouraged by short-term rental platforms such as Airbnb, has significant potential to mutate how a neighbourhood is used and by whom, including loss of services which low income residents rely on for their everyday life, such as access to public space and affordable services” – from the discussion paper prepared for Noosa Council on STA’s
It is important to recognize how isolating STA’s to the coastal strip will, over time, contribute to segregation and inequality. It can have profound consequences for affordability, and how easily individuals can access jobs, shops, activities, green spaces and the beach, and profound consequences to how the community perceives and experiences the shire.
Just what is Council trying achieve by saying one neighbour can take advantage of economic opportunities offered by STA’s and another, perhaps just across the road, cannot? Creating distinct zones that work against a diverse and inclusive community brings injustices into play and sets up a situation of haves and have-nots. Residential segregation has never been a good thing, and is usually indicative of wider injustice.
The proposed division of the Shire doesn’t resolve any of the bigger issues like the potential for over-tourism with attendant lack of contribution to infrastructure and services or amenity issues for neighbours of STA’s.
If Council really wants to address these issues why not make STA subject to a development application across the shire? This would give Council the necessary tools to regulate aspects of STA, collect fees to contribute to infrastructure and services, be a more transparent solution allowing Council to keep track of growth and gentrification, and would be a more equitable solution for residents, giving the same opportunities to all.
Under State Planning law existing STA’s outside the zone can continue to operate into perpetuity, without regulation, and without a DA, so only new STA’s would be affected.
Setting up defacto residential accommodation enclaves within the current tourist hotspots, the so-called “blue zones”, and making property owners living in other areas, often just across the road, go through the expensive MCU process would be creating STA apartheid. In one fell swoop of beauracratic and planning insanity, Council enters the realm of social engineering as once vibrant residential/tourism mix zones become seasonal ghettos, languishing without many people in the low season. In other words, fractured neighbourhoods where identity with place and community has been lost.
As Judy says, why not require STA operators letting whole houses across the shire subject to development applications? This way, Council would have the necessary tools to regulate the industry, create a level playing field with accommodation providers who have huge investments in licensed establishments, and who have jumped through the hoops to meet safety standards, and provide the required parking spaces, etc. I have no doubt that this would stimulate the less-regulated, owner-occupied STA sector in meeting demand for non-resort accommodation, and be more like the original idea of providers such as AirBnB which was to have owner-operators at the core of this new industry.
Judy and Rod nail the problems with the Council’s proposed approach – and they are significant.
Inclusion and fairness should be the guiding community principles. And no scheme adopted by the Council should be economically punitive on proponents.
From my understanding there are already codes of conduct in place for short term letting and I can’t see how council can impose restrictions on bona fide owners.
Hi John. There are no codes of conduct in Queensland. Some letting agencies have talked about developing a voluntary code, but basically it’s a regulation free area. The State govt. can develop regulations and local councils in some places have regulated STA’s with local laws.
Restrictions can be placed on ‘bona fide owners’ through zoning. Eg the draft plan doesn’t allow party houses in any part of the shire.
The new plan proposes a DA or MCU for whole STA houses outside the ‘blue’ (coastal) zone – and through that Council can regulate such things as parking, numbers, safety, amenity of the neighbourhood, etc. and recoup some of cost of providing tourism infrastructure if owners want to set up STA. I think that’s a good thing, but I think it should be shire wide. Why have a free for all in the coastal suburbs and place restrictions on those living across the road?
As Rod has said above it’s a fine piece of social engineering that’s being proposed in the plan, a kind of arpatheid, that puts local residents last in all the coastal suburbs and imposes restrictions on the basis of arbitrarily drawn lines in otherwise identically zonesd residential areas.
If you decide to STL your home currently and have not applied for an MCU you are operating without codes. Registered B&Bs have had to meet fire regulations and parking codes to name just two. It’s a bit Unfair, under the current proposals, to just allow laisez faire accommodation businesses in the current ‘blue zones (without safety or other regulations) while expecting property owners nearby to apply for code approval to run an identical business.