It’s no surprise that major players like Stayz are now on the news commenting on Noosa’s proposed new Plan. The Queensland Government has been slow to act on regulating short term accommodation and if what’s happened in other states and countries is anything to go by the letting platforms are willing to spend big dollars flexing their muscles and lobbying to make sure the process stays slow and that nothing stands in the way of their profits.
Mayor Wellington and Councillors Stockwell, Wilkie and Glasgow introduced a surprise into the mix last week that caught those big players off guard. The letting platforms have been quick to realise this Noosa move might just catch on and other councils may follow suit, so they’re now in damage control mode.
The new draft Noosa Plan proposes that short term letting of entire premises will no longer be a consistent use in low density residential areas, so unless there is a long standing existing use as short term accommodation anyone in a low density zone who wants to enter the short term accommodation market will have to spend hefty dollars for a development application that is probably not going to succeed.
In essence that means what’s there now can stay but there will be no expansion of short term letting of whole premises in low density residential areas. This may in the long term result in a reduction if existing use rights are allowed to expire. However this may not be a bad thing, and may also be a necessary adjustment. A local real estate agent recently suggested there is currently an oversupply as many people saw potential earnings and moved into provision.
The new rules are clearly aimed at stopping the expansion of whole houses in low density residential zones being run as tourist accommodation businesses. Traditional bed and breakfast with the host on site and letting of premises for less than 60 days and four occurrences in a year (e.g. while away on holiday, or for Christmas, Easter or the Tri) will still be allowed without a development application.
The main arguments against the new zoning rules rely on two basic premises, both of which are primarily about financial impacts. Firstly it’s argued that the new rules may have an effect on property prices, and in this regard may disadvantage some owners more than others, or that it will reduce the profits of real estate agents selling to investors.
Secondly, a libertarian approach suggests owners should be able to treat their house and its neighbourhood as a commodity they can use to make money whenever and however they want, notwithstanding that it affects their neighbours. Both these arguments are usually coupled with the statements that ‘tourists spend money’ therefore it’s good for the community, or that more tourism means more jobs.
Those worried about dwindling tourist numbers or investment properties might consider that the new Parkridge development has been zoned for tourist accommodation; that population growth in South East Queensland will ensure we are not short of tourist visitation; and STA’s will still be a consistent use in other residential zonings.
In terms of tourist dollars it should also be pointed out that permanent residents also spend money, and that many of the existing STA’s in residential areas are owned by out-of-town investors so the tourism accommodation dollars are drained away from the community.
The main arguments supporting the new rules also rely on two basic premises. Firstly residential communities that are zoned low density are primarily for long term living by locals, and that providing housing for locals and protecting the amenity of local communities and neighbourhoods are more important goals than tourist dollars or the desire for some individuals or businesses to make money from tourism or selling real estate to out of town investors. This relies on the premise that permanent residents and holiday makers have fundamentally different requirements and activity patterns, making them incompatible as neighbours, which is apparently borne out by the large volume of complaints and comments Council receives from residents about STA’s.
Secondly, stopping the unregulated expansion of tourist accommodation in the shire goes some small way towards limiting the growth of tourism and the demands this growth is imposing on infrastructure and on the amenity of the place for those who live here.
I’m someone who will probably be financially disadvantaged by the new rules. I live next door to two short stay rentals that will continue to operate, and while they are currently reasonably well managed there are no guarantees for the future and I will still have many of the attendant problems with none of the financial benefits or future potential.
My property will probably lose value, and should I chose to sell the pool of buyers will be diminished because investors will leave the market in my area. The sky might even fall according to some real estate agents, but there are bigger things than money; things like community safety, values and pride, having kids know who lives in the neighbourhood, knowing you can get a good night’s sleep without worrying about holidaymakers next door who are out to get the best outdoor, late night fun every week night; there’s knowing and caring for the people around you, looking after the local park, making sure a lost dog gets back to its owner, supporting the local footy team or the volunteer firefighters; the fabric of community. All these things are lost when we turn our neighbourhoods into a giant hotel for strangers and put money before anything else.
A line needs to be drawn somewhere. It’s an imperfect line because of the existing rights law and because some people will be advantaged or disadvantaged more than others, but then some people and neighbourhoods are already suffering the consequences of there being no rules, and more people will suffer if there’s no regulation.
There are winners and losers in every decision and Councils have the difficult role of deciding on the best and fairest outcome for the community, not just the winners or the losers or those wishing to make a buck. As one of the potential losers I’m prepared to say I think community values are bigger than the effect on me as an individual and that’s what should be driving Council’s determinations in devising a new plan.
It’s been argued that a new set of local laws will provide enough regulation of existing and future short term accommodation. I’m yet to see them, but however well they are drafted I doubt they will cover the myriad of situations we’ve faced over the past years as neighbours of STA properties or whether Council will have the resources to adequately police the new laws. They might go some way towards making things better for neighbours, but they can never be the whole story about protecting residential neighbourhoods from encroaching tourism businesses.
I am thankful Noosa Council is attempting to do something to limit short term accommodation in low density residential areas. It’s a brave move and there’ll be more than the locals who will have something to say about it, but I hope it comes off. I’m pretty sure that most people don’t want their neighbourhoods turned into hotels and I hope they stand up and support this proposal.
