PlanningAlerts

8 Comments

Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

1. To whom it may concern,

   I am one of the owners of a 24/7 facility that is approximately 400mtrs from the current application for this site. Furthermore there is another 24/7 facility due to open approximately 200 mtrs from this site in the next month or so. I have been an owner operator for many years and also a consultant to the industry in general. The proliferation of 24/7 facilities is placing ever increasing demands on each facility to remain financially viable. I come from a family of Town Planners and have had the advantage to assess the feasibility of each location. Despite the difference in name the model is essentially the same and quite frankly the corridor of population serviced by the existing clubs cannot sustain yet another club particularly in such close proximity. I realise that Council perhaps views this as progress but ultimately all it will do is put more pressure on each existing facility. We now have another centre opening in Brightwater which we have also been servicing previously.

   We are strong supporter of local community businesses and sponsor amongst others the Kawana Surf Club - we also provide free membership to other young sporting representatives. All of which is called into question when every membership is vital given the competition. This is not healthy competition and I strongly object to such an approval for another centre.

2. I am a current owner of a 24/7 facility, and have been for the past 3 years, during which time I have seen the steady decline in trading due to an influx of these facilities flooding the market. There currently exists 4 of these same facilities, offering the same services, within a 5km radius and 2 more are due to be added, with the addition of this facility there would be 7 within that radius. The current population cannot support these facilities and the existing businesses will suffer.

   I also employ 6 staff members whose positions would have to be assessed and cut back due to the addition of yet another same type 24/7 facility. I am a supporter of the Mooloolaba Surf Club, and local Primary Schools, also other local sporting junior clubs and swim clubs, I also sponsor the local emergency services and other local charities, and we are a major sponsor of Headspace Youth Mental Health Foundation We also offer rehabilitation services to elderly or disabled persons free of charge and are equipped for persons with disabilities. Sadly all of these things would have to reassessed if more competition was added to the now already overloaded market.

   I also strongly disagree to the approval of another centre as the current facilities more than adequately supply the area and appeal to Council consider not supporting this application.

3. The basic due diligence of a fitness centre can assume that a certain percentage of the population within a short radius will join a fitness centre whether that be for classes, general training etc.. Suburbs within 10km of the coast have proven to achieve even less than that within the population. Unfortunately persons buying into their first fitness centre are not being completely informed and are jumping into these ventures unaware and panicking soon after when they are struggling to pay their tenancy lease. Gym owners in Metropolitan areas who are now branching into the coastal areas are learning this lesson all too late, that there is even less a percentage of the population joining a fitness centre.
   
   The oversaturation of Fitness Centres is now shown in the US and across Europe where fitness centres are collapsing as fast as they were established. I respectfully respect that Councils considering these new applications take some responsibility in realising this is just not healthy competition and that the Sunshine Coast is now at the point of some collapses.
   
   Oversaturation of fitness centres within an area will not bring cheaper membership prices for the public as the model would only then need to realise an even larger membership base to break even for the clubs. There are families behind these small centres which would more than likely be on the verge of losing their livelihood and more if the current trend continues. These new applications should be viewed with some empathy towards current owners/workers/families.
   
   I would suggest current owners of Fitness Centres in areas such as the one in hand lodge a formal objection through the formal channels to their local council.

4. I would just like to add an opinion to this discussion. I was under the belief that a Town planner/ council department was given guidelines and information prepared by numerous official government departments (e.g Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)) for the approval process of town planning and or permits and permissions.

   With this in mind I thought we were all paying to the council to ensure that we were not just legally permitted to build and meeting all requirements but also within the guidelines of Acts such as "Purpose of the Fair Trading Act 1989 (Qld)" where I would imagine recommendations on fair trade would be legally binding.

   The point I'm building to here is that I believe there must be a requirement to look into statistics released from the ABS on what is feasible within the general population and if those figures would show a disadvantage to already operating local businesses then the responsibility and duty of care should rest with the appropriate authorities on whether similar business models can enter the area.

   With this in mind there has been released figures showing that as an industry standard we know that we can effect serviceability to 16-18% of a population within a 8-12 minute drive of our locations.

   Would this not be a factor in the town planning?

   Should I give up on my dreams of owning a Health club as an owner operator because a company with more money then me can afford to setup beside me and wait out my eventual collapse?

   I know the points I'm raising here are best suited for the office of fair trading but I would just like anyone from council whom may be reading this to know a concerned - born and breed - local business owners opinion.

5. I have been involved in the 24 hours gym industry for the past 5 years, during that time I have worked in these facilities in various capacities, one of which was Floor manager. In this role I learnt a lot about the mechanics of the 24-hour model. The rule of thumb for any 24-hour Franchise is to aim for 3.5 to 4 members per square metre.

   For a gym of 576 m2 the best possible economic result would be to have capacity membership which in this case would be around 2020 or so members. 24 hour facilities also work very hard to get to their break even membership numbers in the first few months of presales and opening the gym doors, typically a gym of size 576 m2 the break even membership would be around half of the capacity membership, which in this case would around the 1000 membership mark.

   On the data that Anytime has produced to support their application they have modeled a gym in Victoria that has membership numbers of 750, stating an average door check in rate of 111 per day. On a break-even membership level the average check ins using Anytime’s data would be closer to 150 check ins, however as the membership base grows, this will increase and most likely double.

   Anytime’s Fitness gym model also runs Fitness classes morning and afternoons (typically these classes are run in the mornings to enable people with school age children to attend after school drop off and before midday and in the afternoons when most people are knocking off from their day job), this floor plan has rooms available for such classes, this would mean at peak traffic times on the Nicklin way 10 to 20 people will be looking for parking to attend these classes, as well as the other members who just use the gym facilities.

   In brief, my opinion is that in the event of vehicles waiting for car spaces to become available within the centre, it would only take a matter of two or three vehicles to back up and block the entrance to the site. With delivery trucks also utilising the car park, the situation is compounded. As these vehicles back up onto the Nicklin Way, the shoulder of the roadway is not wide enough for those other vehicles behind to manoeuvre out of the flow of traffic coming from behind on the corner of this stretch of the Nicklin Way. Another factor to this is vehicles attempting to either negotiate a park on the shoulder of the road, or enter back onto the Nicklin way from those car parks. Being that the speed limit is 70km/hr. further exacerbates the situation. This would certainly cause further congestion on the Nicklin way and quite likely regular accidents. The shoulder of the road here is only one car width and not wide enough to angle out to enable a better view of traffic.
   In the event of these members not being able to get a park they will then try to re-enter the traffic and maneuver across to the centre of the Nicklin way to be able to perform a U turn, at the Jessica Boulevard intersection (which in the current traffic situation is almost impossible), so they can park in the car parks opposite, which then carries the added concern of these vehicles waiting at the driveway and banking up the traffic behind them to re-enter the traffic to travel across 3 lanes to perform the U turn, and when finding car parking in the Private car parks opposite then trying to cross 6 lanes of Traffic to get the gym.

   As Council does take some responsibility in relation to traffic management with sites that have some impact on traffic safety, it would seem that this situation also warrants the same attention. “

6. not enough car-parks for a business this size.
   traffic congestion is overly heavy now at Jessica blvd and Nicklin way intersection. in peak times i wait 2 sometimes 3 traffic cycles just to do a right hand turn

7. To whom it may concern,
   It has come to my attention there is an application in Local Council for a high volume traffic business to be located on Nicklin Way.
   Turning right off Nicklin on to Jessica now tests the patience of even the most patient driver not to mention the possibility of more accidents in peek times.
   This area is not equipped well enough to handle high volumes and living in Minyama myself this will be a problem that I am sure you will hear more of down the track.

8. Dear Chris,

   I was recently CC into an email that was a response from you with local
   residents concerns of Proposed gym at location 6/26 Nicklin Way. In your
   response you state that none of the surrounding businesses have made
   objections to the Proposal. Can I please call your attention to the your
   website where there are objections from Lot 2 & 3 Four Futures pty Ltd and
   Lot 4 John and Glenwyn Sheahan which were made via Town Planner Emmett
   Herps, and also Lot 5 Matthew Bartholomew who owns Bed Mart which is the
   adjacent building. Therefore 4 out of the 6 lots have placed objections,
   which should be of concern to you, as you have clearly over looked them.

   You also stated in your email that there was an anonymous flyer sent around,
   who you stated was from a nearby gym business owner. That in fact is not
   correct and that flyer was distributed by local Neighbourhood watch whom is
   run by John Harrison another concerned resident who has objected, that flyer
   was also picked up by a Local water front real estate agent and also
   distributed by him via email.

   I am also asking the question as to where the data is stating that the noise
   will be directed outwards towards Nicklin way, as you have stated in other
   emails as I cannot see any factual information on the application to state
   that, and note that there are quite a few concerned residents living behind
   that area who will be affected.

   Lastly to make a fair and just decision on this application, I and all other
   residents and surrounding business owners would assume that Council takes
   into account all of the objections supplied to them by local rate payers and
   makes a decision on what is best for the local community. With that in mind
   I am appealing to you to please take all of the objections into account,
   these are made be concerned local residents and business owners and deserve councils attention.

   Kind Regards

   Daryll Leabourn.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Sunshine Coast Regional Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment