Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Canberra’s most creative
residential property specialists

A hotel for the airport

By johnboy 24 October 2013 47

The ABC has word on plans out at Snowtown for a hotel to join their legoland collection.

The Canberra Airport will build a four-star, 180-room hotel to help attract international flights to the capital.

The hotel would be built between the airport and the Brindabella Business Park, five-minutes walk from the terminal.

The airport would build and own the hotel, but hopes to attract a private operator to run it.

It would have a four to four-and-a-half star rating, and include conference, restaurant and bar facilities.

Steve Byron’s the luckiest man alive, we thought we had fun getting politicians to build their dream city with lego but out at the airport they get to do it for realsies!


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
47 Responses to
A hotel for the airport
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Chop71 11:48 am 30 Oct 13

Rather than joining the mob in airport bashing, I think the new airport is brilliant!!!

…. and when fully completed, if we have the opportunity for international flights we will all be better off.

IrishPete 11:42 am 30 Oct 13

breda said :

IP, there is no Federal payroll tax, and as a privately owned company operating in the ACT they pay the same Territory company taxes as everybody else. Since they are a large employer across their many ventures, I imagine it is a hefty amount, which takes some of the burden off individual ratepayers.

Public sector bodies, so beloved by many readers here as desirable employers for the Territory, are exempt.

Whydo people keep telling me what I already said? Anyway, this book (hopfeully the link works properly http://books.google.com.au/books?id=2RBv66RWYHQC&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=canberra+airport+payroll+tax&source=bl&ots=c5wtjqrUhf&sig=y5WvAPXZ8aclTLqfrPAjmDChRog&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oFRwUvoeztOQBYfdgJgG&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=canberra%20airport%20payroll%20tax&f=false ) suggests that Canberra Airport DOES pay rates.

I would have thought that a business operating on Commonwealth land would be outside the ACT’s jurisdiction for payroll tax too, but perhaps that assumption is wrong. I wonder does the ACT get the GST from transactions in the airport precinct, or does that get pocketed by the Feds?

IP

JC 11:24 am 30 Oct 13

breda said :

IP, there is no Federal payroll tax, and as a privately owned company operating in the ACT they pay the same Territory company taxes as everybody else. Since they are a large employer across their many ventures, I imagine it is a hefty amount, which takes some of the burden off individual ratepayers.

Public sector bodies, so beloved by many readers here as desirable employers for the Territory, are exempt.

But they should be in locations of the governments choosing paying rates and everything else.

Office buildings (except airport/airline related) and shopping centres (except at the terminal for the benefit of airline passengers), hardware stores, swim schools etc should not be built on airport land, just because there is a planning regulation loophole. Simple as that.

breda 10:36 am 30 Oct 13

IP, there is no Federal payroll tax, and as a privately owned company operating in the ACT they pay the same Territory company taxes as everybody else. Since they are a large employer across their many ventures, I imagine it is a hefty amount, which takes some of the burden off individual ratepayers.

Public sector bodies, so beloved by many readers here as desirable employers for the Territory, are exempt.

IrishPete 11:06 am 29 Oct 13

Mark of Sydney said :

Sorry, I don’t get it. The airport is privately owned. Only the Commonwealth is exempt from ACT government taxes. As far as I know, the other organisations at the airport, including the airport operator, pay comparable rates and taxes to the ACT Government as other building owners and employers do elsewhere in the Territory. So how is the ACT community subsidising the airport and its tenants?

Others have answered – Commonwealth land means no rates. Also, if ACT has them, no developer contributions for infrastructure. I presume both of these apply to the whole retail area and Brindabella Business Park too.

I wonder how they pay payroll tax, and to whom (ACT or Feds?).

IP

johnboy 11:03 am 29 Oct 13

Mark of Sydney said :

In any event, the whole argument about the airport precinct is now pointless. The offices and shops are not about to disappear. Let’s make the best of it rather than moan about how it should have been.

If you’ve been dragged down an alley and are being sexually assaulted are you equally as relaxed?

“Let’s just enjoy the reaming rather than moan about how we ended up here?”

JC 10:40 am 29 Oct 13

Mark of Sydney said :

Sorry, I don’t get it. The airport is privately owned. Only the Commonwealth is exempt from ACT government taxes. As far as I know, the other organisations at the airport, including the airport operator, pay comparable rates and taxes to the ACT Government as other building owners and employers do elsewhere in the Territory. So how is the ACT community subsidising the airport and its tenants?

It is commonwealth land, so no rates to the ACT. It does however pay payroll tax and does contribute to the community.

There is also the opportunity lost to the ACT government and it’s rate payers through the devaluation in commercial land elsewhere in Canberra (how many office buildings have been built in recent years?) and the lack of sales via the flooding of office space on the market by the airport simply due to a loop hole that exempts them from planning controls, a loop hole that was put in place to allow the airport to develop as an airport, not as a town centre. But guess town centres make more money than an airport.

JC 10:36 am 29 Oct 13

Mark of Sydney said :

No, the lack of transport to the airport is not due to the airport precinct hosting offices and shops. Without the offices and shops there is no way there would be any public transport to the airport. ACTION provides services to the airport precinct because it’s an employment centre. Those services can also be used by airline passengers.

In any event, the whole argument about the airport precinct is now pointless. The offices and shops are not about to disappear. Let’s make the best of it rather than moan about how it should have been.

Oh yes it is. If those buildings had of been built elsewhere in the town centres rather at the fringe of the city it would be a shit load easier to provide buses. Just look at appropriate places, Woden, Belconnen, the City, Gungahlin, Tuggeranong, all town centres that get very regular buses because they are TOWN centres.

The airport is not a town centre, it is not in a location where a town centre would be anyway, so it gets end of line bus services. Would be very difficult to give it even the same level of frequency as say other non town centre employment centres such as Russell and Barton due to georgraphy, no through routes, no possibility of through routes and certainly not a hub.

Now whilst you may well disagree about the Territory plan the simple fact is it is there to help the city to develop in a planned and controlled manner. The developments at the airport very simply are inappropriate, have distorted the plan, have distorted the commercial office market all to the benefit of one family. Sure they are there and nothing can be done about it, doesn’t stop us having a debate about any future developments, such as the hotel or future expansion, nor the effect this has had on the city as a whole.

Mark of Sydney 9:38 am 29 Oct 13

IrishPete said :

Mark of Sydney said :

I think you understand wrong. The ACT can’t tax the Commonwealth, so Commonwealth land is exempt from rates, and the Commonwealth doesn’t pay payroll tax to the ACT (nor does the Commonwealth pay such taxes elsewhere in Australia), but the airport is owned privately. I can’t be sure without further research, but I doubt whether the airport or its tenants are entitled to any tax concessions as a consequence of operating at the airport as against elsewhere in the ACT.

With a personal interest in better transport options to the airport, I recently raised with ACTION the issue of bus services to the airport as part of the consultation on the proposed changes to its network. For what it’s worth, the ACTION person told me that 1. his understanding was that the private airport bus service loses lots of money, and 2. ACTION was planning to reopen discussions with the airport operator on the possibility of routing a proposed new all-day service between the city and the airport closer to the terminal. The proposed new airport hotel makes this all the more important, for the hotel’s employees if not for its guests.

I’m with breda on this discussion. There are some seriously odd obessions on display here, not the least about the supposedly wicked airport owners. Okay, they may have taken advantage of development opportunities not available elsewhere in Canberra as a consequence of the way airports in Australia are regulated, but is the result all that bad? Seems to me they have built a first-class gateway to the city, and an office environment that’s a big improvement on most of the town centres.

The only thing lacking is decent public transport.

Hang on, I understand wrong, but you then proceed to explain how I am right?

The “only thing lacking” is a contribution in the form of rates and taxes to the ACT Government for the provision of services like roads and public transport.

As an employer itself, does the airport pay payroll tax? Do the private sector organisations based there and on adjacent land pay payroll tax? Not everyone there is a Commonwealth public servant.

If the current public transport is loss-making, that might be because it is so expensive, goes to the wrong places, and is infrequent and starts and stops well after and before the flights begin and end. Rumour has long been that the airport will not allow Action to operate to it.

Yeah, it’s a nice airport (with expensive parking and no alternatives for many users), but the ACT community is subsidising it indirectly but substantially.

IP

Sorry, I don’t get it. The airport is privately owned. Only the Commonwealth is exempt from ACT government taxes. As far as I know, the other organisations at the airport, including the airport operator, pay comparable rates and taxes to the ACT Government as other building owners and employers do elsewhere in the Territory. So how is the ACT community subsidising the airport and its tenants?

IrishPete 8:53 am 29 Oct 13

Mark of Sydney said :

I think you understand wrong. The ACT can’t tax the Commonwealth, so Commonwealth land is exempt from rates, and the Commonwealth doesn’t pay payroll tax to the ACT (nor does the Commonwealth pay such taxes elsewhere in Australia), but the airport is owned privately. I can’t be sure without further research, but I doubt whether the airport or its tenants are entitled to any tax concessions as a consequence of operating at the airport as against elsewhere in the ACT.

With a personal interest in better transport options to the airport, I recently raised with ACTION the issue of bus services to the airport as part of the consultation on the proposed changes to its network. For what it’s worth, the ACTION person told me that 1. his understanding was that the private airport bus service loses lots of money, and 2. ACTION was planning to reopen discussions with the airport operator on the possibility of routing a proposed new all-day service between the city and the airport closer to the terminal. The proposed new airport hotel makes this all the more important, for the hotel’s employees if not for its guests.

I’m with breda on this discussion. There are some seriously odd obessions on display here, not the least about the supposedly wicked airport owners. Okay, they may have taken advantage of development opportunities not available elsewhere in Canberra as a consequence of the way airports in Australia are regulated, but is the result all that bad? Seems to me they have built a first-class gateway to the city, and an office environment that’s a big improvement on most of the town centres.

The only thing lacking is decent public transport.

Hang on, I understand wrong, but you then proceed to explain how I am right?

The “only thing lacking” is a contribution in the form of rates and taxes to the ACT Government for the provision of services like roads and public transport.

As an employer itself, does the airport pay payroll tax? Do the private sector organisations based there and on adjacent land pay payroll tax? Not everyone there is a Commonwealth public servant.

If the current public transport is loss-making, that might be because it is so expensive, goes to the wrong places, and is infrequent and starts and stops well after and before the flights begin and end. Rumour has long been that the airport will not allow Action to operate to it.

Yeah, it’s a nice airport (with expensive parking and no alternatives for many users), but the ACT community is subsidising it indirectly but substantially.

IP

Mark of Sydney 8:47 am 29 Oct 13

Last line highlights the whole issue really. The lack of transport is because the development at the airport was no done in accordance with the territory plan. If all the office buildings and shops had of been built elsewhere such as the town centres it would not be so bad. Same too with the road network etc etc etc.

No, the lack of transport to the airport is not due to the airport precinct hosting offices and shops. Without the offices and shops there is no way there would be any public transport to the airport. ACTION provides services to the airport precinct because it’s an employment centre. Those services can also be used by airline passengers.

In any event, the whole argument about the airport precinct is now pointless. The offices and shops are not about to disappear. Let’s make the best of it rather than moan about how it should have been.

JC 10:34 pm 28 Oct 13

breda said :

So, JC, can you produce any figures for crime at the airport as opposed to Civic?

A report of someone else “being scared” doesn’t count.

Two points. Safety in numbers. Not sure if you have been to the airport at 4am, but there ain’t that many people out there and the staff carpark for the terminal is a good 400m walk down a track. The car park for the office buildings are also a bit of a hike with few people around.

Second point perception is reality. Didn’t say the airport was more dangerous than the city or any other town centre, just simply the lack of numbers give the perception.

JC 10:32 pm 28 Oct 13

Mark of Sydney said :

I think you understand wrong. The ACT can’t tax the Commonwealth, so Commonwealth land is exempt from rates, and the Commonwealth doesn’t pay payroll tax to the ACT (nor does the Commonwealth pay such taxes elsewhere in Australia), but the airport is owned privately. I can’t be sure without further research, but I doubt whether the airport or its tenants are entitled to any tax concessions as a consequence of operating at the airport as against elsewhere in the ACT.

With a personal interest in better transport options to the airport, I recently raised with ACTION the issue of bus services to the airport as part of the consultation on the proposed changes to its network. For what it’s worth, the ACTION person told me that 1. his understanding was that the private airport bus service loses lots of money, and 2. ACTION was planning to reopen discussions with the airport operator on the possibility of routing a proposed new all-day service between the city and the airport closer to the terminal. The proposed new airport hotel makes this all the more important, for the hotel’s employees if not for its guests.

I’m with breda on this discussion. There are some seriously odd obessions on display here, not the least about the supposedly wicked airport owners. Okay, they may have taken advantage of development opportunities not available elsewhere in Canberra as a consequence of the way airports in Australia are regulated, but is the result all that bad? Seems to me they have built a first-class gateway to the city, and an office environment that’s a big improvement on most of the town centres.

The only thing lacking is decent public transport.

Last line highlights the whole issue really. The lack of transport is because the development at the airport was no done in accordance with the territory plan. If all the office buildings and shops had of been built elsewhere such as the town centres it would not be so bad. Same too with the road network etc etc etc.

Mark of Sydney 7:18 pm 28 Oct 13

IrishPete said :

breda said :

“Wow, a railway station with no trains – about as impressive as an international airport with no international flights.

IP”
——————————————–
Here’s the thing you Moscow/old Beijing style central planners don’t get – it doesn’t matter if they are wrong. Their and their shareholders’ (if any) money is gone, not that of unwitting taxpayers who had no say.

How anyone could claim that the nomenklatura’s “planning ” of Civic, to take just one example, is so brilliant that we ought to defend it, is mind-boggling. Indeed, in keeping with the komissariat’s worldview, having turned central Civic into a wasteland after dark which is a mugger’s paradise – what do they do? Why, they extend it (Bunda Street).

As someone who spends quite a bit of time in Parramatta, I can report exactly the same results there. They closed off a bunch of roads to create what they call is a “plaza”, and it is now a hangout for muggers, junkies and beggars. No-one in their right mind walks around there late at night.

The last remaining healthy artery, Church St, home to dozens of thriving restaurants and bars, and very safe because there are always lots of people and cars around, is now in the council’s sights for closure.

These people have no capacity to learn, because ideology is much more important than results.

Private monopolies sanctioned by government are as bad as any failure of central planning. Canberra should have second airport to compete with SnowTown. They threw out all the flying schools (or priced them out of existence).

Anyway, I understood the Canberra Airport gets all kinds of hidden concessions, such as not paying rates to the ACT Government (I’m not certain of this, but someone on here will know; and other taxes too?), not allowing public transport to go to the airport so they can award a lucrative private contract and so on.

IP

I think you understand wrong. The ACT can’t tax the Commonwealth, so Commonwealth land is exempt from rates, and the Commonwealth doesn’t pay payroll tax to the ACT (nor does the Commonwealth pay such taxes elsewhere in Australia), but the airport is owned privately. I can’t be sure without further research, but I doubt whether the airport or its tenants are entitled to any tax concessions as a consequence of operating at the airport as against elsewhere in the ACT.

With a personal interest in better transport options to the airport, I recently raised with ACTION the issue of bus services to the airport as part of the consultation on the proposed changes to its network. For what it’s worth, the ACTION person told me that 1. his understanding was that the private airport bus service loses lots of money, and 2. ACTION was planning to reopen discussions with the airport operator on the possibility of routing a proposed new all-day service between the city and the airport closer to the terminal. The proposed new airport hotel makes this all the more important, for the hotel’s employees if not for its guests.

I’m with breda on this discussion. There are some seriously odd obessions on display here, not the least about the supposedly wicked airport owners. Okay, they may have taken advantage of development opportunities not available elsewhere in Canberra as a consequence of the way airports in Australia are regulated, but is the result all that bad? Seems to me they have built a first-class gateway to the city, and an office environment that’s a big improvement on most of the town centres.

The only thing lacking is decent public transport.

c_c™ 6:53 pm 28 Oct 13

Mess said :

c_c™ said :

Mess said :

Word has it it will be a Novotel, Rydges or a Vibe. All decent 4 – 4.5 star brands.

You’re kidding. Novotel sucks, they charge as much as a five star hotel in most cities!!! The only thing worse than Novotel is ironically Sofitel, the supposed premium brand.

Every Novotel I’ve stayed at has been fine. The Novotel on Collins in Melbourne is better than many 5 star hotels I’ve stayed in.

Yeah Novotel on Collins has always had a decent reputation, but each time I compared the rate, they were within $20 a night of the 5 star places nearby.

Novotel Darling Harbour has reportedly improved since the reno in recent years, it was getting really shabby. But again, the pricing is nutty.

For comparison, I picked a random weekend (Nov 22-24) and compared NDH to the Westin, a 5 star regarded as one of the best in Sydney on TripAdvisor.

Novotel per night $426, Westin per night $434 (there’s at least 3 other 5 star places who charge around the same)

Now the Novotel DH has improved, but for only an $8 difference per night, why on earth would you pass up a 5 star in the CBD?

IrishPete 6:20 pm 28 Oct 13

breda said :

So, JC, can you produce any figures for crime at the airport as opposed to Civic?

A report of someone else “being scared” doesn’t count.

Fear of crime is as important a measure as crime itself.

From the ACT Police crime stats page http://www.police.act.gov.au/crime-and-safety/crime-statistics.aspx it looks like they may not collect stats for the airport. Given it’s not ACT land, that would figure.

IP

breda 5:20 pm 28 Oct 13

“Canberra should have second airport to compete with SnowTown. ”
———————————————-
You mean, a government-mandated second airport? So that they could both go broke?

Who would decide which one gets the traffic? Who would pay for the new airport? Hey, it’s only a few hundred million we are talking about here! Not our money, presumably. The Tooth Fairy’s money, perhaps, although the TF at least leaves a coin under our pillow.

This kind of infantile “waah! I don’t like the way the world is and everyone should pay until I’m happy” stuff is part of the working day in a childcare centre. In debating politics among grownups, it’s just pathetic.

breda 5:09 pm 28 Oct 13

So, JC, can you produce any figures for crime at the airport as opposed to Civic?

A report of someone else “being scared” doesn’t count.

IrishPete 5:08 pm 28 Oct 13

breda said :

“Wow, a railway station with no trains – about as impressive as an international airport with no international flights.

IP”
——————————————–
Here’s the thing you Moscow/old Beijing style central planners don’t get – it doesn’t matter if they are wrong. Their and their shareholders’ (if any) money is gone, not that of unwitting taxpayers who had no say.

How anyone could claim that the nomenklatura’s “planning ” of Civic, to take just one example, is so brilliant that we ought to defend it, is mind-boggling. Indeed, in keeping with the komissariat’s worldview, having turned central Civic into a wasteland after dark which is a mugger’s paradise – what do they do? Why, they extend it (Bunda Street).

As someone who spends quite a bit of time in Parramatta, I can report exactly the same results there. They closed off a bunch of roads to create what they call is a “plaza”, and it is now a hangout for muggers, junkies and beggars. No-one in their right mind walks around there late at night.

The last remaining healthy artery, Church St, home to dozens of thriving restaurants and bars, and very safe because there are always lots of people and cars around, is now in the council’s sights for closure.

These people have no capacity to learn, because ideology is much more important than results.

Private monopolies sanctioned by government are as bad as any failure of central planning. Canberra should have second airport to compete with SnowTown. They threw out all the flying schools (or priced them out of existence).

Anyway, I understood the Canberra Airport gets all kinds of hidden concessions, such as not paying rates to the ACT Government (I’m not certain of this, but someone on here will know; and other taxes too?), not allowing public transport to go to the airport so they can award a lucrative private contract and so on.

IP

JC 4:36 pm 28 Oct 13

breda said :

“Wow, a railway station with no trains – about as impressive as an international airport with no international flights.

IP”
——————————————–
Here’s the thing you Moscow/old Beijing style central planners don’t get – it doesn’t matter if they are wrong. Their and their shareholders’ (if any) money is gone, not that of unwitting taxpayers who had no say.

How anyone could claim that the nomenklatura’s “planning ” of Civic, to take just one example, is so brilliant that we ought to defend it, is mind-boggling. Indeed, in keeping with the komissariat’s worldview, having turned central Civic into a wasteland after dark which is a mugger’s paradise – what do they do? Why, they extend it (Bunda Street).

As someone who spends quite a bit of time in Parramatta, I can report exactly the same results there. They closed off a bunch of roads to create what they call is a “plaza”, and it is now a hangout for muggers, junkies and beggars. No-one in their right mind walks around there late at night.

The last remaining healthy artery, Church St, home to dozens of thriving restaurants and bars, and very safe because there are always lots of people and cars around, is now in the council’s sights for closure.

These people have no capacity to learn, because ideology is much more important than results.

What and the airport is any better? Yeah right. Wouldn’t want to be working out there late at night and have to walk back to the carpark in darkness. Used to scare me when my wife worked out there with 4am starts and 11pm finishes. (not the same day of course)

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site