The ongoing saga of the Mt Buffalo Chalet
Why would you want to change this ….
To this?
Well, if you could get it for nothing, I guess you would!
I am not the slightest bit surprised (or upset) that the State Government has rejected the proposal put forward by local consortium Mt Buffalo Community Enterprise Ltd (MBCE) for a $51 million conversion of the Mt Buffalo Chalet into a rather uninspiring and over-ambitious 99-room hotel/resort. I think the plan was very flawed.
Seriously, have a look at the ‘commercial in confidence’ concept and business plans now fully on display at MCBE’s website. Make sure you click on the ‘fly through’ and I’m sure you’ll agree with me that this was basically a total rebuild with very little of the original chalet to be left intact. And, according to the business plan, MBCE was seeking to fund the $51 million of demolition and new works as follows:
- State Government contribution: $33 million
- Federal Government contribution: $12 million
- Capital raised by selling shares to the public: $6 million
- Capital invested by MBCE Ltd: NIL
Yep, that’s right, this consortium was proposing to put none of its own money into what they claim would be a ‘financially viable’ enterprise yet, presumably, the 16 foundation shareholders would all gain a rather valuable asset, not to mention the lion’s share of the trading profits (if any could be made).
Look, I know we all want the Chalet to be restored and opened to the public, but the reality is it’s never been a viable accommodation centre and the best bet is for the government to simply put a few million into restoration works, let out the cafe and the bar to an operator and then set up a NOT-FOR-PROFIT company to run tours of the building. I’ve said it all before and I’ll say it again:
Forget about the accommodation side and just keep it as an historic building for day trippers.
Keep it simple.
Problem solved.
.
Promoting 'Beautiful Bright'.
Click 
There are other options which have been canvassed before with you. Firstly, I agree that the proposed development by MBCE is over the top and I cannot blame the State Government for saying “No”.
In my opinion, as one who has stayed at the chalet several times, the old girl has a special charm. Sure the rooms as they are now probably rate around 1 Star, but that’s not to say that improvements cannot be made along with the appropriate investment in mains electricity which for a start would significally reduce running costs. The last lessees were paying around $50K per month for diesel which would be more like $75K per month at today’s prices.
The real kicker would be the construction of the mooted Mt Buffalo Skyway (whatever happened to that proposal?). People today seek special experiences when on holiday and the combination of travelling by gondola then staying at a sympathetically restored 100 y.o. chalet would be a boon for our region.
Noel, I seriously doubt that trying to upgrade the old rooms into something commercially acceptable to today’s customers is a realistic proposition for any developer/investor. And connection to the electricity grid is estimated at $11.5 million. Then there’s the sewerage issue – that’d also require $millions to be spent if it’s going to be reused for accommodation.
You’re looking at a minimum cost of around $20 million before the doors could be reopened and then you’ve got to hope that there’s still a large enough market for people wanting to stay in what is your old style guest house. There’s not much to do up there so I doubt you’d get many people staying for like a whole week in the non-winter periods (and even in winter – there’s no skiing, remember?).
Yes, the gondola would help to improve short stays but again you’re looking at another $20-$30 million investment and there’s no prospect of that
pipe dreamidea going any further anytime soon. If the Chalet is to be a viable accommodation centre (something it’s never been) it needs to stand on its own two feet and not rely on something as unlikely as the gondola to make it work. It also requires a massive investment and a huge dose of good luck (or foolhardiness) if they think they can even get it up to an occupancy rate of 35-40 %, which would be the minimum break even, I’d suggest.But if it were to reopen as simply a cafe, a bar and an historic building for public viewing then that would certainly make it a real tourist attraction for daytrippers staying in the towns below … which would be of far greater benefit to our local economy than having people staying up there. And that’s all achievable within 12 months in my opinion.