Seaworlds New 2006 Attraction

[Chaos-Maniac]

Has any further construction been made yet? Will this 'eye' have any theming to it, or just simply left how it is?

[myk]

It looks finished. Also, I don't think there will be themeing, it's a wheel. According to Nine it will "only stay if it is popular among the guests".

[joz]

Well for those playing along at home, Seaworld's first major ride in over 11 years is now open!

[MickeyD]

Well for those playing along at home, Seaworld's first major ride in over 11 years is now open!

Cool great news! It's certainly eye catching, hehehe BTW the Big wheel going in (one day) in Melbourne will be called "The Southern Star"

[djsupersleuth]

Well, just back from the Gold Coast and enjoyed it thoroughly. Here are some photos of and from the Eye.

[mattcrombie]

Great Photos. I havent got to ride it yet myself. Im gonna try to on Wed.

[Chaos-Maniac]

Wow. Looks fantastic. The view is better than I thought!

[mattcrombie]

The Eye is leaving Seaworld in May. Just to Inform you all.

[smash210]

The Eye is leaving Seaworld in May. Just to Inform you all.

Whats going to happen to that space then. There was talk they might built their own if it was popular enough, do you know if this is true??

[mattcrombie]

On Gold Coast news, they mentioned that Seaworld has sent in request for the Eye to stay permanently, but council have denied it saying its above there 3 story limit, and if they say yes to this for a permanent attraction, it would lead to other company's wanting to build high rises. So Seaworld is trying very hard to keep this, but doesn't look promising.

[myk]

What about that Pivotal Point thing at Aus Fair. That's like, 12 storeys.

[Spotty]

I think thats different due to the fact that its not actually on the spit. So the height restriction may not apply for Aust. Fair.

[Churros]

Well, that is kind of the case. As it stands they are attempting to get permission from the Council, but the Save our Spit association is against it, believing it is an eyesore, or puts the spit in danger. Personally, I really don't think The Eye is going to do anything to harm the spit. I understand why they have a 3 storey limit for buildings in the form of accomodation and whatnot, but all the poor old thing does is spin around ver slowly and give people the oppurtunity to experience the coast in a unique way. As far as its appearance goes, it is actually a very awsome sight when driving along the Aussie Fair side of the Broadwater, but that is just my opinion anyway. Bottom line is if you wanna have a go at it, best thing is to get it before May. Even if they do manage to get permission for it to stay, there will be a few that won't be too happy about the decision.

[Spotty]

I sense we have another LPS situation on our hands where residents will find anything they can to complain about...

[mickey_079]

I sense we have another LPS situation on our hands where residents will find anything they can to complain about...

HAHA! Your so right! SO SO RIGHT! I'm kind of getting sick of whining residents. Have to agree with churros (ohhh that are so nice), its not as if you can see through it, ok understandable if it was a sky scraper, but i mean its a circle, gaps in it!

[dreamworld_rulz]

In defence of the residents. the residents really didn't have leg to stand on as LPS was there before them. However with the eye the residents where there 1st. So in a way the residents really have a leg to stand on.

[MickeyD]

Interesting there aren't any Resident's living on the Spit permanently AT ALL! So god knows who is doing the whinging!! The GCCC have a reputation for being (er um) amongst the most dodgy in Australia and have pushed through all sorts of changes (like building height codes and suburban developments) for the region in recent years often without proper consent of residents. I can't see why they would hold up SW. As said by others I think the eye is a magnificent site for the coast. A true Icon which is something the region has been lacking. Fair enough, a large portion of land on the spit is dedicated to the Environment but most of the Spit is in fact reclaimed. Other than a bit of power usage, The Eye has little impact to the environment it stands on. I hope they get to keep it

[aidan]

MickeyD dont say that it wont distupt the environments, the eye could disgruntle the wind and make it less windy. Nobody wants that. lol.

Edited March 5, 2007 by aidan

[GoGoBoy]

Don't be so quick to jump on the "whinging residents" bandwagon people. I agree that the residents around Luna Park have no right to complain about the noise from Luna Park from any of the rides WITHIN the parks original boundary. However the rides at the subject of current complaints (ie. Ranger/Spider) were only positioned in that particular location in 2004. In 1995 this area was just used as the overflow of the Big Dipper and before that there was nothing there. So in fact a large majority of residents around that area were actually there BEFORE the rides got put there. In that case I think they have all the right to complain. So you have to take it on a case by case basis and get all the facts

Edited March 5, 2007 by GoGoBoy

[mickey_079]

The GCCC have a reputation for being (er um) amongst the most dodgy in Australia

You have never been to cessnock have you?

[Richard]

The Gold Coast City Council faces a pretty interesting problem with this matter. I'm sure they're not taking issue with Sea World wanting to keep the ride or install a new similar one. The real issue is that if they grant permission to Sea World it sets a dangerous precedent where property developers can easily argue for high-rise developments on the spit, and with Sea World given approval for a permanent wheel, the Council would have little ground to stand on. I think it's of paramount importance to the Gold Coast that The Spit remains untouched. The last thing the area needs is an extension of the abomination that is Surfers Paradise towards the north.

[Churros]

There are two major things that I agree with that people have stated so far. The first is that I don't believe that it is unreasonable that local residents complain about noise, etc. However, I don't believe that residents are the ones complaining. The only residentish buildings on the spit are the three resorts, other than that is a really quite unpopulated for the fact that it is being preserved for environmental sustainability purposes. If residents are complaining, it would only be residents who live on the other side of the broadwater, in which case it would only be a visual issue rather than anything associated with noise. The second is that, yes if they permit this construct to remain then it opens the way for other developers to 'ruin' (for the lack of a better word) the spit by building over sized accomodation or commercial buildings. You would have to say though, that a huge wheel and a building like Q1 for example fall in very different categories, and let's not mention the fact that Seaworld is something that has existing on and given much to the Gold Coast region for sometime, which puts them on a different playing field to shot-gun developers that decided the spit will be the next place for a super-structure. The only thing that I cannot say I totally agree with is this "let's preserve The Spit" it is a natural resource argument, when there are certain areas of the spit that are polluted by used needles, protection wrappers and a whole lot of other things that has really made anywhere north of Seaworld in that area really somewhere I stear clear of. I am sorry if this comes as a bad advertisement for the coast. The only thing I do not understand is why the number of people who fight for the Save our Spit idea will vigourisly protest an attraction like The Eye, which is built by an organisation that has committed heavily to improving the experience of staying at the coast, and will construct a safe, family friendly attraction. Meanwhile, other elements of the spit's deterioration (some of which I have only touched upon) seem to slip under the radar.

[Richard]

When it comes to council approval, they simply can't and won't play favourites. A business that has been around for decades is no different from a new developer if they both want the rules to be bent in their favour. The moment the local council greenlights a permanent 60m tall addition in this area, the floodgates are opened. The local council will naturally deny such high-rise developments but they'll quickly be taken to court. Having a 60m structure will quickly set a nasty precendent and make preservation of the area pretty difficult. To say that those against developments on The Spit (namely those associated with the Save our Spit campaign) are somehow oblivious or ignoring obvious litter and pollution problems on The Spit would be pretty inaccurate at best. I'm trying to understand how rubbish problems are relevant to allowing high-impact developments in the area. Because there are issues there, it's an area not worth preserving? I would love to see Sea World keep the ride or build a similar one. I think it's a great addition to Sea World and complements the park's other attractions perfectly and be a unique opportunity for a park that's in a truly amazing location. However, if the price we pay for keeping this ride is degradation of the surrounds, then I'm not totally convinced it'd be worth it. I'm not sure it's a terribly moral viewpoint that Sea World should be allowed to keep the ride but other developers should be denied the right to build structures of a similar size.

[Churros]

In all honesty, I 100% agree with what you are saying when it comes to the way that the council will have no leg to stand on when other developers wish to create high rises, etc. I am just saying that it is unfortunate that it is the case. As for my response about the unhygienic state of the area, etc. I just wish that they could instigate as much change in sorting out these problems as they manage to do when it comes to changes involving things such as the Seaworld Eye. Admittedly, I can see both sides of The Eye debate. I can understand if it goes, and I can understand if it stays. In all honesty, I wouldn't mind if the council simply said, "We cannot give a permit it has to go." I just don't understand why specific activist groups manage to muster up enough energy to target the attraction, when there are so many issues that while addressed are not so vigorously faught for. And don't get me wrong, I am as much of a believer in environmental sustainability as any, that is why I was against the idea of them creating the cruise ship terminal. However, as cherishable as the Spit is (and I do agree, that in spite of its problems, it is still something that needs to be preserved), there are just bigger issues associated with the area than a big ferris wheel.

[mattcrombie]

The EYE has re opened.... Today Sunday 29th.