Sea World updates 2016

[Reanimated35]

Isn't that what my mistress is for?

[Park Addict 93]

How can you afford both a wife and a mistress! That must get expensive.

[Santa07]

4 hours ago, Jordan M. said:

How can you afford both a wife and a mistress! That must get expensive.

Who said he was paying in money?  

[Reanimated35]

This popped up as a suggested video and seems somewhat relevant....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkKKV11RcRc

(Also last post I'm making on this since this is way too off topic now) 

[themagician]

Floats and theming from carnivale is continuing to appear at SW, there are also a couple of them outside the plaza on the grassed area (Photos: TPSN)

[pushbutton]

An article in todays Sunday Mail about the proposed casino resort next to Sea World says Sea World could double in size,  to become Australias biggest theme park (so presumably bigger than Dreamworld ).

I would be interested to know how it could do that. As far as I can tell the only adjacent land that's not already built on is where the casino will be! 

The article says Village support the casino plan but there's no comment from them about the supposed expansion to Sea World. 

I'm inclined to think it's just wild speculation from the writer of the article at this stage. 

However if it is true then it could explain why there's so much unused space at Sea World at the moment. 

If it did double in size I'd imagine the entire park layout would need a complete review. 

Interesting if nothing else. 

[Reanimated35]

9 minutes ago, pushbutton said:

An article in todays Sunday Mail

Did you invent a time machine or has there been news other than what the sunday mail already ran a report on months ago?

Ah, just found both articles and it seems the only change is the plans are now to be made public. 

Quote

Detailed site and floor plans will be made public by the ­Department of State Development, which will embark on a three-month community consultation from January.

 

[Park Addict 93]

Quote

 

Immerse yourself on a exclusive tour into the WORLD of SHARKS @ Sea World - available from 27 December 2016 only.

Join expert marine educators, on a private tour of Shark Bay at Sea World. Despite such a wide range of species the word shark is often instinctually connected with a handful of large, apex predators. These sharks are frequently the centre of media attention, whether they have come in contact with swimmers or more commonly (but less reported) have been injured themselves by fishing gear. This exclusive tour will provide you with a rare chance to see past the headline and experience something deeper with these animals. Don't miss this opportunity.

 

Mega Pass holders will get 1 free tour.

[Jamberoo Fan]

5 hours ago, pushbutton said:

An article in todays Sunday Mail about the proposed casino resort next to Sea World says Sea World could double in size,  to become Australias biggest theme park (so presumably bigger than Dreamworld ).

I would be interested to know how it could do that.

I refer to part of a post I made in that 'Sea World Expansion' topic:

On 05/09/2016 at 8:23 PM, Jamberoo Fan said:

I have a slight concern that Sea World may 'claim' the casino as part of the park similar to how Movie World is 'claiming' TopGolf as part of their park despite being a completely separate entity. It's a 5 hectare development site after all - just enough for Sea World to 'claim' and 'overtake' Dreamworld as Australia's biggest theme park. But to "double in size"? That is really sudden and unlikely. It depends on how they defined 'size' - are they referring to hectares or the number of rides etc.? I'd probably think the latter. It is easier to double the number of rides etc. than by doubling the number of hectares the park has.

Here's an artist impression that was released today that shows very well how the development will look next to Sea World:

A more panoramic version of the artist impression can be found here.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Jamberoo Fan

[Santa07]

It certainly sticks out doesn't it... I'm surprised it's even been approved with the height restrictions that I think are in place along there.

[mba2012]

It hasn't been approved. This is the first concept, chances are it'll look quite different if it gets built. 

[MickeyD]

1 hour ago, Santa07 said:

It certainly sticks out doesn't it... I'm surprised it's even been approved with the height restrictions that I think are in place along there.

The 'Spit' is entirely reclaimed land.. just saying

[bladex]

looks bloody terrible who wants that THING towering over seaworld?

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

2 hours ago, MickeyD said:

The 'Spit' is entirely reclaimed land.. just saying

I don't believe so - although it has changed alot in the past 200 years, I believe it to be the product of environmental factors, sediment deposits from estuarine flows \ ocean currents and the like. 

I had a quick look around and these might give some more info: http://www.goldcoastaustralia.com/media/documents/Environmental_History_of_the_Spit_-_Broadwater.pdf

And this http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/thegoldcoast/the-spit-history-2787.html

edit: ok on reread you said 'reclaimed' not 'man made' so i guess technically it is 'reclaimed' depending on your view of the word - but it is entirely natural formation - at least up until the GC Seaway was built...

Edited December 18, 2016 by AlexB

[MickeyD]

Thanks @AlexB that's a pretty interesting read!! I stand happily corrected?

It's interesting how this body of land compares similarily to the massive sand islands to the North (the Straddies, Morton, Bribie and Fraser) and how over time they formed, breaking away from the Mainland.

I was always of the understanding that the Spit was extended and changed to stabilise the Wild waters of the Bar between Stradbroke and the Mainland? 

Edited December 18, 2016 by MickeyD

[mba2012]

The spit as exists now is mostly man made. Wavebreak island is entirely man made, as is the seaway. Before the seaway was built, the original bar moved around, less than 100 years ago it was about where the southport yacht club is now. 

At some point they decided to build the seaway and Wavebreak island. As MickeyD said, this stabilised the sea entrance and allowed the spit and the southern end of south stradbroke to form. I do believe that there has been significant reclamation of land to make the spit more useful as well. I know there are pictures on these forums that show the significant amount of broadwater that sea world has taken over.

But Alex, you are right when you said it was entirely natural until the seaway was built. 

[MickeyD]

I appreciate your insight too, thanks for sharing @mba2012.

Having attended High School on the GC myself I recall learning about this phenomenon in the History of the area. Something that always perplexed me why so many Environmental Activists have jumped up and down so much about developing the area.. Clearly a lack of knowledge of History perhaps? All said and done, much of it was underwater barely a Century ago!

 

Edited December 18, 2016 by MickeyD

[mba2012]

I wouldn't consider myself an environmental activist, but I'm not a huge fan of the idea of development on the spit and I can see where they are coming from. It has created a unique environment, where all comparable areas have been developed. It's also a really nice area for locals and tourists to go, its absolutely my first choice over every other beach on the coast. 

To be fair though, this current development doesn't appear to do much in the way of developing this environment. Especially considering most of the land is just a grass field at the moment. The previous proposals on wavebreak island were atrocious though. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I like the look of the current development. The spit isn't really anything special, and in a sprawling metropolitan area such as the gold coast where every possible skerrick of land has been built on, new developments are delayed waiting for older buildings \ blocks of land to sell. The gold coast needs reinvigorating to bring it into the current milennium. The first third of the spit has already been developed to a degree, with sea world taking up almost another third. The vacant block that this proposal is to be built on has no other purpose and this kind of development is sorely needed to take the pressure off the main drag.

It has the added advantage of breaking the current height limits, paving the way for Sea World to perhaps get an exemption too, as they wouldn't be the sole 'break' to the skyline when right next to these towers. I like the look of it too - it is modern and aesthetically pleasing. The majority of people who would oppose it are the mainlanders in Southport who fear losing their ocean views. We could see SW get an observation tower, or another Eye - both attractions that are very suitable for the park and its location, as well as its demographic. Both attractions also have a decent capacity which is also sorely needed.

Onto Wavebreak Island, it is man made - as the construction of the Seaway demanded it to prevent too much erosion to the rest of the broadwater. I'd have liked to have seen the cruise ship terminal \ casino proposal they had planned there - however that too was victim of too many people fearing change in their own backyard.

For the GC to claim the title of tourism that it aspires to, not having a cruise terminal denies it an avenue of tourism that would really help the coast. There are too many locals there now that moved there because of the allure of the location, but now do not want it to grow and change to keep up with the changing needs of the primary source of income for the area.

[New display name]

From my local member today.

 

"The State of Queensland has announced, via the Sunday Mail, that the proposed Integrated Resort Development will move forward to its next phase with detailed plans being made public today prior to a three month consultation period.

Separately the Premier has also announced plans for the State to rejuvenate the Spit north of SeaWorld, as well as what appears to be a willingness to now "...drawing up a master plan for the Spit now that ASF's concept plan has been made public".

[Slick]

Parking looks like it'll be as fun as ever.

[pin142]

Parking hasn't really been an issue there @Slick, it is the clusterfuck that is getting back to the M1 that I have found to be the worst thing.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Which they appear to have at least identified something to help - the bridge across the broadwater from (i think) smith street eliminates the GC HWY clusterfuck past Australia Fair... I realise parts of Smith Street are just as bad, but hey - at least it will help...

Plus - if you ever need parking on the spit - just keep driving past SW resort - you'll find heaps... It'd be great for them to do a 'spit tram' although maybe not with those connotations...

[mba2012]

The bridge in the picture comes from Queen street, which continues to run along the south side of the old hospital site. The only thing you'd be skipping is the current bridge.

[MaxxTheMonster]

Yeah that wont fix anything...  Well not for leaving that area...  Heading there would be much better...  You skip one full intersection of lights and a pedestrian crossing...

Problem then is you would then end up with worse traffic at the intersection of Queen St as it will be a 4 way not T intersection...