Sea World Expansion

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Oh come on. Seriously?

Why is everyone so hung up on whether the monorail will fit? Its easy to see them goofing on the truck in DD - they probably checked the height with the supplier, and the supplier didn't measure to the pipe, but do you honestly think for one moment that they've put all this into construction of the roof, and not even considered whether the monorail will fit?

Be serious here. Please.

[Richard]

A $3 billion casino development is not going to be a gaudy/sleazy 1970s Vegas casino covered in flashing lights. It'll be a 5/6-star resort built to attract the Asian high-roller market. You wouldn't even know it's a casino from the outside.

The proximity to Sea World and what they are sacrificing, in addition to suggestions of the park expanding indicates that the project will benefit the park. It would almost certainly see significant redevelopment and consultation with Sea World. Between gaming laws/regulations and mutual best interests I think it's safe to say that there will be nothing you need to protect your children from. 

[AllegroCrab]

I think even the Casinos themselves have it in their own interest to not be associated with the negative imagery. They draw people in by advertising themselves as a nice place to go.

[Jamberoo Fan]

10 hours ago, themagician said:

Also sea world have said that the statement that the park will be doubling in size are untrue and at this stage no such plans exist.

Thought it was highly unlikely. Does that also rule out the 'water park' and 'biggest Australian theme park' rumour?

6 hours ago, Richard said:

A $3 billion casino development is not going to be a gaudy/sleazy 1970s Vegas casino covered in flashing lights. It'll be a 5/6-star resort built to attract the Asian high-roller market. You wouldn't even know it's a casino from the outside.

That's what I'm hoping for (and expecting). Before, I was talking worst case scenario particularly as very detailed plans have not been released yet.

[Theme Park Girl]

I hope they do something soon in regards to the water park, whether or not it's involved with this talked about expansion. Here's some pics of it atm, as you can see it's pretty much just sitting stagnant until they follow up somehow.

Must be frustrating for park guests who expect to have somewhere to swim when they visit. I can only imagine the incoming complaints over the summer months, especially given I was employed there during the time they were constructing Shark Bay (with the sharks temporarily housed in the swimming pools) and was bombarded with complaints whilst working the Hot Dog stand set up just outside.

If people can externally see something like that, but can't use it during its prime period, they are gonna kick up a stink ?

[joz]

It still makes me cringe when I see the '& water park' branding on Sea World Resort.  For how much money has gone into the resort and how good it's looking at the moment, it seems so strange to me to give almost equal billing to a defunct feature that really wasn't really that great in the first place.  

[bladex]

add or expand the water park? GREAT sea world might actually be worth going to again.

[Theme Park Girl]

5 hours ago, bladex said:

add or expand the water park? GREAT sea world might actually be worth going to again.

Neither. Sea World have been stating for a while now that the water park is permanently closed, and I've been informed by an official rep that it's not reopening. It will be demolished/bulldozed and replaced with something new. 

[westical]

Keeping the landscaping maintained at least.

[New display name]

On Sunday, the ASF Consortium unveiled its planned Integrated Resort Development proposal for the southern end of the Spit.

If you are interested in further information please follow these two links to either the Department of State Development page:-

www.statedevelopment.qld.gov.au/…/gold-coast-integrated-res…

or the ASF website (Gold Coast Evolution on Facebook):-

www.goldcoastevolution.com.au

The State has also indicated, in the new year it intends to work-up a detailed plan for approximately 140 hectares of coastal parkland.

Please note that it will be the Department of State Development that will undertake independent public consultation on ASF's proposal.

 

2 outstanding questions.

1.  Where will I park when I go to SW?

Pink area is where the casino will go and not only will SW lose its overflow car park but some of its hardstand car park.

I think they have missed an opportunity with the monorail here.  I’m no monorail person but even I can see the positives to extend the monorail around the casino.   If the casino wanted to add a statement, then instead of a bridge I would have run the monorail to the heart of the Gold Coast.

 

2. I assumed SW new car park will be under the new casino and if SW was to double in size then SW remaining car park would be turned into usable space.  This hand has not been shown yet and if this is not the case then where is the extra land?

Could it be the case that the SW resort will demolished and rebuilt within the casino precinct?

I think they have missed an opportunity with the monorail here.  I’m no monorail person but even I can see the positives to extend the monorail around the casino.   If the casino wanted to add a statement, then instead of a bridge I would have run the monorail to the heart of the Gold Coast.

Edited December 20, 2016 by YLFATEEKS

[loki75]

The QLD govt. have rejected ASF's casino and resort proposal.

Key points.

To have a masterplan for the spit

Three storey height limit to apply for development on the spit.

Casino license to remain on the Gold Coast but no integrated resort would be allowed on the spit

 

http://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/news/gold-coast-spit-casino-and-resort-rejected-by-queensland-government/news-story/5370e99a7d840f1d57a04337ea3612d5

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Fuckers. get with the times.

 

this ridiculous height limit, ensuring mainlanders living BAYSIDE get undisturbed OCEAN views is preposterous.

[rappa]

It'll change.

Caesars Entertainment is kicking around now, they'll offer enough cash and the government will flip again. Eventually the people complaining die and things change.

[Locke]

Terrible decision. I can't stand AP. Hope it gets reversed next election and the ALP gets kicked to the curb.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Oh yeah because the liberals have got such a great record in QLD \ Federal levels in recent times...

[Locke]

3 hours ago, AlexB said:

Oh yeah because the liberals have got such a great record in QLD \ Federal levels in recent times...

At least stuff gets proposed. ALP have no ideas, they're like a care-taker government.

[Reanimated35]

[TomiJ]

Please No Politics. 

[New display name]

This is why we can't have nice things.   Stupid people everywhere.  Stupid people believe whatever they are told.  OVERFLOW car park at MW. (stopped because council listened to stupid people) A casino on a piece of land that nobody ever uses.  (stopped because government listened to stupid people)

I guarantee both these don’t even know where it is and all that it is currently used for is an overflow car park by SW.

“This is an excellent outcome. Now to preserve the space for the people to continue to enjoy - it's such a unique space.”

“Thank goodness. It's a beautiful natural open space. Down there nearly every weekend. Let's focus on its natural qualities. Great recreation area. Diving, snorkelling, great bike ride to The Spit, dog area, fishing etc etc etc”

Village now need to lease the land of the Queensland Government themselves but sadly I don’t think they have the money now.

The Gold Coast people are so stupid.  Where do people think the jobs come from on the Gold Coast.

[joz]

What a shame we'll never learn asf's plan for dealing with parking.  I can kinda support the idea that the development is a bit big for the space, I can kind of buy the traffic would be too big an issue, but I cant get behind this horseshit about how important the land is.  North of SW is the area which I can support should be upgraded into a big piss off parkland.  

 

Question on that, instead of the cruise ship terminal being built at the end of the spit or on the ocean side, why couldnt it be built south of SW?

[New display name]

Traffic is already an issue but at least with a big development you can force the developer to pay to fix the problem.  Good luck to them getting any money out of a new fish and chip shop to fix the traffic.  You can have the best of both worlds at the spit.  Up to SW develop the shit out of and past SW leave it as open public space.   Who here has ever had a picnic or BBQ in the current SW overflow car park?    

[joz]

Well I have but I expect I'm an extreme case.  I agree that south of the park makes sense for development, theres only a couple of small plots available and they're currently overgrown and inaccessible to the piblic anyway, not the sort of thing people would miss.  Also wonder if you could build a cruise ship terminal west of SW's carpark and have a dining entertainment area shared by the CST and Sea World?  Just throwing ideas out there that would get a CST built while avoiding most of the controversy.

 

Another thing that struck me from the announcement yesterday was when Anna goes 'we have a vision for the Spit; to let the community decide what to do with it' which to me kind of sounds like no vision at all.  

[New display name]

The community did decide.

The results found more than half of respondents, 54 per cent, were in favour of the proposal and 42 per cent were opposed. Four per cent were “unsure” whether they were in favour of the $3 billion plan.

Those surveyed who supported the project said it would create and support jobs; be a catalyst for better public transport; boost tourism; have minimal environmental impact; and make better use of the area. They gave their support on the condition that access to the area be improved.

The 42 per cent who opposed the development believed high-rises would spoil the area, that it would adversely impact the environment; not fix transport issues; contradict the city plan; and introduce an unwanted casino.

State Development Minister Anthony Lynham said the decision showed the Government “listened to the people”.

“The last community consultation was extremely extensive and that was the Donaldson survey — and they all showed that people don’t want high-rises on The Spit,” he said.

“This is a balanced decision, this is what the people of the Gold Coast and people of Queensland want.

The Premier said the height limit on The Spit, which also effectively kills Sunland’s twin tower development The Mariner, would not impact construction jobs growth.

Opposition Leader Tim Nicholls said he would reopen a registration-of-interest process for integrated resorts within its first 100 days of government if elected.

“We would consider a proposal from ASF or other parties through this process,” he said.

Mr Nicholls said the decision sent a message that Queensland was closed for business.

“Annastacia Palaszczuk gifted The Spit site to ASF two years ago without a competitive process,” he said.

“Now, Labor has unilaterally taken the site away.”

(from GC Bulletin)

Personally, pro casino or anti casino I don't care.   In my eyes, the land before SW is the land you drive past to get to either SW or the spit.  There's nothing of great value to save. 

[Theme Park]

There is the positive side that the second casino license still exists and the cruise ship terminal isn't completely dead.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

a cruise terminal south of sea world would be difficult - the ships need to be able to turn around - the sandbars wouldn't be helpful - you'd have to dredge the broadwater. The original plan was to put it on wavebreak, which - directly opposite the seaway, is all deep wide water...

Here's the P&O Pacific Dawn (a small ship by standards) scaled to the broadwater west of the SW carpark....