Skeeta

SeaWorld overflow car park lost.

27 posts in this topic

I was under the assumption that the casino site was only about half of that. There's a fence that runs along the back of that grassy field and I'd assumed that was where the state-owned land was, which would make the site unimaginably small.

To be honest, I think (and hope) this new idea for the casino is going to struggle to get off the ground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look up titles for SeaWorlds land it says SeaWorld leases it land off the state government.   I also think it would be hard to get the parking in with the height limits but in saying that the state government do have the power to override the height limits.  

Edited by skeetafly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Off topic, but how big is the casino site meant to be? The area of land looks TINY.

According to the measurement tools available in a popular mapping software, the plot of land is ~160x220m.

By comparison, Jupiters is ~300x180, Treasury Casino is 90x70, Reef Casino is 100x170, and Townsville is 220x160.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the measurement tools available in a popular mapping software, the plot of land is ~160x220m.

By comparison, Jupiters is ~300x180, Treasury Casino is 90x70, Reef Casino is 100x170, and Townsville is 220x160.

They're not $2B developments though. Jupiters is the most comparable, but still far off what I'm assuming a $2B integrated resort would look like.

Heck, check out the pictures of Wavebreak Island and it's HUGE. Don't know why the site is so small.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the State Government is happy to give out/lease some of the land on the spit, which it seems to be at the moment, could SW perhaps make the move across the road to give it plenty of room for expansion in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think land reclaimation wouldn't hurt - dredge some of the broadwater (it's pretty broad), establish some new channels... the area is mostly recreational usage rather than any sort of marine sanctuary...

 

But i still think the wavebreak island development had the most potential - it would bring energy to the northern (southport) end of the GC, utilise previously unutilised land, and potentially bring in massive tourism when you consider the proposed cruise terminal that was to go with it.

If the carparking issue becomes too great a problem, sea world may just have to think around it - perhaps a multideck carpark is the answer? If they built just a second level, it would double their current capacity... not to mention that the monorail could be given a new 'front gate' station inside the carpark which would also give the park another 'admission' point...

Hell extend the damn thing and connect it to a Casino (hotel) entry point as well - link both resorts, and run it at night too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is happening, as council approved it yesterday.

and who says a casino has to be trashy? It's being built as a resort so will no doubt be designed to enhance and complement the surrounds. 

 

Jobs and revenue for the GC is a good thing.

 

its also a minimum 3-4 years before construction begins 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems a shame to stick something as trashy as a casino next to a family theme park.

Hope it doesn't happen. 

Just remember that right next to Palazzo Versace, a hotel where numerous A-List celebrities have been known to stay while they are on the Gold Coast, is a grimy old fish market. It's honestly not that strange to see business that may not be complementary next to each other.

Well it is happening, as council approved it yesterday.

and who says a casino has to be trashy? It's being built as a resort so will no doubt be designed to enhance and complement the surrounds. 

The way I'm thinking about it is this way. A resort next to Sea World may entice guests staying at the new property to visit the park, where they'll be spending money on food, admission and souvenirs. After all expenditures are taken, this could mean more CapEx for the park, and I think we all know what that means!

Could the Queens Wharf development have a flow on effect for the Gold Coast parks? If a tourist visits Brisbane, they may very well be enticed to visit the Gold Coast parks. These new developments are looking to be highly promising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that I hope is considered in extreme detail is traffic management - the road to the spit is HEAVILY congested during peak times - even in winter! Something will need to be done about increasing the vehicular traffic up Sea World Drive. Must take a look at the conditions attached to the development.

Well it is happening, as council approved it yesterday.

If there's one thing i've learned - it's that council approval does not a development make - take this headline as an example "Waterpark for <insert various cities, regional areas etc here - such as Cairns, Sunshine Coast>"

How many waterpark proposals have we seen greenlit but ultimately not go ahead?

Seems a shame to stick something as trashy as a casino next to a family theme park.

Trashy is your opinion. In todays age of modern architecture and facilities, I find it highly unlikely the casino would be 'trashy'... it has to be better than Jupiters at least.

Then i'll point out places like Circus Circus Casino in Las Vegas - that have made at least an effort to combine theme park with casino... or Stratosphere... or Buffalo Bill's Desperado?

Casinos aren't the "Robert DeNiro Mafioso" you might know from the film. They recognise that it is profitable to be family friendly, and that money can be made of family activities just as easily as it can from poker machines in smoke filled rooms.

What casinos have you been to, that would lead you to conclude they are 'trashy' ? I've seen Casinos in Vegas, LA, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and in three Australian states \ territories. I don't think I could honestly say any of them would be considered 'trashy' (Although Canberra Casino was pretty crap).

The way I'm thinking about it is this way. A resort next to Sea World may entice guests staying at the new property to visit the park, where they'll be spending money on food, admission and souvenirs. After all expenditures are taken, this could mean more CapEx for the park, and I think we all know what that means!

And just as easily - Mum and Dad can drop the kids at the gate for a day of rides while they go to the Casino and blow their retirement fund. lol... but yes - a Casino next to Sea World would probably result in mutually leveraged benefits to both attractions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt, it's a very long way from a final tick of approval. They have committed to a 2 year community engagement/consultation, then council has to agree on the plans which if GC council is consistent will take at least 12 months to'ing & throwing. It also has to survive a local and state election in that time that could again change things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given Wavebreak island is isolated, and not home to anything protected, as well as the fact that South Stradbroke is by far a bigger sanctuary to maintain, i think it was a mistake not to consider developing Wavebreak. it would have balanced the traffic across the coast, instead of condensing it.

Smith Street is bad enough as it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the State Government is happy to give out/lease some of the land on the spit, which it seems to be at the moment, could SW perhaps make the move across the road to give it plenty of room for expansion in the future?

Well they don't really need expand out of the parks land cause they have tons of room in the park.

For starters where sea viper and pirate ship were as the wildlife attraction was cancelled anyway if DW and WWW can work with 1 car park I'm shore sea world can until the park opens up more rides.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given Wavebreak island is isolated, and not home to anything protected, as well as the fact that South Stradbroke is by far a bigger sanctuary to maintain, i think it was a mistake not to consider developing Wavebreak. it would have balanced the traffic across the coast, instead of condensing it.

Smith Street is bad enough as it is.

 

 

 

The latest Ecological report for the Broadwater disagrees with you.

A number of shorebirds of conservation significance were recorded during the surveys in the project area. These migratory species are protected under international agreements (i.e. Bonn, CAMBA, GAMBA, JAMBA, and ROKAMBA) and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 additionally, three (3) of these shorebird species –

Numinous madagascariensis (eastern curlew), Sternula albifrons (little tern) and Esacus magnirostris (beach stone-curlew) are identified as significant under Stateand Commonwealth legislation. These species were all recorded on or within the vicinity of Wavebreak Island. This area is consequently identified as highly significant for shorebird conservation.

I agree it’s a better location.

 

 

 

Edited by skeetafly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trashy as in conceptually, not architecturally or visually. 

For whatever their attraction is to anyone, casinos also bring large doses of misery, drunkenness, prostitution and desperation.

For example I'll guarantee car break-ins in the Seaworld carpark will increase astronomically with a casino next door. 

I guess I see Seaworld as being pretty good, clean family fun. Seems a shame to mix the two worlds so closely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure Southport already has the highest crime figures of anywhere on the GC.

I wouldn't be worried about drunks, they'll stick to surfers (no major issues with it at Jupiters). Misery, well thats self inflicted and not overly transferred to the general public in the vicinity. Prostitution? What casinos you hanging out in? The Internet age and smart phones has negated the need for hubs such as casinos and hotels. I think you have somewhat of an archaic and certainly negative viewpoint which is clouding sane judgment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they don't really need expand out of the parks land cause they have tons of room in the park.

For starters where sea viper and pirate ship were as the wildlife attraction was cancelled anyway if DW and WWW can work with 1 car park I'm shore sea world can until the park opens up more rides.   

And until SV had to be demolished & they filled in part of the lake for Wild they were very land locked and I don't really want to see anymore of the lake filled in, give the park a real charm. 

 

With the car park, I'm not suggesting build a second across the road just acquire the land for future expansion, most animal exhibits need large plots of land, just look at Shark Bay & Dolphin Cove.

 

The car park could always just go up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Parkz Crew

    Support Parkz... join the Crew for:

    • Ad-banner free viewing
    • Parkz Crew profile badge
    • Extended editing
    • See who's liked your posts
    • Purchase discounts

    Join Now from $20/yr

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.