Decision Time

The Gold Coast City Council are about to make a decision on the Sunland development on The Spit and we need your help to tell them this proposal is simply not in the public interest…

* To build Sunland’s two apartment towers (comprising, one tower being 47 storeys high and the other tower being 39 storeys high) in a 3-storey height zone

* To extend the Mariners Cove Marina 70 metres out into the Broadwater

* To block Seaworld Drive with traffic

* To build apartments out over the Broadwater

* Will block and disturb wind patterns coming across the Broadwater and ruination of a traditional, rare resourse, safe, flatwater sailing area

* Start a precedence and open the door for the whole Main Beach Spit Area to be developed out with many Major Multi Storey Developments

* Mindless distruction of historic sensible and sound good urban plan practice of retaining open urban recreational/green space areas forever destroyed for now and future generations, whereby there are many current zones and available developable land throughout the Gold Coast City to cater for these types of developments

Two Public Rallies will be held and we need your assistance of attendance

1. GCCC Planning Committee MeetingTuesday 13 September 8:30am to 9:30am

2. GCCC Council MeetingThursday 15 September 12:30pm to 1:30pm

Where?

Council Chambers, Evandale, Bundall…next to Arts Centre.

If you don’t agree to high-rises on The Spit please come along and let Council know how you feel…your presence will make a difference.

Orsm!!

Is a petition likely too?

It would be a shame to see a building of cultural significance like this building stopped through uninformed public anger.

It strikes me as a more relevant talking point the acres of poorly designed low rise mc mansions across the gold coast.

gestalt - has someone hacked your account??

No mate.

Just putting forward the opposite case.

I assume lost in space is talking about the sunland/zaha hadid towers.

think so. i agree ive seen uglier, but if it blocks wind, and, and..........

it would help to pop it in quotes or italics if it's not your thoughts

please don't touch anything on the spit, marina mirage northward

I guess you are in luck then because this development is to the south of marina mirage.
everyone can make up their own mind about this. there are many examples on the GC that aren't very good at all.

I wonder if lost in space copied his post from somewhere because there are a few points that I don't think are representative of the situation as I understand it.

there are a few points that jump out to me I added in bold. can you respond to my comments lost in space?

* To build Sunland’s two apartment towers (comprising, one tower being 47 storeys high and the other tower being 39 storeys high) in a 3-storey height zone -

there are multi storey buildings 500 meters south of the site.

* To extend the Mariners Cove Marina 70 metres out into the Broadwater

* To block Seaworld Drive with traffic

the proposal includes road upgrades to deal with this issue.

* To build apartments out over the Broadwater

images I have seen make me question this. there doesn't appear to be any apartment over the water. I think the apartments are in the towers, do you have plans? www.designboom.com/architecture/zaha-hadid-mariners-cove-towers-gold-coast-australia-sunland-group-06-16-2015/

* Will block and disturb wind patterns coming across the Broadwater and ruination of a traditional, rare resourse, safe, flatwater sailing area

what about the existing buildings 500m south. aren't they already doing this?

* Start a precedence and open the door for the whole Main Beach Spit Area to be developed out with many Major Multi Storey Developments

in the planning world precedence is not a valid argument. every application is based on it's own merit. this is why some proposals get knocked back and others approved.

* Mindless distruction of historic sensible and sound good urban plan practice of retaining open urban recreational/green space areas forever destroyed for now and future generations, whereby there are many current zones and available developable land throughout the Gold Coast City to cater for these types of developments

can you let me know what open recreational green space is being destroyed here. the proposed site is an existing bitumen carpark and shopping centre. actually it seems to be that this proposal is adding public space. it is turning the bitumen carpark into parklands and adding a museum, art gallery and aquarium. so nothing is being destroyed for future generations. it is actually being improved.

what does these types of developments mean? can you show me an example anywhere on the goldcoast of this type of development.

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said..
I guess you are in luck then because this development is to the south of marina mirage.
everyone can make up their own mind about this. there are many examples on the GC that aren't very good at all.

I wonder if lost in space copied his post from somewhere because there are a few points that I don't think are representative of the situation as I understand it.

there are a few points that jump out to me I added in bold. can you respond to my comments lost in space?

* To build Sunland’s two apartment towers (comprising, one tower being 47 storeys high and the other tower being 39 storeys high) in a 3-storey height zone -

there are multi storey buildings 500 meters south of the site.

* To extend the Mariners Cove Marina 70 metres out into the Broadwater

* To block Seaworld Drive with traffic

the proposal includes road upgrades to deal with this issue.

* To build apartments out over the Broadwater

images I have seen make me question this. there doesn't appear to be any apartment over the water. I think the apartments are in the towers, do you have plans? www.designboom.com/architecture/zaha-hadid-mariners-cove-towers-gold-coast-australia-sunland-group-06-16-2015/

* Will block and disturb wind patterns coming across the Broadwater and ruination of a traditional, rare resourse, safe, flatwater sailing area

what about the existing buildings 500m south. aren't they already doing this?

* Start a precedence and open the door for the whole Main Beach Spit Area to be developed out with many Major Multi Storey Developments

in the planning world precedence is not a valid argument. every application is based on it's own merit. this is why some proposals get knocked back and others approved.

* Mindless distruction of historic sensible and sound good urban plan practice of retaining open urban recreational/green space areas forever destroyed for now and future generations, whereby there are many current zones and available developable land throughout the Gold Coast City to cater for these types of developments

can you let me know what open recreational green space is being destroyed here. the proposed site is an existing bitumen carpark and shopping centre. actually it seems to be that this proposal is adding public space. it is turning the bitumen carpark into parklands and adding a museum, art gallery and aquarium. so nothing is being destroyed for future generations. it is actually being improved.

what does these types of developments mean? can you show me an example anywhere on the goldcoast of this type of development.

I wonder if lost in space copied his post from somewhere because there are a few points that I don't think are representative of the situation as I understand it.

there are a few points that jump out to me I added in bold. can you respond to my comments lost in space?

LostinSpace will add my comments in itallics, so you may understand my reply to your uniformed and pro developer biased representation of the situation.

* To build Sunland’s two apartment towers (comprising, one tower being 47 storeys high and the other tower being 39 storeys high) in a 3-storey height zone -

there are multi storey buildings 500 meters south of the site.

So what? Those multi storey building had been constructed in zones that had been zoned for multi storey since a long time in the past, not in a 3 storey height restricted zone that was put in place to protect open urban green space areas, without mass density and overshadowing to the whole of the Surfers Paradise Area.


* To extend the Mariners Cove Marina 70 metres out into the Broadwater

* To block Seaworld Drive with traffic

the proposal includes road upgrades to deal with this issue.

How can massive increased residential and increased tourist facilities on a two lane in and two lane out, of not only SeaWorld Drive but MacArther Parade (one lane in each direction) and Waterways Drive (Partly two and partly one lane) at Main Beach, road upgrades deal with this issue? Road or intersection upgrades there do not solve the choke neck stranglehold of MacArthur Parade and Waterways Drive have of traffic going to or coming from the SeaWorld Drive Area, ya boof! I'm sure Main Beach residents will not stand for a new major arterial road built through their suburb and anyway that is not what upgrades are proposed, are they! The upgrades proposed are only a cosmetic token gesture cover to say look we upgraded the roads immediately in front of our development, aren't we good fellows. So Public, you should swallow our pill of mass exploitation of an area not zoned for multi storey, mass density!


* To build apartments out over the Broadwater

images I have seen make me question this. there doesn't appear to be any apartment over the water. I think the apartments are in the towers, do you have plans? www.designboom.com/architecture/zaha-hadid-mariners-cove-towers-gold-coast-australia-sunland-group-06-16-2015/

Are you Blind as a Bat my Man? All images I have seen clearly show the Tower closest to the Waterway is completely built on reclaimed land extending into the Broadwater. Why can't anyone else that has land backing onto, say the canals extend and build there residences or backyards out into the canals? If Council and the Waterways Authority are happy to let Sunland do this then why can't they see their way clear to let everyone else do the same?

* Will block and disturb wind patterns coming across the Broadwater and ruination of a traditional, rare resourse, safe, flatwater sailing area what about the existing buildings 500m south. aren't they already doing this?

I'm sure your just trying to be a cunny funt or absolutely stupid here. I'm not going to dignify this of an answer as most sailors of the Broadwater could rub two sticks together and understand this.

* Start a precedence and open the door for the whole Main Beach Spit Area to be developed out with many Major Multi Storey Developments

in the planning world precedence is not a valid argument. every application is based on it's own merit. this is why some proposals get knocked back and others approved.

Are you serious? Who are you trying to fool here. Sunland gets approval, then ASF will follow. Marina Mirage will be open to major redevelopment opportunities next, SeaWorld Nara is then a target to redevelop, along with the nice juicy parcel of State Government owned land where the Water Police and Gold Coast Waterways Authority and Marine Cadets are, maybe Southport Yacht Club and their Marina Slip could be redeveloped into Multi Storey as well. Where will the lunacy stop. If one is allowed to build Multi Storey then any other land holding in that location will be to, mark my words!

* Mindless distruction of historic sensible and sound good urban plan practice of retaining open urban recreational/green space areas forever destroyed for now and future generations, whereby there are many current zones and available developable land throughout the Gold Coast City to cater for these types of developments

can you let me know what open recreational green space is being destroyed here. the proposed site is an existing bitumen carpark and shopping centre. actually it seems to be that this proposal is adding public space. it is turning the bitumen carpark into parklands and adding a museum, art gallery and aquarium. so nothing is being destroyed for future generations. it is actually being improved.

Hahah, yes Sunland are a good corporate citizen, then why have they not put there hand in their pocket for the Gold Coast Cultural precinct? Instead they want to do something in competition, maybe because, lets see now "Yeh lets look as though we are giving something to the public, yeh, that's it, then they will have to let us approve our building, Oh aren't we good and clever, oh seeing we could not get this ugly building approved for Brisbane Waterfront, I know, lets use the same drawing and plans and plonk it here on the Gold Coast, hahaha!" Your entitled to your opinion about not liking the spit, but many,many Gold Coastians, including myself do like it and we do not want to see it furked, which is what will happen with this development and the others that are being mooted.

what does these types of developments mean? can you show me an example anywhere on the goldcoast of this type of development.

If your that thick and need me to spell it out then I will do you a favour and you can thank me for it later:- M.u.l.t.i S.t.o.r.e.y D.e.v.e.l.o.p.m.e.n.t

There happy now Gestalt

It's all good stuff untill they want to do it in your playground

you need to keep it real and not make stuff up.

go online and look at the proposal via pd online.

there is no overshadowing of the "Whole" surface paradise area. that is silly. every application includes shadow studies and if you look you will see the design deals with this.

there is no arterial roads through suburbs. scare tactics? go into pd online there will be a traffic report.

i'm, sorry but precedence is not accepted in planning. you can argue all you want about this but when you have to stand in front of a planning department and discuss a design you will learn this quickly. each building is assessed on it's own merits.


the site currently has buildings built out onto the water. the site extends out to the end of the marina as well. is it the pub that is on the water already? your mc mansion on the canal doesn't come with a marina or a pub.

what green space is being taken away.?


a firm like zaha hadid is THE world leader on creating open flexible public spaces that are site contextual and permeable. they are pushing the edges of architecture and urban planning in a positive and socially responsible way. it is not accurate to lump them in with other proposals that thankfully have been knocked back.

name calling, untruths and misinformation posted on interwebs.... blah blah blah... surely you can do better than that.

hoe about you discuss the design. make an informed decision

Select to expand quote

Haircut said..
It's all good stuff untill they want to do it in your playground

Haircut said..
It's all good stuff untill they want to do it in your playground

it is my playground.

It will create a massive wind shadow at "the Train" on a South Easter

Select to expand quote

Haircut said..

please don't touch anything on the spit, including Southport yacht club northward

Fixed it

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said..
you need to keep it real and not make stuff up.

go online and look at the proposal via pd online.

there is no overshadowing of the "Whole" surface paradise area. that is silly. every application includes shadow studies and if you look you will see the design deals with this.

there is no arterial roads through suburbs. scare tactics? go into pd online there will be a traffic report.

i'm, sorry but precedence is not accepted in planning. you can argue all you want about this but when you have to stand in front of a planning department and discuss a design you will learn this quickly. each building is assessed on it's own merits.


the site currently has buildings built out onto the water. the site extends out to the end of the marina as well. is it the pub that is on the water already? your mc mansion on the canal doesn't come with a marina or a pub.

what green space is being taken away.?


a firm like zaha hadid is THE world leader on creating open flexible public spaces that are site contextual and permeable. they are pushing the edges of architecture and urban planning in a positive and socially responsible way. it is not accurate to lump them in with other proposals that thankfully have been knocked back.

name calling, untruths and misinformation posted on interwebs.... blah blah blah... surely you can do better than that.

hoe about you discuss the design. make an informed decision

Gestalt Old Buddy, your not convincing me of anything here and your rhetoric is typical of party line type speech. These types or this Building in that location will contribute to stuffing of a major, major proportion of suitable available wind condition across the Broadwater for Flatwater Sailors, where 100's of them (local, interstate and international) have been utilising that area on a regular basis for well over the past 40 years. The General Public are not fooled as easy these days into your way of thinking as the B.S. that all politics is trying to convince us of or ram down our throats, apart from the gullible where I have to admit there is a fair proportion of our Nation who are still prepared to be stooged or find it hard to think for themselves or just don't care because it's not in there backyard.

How about you let the Breezers know of what your personal stake or financial interest is in this project? Or is it maybe your part of the Secret Underworld Cloak and Dagger, Developer/Consultants and/or Pro Development Exploitation at all cost, Powers That Be here on the Gold Coast, if your not prepared to front up about it?

I will tell you what my stake is, I have been Kiting at and enjoying my recreational freedoms at the Kfc's Kiting Location for the past 9 years and I do not want approximately 80% of current suitable available wind directions stuffed from Major Multi Storey Highrise Developments built in a location that has been deemed and appropriately Zoned for a long, long time, 3 Storey Maximum Height Restriction for protection of Open Green Space Amenity and relatively undisturbed vista across the Broadwater. As Brownie from Coastwatch used to say "Don't destroy what you came to enjoy".

If these types of blight on the landscape and Wind Blocking/Disturbing Developments get approved and come to being, then I would not like to be you amongst your Windsurfing Community Mate's that you were part of the support and problem of these types of projects in the said location that caused the demise of a great fun, unique and scarce resource area for Flat Water Sailing

Loathe as I am to get involved in an on-line "spat" I do think it's high time that those who don't actually live on the GC butt out!
The serious concerns being expressed by a significant number of locals in regard to both the aforementioned "developments" are more than valid, so perhaps a little less vitriol and a little more understanding might not be such a bad idea.
Indeed, one wonders how "the Draftsman" would feel if said high-rise development was proposed for Victoria Point? Or if the State Government decided that Wellington Point would be an ideal location for a new cruise ship terminal?
And before you go lumping me in the NIMBY/anti-progress camp, I hasten to add that I am a big fan (and frequent user) of our new light-rail system.
I could go on with a little history lesson as to why the Bjelke-Peterson regime imposed the three-story limit on Spit, or a discussion of what international visitors to the GC are actually here for, but think I might save those for another day when I'm not feeling so disillusioned with it all...

@ lostinspace. it's a conspiracy. I get it.......

@ kirk.

each building is assessed on it's own merits. a building of this nature would involve a different assessment at Victoria point because it would be in the middle of a low rise residential area. although I am not a resident of Victoria Point I would be against it. not in any way shape or form similar to the sunland development being discussed.

cruise ship terminals....

I missed the first maybe 15-30 mins tonight. Did the dredging of the southport side channel get discussed?

Select to expand quote

Haircut said..

I missed the first maybe 15-30 mins tonight. Did the dredging of the southport side channel get discussed?

Hi Haircut, yes it was good to see a few of you guys there tonight for support.

No I believe nothing was brought up about the dredging on the Southport Side Channel and as far as I know the Queensland Minister for Transport stated a couple of months ago after the findings of the Survey about the proposed Second Main Channel that there was not sufficient interest in the affirmative for it from the public and partly because a lot of our troops rallied to the cause and submitted to the Survey for the negative, which helped the outcome. Whether it is back on GCWA Agenda, I am not aware of it, unless some one else knows?

There was mention however of tonight's audience enquiring about if any dredging works are to be done or occur in regard to a Sailing Basin. The Board Members sort of danced around their answers a bit on this. They did say however this is in some one else's hands. Now it probably does not take to much of a guess to understand who the uncaring, reckless, short sighted, thoughtless, exploit at all cost and person who calls the shots around here is, that they may be referring to. To my knowledge Tom Tate in cahoots with some other Business People, wants to push for a leg series of the next America's Cup Challenge to be held here on the Gold Coast seeing there is no Fast Cat Races this year as it had been cancelled for some ungiven reasons. Not that there is any specifics on where or how big this Sailing Basin is to be but it is assumed to be held in the Broadwater in Front of the Main Beach Spit Finger and South of Wave Break Island and in Mayor Tom Tate's words when interviewed about it on 9 Gold Coast News a few weeks ago he said something to the effect, if my memory serves me right? "Oh Yeh, we want to try a secure a leg of the America's Cup here (as he was standing at the Spit Finger facing Wave Break Island), It will be great for the Gold Coast and we will just dredge the whole place to cater for it, so no worries there".

The only thing Mayor Tom Tate does not realise yet, that all the Highrise Developments (contrary to the long standing 3 Storey Height Restriction Zone) he is in favour of and promoting for the Main Beach Spit is going to be detrimental to any sailing out on the Western Side of the Spit and South of Wave Break Island due to the effects of severe blocking and disturbing of the predominant available direction winds. I don't think he has given it to much thought. But there again I don't think he gives anything to much thought as his style is just to Steam Roller anything and everything through and suffer or deal with any consequences after.

Definitely confused about where the 'cultural significance' Gestalt talks about comes from. An art gallery, (haven't we got a few of these already?) museum (I'm sure we've got some of these on the Coast) and an underground aquarium (so that we can actually see the sorts of fish we've wiped out by over-development of the Broadwater?) really don't seem to meet the definition of cultural significance I'm familiar with.

Don't necessarily agree with his praise of Zaha Hadid either. There's plenty of criticism that her architecture simply 'sucks in whatever ideology is close', in this case glitzy, unsightly high rises, night clubs, bikies, drugs etc.). Someone pointed out that her design for the Tokyo Olympic Stadium looks like a turtle waiting for Japan to sink to make it's way out to sea and an art historian has criticized how at least one of her designs (in Rome) actually shuts out the community rather than welcomes it in. The Sunland design certainly doesn't seem to be too welcoming for the average punter with limited funds wanting to visit.

Not true that precedence plays no part in planning. Land and Environment courts are renowned for taking precedence into account when determining appeals against planning decisions and once council has approved one high rise development in breach of its own three storey limits then people have Buckley's chance of stopping future high rise.

And this point is important because while the Sunland development may be on an existing, developed site, that site is not high rise and does not open the door for the rest of the Spit to be reclaimed over time for high rise. This is what Lost in Space correctly identifies as the potential to lose scarce, valuable and irreplaceable green space.

I don't think the high rise building Gestalt talks about to the south are actually on the Spit are they? What council approves on privately owned land is one thing but what it approves on land belonging to the community (as the Spit does) is surely another?

Finally, has anyone considered how expensive it is at present for governments to protect beach side properties as sea levels rise and cyclones increase? Whatever developments are constructed on the Spit are going to be subject to climate extremes so shouldn't we either not put them there to start with or (worst case scenario) keep them small and low key so we don't have to invest billions in saving them?

In your other post you admitted you weren't too sure about wind shadow Gestalt. It's a bit late to realize others were right after the development has been built isn't it?

I think leaving the Broadwater in its most natural state would be the best 'culturally significant' use for this and future generations. I have fewer issues with such a development away from the Broadwater. Southport is virtually one or two blocks deep. Why don't they redevelop the run down areas in Southport itself if they're so keen to do something culturally significant?