http://www.goldcoastcruiseterminal.com.au/

Tell me it isn't so.

I've been away for a while, and FIFO for a while before that, so I've missed this. Currently living in $ydney and here's what it's like getting to the beach for a swim:

1. Battle through traffic and get lost in underground tunnels, all the while the auto electronic toll beeper going off, and all the while watching your speed.

2. Arrive at beach and drive around for 25 minutes hoping to get lucky and find a car park.

3. Find car park and insert GPD of small African nation to park for a maximum of two hours.

4. Share beach with ten thousand other poor souls. Too scared to leave bag by itself on the beach while you swim.

Going for a sail isn't much different. I missed a turn the other day and it took me 30 minutes to circle back around.

If this is what "progress" is, building a megalopolis, I don't want it. If this is what the Cruise Terminal is all about I am dead against it.


Also it will affect Shearwater. Those things are about 20 stories high.

This would be pretty devastating for the broadwater in general if it goes ahead. There will be massive redistribution of sand and erosion. I guess the reality is that this is "progress" and there is no real thought for "community" beyond bringing money into it. [}:)]

I doubt that a feasibility study will realistically look into environmental impact as well as boat safety. Haven't we got enough plastic and shiny stuff on the gold coast already!!!

it;s a shame,

but between the day trippers, the jet skis and the total lack of parking i kinda gave up on that neck of the woods a few years back. i really liked the train as a location.

occasionally i'll hit shearwater.

if i lived on the goldy i'd say i'd be hitting the unpopulated surf beaches instead of the flat water.

i guess living where i live i trade the clean blue water for brown town. flip side is i get a 6 min trip to my local, no crowds and gust free breezes from most directions.

I worked around the world on cruise liners and visited some of the best cities via ship, it really is a true "coming of age" to have a quality cruise ship terminal for any major coastal city.

Now i know not everyone is in favour and I am indifferent but it should happen we have everything to offer.

Look at Florida.....not an issue

Ok it may effect or sailing but lets say there are 200 sailors on the coast, this would create 2000 knock on effect jobs.

Let the verbal beating begin.....................

If the Broadwater is for locals to enjoy then I don't see the logic of re-packaging it to sell to non GC residents in order for a third party to make a profit.

Too many people think this is called progress.

Since when has the goldie been about the environment or even about the enjoyment of the locals?
LOL.
No sun on the beach in the afternoon anymore, D'oh we blocked it out for our sea view. Dugongs / seagrass? Long Gone, canal estates now. Runoff from a thousand canal estate roads every time it rains. The noise, the exhaust and oil trace of a thousand boats per hour. Gas fireballs and helium balloons floating up from seaworld all day. Main channel is regularly dredged as it is.

Hardly a pristine environment, why not let cruise liners slip in there.

I guess They could just cement the broadwater so there can be more high rise and parkig for main beach? :)

You mean cement Main Beach for parking for the cruise terminal!!! Then they car charge for parking for us all. Good way to make some more money.....

If the Gold Coast was so affected by the GFC due to the drop in tourism, why do we want more tourism related jobs?

As built up as it is the Gold coast is still surprisingly pristine. On a high tide the broadwater can be crystal clear. I've suffered vertigo more than once when looking down. And because it is long and thin air pollution is negligible; it gets blown away by the slightest breeze.

Select to expand quote

tilldark said...
Interestingly you can see how charged this topic is by checking this site

http://www.saveourspit.com.au

Pretty pathetic and looks like an desperate anti-slander ... give me even less hope for a sensible outcome to this

Oh dear.

#1 Auto-play on video means music coming from ...somewhere. Aaargh! where do I turn it off?

#2. "This site is dedicated to free speech" - sure sign of a victimisation complex

#3 Save Our Spit From The Save Our Spit Alliance (Gecko) - WTF?

#4 Save our spit alliance are fighting any cruise ship terminal anywhere on the Gold Coast. Does this go against there membership objectives, we think so. Take a look at there membership form here

Confusing there/their makes you look illiterate (English as 2nd language excused, and yet less likely to make the mistake). The first page hasn't got it right once.

#5 suspicious supporter comments: "I bet most of them do not even live here there support group is probably elsewhere. If they had there way the gold coast will die a slow death...

Hmmmm...

#6 The 'businesses' listing list businesses that support the other alliance, with the same name, that is ...against the development, and this one is for, so the listings are the businesses that are for the anti-development... and some are saying they aren't on the not development site, so they are listed on the anti anti development ...with the same name, so ...if a business is listed on the other site they list them on this site to display how they are not supporting this site, even if some aren't on the other site any more, which is the anti development sos, and this is the anti anti sos site...

...what?

---

Anyway I'm against it being at Wave Break for my own, selfish reasons. That's how democracy works. [insert free speech rant/guns/anti-pedophila rant].

Select to expand quote

tilldark said...
Interestingly you can see how charged this topic is by checking this site

http://www.saveourspit.com.au

Pretty pathetic and looks like an desperate anti-slander ... give me even less hope for a sensible outcome to this

Its intersting how the pro criuse ship lot are so very quick to type cast and ridicule those who are against as stinking Hippies bloody greenies and so forth . If your point of view is to attack the man not the ball than you have a very weak point of view .

The first thing is that the Save our spit lot are only against the terminal being in locations that are finacially, engineering and enviromentaly not viable .
Their point of view and mine is an off shore terminal , however the deal is lost as this is more to do with casinos than the terminal itself . The developers are only intersted in the deal provided that there are casinos involved as without them they will make a loss.

The spit is a glorified bar mouth at best, the gold coast is not a port the dredging required and the limits to when a Ship could cross a moving sand bar let alone be insured to do so is yet to be determined . Just remenber its not just where the rock wall ends they will need to go another KM out to sea past the breakers .Reducing the number of visits to a trickle at best, keeping in mind they will not be able to cross when its above 20knt .

And to give you an idea of the size of these boats they dont fit under the gateway bridge . The revenue that would come for the the day trippers would not even pay for the dredging.

No cruise ship company to date has even mentioned wanting to come here.

Select to expand quote

ggh said...
If your point of view is to attack the man not the ball than you have a very weak point of view.

Right on. It means you don't have much of an objective argument.

The only argument I can take from that site, and 90% of it is cringe-worthy ridicule of the other side (with the same name), is a vague reference to "progress" and jobs. I really, really, really don't want to see even more jobs on the Gold Coast dependent on tourism. It's a very bad idea.

Also: When they created the seaway it affected the tides. They now come in faster and higher than the canals were built for. Making the seaway even bigger would exasperate the problem even more.