KIRRA MARINA IS BACK?

Well we already have wet n wild for waves why not destroy Kirra for a few extra dollers for rich fat cats who dont respect the ocean.What is this Dubai?

Seriously this cant be legit can it?

never gonna happen.....it may up the spit but not kirra .

I think Stu summed it up pretty good here, i know that was back in 2012 but its the same deal http://www.swellnet.com/news/surfpolitik/2012/08/01/queensland-terminal-...

This guy is the Chairmen for The Gold Coast Surf Industry Taskforce (GCSIT). John Nielson.

He's on the record in the gold coast bulletin as saying this about the development at Bilinga, "I've got kids who need jobs and there's not much going on around here."

And told a local protestor at the announcement, "You don't speak for all surfers."

Is John serious? Surely there's not a surfer alive who would want, agree to, or allow this monstrosity of a bad idea to ever exist. Not at bilinga or the spit.

Contact the GCSIT and tell them what you think!

http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/gold-coast/anger-as-bilionaire-...

Stu was onto it.
Now all those mincy jersey shore gold coasters will be coming down here for waves. :(

Round and round we go,theres always another greedy fuk to take the place of the previous one.

We surfers would get much more traction in our argument if we proposed an alternative location. I can't imagine that the surfing population who would protest against this on the GC holds a majority within the GCCC limits, so the leverage we have isn't limitless.
Sooner or later the big wigs will use the line 'surfers complained about the spit, surfers complained about Kirra, the project is going ahead so we'll just do it at 'xxxx' as we've accomodated their needs twice now without reaching a suitable agreement.

1) Broadbeach/Mermaid is a goer. Banks are usually shit, the place suits a massive harbour installation, close to the hustle and bustle and highrises and the added bonus is that the foreshore north of here may be protected from erosion by installing such a structure that would allow sand to build up on the northern side. Make the southern breakwall taper off as a lefthand point and everyone's happy except for the environmentalists who know better than to damage our fragile marine ecosystems with massive cruiseships.

2) Surfers

3) Narrowneck

4) North Tugun - worst case scenario but the banks are shit up there too, if it's far enough up the beach it shouldn't effect kirra, might impact on currumbin alley though.

Anyway if it's going to go in, then this is the way to negotiate.

It's not just about where has shit banks, imo.

The problem with having the marina in any part of the southern goldie (ie Tugan, bilinga or kirra), is the south to north sand drift will greatly impact the beachies, and the two points Alley & Burleigh to north of any marina. Having it at Bilinga comapared to say Mermaid, means there is 25 odd km's of coastline to the spit be affected by the sand flow effects, compared to 10 or so kms from mermaid.

Who knows what effect that would have when those beaches to the north of it -- already eroding -- when they become sand starved? I know the bank at burleigh needs sand to break at sharkies, the cove and the rock-break.

With mermaid to northcliffe just about dropping into the ocean from erosion last storm season, I just cannot imagine a marina being built along the coast.

It's not just surfers affected then. It's every cashed up & influential person on the gold coast living on waterfront blocks. You think hedges ave crew will like to see their 4 million dollar homes end up in the drink?

If it has to be anywhere -- not that I subscribe to that theory -- the spit is the only real option, but the developers and council don't like the logistics involved and the reduced capacity in the spit not to be able to have 500m ocean liners and resort ships dock there.

The flip side to that is; reclaiming a kilometre of land out to sea from an ocean front sounds like a bad idea, and money waiting to be lost when it all gets washed away.

Not uncommon to have a few 10-foot plus swells every summer storm season along the bilinga to tugun stretch. That will test any engineering, I would think.

People on facebook mentioned in maidera or somewhere a similar marina idea was constructed and the whole lot washed away within 12 months. So there's a precedent.

I pretty much disagree with any notion that we have to meet greedy, bloated developers anywhere near halfway when it comes to developing the ocean front or the spit and compromising the environment. It's a horrible idea born of nothing more than greed.

But I admit, that could be seen as a pretty extreme view, and that progress will eventually win out.

... In a way it'd be funny to watch the greedy ppl associated with the development, it'd be funny to watch them destroy the billion dollar gold coast waterfront real estate industry, which no doubt they are a part of, when it all erodes away because they've run out of sand.

braithy wrote:

It's not just surfers affected then. It's every cashed up & influential person on the gold coast living on waterfront blocks. You think hedges ave crew will like to see their 4 million dollar homes end up in the drink?

But I admit, that could be seen as a pretty extreme view, and that progress will eventually win out.

Braithy, I was talking to friend of ours this weekend, who has land down Nobby's way. I never knew this but awhile ago the council asked permission from the land owners on Nobby's to Broadbeach, as to construct a footpath in front of their land which was in place at the time. The land owners came up with an unanimous decision of NO.
Since then the land has deteriorated some what and the council have refused to help these land owners out at all. If they had of said yes then maybe the erosion could of been helped and stopped with funding from the council....?

It will be a shame for this infrastructure to go ahead, anywhere IMO, does the GC need another casino. Already down Cooly and Tweed way there are thousands of pokie machines that destroy peoples expenditure and families.
As it has been said there is not much down that ways at all, let alone car parks, maybe one big parking space a kilometre out to sea..?

Progress and money which talks will eventually win :(

I agree Welly. the same council deal is at play at Tugun after the people nixed the beach-bikepath there.

It makes me really sad to think of what has already become of the GC from the late 70's and 80's. Progress and money has always won out here, and this marina will be no different.

My biggest question to the billionaire developers is, how much money is enough for you? How much more could you possibly need?

If there's an uglier human trait then greed, someone please tell me what it is.

I hope they are also assessing economic feasability for this, otherwise it could turn out to be a white elephant of mammoth proportions. If you look at the average tourist on the Goldy, they don't strike me as a cruise ship passenger 'type'. I suppose that's cos there aren't any cruise ships coming yet, but either way, there will need to be a bit of a change of pitch in tourism to attract the target market required.

This strikes me as a strange time to be proposing such a venture, considering local and broader economic conditions, coupled with the fact they are looking to ramp up casino activity in other big cities like Sydney. I wonder if there is enough to go round and make this all viable. It also seems that none of the coastline will make such a venture easy to set up, maintain, and run. I think this is why half of the tenders pulled out before submissions were due, which makes me worry that the others are going in without proper consideration of costs - both initially and ongoing. If it fails we will be left with a very large mess

"Kirra Cruise Terminal Public Land Grab on Again. To Save Our Southern Beaches Alliance and Gecko are planning a huge rally at 10am Sunday 19th January at Kirra to protest at not only this Kirra Proposal, but also the Broadwater cruise ship public land grab proposal. "

http://gecko.org.au/2014/01/kirra-cruise-terminal-public-land-grab-on-ag...

I'm not much of a protester, but this might be worth while. I'd like to encourage everyone to join.

Filthy creatures , I hope they never get there way to ruin the best end of Goldy .....if they do I will be hoping a Cyclone washes the trash they build into the Ocean.

yocal wrote:

We surfers would get much more traction in our argument if we proposed an alternative location. I can't imagine that the surfing population who would protest against this on the GC holds a majority within the GCCC limits, so the leverage we have isn't limitless.
Sooner or later the big wigs will use the line 'surfers complained about the spit, surfers complained about Kirra, the project is going ahead so we'll just do it at 'xxxx' as we've accomodated their needs twice now without reaching a suitable agreement.

1) Broadbeach/Mermaid is a goer. Banks are usually shit, the place suits a massive harbour installation, close to the hustle and bustle and highrises and the added bonus is that the foreshore north of here may be protected from erosion by installing such a structure that would allow sand to build up on the northern side. Make the southern breakwall taper off as a lefthand point and everyone's happy except for the environmentalists who know better than to damage our fragile marine ecosystems with massive cruiseships.

2) Surfers

3) Narrowneck

4) North Tugun - worst case scenario but the banks are shit up there too, if it's far enough up the beach it shouldn't effect kirra, might impact on currumbin alley though.

Anyway if it's going to go in, then this is the way to negotiate.

You know in the right place (an area that doesn't already have a good set up or affect a nearby already good set up in a negative way) a marina could actually be a positive for surfers, a marina is basically a big headland with an inlet, both which mean a break in a straight beach, sure you loose a little beach but chances are very high that it would produce some sort of set up itself either from the dredging of a channel or from sand build up around rock walls or from the fact that they would have to dredge/pump sand to keep the harbour opening open.

Obviously any man made object is an eyesore but hello people, we are talking the Goldie stand on any beach on the Goldie and unless you are looking directly out to sea, you are looking at a man made object and in a lot of places late arvo your shadowed by man made objects..

If it was up to me id say roll the dice at narrow neck, i bet it would produce a better wave in some way than that artificial reef and would most likely improve the quality of beaches in either direction because it would help stop the north to south gutter effect.

You might be right Indo D.
There was a temporary pier of some sort made down in south Wollongong a few years ago that went a fair way out while they were building a proper one inside the harbor.

For some reason it created an excellent righthander with the weird currents and rips underneath each pole.
Even at 1 foot or two foot it would constantly be a perfect semi long little right bowl heading under the pier.
Completely unexpected im guessing and we were disappointed when it was pulled down.

If designed correctly at narrowneck it might be a gamble though there might be a small chance it makes another Kirra or Burleigh heads type wave. at least some sort of wedge or rip bowl on either side.

Seems when its planned and designed for surfers they dont often turn out well for surf breaks.
Pretty big gamble.

From what I understand the goldie has a very good history of man made structures improving surf spots.

Correct me if im wrong as its only from what ive heard (any very old goldie surfers out there?)

D-bah wasn't the quality wave it is now before the groynes to stabilise the river mouth went in.

Snapper/superbank has definitely improved from the sand by pass but obviously this has been at the expense of Kirra.

Kirra has been said to been better after the groynes went in.

Currumbin alley?....has a groyne at river mouth, dont know if this changed the wave?...but ive surfed it pretty much perfect with the groyne there.

Palm beach, from memory has groynes...no idea what it was like before, but gets good banks.

Burleigh...no idea if the groynes at tulubudgery river mouth or Palm beach ever affected the wave quality?

The spit is said to be better than before the sea way, and it also has a jetty that can get a fun bank running towards it.

The seaway is said to get a left when huge, no idea what the rivermouth was like before the seaway?

South Straddie/TOS, is said to be much better than before the seaway and sand by pass went in.

Obviously have no ide what the natural rivermouths would have been like before they were stabilised, obviously rivermouths can get epics waves but normally banks are fickle and there is also plenty of examples of river mouths that rarely to never do it.

True Indo good points raised....

But do they need another casino, not that it bothers me but i've seen a lot of people loose out big time.
Well I suppose the drug lords can launder their money....?

Yeah screw the Casino sure dont need that, scum of the earth casinos basically legal theft.

Anyway the Kirra proposal is for sure just a diversion tactic, realistically the seaway proposal is much more realistic.

BTW. is there any proof or even theories that it would ruin the surf at TOS? I haven't seen any?

Although no one would want to roll the dice on that one, i really dont think you could improve that beachie, would have to be the pest peak style beachie in OZ had so so many good surfs there.

The Balinga/Kirra Marina is just a "red herring" to take the pressure off the Spit/Main Beach proposal ........Both are bad ideas ..............

Yeah I agree Greg. I couldn't see this Kirra proposal ever passing a simple EIA.. I've always been of the belief that it's a smokescreen for the Broadwater terminal (as per The Australian, no proposal has been submitted to the government, and 'acting Premier Jeff Seeney said he was "very sceptical" about Leda's idea').

If the government is serious about putting in a cruise ship terminal, I reckon they'll leverage the Kirra response and work it in favour of the Broadwater as much as possible. Just my 2c anyway.

Well, surprise surprise.

"...Premier Campbell Newman quashed plans for a $2 billion cruise ship terminal".

"But Mr Newman made it clear yesterday that the Broadwater cruise ship terminal plan was still on the table."

http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/lifestyle/beaches-and-fishing/premie...

Yep, I also ignored all the hyperbole surrounding this, as there was no way they were seriously contemplating this.

As a lot of people have been saying, just a front to make the Broadwater terminal look the better of two evils..

Man, that whole Broadwater area is already choking. Try having to commute a couple of thousand per ship around the coast and see how long it takes to get to Sea World...