Flashback: Debate over where the Gold Coast cruise ship terminal should be built

FROM inside the Broadwater to an offshore jetty, there’s no shortage of proposed locations for the controversial Gold Coast cruise ship terminal.

DEBATE over the merits and needs of a cruise ship terminal has raged for more than 17 years and there’s no end in sight.

This week the city’s most controversial issue floated back onto the agenda as the Gold Coast City Council considered what to do next with their proposal to build an offshore model.

Mayor Tom Tate asked the State Government to back an exploration of the project as part of a Spit masterplan, considering the offshore location at Philip Park or even other options such as Doug Jennings Park and the Seaway.

The proposed offshore Gold Coast cruise ship terminal. Photo: Supplied

The question of where to put the proposed terminal has been at the heart of the debate.

The Spit has been the major focus of various plans, ranging from those considered by the Beattie Government in the early to mid-2000s to ASF’s 2014 proposals.

Others floated included Wavebreak Island berths in plans floated by both developers ASF and Sembawang while other developers, including Bob Ell, instead put forward plans for a mega terminal off Kirra on the Southern Gold Coast.

COUNCIL DELAYS CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL REPORT

The Sembawang proposal.

But councillors were briefed on multiple locations when the idea was revived in 2012 when Cr Tate was first elected.

In June 2012 councillors considered a report by council bureaucrats that gave a detailed analysis of five options.

Four of the options were sites either in the Seaway or inside the Broadwater with the final option an undefined offshore location with sufficient water to dock.

City councillors voted for further investigation of only two options — the first inside the Seaway and second further south near the Marine Stadium.

The report initially found the offshore option was “plausible” because it reduced the huge costs created by dredging. But testing and modelling was needed to determine “the viability of exposure to significant ocean swells”.

TRUE IMPACT OF CST

The ASF Wavebreak Island proposal.

An offshore facility, it was claimed, would also require the extra cost of a ferry system to get passengers and crew to shore.

In his pre-election announcement Cr Tate had mooted the idea of a terminal at Doug Jennings Park at The Spit.

In the early 2000s the Beattie Government commissioned the $120,000 computer analysis to determine whether it would be feasible for large cruise ships to navigate the Seaway and dock at a nearby terminal at the end of The Spit.

FLASHBACK: BATTLE FOR THE SPIT

Artist impression of a cruise ship crossing the Gold Coast Seaway.

FLASHBACK: WAVEBREAK ISLAND PLAN

State Development Minister Tony McGrady told the Bulletin in 2005 the results were promising.

Mr Beattie, a strong advocate for a terminal on the Gold Coast, agreed and said he was looking forward to seeing the results of the study but there was still some work to be done before it could be considered by Cabinet.

The project at the time appeared to be full-steam ahead, despite divided public opinion before things came to a crashing halt in late 2006.

Cruise ship terminal gallery

VIEW GALLERY

The Government abandoned the long-mooted development on the eve of the September 2006 state election in a move to save several seats.

The ploy was successful and it was nearly six years before the idea again became a serious consideration under the Newman Government and the new 2012 council.

The offshore proposal was mooted in early 2016 by Cr Tate.

It’s been six years since the 2012 proposal was unveiled and the idea remains years out of reach still.

The Premier this week told the Bulletin the project would have to be submitted through State Development and considered by the department officers.

With the future still uncertain, it’s clear the debate on the future of a cruise ship terminal and where it should, if built, will continue for years to come.