Surfers Paradise - land swap for The Glades **canned**

[markTHEblake]

For those who didnt know, the members of Surfers Paradise Golf Club, have agreed to swap their land for The Glades golf course, and $20M(?)

The deal is up before Council for planning approvals etc etc, and its being opposed by the surrounding residents of both courses, amongst others. If not approved by about now, then it will go to Planning and Environment Court by end of year.

The website for the redevelopment of the site project is here, Santa Cruz Central Plenty of plans and pics.

And here is the objection groups site

Before & After



You will notice that the original idea that a 9 hole Par 3 golf course would comprise part of the redevelopment has been canned. Probably flood mitigation issues (but gee, how much land does a par 3 course use)

I am all for clubs doing what they need to do to survive the 21st century, but its a shame to see a golf course that was built by members be turned into such a monstrosity

[Moe Norman]

I don't mind the Glades, but for a weekly Saturday game - I'd prefer Surfers

[kpac]

I don't mind the Glades, but for a weekly Saturday game - I'd prefer Surfers

yeah? how's that work? Glades is a pretty good track - surfers is pretty ordinary.

for me - i dont have a problem with the move - neither course (esp surfers) were going well financially and rather than continuing a downward turn untill they're giving land away to cover debt, why not merge and try for a stronger entity while the economy is good. I hope that the glades will thrive into the private course of the coast.

[markTHEblake]

until they're giving land away to cover debt

Surfers don't have any land to give away. Part of the motivation on their part is the inevitable widening of the main rd which would cost them 2 holes, and no room to relocate them.

I don't think even the local re-routing Guru69 could map out a par 70 on that tiny plot. Apparently its the smallest 18h golf course on the coast.

[Moe Norman]

yeah? how's that work? Glades is a pretty good track - surfers is pretty ordinary.

I like Glades as I said, but its a real slog on foot and I hate carts. Resort courses have their place, but I wouldn't want to play any resort course on a weekly basis

[Moe Norman]

If you want your weekly game in a cart, thats your business.

[markTHEblake]

I wouldnt have thought that Glades would be a tough walk, doesnt seem any different than other long tracks. Not that I have walked it though, and i am getting old and unfit

[Moe Norman]

I've walked it once, long and painful.

[markTHEblake]

As reported in the last newsletter, Surfers Paradise JV Nominees (“the Developer”) lodged a Change to Application with the Gold Coast City Council on 27 March 2008.

On 28 May 2008, the Department of Infrastructure and Planning issued an Information Request (Changed Application) (“Information Request”) to the Developer with the 35 page Information Request having input from Gold Coast City Council, Department of Main Roads, Queensland Transport, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Natural Resources and Water, and Department of Emergency Services.

The Information Request seeks clarification, additional information and revision of many aspects of the development application.

The Developer now has until May 2009 to respond to the Information Request by addressing the issues raised or alternatively nominating to supply some or none of the information requested and asking the application be assessed on its merits as submitted.

The 30 day public notification and objection period will only commence after the date when the Developer provides notice to the relevant authorities requesting the application be assessed.

Some of the issues raised in the Information Request include:

*

Potential problems with the proposed lake system as its shallow depth, slow flushing rates and potentially high nutrient inputs indicate the lake system is likely to produce conditions for algae growth resulting in problems with ongoing water quality maintenance.
*

The existence of high levels of acid sulfate soil and potential problems of oxidation during excavation of the sandy soil to create the lake affecting the canal/ lakes long term health
*

Lack of flood free access to and from the development site and ongoing concerns with flood mitigation and lack of adequate modelling studies on the affect of flooding within the development site
*

Lack of provision for community facilities such as community meeting rooms and other social infrastructure facilities within the development and lack of parks and other public open space recreational areas
*

The inclusion of a proposed tavern in the development and whether it is justifiable because of the possible negative social and community safety issues arising from its presence
*

The loss of virtually all vegetation from the existing 40ha site particularly the large old growth trees and other locally-significant species that provide habitat and nesting for many wildlife
*

Lack of adequate public parking and ongoing issues with traffic congestion, public transport and vehicular access to and from the development site

[BrisWesty]

No great surprises in that list Blakey.
How many units are they proposing?

[PeteyD]

Sounds like a bunch of nimby's complaining and sticking the Environment on it to give it justification.

[BrisVegas]

so is Glades still operating? I haven't played it yet, but have been meaning to.

[BrisWesty]

Nah PeteyD, this is the info request from council and the government groups like Environmental Protection Agency etc.

The NIMBYs get their crack (not DC's) after the applicant responds to the information request.

Glad I'm not assessing that one!

[PeteyD]

Oh OK. Bloody EPA stuff then.

[markTHEblake]

There has been no changed to the status of this development, Developer has not responded to the Information Request by council (as above)

Late last year the Gold Coast council endorsed proposed changes to the planning scheme to prevent golf courses from being converted to concrete jungles. It is not clear when this new planning scheme would take affect though.

And if interested the waiting list for Surfers Paradise membership is 9 months, mine came up last week and I knocked it back. If i knew it would have come up that quick I wouldnt have joined another club in the meantime.

[Moe Norman]

so why did you knock it back?

Gold Coast Country Club looks to be a prime spot for a development!

[markTHEblake]

Gold Coast Country club is ripe for development, but the members dont own it, and the Pro leases the course (off the same person who owns Logan City GC), and i aint a member there anyway.

Lots of reasons for knocking back the Surfers membership, when I added them all up, it equaled stay put for now, the overriding one is probably that I have settled in, made new friends, and to change again so soon would make a mockery of the reasons I gave for switching in the first place.

[markTHEblake]

Today the Gold Coast Council killed this golf course swap deal by finally rejecting the Development Application of the existing course. The developer can go to the land court but the objection group believes that there are far too many hurdles, having read the report i would agree, not to mention the rumours that the developers are suffering GFC pain, possibly the reason that they didnt meet all the requests for information from the council is they gave up

And given that soon the Council will soon have implemented their golf course protection policy that is the nail in the coffin for any course that has a desire to cash out and relocate, as the only developments to be allowed on a golf course will be "open space and recreation"

[kpac]

Today the Gold Coast Council killed this golf course swap deal by finally rejecting the Development Application of the existing course. The developer can go to the land court but the objection group believes that there are far too many hurdles, having read the report i would agree, not to mention the rumours that the developers are suffering GFC pain, possibly the reason that they didnt meet all the requests for information from the council is they gave up

The reason it wont/wasn't continued was developer $$. The bloke behind it, has flogged of every development that i knew he had lined up. Even the finished stuff is being sold off in mass, to try and 'get out'. I think you'll find with a more powerfull developer this would have been sealed up long ago, and you'd now be looking at a big ditch. But anyhow possibly a lost cause now. The residences around the course think they have 'won' however personally i don't see this course lasting long anyway (but maybe that's just me) the real shame is the Glades. If they don't figure out a more viable playing arrangement, that course will be a fraction of what it currently is.

And given that soon the Council will soon have implemented their golf course protection policy that is the nail in the coffin for any course that has a desire to cash out and relocate, as the only developments to be allowed on a golf course will be "open space and recreation"

1. I don't see this a being viable, and the council are the only people stupid enough to think that it is.

It's a good intention with ramifications that see golf courses die in other parts of the world.

Developers Dictionary

"Golf Course Protection Policy": A 'holding' investment. ie. A piece of land that you buy, put no $$ into until the course dies. Claim that the golf course failed. The get in good books with council by providing a "open space area"........ sit & wait around 5 years, until everyone forgets about the once golf course, and apply to develop.

[markTHEblake]

sit & wait around 5 years, until everyone forgets about the once golf course, and apply to develop.

I heard that is why the Merrimac public course has closed, and by now probably have cows from next door walking all over it. After a few years the owners will ask "what golf course?" its just a paddock, that golf course policy cant apply.

The signs on the front gate seemed very strange "entry prohibited, any rights to access this property are no longer valid" but in light of working around this policy that makes sense.

If they don't figure out a more viable playing arrangement, that course will be a fraction of what it currently is.

Perhaps with the closure to the public of a few others, Hope, SC, it might get a rebirth?

[Minor_Threat]

So what is the current state of Surfers GC. I have played it a lot and really like it. Does it still exist?

[razaar]

My old mate Max Stewart (past President) of Surfer's Paradise GC and a leading voice opposing the swap will be celebrating.

[kpac]

I heard that is why the Merrimac public course has closed, and by now probably have cows from next door walking all over it. After a few years the owners will ask "what golf course?" its just a paddock, that golf course policy cant apply.

Ha, that's out office work: "Cypress gardens", it will soon be know as mate, Nothing special, but neither was the golf course.

MT - Yep surfers is still plugging away mate, can still get a round there no problems.

[Hawkers2008]

For the sake of the argument assume that its envitable that there will be some loss of their current course to roadworks and possibly also resulting safety issues and that in the long term moving from the site will be the better choice golfwise.

Given that and seeing as this proposal has gone tits up what are their future options likely to be - could they get a site that not to distant to build something on or is there another facility that they might be able to takeover and if so which course(s).

[markTHEblake]

I cant understand whythe club doesnt just build a resort and residential on the course, make it 9 holes semi-public and they will make plenty of cash to purchase Glades or Arundel outright - both of which are on the market.

This might just provide the right balance for the locals and council who want to retain their open space and golf course and get the club to benefit financially.