The Shade Paradox: Rethinking the Surfers Paradise Revitalisation Plans

When the City of Gold Coast asked the public for feedback on its proposed Surfers Paradise Revitalisation concept design, one message came through loud and clear: people want more shade.

It sounds straightforward enough — but “more shade” is not as simple as it seems. The way shade works in Surfers Paradise is shaped by time, place, tree type, and design decisions. If we don’t define what kind of shade people mean — and when they want it — we risk designing solutions that miss the mark entirely.

1. What “more shade” really means

The first ambiguity is whether respondents were comparing shade levels to what currently exists, or to what was shown in the concept design. The survey didn’t clarify this point. If people were reacting to the renders, they might simply have noticed that the proposed designs showed less canopy coverage than today — and were asking for that loss to be addressed, not demanding new types of shade altogether.

2. Blaming the trees misses the point

The Council’s 2020 report concluded that Norfolk Pines were poor shade trees, forming the basis for proposals to remove and replace them. But that conclusion overlooks how these trees are actually used. The problem isn’t with the pines — it’s with the placement of public furniture beneath them. In practice, people regularly gather under the Norfolks, enjoying the filtered shade they provide. The photographic evidence is abundant. Removing established trees based on an assumption about “poor shade” would be a serious misjudgment.

3. Afternoon shade is already abundant

Surfers Paradise beach is famous for its skyline — and infamous for the shadows it casts. By mid-afternoon, especially in winter, large sections of the Esplanade are shaded by the towers themselves. This means any conversation about “more shade” must specify the time of day. If shade is desired in the afternoon, much of the need is already met naturally by the built environment.

4. Morning sun exposure and the east-facing Esplanade

The Esplanade faces due east, into the rising sun. Early in the day, it’s bright, exposed, and hot. This is where the Pandanas palms play a vital role, casting low morning shade over the beach-edge walkway. The Council’s proposed design removes almost all of them, replacing them with tall palms. Those taller trees will not cast usable shade on the path until around midday — leaving one of the most active parts of the foreshore exposed just when it’s most needed.

5. Lessons from Cavill Avenue’s canopy

The Council’s own 2020 report praised the Poinciana trees over Cavill Avenue as a model of good urban shade — broad, dense, and inviting. Yet in the concept renderings, the Poincianas are gone, replaced with tall, slender palms that provide minimal canopy coverage. The lesson appears to have been forgotten.

A smarter shade strategy

“More shade” should not mean fewer trees that actually work. True shade planning means understanding how people use the Esplanade through the day and designing for comfort, not just aesthetics. Surfers Paradise already has many of the right trees in the right places. What’s needed is refinement, not replacement — smarter planting, better placement of seating, and respect for the mature canopy that defines this iconic beachfront.

‍