• Queries planned capacity against its own beaches

• Not swayed by cruise line’s environmental pledges

• ‘Nice of you to visit, but bring more detail next time’

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Atlantis yesterday said it has not been swayed by Royal Caribbean’s pledge to hit an environmental “gold standard” as the cruise giant is “packing a lot of people” into its Paradise Island beach club’s 17 acres.

Vaughn Roberts, the mega resort’s senior vice-president of government affairs and special projects, told Tribune Business that Royal Caribbean’s promises not to construct any structures on or over the water - and to employ “a very sophisticated waste water management system” - for its $100m project had done little to address its long-standing concerns.

And he also queried whether the Royal Beach Club, which will be located near western Paradise Island’s tip in the Colonial Beach area, is sufficiently large enough to accommodate the 2,750 average daily passenger count cited by Royal Caribbean. Mr Roberts said Atlantis “never has 3,000-4,000 persons a day” on its beaches, which stretch for several miles, suggesting that the cruise line is seeking to “pack a lot of people” into a much smaller space.

And, with Atlantis “focused squarely” on the environmental concerns sparked by Royal Caribbean’s proposal, he also encouraged Bahamians to query the project’s economic benefits for local businesses and their employees and whether it will “displace” existing passenger spending enjoyed by Bay Street merchants and restaurants, plus tour and excursion operators throughout New Providence.

Senior Royal Caribbean executives last week said Atlantis and others should feel “comfortable” their concerns will be addressed by the Department of Environmental Planning and Protection’s (DEPP) public consultation and approval processes, and that they will share more information publicly about their plans as this progresses.

Mr Roberts, though, said their reassurances had made little impression on the Paradise Island mega resort which - if the Royal Beach Club project is approved - will effectively be its immediate next-door neighbour. Describing Royal Caribbean’s multiple media interviews as “interesting”, he told this newspaper: “We didn’t really see them address any of the concerns we’ve raised and had on the table for the last two years.

“To say they will use some state-of-the-art wastewater treatment plant is one thing, but to show up with the design of the facility and technology would be helpful. On the coastline, it’s one thing to say they will not be putting jetties on the water, but it doesn’t rule out the possibility of expanding the beaches. It’s nice of them to visit, but hopefully next time they will come with more details.

“Our concerns are squarely on the environmental details, and all this time later they’ve not come back with specifics on how they will address these issues and not touch the coastline at all.” Michael Bayley, Royal Caribbean’s president and chief executive, last week told Tribune Business that all questions and criticisms surrounding the Royal Beach Club will be addressed but the project first has to pass through - and respect - the DEPP process before details can be shared.

He said: “We’re going to have a very sophisticated waste water management system. I think, as time will tell, they should feel comfortable we’ve addressed those questions but we need to go through the process with the DEPP before we start sharing this information.

“There are no structures on the water. There are no overwater cabanas. There’s nothing like that planned. Everybody’s entitled to voice their concerns and raise the question. We have no issue with that. We just believe we need to go through the process and will share all the relevant information when the timing is right.”

Mr Roberts, meanwhile, said Atlantis was “solely focused” on the environmental issues and DEPP approvals process. “We know they’ve made reference to us, and they seem to appreciate why we’ve raised these concerns,” he added of Royal Caribbean.

“For us, it’s significant. We have a massive facility and investment on Paradise Island that’s been in existence for over 25 years, it’s demonstrated the economic impact and we’ve certainly managed around any environmental issues there. We stand on our record, are very proud of what we’ve done for The Bahamas, and we hope anyone else coming in approaches development in a sustainable and responsible way, and will be mindful of the environment.

“We continue to wait to see what the details are, and what the detailed responses are, to the questions we have raised and others have raised,” Mr Roberts continued. “On any given day there’s never 3,000-4,000 persons on the Atlantis stretch and it’s a much larger beach. It’s a lot of people to pack into the space on that [Royal Caribbean] beach.

“We need to see more details. They seemed to give some assurances they will provide more details. We continue to raise the concerns, and are going to stay very close to it and be very vigilant. It’s important to us, important to our future and important to the experience we deliver to our guests.”

Mr Roberts said Atlantis, which has already encouraged its near-6,000 staff to voice their concerns over the Royal Caribbean project, was similarly enthused by the opposition from others and those who were challenging non-environmental aspects of the $100m Royal Beach Club.

“Somebody should question the economic impact and the displacement of business onshore; business across New Providence, not just downtown Nassau. People take excursions everywhere,” he said. “The distribution of the tourism dollar, people ought to question if this reduces that, constrains that. These are important issues someone should question. We’re squarely on the environmental position.”

The Royal Beach Club’s daily passenger average of 2,750 is just below 10 percent of the 28,000-plus record arrivals recently set by Nassau Cruise Port, suggesting that there will still be significant business for others to compete for. And Mr Bayley and other Royal Caribbean executives pledged that “more than 60 percent of our guests” - which will have risen to 2.5m per annum by 2027 - will never visit the Paradise Island project.

Addressing fears from Bay Street merchants and other tourism stakeholders that the Royal Beach Club will suck cruise passengers, and their spending power, away from Bahamian-owned businesses, Mr Bayley said: “I’d say that’s just inaccurate. It’s just not factually correct.

“We need to start working together as a collective team to improve the overall experience for our customers and tourists we’re bringing to the destination, and we need to start thinking win-win. How do we create experiences that make Nassau a desired destination for tourists? It’s not going to happen with a negative narrative; it will happen by positively working together. We can win together, and we can lose if we can’t work together.”

Mr Roberts and Atlantis have previously denied that their concerns are motivated by the competition that the Royal Beach Club will present for cruise passengers who, in the past, have provided a lucrative revenue sources for the Paradise Island resort.

However, they are not alone in voicing concerns over whether the proposed Royal Beach Club site - encompassing a relatively thin tract of land - can cope with several thousand passengers daily even with the Government’s four Crown Land acres added to the 13 private ones acquired by the cruise line.

Joe Darville, Save the Bays president, who was last week among several activists to sign a letter demanding ““a thorough, transparent review of the environmental, economic and cultural impacts of Royal Caribbean’s proposed beach project on Paradise Island”, said the proposed volume of visitors made it almost impossible to avoid a negative impact.

Responding to Royal Caribbean’s promises, he told Tribune Business: “A company as large as that, and with all the resources they have, there’s probably a good possibility they could put in structures that may not significantly damage the environment.

“But, no matter what they do, that little part of Paradise Island cannot bear a large development. It’s surrounded by ocean on the side of the harbour and outside the harbour. There are multitudes of live coral reefs in that area. It’s almost impossible not to have a significant deleterious on a little part of land like that, particularly with hundreds and thousands of people there on a daily basis. It’s almost impossible that the impact will not be deleterious.”