Sign In
or Create a new account
DO YOU SUPPORT A SUBWAY OR BURRIED RAIL LINE FROM CIVIC OR WICKHAM?
The very cashed up investor can afford a subway! Lets not be bluffed in giving up our taxpayer owned resource cheaply. Everyone of the ugly Honeysuckle buildings has underground carparks on the waterfront!
Build over the line from Wickham to Civic, lets face it its a concrete jungle already with poor planning. From Civic to Newcastle sink the line and put parkland over it?
Lets not be too short sighted. Why would we plan a world class city without a heavy mass transport solution? If the developer is serious about future planning and population growth, removing any infrastructure is a mistake. Any argument about the cost of this is not the Taxpayers problem, this is OUR asset and a company seeking profit wants it for their benefit!
Relates to
date: 30 October 2008 Closing date for discussion forum
Comment 1 23 Oct 2008, 5:32 AM
How did you open this thread Matt, when you know from your State Planning experience that a subway is completely impractical?
A useful train subway in Newcastle would cost more than $500 million, would be environmentally unsustainable and attract less patronage than the handful of people that use it now. Imagine the cost of elevators and access for the disabled! Imagine the cost of bolstering the tunnels against sea water and vibrations from the harbour!
Let's get some facts on this page. It is getting a lot of hits but not many fact-based suggestions.
Comment 1.1 6 Nov 2008, 1:27 AM
I actually think this makes good sense. I've been reluctant to say it because of the obvious retort. but $500M you gotta be kidding. In essence you're building a concrete drain, 500m long. (Precast concrete sections, lowered into a trench, and sealed.) Tens of millions certainly, but $500M has gotta be the product of the kind of sloppy un-cost-conscious thinking you get from RailCorp.
I think he forgot to add this. If you build *over* the rail line in between that concrete jungle then the real estate value of that space has gotta be worth what? Tens of millions.. :)
Comment 2 23 Oct 2008, 10:39 AM
I disagree with Reformer's comment above,
sinking the rail line would not have to be as expensive as you suggest. We could simple dig a trench (not too deep, but deep enough) and cover over it with the "greenspine" suggested by gpt.
This project would cost money but i think it would satisfy both parties; the two halves of the city would be rejoined and this piece of infrastructure (that i believe will be crucial in years to come) can remain in a less obtrusive mannor.
Former Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer proposed something similar in Septermber 2005
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2005/09/12/1458114.htm
i think that proposing to <bold>remove<bold/> infrastructure in a city that will grow into a very large central hub is absolutely foolish. Buses clog the streets and burn fuel. Do we want hunter and king streets to become geroge street in sydney? i sure don't
Comment 3 25 Oct 2008, 9:29 PM
Why would anyone throw money at putting the rail line underground from Wickham or Civic. It is such a stupid idea it is beyond belief. The rail is totally under used, would more people use it if it was underground? The rail area is used mainly to park trains overnight ready for Sydney. The whole rail corridor is ugly, obsolete and obstructive. Get rid of it, it is NOT needed. Use the six lanes of Hunter street for one way traffic to the east end. How about as a community start thinking of our young people, give them a vibrant new city with retail and entertainment jobs. Stop living in the past, Save the rail people, it's not all about you!
Comment 3.1 30 Oct 2008, 6:57 PM
Ideas Man, obviously you dont catch trains.
Digging a trench, laying rail lines and putting a lid on it is a good idea except that the diesel trains wouldnt be allowed to run in it.
Comment 3.1.1 6 Nov 2008, 1:31 AM
Diesel trains run through lots of tunnels elsewhere.
Besides, the diesel trains we use are horribly out of date and could easily be replaced with hybrid or fuel cell powered units. But that's another story.
Comment 3.2 2 Nov 2008, 10:45 PM
The rail line does cut the city from the harbour a more practical solution should be sort. An electrified subway from Newcastle Station to Wickham Station should be considered.This would open the land up for parkland cycleways and practical commercial and public use. For example between Newcastle Station and Queens Wharf could used for the legal precinct, move the carparks off the foreshore to between Queens Wharf and Market Street leaving more land for water front parkland. Funding to come from land lease, land sale, State and Federal Government infrastructure spending The Hunter Region generates enormous wealth for the state and the nation surely some of this wealth could be spent here.
Comment 3.2.1 2 Nov 2008, 11:05 PM
Thanks Deedee ...thats right there is enormous wealth from our region and an enormous future growth potential ...we'll need all the infrastructure we can get ...so lets keep what we have but IMPROVE it and use the the corridor productively for the benefit of the whole region.
Comment 3.3 2 Nov 2008, 10:59 PM
If we are to look to the future IDEAS MAN then we need to plan for the planned growth in the Hunter Region which means you don't rip out infrastructure ...to add to a road network which is reaching gridlock ...unless you are a developer or landowner on the harbour driven by narrowminded self interst and greed ....
Better to keep what we have and IMPROVE it for the long term good .
Comment 4 7 Nov 2008, 10:38 AM
if it is so expensive then when have perth done it for their city station and subiaco? And all those buildings along Honeysuckle have underground carparks, so it must be technically feasible.
I agree - if the line goes, there is a very limited prospect that a developer would leave the land vacant, especially when there is land along the foreshore already as parkland.