Another push for a terminal for Newcastle

[MicCanberra]

Yeah but the rail is all underground which is the big difference. There are no heavy rail lines running on the surface of the land in the CBD of those cities.

 

With all the tunnels an mines under Newcastle, they should just use some of those.

[GUT2407]

The rail line killed the city. I have been there since and it is much better with the rail line gone and the city is starting to thrive.

 

No major city has heavy rail going through the CBD. London, Tokyo, Canberra, Singapore and many more have the heavy rail on surrounding areas or underground rail. Sydney is the same. Central Station is certainly not in the CBD and the train line comes west and up from the south avoiding the main areas of the city.

 

Newcastle Station was always a drug whole full of undesirables. It was rotten and filthy and the area to the south of it was nothing to be proud of. It reeks of the rotten stench of urine, covered in graffiti and I could go on forever about how bad the city has been in the past. At least the new honeysuckle development is making the city start thriving again and turning it into something more family friendly and desirable.

 

 

Only druggies and urine stench has been since they closed the line.

 

Now I'm one who thought closing it was a good idea, but let's use facts.

[The_Big_M]

I was under the impression, that the gov at the time threw so many hurdles at the casino idea that, he had to redesign, re-work, and offer the current model to appease them, just to get it over the line.

 

Pretty much the opposite.

 

There was no licence for a second casino. Barangaroo was planned for redevelopment, including a cruise pier. Packer made an unsolicited offer to add a casino, nobody could believe it as there was no second casino licence, there were secret meetings and then a contra-proposal from Star given the obvious impact on its business, which is probably where you come from with the negotiations. And then a deal was done, with Packer granted a licence for a casino, with certain elements agreed and subject to ongoing negotiation.

 

So it was never the case that the option was available and Packer had to comply, pretty much the reverse; he made some deal that the government found ultra attractive... up to you what form that would be, since everything is 'commercial in confidence'.

[The_Big_M]

The rail line killed the city. I have been there since and it is much better with the rail line gone and the city is starting to thrive.

 

I haven't seen it. The city was dying, but not because of the rail line imo. Just the suburban decentralisation that you see everywhere in Aust - including Sydney.

 

As for the change since, can't see much improvement. The major anchors that had left are still gone, and there's similar sorts of pockets that there used to be, even when the rail line was there. Sure, when it's done it _should_ be better - but there's nothing that would not have been possible by retaining the transport infrastructure you had instead of regressing... Hey, just like they did with the tram lines in Sydney.

 

No major city has heavy rail going through the CBD. London, Tokyo, Canberra, Singapore and many more have the heavy rail on surrounding areas or underground rail. Sydney is the same. Central Station is certainly not in the CBD and the train line comes west and up from the south avoiding the main areas of the city.

 

Untrue. Just locally, both Melbourne and Brisbane, the nearest major cities have heavy rail in the CBD. Looking further, most European cities do have multiple heavy rail hubs in the city: Paris, Berlin, Rome, Nuremberg, Munich, the list goes on. And they're cities with social activity that are humming and thriving - you even commented how behind we are in public transport. This removal puts us further behind.

 

As for Sydney - as said, you'd have to be the first person to hold it up as a model of planning!

 

Even the single element of trams that we had in the 60s with the largest network in the southern hemisphere, all got removed, and now there's massive disruption just to add a much simpler line back in.

Edited September 18, 2016 by The_Big_M

[MicCanberra]

 

Untrue. Just locally, both Melbourne and Brisbane, the nearest major cities have heavy rail in the CBD. Looking further, most European cities do have multiple heavy rail hubs in the city: Paris, Berlin, Rome, Nuremberg, Munich, the list goes on. And they're cities with social activity that are humming and thriving - you even commented how behind we are in public transport. This removal puts us further behind.

 

As for Sydney - as said, you'd have to be the first person to hold it up as a model of planning!

 

Even the single element of trams that we had in the 60s with the largest network in the southern hemisphere, all got removed, and now there's massive disruption just to add a much simpler line back in.

 

Totally Agree.:D

[mrs and mrs]

Pretty much the opposite.

 

There was no licence for a second casino. Barangaroo was planned for redevelopment, including a cruise pier. Packer made an unsolicited offer to add a casino, nobody could believe it as there was no second casino licence, there were secret meetings and then a contra-proposal from Star given the obvious impact on its business, which is probably where you come from with the negotiations. And then a deal was done, with Packer granted a licence for a casino, with certain elements agreed and subject to ongoing negotiation.

 

So it was never the case that the option was available and Packer had to comply, pretty much the reverse; he made some deal that the government found ultra attractive... up to you what form that would be, since everything is 'commercial in confidence'.

 

cheers for that,its good to learn new stuff.

I just remember, embarking out of the big tent at barangaroo, and thinking wow this terminal, will be awesome ,but its not to be.

[David1951]

40 Days until RCL start using Port Kembla and stopover [emoji3]check it out here. Radiance is the first of many this season to visit

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/4174309/miami-loves-the-gong/?cs=300

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited September 19, 2016 by David1951

[MicCanberra]

Thanks for the article, makes it sound so nice.:D

[Brisbane41]

I haven't seen it. The city was dying, but not because of the rail line imo. Just the suburban decentralisation that you see everywhere in Aust - including Sydney.

 

As for the change since, can't see much improvement. The major anchors that had left are still gone, and there's similar sorts of pockets that there used to be, even when the rail line was there. Sure, when it's done it _should_ be better - but there's nothing that would not have been possible by retaining the transport infrastructure you had instead of regressing... Hey, just like they did with the tram lines in Sydney.

 

 

 

Untrue. Just locally, both Melbourne and Brisbane, the nearest major cities have heavy rail in the CBD. Looking further, most European cities do have multiple heavy rail hubs in the city: Paris, Berlin, Rome, Nuremberg, Munich, the list goes on. And they're cities with social activity that are humming and thriving - you even commented how behind we are in public transport. This removal puts us further behind.

 

As for Sydney - as said, you'd have to be the first person to hold it up as a model of planning!

 

Even the single element of trams that we had in the 60s with the largest network in the southern hemisphere, all got removed, and now there's massive disruption just to add a much simpler line back in.

 

I grew up in the city and know that the rail line was killing the city. Seeing the city after the rail line torn up it is more vibrant, more people are coming back and it is finally becoming more popular for families, bike riders, picnics and more restaurants, bars, clubs and entertainment venues.

 

We are living in the future not the past so what happened in the 60's is irrelevant.

 

I personally have never seen a major city anywhere in my world wide travels of heavy rail cutting the CBD in half.

 

I can guarantee as someone who grew up in Newcastle and moved away for work and goes back there that the city is better off without the rail line destroying the city. No one used it anyway and the locals would know to head to Broadmeadow Station if they were heading to Sydney. The rail line should have been cut at Broadmeadow like the labor party wanted to do instead the liberals caved and cut it at Wickham. Ever since the line was cut the whole city has come alive. There are more bike tracks and eventually there will be light rail going with the flow of the traffic opposed to cutting the city in half.

[The_Big_M]

I personally have never seen a major city anywhere in my world wide travels of heavy rail cutting the CBD in half.

 

You have your perspective and experiences, I have mine. I don't agree with a number of things, including the above statement that it cut the CBD in half, nor that the actions taken were the only or best 'solution', nor that things have dramatically improved. However, it doesn't seem either of us will change our views so rather than flogging a dead horse, probably best to leave the pros and cons there.

 

We are living in the future not the past so what happened in the 60's is irrelevant.

 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

 

Some learn lessons from the past... and some don't.

[ctp365]

Thanks for the article, makes it sound so nice.:D

 

 

Mic, it truly is a beautiful place and has lots to offer for tourists. I spend alot of time down there as my partner, David lives down there. The coast line down there is spectacular.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[GUT2407]

I grew up in the city and know that the rail line was killing the city. Seeing the city after the rail line torn up it is more vibrant, more people are coming back and it is finally becoming more popular for families, bike riders, picnics and more restaurants, bars, clubs and entertainment venues.

 

We are living in the future not the past so what happened in the 60's is irrelevant.

 

I personally have never seen a major city anywhere in my world wide travels of heavy rail cutting the CBD in half.

 

I can guarantee as someone who grew up in Newcastle and moved away for work and goes back there that the city is better off without the rail line destroying the city. No one used it anyway and the locals would know to head to Broadmeadow Station if they were heading to Sydney. The rail line should have been cut at Broadmeadow like the labor party wanted to do instead the liberals caved and cut it at Wickham. Ever since the line was cut the whole city has come alive. There are more bike tracks and eventually there will be light rail going with the flow of the traffic opposed to cutting the city in half.

 

 

I not only grew up there, but still live here, not sure where you are visiting if you think things are improving. Most hope that they will but not happening yet.