| home |
|
| news |
|
| discussions |
|
| content |
|
| site |
|
|
| technical support | Need Help? Lodge a support ticket!
Note: This is for technical support only. General questions about railways should be posted to the Forums.donation 
Please Donate!photo comp Have YOU voted yet on Photo of the Month?
Click Here!
Voting Closes 31/12search |
| |
| Author |
Message |
qf380
Beginner
Joined: Sep 02, 2008
Last Visited: Sep 9, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 1:01 am
|
| SPSD40T2 wrote: | | Quote: | | public-private partnerships across the train network in which developers build new railway stations in return for the right to build above the stations |
Geez..Hope Rush and Humprhies dont find out about this bit !!  |
Haha so true.
This is what happened in Hong Kong with the MTR corp. When they built the new airport, on the route toward the airport. There was these little fishing villages and MTR said they wanted to build a station there, but they need this HUGE amount of land to do it. For instance where we had an apartment in Tung Chung, it was a little fishing village, then MTR bought all the land to "build a station", and they built a station, put a huge outlet mall on top of it, and then they also built 8 of these 40 storey apartment buildings. They created a whole new town. Same happened in Tsing Yi, they wanted all the land, they built the station, built a huge shopping centre ontop and all these apartments.
And as far as i know, that what its like at majority of the MTR stations, they all have shopping centres on top that MTR owns. Rather smart in my opinion.
|
|
 |
Riccardo
Minister for Railways
Joined: Aug 20, 2003
Last Visited: Nov 28, 2008
Location: Elsewhere
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:15 am
|
Yes, it is said that the MTR's real business value is its landholdings, not its rail transport.
It would be good if this common sense was had in Melbourne. But you would need a NIMBY removal program and at least a transit cities style urban renewal authority in each place.
For example, Footscray would be an ideal place to start again. With the bulldozer. You would then offer all the resumed properties (usually tenants) first pick at the ground floor of the 30 storey buildings that should be built on those sites. Starting with the station carpark.
If you need to get in touch, drop a comment at the Transport Textbook or on my blog.
|
|
|
PalmerEldritch
Say goodnight to the bad guy
Joined: Jun 16, 2004
Last Visited: Oct 27, 2008
Location: Princes Park, Carlton
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:18 pm
|
| Riccardo wrote: | | For example, Footscray would be an ideal place to start again. With the bulldozer. |
I think it won't be long until a lot of buildings to the north of Dandenong station get this treatment, along Railway Parade west of Robinson Street (the old Grenda's Bus Depot is gone), and along the west side of Robinson Street up to near Centrelink, whilst properties on both sides of George Street have been fenced off. This is to allow for the construction of the George Street bridge and the re-alignment of the eastern end of George Street with Walker Street.
This is only the beginning. The next phase will see the demolition of buildings heading north-east from the railway station to the south-western corner of the Walker Street and Lonsdale Street intersection to make way for the 'City Walk'.
Watch out for the mighty Blues in 2008, with Judd, Stevens, Kreuzer, Cloke and Aisake
Ó hAilpín to join Fevola, Gibbs, Murphy, Carrazzo, Scotland, Fischer, Waite, Setanta
Ó hAilpín, Houlihan, Walker, Simpson, Betts and co!
|
|
|
Robbb01
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Sep 14, 2008
Last Visited: Dec 1, 2008
Location: The eastern suburbs PB whole, Manningham
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 02, 2008 3:56 pm
|
Footscray would be a great area to start again...
i agree
along with areas like Oakleigh, Preston, Greensborough, Nunawading, Blackburn, Brunswick, St Albans and a heap more....
we need more underground stations to allow more parking, bus interchanges, apartments, offices, shops and the list goes on!
Now I may be an idiot, but there is one thing I am not, sir, and that, sir, is an idiot.
|
|
|
cameron_stewart
Station Master
Joined: Jun 14, 2008
Last Visited: Nov 26, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
|
Speed
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Mar 19, 2007
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:24 pm
|
Another lobby group states what they want the transport statement to say. The unusual one is the Footscray ferry.
| Quote: | The Melbourne Transport Forum, representing 19 metropolitan councils, called on the state and federal governments to prioritise investment in public transport above roads.
The group's metropolitan transport plan, "Pt4me2 for a change", said 30% of car trips should be undertaken by public transport by 2030 - and half by 2050. It recommended that train and trams run every 10 minutes on every line, seven days a week between 6am and midnight.
Spiralling petrol prices and concerns about climate change had led to a spike in public transport patronage, particularly train and bike travel, the report found.
But it said governments had failed to tackle most commuters' dependency on cars and should stop widening roads and start building rail lines.
The report argued that extending the road network to cut congestion was "akin to putting more holes in a belt to solve an obesity problem".
Among the report's recommendations were:
- extending the Epping train line to South Morang
- the electrification of lines to Sunbury, Bacchus Marsh and Caroline Springs
- building train lines from Huntingdale to Rowville and from Clifton Hill to Doncaster
- staffing all train stations
- establishing a fast ferry service between the City and Footscray
- providing a rail service between the city and Melbourne Airport
- introducing a public bike hire system, and
- increasing public transport services to outer suburbs.
Pt4me2 spokeswoman and Maribyrnong councillor Janet Rice said the plan would cost about $5 billion to implement.
She said the Brumby Government's own transport plan, expected to be released next month, would hopefully include many of the report's recommendations, |
http://www.theage.com.au/national/5bn-public-transport-demand-20081020-54ek.html
|
|
|
LamontCranston
Station Staff
Joined: Oct 19, 2008
Last Visited: Nov 27, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 2:14 pm
|
| Riccardo wrote: | | But freight doesn't vote. |
Business vote through their campaign contributions.
|
|
|
fogcv
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Dec 06, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 3, 2008
Location: The Burnley Group
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 2:39 pm
|
| LamontCranston wrote: | | Riccardo wrote: | | But freight doesn't vote. |
Business vote through their campaign contributions. |
And, Business can donate to (i.e. vote for) BOTH sides of politics at the same election !
Anyone for a new toll road ?
The Ghost of (Sir) John Monash (Circa 1931)
|
|
|
LamontCranston
Station Staff
Joined: Oct 19, 2008
Last Visited: Nov 27, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:24 pm
|
Regarding Melbourne Transport Forum proposed new train lines, they're shortened versions of two of the three lines that were meant to be built following the Loop - would it be worthwhile going with the original plan and extending the Rowville line to Ferntree Gully (with a stop at Knox); and extending the Doncaster line two more stops (Koonara & East Doncaster) 
|
|
|
alstom_888m
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Aug 26, 2007
Last Visited: Dec 3, 2008
Location: Craigieburn Suburban Railway Line, Melbourne
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:32 pm
|
|
What was the third? South Morang?
Reliable, Economical, Safe, By Rail.
|
|
|
ZH836301
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Apr 26, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 3, 2008
Location: BleakCity
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:41 pm
|
|
If he's talking about MTP 1969, Dandenong to Frankston.
|
|
|
Batman1988
Junior Train Controller
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Iskenderun railway station, Republic of Hatay
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:41 pm
|
I believe the third new line in the 1969 plan was to be a link from Lyndhurst to Frankston, with the junction peeling off from the Frankston line at a new station at Wells Road.
Nonetheless, I take your point about South Morang... 
EDIT: Beat me to it...
“Those ticket inspectors are trying to kill us.”
“I know, dad!”
“It’s a new experience for me…”
“Happens to me all the time!”
|
|
|
LamontCranston
Station Staff
Joined: Oct 19, 2008
Last Visited: Nov 27, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:47 pm
|
Lyndhurst to Frankston.
ZH836301 provides a nice scan of a diagram of it on page 3 of "Sorry, Sir Rod, your rail tunnel plan is just loopy"
http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11342126-0-asc-s30.htm
And looking at it again I just had another question: would a revived Doncaster line be affected by the lack of a juncture at Victoria Park to the Loop?
| Quote: | | In the first stage, the railway will be connected to the Clifton Hill line, but it is ultimately proposed to have a direct link with the underground loop, via Fitzroy which will also provide a direct route to the city for trains from the Epping and Hurstbridge lines. |
I'm suspecting they'd become rather crowded 
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT + 10 Hours
|
You cannot post new threads in this forum
You cannot reply to threads in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.6 © 2001 phpBB Group
Theme images and concept © 2004 by Michael Greenhill and Railpage, All Rights Reserved.
Version 2.0.6 of PHP-Nuke Port by Tom Nitzschner © 2002 www.toms-home.com
|
|
