daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy (aug.2, 2013) | DMCA policy | flipboard magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > OZScrapers > Urban Spaces > Transportation

Transportation Trains, planes and automobiles.



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 21st, 2014, 11:08 AM   #1701
brianc68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,155
Likes (Received): 55

Quote:
Originally Posted by aussieboy

Fair enough - there's definitely scope for a Sydney LCCT (as long as people don't get dissappointed when it doesn't deliver the economic boost oft-spoken of)

As for connections, there are a lot of non-MEL/BNE connections through Sydney - e.g. Canberra, Newcastle and regional airports
True. But I do think the future will look something like the LA basin. LAX remains the dominant airport with alternative airports like Burbank catering to LCC like Southwest and the odd mainline carrier. The driver for airports like Burbank is convenience to the local population flying primarily domestically.

If you live in the San Fernando valley (not unlike western Sydney) why trek all the way to LAX just for a low cost flight up to San Francisco.
brianc68 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old April 21st, 2014, 02:37 PM   #1702
NoshowwithoutPunch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,574

For the record the video on the other thread say planning is 'well underway' fir 10km extension of SWRL to Badgers. Makes me wonder if they're are plans for more urban development, not just airport. It is after all, only residential uses conflict with airport. Not commercial or retail.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
NoshowwithoutPunch está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2014, 03:42 PM   #1703
KIWIKAAS
Registered User
 
KIWIKAAS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Hague
Posts: 3,962
Likes (Received): 172

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianc68 View Post

True. But I do think the future will look something like the LA basin. LAX remains the dominant airport with alternative airports like Burbank catering to LCC like Southwest and the odd mainline carrier. The driver for airports like Burbank is convenience to the local population flying primarily domestically.

If you live in the San Fernando valley (not unlike western Sydney) why trek all the way to LAX just for a low cost flight up to San Francisco.
I agree, although I think Ontario Airport would be better comparison with Badgerys.
KIWIKAAS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2014, 03:45 PM   #1704
KIWIKAAS
Registered User
 
KIWIKAAS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Hague
Posts: 3,962
Likes (Received): 172

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoshowwithoutPunch View Post
For the record the video on the other thread say planning is 'well underway' fir 10km extension of SWRL to Badgers. Makes me wonder if they're are plans for more urban development, not just airport. It is after all, only residential uses conflict with airport. Not commercial or retail.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
There has been for some time.....the 'Southwest Growth Centre'
KIWIKAAS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 12:38 AM   #1705
Hollis Park
Hollis Park
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SYD/BNE
Posts: 66
Likes (Received): 4

Hey guys,

I'm personally of the view that Sydney should go the whole hog and develop a super-airport at Badgerys Creek to completely replace Kingsford Smith, although I understand it's a very unlikely scenario, for the following reasons:

*The existing Sydney Airport authority having a veto over a second airport development, meaning that it is in their interest to keep operating and minimise the threat of a competitor.

*Building such a massive undertaking would require infrastructure investment in roads and rail unprecedented in Australia. The very idea of Sydney and how it operates would have to undergo a massive change. On the other hand, my understanding of transport planning is that transport systems work best when there is 'bipolarity' - i.e. two centres of activity, with a corridor running in between. Establishing a centre, or centres of activity in Western Sydney would allow such a 'bipolar' system to be developed, linking with established infrastructure in the east, leading to a more efficient transit system that doesn't congest at a single point of major activity.

*The question of what to do with a vacant Mascot site is daunting. If it were to be developed into a major centre, it would need a level of infrastructure comparable or exceeding the existing airport anyway!

Nevertheless, I think it's interesting to think about what could be done with a site like Mascot. Although in airport terms it's small and inadequate, it is by every other dimension a MASSIVE site, and could easily contain another entire CBD or two, firmly cementing Sydney's position as Australia's unchallenged global gateway. It would make Barangaroo look like a pocket park refurbishment...

To give an idea of just how big Mascot actually is compared to our CBDs, here's a direct scale comparison I knocked together with some other images I've used before of Sydney and Melbourne CBDs:

**
Hollis Park no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 03:07 AM   #1706
NoshowwithoutPunch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,574

As I said earlier, taken a long time to find a viable use for Kai Tak, though arguably the need would be even stronger there.

Contamination is obviously huge, lot of land to sell (need to do it without flooding local markets), supporting infrastructure (they got away with no rail link in the old days, but probably wouldn't now if resi is planned).

If Mascot got reused I guess you've got 2 ready to go underground rail stations, and the bay frontage might become 'des res' but with Green Square being a multidecade project, ditto CentralEveleigh, yet another big block of inner suburban land on the market, while it would definitely help affordability near the city, it may not be viable without very long staging.

Not sure how you would sell the idea of just redeveloping the block for housing. You saw what happened with Bangas. Balmain residents wanted yet another dog-walking park. Just-trolling-again wanted a beach.

Ensuring you were able to both move the airport and ensure good use is made of Mascot is probably beyond our political system, which requires vast sums of money for lubrication but requires pandering to self-interest for re-election.
NoshowwithoutPunch está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 07:33 AM   #1707
TOCC
Registered User
 
TOCC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Heaven
Posts: 5,075
Likes (Received): 186

It would be an absolute waste of resources to close down Kingsford Smith and develop Badgerys Creek into a new mega-terminal..

Firstly, have a look at the Sydney annual report where it give a map representation of where frequent airport users live and travel from, not surprisingly the bulk are in the inner city ring.. North Shore, Inner West, Easter Suburbs etc... Day trips are an extremely common practice for many businesses.. What do you think is going to happen if the morning commute from the airport to Sydney CBD increases from 20min to 90min or vice versa. its going to impact on business efficiency.

Secondly, KSA is a $multibillion facility, an asset to the city and the country, its not dangerous, its not outdated, its not running at capacity so why they hell would you close it down and write off tens of $billions and then have to find a further $10-15billion to build the required facilities at Badgery's Creek? Just so Sydney can have a shiny new airport out in the Western Suburbs? Please, what an absolute waste of money.

Sydney is incredibly fortunate to have an airport in such close proximity to the CBD and also accessible via PT, Badgerys Creek will complement this and open up business opportunities for those operating in Sydney West. Until the point in which Kingsford Smith is operating at capacity and further expansion and renovations are going to impeded on the efficiency of the airport, it makes no financial sense to close it down..

Sydney is primed to be in the best position with two competing large scale airports in the future, one with enormous growth potential with low operating costs(hopefully) and another in a envious location which will justify it charging a premium.
__________________

Sky_Is_The_Limit liked this post
TOCC no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 08:24 AM   #1708
ArtNouveau
Registered User
 
ArtNouveau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 266
Likes (Received): 29

What about the opportunity costs of having prime land so close to the cbd used as an airport plus all the associated industrial and under-utilised land nearby when there is a housing shortage?
ArtNouveau no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 08:50 AM   #1709
AtD
Registered User
 
AtD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,512
Likes (Received): 146

Don't forget this is right next to Port of Botany, which was recently expanded so we can have Barangaroo. The industrial area spans all the way up to Alexandria.
AtD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 10:12 AM   #1710
TOCC
Registered User
 
TOCC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Heaven
Posts: 5,075
Likes (Received): 186

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtNouveau View Post
What about the opportunity costs of having prime land so close to the cbd used as an airport plus all the associated industrial and under-utilised land nearby when there is a housing shortage?
Sure that is a bonus.. But you still need to add up the costs...
Housing Shortage, please elaborate on this for everyone, this term a political scaremongering tactic, the Sydney housing market like everywhere else in the country lives under the supply and demand model... If what you were really referring to is the cost of housing, then this is the worst possible solution..

Cost to build new dual runway mega airport with new high speed rail, new roads etc, plus cost to buy and decommission the old airport would easily be up to $20billion, thats $20billion directly on the taxpayer.
Then there's 28'000 people employed directly by the airport and 330'000 employed indirectly in the local area who's job's will be impacted and or moved if this were to occur, the cost of this is going placed on the businesses, what happens when 500 business all of a sudden attempt to sell mass property that they use as equity for their business?

All that said, you still need to make $20billion off the sale of land and development of KSA, do you really think a $20billion overhead on a property development is going to solve the cost of housing in Sydney?
TOCC no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 12:29 PM   #1711
kontaveit2012
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 203
Likes (Received): 12

Although it suits me to have an airport in Mascot, if there was a train between Badgery's Creek and Central that took less than 30 minutes I would be for turning KSA into an Urban Renewal site. If you filled it with Shanghai style apartments it could probably fit over 2 million people, maybe more
kontaveit2012 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 02:03 PM   #1712
Sky_Is_The_Limit
Registered User
 
Sky_Is_The_Limit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 9,776
Likes (Received): 870


I don't think you'd want to fit 2 million residents into that space, nor do I think a hypothetical redevelopment of Kingsford Smith should be purely residential.

At a modest 20,000 residents / square kilometre, you could accommodate roughly 181,000 residents.

20,000 residents / square kilometre is about as dense as 0.253 sq km Elizabeth Bay is at present (population 5,093)
Sky_Is_The_Limit no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2014, 03:06 PM   #1713
kontaveit2012
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 203
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky_Is_The_Limit View Post

I don't think you'd want to fit 2 million residents into that space, nor do I think a hypothetical redevelopment of Kingsford Smith should be purely residential.

At a modest 20,000 residents / square kilometre, you could accommodate roughly 181,000 residents.

20,000 residents / square kilometre is about as dense as 0.253 sq km Elizabeth Bay is at present (population 5,093)
I am sure you could fit more than that... And I do think that it should be largely residential. It is not feasible for Sydney to grow any more unless the government makes efforts to turn Sydney into the "Ruhr" region of Australia. I highly doubt they will do this so high density housing close to the city is absolutely essential.
kontaveit2012 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:07 AM   #1714
brianc68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,155
Likes (Received): 55

Quote:
Originally Posted by TOCC
It would be an absolute waste of resources to close down Kingsford Smith and develop Badgerys Creek into a new mega-terminal..

Firstly, have a look at the Sydney annual report where it give a map representation of where frequent airport users live and travel from, not surprisingly the bulk are in the inner city ring.. North Shore, Inner West, Easter Suburbs etc... Day trips are an extremely common practice for many businesses.. What do you think is going to happen if the morning commute from the airport to Sydney CBD increases from 20min to 90min or vice versa. its going to impact on business efficiency.

Secondly, KSA is a $multibillion facility, an asset to the city and the country, its not dangerous, its not outdated, its not running at capacity so why they hell would you close it down and write off tens of $billions and then have to find a further $10-15billion to build the required facilities at Badgery's Creek? Just so Sydney can have a shiny new airport out in the Western Suburbs? Please, what an absolute waste of money.

Sydney is incredibly fortunate to have an airport in such close proximity to the CBD and also accessible via PT, Badgerys Creek will complement this and open up business opportunities for those operating in Sydney West. Until the point in which Kingsford Smith is operating at capacity and further expansion and renovations are going to impeded on the efficiency of the airport, it makes no financial sense to close it down..

Sydney is primed to be in the best position with two competing large scale airports in the future, one with enormous growth potential with low operating costs(hopefully) and another in a envious location which will justify it charging a premium.
Completely correct on all points.

I'd add that a lot of Sydney's air traffic is interstate business day trippers. Mascot's CBD proximity is a big driver for this. If they ever close mascot, which they won't, don't underestimate the effect on Sydney's business HQ status. People will teleconference or just do less business travel. People on here will scoff, but it would happen. And there would be knock on effects. People complain already about how far Tullamarine is from Melbourne, and I've personally experienced situations where business day trips didn't occur completely because of this.
brianc68 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:11 AM   #1715
exocet
baby whinger
 
exocet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 1,362
Likes (Received): 187

I used to travel around the country every three months with work. The ability to fly back into Sydney on an early flight and get to the office in time for a full day's work was absolutely invaluable.
exocet no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 03:28 AM   #1716
aussiescraperman
Registered User
 
aussiescraperman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne & Brisbane
Posts: 1,034
Likes (Received): 5

I envision KSA as the la guardia or ronald reagon airport of sydney in the future. Primarily servicing domestic traffic whilst badgery's can be a shiny new international airport with also a large portion of domestic aswell.
__________________
i can only imagine
aussiescraperman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 04:43 AM   #1717
Sky_Is_The_Limit
Registered User
 
Sky_Is_The_Limit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 9,776
Likes (Received): 870

Quote:
Originally Posted by kontaveit2012 View Post
I am sure you could fit more than that... And I do think that it should be largely residential. It is not feasible for Sydney to grow any more unless the government makes efforts to turn Sydney into the "Ruhr" region of Australia. I highly doubt they will do this so high density housing close to the city is absolutely essential.
I don't follow your logic.

You say it is not feasible for Sydney to grow anymore? Yet you are advocating super dense development that is unprecedented in Australia and over 10 times more dense than the most dense neighbourhood in Sydney at present. And that neighbourhood is less than 3% the size of government owned land at Kingsford Smith.

The Draft Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney and the NSW Long Term Transport Masterplan both assume strong population growth to 2031. Beyond that, the ABS estimates the population will hit 7.1 million in the GCCSA in 2054. That's an increase of about 2.35 million from 2013 - more than metropolitan London and New York are expected to grow by.

These new residents need new jobs. As such, urban infill projects in the Global Economic Corridor should not be heavily skewed towards residential or commercial development. Mixed uses are imperative to the success of future Sydney.

Your earlier suggestion that 2 million people could live in an area of 9.07 sq km is highly unlikely and unrealistic in a Western context. Even Manhattan has a much lower population density than you are suggesting. The population of Manhattan (~1.6 million) and area (59.5 sq km) reaps a density of approximately 26,900 / sq km. 2 million in 9.07 sq km is almost 221,000 per sq km.
Sky_Is_The_Limit no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 06:05 AM   #1718
ArtNouveau
Registered User
 
ArtNouveau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 266
Likes (Received): 29

You could comfortably fit 200,000 in there if you wished with room left for commercial, retail and recreational activities. A true Live, Work, Play environment in Sydney's Global Arc for the 21st Century that would connect and coordinate with the renewal areas around it.
ArtNouveau no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 05:52 PM   #1719
kontaveit2012
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 203
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky_Is_The_Limit View Post
I don't follow your logic.

You say it is not feasible for Sydney to grow anymore? Yet you are advocating super dense development that is unprecedented in Australia and over 10 times more dense than the most dense neighbourhood in Sydney at present. And that neighbourhood is less than 3% the size of government owned land at Kingsford Smith.

The Draft Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney and the NSW Long Term Transport Masterplan both assume strong population growth to 2031. Beyond that, the ABS estimates the population will hit 7.1 million in the GCCSA in 2054. That's an increase of about 2.35 million from 2013 - more than metropolitan London and New York are expected to grow by.

These new residents need new jobs. As such, urban infill projects in the Global Economic Corridor should not be heavily skewed towards residential or commercial development. Mixed uses are imperative to the success of future Sydney.

Your earlier suggestion that 2 million people could live in an area of 9.07 sq km is highly unlikely and unrealistic in a Western context. Even Manhattan has a much lower population density than you are suggesting. The population of Manhattan (~1.6 million) and area (59.5 sq km) reaps a density of approximately 26,900 / sq km. 2 million in 9.07 sq km is almost 221,000 per sq km.
What I meant was Sydney could not grow any more in terms of Urban Sprawl.

And BTW, surely all of the terminals and their associated sites plus the airport itself is more than 9KMSQ... I thought it was. If it is that small then I concede the figure I put forth is completely out of range. This having been said, heading towards 500K is doable if it is necessary
kontaveit2012 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
mandurahboyz

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu