Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 70 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I wanted to talk about the site uses rather than the transport dimension.

People were hostile to the jolimont railyards and trackage and still wish to see roofing over as far as exihibtiion or even spring.

Why no hostility to the spencer st yards?

Same problem, value to be realised, limited rail uses and those that are in place could be readily moved or roofed over.

The reality is the only required rail uses now are urban commuter trains and only some of those as others used loop trackage and some will be placed in a new tunnel. The country trains are being confined to very limited trackage post Rrl and apart from three limited freight operations which pass SXS, their really isnt any need for freight trackage east of moonee ponds creek.

And the real freight handling not part of the port is in the altona laverton area, with proposals to have some of it in donnybrook.

Sidings for suburban car storage are from a rail point of view as well as land use point of view, better off at the extremeities of the system. Plans are underway to deliver this, including calder park, coldstream and east pakenham to match recent efforts at cranbourne and craigieburn.

So y could readily remove most of the trackage, stop docklands being cut off and put some choice pieces in the gaps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,722 Posts
IMO the spencer rails are more urgently needed to be decked than jolimont for exactly what NSWP was saying, docklands.

its more important to compeltely connect the new and old CBD to one another than it is to fill a gap becasue its just an eye sore. ie sort out what tracks are actually needed at spencer st, remove the defunct ones and deck that mo fo.

jolimont rail will get there. the fed square east bit will likely be partially govt funded/public space which may take a while, but the rest of the tracks to richmond will likely cater for more sporting infrustructure, with the sporting precinct always expanding and the current melb park filling up fast it will likely be a good site for some (light) arenas like showcourts or similar; or (if they ever coem) an atheltes village(public housing afterwards) if Melbourne ever hosts and olympics again.

the fact that jolimont is more "to the side" of the cbd makes it a lower priority for decking over spencer st in my book.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,899 Posts
I took this pic from high in the CRA building.........Ummm 101 Collins is there now anyway think some redevelopment of rail rards is a going thing...don't ya reckon ?


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,899 Posts
Around 1970...or soon after. The only tall buildings in Melbourne at the time were the CRA ( site of 101 Collins ), The Reserve Bank ( NE corner of Collins and Exhibition sts ) ICI ( still there NE corner of Albert and Nicholson sts ), Shell ( Now site of CGU NW corner of Bourke and William sts ) and National Mutual ( a shadow of it's former self............ ) The red brick Ponsford stand at the MCG was pretty new as well.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
371 Posts
SXS also plays a role in cutting off the CBD from Docklands. Ideally Docklands should be just part of "The City" without the burden of SXS in the way as downtown Melbourne is pretty undersized for a CBD. There is so much space for development where Wurundjuri Way and SXS is that it's not funny. That would ensure that there is less of need for Fisho to reach for the sky at present and allow for the stabling yards to be place there along with other industrial factories and warehouses and freight terminals
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Agree. In fact, i think docklands would be more successful if it wasn't docklands, but was just a westward extension if the city both in practice but also in marketing. Melbourne could have been like sydney, with its own circular quay. The stadium was just downright dumb, any similar location like the soon to be egate, or even just more of the same, like old scotch oval area or goschs paddock. Even the wasteland north of south kensington would have done. No point arguing activation, the business uses and resi do the activation required.

Sxs itself could still have been made a feature, with a substantial pax concourse for long distance pax, more simple arrangement for subs.

I blame SXS for the following:

Former DFO shops, poor value land use.

Collins st bridge which cut into goods shed

Continuing neglect of savoy site and former crown carpark site.

Preponderance of trams running needlessly along spencer, while docklands is underserved.
 

·
WARREN
Joined
·
8,211 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,239 Posts
^^ even from that 2006 shot you've got AAMI park built, Olympic park demolished, changes to Melbourne Park, One East Melbourne on Wellington Parade South, Ernst and Young in Herald Sun building, Mercer building opposite that on Exhibition, Eureka Tower (not shown in that pick but would have been built in 2006 so this is a render?), Zen and plenty more!!

but back to the topic at hand:

the existance fo Docklands is what makes the decking of the railyards less likely to occur. it has left a ongoing dampener on CBD property prices which makes building a great big deck uncompetitive.

E-Gate will resolve a large portion of what you are talking about north of Dudley.

I do not think you'll find significant savings between Dudley and Collins as this is where the tracks fan out to platform space at SXS.

Stabling is most suited to the outer suburbs for the out of operations timing (i.e. after 8pm retirements as frequencies dwindle to 6am start up next day) but some inner urban sidings are preferable to minimise dead running from the morning peak to interpeak and then back to the pm peak. ie. morning peak full trains from Pakenham to CBD empty trains out, PM peak empty train from Pakenham to CBD full trains in. Why not delete 100km of dead running (2 hours of driver pay + running costs) and stable that train in the city. same for VLine services and the Dudley workshop - rather than run v-lines out of the city just have them sit at the workshop inter-peak to save running costs.

doesn't mean it shouldn't happen more efficiently but it is likely to remain in some form.

Also worth noting that everyone bemoaning the lack fo development land in the area and ready to sell off the railway land will be the first to complain about the expense of a tunnel or some such in 30-40 years to bolster CBD PT capacity.


I think the Stadium has served its purpose well... for 10 years it basically was Docklands - its finally been encircled by buildings and other parts of Docklands are becoming attractors in their own right.

I believe that when the AFL takes ownership of the site in about 2030 they'll immediately "do a Waverley" sell it as a development site and use that money to fund a new venue in a new location - whether that be another 'boutique' inner melbourne stadium of 40-50k or a smaller stadium in the outer suburbs for small games and concentrating matches at the MCG I don't know. but I'm sure they'll always have suitors to build and house such a venue for them.
 

·
Sydney: World's best city
Joined
·
40,696 Posts
SXS also plays a role in cutting off the CBD from Docklands. Ideally Docklands should be just part of "The City" without the burden of SXS in the way as downtown Melbourne is pretty undersized for a CBD. There is so much space for development where Wurundjuri Way and SXS is that it's not funny. That would ensure that there is less of need for Fisho to reach for the sky at present and allow for the stabling yards to be place there along with other industrial factories and warehouses and freight terminals
One weakness is how few streets in the Hoddle Grid especially Bourke Street dont continue right over the tracks from Spencer Street. Bourke Street is split in two by Southern Cross Station.

I do think that building the airspace over the tracks up to Latrobe Street might address some of the issues.

The other issue too, is the style of buildings in docklands - preference for shorter buildings not so densely clustered, which you'd see in the blocks on the Hoddle Grid nearer to Southern Cross Station.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
^^ even from that 2006 shot you've got AAMI park built, Olympic park demolished, changes to Melbourne Park, One East Melbourne on Wellington Parade South, Ernst and Young in Herald Sun building, Mercer building opposite that on Exhibition, Eureka Tower (not shown in that pick but would have been built in 2006 so this is a render?), Zen and plenty more!!

but back to the topic at hand:

the existance fo Docklands is what makes the decking of the railyards less likely to occur. it has left a ongoing dampener on CBD property prices which makes building a great big deck uncompetitive.

E-Gate will resolve a large portion of what you are talking about north of Dudley.

I do not think you'll find significant savings between Dudley and Collins as this is where the tracks fan out to platform space at SXS.

Stabling is most suited to the outer suburbs for the out of operations timing (i.e. after 8pm retirements as frequencies dwindle to 6am start up next day) but some inner urban sidings are preferable to minimise dead running from the morning peak to interpeak and then back to the pm peak. ie. morning peak full trains from Pakenham to CBD empty trains out, PM peak empty train from Pakenham to CBD full trains in. Why not delete 100km of dead running (2 hours of driver pay + running costs) and stable that train in the city. same for VLine services and the Dudley workshop - rather than run v-lines out of the city just have them sit at the workshop inter-peak to save running costs.

doesn't mean it shouldn't happen more efficiently but it is likely to remain in some form.

Also worth noting that everyone bemoaning the lack fo development land in the area and ready to sell off the railway land will be the first to complain about the expense of a tunnel or some such in 30-40 years to bolster CBD PT capacity.


I think the Stadium has served its purpose well... for 10 years it basically was Docklands - its finally been encircled by buildings and other parts of Docklands are becoming attractors in their own right.

I believe that when the AFL takes ownership of the site in about 2030 they'll immediately "do a Waverley" sell it as a development site and use that money to fund a new venue in a new location - whether that be another 'boutique' inner melbourne stadium of 40-50k or a smaller stadium in the outer suburbs for small games and concentrating matches at the MCG I don't know. but I'm sure they'll always have suitors to build and house such a venue for them.
Jjpro you can alWays be counted on to defend the powers that be and their status quo.

And i won't be bemoaning a lack of tunnel in forty years. I'll do it now. You know the drill. You know we shouldn,t be keeping train sets in the centre of town. You know we shouldnt be shunting them coz we shouldnt have anything that needs shunting.

Over one hundred and fifty years of poor decision making by the government rail transport authorities, a fine tradition for current ones to live up to!
 

·
Registered Melbourne
Joined
·
4,166 Posts
I wanted to talk about the site uses rather than the transport dimension.

People were hostile to the jolimont railyards and trackage and still wish to see roofing over as far as exihibtiion or even spring.

Why no hostility to the spencer st yards?
Good move. Isn't the "transport dimension" part of "site usage" ? And as regards to "people being hostile" where's the evidence? I guess I must defer to the people that march by doorway every day wishing that the railyards- sorry, railtracks, should be covered over from Russell to Spring.

Hostility? honestly, where?

Same problem, value to be realised, limited rail uses and those that are in place could be readily moved or roofed over.

The reality is the only required rail uses now are urban commuter trains and only some of those as others used loop trackage and some will be placed in a new tunnel. The country trains are being confined to very limited trackage post Rrl and apart from three limited freight operations which pass SXS, their really isnt any need for freight trackage east of moonee ponds creek.

And the real freight handling not part of the port is in the altona laverton area, with proposals to have some of it in donnybrook.
Yes, we've all heard this, but what proportion on rail freight is coming out of Altona/Laverton? And where are the plans for Donnybrook?

Sidings for suburban car storage are from a rail point of view as well as land use point of view, better off at the extremeities of the system. Plans are underway to deliver this, including calder park, coldstream and east pakenham to match recent efforts at cranbourne and craigieburn.

So y could readily remove most of the trackage, stop docklands being cut off and put some choice pieces in the gaps.
How is Docklands cut off from the CBD? Because there's no road west from Bourke or Lonsdale Streets? Go down & have a look. I don't see traffic jams in Flinders, Collins & Latrobe Streets: at all.

A simple fact: if you want to have means of transport into a major city, you need to provide for it on the ground. Lewis Mumford, in "The City in History" remarked that a third of Los Angeles was given over to transport: much of it in freeways and carparks. Mumford was making a case there that the means of transport (the automobile) had pretty-much destroyed the city.

It's fashionable at the moment to trash Europe, but one of the reasons why Europe is so heavily in debt is because it has invested so heavily in upgrading and extending public transport. We don't trash the US, because even if their debt is so much larger, they certainly didn't run it up on transport or health or whatever.

Look at any European city ... & then look at Melbourne. Walk out into Docklands: lots going on there, but huge areas which are stil abandoned wastelands.

A friend of mine- 'in the know"- commented that we'd really shot ourselves by failing to provide for the option of an extra two tracks between Southern Cross and Flinders Street.

Lots of people here think that if you travel by train, you shouldn't be seen: you should be: Underground. Trouble is: putting the rabble underground costs a lot: much more than the "choice" real estate you could build on the yards west of Spencer Street, especially when... well, just follow either of the roads that lead beyond the tram terminals in Docklands.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
371 Posts
Good move. Isn't the "transport dimension" part of "site usage" ? And as regards to "people being hostile" where's the evidence? I guess I must defer to the people that march by doorway every day wishing that the railyards- sorry, railtracks, should be covered over from Russell to Spring.

Hostility? honestly, where?



Yes, we've all heard this, but what proportion on rail freight is coming out of Altona/Laverton? And where are the plans for Donnybrook?



How is Docklands cut off from the CBD? Because there's no road west from Bourke or Lonsdale Streets? Go down & have a look. I don't see traffic jams in Flinders, Collins & Latrobe Streets: at all.

A simple fact: if you want to have means of transport into a major city, you need to provide for it on the ground. Lewis Mumford, in "The City in History" remarked that a third of Los Angeles was given over to transport: much of it in freeways and carparks. Mumford was making a case there that the means of transport (the automobile) had pretty-much destroyed the city.

It's fashionable at the moment to trash Europe, but one of the reasons why Europe is so heavily in debt is because it has invested so heavily in upgrading and extending public transport. We don't trash the US, because even if their debt is so much larger, they certainly didn't run it up on transport or health or whatever.

Look at any European city ... & then look at Melbourne. Walk out into Docklands: lots going on there, but huge areas which are stil abandoned wastelands.

A friend of mine- 'in the know"- commented that we'd really shot ourselves by failing to provide for the option of an extra two tracks between Southern Cross and Flinders Street.

Lots of people here think that if you travel by train, you shouldn't be seen: you should be: Underground. Trouble is: putting the rabble underground costs a lot: much more than the "choice" real estate you could build on the yards west of Spencer Street, especially when... well, just follow either of the roads that lead beyond the tram terminals in Docklands.
Oh Go Away old Yardy. I don't know how you make the connection with the no traffic jams on Flinders, Collins and Latrobe and say that Docklands is connected because there's little traffic. Are you that blind that you cannot see the railyards and SXS smack bang in the middle of the CBD and Docklands? It's obvious that the ugly presence of those railyards have contributed to Docklands' failure and the westend being known as the arse end of town due to it's isolation.

In a dense CBD where land is at a premium of course train lines should be placed underground as they have been in NYC, Chicago, London and even Sydney. Those railyards and SXS take up many city blocks of space that could have been put to better use. Imagine a Melbourne CBD extending down to the waterfront without the artificial extensions and barriers in place. I blame the failure of a complete loop for these barriers in place and Bracks who missed a golden opportunity to underground SXS once and for all and shift the V Lines either to North Melbourne or have them run another route to Flinders
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Oh Go Away old Yardy. I don't know how you make the connection with the no traffic jams on Flinders, Collins and Latrobe and say that Docklands is connected because there's little traffic. Are you that blind that you cannot see the railyards and SXS smack bang in the middle of the CBD and Docklands? It's obvious that the ugly presence of those railyards have contributed to Docklands' failure and the westend being known as the arse end of town due to it's isolation.

In a dense CBD where land is at a premium of course train lines should be placed underground as they have been in NYC, Chicago, London and even Sydney. Those railyards and SXS take up many city blocks of space that could have been put to better use. Imagine a Melbourne CBD extending down to the waterfront without the artificial extensions and barriers in place. I blame the failure of a complete loop for these barriers in place and Bracks who missed a golden opportunity to underground SXS once and for all and shift the V Lines either to North Melbourne or have them run another route to Flinders
unfortunately yardy likes to stalk me, and follow me around with his collection of red herrings, straw men and sacred cows.

all of what you've sais is right CJ and nothing to add.

i doubt yardy will get it though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
first of all, if we removed or undergrounded the rail, we would be talking about say around 2002, extending the Hoddle grid by 3 streets, with all current east west and little streets, i would sell this realestate first. the water facing street and the one behind it could be marketed on the strength of views. say 10 storey height limit on the water facing street, so the one behind it can have some talls with water views.

Come 2010, we might only now be talking about developing the two peninsulas and the yarras edge, more water views. with four east west tramlines extended down to the water along the hoddle grid, normal extensions of say 109, 75, 86, 96, 31 etc, the hoddle grid extension would be a healthy, happening part of the cbd, well established prior to taking on the more adventurous developments along the water front.

dont fret over the rail. if the city loop had been built properly, wiith a rolling stock, signalling and pedestrian capacity of 50,000 people per track per hour or 200,000 in total, we might never reach capacity.certainly the 1976 viaduct was a mistake, only three freights a day now pass sxs, the vlines could terminate at fss and remember yardy,the traralgon line was de-electrified so the option of running its trains through the city loop was lost.

much of the crazyness about getting people to change at pakenham would be unnecessary if an electric velo, 6 cars and picking up pax at berwick and narrewarren if requiired, could run through the loop on its way to sunbury. but we lost that with the delectrification, the silly loop design and the bureaucratic separation between vline and metro, not seen in sydney.
 
1 - 20 of 70 Posts
Top