Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community
Chiliburn

Port Botany cruise terminal

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, keagle said:

Replace the Harbour Bridge with a new, higher deck at the same time.😀

 

Build a tunnel under the bridge for the cruise ships.

 

simples.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did here that one thought was to continue to use OPT as well and a cruise would embark at one and disembark at the other so folks would still get to sail in/out of Sydney Harbour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if we add some ballast to a big ship. So it just fits under the bridge, remove the ballast while it is under the bridge, thus lifting the bridge and slip a few bricks under the old girl to raise her a few feet.

 

cant see anything wrong with that idea can you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Docker123 said:

 

Build a tunnel under the bridge for the cruise ships.

 

simples.

 

 

6 hours ago, SinbadThePorter said:

 

The obvious thing is to just move Sydney Harbour to somewhere more convenient.

All great ideas but we all know that if the government will not sanction the simple cheaper options, they will never sanction either of those ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Toryhere said:

Thousands of people and supply trucks trying to get through on one road from the Harbour Bridge through a residential area? I can see why the government baulked at it. 

Also, it might sound nice and easy to compulsorily acquire people’s property, but having represented several victims of such resumption by government I can tell you that they don’t always see the benefit of it. 

Its all hypothetical of course, but in reality of the government wanted a solution for another cruise terminal it would have been a good option with an existing wharf that needed extending and nearby property acquired. 

 

Unfortunately the problem with Sydney and Australia is due to the over development of areas like Sydney Harbour for example when a desperately needed facility or service is needed there is no room as no planning was ever done.

 

Obviously my scenario cannot go ahead and will not go ahead, but it was still a possible option if the government was serious about it. There were better chances of getting the properties surrounding that than bailing up the likes of Turnbull and asking hin to surrender his mansion for a desperately needed cruise port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brisbane41 said:

Its all hypothetical of course, but in reality of the government wanted a solution for another cruise terminal it would have been a good option with an existing wharf that needed extending and nearby property acquired. 

 

Unfortunately the problem with Sydney and Australia is due to the over development of areas like Sydney Harbour for example when a desperately needed facility or service is needed there is no room as no planning was ever done.

 

Obviously my scenario cannot go ahead and will not go ahead, but it was still a possible option if the government was serious about it. There were better chances of getting the properties surrounding that than bailing up the likes of Turnbull and asking hin to surrender his mansion for a desperately needed cruise port.

Yes, the point is that Sydney developed before cruising became thing. And truth be told, it really only makes sense to put a cruise terminal on the southern side of the Harbour before the Bridge. That has the best transport and infrastructure to deal with such a facility.

Farm Cove is a public space as ins Lad Macquarie’s Chair. Elizabeth Bay, Rushcutters Bay, Darling Point, Double Bay, Point Piper, Rose Bay and Watson’s Bay are all too heavily populated with the most expensive real estate in the Country. Garden Island or Woolloomooloo Bay is a possibility, but I doubt whether the Feds would give it up, and if they did I am sure that another Barangaroo style suburb would be the use favoured by the State government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sydney was settled by Europeans who cruised there (I know the indigenous Australians were already settled there) and then by the many people who then followed who also cruised here. Up until around the 1950's most people cruised into Sydney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a pity that they couldn't reclaim Campbells Cove and extend the Quay pier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about extending Circular Quay Wharf No. 4 out about 400 metres into the middle of Circular Quay.

 

Then you would have two cruise ship berths on either side. Ferries can still access the other wharves.

 

Pay for it by selling the OPT site off to a casino operator. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2019 at 7:02 PM, MicCanberra said:

Why don't they use Circular quay extend one of the middle wharves out by 400m and then they could use both sides and dock 3 large ships at once. The ferries can move to darling harbour or pier one.

 

6 hours ago, SinbadThePorter said:

How about extending Circular Quay Wharf No. 4 out about 400 metres into the middle of Circular Quay.

 

Then you would have two cruise ship berths on either side. Ferries can still access the other wharves.

 

Pay for it by selling the OPT site off to a casino operator. 😉

Great idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, SinbadThePorter said:

 

So that's where I heard it. 🤔

LOl. I don't think it will ever happen, but I think the idea has merit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MicCanberra said:

LOl. I don't think it will ever happen, but I think the idea has merit.

 

Well, my contribution was the idea of selling off harbour side land to a casino operator.

 

The NSW state government loves to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SinbadThePorter said:

 

Well, my contribution was the idea of selling off harbour side land to a casino operator.

 

The NSW state government loves to do that.

I wouldn’t think they’d have much trouble getting a buyer.

 

Maybe another “Toaster”!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, banzaii said:

From the 21-22 RCCL Deployment thread:

 

https://www.yoursaycruisecapacity.com.au

 

Nothing happening for 4 years!  Sydney could lise a lot of cruise business in that time!

3-4 years before construction begins, How many years to build a sea wall and a terminal?

 What if they use part of the container terminal as a temporary solution.Theres talk of getting container trucks of Sydney roads and containers on rail from port Kembla.

It would be only for 6 months a year, The only problem would be a check it area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Chiliburn said:

3-4 years before construction begins, How many years to build a sea wall and a terminal?

 What if they use part of the container terminal as a temporary solution.Theres talk of getting container trucks of Sydney roads and containers on rail from port Kembla.

It would be only for 6 months a year, The only problem would be a check it area.

Three years sounds realistic if you consider they  will probably need twelve months to complete their "feasability " study  and get the OK ( read pay off)  from all the anti terminal parties. You would assume they would not seriously start the actual design and planning stage until approval so add another twelve months and then 12 to 18 months ( it is a govt .dept) for construction.

 

It will be interesting to see how the " third terminal" will be utilized if you consider that the OPT ( Sydney Harbour)would continue to be the prefered option for the cruise lines and White Bay would still service smaller ships capable of fitting under the bridge. The " peak" season is really only say three  months of the year  and the two existing terminals can comfortably handle the off season demand. Yes,there will be an increase in the number of cruise lines and ships coming  to Sydney  but building a terminal and the associated infrastructure is not a cheap exercise and I wonder if the  volume ofthe increased number of vessels would justify the investment ie. two terminals are not enough but three are too many.  From what I have heard ( from sources that should  know) it will happen but it will be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gbenjo said:

Three years sounds realistic if you consider they  will probably need twelve months to complete their "feasability " study  and get the OK ( read pay off)  from all the anti terminal parties. You would assume they would not seriously start the actual design and planning stage until approval so add another twelve months and then 12 to 18 months ( it is a govt .dept) for construction.

 

It will be interesting to see how the " third terminal" will be utilized if you consider that the OPT ( Sydney Harbour)would continue to be the prefered option for the cruise lines and White Bay would still service smaller ships capable of fitting under the bridge. The " peak" season is really only say three  months of the year  and the two existing terminals can comfortably handle the off season demand. Yes,there will be an increase in the number of cruise lines and ships coming  to Sydney  but building a terminal and the associated infrastructure is not a cheap exercise and I wonder if the  volume ofthe increased number of vessels would justify the investment ie. two terminals are not enough but three are too many.  From what I have heard ( from sources that should  know) it will happen but it will be interesting.

Graham who owns and operates Botany container terminal ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chiliburn said:

Graham who owns and operates Botany container terminal ?

 

NSW Ports operates it and has a 99 year lease on it.

 

It is a consortium of various investment companies including Super Funds and the Abu Dhabi government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chiliburn said:

At least they won’t have to deal with the federal government and navy.

Sadly  just the greenies and all the self interest groups. Minorities rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I lived in the Matraville area (2 km from Port Botany) in the mid-late 1960's when the Port Botany Container Terminal was thought of and being planned. There was huge opposition from adjoining councils and residents, but industry won, when you see what is there now.  Just chuck in a cruise ship terminal and all will be complete.

Edited by NSWP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Member Cruise Reviews
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...