Talk:Cross City Tunnel

White Elephant Infrastructure Projects

The "saga" continues...

The saga has made me wonder about adding a new category "White Elephant Infrastructure Projects", possibly to include this, plus maybe the Millennium Dome. That category name wouldn't really be NPOV though... maybe "Controversial Infrastructure Projects".

"White elephant" is certainly a term that lends itself to nNPOV. Almost all modertate to major sized infrastructure projects are controversial (at the very least NIMBYism is in action in most projects), so I don't know if such a category would add much. Cheers, --Daveb 08:14, 18 October 2005 (UTC).

I hope news.com.au article do not expire too soon.

Do they expire? I had assumed that they would last for a while (a few years at least). I could easily be wrong though. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 02:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Buyout speculation

Added info about buy-out speculation, but could not find a good source on how the speculation started. Any leads? - 203.31.24.51

Hmmm. I have obviously missed such speculation. Was it in the papers at all? If it is notwidely knownat themoment, and cannot be sourced, perhaps it should be removed from the "history" section? --Grey.Label 09:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I've added a link to one such article. It doesn't name a source, although it was it paper (and on the TV news etc), and it was about the Cross city tunnel, so it's worth including I think. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 01:05, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

The news.com.au link re media speculation about a buyout, has expired. From memory, the rumour started with Lee Rhiannon MLC, from the Greens. Ms Rhiannon was of the view that the Tunnel company was about to go broke, and the Government would be forced to buy the Tunnel to prevent it being closed. The rumour was then repeated at length in various media outlets, and announced as an inevitability by 2GB radio host Alan Jones

I am not aware of any evidence that the Tunnel company is going broke, ro that the Government has any obligation to buy the Tunnel if it did. The claim disappeared when it became clear that such an option was never seriously considered by either party.

I'd be happy to hear anyone else's recollections - it is an academic debate as the issue has moved on and changes are not required to this section of the article. Jeendan 04:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Toll in one direction

Is the point about nearby tollways being toll in one direction meant to be a critism of the XCT? Making the XCT tolled in one direction only would surely make things worse. Tabletop 09:31, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

The criticism is about the cost of using the road. Use any other single tollroad in the city area, and the cost of that one toll is the total cost for the return journey. If you use the cross city tunnel, it's twice the cost of one toll. As to whether charging more but in only one direction would help or not, it's hard to know. However at the moment the price is high enough, and public resentment about the road closures is strong enough, that people are deliberately not using the tunnel. Companies whose customers dislike them I suspect are not as profitable as they could otherwise be, nor I suspect will they have as strong a growth potential as they otherwise would. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 01:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture

Can someone please change the picture? That picture has too many cars using the tunnel and does not accurately reflect the few cars that actually use it. :-) (JROBBO 10:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC))

Cost of tunnel?

Okay, in this [1] SMH article, it indicates that the cost of the tunnel was $800M (220M in equity, 580M in debt). Our "History" section, we say that it only cost $680M to build. Assuming we are talking about the same sort of "cost", then both of these things cannot be true?

Any suggestions? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Grey.Label (talk • contribs) 04:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

Fine. Grey.Label 04:02, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

References

I just went through and converted all the in-body external links to references. Unfortunately the articles from news.com.au and the Daily Telegraph have expired, and I had to remove the references. If anyone can find working references for these items, they would be appreciated. --Crocodile Punter 09:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CrossCity opening Tripodi Iemma.jpg

Image:CrossCity opening Tripodi Iemma.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 10:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)