MOD 4 - Sydenham Station and Metro Facility South

There should be provisioning for pedestrian access over the railway lines from Mary Street St Peters into the new Sydenham Creative Hub that also accesses the station from the northern end.
That way residents from Marrickville on the western side and residents from St Peters on the north eastern side can more easily access both Sydenham station and the metro network, no point building it if you don't make it easy to access. The current access to Sydenham station is quite isolated (relatively speaking) from residents and additional access would be a good idea

EAGLE PARTNERS
TRANSPORT CONSULTANTS
21 ST. GEORGES CRESCENT, DRUMMOYNE, NSW, 2047.

NSW Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39, SYDNEY, NSW, 2001.

Attention: Director - Transport Assessments,

Dear Sir / Madam,

SUBMISSION, RE -

APPLICATION NO. SSI 7400. MOD 4.
SYDNEY METRO - CHATSWOOD TO SYDENHAM - SYDENHAM STATION AND SYDNEY METRO TRAINS FACILITY SOUTH.

Display advertisements in the Sydney press of 28 June 2017 invited public comment on a proposal to reconfigure Sydenham Railway Station to accept "metro" type trains, to construct and operate an adjacent train stabling and maintenance facility, and to perform associated enabling works. The closing date for submissions was to be 9 August 2017.

We support the proposal, with the following conditions.

STATION DESIGN OPTIONS
The Modification Application claims that passenger interchange between current train services operated by Sydney Trains and the proposed "Metro" trains, is is a prime purpose of the application.

It is thus disappointing that just one page of the Application (page 24) is devoted to the "design strategy" for Sydenham Station. Being a junction station, it is already an important interchange station. Given that the Metro trains' routing to the north will offer new destinations and faster trip-times for some travellers than are presently available, the degree of interchange might be expected to substantially increase.

It is therefore disappointing that the Applicant, Transport for NSW, has not adopted a station design put to it in November 2015 which involved the lowering of the railway tracks serving Sydenham platforms 1 ("Up" Metro) and 3 ("Up" T2 Airport Line), which would have enabled across-the-platform, same-direction interchange for passengers between Metro trains and T2 Airport Line trains in both directions - inbound and outbound. It would have enabled significant travel-time savings for thousands of future passengers. It would also have simplified wayfinding and its associated signage. Less ambulant passengers would have had less need to use stairs, escalators or lifts.

By actually encouraging interchange at Sydenham, that design may well have provided more passenger accommodation on Sydney Trains' services at St Peters and Erskineville stations, the potential shortage of which has generated considerable public concern.

The Minister for Planning might consider whether a further cost/benefit analysis of the above alternative station design is warranted as a condition of approval of this Application.

STATION DESIGN IN DETAIL.
A notable omission from the plans provided in the Application documents is the provision of escalators between the proposed elevated concourse and the platforms.

The Transport for NSW Design Guidelines for Sydney Metro City & Southwest, Chatswood to Sydenham, dated June 2017, Item 4.1.4 - Circulation Elements (page 67) state - "All Sydney Metro platforms are to be served by escalators and lifts. Lifts and escalators are to provide direct access from entry concourse to platform level".

It should be a condition of any approval of this Application that escalators be provided between the proposed elevated concourse and the station platforms.

DECLARATION.
No reportable political donations have been made by the authors of this document in the previous two years.

Kevin Eadie
Partner
Eagle Partners

[email protected]

9 August 2017.

f; MetroSydenham1.doc.

Submission
Sydenham Station and precinct works for Sydney Metro City & Southwest, Chatswood to Sydenham

SYDENHAM STATION AND SYDNEY METRO TRAINS FACILITY SOUTH
MODIFICATION REPORT
My opposition to the proposal is largely in principle opposition to the haste with which the untried Sydney Metro is being rolled out, the deficiencies of moving away from an integrated train system to a fragmented version with Sydney Metro being incompatible with the current system the deficiencies of the proposed Metro Trains themselves and the imposition of modernism at the expense of heritage at both Sydenham station and the Sydenham Pit.

I am opposed to the Sydenham Station modification and Sydney Metro Trains Facility for the following reasons.
Sydney Metro System is incompatible with existing rolling stock
The Sydney Metro decreased passenger comfort due to many design weaknesses
The Sydney Metro is being rolled out too quickly without public evaluation and experience
The Sydney Metro is fuelling a real-estate bubble with developers rushing to exploit Government plans to forever change the nature of suburbs at the expense of residents.
High density urbanisation along transport corridors leads to unfavourable transport outcomes due to a high percentage of occupiers not using the transport corridors and criss-crossing the city to work or recreation using alternative transportation by necessity and adding to traffic congestion
Sydney Metro system is adding to the radial nature of the transport system through closure of interconnecting lines
Sydney Metro trains cannot be used on existing lines due to undersized carriages
Sydney Current rolling stock cannot be used due to undersized loading gauge

A folly of state planning gone too far. The system is being installed with inappropriate haste as though it is already a success before extreme short comings are revealed.
State planning is in a rush to accommodate the corporations, developers and enterprises capable of high rise building, a rush to irrevocably change the ambience of suburbs with excessive height limitations and high rise, a rush to diminish personal living space, a rush to enforce the loss of open space per resident, the imposition of high rise living to young families with adverse impacts upon the play space of children, a loss of privacy in urban back yards due to high rise and town houses.

In many respects the situation is a lose, lose, lose situation.
Where are the losses? Some are detailed below.

Loss of an integrated rail system
Loss of seating - 75% of people stand and only 25% get a seat
Loss of comfort as passengers have to endure chronic standing times as the Metro system is rolled out to ever increasing distances in far flung locations.
loss of comfortable seating
loss of forward facing seating
loss of wide spacious carriages
loss of train guards to ensure safety at train departures
loss of station staff ensuring safe loading at key platforms of high passenger density
loss of Sydenham station heritage platforms 1 and 2 Bankstown platforms buildings, the parcels office and the major concern with the loss of platform 6 building .
Loss of current heritage aspect of Sydenham Pit and Drainage Pumping Station with the imposition of an aqueduct

Future losses
lose train service for Yagoona and Birrong
lose interconnectivity between Bankstown line and Southern and Western lines
lose interconnectivity and ability to reroute trains in either direction on North and North shore lines with loss of Epping Chatswood line



I would like to detail the above as follows:
Loss of an integrated rail system
Introduction of the Sydney Metro is about to cause the loss of integrated rail system Sydney Metro is incompatible with existing network This causes fragmentation of the complete network as rolling stock is no longer universal.
Worse still it is being used to supplant high worth heavy rail corridors. The concern is the abandonment of existing rail lines forming north south connections or linking existing major rail lines. I refer to
Bankstown to Regents Park line - to be completely abandoned
Carlingford line - to be replaced with a light rail slowing commuter times to the city
Chatswood to Epping - now being converted to a metro nullifying the ability to run trains from Hornsby to the city along either the main north line or the North shore and re-route them in the case of a major blockage

Sydney Metro system is adding to the radial nature of the transport system through closure of interconnecting lines
Sydenham to Regents Park is an important interconnecting line between the Illawarra lines and the southern and western line. In the event of a major blockage on the Lidcombe to Redfern section it allows flexibility of operation and interconnectivity. Trains could be re-routed from the south via Sefton to Birrong to Sydenham and thence to the city or from the western leg of the triangle at Lidcombe through Regents Park to the Sydenham and thence to the city.

Seating
Loss of seating
At full loading only 25% passengers get a seat. This means that 75% have to stand.
The Sydney Railway Company of 1854 ordered three classes of carriages for the opening of the system. The railway began operation under government ownership on the 26th September 1855. In particular the carriages employed provided seats for all passengers. In fact the original 1855 Wright third class cars ordered and built for the Sydney Railway Company had all its 36 passengers with seats due to transverse seating in two compartments of equal size, seating 18 with 5 across at the compartment ends and four across on narrow backless forms in the centre. Transverse seating across the carriage provided passengers with a far easier exterior view enabling enjoyment of the train's progress
Second class cars sat 40 in four compartments using two full car width transverse seats and First class was a coupe with 3 compartments; 4 across transverse seating and a total of 20.
By this measure Sydney Metro trains are less than third class so more like fourth class or fourth rate. Sydney Metro introduces cattle class accommodation. Only livestock carriages enforced living creatures to stand for the duration of their journey. The Metro champions enforced over-crowding due to the undersized carriages and scarce provision of uncomfortable seats. Undersized carriages to fit in undersized rail tunnels to save costs. A rat railway with very long rat holes.
Residents in the planned high density apartments will suffer an extreme lack of public open space and lack of adequate or expanded parklands and parks with sporting fields and then when commuting on the Metro will be forced to stand for unacceptable distances.

Loss of comfort as passengers have to endure chronic standing times
Loss of comfort as passengers have to endure chronic standing times as the Metro system is rolled out to ever increasing distances in far flung locations. This unbearable amount of standing time will not only be physically draining but it will be frustrating due to the need to hang on to what hand rails are available while at the same time being unable to engage on other activities.
Seating should be a priority for long distance travel since it enables positive activities such as reading newspapers, using laptops or university students applying themselves to their studies.

Loss of comfortable seating.
One has only to compare the seating shown in the Sydney Metro Trains promotion to realise how inferior it is to the comfort of the seats of an Oscar Train. The Sydney Metro seats are thin and do not have adequate cushioning. Many state the most comfortable seat are in the V sets which have a good head rest.
Loss of the ability to sit up straight. The Metro seats all lean backwards seating.
In addition they do not have a head rest.

Loss of forward facing seats
Sydney Metro passengers will suffer extreme discomfort to trying to look outside from inward facing seats. Looking across the carriage will be blocked to some degree by standing passengers dependent upon time of day.
No other form of transport has such a backward seating arrangement. Cars, buses ferries which have spacious decks and planes all have seats usually in pairs facing the direction of travel. Even push bikes enable a cyclist to view the forward direction.
The immediate competition for the Metro is motor cars where you can sit two abreast and face the direction you are going. This is the most comfortable and psychologically satisfying method of seating. We have had it from the time of sulkies. Faced with the fight to get a fourth rate seating arrangement and travel in a tunnel or travel by car or bus above ground it is obvious which transport system is to be preferred.
No seat arm rests to arrest rapid deceleration and acceleration
Sydney Trains publicity states that 'Platform screens keep people away from the edge and allow trains to get into and out of the station much faster.' This will cause more rapid deceleration on stops and acceleration when starting. By Newton's First law on motion this will require passengers brace themselves for such changes in motion. The inward facing seats will amplify this motion with no additional support and yet more discomfort.

Loss of wide spacious carriages
The Sydney Metro champions undersized carriages. The lack of open space is a major design flaw which will cause immediate congestion though-out the cars due to large numbers of standing passengers. This will block lines of sight through the carriages and the free passage of commuters and security staff moving through the carriages. This contradicts the opening statement of Sydney trains first sentence on Safety where it is stated `Safety is the number one priority for the design, construction and operation of Sydney Metro.' Clearly congestion is more important.

Loss of train guards to ensure safety at train departures
Sydney Trains state that `Safety is the number one priority for the design, construction and operation of Sydney Metro'. On site human observation by a train guard and at high volume platforms station staff will be far safer than automatic doors and station monitoring. Station monitoring doesn't have ears and cannot detect screams. Situations can arise in public interchange with carriages such as women with strollers in addition to the mobile toddlers and children where on site human observation provides the optimum safety. Guards are better than `Expert train controllers'. They are in fact on site expert train controllers.
Reliance on surveillance at platforms loses human interaction.

Loss of Sydenham station heritage platforms 1 and 2 Bankstown platforms buildings including the Parcels building.
The major concerns are the imposition of the new awning system at the north end which will dominate the site and the loss of the Parcels Building and the lack of symmetry arising from the modernisation of Platform 1 and the loss of The Platform 6 building.
The new awning will also remove the last significant part of all platforms where passengers can stand in the sun.
Platforms 3, 4 5 and 6 would benefit if the new structure was not so imposing and moved well to the north of the platforms with only minimum awnings if at all.
Sydenham station has current heritage value. The new structure will dominate the horizon as viewed from the east along Burrow Road and north-west from Hogan Avenue. Reducing its height and pretention would enhance the heritage values.
The removal of Platform 1 would result in a major impact on the fabric of the platform including the loss of the original brick face.
Platform 1 was designed in a curvilinear form to stand in near-symmetry with Platform 6 locate along the southern boundary of the site. The removal of the platform and the construction of the straight platform required for the Metro trains would result in a major impact on Platform 1 and disrupt the current symmetry with Platform 6.
The new paid concourse, access stairs, lifts, overhead canopy structure, platform buildings and protective barriers would be located on the new platform and would not further impact significant fabric.
The Parcels Office would be removed to allow for the construction of a new paid concourse and overhead canopies. There would be a major direct impact on the fabric of the Parcels Office as a result of its demolition. Overall, the impact of its removal on the station group would be major.
Parcel buildings are a rarity with continued modernisation and this should be retained.
The realignment of Platform 2 would involve demolition of Platform 2/3 on the north and east sides of the platform building. This would have a major impact on the platform including the loss of the original brick face on the majority of the platform.
The platform would be reconstructed to include an extension of Platform 2 in the north-eastern end to accommodate the straight rail lines required for the Metro trains. This would result in the loss of the historic curved platform end and of the original near-symmetry of the station platforms. This would have a major impact on the original platform layout.
The almost complete demolition of Platform 2/3 to be reconstructed in straight lines would result in a major impact on the station group as a whole.
The Platform 6 building would be removed to allow for the construction of a new paid concourse and overhead canopies. Its removal would result in a major impact on the fabric of the building and on Sydenham Station as a whole. This loss and the Parcels Office is the most unwanted outcome at the Sydenham station. These are two of four significant buildings within the precinct, and with the removal of two of four original platforms, results in a major direct impact. A 50% loss of heritage buildings is unacceptable.
I need be move the whole Metro station further north so as to have no such impacts and change the north and east station access to preserve the heritage elements. A subway might be an improvement.

Loss of current heritage aspect of Sydenham Pit and Drainage Pumping Station with the imposition of an aqueduct
One of the more enjoyable observations to be made from the quality trains on the current system where you can sit facing forward and look comfortably out the window is the site of the heritage brick lined Sydenham Pit. It would be a great loss to have any new structure imposed upon this item.
Sydenham Pit and Drainage Pumping Station should be conserved as an operating element of the Sydney stormwater system, continuing its historic function. The significant fabric is testament to the skill of past trades people. The surviving historic fabric of Exceptional and High significance should be retained and conserved.
I oppose the construction of any new structure across this.


Conclusion
I oppose the destruction of 50% of the heritage buildings at Sydenham station. I oppose the imposition of new structures at the Sydenham pit. I recommend that State Planning halt the expansion of the Sydney Metro until it has been in operation for at least a year on the Chatswood Rouse Hill North west line and until such time that it has gained public acceptance rather than bureaucratic acceptance. Meantime its multitude of design deficiencies and incompatibility with the current system and the proposed imposition of the Metro on fully proven current heavy rail lines that have provided outstanding service over decades all rings alarm bells that it is not acceptable.

Ian Hill

Ausgrid has reviewed the documents and in particular sections 7.8.8 and 7.8.9 of the submission.

We note the requirement for ongoing consultation regarding the Ausgrid asset relocations associated with the modification and have no further comment to make.

Please see attached PDF for explanation of issues and recommendations.

see attached letter

I am opposed to the proposal in its present form as detailed in the attached file.

See attachment.

See attached.

See attached

See attached

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

submission attached