Sydney Metro - Western Sydney Airport

My husband and I support the project, but please see attachment with our SUBMISSION .

I support the project in general. I do, however, have concerns that the present state of planning is short-sighted in a few areas. The points of interest are as follows:

1. Provision of extra platforms to enable future cross-platform interchange at Western Sydney Airport and Aerotropolis stations.

According to the NSW government's own planning literature, there are long-term plans for an extension of the South-West Rail Link from its current terminus at Leppington to Aerotropolis station, and for a metro line from Parramatta to the Western Sydney Airport station. Although neither of these projects is currently funded, they are both on the planning horizon, and provision should be made to accommodate them wherever this is expedient. In particular, there would be a permanent benefit to passengers if the interchanges between these lines at the Aerotropolis and WSA stations took the form of cross-platform interchange, rather than separate platforms for each service. This practice is currently in use in stations in Sydney such as Central, Town Hall and Glenfield, and by cutting down the necessary time and movement for passengers when changing trains, has an enormously beneficial effect on travelling time, passenger experience and network efficiency (since passengers are more amenable to changing trains). Provision for cross-platform interchange with the future SWRL extension and Parramatta-WSA metro at Aerotropolis and WSA stations should thus be made an absolute priority in the current planning for the WSA metro. In the present planning document, however, no provision appears to be made for four platforms at either of these stations. Should the line proceed in this state, and the future projects eventuate, they would be permanently handicapped by onerous interchange requirements, which would have a deleterious effect on patronage on all three lines.

The ideal platform layout would be two island platforms flanked on each side by tracks (making four tracks in title). Platform 1 would be used for the "up" WSA metro, Platform 2 (across the island platform) the terminating service for the SWRL/Parramatta metro, a turnback loop beyond the platforms would seamlessly connect Platform 2 to Platform 3, which would serve starting trains for the SWRL/Parramatta metro, and finally Platform 4 (across the island platform from platform 3) would be used for the "down" WSA metro.

In this scenario, a passenger arriving at Aerotropolis from the SWRL would be able to walk across the platform for a train to WSA. Likewise a passenger arriving at WSA from Parramatta would be able to walk across the platform to reach Aerotropolis. Given that airport passengers in particular are likely to be carrying heavy luggage, ensuring a smooth interchange experience at these locations, avoiding walks through long corridors, stairs or elevators, is vital.

Initially Platforms 2 and 3 would remain inactive in regular service, until the SWRL and Parramatta metros are constructed, although they could potentially be used for stabling or turnback purposes. But if provision is not made in the initial construction of the WSA for cross-platform interchange at these two stations, then public transport will be forever hobbled, or the error will have to be retroactively rectified at far greater expense than the relatively trivial extra cost of providing for this station design in the initial project.

2. Passive provision for additional intermediate stations

The presently proposed station spacing of 6 stations over a 23km line (for an average inter-station spacing of 4.6km) is extremely sparse for a metro line, where stations are usually optimally placed at 1-2km distances from each other. While this may be appropriate for the present state of the area served (lightly populated farmland), once this area is developed into an urban zone, more closely spaced stations would be beneficial. Passive provision should therefore be made for additional intermediate stations, at a rate of 1-2 per current inter-station zone. In the above ground sections this may be straightforward to achieve as long as the line is designed to be straight and flat, but in the tunnelled sections of the line foresight should be used to determine possible future station locations, and provide at a minimum passive provision for these to be constructed, if not station shells as part of the initial build.

3. Excessive tunnelling

In general an excessive proportion of the project is tunnelled, when the vast majority of the corridor is in open farmland. The scope of the project should be revised to see if tunnelling can be reduced, since this provides a significant addition to the potential cost of the project. Even in the St. Marys-Orchard Hills section of the line, there is the possibility of an above-grade alignment running alongside the Western line to Werrington, then passing through the grounds of the Kingswood WSU campus (here it could run as a viaduct to avoid severing the campus in two). While there may be opposition from WSU to such an alignment, this could be mollified by providing a station at the campus, thereby making it far more accessible and attractive to potential staff and students.

4. Platform lengths

It is unclear what the lengths of the platforms (and correspondingly the station caverns) for the WSA metro will be. The project overview speaks of 3-car trains with provision for later expansion to 4-car trains, but the station designs appear to be for 8-car platforms. In light of the added costs of longer platforms, especially at underground stations, and the likely long-term patronage of the line, I would argue that 4-car platforms are sufficient, and that added capacity would be more economically achieved through increased train frequency (30 trains per hour is easily feasible, while up to 40 trains per hour is technologically possible).

5. Expedite the extension of the South-West Rail Link to Aerotropolis

The extension of the South-West Rail Link from its current terminus at Leppington to the WSA metro's Aerotropolis is in the NSW government's long-term planning strategy. At present, however, it has a low priority level and may not be constructed for several decades. The decision to postpone the SWRL extension to this timeframe is baffling, since it is a reasonably inexpensive, uncomplicated project to complete, and would come with major benefits of transport connectivity for residents of the south-west of Sydney.

In particular, it would enable the Liverpool/Glenfield area to be directly connected by rail to Aerotropolis and WSA, whereas if it is not built these areas will be subject to a circuitous route via St. Marys or slower and less reliable road transport. Furthermore, it would represent an alternative pathway between Aerotropolis/WSA and the Sydney CBD. By providing a direct train link from the Sydney CBD to Aerotropolis, it would also ensure the success of the proposed "third CBD" in this location.

Moreover, the line would be one of the cheapest transport projects per kilometre to build in the Sydney region. The distance between the current end of the line at the Rossmore stabling yard and the proposed Aerotropolis is roughly 6-7km depending on the exact alignment, with the potential for 2-3 stations. The line could be built entirely at grade (save perhaps for a short cut-and-cover section on the approach to the Aerotropolis station if this is located below ground), and the entire corridor is unbuilt farmland with gentle gradients. Recent projects of comparative scope include the initial SWRL ($1.8billion, completed in 2016, for a 12km line with two new stations, new stabling and an extensive reconfiguration of Glenfield junction) and the Mernda line in Melbourne ($600million, completed in 2018, for a 7km line with three new stations). It would thus be reasonable to expect that the SWRL extension could be built for approximately $600million-$800million, since it requires little-to-no extra stabling and has a straightforward interface with the existing line (which was designed with a westwards extension in mind). The $2billion price tag given for this line in earlier planning documents is excessive and not justified by the nature of the project.

It is therefore likely that should a rigorous cost-benefit analysis be undertaken of the SWRL extension to Aerotropolis, it would receive a very high ranking, perhaps substantially higher than other projects presently considered ahead of it in the infrastructure pipeline. In light of the modest construction cost and considerable benefits of this line, it should be given much higher priority than it presently has. Ideally, it would be absorbed into stage 1 of the WSA metro as a single construction project, although operationally it would remain part of the existing Sydney Trains network (doing so would increase total project costs by a mere 6-8% of the current $10billion budget for the WSA metro). Although the operational efficiency of metro lines is superior to double-decker suburban lines as they are currently operated, this is not a reason to avoid extending the suburban network at all costs (and indeed, reform of operations in the existing suburban system can and should be pursued).

The SWRL extension would be of great benefit to overall connectivity in the area, would ensure the success of the "third CBD" project at Aerotropolis, and would have flow on network effects with the WSA metro, enabling both lines to prosper more than either would in isolation. It should therefore be built as soon as is feasible.

Better to utilise existing airports and fast rail systems .

Please refer to the attached document

See attached letter.

Please attached

The WSA metro is
 Incompatible with the rest of Western Sydney’s rail system
 The wrong technological choice (insufficient number of stations to justify fast accelerating, imported metros)
 Very expensive (long tunnel sections),
 Financially risky (linked to equally risky airport),
 Mono functional and inflexible (small diameter tunnels)

Refer to attached letter

Support of the project is generally given with a request for access to the Airport Terminal Station on the western side of the WSA site from Anton Road. There would be many benefits if access was available to Agribusiness Precinct and Luddenham. Refer to submission attachment for details.
Submission also made to On-airport lands.

Western Sydney University submits the attached comments in response to the proposed Sydney Metro - Western Sydney Airport project

Sydney Metro - Western Sydney Airport_1953-2109 Elizabeth Drive, Badgerys Creek. Submission attached.

Frances Pulham
4 Australia Street
ST MARYS NSW 2760
Sydney Metro - Western Sydney Airport
Application NoSSI-10051

OBJECT TO THE PROPOSAL
Reasons:
 Documents of the application did not make any assurances for residences during the construction. What do we do / who we contact to complain?
• Greater level of noise.
• Construction dust, dirt etc.
• Damage from vibration to properties. (All properties in 1km from proposed line should have inspections before and after construction.)
• General loss of amenity during construction.
If residents feel unfairly treated they will turn the media, particularly the current affairs shows.

 Reference to is made to connecting the proposed line to Northern metro line "Track stubs for potential future connection to north". Chapter 7 - Project description operation
This was never expanded upon in the documents. If this happens the line will go under or through my home.
This is within the scope of the project as it not a stand alone. It is causing great concern as homes Compulsory Acquired are purchased for less than market value with limited or no negotiation. We currently have homes being built that may need to be demolished for the line.
We will not be able to sell as no one wants a house with this hanging over it.

DECLARATION
I declare that I have not made any reportable political donations in the previous two years.

See attached PDF

Please see attached. While broadly in support, please note recommendations from Council.

Please see attached submission to the Sydney Metro - Western Sydney Airport EIS from the Urban Development Institute of Australia NSW (UDIA)

Dear Planning NSW,

I am very concerned about the future of transport links in Western Sydney. I grew up in an area adjacent to Leppington.

My main concern about the proposals for Metro rail solutions in this area is that none seem to encompass the most obvious solution of extending the existing SWRL to Badgery's Creek. This could be done in addition to any Metro expansion, and should be the immediate priority.

Existing infrastructure would permit a sub-35 minute trip from the new airport to the existing Kingsford-Smith airport at Mascot. It is presently, within the limits of the existing system (which can be sped up), a 25 minute trip from Glenfield to Wolli Creek. The state government should commit to an "all-of-the-above" response to transport challenges, and where new Metro lines are appropriate, build them. However where the simplest fix to transport need is to build on the existing network, this should not be ignored, as seems to be the case at present.

yours faithfully,
Matthew Doherty

Please refer to the attached

Heritage NSW advice attached

I have been advised by the Manager Strategic Planning Chris Shannon that he has no comments to make thankyou JUDY