Sydney Metro - Chatswood to Sydenham

Hello,

I agree with the proposed Chatswood-Sydenham Metro.

I have one comment/suggestion, it's to do with Sydenham.

The metro dive surfaces on the west side of the existing Sydney Trains lines south of Edgeware Road according to images in the EIS. This poses a range of issues:
1) The western platforms (1 and 2) at Sydenham are heavily curved, they are not suitable for proposed metro operations (the centre platforms are straight, but getting the metro to/from those platforms is challenging)
2) The infrastructure to the south and south-west of Sydenham station imposes many constrains to the metro alignment/set-up
3) Metro trains operating through to Bankstown will create challenges with serving Erskinsville and St Peters stations by existing Sydney Trains' services.
a) Stopping at Erskineville and St Peters is highly incompatible with express Leppington/Campbelltown/Macarthur via East Hills services
b) Illawarra trains stopping at Erskineville and St Peters while only using the two tracks though these stations is not practical at the current 16 trains per hour maximum frequency (and it will only increase)
c) CountryLink trains also use the Illawarra Lines to access the Sydenham XPT maintenance facility.

Ultimately Sydney Trains will require at least one additional track, probably two between Erskineville and Sydenham to maximise the capacity for South and Illawarra express services, while meeting CountryLink's needs too (this will still hold, albeit delayed, if the metro is extended to Hurstville). It means all six Sydenham platforms will be required for Sydeny Trains.

My attached diagram suggests an alternate alignment: heading south from Waterloo, keep to the east of the proposed alignment, build an underground station at Sydenham with a dive immediately west of Sydenham station. While this adds the expense of additional tunneling and a further underground station, the complexities of overlaying existing infrastructure at Sydenham is eliminated should have significant offsets. It also maintains greater flexibility for Sydney Trains.

Should the metro be extended to Hurstville, stub tunnels immediately to the south-west of Sydenham could be provided, with the lines looping west of the XPT Maintenance Centre, under the freight lines and into Tempe.

For your consideration.

Chris Downs

Please see attached submission

Please see uploaded PDF attachment

Uploaded below

Sydney Metro Chatswood to Sydenham Submission
Objection to the proposed Sydney Metro
Made by: Pip Rath, 13/25A Hickson Rd, Millers Point

I object to the Sydney Metro Plan and in relation to the proposed station at Barangaroo for the following reasons:

Operational problems: The situating of the metro tunnel under part of the residences bounded by Dalgety Road, Towns Place and Hickson Roads is more than likely to produce ongoing unacceptable operational noise and vibration (see Chapter 11 Chatswood to Sydenham EIS).

Despite the real risk of vibration and operational noise to residents of these buildings no effort is being made to mitigate the problem. At the very least the track should have high to very high attenuation and not standard. The buildings in question have 6 floors of underground carpark and consequently noise and vibration will echo through the hollow space. It is extraordinary such attenuation is not being contemplated for this section of track in the tunnel but is contemplated for track near Pitt Street and Martin Place.

Construction Noise: (See Chapter 10 of EIS). The construction proposals for the Barangaroo station will severely impact the quiet enjoyment of residents and businesses along Hickson Rd from central Barangaroo down to Towns Place.

Residents and workers have had to put up with high noises levels during construction of Barangaroo Park. Construction and truck movements have been and continue to be disruptive. All construction and trucks should be placed on the Barangaroo central area where the proposed station is situation. Movement of trucks etc along Hickson Rd from the site to around Towns Place and Dalegty Rd should be extremely limited.

Residents have had extremely bad experiences of trucks sitting outside on Hickson Rd and Towns Place idling at 4-5am in the morning while waiting to go on site. No amount of complaints made much difference.

Quite enjoyment of our property is paramount and there is no thought being given to compensating residents. At the very least all construction should be kept as much as possible on the Barangaroo central area where there are no buildings.

Barangaroo wrongly situated: The proposed Barangaroo station is wrongly situated to achieve the objectives announced by the Premier (eg, reduce traffic at Wynyard and Martin Place and connect the old financial hub with the new at Barangaroo south and to ferry at Barangaroo south).

Number of commuters must go up at Martin Place since commuters will be able to go directly to it from the North Shore.

As for Wynyard numbers, the numbers from the north may reduce as commuters can get off at Barangaroo instead of Wynyard and walk down. However, why would commuters change at Sydenham and go to Barangaroo and then walk back to the southern buildings when they can walk the same distance from Wynyard? This attitude will be pronounced in bad weather as the walk up Hickson Rd is open, while the walk from Wynyard is largely covered.

The Barangaroo station is also badly situated to encourage the high numbers expected to attend events in the new convention centres at the far southern end of the Barangaroo and Darling Harbour complex to use the station and hence metro system. Town Hall and Wynward are much closer options to that end.

The idea of the station being important in connecting the two financial hubs is fanciful. Anyone near Martin Place wanting to go to the business hub at south Barangaroo is likely to walk down rather than get a train and walk up Hickson Rd. Similarly, why would anyone walk in the opposite direction to the Barangaroo station to get to Martin Place area when they can just walk up through Wydnyard? This will be exacerbated in bad weather (or indeed in hot weather).

Summary:

While the proposed metro may be good infrastructure, the station at Barangaroo is nothing more than a political grab.

It is wrongly situated to make the best use of Barangaroo south and Darling Harbor and its connection to the CBD. The operational noise and vibration has not been properly attenuated and the construction noise will severely impact residents and workers for years as it is presently proposed.

Peter and Beryl Hourigan
15 / 5 Towns Place
Millers Point NSW 2000

Director
Transport Assessments
Department of Planning and Environment
GPO Box 39
SYDNEY NSW 2001

21 June 2016
Dear Director,

CHATSWOOD-SYDENHAM METRO: SS15 7400

I own and live in apartment 15/5 Towns Place Milers Point. While I support the proposed Sydney Metro proposal I have a number of objections to its proposed implementation. The most serious is relating to noise and vibration issues to my home, residents and businesses.
The current plans show the eastern tunnel passing beneath the north western corner of my building on Dalgety Road at a depth of 35 metres.
The tunnel continues south, in part below Dalgety Road and under the terraces on Dalgety Road to the new proposed metro station at Barangaroo. Those terraces on Dalgety Road sit on a sandstone escarpment approximately 10 metres above the road surface. This additional 10 metres adds to the 35 metre buffer between the tunnel and residents.
In contrast, the Towns Place building not only lacks this 10 metre buffer, but also has a car park to a depth of approximately 20 metres below ground level. This significantly reduces the buffer between the tunnel and building structure, exacerbating noise and vibrations issues.
The limited buffer could be resolved by relocating the eastern side of the tunnel approximately 10 metres to the west of Dalgety Road so that no part of it runs close to or below the Towns Place building on Dalgety Road. Moving the tunnel west places the tunnel below much deeper bedrock where noise and vibration will not impact on any surface building.
Whilst best practise for this type of rapid transport system is for the rolling stock to have rubber wheels running on rubber tracks it s understood that for consistency the Metro's system will have steel wheels and tracks. While acknowledging the need for consistency, this track should have high quality attenuation measures installed. Particularly that part from the harbour to Barangaroo metro station. Demonstration of the noise and vibration attenuation should be a fundamental requirement for the design, construction and contract submissions.
The use of temporary stockpiling of spoil on Hickson Road before double handling and removal is unnecessary with modern construction processes. The spoil should just be removed from the area directly to its final destination, and this should not occur at night.
The proposal that the spoil may be removed from the area by barge should require its removal from the harbour side of the central Barangaroo site. To do so from any other local harbour location would again involve double handling, unwarranted and unreasonable noise and increase the number of truck movements in the area.
While these matter seem basic, it is unfortunately these simply issues are not neglected when dealing with complex issues.
I am happy to discuss my comments or be involved in any community engagement process.

Yours faithfully


Peter and Beryl Hourigan


CC
Mr Andrew Constance, Minister for Transport and Infrastructure,
Mr Tim Reardon, Secretary Transport for NSW, Level 6, 18 Lee Street CHIPPENDALE NSW 2008 (PO Box K659 HAYMARKET NSW 1240)

THIS PROJECT HAS SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON SEVERAL SUBURBS OF SYDNEY AND THEREFORE IT HAS TO BE CAREFULLY EXAMINED BEFORE GOING AHEAD. THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER MAJOR PROJECTS FOR TRANSPORT IN SYDNEY AND SURROUNDING SUBURBS LIKE LIGHT RAIL CORRIDORS ALONG METRO ROADS. IT IS SHAMEFUL THAT PREVIOUS GOVERNMENTS HAVE NEVER COMMITTED TO A LONG TERM INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING. WE NEED A SECOND AIRPORT AND IMPROVED INTERCITY TRAINS TO BE AT THE TOP OF THE LIST.

Please find attached Sydney Airport's submission in response to the Sydney Metro (Chatswood to Sydenham) Environmental Impact Statement.

We would be pleased to discuss any issue contained in this submission in greater detail.

Please find attached submission

See attached letter stating 5 reasons for objecting to the EIS.

Mr Douglas & Mrs Maree Fryer
Unit 5 16 Dalgety Road. Millers Point NSW 2000.
Chatswood - Sydenham Metro.
SS15 7400
We object to the proposed alinement of the rail tunnel.
We have not made any political donations in the last 3 years.
We believe the rail tunnel will likely go under or extremely close to our home.
Our building extends several levels below the street ( Dalgety Road ) which is also cut well below the original ground level.
This would put the rail very close to our foundations and the structure of our home.
We believe the vibrations would significantly weaken or destroy our foundations and eventually the structure of our building.
Therefor this has a high likelihood of putting our Safety at a significant risk.
The vibrations can also cause harm to our health and with that affect our way of life. I have had a previous experience where outside vibrations have caused disorientation and headaches.
We ask, why put the rail line near housing when the whole of Barrangaroo North Park is only across the road and if the rail went under the park it would not affect any People and or Property.

Dear Sir or Madame,

Please find attached our submission with regards to Application Number: SSI 15_7400.

Regards,

Colin.

Please see the attached file, detailing my objection on the grounds that additional metro stations should be added between Sydenham and Waterloo, namely at Alexandria (McEvoy/Maddox St).

Please see attached submission prepared on behalf of Monte Sant' Angelo Mercy College

Please see attached submission.

Please find attached Objection to the Crows Nest Metro. Lyall Resident, 26 Clarke St, Crows Nest NSW 2065. Dr. Karen Rook

Providing public transport options is a much better long-term plan for transport than building roads such as WestConnex which will just become congested again in a few years, but has limited impact without providing more stations.

Attached

The Chatswood West Ward Progress Association members have expressed qualified acceptance of the project, however, as outlined in our attached submission we have a number of concerns that we like to see addressed by Conditions of Approval.

Dear Sir or Madam:

Re: Sydney Metro City & Southwest - Chatswood to Sydenham

Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission on this project.

I would like to reject the conclusions reached with regard to 4.4.3 (Phase 3 - additional station options) regarding the provision of a Station in the Artamon Industrial Area.

In my view the outcome was poor in the `Performance of Artarmon Industrial Area Station against the project objectives' because you did not take into account the possible impacts on Lane Cove.

If a station is placed on the Pacific Hwy in the vicinity of Alto Pl it will have a positive impact on the residents of the existing & future high density housing in the area and the Lane Cove Shopping Centre. Furthermore it can still be utilised by those commuting to the Artarmon Industrial Area.

It seems to me that by only considering the Artarmon Industrial Area in assessing the performance of a station you have missed an opportunity to provide a train link to Lane Cove.

I'd imagine that it's unusual to find, in modern urban metro systems, stations as far apart from each other as Crows Nest & Chatswood. Ie 3.7km in a straight line, 5.3km by road.

Clearly once the tunnel's board you can't change it. You have a responsibility to ensure that a public system of this magnitude is able to have a positive impact on the highest number of people. By leaving Lane Cove out of the equation you are not doing this.


Yours faithfully

Gavin Imhof

Lavender Bay Precinct wishes to lodge a submission to the EIS. Please see attached.
thank you, Ian Curdie
Secretary.