Sydney Metro West - Concept and Stage 1 (major civil construction between Westmead and The Bays)

I believe a station at Rydalmere and Camellia for the new West Metro line is absolutely necessary. It would be crazy to take away the stations that already exist. There is a growing university at Rydalmere where students require the station to get to and from each day. Both suburbs are growing in population with new housing being introduced. These stations need to stay.

I am providing this submission on behalf of my elderly mother, who lives opposite a proposed construction site for the west metro, and who will be adversely affected by the project both during construction and on completion.
During construction the EIS proposes that her street will be a one way 24 hour truck route with site entry opposite her house. This will have a serious impact on her amenity and wellbeing. Her main bedroom is at the front of the house and is not sound proof, with the house having no air conditioning. My mother is a light sleeper and relies on fresh air to ventilate the house. She lives independently but has mobility issues due to age, and will not be able to keep up with extra cleaning from the construction site opposite her home. A trip to the local shops is going to be extremely difficult given the truck traffic and her mobility. With the restriction on parking it will make it more difficult for family and friends to visit and provide her support structure.
Post construction the property will be affected with an easement noted on her title which will inhibit any possible opportunity for future development of the house so she will not have the benefit of land values recently achieved by surrounding properties in her area. I would like the opportunity to discuss these issues to confirm mitigation measures that could be put in place to reduce the impact to her every day way of life.

In my report I found that the Sydney Metro Greater West project was justified on outdated population data that have been radically altered due to the force majeure of COVID-19. The critical economic factor that achieved an estimated Benefit-Cost-Ratio greater than 1 according to the business case was population growth, railway and airway patronage. I have the same concerns about this project. I understand that a reevaluation would cost money. But given similar circumstances and proximity, I carry the same concerns. I understand that the Metro West is not reliant on Western Sydney Airport, however due to continued susceptibility to COVID-19, prolonged lock-down measures, and the recession, I am not confident that this project will achieve its intended benefits without the forecasted patronage. Especially when publicly funded infrastructure increasingly becomes a challenge for government. How confident are you in the patronage data?

There needs to be at least one other stop between Olympic Park and Parramatta.

The whole idea of Public Transport is to remove cars from the road as much as possible and provide cheap and frequent access to citizens throughout state. The benefits of reducing the number of cars on the road were evident during the recent lockdowns: pollution was significantly reduced and would have contributed to fewer health issues for many, especially those who live near major traffic corridors.

Those who live between Olympic Park and Parramatta will not have access to the Metro under current plans, forcing them onto the road either to drive to their destinations or to get to nearby public transport hubs. The closure of the Carlingford heavy rail line recently has already exacerbated this.

The region needs more access to the metro, not less. It needs more stops.

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

METRO WEST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT – MAY 2020.

To -
Planning and Assessment
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
Locked Bag 5022
Parramatta NSW 2124

Submission from -

Eagle Partners
21 St Georges Cres.
Drummoyne, NSW, 2047.

APPLICATION NO. SSI-10038 – METRO WEST - WESTMEAD TO THE BAYS

WE SUPPORT THE PROJECT, with reservations, as detailed below.

OVERVIEW
This submission is based on information provided by Sydney Metro on a number of websites in late 2019 and early 2020. It refers to a proposed underground “Metro” railway between Sydney City and the suburb of Westmead. Submissions were invited from the public, with a closing date of 26 June 2020. This submission is in response to an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Concept Stage Application and Stage 1 Application (tunnels and station boxes) for that part of the railway between Westmead in the west and The Bays in the east. Therefore, this submission does not make reference to that section of the proposed railway between The Bays and Sydney City.

It is noted that submissions will be considered by the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment in its assessment of the project, and that the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment will provide Sydney Metro with a copy of all submissions received during the exhibition period. Sydney Metro will review all the submissions and prepare a Submissions Report to respond to issues raised. If changes are required as a result of the issues raised, a Preferred Infrastructure Report may also be prepared. Approval from the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces is required before Sydney Metro can proceed with the project.

INFORMATION BY “DRIP”
It is regrettable that the public has not been given sufficient information to respond to the whole of the Metro West project. It has become common in recent years to drip-feed information to the public for major projects, while major portions of the project are still in the concept or design stages. It inhibits transparency in democratic decision-making and is not in the public interest. In this case, the public is invited to respond to the “tunnels and station boxes” components of a project, without any details of the trains or stations which they will use. Nor can any public comment be regarded as “informed” when no information is available regarding the Bays to City section of the project.

LONGER TERM VIEW REQUIRED
There is a widely held view that the impetus for this West Metro was a rather late realisation that Sydney Trains' Western Line, between Sydney City and Parramatta, was already exceeding capacity at certain times of day, and that to relieve overcrowding some kind of parallel relief capacity was required. Hence Metro West. But the proposed design of Metro West implies that its main, or sole, purpose is as a relief for Sydney Trains' Western Line. The design should have a much wider vision, both geographically and with a view to the future. The design of West Metro should reflect the likelihood of it being extended, at one or both ends, and needing to serve the kind of urban development which is likely to have occurred around its stations over the next hundred years.

MINIMISING TRIP TIMES
Initial Sydney Metro promotional material, circa 2011, emphasised the need to minimise door-to-door travel times for Metro users. The need therefore to minimise walking distances at stations and at interchanges was acknowledged. That principle seems to have been abandoned in more recent times. It is most glaringly obvious by the failure to implement across-the-platform interchange for passengers at junction stations, a railway design principle which has been in practice throughout the world for over a hundred years. As Sydney's increasingly complex rail network expands, but becomes less integrated, (heavy rail, Metro and light rail) the need for passengers to interchange between lines will grow, exacerbating this failure.
As the approving authority, the Minister for Planning should ensure that a renewed emphasis be placed on minimising walk-up times to stations, and walking distances between trains at interchange stations.

The following comments relate to specific locations along the route of the proposed railway.

1 – WESTMEAD STATION
The EIS proposes that Westmead Metro Station be built underground, below Alexandra Avenue, and to the south of the existing Sydney Trains' surface station.

Chapter 7 of the EIS refers to “direct interchange” between Metro and Sydney Trains' station. It is not clear whether this will require passengers to“tag off” with Opal card and tag on again when transferring between the two railways. Tagging is inconvenient and time-consuming and should be eliminated wherever possible.

The site for the Metro station may have been chosen with a view to the future commercialisation of the existing residential properties to the south of Westmead Station. If this is NOT the reason, the Metro station should be moved to a site NORTH of Sydney Trains' station, where access to that station, the hospital precinct, the University of Western Sydney campus, T-way buses, and the light rail terminal, would enable much shorter, safer, and faster pedestrian links. An underground “all-weather” pedestrian passage could then be provided under Hawkesbury Road, to an entrance for the combined stations in the vicinity of the Hawkesbury / Darcy / Farmhouse block.

2 - OLYMPIC PARK STATION
Chapter 7 of the EIS recognises the need for this station to cater for normal day-to-day passenger flows as well as special event crowds, and the need to separate the two. It does not provide detail as to how this is to be done.
The station design should allow for each track to have a platform on both sides, as is provided at the adjacent Sydney Trains station. This feature may not be required initially, but may prove advantageous in the longer term as it reduces dwell times for trains by enabling simultaneous alighting and boarding. Allowance for a central island platform at the Mero station should therefore be made by splaying the running tunnels at both ends of the station. The tunnels, if they are located as shown in the EIS, will not allow for an island platform.

3 - NORTH STRATHFIELD STATION
Given the close proximity to the Sydney Trains station, and the likelihood of a high volume of interchanging passengers, short, all-weather, “tag-free”, underground pedestrian links should be provided, as suggested for Westmead station, above.

4 - FIVE DOCK STATION
Why are the operational tunnels shown widely spaced at Five Dock but not at other stations?

REPORTABLE POLITICAL DONATIONS
No reportable political donations have been made in the last two years.

Kevin Eadie
Partner
Eagle Partners
[email protected]

file – MetroWest1.doc

17 June 2020.

I am a resident of Rozelle and am very supportive of this project, as I believe it has the potential to provide much better public transport access/connectivity than the area has at present, via the proposed Bays Precinct station.

However, I refer to Chapter 7 of the EIS for this project, which demonstrates the location of this station is well removed from the main population centres of Balmain and Rozelle, near the southern tip of White Bay (refer Figure 7-9).

It is therefore critical that the station is made as accessible as possible for the existing residents of the area (and not just the new residents/workers of the proposed Bays Precinct), through pedestrian linkages and bus interchanges. This will maximise the usability of the Metro for existing residents and reduce reliance on other congested forms of transport from the area.

In this regard, I note that Figure 7-9 higlights a "potential connection" between the intersection of Mullens and Robert Streets, and the station entrance. See attached a diagram with the connection circled in red. I would urge the Department to implement this connection, which will facilitate a much more direct walking route from Mullens Street (which links with the rest of the Balmain peninsula) to the station entrance. It would presumably also provide for a better interchange between the buses which run down Mullens Street.

Many thanks,
Mike

I am a resident of Balmain and a I believe the project has the potential to provide much better public transport access/connectivity than the area has at present, via the proposed Bays Precinct station.

However, I refer to Chapter 7 of the EIS for this project, which demonstrates the location of this station is well removed from the main population centres of Balmain and Rozelle.

It is therefore critical that the station is made as accessible as possible for the existing residents of the area (and not just the new residents/workers of the proposed Bays Precinct), through pedestrian linkages and bus interchanges. This will maximise the usability of the Metro for existing residents and reduce reliance on other congested forms of transport from the area.

In this regard, I note that Figure 7-9 higlights a "potential connection" between the intersection of Mullens and Robert Streets, and the station entrance. I would urge the Department to implement this connection, which will facilitate a much more direct walking route from Mullens Street (which links with the rest of the Balmain peninsula) to the station entrance. It would presumably also provide for a better interchange between the buses which run down Mullens Street.

Many thanks

The new Metro West will be an important transport link.
However, a station at Rydalmere should be included. It will service the growing University of Western Sydney Campus. It will service the planned residential redevelopment for Rydalmere and Ermington. It will provide an interchange for travellers on the new Carlingford Light rail.. Those people will not have to go into Parramatta to transfer to the fast link to Olympic Park, Barangaroo and Sydney CBD.
A second point is that the present Metro carriages do not provide a designated bicycle area. Cyclists use empty Disable facilities or fit the best they can. The new Metro West should provide marked bicycle locations in the carriage. Cycling usage is on the increase. I am a bicycle rider and a resident member of Parramatta City cycling Advisory Committee.
These are my personal submissions.

I support the project and would like more focus to be on North Strathfield which seems to have been forgotten, wedged amongst larger suburbs.

We are the Community Managers for the Kings Bay Estate, Five Dock (Harris Road) where tunnelling works will be undertaken underneath the Estate and we seek further understanding of the potential acoustic and structural impact of the works and how Sydney Metro propose to handle any concerns and repairs.

In Document 2 “Strategic need and justification” there is no reference to “NBN”, “pandemic” or “Covi-19’ despite the EIS being dated in mid April.

It is obvious that the CBD has been deserted by its usual occupants for the last three months. There is the anecdotal experience that both employers and employees are finding that enforced isolation has changed work practices previously thought to be inviolable. Macquarie Bank for one is about to accept 20% of its workforce back to its CBD offices based largely on the fact the selected employees’ home situation is not suitable to working from home. The implication is that both parties are contend with the new arrangements.

In the light of this experience and the forthcoming completion of the NBN upgrades, all the transport usage projections should be revisited before vast amounts are spent to satisfy a demand that no longer exists in expected numbers.

Providing for public transport always costs money and involves generous subsidies. At a time when the pressures on the Budget are unprecedented, more thought should be given to the assumed need to duplicate an existing rail connection. The opportunity to move jobs closer to, or even at, home has now been presented, but no analysis has been undertaken as to how this opportunity could be exploited. This could happen by, for example, allowing for more commercial zoning in transport hubs distributed across the metropolitan area. As is so often the case in such debates, Paragraph 3.32 “Better use” is confined to “Better transport use” and fails to include “Better land use nearer to the other end, or at intermediate stages and possible nodes in the journey.”

If Paragraph 3.4 Travel time is an important consideration, why not ask questions like “Why is the journey necessary in the first place?” and “Is a connection to Macquarie Park also important?” Tens of thousands of people seem to have been managing quite well lately while not making any journeys to the CBD. It is not as if there is a shortage of other projects on the wish list: https://tinyurl.com/y8he7fr8.

And that list does not include extending Parramatta Light Rail Stage 1 to Epping Junction (thence to Macquarie Park) and to connect it with the other parts of the heavy rail and metro network.

The Metro West needs a stop between Parramatta and Olympic Park.
We have Western Sydney University with campuses at Rydalmere, Parramatta and Westmead - a transport link between these would make perfect sense and be a wonderful worthwhile visionary project. Please see the big picture rather than the short term money savings.
I understand the Parramatta River may cause problems - so if Rydalmere is really not an option - a stop at Rosehill could also work or Silverwater or Camelia.
Silverwater has poor public transport options and there are a lot of job opportunities here - but only if you have your own transport. A stop at Silverwater would be very worthwhile too.
The population of this area is set to double - so please look to the future - and add another stop between Parramatta and Olympic Park.

A metro station at Camellia needs to be made due to a highly dense population in the Parramatta area. Having this additional stop will improve the congestion during peak hour daily commutes.

The construction on Callan St at Rozelle and neighbouring streets has been extremely disruptive during the pandemic while we continue to work from home for the unforeseeable future. The Social Impact Assessment has highly underestimated the cumulative impact associated with the WestConnex, the planned Western Harbour Tunnel as well as the Sydney Metro West geotech activities near the power station. We have had to endure direct noise impact from the WestConnex construction, strong vibrations from the deep excavation, dust directly coming into the house from the large dump trucks moving in and out and unable to access our own driveway with multiple children in tow for several weeks. The report suggests that the impact to our way of life is 'unlikely' and the consequence is 'minor' given the short term trenching activities however I would strongly encourage that careful consideration is made when taking into account the cumulative lifestyle impacts, the health and well-being of residents throughout the pandemic and the on-going major projects that are occuring now and in the future.

42 storeys is way too big for this area and facilities. if overdevelopment is not good for Mr Elliott's Baulkham Hills then it is not good for Burwood.

I live right nextdoor to the proposed site for the Five Dock metro station (171-173 Great North Road, Five Dock)

I am concerned for the noise levels during the demolition & excavation works especially before the acoustic barrier is constructed. I was informed that this could be for a period of 3-6 months.

We are a young family, with a baby and are planning to have another baby in 2021.

I am wondering what options are available to me with regards to being relocated during this phase at the expense of the government ?

The attached submission is a community submission from the residents of Callan Street Rozelle objecting to the planned trenching of Callan Street Rozelle and installation of a high voltage cable by the Sydney Metro, which is one of the multiple State Priority projects planning to rip up Callan Street and incur significant mental and physical health impacts for residents.

We support the increase of public transport in Greater Sydney, and believe putting transit within walking access of more residents and workers will increase the number of people who don't have to use a car.
To that end, we believe the Sydney Metro West project should have additional stations in Pyrmont, Leichhardt, Silverwater, and Camellia, and of course extend into the Sydney CBD. This will bring the stations closer to users and increase the value (and land value uplift) of the system. While this will slightly increase the longer distance travel time, we don't believe most users are making end-to-end trips compared to the number potentially traveling between points along the way.
We want to ensure that all stations are well integrated to the local footpath and bikepath networks, are accessible to those with physical disability, and ensure easy transfers to bus and light rail transit.
We want to ensure stations have entrances at each end of the platform to maximise walk access and minimise excess walk time within and around the station.

Use of 4 star direct vision standard trucks for the Metro West project
I request that when the project goes to tender for trucks to remove spoil etc and to deliver construction equipment to work sites, that the tender specifies the use of trucks that meet the 4 star direct vision standard for safety. Here's a link to a document explaining the standard:
https://www.clocs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Direct-Vision-Standards.pdf
Here's a link to a video explaining why this standard needs to be applied to construction vehicles being used in the inner west, where streets are narrow and crowded with pedestrians and cyclists.
https://youtu.be/ubjtsHlEyxQ
At the very least, if you don't want to apply the 4 star standard, at least decide what rating will be the minimum permissible for this project and exclude all trucks that fail to meet that minimum direct vision stanard. We don't want old trucks with hopeless driver visibility navigating busy areas such as Five Dock.
The 4 star standard really should be the basic standard across the board for all major projects - this shouldn't be a one off for this project. This ties in with the NSW government's Vision Zero strategy for reducing road deaths.

Please refer to attachments for comments provided.