Sydney Metro West - Rail infrastructure, stations, precincts and operations

Amendment 2: Update the design to show the track form under Lancelot Street to be Type 3A (Isolated Slab Track)

Key concerns addressed by this amendment:

· Reduce the noise and vibration experienced by The Residents resulting from trains during operation of the Metro

Sydney Metro is proposing to use the Type 2 track form under Lancelot Street which reduces ground-borne vibration as trains pass along the track. The modelling from Sydney Metro shows that this track form reduces the predicted noise to 30-35 dBA which is marginally below the NSW Environment Protection Authority maximum of 35 dBA for residential properties.

Lancelot Street is a quiet street with low levels of ambient noise and very little road traffic. The Residents are concerned that models used to predict noise levels from ground-borne vibration, such as the model used by Sydney Metro, have inherent risk of inaccuracy, and designing the tunnels to be so close to the 35 dBA maximum would result in the sound levels exceeding 35 dBA. This would be noticeable to the residents in both daytime and night time. Of particular concern, is the model used by Sydney Metro do not appear to take into consideration the increase in noise resulting from dual tunnels under each property at close distance, and also the increase in noise levels as the train wheels and tracks start to wear, which could increase sound levels by up to 10 dBA each (ref Federal Transit Administration Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, FTA Report No. 0123, dated September 2018).

The modelling by Sydney Metro also showed the predicted ground-borne noise levels if the Type 3A track form was used. This would result in much more acceptable sound levels of 25-30 dBA.

The Residents call for the Type 3A track form as a minimum requirement to be used in the tunnels under Lancelot Street to ensure vibration and sound levels remain at an acceptable level both when the Metro becomes operational, and also in future when the train wheels and tracks start to wear.

The Metro rail tunnels run directly under our family home of 63 years in Lancelot St, Five Dock, and this is causing great concern regarding the noise and vibrations to our property when the Metro is in use. Therefore we propose the following -

Amendment 2: Update the design to show the track form under Lancelot Street to be Type 3A (Isolated Slab Track)
Key concerns addressed by this amendment:
·       Reduce the noise and vibration experienced by The Residents resulting from trains during operation of the Metro
Sydney Metro is proposing to use the Type 2 track form under Lancelot Street which reduces ground-borne vibration as trains pass along the track.  The modelling from Sydney Metro shows that this track form reduces the predicted noise to 30-35 dBA which is marginally below the NSW Environment Protection Authority maximum of 35 dBA for residential properties. 

Lancelot Street is a quiet street with low levels of ambient noise and very little road traffic.  The Residents are concerned that models used to predict noise levels from ground-borne vibration, such as the model used by Sydney Metro, have inherent risk of inaccuracy, and designing the tunnels to be so close to the 35 dBA maximum would result in the sound levels exceeding 35 dBA.  This would be noticeable to the residents in both daytime and night time. 

Of particular concern, is the model used by Sydney Metro do not appear to take into consideration the increase in noise resulting from dual tunnels under each property at close distance, and also the increase in noise levels as the train wheels and tracks start to wear, which could increase sound levels by up to 10 dBA each (ref Federal Transit Administration Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, FTA Report No. 0123, dated September 2018). The modelling by Sydney Metro also showed the predicted ground-borne noise levels if the Type 3A track form was used.  This would result in much more acceptable sound levels of 25-30 dBA.

The Residents call for the Type 3A track form as a minimum requirement to be used in the tunnels under Lancelot Street to ensure vibration and sound levels remain at an acceptable level both when the Metro becomes operational, and also in future when the train wheels and tracks start to wear.

Providing comments in the attached document for review and amendment to the EIS before approval.

I live in Malta St at North Strathfield and so, as the crow flies, some 250m from your proposed Metro station. Whatever way I look to your proposal it will bring with it a massive change to my living arrangements.

In my area the City of Canada Bay Council propose as follows:

SYDNEY METRO WEST NORTH STRATHFIELD LOCAL CHARACTER STATEMENT DRAFT
The proposed interchange at the heart of the character area offers an opportunity for increased development and will transform the existing local character into an active and lively precinct. The proposed density will be focused around the station and transition sensitively to local character areas and heritage items.

AREA 11 (Pomeroy to Allen St – now low density residential R2)
Defined as an area that can support medium density residential development.

(3) SCHOOL DISTRICT
This character can be improved upon with future development providing a better interface with the street providing more amenity and character along George St.
A change of land use or future redevelopment should facilitate improved pedestrian connections to the Metro/train station and the provision of a plaza/civic space. Up to 10 storeys will be permitted for new development and it should also seek to ensure that significant trees are retained on site. Student drop off and pick up times also need to be managed to mitigate congestion at peak hours.

This means that development in the school zone adjoining the station goes to 10 storeys and that houses in my street will be demolished to accommodate at least 5 storey high units.

CURRENT TRAFFIC ISSUES
Traffic in George St can even now be chaotic particularly in school drop-off and pickup periods. Unless the driver is early forget about Parking in Malta St during school hours.

FUTURE TRAFFIC ISSUES
McDonald College up to 10 storeys (and perhaps even the newly built Our Lady of the Assumption Primary School).
Five storey development between Pomeroy St and Allen St.
The proposal to construct a new Woolworths supermarket at the corner of Allen St (DA2021/0366).

SO WHAT RESEARCH HAS THE METRO UNDERTAKEN INTO GEORGE ST TRAFFIC VOLUMES?
Nil. Not a thing. It’s almost as though the area (being on the western side of the project) is comparatively unimportant.

THE SCHOOLS DISTRICT
Suddenly we have Council and the McDonald College amenable to an increase in height limits.
Question: Where did this proposal germinate?
Did it come courtesy of the State Government, Council, the Metro or the College.
I include the Metro because of detail contained within the Transport Administration Amendment (Sydney Metro) Bill 2018.
This legislation details the ‘orderly and efficient development of land’ near Metro Stations.

With the coming of the Metro (and maybe within 5 years) North Strathfield will lose its identity and become just another high-rise suburb. That is something that I do not support.

As a resident of Five Dock, I right this submission in relation to the Five Dock Station. I find the application for the major civil construction a farcical process. You have people being paid to paint the project in the best light possible. Everything is always a minor or moderate beneficial, or adverse impact. What does it take for something to be considered a major impact? Most of the station designs are shown as indicative only, so how can someone reach a reliable conclusion as to the impact the project will truly have. In point, from the beginning of the project the Artist Impression has shown Five Dock Station (Indicative only) as a three story unintrusive building. However, in the current report they suggest it could rise to seven storeys. How can you rely on a report that is basically giving an opinion on designs that will look nothing like the indicative picture provided in the documents? What this shows is the opinions in the reports have been skewed to show the project in the best light and all adverse issues minimised to only a minor or moderate impact just to have the project approved. Once the approval is provided, Metro West can then change the designs to what every they want. To say that there will only be minor or moderate impact shows that the people preparing the report have lost any empathy due to the pay-packets they receive. The Metro West project Is a decade long project and to say it will mainly have minor or moderate impacts is ridiculous. The people who have been paid to prepare this document are promoting it like a Lyle Lanley spruiker wearing rose coloured sunglasses and blinkers, just to get the project approved.
For the current EIS I feel it is only worthwhile to comment on the information relating to when the project is finally operational. The reason for this is because the construction is approximately a decade long and it has already started and the issues, I raised in my original submission regarding the civil construction including station excavation and tunnelling work are the same. So, since the issues I raised in the first EIS hasn’t changed anything what’s the point of raising them again. I simply must accept that mine and my family’s quality of life will be just collateral damage resulting from the construction of the Metro West.
The main issue with construction is what impact it has on people’s quality of lives. Does it improve or add to people’s lives that currently reside in the surrounding area? Currently it doesn’t, 8 years or more of construction basically the final years of my daughters’ educations. This construction has nothing but a huge negative impact on my quality of life. Such things as difficulties getting in and out of our residents, ongoing noise, dust, incurring additional personal expenses, late night work, made to feel like an inconvenience by the people doing the construction. I suppose the people writing the report can make something up to indicate that mine and my family’s quality of life has improved.
In relation to when the project is finally operational I have concerns with what the buildings will look like and the height they will have on in the visual impact for the area. How can you say visual impacts will only have minor or moderate impact based on a photomontage that is said to be only indicative? Based on Metro West use of the term indicative the actual design can look completely different to what is indicated as indicative. By using indicative pictures no one knows what the actual building will look like, so the true impact isn’t known, it is only guessing.
My second major issue is the design layout and concerns relating to pedestrian safety and the Kiss and Drive locations. In Figure 98 of Technical Paper 1 it shows the integrated access plan which I have several concerns with.
If there are more traffic going on side roads there will be greater traffic congestion and bottle necks on the side roads. For example, as was provided in the report Second Ave it is a two-lane, two-way undivided local road and mainly provides access from low and medium density residential dwellings to Great North Road. Parking of vehicles on both sides of the road reduces the ability for vehicles to pass concurrently, requiring one direction to give way. If more traffic will be using Second Ave and Kiss and Ride areas located on both sides of the road and so close to Great North Rd it will create traffic congestion near the corner which might back on to Great North Road slowing down traffic flow.
In addition, the location of the Kiss and Ride spot located on the south side of Second Ave is right in front of a buildings driveway and the proposed service laneway, blocking entry and exit from these locations.
Another concern is the corner of Second Ave and Great North Road. It is a hard corner to cross at the best of times. It’s part of the major pedestrian flow up and down Great North Road. With more cars coming off Great North Road, it will make it even more unsafe to cross once the Station becomes operational.
Finally, the Kiss and Ride locations for traffic travelling South on Great North Road seem to work with traffic flow, however for traffic flow going North on Great North Road, there seems to be limited options. If convenient places are not provided to drop people off or pick people up from the Station it will result in people double parking, holding up traffic and thus increasing traffic congestion. More consideration must be made for Kiss and Ride locations so not to reduce traffic flow.

See attached submission

Burwood North station:There should be a new cycleway along the Parramatta Road between the exit and Neich Parade
There should be an off-road cycleway at Concord Oval next to Loftus Street
Advantage:Improve the bicycle network between Burwood North/Canada Bay and Burwood Park
Parramatta Station:There should be an underground connection between the future metro station and the exisiting train station to improve the connection between the exisiting bus interchange and train service
Hunter Street station: There should be a bus layover bay at the O'Connel Street exit under the future commercial building

Please see attached submission on behalf of White Bay Stratas

The Western Sydney Leadership Dialogue (the Dialogue) welcomes the publication of the ‘Sydney Metro West – Rail infrastructure, stations, precincts and operations’ environmental impact statement and the opportunity to comment on this critical planning document.

Sydney Metro West (SMW) is an essential piece of infrastructure that will change how transport and movement will happen within and between the Central and Eastern Cities. The Western Rail line has been the backbone of Sydney’s economy for generations, and by effectively doubling passenger capacity between Parramatta and Sydney, SMW will unlock tremendous economic opportunity for future generations, particularly in fast-growing Greater Western Sydney.

The placement of each of the Sydney Metro stations, and the precincts that will evolve around them, will play a large role in the customer experience and transform the areas where they will be located. As such, the Dialogue appreciates the opportunity to comment on this city shaping project.

Given the scale of the Sydney Metro West project, as well as the amount of investment set to occur surrounding station areas, there is an opportunity to capture social value along the SMW corridor to ensure a substantial community dividend is realised from one of the largest dollar-value investments in public infrastructure. As such, the Dialogue has recommended the below to government in our discussion paper, ‘Humanising Infrastructure’, with the SMW providing the perfect opportunity to introduce a new, deliberate and coordinated approach to social procurement.

The Dialogue welcomes the inclusion of the (planned) Parramatta Light Rail – Stage 2 (PLR2) station into the Sydney Olympic Park Sydney Metro station plan (section 9.2.2 and 9.3.3). Due consideration has been given to the design of the Sydney Olympic Park Metro station as a transport interchange between the Metro West and PLR2, and given the necessity of the PLR2 to Western Sydney, the Dialogue welcomes this. We note, however, the PLR2 project has been deferred indefinitely.

The Dialogue also notes that there has been no specific consideration given to housing, and more importantly social and affordable housing, within each station precinct plan in the EIS. While perhaps beyond the scope of the EIS, the volume of development generated by this project will demand further discussion around the scale and nature of residential development that is provided, and the opportunity for the project to catalyse new supply of social and affordable housing.

The Dialogue recommends a 30% inclusionary zoning mandate within a 1km radius of new metro stations, including the full range of “affordable” housing typologies (including key worker and student housing, sub-market rental, rent-to-buy, shared equity ownership, etc.) as well as build-to-rent housing. The Dialogue would greatly welcome this being considered in the future when planning over and adjacent-station developments, and related developments (sections 5.4.4 and 5.4.5). You can read more about it in ‘The Dialogue’s Five Point Plan for Social & Affordable Housing in GWS’.

Again, the Dialogue welcomes the substantial progress on delivering SMW in the publication of the rail infrastructure, stations, precincts and operations EIS, and the hard work of the Sydney Metro team in getting the EIS to this point. We look forward to further discussions with the team over the coming months as the EIS is refined and finalised.

Refer attachment

Please refer to my submission in the attached document (Sydney Metro West - EIS submission.pdf).

Westmead to Sydney (CBD) metro infrastructure.

There would be very little parking for cars. My suggestion is to unlock isolation of Olympic park. It should be considered at Sydney Olympic Park Station that a large car park (multi-storey) for those travelling on the metro etc.

Also for convenience of access for those in the north a new bridge should be built over Parramatta river. It could connect Hill Road in south with Wharf Road in north or Hughes Avenue - Kissing Point In North.


Peter McDonald
1 Bay Road
Arcadia. NSW 2159

Retain existing green canopy and add more once metro is complete in Queen, Pomeroy and George St and also within the station area itself.

Leave the heritage garden at the front of North Strathfield as is… it is a valuable asset to our local community and is a prized characteristic of our existing North Strathfield station…it is HERITAGE listed for a reason…

Why can’t the entrance be moved further north along Queen Street, it should be separate to the existing North Strathfield train station and the front gardens would remain

Overpass/Walkway Bridge - this an eyesore, very intrusive and looks cheap … with all the space available along Queen Street, isn’t there a more seamless way of adding this feature… underground with lifts perhaps??? another entry point on the western side of George St … or further north along Queen Street… more entry points/exits to the metro are required to ease future congestion as North Strathfield is a designated growth area

Weather proof all these new areas please unlike North Strathfield station… and please completely weather proof North Strathfield station.Extend the covered area of the existing station across to where the existing overpass is to give more shelter, but keep in line with the current building shape.

Build consistency of place, appearance between the new Metro and exisiting North Strathfield station

Consider making the overhead concourse the main entry/exit point for the station and remove the current uncovered walkway over pass. This would mean removing the existing eastern side stairs that frankly, look like leftovers from the Eastern Europe soviet era. This would allow more room for the garden on the eastern side to be retained/revised/expanded. The lifts could be reused in the new concourse. The North Strathfield ticket office could also be moved to concourse.

Find some way of greening the hideous freight rail underpass. It looks like a bomb shelter, and just encourages graffiti.
Regards
Margaret Benn - North Strathfield Resident

Being a resident in the Sydney West area and relying on public transports commuting to work I am very pleased and long awaited for the upcoming metro network connecting Sydney Metro and Sydney West.
1) There are many apartment buildings, offices, retail business and light factories along Parramatta Road whereas most of these places are only assessable by cars. My suggestions to realign the metro line to the south side of Parramatta road - from Burwood to Harris Park with stations in Flemington, Homebush West. This option will significantly reduce the current ultra-high traffic pressure on Parramatta Road, Flemington market and Homebush Bay drive thus allowing people with much better public transport access to the southside of Parramatta road. Vice versa the demand are much lower in Sydney Olympic Park due to the comparatively low population density already served by existing railway network. Silverwater and Clyde are more of industrial / factory zone hence there is absolutely NO values of Metro services into these areas.
2) Another suggestion is to extend the Metro line to Seven Hills / Blacktown - being the major hub in Western Sydney there are definitely benefits to see Metro network connecting Sydney Metro to Blacktown via Parramatta. Metro stations in Constitution Hill, Toongabbie, Seven Hills not only rejuvenises these areas thus reducing car traffics on Old Winsor Road and Cumberland Highway
Hope my comments and suggestions are of useful and can be seriously considered for creating a better community & live / work environment with this Metro project.
I wish you succeed with the project.

Detailed submission attached.

See attachment

Please find detailed submission attached

I am afraid I forgot to make a few other points/requests.

1. Total emissions from this project are calculated and used to inform design choices i.e. total emissions of different design options should be calculated and compared. An example could be a. traffic calming + footpath widening + proper bike lanes are installed (huge possible near term reductions in energy consumption and emissions), versus b. retaining this public space for the movement and parking of private vehicles is, then the emissions of these private vehicles being used locally + fuel refining and transport + embodied emissions of those vehicles should be included in the project emissions budget. Waiting to electrify personal vehicles could use up a huge chunk of our emissions budget, and makes the city an awful, noisy, busy, stressful place.

2. Please make it easy and simple to get to the platforms. Please stop installing huge barriers that people need to pass through to get onto PT. I use a double pram to get two kids around (also have an electric cargo bike I would like to be able to get on the metro while fully laden). It is frustrating having to find the wide gate, and then waiting behind people who could use the smaller ones but don't. Everyone benefits when people use PT instead of having to buy a car to get around – so please make the PT easier and more attractive!

To support this, please also ensure there are guards on the trains and at the stations. Barriers don't stop people who want to disrupt others from getting on a train, proper staff to keep people safe do.

3. Please ensure the lifts are big enough to carry an electric cargo bike. I would love to be able to take my kids to Parramatta or elsewhere on the bike on the metro.

I support the project generally, but the bike infrastructure and walking infrastructure should be improved.

Each metro station should include safe, accessible, reliable, weatherproof bike parking, so that families can leave electric cargo bikes there and know they will still be there when they get back. Each metro station should have a safe, connected, accessible network of fully separated bike lanes to allow and encourage locals to ride a bike to catch the metro. The public domain around each metro station should be attractive to people walking and riding bikes, and minimise motor vehicle movements. The speed limits for roads within the catchment should be safe (30 km/h). The main streets should be activated (such as in the Reclaiming the High Streets report from Committee for Sydney). A transport hierarchy prioritising people walking or using mobility devices, then riding bikes, then public transport, above all other modes of transport, should be used.

Visitors and transit riders should access the station via foot or on bike – making the streets safer and more accessible for everyone.

The EIS maps of each station do not seem to show wider footpaths or extended cycle paths (very happy to be corrected).

Wombat crossings with traffic calming and safe speeds/ traffic filters should be used instead of signalised crossings.

Dedicated, separated cycle infrastructure should be prioritised over shared paths. On-road "bike paintings" won't result in more people riding bikes.

These new buildings should be beautiful and sympathetic to our history.

If possible please consider reclaiming more public domain and build a fenced playground at e.g. Burwood North Station.

High quality, comfortable homes should be built above the stations so that people can live in walkable/public transport accessible homes. These should only have car spaces for residents with a disability and (electric) car-share spots. They should have world-best bike parking, and (electric) motorbike parking.

1. I like the plan of sydney Metro - Western sydney Airport that connects the new International airport to St. Marys and then connecting to Schofields to join with the existing North West Line. However, the North West Line should be fine tuned further to service more people on the Line. Thus, I suggest to create a new Metro station/interchange in Chatswood West and the line can be branched from there toward the Upper Sydney North-shore so that the customers from Lane Cove and the West side of Chatswood can easily use the Metro line to go to the new airport, and customers from Central Coast/Newcastle region also easily access to the new airport via this line. Try to combine with the potential increasing customers from Central Coast/Newcastle who will use the train more thanks to the newly allocated budget to upgrade the train line from Newcastle to Sydney to make a good reason to build this Chatswood West Metro Interchange.
2. Given the high cost of this project, to improve the return on investment, please put the priority of completion of the circle from the new airport to the city (that means please complete the connection from the new airport to North West Line and from the new airport to Westmead to the West Line from Hunter street to Sydney Olympic Park first) so that the city can have a Metro circle and return on investment will be faster. The return on investment will mainly from the revenue that customers from Sydney and Central Coast/Newcastle and NSW North Coast will use the Metro to access to the new international airport.

So I think the first priority is to complete the North West Line and Chatswood West Interchange first then branching the North West line into 2 lines: one new line connects to Killara train station so customers from Central Coast/NewCastle and the North region can go straight to the new airport via Killara to save time; and one existing line to Chatswood for customers from Lower North Shore to access the new airport. This will make sure the project will get the return on investment faster in ordrer to build the West Line after that, then after that can start the City & SouthWest Line (the reason is that City and South West customers already have access to existing international airport so they may not need to use the new airport and new Metro Line too often so return on investment for this South West Line will be slow).