Action for Public Transport (N.S.W.) Inc.

Action for Public Transport is a transport consumer group. Our members are users and beneficiaries of public transport. We have no affiliations with any political party.

Brief statement:

We object to the proposal. We propose an alternative and we set out a scenario for the alternative.

Reasons:

We object to the proposal because ...

• Many experts have criticised the plan to convert an outlying part of Sydney's railways to single-deck using trains that are optimised for inner-suburbs tranvel and cannot share tracks with existing trains. References for some of their comments are in an appendix below. Because of the constraints imposed on unbroken travel by the mix of networks, having two Sydney rail networks is worse than having one.
• The substitute buses required during conversion will, according to your traffic analysis, be much slower than rail services. This is not only because they have to follow a longer path than the railway but also because the whole North Ryde area is badly congested in every direction at peak hours. Delays resulting from slowness of buses are an unacceptable imposition on thousands of passengers, especially when they are expected to last for seven months.
• Chatswood railway station is unsuitable for interchanging large numbers of passengers. Its platforms are too narrow for the numbers expecting to transfer once NWRL opens - perhaps 5000 per hour, not all of whom can expect to fit on the first inbound North Shore train at Chatswood.
• Rather than using Chatswood as an interchange, it would be better to provide interchange facilities at Epping by constructing two wide underground platforms for single-deck trains west of but connected by escalators and/or lifts etc with the existing ECRL platforms 5 and 6. There would be no need to alter ECRL services except perhaps briefly during construction. Of course, the Epping end of the NWRL would be designed to not use the existing tunnels north of platforms 5 and 6.
• The plan to send Northern Line trains to the CBD apparently means sending them to terminating platforms at Central, requiring the vast majority of CBD passengers to change trains for further travel. This is an unwelcome imposition on these passengers.

Alternative Scenario:

A plan should be made that covers:

• Building a Parramatta River crossing, perhaps via Strathfield, capable of carrying double-deck trains and intended to facilitate eventual building of an inner-west SRT line. Useful areas it might serve include the fifty thousand new home units which the forthcoming Metropolitan Plan is expected to allow along Parramatta Road at several locations between Granville and Camperdown. Note that the existing six tracks between Strathfield and Illawarra Junction are already heavily loaded in peak hour and there is a clear warrant for relief.
• Eventual replacement of the light automated NWRL trains with a crewed train capable of running with and alongside existing double-deck stock and suitable for service on existing ground-level tracks such as the Bankstown line where there is a risk of trespassers on the track.