Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

[neilrex]

Penrith gets by with 2 trains an hour off-peak ( three if you count the mountains train ), and about 6 trains at hour during the peak periods.

And they need a train every two minutes ?

The real problem that is going on there, is that the critical platforms at Town Hall station are serving three different western lines ( Penrith, Richmond, and Epping ), as well as various stopping patterns, and two Northern lines ( via Gordon and Macquarie Park ), as well as trains to North Sydney.

That is what is driving your need for so many trains, it isn't the actual capacity requirement for passengers to Penrith per se.

Most metro systems around the world do not have this particular issue, because they tend to have dedicated lines for each service. Even where the lines bifurcate in the outer areas, they tend to have a common stopping pattern along the shared parts of the line.

Now if you were in London, and you wanted to go to Guildford or Reading or Ipswich, you'd have to get to one of the big stations to catch the train there. You don't go there on the Tube. Campbelltown and Penrith are further from Sydney, than those places are from central London.

[simonl]

Are you joking? Rail came to Parramatta in 1855. Liverpool probably wasn't that far behind.

[simonl]

Penrith gets by with 2 trains an hour off-peak ( three if you count the mountains train ), and about 6 trains at hour during the peak periods.

Pretty sure that was 4tph before the drivers shortage a decade ago. These have been reinstated on weekdays albeit not weekends.

[tonyp]

Shopping malls are built where they are, for a whole host of reasons, including existing shopping centres and the availability of land.

Some of the suburban town centres of Sydney, which mostly have a shopping mall, were there before the railways came. For example, Liverpool and Parramatta. And some have developed after the railways came. "Hornsbÿ" was originally at Normanhurst, and moved to Hornsby after the railways came.

I don't think that most of the Westfields were built so that shoppers could get there by train.

Back in the days when lots of people went shopping by train - back in the 30's and 50's when the typical shopper did not own a car, back in those days, most of the shopping was done in the CBD.

"Roselands" was quite remarkable when it was built, it was considered one of the marvels of the age, people came from far and wide to visit it, all in all it hasn't really been a great success.

Roselands (1965) was really the first major car-dependent centre, but as the trams died out in the late 1950s, other centres were already being converted to being car-based. Grace Bros actually opened in Bondi Junction (tram) and Parramatta (train) back in 1933 but it wasn't until the late 1950s that they added carparks to these and the modern shopping mall as we know it started to emerge in these largely tram-created centres. (For starters, look for the word "Junction" in a suburb's name to identify many of the tram-created centres.) A lot of people actually only went as far as these suburban centres by tram to shop and not necessarily as far as the Sydney CBD. Decentred behaviour in Sydney started long ago.

Parramatta and Liverpool are slightly different because they are very old, starting as colonial towns in 1788 and 1810 respectively. While Parramatta was quite a significant centre, Liverpool was basically a rural service centre until the 1950s. The railway arrived in both in the 1850s but only as stops on country lines. There was no way they were fully "suburban" in the current sense until the 1950s.

Lowy's strategy in locating Wesfields near railway stations is an interesting one because it's at variance with the other major developers who follow a very car-oriented approach (shoppers can carry more away in a car than by public transport). Perhaps he tries to pick up that extra little bit of customer, perhaps it's because he's European and following an old habit, but it's not easy to take the space for extensive carparking at the core of a major centre (and then protect that parking from general usage in favour of your customers) - much easier to go out near a main road somewhere where there is more exposure and less demand pressure on land.

[grog]

Wasn't it NSW government planning policy that forced them near major centres?

[tonyp]

Wasn't it NSW government planning policy that forced them near major centres?

In theory maybe but it hasn't worked out that way very well after a bit of push and shove!

[Glen]

Now if you were in London, and you wanted to go to Guildford or Reading or Ipswich, you'd have to get to one of the big stations to catch the train there. You don't go there on the Tube. Campbelltown and Penrith are further from Sydney, than those places are from central London.

Interesting point, for those (in the Govt) who used to argue the case for the NWRL ending at Chatswood (as it was originally announced) that "changing trains is normal overseas", projects like the Paris RER network and London's Cross Rail are designed to achieve the exact opposite, what we were given by Bradfield in 1926, and that is suburban railways right into the heart of the City.

[grog]

Funnily enough crossrail trains are not too different to Sydney Metro trains - single deck, 3 doors per side, plenty of standing room and hanging straps.

[rogf24]

Lowy's strategy in locating Wesfields near railway stations is an interesting one because it's at variance with the other major developers who follow a very car-oriented approach (shoppers can carry more away in a car than by public transport). Perhaps he tries to pick up that extra little bit of customer, perhaps it's because he's European and following an old habit, but it's not easy to take the space for extensive carparking at the core of a major centre (and then protect that parking from general usage in favour of your customers) - much easier to go out near a main road somewhere where there is more exposure and less demand pressure on land.

Wasn't it NSW government planning policy that forced them near major centres?

Not every shopping centre near a station or major centre is a Westfield. There's Macarthur, Bankstown, Merrylands and Rhodes which had trains before the shops arrived. In Melbourne, you've wonderful examples like Westfield Southland which has a train line but no station to stop at, yet anyway, and in Ringwood, there's no footbridge to cross a busy road from station to shops (Macarthur has one). Whether it was a historical accident or not, I think Sydney has done a better overall job at integrating activity with rail than other Australian cities, especially outside of the inner-city.

[neilrex]

Are you joking? Rail came to Parramatta in 1855. Liverpool probably wasn't that far behind.

Not joking at all. Liverpool and Paramatta were substantial towns long before the railways came. For several decades, Parramatta was bigger than Sydney. The railways were built to go there, because that's where the town was.

Other places, for example Hornsby and Hurstville, only became of significance AFTER the railways were built there.

[neilrex]

Lowy has been very good at getting governments to agree to him expanding his centres like an octopus and taking over the whole neighbourhood. For example at Burwood, Hornsby, Bondi, Chatswood and Blacktown. Or maybe like a python.

And even preventing supermarkets being upgraded in nearby suburbs. Like Five Dock, most notoriously.

All of the shopping centres have their own story, frankly I think there is not a lot of point in trying to categorise them too much.

[hornetfig]

Back in the 50s/60s, BJ also had three movie theatres, large Coles and Woolworths "variety stores". It has long been a major shopping centre for the eastern suburbs.

Don't forget McDowells/Waltons/Venture

[Transtopic]

One of Westfield's first shopping centres was at Eastwood, built in the 1960s, which was then the dominant retail/commercial centre on the Northern Line. I think it was their second centre after the first at Blacktown, but not sure. It's called the Eastwood Village Square now and although relatively small compared with today's regional shopping centres, it originally had a 2-level Mark Foys Department store, a Coles New World supermarket and numerous specialty shops. There was no on-site parking at all. I don't think it had much to do with being a hop step and jump from the railway station, but more to do with being in an established shopping centre.

However, with the rise of car ownership throughout the 60s and 70s, the establishment of what is now Macquarie Centre, originally developed by Grace Bros, took a lot of business away from Eastwood because it offered abundant free parking and a shopping experience on a grander scale, even though at that stage it had no rail link. Eastwood is still searching for its place in the pecking order.

Major regional shopping centres like Chatswood, Burwood and Hurstville developed around long established centres which just happened to be on a rail line or in earlier days on a tram line. Most didn't have to compete against new greenfield regional centres, such as Roselands, Eastgardens or Macquarie Centre.

[mandonov]

Well to bring the discussion back around to the actual topic...

Macquarie has published it's first round of public consultation for it's Martin Place Metro proposal. Some initial concept drawings have been included:

Cross Section



Access Diagram



Street Level



Concourse Level



Platform Level



Note in the concourse diagram that the connection to the MLC Centre remains, as well as one to the east that I don't know what it connects to.

Note in the platform diagram the escalators and lift to the far left would be the connection to the ESR platforms, and the outline to the far right would be a direct platform connection to the empty lot on O'Connell Street if the government chooses to build that link.

[simonl]

Looks like the east connection is to the existing Martin Place station.

[lunchbox]

^^^^^^^^ That's correct. The angle of the escalators is roughly parallel to the Eastern Suburbs Line tracks passing overhead, enabling the escalators, or a connecting passageway, to enter the western end of the ESR Martin Place platforms.

There's a challenge however, for the people responsible for service information. The overt and deliberate distiction between Sydney Trains and Metro brings with it problems in presenting service information to the travelling public. So far as Joe and Josephine Public are concerned, the Metro is just another train line. They should not have to cope with the unnecessary distinction between Sydney Trains and Metro. Macquarie's advisors are already confused. An "artist's impression" of the concourse shows a panel depicting Sydney Trains' network - but it's headed "Metro Map" !

[neilrex]

The place at eastwood was a store called McDowells, they also were at Dee Why, the got taken over by Waltons, neither of them were any good.

I am unconvinced that Westfield was ever there. The original small Westfield at Hornsby was one of their early ones.

[neilrex]

So, to get into the station from the street level in Martin Place, you have to go into the building on the south side of the street, then down two pointlessly short escalators, including the long walk-around from one end to the other, then back underneath the street you were just on, then through a pedestrian tunnel almost to Hunter street, and then turn back around to face south again to get down to one end of the station. That's appallingly bad planning.

[Tonymercury]

^ The overt and deliberate distiction between Sydney Trains and Metro brings with it problems in presenting service information to the travelling public.

And the poor old Sydney Trains staff at Epping and Chatswood are probably going to be the first to be the only staff present when the metro has a problem and Joe Public wants know what happened.

[grog]

So, to get into the station from the street level in Martin Place, you have to go into the building on the south side of the street, then down two pointlessly short escalators, including the long walk-around from one end to the other, then back underneath the street you were just on, then through a pedestrian tunnel almost to Hunter street, and then turn back around to face south again to get down to one end of the station. That's appallingly bad planning.

No. There are escalators down to platform level from both entrances.

[mandonov]

^^^^^^^^ That's correct. The angle of the escalators is roughly parallel to the Eastern Suburbs Line tracks passing overhead, enabling the escalators, or a connecting passageway, to enter the western end of the ESR Martin Place platforms.

There's a challenge however, for the people responsible for service information. The overt and deliberate distiction between Sydney Trains and Metro brings with it problems in presenting service information to the travelling public. So far as Joe and Josephine Public are concerned, the Metro is just another train line. They should not have to cope with the unnecessary distinction between Sydney Trains and Metro. Macquarie's advisors are already confused. An "artist's impression" of the concourse shows a panel depicting Sydney Trains' network - but it's headed "Metro Map" !

The connection to ESR platforms are to the south (left in image) side of the platform diagram, pointing diagonally to the east.

The connection I was confused about was the straight continuation east of the MLC connection in the concourse diagram. As simonl says, it's most likely a connection to the existing ESR concourse.

[Transtopic]

The place at eastwood was a store called McDowells, they also were at Dee Why, the got taken over by Waltons, neither of them were any good.

I am unconvinced that Westfield was ever there. The original small Westfield at Hornsby was one of their early ones.

Just to put the record straight, Westfield Eastwood opened in 1964, with Mark Foy's Department Store as the major tenant. Mark Foy's later became McDowell's which was subsequently bought out by Walton's. Walton's closed and Westfield sold the centre in 1994, which was later converted to strata title.

[neilrex]

It's unclear what those platforms with a maze of narrow corridors, corridors blocked by escalators with narrow spaced to get past them, blind corners facilitating pedestrian collisions, and very narrow platforms near the tracks, is supposed to achieve.

[mandonov]

It's supposed to facilitate the high turnover of passengers. Having a lot of corridors between the platform face and the central corridor prevents people from having to walk far along the platform to get to it, therefore reducing conflicts between waiting, alighting, and boarding passengers.

The central corridor doesn't look too narrow to me either, even with escalators in the middle. The vast majority of passengers at the station would more than likely be exiting rather than transferring to the ESR, so it makes sense to direct most foot traffic to the exit rather than to the interchange connection.

They don't want to end up in a situation like at Epping where hundreds of people are shuffling along half the length of the platform to get out.

[Frosty]

I would also want to avoid having to going through a myriad of shopping centres trying to exit a station I don't Martin Place to turn into a Melbourne Central where the only way in is to go through the silly shopping centre there is no direct entrance. Most people want to the quickest way out of a station.

What would be interesting once Sydney Metro is built how convenient would be an Out of Station Interchange be between Town Hall and Pitt St station.