Review of Environmental Factors - Transport for NSW - NSW ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• The network is both inside and outside the rail corridor.• GRN would require a substantial upgrade, including new base stations, to ensure 100%network coverage of the rail corridor.• The cost of this upgrade is comparable to the development of an entire new network.The radio communications marketplace responded with three systems: APCO-25, TETRA andGSM-R.APCO-25 is a proven standard for emergency services but was rejected for the reasons listedbelow.• It has no proven history of usage in a rail environment.• It does not support a functional addressing system that maps train run numbers to mobilesubscribers’ numbers, which is a key requirement.• It does not meet the interoperability requirements.• It relies on a dispatch terminal for functionality, which does not meet RailCorp’s reliabilityrequirements.• It is not scalable in regard to the future growth of the rail network.TETRA is also a proven emergency services communications system and is deployed in anumber metropolitan rail networks. However, it was rejected for the reasons listed below.• This application is confined primarily to underground metro networks that are notcomparable to RailCorp’s network.• It relies on a dispatch terminal for functionality, which does not meet the RailCorp reliabilityrequirements.• It does not meet the interoperability requirements.• There is no commercialised Automatic Train Protection (ATP) solution available.GSM-R was deemed the platform most suitable for RailCorp’s train network and systemrequirements for the reasons listed below.• It is the only rail-specific communications standard and has the highest levels of safety andreliability in its design.• It is an open standard with a large number of equipment suppliers.• It achieved a higher level of compliance with the RailCorp functional requirements whencompared to the other systems.• It is deployed by major rail operators in Europe and Asia, some with networks comparablein size and complexity to RailCorp’s network.Page 26 of 64
• It operates on a spectrum of 1800 MHz which was available for purchase by RailCorp. Theother options would have required the leasing of a radio spectrum from atelecommunications licence holder.• It is a scalable network that can grow in step with RailCorp operations and network.• It is compatible with the Australian Rail Track Corporation’s communication system.• It provides a platform for future enhancements and increased operational safety, including aLevel 2 Automatic Train Protection (ATP) System, as per the recommendations of theWaterfall inquiry.• It will deliver the best value for money solution with the least risk.3.5 Alternatives to the Wollongong Yard SiteThe following options were considered for the development of the Wollongong Yard site:• to do nothing; or• install a new BTS, elsewhere in the Wollongong area.The do nothing option was rejected for the reasons listed below.• The inability to meet the requirement of 100% network coverage.• A ‘black spot’ in the DTRS network, resulting in a significant safety issue in the event of anemergency call or a train incident.• The increasing maintenance costs of the MetroNet facility and the limited reliability foradequate operation for the next 10 – 15 years.Radio frequency modelling indicated that a new BTS installed elsewhere in the Wollongongarea would not provide adequate coverage to the rail corridor. A second site would then berequired, increasing costs and environmental risks.3.6 Justification of the Preferred OptionOverall this work, as part of the DTRS project, will result in significant benefits by providing amore effective communications systems for the RailCorp network. The system is in use aroundthe world and allows for continuous communications coverage, the capacity to makesimultaneous calls and greatly improved emergency calling capabilities. Once active, the DTRSwill provide a more effective communications system that will assist in the safe and efficientoperation of RailCorp’s electrified rail network.It was decided to construct a BTS adjacent to Wollongong railway station because it will enablethe site to be consistent with the whole RailCorp DTRS network. Consistent technology choicewill enable RailCorp to improve its existing quality of service, reliability and emergencyresponsiveness. The reasons for selecting the technology are discussed above.Page 27 of 64
Page 1 and 2: Digital Train Radio SystemWollongon
Page 3 and 4: 4.13 Electromagnetic Energy (EME) .
Page 5 and 6: Approval ProcessThe proposal is bei
Page 7 and 8: 1 Introduction1.1 Background to the
Page 9 and 10: Land around the site is used for th
Page 11 and 12: Figure 2Site location mapMap sectio
Page 13 and 14: • Letter: a letter will be sent t
Page 15 and 16: 2.2 State Environmental Planning Po
Page 17 and 18: The State Environmental Planning Po
Page 19 and 20: Roads Act 1993Under Section 138 of
Page 21 and 22: 2.8 Other GuidelinesConsideration o
Page 23 and 24: Power CabinetThe power cabinet will
Page 25: 3.3 Timing and CostingConstruction
Page 29 and 30: 4 Environmental Impact and Risks4.1
Page 31 and 32: diesel). Fuel use will emit greenho
Page 33 and 34: • that the proponent should also
Page 35 and 36: Possible Construction NoiseControl
Page 37 and 38: • Any spoil or waste material tra
Page 39 and 40: 4.10 Visual Aesthetics and Urban De
Page 41 and 42: 4.12 Socio-Economic EffectsExisting
Page 43 and 44: As few vehicle movements will be re
Page 45 and 46: Table 3Consideration of Clause 228
Page 47 and 48: EPBC Act 1999 FactorsMatters of nat
Page 49 and 50: and in accordance with RailCorp pro
Page 51 and 52: No specific control measures are re
Page 53 and 54: Appendix 1: Principles from the Tel
Page 55 and 56: Principal(g) A telecommunications f
Page 57 and 58: Principal(c) Towers may be extended
Page 59 and 60: Principal(d) The telecommunications
Page 61 and 62: Principalgovernment authorities and
Page 63 and 64: ReleasedBy: EGUGL InfrastructureDat
Page 65 and 66: ReleasedBy: EGUGL InfrastructureDat
Page 67 and 68: Environment & Heritage | NSW BioNet
Page 70 and 71: ITEM NAME LOCATION SUBURB LGA SHR S
Page 72 and 73: Australian Heritage Databasehttp://
Page 74 and 75: Heritage Branch Website - Online Da
Page 76 and 77:
Heritage Branch Website - Online Da
Page 78 and 79:
Heritage Branch Website - Online Da
Page 80 and 81:
Other Matters Protected by the EPBC
Page 82 and 83:
Name Status Type of Presencehabitat
Page 84 and 85:
Name Status Type of PresenceGreenho
Page 86 and 87:
Name Threatened Type of Presencewit
Page 88 and 89:
NameCommonwealth Land -Commonwealth
Page 90 and 91:
Name Threatened Type of Presencewit
Page 92 and 93:
Name Threatened Type of PresenceArc
Page 94 and 95:
NameBelmore Basin LighthouseBulli F
Page 96 and 97:
For species where the distributions
Page 98 and 99:
Summary of Estimated RF EME Levels
Page 100:
Table of Other Areas of InterestAdd
show all

Review of Environmental Factors - Transport for NSW - NSW ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?