One of the quirks about building physical infrastructure is that if policies change, or plan get made but are never put into action, then this leaves traces in the real world. Ghost platforms and stations get left behind. Platforms and tunnels that seemingly lead to nowhere get built. Platform numbers don't make any sense.
Lidcombe Station has a Platform 0 which was built on the northern side of the station after the rest of it. Blacktown Station had Platform 3 built in the V of two existing sets of lines which necessitated the renumbering of the other platforms; which is why there is a Platform 7 but its pair is Platform 6 and not 8. St James Station famously has two filled in platforms and a set of tunnels that head off to the north, turn right and then stop.
Central Station is currently undergoing a major refit to accommodate the Metro Extension and Platforms 12 and 13, 14 and 15, have all been unceremoniously torn out; with the Metro likely to acquire the platform numbers of 14 and 15, with the mysterious and unlucky Platform 13 disappearing.
Then there is Wynyard Station; which is the OG Big Boss of strange platform numbers. Wynyard Station currently has Platforms 3 and 4 and Platforms 5 and 6 but no Platforms 1 and 2, as those two used to exist and have been converted into car parking space after the Cahill Government stupidly tore out all of the tram lines.
Wynyard Station as it currently stands has Platforms 3 and 4 and Platforms 5 and 6 which are offset from each other. It makes some sense that Platforms 1 and 2 and Platforms 3 and 4 would have been four platforms across the top but even as built, the placement of Platforms 5 and 6 underneath 1 and 2 seems to imply that there could have been nay should have been the existence of Platforms 7 and 8 underneath 3 and 4.
As someone with far too much curiosity to let this slip away quietly into the night without explanation, I spoke to the Station Master at Wynyard who was enthusiastic but didn't know anything; I spoke with a very helpful person at Sydney Trains who then directed me to a beautiful nerd at Sydney City Council who emailed me the following diagram and said that they knew where to find lovely things such as plans and approval documents from more than a hundred years ago, way down in the stacks.
Yet again I am confronted with the 1912 Bradfield Plan, which was for the then future Sydney trains and underground network. It must be said that Sydney is massive. Sending all of our commuter trains underground, like London, Paris or New York would have been expensive. Sending our commuter trains overground, similar to the the Chicago or New York "L" elevated lines, would have been impractical. Bradfield decided to use the existing heavy rail and then send commuter trains over that. This explains why Sydney had full-size Pullman coaches for its commuter train network and how Sydney was able to use clever packaging to convert most of the fleet to double-deck suburban rail cars. I think that Sydney is unique in having double-deck rail cars that go underground as part of the normal suburban commuter rail network.
The 1912 Bradfield Plan ambitiously had railway lines that were never built but which were planned for. The Inner West Line and the Northern Beaches Line were never built. The Eastern Suburbs Line was built was built albeit many many decades later. Then there are things like the Carlingford Line that waited patiently to be connected to Epping and never was, the Castle Hill Line which was only dreamed about, and things such as the Cronulla Line which were anemic in their construction.
The most ambitious project was the Sydney Underground lines; most of which were built, and the connection to the north side of the harbour with the widest long span bridge in the world which was also built. The Sydney Harbour Bridge is both majestic and practical and would have had four railway tracks and six lanes of traffic per the 1912 Bradfield Plan.
Had all of the 1912 Bradfield Plan been implemented there and then, then Wynyard Square Station would have included 8 platforms as follows:
1 and 2 (built) - would have continued over the bridge and to the Northern Beaches. Instead, Platforms 1 and 2 became the tram platforms which served both the North Shore and the Northern Beaches as far as Mosman.
3 and 4 (built) - serve the North Shore Line to Hornsby. This line and the two platforms retained the alignment and were constructed.
5 and 6 (built) - to serve the City Loop Line, via Circular Quay, St James and Liverpool St (Museum). The City Loop Line wasn't opened until 1956 and leaps over Circular Quay via a viaduct instead of under it and presumably underground and underwater.
7 and 8 (unbuilt) - would have served the Inner West Line and turned left; presumably on to Pyrmont and Balmain et cetera. The space exists underneath Platforms 3 and 4 and I imagine that the layout would have been similar to St James Station or a mirror image of the actually existing Platforms 5 and 6.
However, the non-existence of Platforms 7 and 8 at Wynyard still leads me to ask the question about the rest of the infrastructure which does exist on the rest of the line. I think that Platforms 7 and 8 at Wynyard would have connected to the other stations heading south as follows:
Town Hall would have been built identically to the final product but the tunnels would have gone in different directions:
2 and 3 (built) - serve the North Shore Line to Hornsby.
1 and 4 (built) - Platform 1 currently is the up line from Circular Quay and on to Central. Platform 4 is currently the up line from Martin Place and on to Central. In the 1912 Bradfield Plan isn't even connected to the Eastern Suburbs Railway Line; which suggests to me that these two platforms would have have tunnels to connect to Platforms 5 and 6 at Wynyard.
5 and 6 (built) - would have connected to Platforms 7 and 8 at Wynyard and thence to Pyrmont, Balmain and the inner western surburbs via the Inner West Line. Instead, Platform 5 is the down line to Martin Place and the Eastern Suburbs Railway Line and Platform 6 connects to Platform 6 at Wynard as the down line of the City Loop.
Central would be mostly the same to now, expect that the configuration of where tunnels finally surfaced may have been different:
26 and 27 (built but unused) - somewhere above Platforms 24 and 25 at Central which as far as I can tell are newer inventions, two platforms exist and are labelled on lifts as Platforms 26 and 27. The public are not allowed to go there and the lifts will only stop upon presentation of a key. Given the drawings on the map though, my suspicion is that both sets of platforms would have been needed since it implies the existence of an entirely different Eastern Sururbs Railway Line via the Sydney Cricket Ground and then preseumably following some kind of alignment which is similar to the current L2 or L3 tram lines.
Likewise, Redfern would have also seen some changes:
13 and 14 (half-built but unused) - there is a derelict hole at Redfern Station and a mysterious landing part way down the descent to Platforms 11 and 12 which is where two platforms would have been built. Again, I think that Platforms 11 and 12 are newer inventions but I think that Platforms 13 and 14 would have been part of the line north through Central, Town Hall, Wynyard, Pyrmont, Balmain and then via the Inner West Line.
St James and Museum stations may have been different and Domain Station would have existed.
In the end, we got part of the network built, the Sydney Harbour Bridge repurposed, some of the stations opening in 1926, Wynyard and Town Hall in 1932 and Circular Quay not opening until after the Second World War, though before the war tunnel heads had broken through to the surface and already there were plans for a viaduct.
It could just be that the 1912 Bradfield Plan was too ambitious. Tunneling under Sydney Harbour wasn't done for a very very long time and even today, there still aren't open rail tunnels which pass underneath it. I do not know if any of the current stations on the City Circle are below sea-level but I suspect not.
No comments:
Post a Comment