VR VR ......_ 725. 3309 0451 ,,,.,.. AND:M .. .... ~~. NOT . MCl.BO lJ RNt: FOR F!&.~1vafo1J .Bl'ltJac ;ti LOAN l\cr ··-r ~....· -~~ . .. .. ; !"-· p..;.. METROPOLITAN RAILWAY SYSTEM ELECTRICITY SUBSTATIONS / Heritage Analysis .. \ I I .I __-.- · Andrew C Ward & Associates architects - planners I N1iiiliillif~l11ltii~RY M0041731 Infrastructure Library METROPOLITAN RAILWAY SYSTEM ELECTRICITY SUBSTATIONS Heritage Analysis prepared for the HISTORIC BUILDINGS COUNCIL December 1991 VR 725. 00104652 3309 0451 Metropolitan railway AND:M system electricity substations : heritage analysis Andrew C. Ward B.Arch .. Oip.T.& R.P .. M.RAPJ, A.RAIA 12 Leonard Slreet. Burwood 3125. Tel: 808 4329 Andrew C Ward & Associates CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. BACKGROUND HISTORY 5 2 .1 Early Moves Toward Electrification 5 2.2 The Adopted Scheme 6 2.3 Implementation of the Scheme 9 2 .4 The War Years 12 2.5 Inauguration of Electrified Services 17 2 .6 Expansion of the Network 19 2. 7 11 0peration Phoenix" 23 3. CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ELECTRIFICATION SCHEME 29 4. BUILDING DESIGN TYPES 31 4 .1 Type A: 1914-1916 31 4.2 Type B: 1920-1922 32 4.3 Type C: 1920-1922 41 4.4 Type D: 1925-1933 41 5. SUBSTATION EQUIPMENT 51 6. DATA SHEETS 62 ~ Newmarket ---· :: ~l c;.,r ....,o~ 63 Newport -- ~ -1• e,. 4 .if<. 68 Glenroy 74 North Fitzroy 78 Alb.ion 80 Caulfield 82 Reservoir 84 Mentone 86 i") Seaford 88 Spring Vale 92 Rosanna 94 East Camberwell 96 Mitcham 101 Greensborough 103 Lower Ferntree Gully 105 Hurstbridge 107 Coburg 109 7. INDEX TO SLIDES 111 J Andrew C Ward & Associates 1. INTRODUCTION Andrew C Ward a nd Associates were appointed by the Historic Buildings Council in April 1991 to undertake a heritage analysis of the substation buildings forming part of the .Mel bour ne met_ropolitan railway electrification scheme . This Report is the result of that appointment, and it fulfils the aims of the study, which are as follows: to undertake research as is necessary to firmly establish the comparative architectural · and historic significance of all extant metropolitan railway electricity substation buildings; to document the research, including a Statement of Significance for each of the buildings; and provide relevant slides, photographs, maps and plans sufficient to support the documented evidence. The scope of the study included all necessary research and documentation for the following substations in the Melbourne metropolitan a rea: Newmarket North Fitzroy East Camberwell Caulfield Newport Middle Brighton Mentone Glenroy Albion Macleod Mitcham Springvale Reservoir Seaford Lower Ferntree Gully Mooroolbark Rosanna Greensborough Coburg In addition to these, the Jolimont car shed was to be examined as a comparable building, as well as any additional substations identified but not included in the list. 2 Andrew C vVard & Associates The following tasks were to be undertaken: Collection of Information Review all relevant sources that document the history of all buildings, including Public Records Office holdings, Public Transport Corporation archives, Historic Buildings Council files, and National Trust files. Subject to access being granted, undertake an inspection of the physical fabric of each building to determine the history and sequence of development, physical condition and integrity. Maintain a photographic record, using colour slide film, of all buildings inspected. Assessment of Evidence Concisely set out the e vidence to support the assessment of each building. Supporting documentation shall include a physical description of each building, background history and an indication as to its integrity. Identify which of the buildings are considered to have State significance and provide detailed supporting evidence for the cultural significance of each. Statements of Significance Buildings regarded as of State significance are to have a. comprehensive Statement of Significance, in accordance with the Guidelines to the Burra Charter: Cultural Significance and the criteria of the His ~oric Build in gs Council. Buildings assessed as of regional or local importance should have a brief Statement of Significance only, in order to establish the relative importance of each building. Due to time and budget constraints, it was not possible to fully research all documentation held by the Public Records Office. However, a number of original working files relating to the electrification works were located in the possession of the Electrical Engineering Branch of the Public Transport Corporation, and proved a valuable source of information. The assistance of John Tawton and Peter Nanscawen is acknowledged in this regard, and for their help in gaining access to the buildings. Preliminary investigations indicated that a number of alterations needed to be made to the list of substations to be studied. Those at Middle Brighton and Mooroolbark had been demolished, and so could not be assessed, while the substation at Macleod, proposed in the initial electrification scheme, was never built. An additional substation at Hurstbridge, identified as being contemporary with the substations at Lower Fern tree Gully and Coburg, has been included. 3 Andrew C Ward & Associates The Report covers all metropolitan railway electricity substations erected prior to the Second World War, and data sheets have been prepared for all substations still extant. As indicated in the Background History that follows, a large number of substations were erected after this period; however, as they weee the result of a major change in operations for the Victorian Railways as a whole, and the Electrical Engineering Branch in particular, these buildings have been excluded from the current analysis. The Background History also indicates that a number of substation buildings erected for and/or by the Victorian Railways during the period covered by this Report have been excluded from detailed analysis. These buildings do not form an integral part of the power distribution scheme for the operation of electric trains on the various br"1.nch tines of the Melbourne metropolitan railway network. Information on individual substation buildings is provided in the Data Sheets which form the bulk of this Report. Each Data Sheet lists the results of documentary research and site inspection of a particular building, and provides a Statement of Significance. This establishes the relative importance of each building, summarised in Table 1.1, in accordance with the principles of the Burra Charter and the crite ria of the Historic Buildings Council. A requirement of the heritage analysis brief was that a photographic record be maintained of all buildings inspected, using colour slide film. These slides form an integral (?art of this Report, and an index is provided herewith. 4 Andrew C Ward & Associates Table I .I SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE SUBSTATION DESIGN LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE TYPE State Regional Local Newmarket A * Newport A * Glenroy A * North Fitzroy A * Albion A * Caulfield B * Reservoir c * Mentone B * Seaford B * Spring Vale c * East Camber well B * Mitcham c * Rosanna c * Greensborough c * Lower Ferntree Gully D * Hurstbridge D * Coburg D * 5 Andrew C Ward & Associates 2. BACKGROUND HISTORY 2. I Early Moves Toward Electrification The idea of electrifying the Melbourne metropolitan railway system was first mooted in the 1890s, after schemes had been successfully implemented overseas. In 1896, A. W. Jones of the General Electric Co. USA prepared a proposal for the adoptio n of electric traction, which allowed for a portion of the Melbourne suburban system to be converted. The scheme was opposed by the Railway Commissioners, on g rounds of the cost of installation and anticipated loss of revenue during conversion.I Sufficient interest had been aroused by Jones' plan .fo r a Select Committee of the Legislative Council to be appointed in 1898 to examine the possibilities of electric traction. One of the recommendatio ns of this Committee was that no new lines be built until the question of electrification had bee n fully investigated, although this was not put into effect. 2 A second Parliamentary Committee was set up in 1901, which recommended that an electric t raction expert be engaged to examine local conditions a nd advise on the best system to be adopted ."3 However, the Commissioners were slow to react , and in 1903 Parliament proposed the electrification of the St Kilda line as a forerunner to total conversion. 4 Chief Commissioner Thomas Tait urged Parliament to await expert advice, and Minister of Rail'!lays Thomas Bent authorised Tait to select and engage a consulting engineer . 0 It was not until 1907, while on leave-of-absence, that Tait performed the task with which he had been entrusted. Tait vis ited a number of railways in Europe and USA, in particular electrified railways which had been converted from steam operation, which it was thought would be of relevance to the situation in Melbourne. He encountered widely divergent views on the various methods of electrification, including direct current, single-phase alternating current. and three-phase alternating current; and on the relative merits of third r ail a nd overhead conductors. As a result of Tait's enqu1r1es, negotiations were entered into with Charles Hesterman Me r z, M. I. C. E., of Newcastle- upon-Tyne. Merz had acquired experience of railway electrification as an e ngineer on the North Eastern Railway , acting as consulting engineer on the 1904 electrification of the Newcastle suburban lines. 6 Merz was engaged by the Victorian Government in June 1907, and arrived in Melbourne in November. After an examination of the existing rail network, he submitted a Report in June t he following year. Merz's scheme allowed for the conversion of 124 route miles of the metropolitan system, to be completed by 1912 at a cost of £2,227,000. The main features of the scheme were: co n ver sion would be im plemented in three stages, allowing capital expe nditure to be spread over an extended period. The first stage comp rised the Port Melbourne, St Kilda, Sandringham and Broadmeadows lines, which Merz contended would show the best r eturn on conversion.