sydney-city-centre-review-of-environmental-factors

2.4.3 Analysis of options
Each of the options were analysed against the proposal objectives described in
section 2.3 and a number of evaluation criteria defined in Table 2-3. A summary of
the analysis including the advantages and disadvantages of each of the options
considered for the proposal is outlined below.
The preferred option was selected as it was found to best meet the proposal
objectives and related additional criteria listed in Table 2-3.
Table 2-3
Evaluation criteria and definitions
Evaluation criteria in
order or priority
Traffic efficiency
Amenity
Kerbside use
Business impacts
Definition
The proposal would at least maintain traffic flows for priority traffic
corridors
The proposal would not unduly impact amenity
The proposal would make best-use of the kerbside
The proposal would at least maintain business access and
servicing
Table 2-4 to Table 2-8 analyses and compares each option against the above
proposal objectives and evaluation criteria.
Table 2-4
Analysis of options in precinct 1: north-west
NW1: Kent Street (one option)
Traffic
efficiency
The option would introduce traffic efficiencies, reduce congestion and
improve traffic flows by adding an additional northbound lane and
introducing no stopping during peak periods at the compromise of
removing a southbound lane on the approach to and through the Erskine
Street intersection.
Amenity
Kerbside
use
Business
impacts
Summary
The above improvement would prioritise northbound flows during peak
periods at this intersection. This would benefit road users travelling north
to exit the city.
The option would improve the road user experience by providing improved
lane configurations for traffic travelling northbound with limited amenity
impacts.
The option would benefit road users by removing the flow conflicts
throughout the intersection and setting clearer northbound priorities by
providing two lanes.
The option provides a solution needing limited modification to the existing
kerbside allocations, therefore maximising benefits to road users whilst
not unduly conflicting or compromising those businesses and people that
rely on the road’s kerbside allocations (eg parking, loading).
Whilst the proposal would introduce loading time-restrictions it would still
allow loading/unloading at certain times.
The option identified for this pinch point would achieve the proposal
objectives as it would support the growing demand for access on this
priority corridor and improve road network functionality for northbound
traffic. The option also performed well against the evaluation criteria and
provided the required outcome through one proposed option.
Sydney City Centre Capacity Improvement 35
Review of Environmental Factors