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

NW2: King Street (two options)
Traffic
efficiency
Both options would introduce traffic efficiencies, reduce congestion and
improve traffic flows.
‘Option a’ introduces the efficiency by removing the kerbside allocation
parking and creating full time ‘no stopping’ throughout the work site;
whereas ‘Option b’ introduces efficiency by reducing footpath widths and
removing kerbside extensions, but preserving some of the kerbside
allocations.
Amenity
As both options introduce similar levels of efficiency they would have the
same benefit to road users.
Both options reallocate road priorities by providing improved lane
configurations for traffic travelling west to east along King Street.
The two options remove existing conflict through the intersections by
providing through-only lanes that align across all intersections. This would
benefit road users travelling along King Street who are currently conflicted
by needing to switch lanes between intersections. Neither option provides
a more beneficial outcome to road users than the other in this regard.
The need to reduce the footpath width under ‘option b’ would reduce the
pedestrian capacity between Clarence Street and York Street. ‘Option a’
would therefore benefit pedestrians as it can achieve the same design
outcome without needing a width reduction in the footpath in an area
where there is a high level of pedestrian traffic (footfall).
Kerbside
use
Business
impacts
The amenity impact of ‘option b’ would include altering the character of
King Street by bringing traffic closer to the heritage-listed Grace building
façade. Reducing the footpath width in this location would compromise the
adjacent outdoor dining areas as the residual footpath width would need
to be solely allocated for use by pedestrian traffic. ‘Option a’ is therefore
beneficial to these businesses over ‘option b’.
'Option a’ would have an impact on kerbside allocations as a result of
introducing full time no stopping throughout the length of the work site.
On-street parking and loading would be affected during construction and
as a result of the introduced no stopping restrictions. Businesses would
also be prevented from unloading goods along King Street, other than
between George Street and Pitt Street through the introduction of
compensatory loading zone provisions on the southern kerb.
‘Option b’ would generally allow some level of time-restricted parking and
loading to be retained along King Street and it would therefore benefit
those businesses and people who rely on these kerbside uses.
‘Option a’ would take significantly less time to construct than ‘Option b’
due to the reduced scope of work. The benefit would be the reduced
disruption to traffic entering the city from the Western Distributor; one of
the main roads into the city. Also, there would be less amenity impact on
the streetscape of the road corridor during construction. This would benefit
people who use the outdoor dining areas and businesses that rely on
passing trade.
Sydney City Centre Capacity Improvement 36
Review of Environmental Factors