The newly opened Sydney Fish Market is already facing criticism, not for its seafood or facilities, but for a perceived failure to adequately integrate pedestrian and cyclist safety into its design. Concerns are mounting that the shared pathway adjacent to the January 19 opening represents an “accident waiting to happen,” as cyclists and pedestrians are forced into close proximity.

The $836 million project opted for a wide pavement intended for shared use rather than a dedicated, separated cycleway, despite a crucial cycling route running alongside the market connecting Sydney’s inner west to the city. This decision has drawn fire from City of Sydney Council Deputy Mayor Jess Miller, who described the situation as a “nightmare.”

“We know from experience that whenever you put cyclists and pedestrians and cars and coaches [dropping people at the market] all in one busy environment, it’s a recipe for absolute disaster,” Cr Miller stated. She further explained that repeated advocacy for a separated cycleway was ignored throughout the planning and construction phases.

Cyclists themselves echo these concerns. Bek Hawkins, a regular commuter, acknowledged the shared path was an improvement over riding directly in traffic, but highlighted the inherent conflict. “You get to the markets [and] everybody is walking around looking at the new building, and you’re just on your commute. It creates a clash,” she said. Emma Taviani expressed similar anxieties, stating, “It just feels like an accident waiting to happen.”

Internal Divisions and Prioritization of Vehicle Traffic

The decision to forgo a dedicated cycleway appears to stem from internal disagreements within Transport for NSW, according to former Liberal transport minister Rob Stokes. He described the existence of “two clans” within the department: one focused on people, and another prioritizing vehicle traffic. Stokes believes the final design reflected the influence of the latter group.

“I think a lot of the decisions that had gone into the cycle infrastructure around the fish market had been made by the latter group,” Stokes said. He also pointed to “very powerful vested interests” – fueled by a revolving door between government and the private sector – that consistently favor large road and rail projects over active transport infrastructure.

Transport for NSW responded to Stokes’s remarks by asserting its commitment to expanding Sydney’s walking and cycling network, recognizing it as a “vital part” of the transport system. However, the department did not offer a specific explanation for why initial plans for a separated cycleway were not pursued.

Preliminary designs, seen by ABC Radio Sydney, reveal a potential layout featuring a fully separated cycleway along Bridge Road, albeit with one fewer traffic lane. This suggests a viable alternative was considered, but ultimately rejected.

Stokes himself admitted that while the current shared path is functioning better than anticipated, he believes a dedicated cycleway “definitely” should have been included. He characterized the current arrangement as “the best we could do at the time” due to a lack of early planning and foresight.

Policy Contradiction and Systemic Issues

The decision to implement a shared path appears to contradict NSW government policy, which recommends building separated bike lanes in busy areas along “strategic cycling corridors” – a designation that applies to the route adjacent to the fish market. Michael Harrison, an urban designer and planner with over 40 years of experience, described the final design as “inexplicable.”

“The excuse might have been that the traffic lanes are needed for traffic — and they are. But there still would have been space available for a dedicated cycleway due to the deep setback of the building,” Harrison explained.

Beyond the immediate design flaw, the situation highlights broader systemic issues within transport planning. Stokes lamented the “missing links” between the fish market pathway and existing cycling infrastructure, creating disjointed and illogical connections for cyclists.

Gemma Bassett, a local cyclist, exemplifies this frustration, often opting to ride on the road to avoid the congested and potentially hazardous shared path. “It’s disjointed and illogical,” she stated. “It’s quicker and more convenient to cycle on the road.”

The lack of seamless integration forces cyclists like Bek Hawkins to navigate “several dangerous pinch points” on her commute, requiring sudden merges into footpaths and traffic. This creates a stressful and potentially unsafe experience, and contributes to a negative perception of cyclists among other road users.

Peter McLean, chief executive of Bicycle NSW, acknowledged that attitudes towards cycling are improving with the opening of new cycleway projects. However, he emphasized that significant work remains to ensure best-practice infrastructure is implemented without constant advocacy from cycling groups. “We have a long way to go before world-class bicycle infrastructure is rolled out,” he said.

The situation at the Sydney Fish Market serves as a cautionary tale, illustrating the potential consequences of prioritizing vehicular traffic over pedestrian and cyclist safety. While the market itself may be a success, the surrounding infrastructure raises serious questions about the long-term sustainability and accessibility of active transport in Sydney.