Road Space Allocation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ROAD SPACE ALLOCATION: THE INTERSECTION OF TRANSPORT PLANNING, GOVERNANCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE Ian Henning Jones BA (Planning, Public Policy & Management) University of Oregon Masters (Urban & Regional Planning) University of California, Irvine Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Global, Urban and Social Studies College of Design and Social Context RMIT University November 2014 Abstract Contemporary professional transport planning and policy continue to focus on resolving the car’s place in contemporary urban society. Transport planners really only have two viable alternatives when engaging car-specific concerns: constructing more road space or allocating existing road space to give specific modes priority and/or to reduce travel. The second alternative drives the research programme for this thesis. For reasons made clear in this thesis, turning to transport-specific bodies of scholarly literature fails to provide a useful starting point to understand road space allocation. This research is therefore situated within a ‘mobilities paradigm’ (Urry, 2008). The mobilities paradigm provides a heterogeneous view of the world in which to view what is referred in this thesis as the scientific world of transport planning. This opens up useful exploratory lines of inquiry to understand the ways in which the work of transport planners (i.e. animate) allocating road space (i.e. inanimate) is constrained and constituted. This helps reveal limitations of governance, policy frameworks and professional knowledge in allocating road space. Insight from the sociology of scientific knowledge is used to analyse road space allocation from historical and contemporary settings, and to incorporate materiality into analysis. Utilising a case study methodology, this study critically examines road space allocation in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Data is drawn upon from a critical examination of scholarly literature, a document analysis of archival materials and government policy and legislative materials, face-to-face interviews with over 60 practicing and retired transport planners and participant observation of a transport planning exercise. The findings of this research suggest that though traditional aspects such as politics and legislative mandate do constrain and limit the action and reach of professionals, professionals were found to make and enact normative decisions that resulted in re- imagining road space as more than the site of car travel. Resolving several tensions identified in the thesis which make allocating road space challenging resulted in professionals embodying knowledge and experience reflective of adopting a demand management stance. This stance continues to be advanced by scholars as crucial to destabilising the car’s place in contemporary urban society. However, momentum needed to entrench the demand stance at institutional levels is found to be constrained by cyclical and/or alternating mobility visions generated from constant change in state government in Victoria. Drawing insight from sociology of scientific knowledge has therefore been found to provide for a new and enhanced frame to look at issues related to transport planning, road space allocation and the role of different agents (e.g. actors and infrastructure). Developing new professional knowledge and practices critical to engraining a demand management stance in practice is shown to be informed and enacted through practitioners actively engaging, and/or reacting to and against, technology and infrastructure. This confirms and reinforces the usefulness of tracing the contours of materiality, and in so doing, provides for an improved and more realistic picture of professional transport planning practice. Findings drawn from this thesis therefore advance our current understanding of how professional transport planning practice is constrained and constituted. - ii - Table of Contents ABSTRACT II TABLE OF CONTENTS III LIST OF FIGURES V LIST OF TABLES VII ABBREVIATIONS VIII DECLARATION IX ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS X CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background to research 1 1.2 Questioning the car’s role in urban society 3 1.3 The mobilities paradigm 7 1.4 Road space allocation 9 1.5 Scope and significance 12 1.6 Research question 15 1.7 Thesis structure and summary 16 CHAPTER 2 – ELEMENTS OF ROAD SPACE ALLOCATION 19 2.1 Repositioning the urban infrastructure debate 20 2.2 The constitutive elements of road space allocation 36 2.3 Road space allocation tensions 38 2.4 A conceptual framework to examine road space allocation 51 CHAPTER 3 – RESEARCH DESIGN 60 3.1 Methodology 61 3.2 Document analysis 67 3.3 Interviews 69 3.4 Participant observation 78 3.5 Synthesising research design 80 CHAPTER 4 – GOVERNANCE OF ROAD SPACE ALLOCATION 82 4.1 Placing Melbourne in context 83 4.2 Tracing the boundaries for road space allocation 84 4.3 Chapter summary 94 CHAPTER 5 – EXPLORING CONTESTS OVER USE OF ROAD SPACE 97 5.1 Pre-motor car resolution of the spatial tension 98 5.2 On-street car parking and the spatial tension 103 5.3 Chapter summary 126 CHAPTER 6 – ROAD SPACE ALLOCATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 128 6.1 How governance helps reconcile the capacity tension 129 6.2 How organisational conventions help reconcile the capacity tension 138 6.3 Exploring the role of materiality in the capacity tension 148 6.4 Chapter summary 153 CHAPTER 7 – HIERARCHICAL ARRANGEMENT OF ROAD SPACE 156 7.1 Exploring the role of governance in reconciling the liveability tension 157 - iii - 7.2 Exploring more nuanced aspects of the liveability tension 169 7.3 Chapter summary 179 CHAPTER 8 – OBSERVING ROAD SPACE ALLOCATION 181 8.1 First NOP Workshop 181 8.2 Second and third NOP workshops 184 8.3 Fourth NOP workshop 189 8.4 Final NOP workshop 196 8.5 Chapter summary 204 CHAPTER 9 – ADVANCING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF ROAD SPACE ALLOCATION 207 9.1 Situating findings within the urban studies literature 208 9.2 How intersecting elements resolve road space allocation tensions 215 9.3 Contribution to knowledge 234 CHAPTER 10 – CONCLUSION 237 10.1 Elements that determine and shape road space allocation 237 10.2 Implications for policy 240 10.3 Future research 243 REFERENCES 245 APPENDIX 1 – COUNCIL A CENSUS INFORMATION 275 APPENDIX 2 – ETHICS FORMS 276 A2.1 Plain language statement for interviews 276 A2.2 Consent form for interviews 277 A2.3 Plain language statement for participant observation 278 A2.4 Consent form for participant observation 279 APPENDIX 3 – LEGISLATIVE ACTS 280 - iv - List of Figures Figure 2.1: Russell’s conflicting urban functions .......................................................... 46 Figure 2.2 Russell’s conflicting road functions ............................................................ 46 Figure 2.3: Conceptual framework to examine road space allocation .......................... 52 Figure 4.1: Chronological summary of governance for road space allocation .............. 86 Figure 5.1: 1862 Bourke Street, courtesy of Patsy Smith .......................................... 100 Figure 5.2: Trial of MTC travel survey, The Age ........................................................ 111 Figure 5.3: Proposed MTC freeway map ................................................................... 112 Figure 5.4: Revised freeway map.............................................................................. 113 Figure 5.5: MCC’s proposed car parking ban, The Argus .......................................... 113 Figure 5.6: Picture of open-dummy tram car, circa 1880 ........................................... 115 Figure 5.7: Illustration of workmen tram car, circa 1889 ............................................ 115 Figure 5.8: Map of proposed clearways .................................................................... 123 Figure 6.1: Yellow Fairway lines, photo from author .................................................. 134 Figure 6.2: Council of Port Phillip .............................................................................. 139 Figure 6.3: Parking summit, Port Phillip Parking Plan ............................................... 140 Figure 6.4: Port Phillip mode hierarchy ..................................................................... 141 Figure 6.5: Super Stop design, from DOT Public Transport guidelines ..................... 143 Figure 6.6: New tram platform design, photo from author ......................................... 144 Figure 6.7: Council of Yarra ...................................................................................... 145 Figure 6.8: New Bridge Road tram stop, photo from author ...................................... 147 Figure 6.9: Tram stop relative to hospital, photo from author .................................... 147 Figure 6.10: New flashing Fairway sign, photo from author ....................................... 149 Figure 6.11: New blinking road measures, photo from author ................................... 149 Figure 6.12: Schema of Nicholson Street included in the trial, from GHD report ....... 150 Figure 6.13: Mock-up of control panel ....................................................................... 151 Figure 6.14: Author’s sketch from interview .............................................................. 152 - v - Figure 7.1: Framework for conflict resolution, from Loder & Bayly............................. 159 Figure 7.2: Degree of conflict map, NCT study.......................................................... 160 Figure 7.3: Implementation plan, NCT study ............................................................