Road User Space Allocation Policy Review – what it means
Credit Luke White

Road User Space Allocation Policy Review – what it means

You may not have noticed, but the Road User Space Allocation Policy was recently reviewed by TfNSW.

TfNSW’s Road User Space Allocation Policy establishes a formal modal hierarchy with pedestrians on top and private vehicles at the bottom. It importantly says that vehicle level of service is not a material consideration in prioritising people over cars. It’s a critical part of TfNSW’s policy suite as it implements the vision of Future Transport.

For those less familiar with road space reallocation, consider Seoul, where 15 motorways have now been replaced ('reallocated'). The Cheonggyecheon Freeway, for example, carried 16 lanes of traffic and carried 170,000 vehicles per day. It was reallocated to linear open space. Pedestrian volumes increased by 76%, cars decreased by 45% and it now attracts 64,000 visitors daily.

TfNSW's review of its policy indicates that it is not working as intended. It cites 13 findings – lack of clarity, misunderstanding, and lack of accountability to name a few. It provides 11 recommendations to strengthen the implementation of the policy (pg. 8). Here is a snapshot of the key recommendations:

  • Staff training and capability development
  • Performance indicators and tools to support the policy
  • Stronger alignment between the policy and assurance reviews
  • Review and revise organisation and governance arrangements to embed the policy
  • Review technical guidance, standards and warrants relating to road space allocation
  • Review existing programs in terms of alignment with the policy.

First – this is the second bit of progressive policy pushed out of @simon Hunter’s Strategic Transport Planning Branch in the last month. The recently updated Guide to Transport Impact Assessments is a critical update to a previous guide now 22 years old, which was also led by this branch. This is great to see because policies matter.

Credit Matthew Michael

But perhaps more importantly in my view, this is the first glance we have at Transport Minister Jo Haylen 's policy leanings. It’s easy for a Minister to spruik how the latest transport project will benefit the community, but to make clear trade-offs is much harder. Hopefully, this is a sign of things to come. With highly visible impacts of road projects in the spotlight, drawing the community towards more efficient modes is a smart long-term play.

For practitioners, it’s a reminder that not everyone is aware of this policy, so let’s play our role in increasing its prominence.

Do you still have questions? Feel free to reach out.

Peter Egan

Transport analyst at Self-Employed

2 个月

Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I note the review had no community input. I note very little was said about access/transport services. I note the road space priority is pedestrians and disabled first and large light vehicles last. The priority is meaningless without the suite of services community needs factored in. As the transport modes have a density and scale at which they offer best value as part of a suite of modes, we must consider communities at different scales as we build suites of services for a community - neighbourhood, suburb, town, city, region, state, nation, Earth. Future Transport 2056 has none of this analysis - it has platitudes followed by a list of projects. A listing in FT2056 is enough to get projects built. The result is poor value infrastructure and our social and economic problems.

Leah Beatty

Placemaking | City Shaping & Innovation | Strategy and Implementation | Strategic Urban Planning | Design | Infrastructure Delivery | Transport | Team Culture | Mentoring | Project Management

11 个月
回复
Ian Jones

Planned Disruptions (Network Operations) - Department of Transport

11 个月

Will have to take a look at the actual policy itself. As you point out - one of the more challenging aspects is appetite for trade offs. I would also suggest longevity. Victoria has a history of rolling out plans and policies - only to be usurped by cyclical debates, poor continuity after elections. Would be curious to understand how this mirrors Link and Place (UK), Smartroads/Movement and Place (Victoria) or other US models like road diet.

Mary Haverland

Transport Planning and Advisory

11 个月

Really good and insightful review of the policy. Even though I am on holidays, I couldn’t resist reading (put down the Paris Hilton memoir to do so). Curious to understand how “ Recommendation 3 - developing performance indicators and tools to support the updated policy” aligns with Movement and Place street environments and the logical strategic modal network hierarchies that support them? Amy Naulls Bailey Byrnes Nicole Vukic Bibiana Smith

Graham Newson

Integrated Transport and Mobility Consultant

11 个月

I enjoyed my time at the City of Perth where they had pedestrian priority at the top and private vehicles at the bottom. It really makes you think about modal impacts and needs, even with such things as roadworks.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Jonathan Busch的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了