Arguments as Tools for Assessing Images of Transport in Urban Planning

Abstract

Planners and researchers need instruments for assessing the construction of future images. We propose an argumentative model for assessing instrumental and constitutional images in plans, supported by three master criteria—consistency, coherence, and plausibility—that encompass alternative argumentation strategies and image-building processes. We applied it to an assessment of planning documents in the metropolitan area of Granada, identifying main argumentation backgrounds (metropolitan/urban reforms, transport corridor design, and integration) and fields (demand- and capacity-based) in the formation of the image of Light Rail Transit as an integrated metropolitan system and as urban access system.