Cycling dollars flow

By 8 November, 2011 71

simon corbell

Simon Corbell has announced a $9 million spend on cycling and walking infrastructure:

    – The City cycle loop;
    – Kings Avenue on-road cycle lane and off-road cycle path improvements;
    – accessibility improvements to walking infrastructure in the main town centres (Woden, Tuggeranong, Belconnen and Gungahlin) benefitting visually and mobility impaired people; and
    – interim off-road footpath improvements at Kingston Foreshore;
    – further examination of converting sections of Bunda Street in the City and Hibberson Street in Gungahlin to “shared spaces? of pedestrians, cyclists and drivers;
    – construction of a missing link between the shared paths along Tuggeranong Parkway and Melrose Drive near Chifley and,
    – the provision of cycling facilities along both sides of Yamba Drive between Yarra Glen and The Canberra Hospital.

More information is available from the TAMS Walking and Cycling Trunk Infrastructure Report

[Photo courtesy Simon Corbell's office]

Please login to post your comments
71 Responses to Cycling dollars flow
#61
Okwhatever8:03 pm, 26 Nov 11

Almost everyone pays car rego but a very small number of those people will actually ever use the cycling infrastructure that has cost so much to the community. Yes yes, you should all be applauded for your “greeness” but how about the squeaky wheel not getting all the grease for a change. It’s a lot of money being spent on a monority. I pay my rego for a car and 2 motorcycles but I don’t see my money going to good use, especially in terms of making our roads safer for motorcyclists.

#62
matt312218:41 pm, 26 Nov 11

Okwhatever said :

Almost everyone pays car rego but a very small number of those people will actually ever use the cycling infrastructure that has cost so much to the community. Yes yes, you should all be applauded for your “greeness” but how about the squeaky wheel not getting all the grease for a change. It’s a lot of money being spent on a monority. I pay my rego for a car and 2 motorcycles but I don’t see my money going to good use, especially in terms of making our roads safer for motorcyclists.

+1

The roads definitely need to be made safer for motorcyclists.

#63
OpenYourMind10:27 pm, 26 Nov 11

Okwhatever, do you realise that only the tiniest, tiniest proportion of any road funds go towards cycling infrastructure?

#64
Hanksinatra9:28 am, 27 Nov 11

Thanks “Openyourmind” for the useful link in your comments which support the thrust of my argument http://www.ptua.org.au/myths/petroltax.shtml
However as detailed a list of costs as these lists first appear, they in fact only scratch the surface. There are many more costs to support the car meme for example why not subtract the value of every house, just in Sydney say if it lopped off a garage. This would inherantly decrease block sizes thereby condensing the city and lowering building costs; flow on financial benifits add infinitum.
Or how much money does an RTA itself consume by promoting up carism?
What percentage of police work is devoted to traffic offences?
Just a start. The latest estimates from the UK estimate the cost to the economy (again not counting by any means all costs) of carism is around $100 billion. It could hardly be less in this country.

#65
thy_dungeonman10:44 am, 27 Nov 11

I do find it funny that all the ardent motorist are begrudging us $9 million over 3 years when hundreds of millions is spent on roads and there’s hardly anywhere you can’t access via road and the same can’t be said for cycling.

If they realy are going ahead with the city cycle loop it’s a pity they didn’t start now while they are repairing the pedestrian areas anyway.

#66
fromthecapital3:49 pm, 27 Nov 11

Okwhatever said :

Almost everyone pays car rego but a very small number of those people will actually ever use the cycling infrastructure that has cost so much to the community. Yes yes, you should all be applauded for your “greeness” but how about the squeaky wheel not getting all the grease for a change. It’s a lot of money being spent on a monority. I pay my rego for a car and 2 motorcycles but I don’t see my money going to good use, especially in terms of making our roads safer for motorcyclists.

This is about cycling and walking. Are we to stop building footpaths? Do you understand that income, company tax, gst that the general public are paying are going towards to building roads? If we as a society were a bit more efficient about how we traveled we wouldnt have to spend so many billions…

Anyway, if you aren’t happy about paying the rego on these 3 vehicles then nobody is holding a gun to your head. Sell them and choose a different mode of transport.

#67
Hanksinatra8:43 am, 28 Nov 11

If you Okwhatever are concerned about motorcycle safety then you are the natural ally of the cyclist. The thing that is dangerous about both is car traffic so we can see a natural 2 wheel alliance. As a commuting cyclist I am therefore 100% in favour of “making our roads safer for motorcyclists” by the introduction of policies which, by carrot or stick, reduce car traffic.

#68
Hanksinatra11:58 am, 01 Dec 11

As for who bears the cost of roadways lets have a look at
http://www.velo.info/Library/Cycling_Economics.pdf
http://corporate.sky.com/documents/pdf/publications/the_british_cycling_economy.htm
http://www.cyclingresourcecentre.org.au/page/economic_benefits_of_cycling
http://economicsintelligence.com/2011/03/11/the-economics-of-bike-lanes-%E2%80%93-how-can-john-cassidy-get-it-so-wrong/
shoploppen.dk/Velo-city_presentations/Emmanuel%20Roche.pdf
and finally from a Canberra researcher Paul Tranter at ADFA
http://www.adrawa.com.au/…/Studies/Effective_Speeds.pdf
Now those are just a small sample of the studies available on this topic and I’d be truly interested in finding an economic refutation of the general principle contained in all of them which is this.
Not only are cyclists not free-loading parasites on the road, but they are paying for cars which is great for me because I own a car but I submit , not good for society in general. I’m predicting that the great weight of opposition will come from a cultural perspective rather than an economic one.

#69
Hanksinatra12:05 pm, 01 Dec 11

just a quick addendum
“According the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT), the replacement cost of Portland’s entire bikeway network (300 miles) are approximately $60 million (2008 prices). As they point out in a document: “This included every off-street path, every bicycle
lane, every bicycle signal and associated civil improvement made to create Portland’s network of bikeways.”
How do these $60 million compare to other infrastructure projects? Well, at first I could not believe the number myself, but this is that the PBOT document says: “That is roughly equivalent to the construction costs of one mile of urban freeway.”

Having a decent infrastructure for cycling really is ridiculously cheap!”

#70
Hanksinatra2:44 pm, 01 Dec 11
#71
Bluey3:35 pm, 01 Dec 11

No shared zone on hibberson street or any other street. Theyre the worst idea to implemented since…. I cant think of a worse road related decision honestly.

Advertisement
GET PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP
Advertisement

Halloween in Australia?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

IMAGES OF CANBERRA

Advertisement
Sponsors
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.