Advertisement

Maintenance of ACT Government car parks

By 3 July 2014 16

Now that parking fees have (inevitably) risen again, wouldn’t it be nice if the ACT Government actually spent a bit of this extra revenue in maintaining their car parks?

For example, ensuring that the lines delineating parking spaces are repainted every now and then, repairing ruts in the surface, trimming overhanging trees so that they don’t scratch your car’s paintwork and removing bottles and broken glass left behind by the drunks and winos who seem to favour these locations after dark.

These comments apply to the carpark next to the old Woden CIT but I’m sure others have similar stories (or worse).

Please login to post your comments
16 Responses to Maintenance of ACT Government car parks
#1
tim_c12:23 pm, 03 Jul 14

The extra revenue will be spent on the train set, as well as the interest bill on the money borrow to fund the train set. After completion of the train set, no one will need car parks anymore.

#2
rommeldog561:19 pm, 03 Jul 14

Yep – common.

Check out the parking bay lines (or almost lack of them) in the large carpark in front of the Abode Hotel in Woden. Quite a bit of glass there too. Nice for a now $9-50pd fee.

And the now $8pd one across the road and over the storm water drain also has feint parking bay lines and bushes growing through the ashpelt and tree branches drooping into parking bays. All of which can damage car paint if u an’t careful.

Just part of the polt by ACT Gov’t to get car drivers to use ACTION – or the coming toy train set – me thinks.

But yeah – once again a poor effort by the ACT Government…….

#3
neanderthalsis1:59 pm, 03 Jul 14

The fee hikes are more about encouraging you not to drive. So the ACT local council can happily charge you large sums of money to register your car and park in their carparks while only spending the absolute minimum required to prevent civil unrest on maintaining road and carpark assets.

#4
Hosinator10:41 pm, 03 Jul 14

No, I’d rather they spent the money on health, education, public transport infrastructure and parks.

#5
gazket11:56 pm, 03 Jul 14

buy a motorbike . the money you save on parking will pay for it so really you get a free bike.

#6
Maya12311:56 pm, 03 Jul 14

Hosinator said :

No, I’d rather they spent the money on health, education, public transport infrastructure and parks.

Agree.

#7
rommeldog5612:15 am, 04 Jul 14

Hosinator said :

No, I’d rather they spent the money on health, education, public transport infrastructure and parks.

Well, so would I hosinator (unless they spend it on a Light Rail). But, the ACT Govt make so much $ out of pay parking, you would think that they could spend a fraction of that incoming revenue on maintaining that revenue raising asset in reasonable condition.

There would still be massive surplus income/revenue from pay parking for those other things.

But less use of pay parking (especially if pay parking customers use loss making forms of public transport instead) = less revenue for the ACT Gov’t to spend on things health, education, more MLAs, sky whales, loss making Light Rail, pointless challenges to court rulings over riding ACT marriage equality bills, etc, too.

#8
bronal7:53 am, 04 Jul 14

Parking charges are a fee for service, not a tax. All I am asking is that the ACT Government maintain its carparks to a decent standard to deliver that service.

As far as discouraging driving is concerned, we always come back to the chicken-and-egg problem that more people would catch the bus if they didn’t do a Cook’s tour of five suburbs before reaching the next interchange. Unfortunately, Canberra isn’t designed for public transport, even the new suburbs in Gunghalin.

#9
watto2310:58 am, 04 Jul 14

gazket said :

buy a motorbike . the money you save on parking will pay for it so really you get a free bike.

Already on that, although be prepared to see how bad drivers can be when they see a bike with L’s or P’s!!!

#10
watto2311:01 am, 04 Jul 14

bronal said :

Parking charges are a fee for service, not a tax. All I am asking is that the ACT Government maintain its carparks to a decent standard to deliver that service.

As far as discouraging driving is concerned, we always come back to the chicken-and-egg problem that more people would catch the bus if they didn’t do a Cook’s tour of five suburbs before reaching the next interchange. Unfortunately, Canberra isn’t designed for public transport, even the new suburbs in Gunghalin.

Agreed about the time a bus takes, which is my main opposition to the proposed light rail that saves a whole 2 minutes of the journey on Northbourne… Probably takes longer given you’ll need to transfer from bus to light rail.

Happy to spend money on light rail, just make it rapid not another slow service. If there is provision for a non stop Gungahlin-Civic service plus and all stops service, then fine. Otherwise its a waste of money.

#11
Leon11:13 am, 04 Jul 14

Hosinator said :

No, I’d rather they spent the money on health, education, public transport infrastructure and parks.

The road network already reaches 100% of Canberra’s homes, but the walking and cycling network connects to only 50%.

We wouldn’t need so much parking if more of our streets had footpaths so we could more easily walk to schools, shops and other local places.

#12
davo10111:23 am, 04 Jul 14

watto23 said :

Happy to spend money on light rail, just make it rapid not another slow service. If there is provision for a non stop Gungahlin-Civic service plus and all stops service, then fine. Otherwise its a waste of money.

That would be using the special hover trams then? Or perhaps building a duplicate line for an extra $300 million or so.

#13
Maya12311:28 am, 04 Jul 14

Leon said :

Hosinator said :

No, I’d rather they spent the money on health, education, public transport infrastructure and parks.

The road network already reaches 100% of Canberra’s homes, but the walking and cycling network connects to only 50%.

We wouldn’t need so much parking if more of our streets had footpaths so we could more easily walk to schools, shops and other local places.

School children have difficulty walking without footpaths!!! Wow, how did we manage to get to school in my day? Sounds more an overprotective mummy and daddy excuse for driving the little dears.

#14
jcitizen7:35 pm, 04 Jul 14

Leon said :

Hosinator said :

No, I’d rather they spent the money on health, education, public transport infrastructure and parks.

The road network already reaches 100% of Canberra’s homes, but the walking and cycling network connects to only 50%.

We wouldn’t need so much parking if more of our streets had footpaths so we could more easily walk to schools, shops and other local places.

If cyclists registered their bikes we could put more paths in and at the same time we could put some cameras in to fine them when they totally ignore the bike paths and choose to use the roads when they totally ignore the road rules.

#15
Maya12312:32 pm, 05 Jul 14

jcitizen said :

Leon said :

Hosinator said :

No, I’d rather they spent the money on health, education, public transport infrastructure and parks.

The road network already reaches 100% of Canberra’s homes, but the walking and cycling network connects to only 50%.

We wouldn’t need so much parking if more of our streets had footpaths so we could more easily walk to schools, shops and other local places.

If cyclists registered their bikes we could put more paths in and at the same time we could put some cameras in to fine them when they totally ignore the bike paths and choose to use the roads when they totally ignore the road rules.

Have you worked out the cost of administrating this? I bet you haven’t. Also these comments have become so ho hum. No research, no statistics, just personal bias, and totally ignoring that it is people who ignore road rules. People ignore road rules when driving too. I read a survey that was done on a main road with a red light camera and yes it proved SOME people cycling did run the red light, but guess what, so did some people driving cars as well, and guess what, the figures were about the same for each. So why didn’t you mention the cars that do this too, or doesn’t this suit your prejudice. The effect of the difference between cars and bikes that run red lights is huge though. If a person on a bike runs a read light and gets hit (but because they are the vulnerable road user most, if they value their life, will check it is safe to do so first) it is their own life in the balance here. But if a car runs a red light they are likely to put others in danger, which a bike doesn’t have the same ability to do. But this logic, and no matter how many times it is pointed out (and it has been pointed out MANY MANY times) means nothing for blinkered prejudice. So I expect what I wrote will not change your opinion at all.

#16
watto239:41 am, 07 Jul 14

davo101 said :

watto23 said :

Happy to spend money on light rail, just make it rapid not another slow service. If there is provision for a non stop Gungahlin-Civic service plus and all stops service, then fine. Otherwise its a waste of money.

That would be using the special hover trams then? Or perhaps building a duplicate line for an extra $300 million or so.

There are lots of ways to do this. But another slow public transport service is not what we need. You can easily add a overtake or additional rail at stations, or build a bus rapid transit network or something else. Unlike all the other naysayers I’m trying to be objective and creative.

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Advertisement
GET PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP

Are you in favour of Light Rail for Canberra?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

IMAGES OF CANBERRA

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