2 ms·

> The government money for the cycle lanes comes mostly from car and fuel taxes: My experience from the US is no doubt leading me astray. However, you have mi

> The government money for the cycle lanes comes mostly from car and fuel taxes: My experience from the US is no doubt leading me astray. However, you have mischaracterized your source. It says "Revenue in the NLTF comes from two main sources – fuel taxes and road user charges." The entry for "Road user charges (net)" says "$6 billion End customers of freight carriers in the prices paid for goods and services. Light diesel vehicle owner payments." It does not give a breakdown for just cars, and even people without a car pay for goods and services which are transported over roads. Furthermore, the National Land Transport Fund is not the only organization which funds roads. It took a while to find it, but I see that "Council receive Transport related revenue from several operating streams. These are rates, borrowing and the National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) subsidy, via the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) which Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency administer on behalf of the Government." at https://ccc.govt.nz/assets/Documents/The-Council/Plans-Strategies-Policies-Bylaws/Plans/Long-Term-Plan/LTP-2021-final/Asset-Management-Plan-AMP-Transport-LTP-2021-2031.PDF https://ccc.govt.nz/assets/Documents/The-Council/Plans-Strat... . You therefore need to include rates and borrowing into the total budget sources. According to https://www.nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/national-land-transport-programme/2021-24-nltp/nltp-funding/regional-and-activity-tables/?group=region&state=current&dataType=NLTF&a%5B12%5D=1&a%5B13%5D=1&a%5B9%5D=1&a%5B8%5D=1&r%5B41%5D=1 https://www.nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/national-la... , for example, the "Total for Canterbury › Christchurch City Council › Local road maintenance" for the "The total cost of the activity’s phase for all years, including local share" is NZ$ 548,783.1 while the NLTF funding is 32,772.9+35,390.3+40,024.8 = 108,188 or less than 20% of the total cost - if I understand it correctly. If I understand "Total for Canterbury › Christchurch City Council › Local road improvements" correctly, under 10% is from NLTF funding. The main entry point to this statistics is https://www.nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/national-land-transport-programme/2021-24-nltp/nltp-funding/ https://www.nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/national-la... That sure seems like far less than half the funding for roads in Christchurch come from car and fuel taxes. Can you find a better breakdown? Lastly, look at the breakdown of NLTP funding. "In 2021–24, $24.3 billion of funding is forecast to be managed under the NLTP" of which $910m is "to walking and cycling improvements". That is 3.7% for walking and cycling. You wrote that in Christchurch "3% of trips are by bicycle". Are those numbers pretty proportionate? Especially given the growth in cycle traffic in Christchurch over the last few years? ("with the city seeing a 30% increase in cycling over the last five years" says https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300918660/back-to-the-cyclopolis-christchurch-returns-to-its-cycling-city-roots https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300918660/back-to-the-cyclo... ).

robocat 3y ago
There is a better breakdown here although a bit outdated: https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Cabinet/cabinet-paper-RUC-increase-2020.pdf https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Cabinet/cabinet... > and even people without a car pay for goods and services which are transported over roads. Only partially. About 750000 personal light vehicles below 3500kg pay RUC charges - a lot of that is deisel personal vehicles - 4WDs etcetera. Looks like they pay about 40% of total RUC revenue. The RUC revenue for heavy vehicles is supposed to be assigned to road costs caused by heavy vehicles. RUC = road user charges. The fact they are paying for cyclists is really against the stated purpose of the RUC. Note that the new National government intends to introduce RUC for electric vehicles since those use roads but are not paying their fair share of costs. For 2020/21 common costs are forecast to be $4.49 billion, less fixed revenue of $1.55 billion made up of ratepayer funding, motor vehicle registration and licensing fees and other Crown revenue, which leaves almost $3 billion of common costs to be recovered from RUC and PED. That implies council rates pay about 1/3 of costs which is a similar ratio to your earlier calcs. Hard to calculate better because a lot of the common costs are towards national infrastructure rather than local.
- eesmith 3y ago
  > Looks like they pay about 40% of total RUC revenue. So the other 60% is paid by people wanting goods and services, even if they themselves don't have a car? > About 750000 personal light vehicles below 3500kg pay RUC charges - a lot of that is deisel personal vehicles Yes, because your source says petrol vehicles pay fuel excise directly. It also points out "Unlike Europe, there are relatively few diesel passenger cars in New Zealand, which may be a reflection of effects of having to pay RUC." Where is the excise tax going? I see motorcycles don't pay an RUC. I assume because they are all petrol. > The RUC revenue for heavy vehicles is supposed to be assigned to road costs caused by heavy vehicles. Yes, your source says: "Heavy vehicles pay substantially more than light vehicles, largely because the CAM includes an exponential calculation for the road wear component but also reflecting the need they create for stronger bridges and other structures, and the additional road space they occupy." and "The weight related damage costs are allocated according to the so called “4th power rule”. This is written as ESA = (laden weight/axle factor)^4 x load factor x number of axles. The “4th power rule” is based on historical research from the USA, South Africa and NZ, and is widely accepted as a rule of thumb for road design." A bicycle of 120 kg (including rider) has 1/10th the laden weight of a vehicle so the ESA should be about 1/10,000 th as much. In practice the exponential doesn't work that way ("Vehicles weighing less than around 6 tonnes do almost no damage to roads") but the point stands that bicycle roads are significantly cheaper to build and maintain than ones handling cars. A bicycle takes at most 1/5th space as a car, so the space related costs should also be much smaller. I don't know about NZ but in the US bicycles are generally prohibited from highways, which are also more expensive to build than city streets. > That implies council rates pay about 1/3 of costs which is a similar ratio to your earlier calcs. My earlier calcs had the NLTF paying under 1/3 of the costs for city roads in Christchurch the rest by other ratepayers and other sources. > Hard to calculate better because a lot of the common costs are towards national infrastructure rather than local. Yes, that is why I don't think looking at NLTF numbers gives a good idea of who pays what for the roads in Christchurch. It still doesn't seem that the money spent on the new 101 km of bike paths is all that outrageous, given that it seems proportionate to the number of users or predicted users.

robocat 3y ago

There is a better breakdown here although a bit outdated: https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Cabinet/cabinet-paper-RUC-increase-2020.pdf https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Cabinet/cabinet... > and even people without a car pay for goods and services which are transported over roads. Only partially. About 750000 personal light vehicles below 3500kg pay RUC charges - a lot of that is deisel personal vehicles - 4WDs etcetera. Looks like they pay about 40% of total RUC revenue. The RUC revenue for heavy vehicles is supposed to be assigned to road costs caused by heavy vehicles. RUC = road user charges. The fact they are paying for cyclists is really against the stated purpose of the RUC. Note that the new National government intends to introduce RUC for electric vehicles since those use roads but are not paying their fair share of costs. For 2020/21 common costs are forecast to be $4.49 billion, less fixed revenue of $1.55 billion made up of ratepayer funding, motor vehicle registration and licensing fees and other Crown revenue, which leaves almost $3 billion of common costs to be recovered from RUC and PED. That implies council rates pay about 1/3 of costs which is a similar ratio to your earlier calcs. Hard to calculate better because a lot of the common costs are towards national infrastructure rather than local.

eesmith 3y ago
> Looks like they pay about 40% of total RUC revenue. So the other 60% is paid by people wanting goods and services, even if they themselves don't have a car? > About 750000 personal light vehicles below 3500kg pay RUC charges - a lot of that is deisel personal vehicles Yes, because your source says petrol vehicles pay fuel excise directly. It also points out "Unlike Europe, there are relatively few diesel passenger cars in New Zealand, which may be a reflection of effects of having to pay RUC." Where is the excise tax going? I see motorcycles don't pay an RUC. I assume because they are all petrol. > The RUC revenue for heavy vehicles is supposed to be assigned to road costs caused by heavy vehicles. Yes, your source says: "Heavy vehicles pay substantially more than light vehicles, largely because the CAM includes an exponential calculation for the road wear component but also reflecting the need they create for stronger bridges and other structures, and the additional road space they occupy." and "The weight related damage costs are allocated according to the so called “4th power rule”. This is written as ESA = (laden weight/axle factor)^4 x load factor x number of axles. The “4th power rule” is based on historical research from the USA, South Africa and NZ, and is widely accepted as a rule of thumb for road design." A bicycle of 120 kg (including rider) has 1/10th the laden weight of a vehicle so the ESA should be about 1/10,000 th as much. In practice the exponential doesn't work that way ("Vehicles weighing less than around 6 tonnes do almost no damage to roads") but the point stands that bicycle roads are significantly cheaper to build and maintain than ones handling cars. A bicycle takes at most 1/5th space as a car, so the space related costs should also be much smaller. I don't know about NZ but in the US bicycles are generally prohibited from highways, which are also more expensive to build than city streets. > That implies council rates pay about 1/3 of costs which is a similar ratio to your earlier calcs. My earlier calcs had the NLTF paying under 1/3 of the costs for city roads in Christchurch the rest by other ratepayers and other sources. > Hard to calculate better because a lot of the common costs are towards national infrastructure rather than local. Yes, that is why I don't think looking at NLTF numbers gives a good idea of who pays what for the roads in Christchurch. It still doesn't seem that the money spent on the new 101 km of bike paths is all that outrageous, given that it seems proportionate to the number of users or predicted users.