Page 3707 - Week 11 - Thursday, 22 September 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
(6) Where and what projects are planned as part of this rolled-over amount in 2005-06;
(7) Was there new funding allocated to “Neighbourhood improvements” in the 2005-06 budget; if so, how much and what, if any, of that budget, has been expended;
(8) Is there a list or schedule of improvements for the current financial year; if so, where are the sites that improvements will be made.
Mr Hargreaves: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
(1) The $46,000 expenditure delivered community path upgrades at Watson;
(2) A further $66,000 was expended in the last quarter of 2004-05 on community path upgrades at Watson, a pedestrian refuge at Groom Street, Hughes, various signs and linemarking at Downer, Forrest, Garran, Griffith, Narrabundah, Red Hill, Watson and Yarralumla.
(3) The tender for this work was only awarded in March 2005 with the majority of expenditure taking place after March as indicated in No. (2) above.
(4) There was no roll-over to 2005-06.
(5) No funding remained to roll over.
(6) Refer to (4).
(7) $500,000 has been allocated in 2005-06 with $236,000 expenditure to-date.
(8) Improvements are planned for the Wakefield Avenue / Cowper Street roundabout, lighting for the King Street carpark at Deakin, linemarking at David Street and a pedestrian crossing at Hopetoun Circuit.
Roads—on-road cycle lanes
(Question No 582)
Mr Pratt asked the Minister for Urban Services, upon notice, on 26 August 2005:
(1) Further to NRMA’s decision to undertake an investigation of the on-road cycle lane system and given that in Estimates hearings this year the Minister stated that he had received “no negative feedback” on the cycle lanes and that the NRMA had been consulted on two or three occasions, is he able to give reasons for this sudden call by NRMA to undertake this review;
(2) Will the Minister be taking NRMA’s safety and usage findings on board; if not, why not;
(3) Did the Minister have consultations with NRMA specifically on on-road cycle lanes or did he simply inform them of his decisions to construct additional on-road cycle lanes rather than asking for their valuable input; if not, why not.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .