[!AI]
Takes a fiscally conservative approach, opposing urgent cycling infrastructure investment due to low current usage. While supporting incremental public transport improvements, his commitment to maintaining through-traffic and demand-driven philosophy suggests limited support for proactive cycling promotion, traffic calming, or pedestrianisation initiatives.
I think that active transport improvements should be demand driven.
For buses, that means steady improvements in convenience and reliability. If those improvements increase patronage, then more buses can be deployed. Essentially, that has been happening since the DCC and ORC started having regular, constructive meetings about public transport. I would like to see a loop bus around the Dunedin CBD, and I am hopeful for a successful trial of the Mosgiel on-demand service.
For pedestrians, we have an excellent network of footpaths, and I voted to spend money on our tracks & trails network outside the urban areas. Those tracks & trails are also used by cyclists and the strong increase in recreational cycling will fuel demand for more inner-city cycleways which would ideally be fully separated and safe.
The pedestrian infrastructure is good and caters well for accessibility requirements, with most requests for improvements met with positive response. I do not regard extension of the urban cycleway network as urgent or necessary in the current fiscal climate, as numbers of cyclists in the city are very low.
George St is a pleasant place to shop, and it is very important that through-traffic remains. Bath St is being upgraded right now and eventually the Octagon and Princes St will follow, although they are not high priority in the current environment which is dominated by the demands of water infrastructure.
Thank you
Jules Radich