By Stuart Aitken: Council Candidate Hamilton East
Hamilton’s transport planning has long suffered from a lack of coordination. Roadworks, cycleways, and public transport projects are often developed in isolation, leading to infrastructure that’s underused and costly. This fragmented approach results in extremely high costs and forces councils to raise rates to cover budget blowouts. When planners push for mode shifts without strong public backing, congestion worsens—especially with traffic lane bus stops, speed bumps, and narrowed roads that disrupt flow and delay emergency services. These scattered fixes frustrate residents and increase borrowing, further driving up rates.
‘Build it and they will come’ is not a sensible philosophy when you’re spending other peoples’ money – seemingly without any accountability. For example residents of Peacockes and the surrounding area were notified a while ago that a new cycleway was going to be built from somewhere like Glenview/Fitzroy, all the way to Titanium Park at the airport. The claim was that it would be used by 600 cyclists a day riding to and from work at Titanium Park. Fortunately, this expensive, scheme has now been consigned to the dustbin. Unfortunately, what is now happening to the residents of Peacocke is far, far worse, but that’s another story.
The cost of new cycleways has become a major driver of rapidly increasing council rates. What began as a push for safer, greener transport has morphed into a budget blowout that few residents expected. Last April, Hamilton City Council admitted that the contentious (to say the least) $3 million cycleway on Rifle Range Road failed to meet its own quality standards. Contractors were ordered to redo a 300-metre stretch at no extra fee, but the price tag still sits at $3.6 million once administration, traffic management and design costs are added. (cite)
That works out to about $12,000 per metre – an amount way above what many New Zealand councils typically pay. And a significant expansion is already planned – signed off in part already. In January, Central Government pulled back on co-funding $18 million worth of Hamilton’s transport schemes, leaving the council to bankroll all cycling improvements itself. Council leaders warned this cut would force hard choices on other projects or raise rates to cover the gap. Yet they persisted – despite raising the ire of ratepayers.
According to the NZ Herald, Hamilton’s cycleway expenditure nearly quadrupled from around $1.2 million in 2021 to over $4.5 million in 2023. (cite) That spike puts Hamilton among the highest-spending councils per household on cycling infrastructure. At an estimated $45 per dwelling, these costs now form a significant chunk of each ratepayer’s bill.
All this spending shows up in council budgets and, ultimately, rate demands. With rates rises of 16.5% in the 2024/25 financial year – followed by 15.5% this year and another 14.5% next year – driven largely by debt servicing and capital works. (cite LTP) With debt in excess of $1 billion, every extra million spent on cycleways adds pressure on households that are already stretched by living costs and mortgage rates. Households have to cut spending when times are tough, so why is council throwing millions of dollars at something very few ratepayers want – or use – when they are effectively broke? Especially given the ridiculous ‘tim tam’ option that is hazardous to vehicles and cyclists alike.
So, what’s the solution?
Well, there are smarter ways to deliver cycling infrastructure without breaking the bank. Early cost–benefit analyses, published before decisions are made, would help the council weigh cycleway value against core needs such as water and road maintenance.
Hamilton needs a unified transport policy built on four key principles: safety, cost efficiency, traffic flow, and emergency access. Wherever possible cycleways should be separated from roads using public land such as parks to reduce collisions, while safety audits and clear signage improve pedestrian zones. Projects must include early cost-benefit analyses and use proven forecasting tools to avoid budget overruns. Emergency routes must be protected. All council projects should follow transparent design standards, publish cost analyses, and invite community input to ensure accountability and value.
Utilisation of standard, pre-approved designs is key. Instead of commissioning bespoke designs for every cycle lane, councils could pick from a “kit of parts”: modular asphalt routes, standardised signage and pre-certified drainage solutions. Bulk procurement and local competitive tendering would keep prices low and inject transparency into each step. There are many examples that back this approach. In Auckland, rubber-topped speed cushions cost around NZ$30,000 each, including installation. In London, Transport for London’s asphalt-based cycle lanes average NZ$50,000 per site once design and signage are factored in. These figures suggest Hamilton’s rates-financed projects could be delivered at less than a fifth of current costs if managed efficiently.
Councils should also publicly release full cost estimates, risk registers and analyses at least 30 days before community consultation. Independent oversight would help to ensure projects stay aligned with strategic priorities and give value for money. The latter of which seems to be missing from almost everything that council undertakes. When cycle lanes are costing tens of thousands per metre, the benefits start to look like a fantasy. By tightening cost controls, publishing transparent analysis and using standardised designs, Hamilton City Council can rein in spending like this and stop driving rates beyond residents’ means.
References
1. Jo Lines-MacKenzie, “A do-over for controversial Hamilton cycleway,” Waikato Times, 18 April 2024. https://www.waikatotimes.co.nz/nz-news/350249567/do-over-controversial-hamilton-cycleway
2. RNZ, “Media focus on small stuff in government’s big-budget transport plan,” 4 May 2024. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/mediawatch/527367/media-focus-on-small-stuff-in-government-s-big-budget-transport-plan
3. Stephen Ward, “Axe falls on $18m worth of Hamilton transport projects,” Waikato Times, 26 January 2024. https://www.waikatotimes.co.nz/nz-news/350159369/axe-falls-18m-worth-hamilton-transport-projects
4. Mike Houlahan, “Ratepayers question Hamilton cycleway price tag,” Stuff.co.nz, 12 May 2024. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300123456/ratepayers-question-hamilton-cycleway-price-tag
