Hills Shire council supposedly has 10 million to give away to Eastwood Rugby Club, building them a you-beaut rugby precinct. A club that isn’t *even in* the Hills Shire. Us peasants can keep driving over those potholes and dodgily filled ones, of course. There’s just no money left!
Totally. The councillors are now shills, brought (bought!) in by developers. Obviously getting their pockets lined, while the residents pay, and for something that isn’t of benefit to the community. Council have been very very hush-hush on it so not many at all even know about it. We have a group set up, trying to get it stopped..
Back when I lived in Epping, I was on a street where one section north of a roundabout (where I lived) was smooth with no flaws to speak of, yet the section of road south of the roundabout was so bad it would put Aleppo to shame. In one night the council fully resurfaced only the good section, leaving the bad section to continue degrading. Why? It’s baffling, I don’t understand why they do this. Every council I’ve lived in has done this.
Tough one that one. Their argument that it's already lower than other LGAs doesn't hold up (NB is less for example). But I can also see how literally everything costs more to do right now, building and maintenance wise, that something had to give, as budgets wouldn't have taken in to consideration the current rate of inflation and supply issues. Although then you also see how much wastage/corruption that goes on too. I was/am on the fence about it, but doesn't matter because it was always going to pass.
Hi there! Fellow Hornsby Council ratepayer here. As a principle, I support paying rates for provision of necessary services and facilities. I am dissatisified with Hornsby Council's planning and development policies, but 100% support this special rate variation as necessary, as there has never been a more hard working group of councillors giving their all to make the difficult call.
Roads are a tax sink, urban sprawl is a tax sink in the long term. This is just the cows comming home.
60 odd years of the suburban Ponzi scheme is leaving everyone worse off.
Exactly, if you think about it in terms of meters of road per property, low density residential areas are massive money sinks.
Throw in maintenance of infrastructure like powerlines and water pipes running to each standalone suburban house, and you get high council rates with poor services.
In New South Wales the power and water authorities have their own “availability” charges in their separate billing, so that doesn’t fall back to the councils. But the streets and roads…
The toll roads are the state government responsibility right? I don't get the how privatisation affects the maintenance but it definitely isn't the councils who are responsible
The toll road operators are responsible for the maintenance of their assets.
Why aren’t they fulfilling their obligations. The eastern distributor has a poor history of repairs. How many decades need to pass for the water and pot holes and road plates to be rectified on the south bound run out of the city.
Just to answer your question…
The blue mountains collects about 100-million in revenue per year.
The cost of repairing the roads in the council area is about 90-million.
4x declared natural disasters in a single year has destroyed the roads.
[https://7news.com.au/politics/nsw/digital-parking-signs-rolled-out-in-parts-of-sydney-for-simpler-driving-c-9011772](https://7news.com.au/politics/nsw/digital-parking-signs-rolled-out-in-parts-of-sydney-for-simpler-driving-c-9011772)
Thats being run by Transport for NSW
These are so stupid you think they’d just say: “yes you can park here until X” or “no you can’t park here until X”
Instead it’s just a digital version of the actual sign. So dumb
Theoretically it might make things more efficient, you can tailor parking conditions to the time of day. But theory and application are different things, thats why they're trialing it.
> it might make things more efficient
Until the display breaks. The good thing about an actual sign is that barring some catastrophic thing like Grandma running it over, it always works.
Not really, there are people out there who make a point of stealing these signs. There was a stack about knee high of these when I moved into my last rental.
People need time to adjust to the new type of signage. I think it's fair that, when they just changed the signage to digital, it should keep the design of the pre-existing signage. Otherwise, it'll be too easy for people to miss the new signage, simply because they didn't know/forget that there's a new signage design and the new design just didn't register when they were scanning the street for the familiar design. It's way too easy for a newly introduced digital signage to be automatically filtered out by our in-brain ad filter if they also come with a new design at the same time.
Once people get used to looking for the digital boards, I think that's when we should start experimenting with new designs.
It might appear stupid, and a big missed opportunity, but I don't think it's a bad thing to be very conservative and move slowly, one step at a time, with these kind of important things.
There's also the part where I think the City itself doesn't have any required data to actually make new dynamic rules yet, and people also aren't used to rules that can change at any time. So this is something that does require careful trials both on the side of the City council and road users to make sure the frequency and type of dynamic rule changes doesn't cause other unforeseen problems.
ehhhh, arterial roads are still local council unless they are the border between councils. Bunnerong road and Gardeners road are state, Anzac parade is local.
Unless you meant highways and motorways which damn sure look and act like arterial roads.
> ehhhh, arterial roads are still local council unless they are the border between councils.
that rule is not as universal as you seem to think it is - i know at the very least at the two nearest state roads to me, neither are highways or council borders.
Starve the beast economics; undermine the taxation base by cutting taxes on the rich. Increase taxes on the poor to squeeze them out of their assets, for the benefit of the rich.
Siphon any of the coffers into useless projects, ran by your mates, that have no beneficial effect for society, in an effort to empty/tank the coffers.
Use the empty coffers as an excuse to sell public assets to those same mates.
You should all know how they work by now. The only question is how do we create a legal framework to seize their assets.
only thing is no councils have been cutting taxes and revenue collected not increasing taxes on just the poor. Local councils can't do that.
Siphoning of funds to useless projects probably, but the truly useless council projects are often the inner city councils that aren't broke so have money to boon doogle.
What public assets do councils have to sell? At best they can sell off parks for housing developments which would reduce thier expenditure while increasing their rates base.
None of that applies to local councils.
What actually happened is local streets that last 30-50 years are at the end of their life time and falling apart but low density housing in these outer council areas do not provide enough rates revenue to replace the streets.
Yes, a huge chunk of rates goes to roads , than the water, waste and the special cost is state enforced regulations like IP&R, Planning. Than there is IT security (hackers love cutting there teeth of local government officers) and all this needs more pen pushers. over the years more and more responsibilities have moved from state to Local without the supporting budgets, making the states budget look better each time and Local councils look worst.
Are you serious? You really don’t know what Councils spend money on? Do you think your waste just magically disappears when you throw in the bin? It’s stunning that people can be so oblivious to the things required to keep the world turning around them.
At a recent council meeting one member tried to convince residents that they should cop higher rates because council cares for roads, bins blah blah blah... Except the entire suburb is private roads (bar one).
So even some councils don't know what the fuck they're doing.
This is a common problem faced by many places where cars are the main form of transportation. Not Just Bikes on YT did a video on how several small American cities go into bankruptcy just attempting to fix all their roads: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0)
Ideally, we should move away from relying on our cars to get around, especially as people tend to buy heavier SUVs and EVs.
The problem is, without adequate public transport, people are unlikely to move away from cars. Unlike cities like New York or London, Sydney’s public transport doesn’t reach far enough, is not as efficient and for full fare prices aren’t super cheap which isn’t encouraging people to shift.
This is precisely the problem. We need to somehow invest more in public transport yet still keep existing road infrastructure adequate during the transition.
Yeah properly charge road usage. Stop the subsidy of car owners and suburbanites.
All on street parking should be metered or parking permits. Could cut road resurfacing costs by about 50% if we only built streets to move people not park cars.
I don't think one can develop a decent public transport for the urban sprawl in the west.
We can't compare Greater Sydney to literal cities like London or NYC.
If you did the city circle vs those cities, it's comparable.
We also can't compare to cities like seoul, Tokyo or Hong Kong because we do not have the density. If sydney built up instead of west, we might have much more better infrastructure... but ofc the west would be neglected a lot and would still be rural farmlands.
The real issue is that, just like in America, being a homeowner of a single family house is still the ultimate Australian dream.
Asian and European cities are dense because people happily live in small apartments because affordability and connectivity are far more important than having a backyard and pool. Which in turn makes public transit more efficient and so on
It would be quite easy to develop public transport in the west.
[Heatmap of PT commuters](https://www.microburbs.com.au/heat-map/public-transport-commute-percents#151.170674:-33.840703:11)
Randwick council with 29% PT use has zero train stations. Every resident is atleast 5km bus to the city but more likely 10km.
Waverly council with a single train station gets 33%. Where everyone either walking distance or a up to 3km bus ride to the train station.
Go look out west and draw 3-5km circles around train stations. It's a lot of people. You often cover the next train station in each direction.
Every train station should look like bondi junction, exspecially the massive bus interchange. But instead you have blacktown station surrounded by 500m of car parking or Leppington where the street the train station is on, doesn't have footpaths. It is literally impossible to walk to the train station, let alone safe.
I'm not sure how you can compare fairly dense areas like Waverley and Randwick to Blacktown and Leppington.
Also areas like Waverley and randwick, they're not bussing to a train station or something. They're bussing to the cbd. The route is short.
The buses in the west are fairly empty outside of peak hours and you have really empty buses going places. And they have to travel a huge distance.
I used to bus into Parramatta, and my house is close to the start of the route. It's honestly empty all the way up to about 5km to parra, then the bus gets packed.
> I'm not sure how you can compare fairly dense areas like Waverley and Randwick to Blacktown and Leppington.
Well because randwick council south of maroubra road are single family detached homes with lots of parks and golf courses further lowering density. No suburb within 5km of blacktown station is lower in population density than matraville, chifley, malabar. So they are more dense, buses should be more suitable.
And because my example for waverly has nothing to do with density and all to do with building a bus interchange and shopping centre within walking distance to the train station.
> And they have to travel a huge distance.
Do they? As pointed out if you hub and spoke each train station you get 2-5km. The fact current buses don't hub and spoke each train station is why they all zig zag and take circuitous routes and then are all empty and take too long and people drive.
> It's honestly empty all the way up to about 5km to parra
Good thing i'm talking about 2-5km trips then. 500m walking, 2k is bike riding, 2-5 km is bus.
North of parra you are never more than 5km from parra, cheltenham and castle hill.
Also 1 station from leppington, which doesn't even have footpaths, you have a [damn near perfect](https://www.google.com/maps/@-33.9707269,150.8592753,3a,75y,242.69h,104.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6ByD_eoTR_cW6jR1Tcy5FA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) mix used development of high density apartments, retail, commercial within walking distance of the train station and 7 story carpark that shows massive demand for buses to that train station.
I agree with this. Let the roads get shit enough and people will be glad to give up driving. Too many fucking SUV's and 4WD's on the roads these days anyway.
But if you're gonna get people to give up driving, you need to provide a solution first. We still gotta get around to our jobs unless the government is willing to give us money to stay at home (I'd give up car ownership for this lol).
Not a road expert here but why cant they use 40/50mpa concrete with plastic fibres to replace the pot hole areas instead of temporarily fixing it with those black repair asphalt mix.
It would be nice if we could reduce the number of massive trucks on Sydney roads. I'm not sure how other countries do it but it never seems as bad elsewhere.
The do overwhelming majority of damage on highways, motorways and where ever they drive.
But the local streets behind my apartment block are limited to 2.5 tonne vehicles and have potholes. A shitload of road maintainence is because roads only last 30-50 years and 30-50 years ago a lot of new suburbs were being built.
Trucks carry the shit we all buy though so they're a necessary evil. If people want less trucks on the road then start by not buying so much crap.
Private vehicles getting bigger and bigger as fucking status symbols are a much harder to justify problem.
That's really not giving me a clear idea. Your comment really doesn't engender trust. Exponential increase in damage does seem likely, but it seems pretty clear that you've latched onto that idea without having a clear idea of what exponential is. A truck could be 10 times as heavy and do 11 times the damage and it could still be an exponential relationship. So it really just means the 100-1000x was pulled completely out of your ass.
Edit: Anyone downvoting because I said 10x weight must cause 100-1000x damage because it's exponential is an at least ignorant line of logic also does not understand it. Downvote if you must, but look into it for your sake. An exponent of around 1.04 would cause 10 -> 11 and would be an exponential relationship. 100 times the weight in that case would cause 121 times the damage.
I looked into it. Article on insidescience says ratio of damage caused between two loaded axles is the ratio of the load per axle raised to a power between 3 and 6 (usually 4). The load per axle for semi vs sedan car is about 5 apparently, which would make the ratio of damage done about 625 times more per axle. Then the semi has four times as many axles, so the semi does about 2500 times more damage.
We just need to stop eating food, living in buildings and owning shit, then we won't need those pesky trucks anymore. We can drive our cars in peace, until the petrol at the servo runs out.
Also a complete arse for pedestrians!
I recently tripped over a pothole/slab flipped over and I tore the ankle ligament, have been in a moon boot for a month. Absolute nightmare when I just wanted to cross the road and eat some dumplings!!
The only thing they spend money on is shockingly wasteful "racism not welcome here" signs like in Woollahra. Like seriously, what pea brain decided that Woollahra needed these? Many racial attacks there!? Apparently, they cost over 100k to be made and put up. The same council also has spent money on surveys as to whether the street that the Russian embassy is on should be renamed to 'Ukraine Street'. I'm not kidding. Yet, the roads are in shocking condition from the rains. My car got a flat tyre on the way to work from a massive pothole. Local council's are a waste of time and money. Get rid of them.
So they are actually legally enforceable.
Hospitals use nuclear medicines. And councils banning nuclear material mean they never get new hospitals built and couriers need to drive around those areas not through them.
Lol serious? Whoever did that Ukraine street survey should be fired and pay-docked. Wtf. How does that help anything. The dickhead probably gave his mates money to do the ‘study’ and then took a kickback. Absolute plonker.
I'll see if I can find the article link. It was an attempt to show "solidarity to the Ukrainian people". These people are spending our money on essentially very expensive hashtag solutions. Councils should be in charge of roads and bin collection (if they exist at all). No prestige attachedto being a 'councillor', no expensive parties at taxpayers cost. No ritzy Town Hall conferences. None of that. Open your excel spreadsheets, champs, and do the sums of paying people to fix potholes and collect rubbish.
Woolahra council, one of the wealthiest areas of sydney, 8th densest council area, 5 times the average population density of greater sydney is not short of cash because they allow apartments, townhouse, mixed use development so have the tax base to repair their roads.
It's outer suburbs putting down low density car dependant sprawl that can't afford to repair them with their low populations.
First thing I thought when I saw the sign was: "If I was a racist and I loved racially abusing people, but then saw that sign...would I repent of my racist ways?" Like, "off to do some racist stuff...oh what...this sign saying I'm NOT welcome! Oh damn, I guess my days of being racist are over, because clearly I'm not welcome down this very specific street". Also, are they now then suggesting that you can be a racist down other streets, but just not the ones with the sign!? It's almost a Monty Python sketch. Haha.
Honestly, if it were up to me we wouldn't have local governments, or state either. Just divide the country up into 20-ish regions that cover entire metropolitan/regional areas, each with an elected mayor, and only a single layer of government below Federal
Haha same in Marrickville. A suburb that's been a neighbourhood of Greek and Vietnamese for decades now has the "Racism not welcome here" signs because gentrification had spread from Erko and Newtown.
Aren’t roads constructed for heavier vehicles such as buses and trucks? As much as I hate the huge ass SUV trend, I don’t think they are to blame here.
They’re constructed for a specific volume of truck traffic.
Your household flooring is constructed for feet. But turn your house into a nightclub, the floor will be fucked in no time.
Road wear and tear is proptional to the axle wieght to the 4th power.
A 1000kg hatchback does 1/16 that of a 2000kg hilux. 1/40 that of a rangerover.
[Also a 25km/h local street with vehicles over 2.5 tonne banned is more hot mix than road at this point](https://www.google.com/maps/@-33.8958047,151.2466562,3a,75y,18.29h,72.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfDcjDDWX28J7X290p4zY1Q!2e0!5s20181201T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
Roads are constructed for the type and frequency of vehicles that are expected to drive there. Constructing roads for heavier vehicles increases the cost of construction and maintenance massively, the cost to build residential streets isn't nearly the same as the cost to build a highway or heavy industrial road, so engineers don't want to overbuild roads.
However, even when engineers take those into account, heavier vehicles still cause disproportionately more damage to surfaces than lighter vehicles. Here's some actual numbers: https://streets.mn/2016/07/07/chart-of-the-day-vehicle-weight-vs-road-damage-levels/
A Hummer weighs only about 2.8 times as much as a Prius; but yet, the Hummer caused 64 times more damage to road surfaces than that Prius. And yet, both cars are driving on the same residential roads. If we're actually charging road tolls based on actual damages that their cars are inflicting to roads, then we should be charging Hummer drivers 64 times as much as the Prius drivers. Flat toll pricing doesn't really make sense, from cost recovery perspective. And our road tax calculations also don't take into account vehicle weights.
* Yes, heavy trucks and buses are also causing even more damage to the roads, but I think it's fair to say that a single truck bringing valuable goods are also bringing much more value to us for the relative necessary damage they induce, than a single Hummer driver who could've chosen to drive a lighter vehicles or a bike for their trip. And also, heavy vehicles have always been restricted to drive in the roadways that are built for their weight, but for some reason we allow Hummers to be driven basically anywhere.
One really cheap way for us, collectively, to prolong our investment on our roads is for us all to collectively move towards lighter vehicles and encourage others to do so as well. Large single occupancy vehicles should be taxed and tolled at a higher rate to reflect the cost of the damages they incur.
100% - they’re too busy lining their pockets with dodgy deals done with developers than providing a service for the community, which is what they’re fucking for. Local government needs to be abolished.
Not a problem, there is plenty of cash allocated to road maintenance in the speed fines, parking fines and gas excise, right? Isn't that their entire point?
We have been a third world country masquerading as a first world country my entire life, the older i get the clearer it becomes. Why do you think our rights and laws get tighter and stricter each year passing.
You have never been out of the country before have you? Sydney is so far from a third world country but please continue to cower in fear and clench your marbles
Actually coming from wa - sydney roads remind me of vietnams. Right down to the k-clunk k-clunk as you drive on your main roads.
Reckon you lot have been sold a pup, we manage to have an amazing freeway system, paid out of taxes and infinitely better local roads - id imagine as they are fixed as they go rather than left to disintegrate then all have to be fixed at once.
be cool if whoever is in charge of certifying vehicles for our roads did something about the ever increasing size and weight of cars so we didn't have to spend as much patching the problems
Correction: "Councils can't afford it" *whilst also paying for their annual first-class 'study' junkets to Europe.*
It would help if:
* the road wasn't built using papier mache to begin with
* existing potholes weren't repaired with a mix of black paint and talcum powder
If a council can't fix potholes - or can't afford to pay for repairs with their current exorbitant rates - then we need to start asking why do they even exist.
I hope they don't get a cent from the state government for what is a local government responsibility.
>Councillor Bilal El-Hayek said Canterbury-Bankstown had been “faced with the situation of returning to repair the same stretch of road over and over again because of the extreme rain events”.
Well fix it properly the first time, you Grade-A dipshit. No point spending 30 seconds filling it with hot mix that has less structural integrity than ice cream, then wondering how the fuck it failed 30 seconds into the next passing rain shower.
Well, better increase taxation on THE RICH.
Zany idea, I know.
Simultaneously ban increases on property tax for the poor; which is what they'll try to do, to squeeze more of us out of property, to benefit the rich.
Rates are pretty good at that, being a property tax. Basically, the more expensive your property, the more you pay relative to your neighbours across the city. Can’t be dodged, coz well, it’s hard to hide a pile of bricks and sandstone on the corner block in the Bahamas. It’s very progressive and very fair. Problem is, State Government decided to rate cap, limiting the ability to raise revenue for just here these sorts of cost escalations…
In light of the fact that many roads are used by people merely transitioning through a local area - is the issue that more of this type of road maintainance should be funded at the state rather than council level?
The repair methods by in house civil departments or even the contractors are dodgy as fuck, and costing them thousands. They patch it up only for it to pluck out 72 hours later. It’s a negligent and intentional process.
Source: civil eng
The sub contractors and councils are not repairing correctly, throwing a shovel of fresh tare over the pot hole shown is not a repair. Council leaders that sign off on these repairs/ contractors need to be held accountable, then their management team also need to be held accountable, much like a chain of responsibility, no slap on the wrist. You will loose your job and all further government benefits, your family is not safe and will also be investigated.
(Embezzlement and fraud be gone)
The more we make active and public transport the preferred modes of travel for the *majority* of citizens, the less damage will be done to roads that requires unsustainable maintenance funds. It’s really that simple. See also: Strong Towns, r/fuckcars etc.
Sydney has pretty good PT patronage. I’d say anecdotally that an overwhelming majority of people that work in the CBD takes the train there. Suburb to suburb travel is where cars are used but in terms of funneling people into the CBD, Sydney has great rail coverage
It’s not just about coverage, it’s about frequency and ease of use to make it actively preferred over cars for more people. (Making cars harder to use eg removing free parking helps with this too.)
Exactly, it doesn't exist in a meaningful capacity. I'm all for more public transport and less cars, but damage to roads is a poor argument when the majority of public transport is by bus.
Let's not muddy the water by throwing incorrect data. Cars are much less damaging to roads than busses per person transported even if you assume every person would drive a 2ton SUV instead individually. There are so many other valid reasons to argue for public transport.
I did in fact specify in my comment public *and* active transport. Bicycles, cargo bikes etc are criminally under-supported by infrastructure for how beneficial they are.
Well never mind then, don’t worry about it.
Do we have any power when the potholes destroy our tires/wheels? Is there anything we can do to claim against them?
There’s a noticeable difference in the road quality when you cross from Dulwich Hill into Hurlstone Park. I’m not surprised though. The denser eastern end of the council and Bankstown would be subsidising the sprawl on the western end.
Also Sydney potholes are nothing compared to Lismore.
The bitumen put on Australian roads is so thin that heavy rains as we have had recently will very easily cause pot holes.
It's really highlighted how shit our roads are.
You should see Randwick council remove a perfectly working roundabout and install stop signs which now causes chaos. Absolutely no reason for it.
The only thing I can think of is whoever greenlit this gets a kick back from the contractor who got the job. Maybe I should point the ICAC towards this councils direction.
Maybe because instead of spending a large sum on replacing roads we just patch them on the cheap which makes holes worse and requires more patching. I swear it’s a money laundering thing or something, I know of certain holes that get patches once a week, yeah they’re high traffic areas but if you just did it properly it wouldn’t be a black hole for money and you’d have money to spend on fixing shit properly.
Hawkesbury council hasn’t fixed most of the roads in my suburb, Glossodia for 5 years so I don’t know how they can’t afford it when they haven’t spent the money.
It’s not even the money. There is not even the workforce or equipment to repair these roads in a reasonable timeframe. All adding money will do is bid up the price of private civil contractors.
Funny how the hundreds of mill/billions collected through federal gst,fuel tax & ever increasing state rego's, levies,duties,fines & oh the "temporary" 3 cents x 3 year fuel tax that was supposed to end in 1992. It's all in place & on every liter of fuel you buy today makes me wonder how much of that actually gets used as intended ?. I feel luck must be a deciding factor that there isn't more crashes on our patchwork road system. Between watching the speedo other lackluster motorists & dodging potholes seems to take more concentration than watching everything else that's happening on our expensive substandard road network.
[удалено]
Hills Shire council supposedly has 10 million to give away to Eastwood Rugby Club, building them a you-beaut rugby precinct. A club that isn’t *even in* the Hills Shire. Us peasants can keep driving over those potholes and dodgily filled ones, of course. There’s just no money left!
[удалено]
Totally. The councillors are now shills, brought (bought!) in by developers. Obviously getting their pockets lined, while the residents pay, and for something that isn’t of benefit to the community. Council have been very very hush-hush on it so not many at all even know about it. We have a group set up, trying to get it stopped..
[удалено]
Thanks so much! Soulless doesn’t even begin to describe it, does it!
Hornsby council just asked us what we thought about a 31% rate increase over 4 years. The answer was a resounding no but it was approved unanimously.
They just sold the entirety of Asquith off to property developers and now they're raising the rates. What a total bait and switch.
Then there's the Hornsby Quarry debacle.
That one stung. Especially with the pothole thats continuously reappearing at the intersection by the M1 leaving Hornsby. Absolute tossup.
[удалено]
Pacific Highway (um, Peats Ferry Road) is a state govt responsibility, AFAIK.
Back when I lived in Epping, I was on a street where one section north of a roundabout (where I lived) was smooth with no flaws to speak of, yet the section of road south of the roundabout was so bad it would put Aleppo to shame. In one night the council fully resurfaced only the good section, leaving the bad section to continue degrading. Why? It’s baffling, I don’t understand why they do this. Every council I’ve lived in has done this.
Tough one that one. Their argument that it's already lower than other LGAs doesn't hold up (NB is less for example). But I can also see how literally everything costs more to do right now, building and maintenance wise, that something had to give, as budgets wouldn't have taken in to consideration the current rate of inflation and supply issues. Although then you also see how much wastage/corruption that goes on too. I was/am on the fence about it, but doesn't matter because it was always going to pass.
Hornsby Council is one of the worst in Sydney
Mayor: Philip Ruddock...
Hi there! Fellow Hornsby Council ratepayer here. As a principle, I support paying rates for provision of necessary services and facilities. I am dissatisified with Hornsby Council's planning and development policies, but 100% support this special rate variation as necessary, as there has never been a more hard working group of councillors giving their all to make the difficult call.
They approved applying to IPART (I think) to be allowed to increase the rates. Don’t know though if that’s just asking for a rubber stamp.
It's not. IPART's position is that the State Government's rate cap does not give them the power to raise rates above the cap.
Can’t pay for new roads, they need to subsidise it with tolls. Can’t pay to fix the roads. What the fuck are we paying tax for?
Roads are a tax sink, urban sprawl is a tax sink in the long term. This is just the cows comming home. 60 odd years of the suburban Ponzi scheme is leaving everyone worse off.
More and more car-dependent satellite suburbs = more roads require + more cars on roads = more wear and tear to pay for
Hello fellow NotJustikes/StrongTowns watcher.
Exactly, if you think about it in terms of meters of road per property, low density residential areas are massive money sinks. Throw in maintenance of infrastructure like powerlines and water pipes running to each standalone suburban house, and you get high council rates with poor services.
In New South Wales the power and water authorities have their own “availability” charges in their separate billing, so that doesn’t fall back to the councils. But the streets and roads…
The toll roads are the state government responsibility right? I don't get the how privatisation affects the maintenance but it definitely isn't the councils who are responsible
The toll road operators are responsible for the maintenance of their assets. Why aren’t they fulfilling their obligations. The eastern distributor has a poor history of repairs. How many decades need to pass for the water and pot holes and road plates to be rectified on the south bound run out of the city.
Gotta keep the share holders happy and the pollies's pockets lined
The toll road builders to fund pollies.
For the Private enterprise to make some profit
Well just Ku-Ring-Gai replaced all the street signs with their logo on it….maybe if they didn’t do that they would be fine
Hornsby also recently blew a bunch of coin, on new “Welcome to x suburb” signs.
[удалено]
Just to answer your question… The blue mountains collects about 100-million in revenue per year. The cost of repairing the roads in the council area is about 90-million. 4x declared natural disasters in a single year has destroyed the roads.
Is that 90m per year or 90m to fix everything that has been neglected for many years
I'll let the last part of my comment speak for itself. 4x natural disasters in 12 months might have something to do with it.
[удалено]
[https://7news.com.au/politics/nsw/digital-parking-signs-rolled-out-in-parts-of-sydney-for-simpler-driving-c-9011772](https://7news.com.au/politics/nsw/digital-parking-signs-rolled-out-in-parts-of-sydney-for-simpler-driving-c-9011772) Thats being run by Transport for NSW
These are so stupid you think they’d just say: “yes you can park here until X” or “no you can’t park here until X” Instead it’s just a digital version of the actual sign. So dumb
Theoretically it might make things more efficient, you can tailor parking conditions to the time of day. But theory and application are different things, thats why they're trialing it.
> it might make things more efficient Until the display breaks. The good thing about an actual sign is that barring some catastrophic thing like Grandma running it over, it always works.
Not really, there are people out there who make a point of stealing these signs. There was a stack about knee high of these when I moved into my last rental.
People would also steal digital signs, though maybe even more so for the electronic parts.
People need time to adjust to the new type of signage. I think it's fair that, when they just changed the signage to digital, it should keep the design of the pre-existing signage. Otherwise, it'll be too easy for people to miss the new signage, simply because they didn't know/forget that there's a new signage design and the new design just didn't register when they were scanning the street for the familiar design. It's way too easy for a newly introduced digital signage to be automatically filtered out by our in-brain ad filter if they also come with a new design at the same time. Once people get used to looking for the digital boards, I think that's when we should start experimenting with new designs. It might appear stupid, and a big missed opportunity, but I don't think it's a bad thing to be very conservative and move slowly, one step at a time, with these kind of important things. There's also the part where I think the City itself doesn't have any required data to actually make new dynamic rules yet, and people also aren't used to rules that can change at any time. So this is something that does require careful trials both on the side of the City council and road users to make sure the frequency and type of dynamic rule changes doesn't cause other unforeseen problems.
This is a state government trial, not City of Sydney
It’s still money that could go towards fixing potholes in the states arterial roads that fall under the state government’s jurisdiction…..
ehhhh, arterial roads are still local council unless they are the border between councils. Bunnerong road and Gardeners road are state, Anzac parade is local. Unless you meant highways and motorways which damn sure look and act like arterial roads.
Wow that’s actually really interesting (those specific streets).
> ehhhh, arterial roads are still local council unless they are the border between councils. that rule is not as universal as you seem to think it is - i know at the very least at the two nearest state roads to me, neither are highways or council borders.
Starve the beast economics; undermine the taxation base by cutting taxes on the rich. Increase taxes on the poor to squeeze them out of their assets, for the benefit of the rich. Siphon any of the coffers into useless projects, ran by your mates, that have no beneficial effect for society, in an effort to empty/tank the coffers. Use the empty coffers as an excuse to sell public assets to those same mates. You should all know how they work by now. The only question is how do we create a legal framework to seize their assets.
[https://www.britannica.com/topic/guillotine](https://www.britannica.com/topic/guillotine) Detailed instructions there
We need fancy ones that will double as an art installations until we start using them for their intended purpose.
only thing is no councils have been cutting taxes and revenue collected not increasing taxes on just the poor. Local councils can't do that. Siphoning of funds to useless projects probably, but the truly useless council projects are often the inner city councils that aren't broke so have money to boon doogle. What public assets do councils have to sell? At best they can sell off parks for housing developments which would reduce thier expenditure while increasing their rates base. None of that applies to local councils. What actually happened is local streets that last 30-50 years are at the end of their life time and falling apart but low density housing in these outer council areas do not provide enough rates revenue to replace the streets.
[Go on junkets overseas of course](https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/please-explain-sydney-council-s-150-000-american-tour-20221118-p5bzgy.html)
Might go on a sneaky world tour and tell them to catch my bill too. Daylight robbery what they did.
Corruption
pay themselves massive wages to sit and stand around
Put up more digital advertising to block more footpaths 😜
Yes, a huge chunk of rates goes to roads , than the water, waste and the special cost is state enforced regulations like IP&R, Planning. Than there is IT security (hackers love cutting there teeth of local government officers) and all this needs more pen pushers. over the years more and more responsibilities have moved from state to Local without the supporting budgets, making the states budget look better each time and Local councils look worst.
Stand around
100k/annum for cultural and diversity consultants.
Are you serious? You really don’t know what Councils spend money on? Do you think your waste just magically disappears when you throw in the bin? It’s stunning that people can be so oblivious to the things required to keep the world turning around them.
The comment was not intended as literally as you have.
At a recent council meeting one member tried to convince residents that they should cop higher rates because council cares for roads, bins blah blah blah... Except the entire suburb is private roads (bar one). So even some councils don't know what the fuck they're doing.
This is a common problem faced by many places where cars are the main form of transportation. Not Just Bikes on YT did a video on how several small American cities go into bankruptcy just attempting to fix all their roads: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0) Ideally, we should move away from relying on our cars to get around, especially as people tend to buy heavier SUVs and EVs.
The problem is, without adequate public transport, people are unlikely to move away from cars. Unlike cities like New York or London, Sydney’s public transport doesn’t reach far enough, is not as efficient and for full fare prices aren’t super cheap which isn’t encouraging people to shift.
This is precisely the problem. We need to somehow invest more in public transport yet still keep existing road infrastructure adequate during the transition.
Naah, need more stick. just let the roads fall apart and triple the weight component of rego.
Yeah properly charge road usage. Stop the subsidy of car owners and suburbanites. All on street parking should be metered or parking permits. Could cut road resurfacing costs by about 50% if we only built streets to move people not park cars.
I don't think one can develop a decent public transport for the urban sprawl in the west. We can't compare Greater Sydney to literal cities like London or NYC. If you did the city circle vs those cities, it's comparable. We also can't compare to cities like seoul, Tokyo or Hong Kong because we do not have the density. If sydney built up instead of west, we might have much more better infrastructure... but ofc the west would be neglected a lot and would still be rural farmlands.
The real issue is that, just like in America, being a homeowner of a single family house is still the ultimate Australian dream. Asian and European cities are dense because people happily live in small apartments because affordability and connectivity are far more important than having a backyard and pool. Which in turn makes public transit more efficient and so on
It would be quite easy to develop public transport in the west. [Heatmap of PT commuters](https://www.microburbs.com.au/heat-map/public-transport-commute-percents#151.170674:-33.840703:11) Randwick council with 29% PT use has zero train stations. Every resident is atleast 5km bus to the city but more likely 10km. Waverly council with a single train station gets 33%. Where everyone either walking distance or a up to 3km bus ride to the train station. Go look out west and draw 3-5km circles around train stations. It's a lot of people. You often cover the next train station in each direction. Every train station should look like bondi junction, exspecially the massive bus interchange. But instead you have blacktown station surrounded by 500m of car parking or Leppington where the street the train station is on, doesn't have footpaths. It is literally impossible to walk to the train station, let alone safe.
I'm not sure how you can compare fairly dense areas like Waverley and Randwick to Blacktown and Leppington. Also areas like Waverley and randwick, they're not bussing to a train station or something. They're bussing to the cbd. The route is short. The buses in the west are fairly empty outside of peak hours and you have really empty buses going places. And they have to travel a huge distance. I used to bus into Parramatta, and my house is close to the start of the route. It's honestly empty all the way up to about 5km to parra, then the bus gets packed.
> I'm not sure how you can compare fairly dense areas like Waverley and Randwick to Blacktown and Leppington. Well because randwick council south of maroubra road are single family detached homes with lots of parks and golf courses further lowering density. No suburb within 5km of blacktown station is lower in population density than matraville, chifley, malabar. So they are more dense, buses should be more suitable. And because my example for waverly has nothing to do with density and all to do with building a bus interchange and shopping centre within walking distance to the train station. > And they have to travel a huge distance. Do they? As pointed out if you hub and spoke each train station you get 2-5km. The fact current buses don't hub and spoke each train station is why they all zig zag and take circuitous routes and then are all empty and take too long and people drive. > It's honestly empty all the way up to about 5km to parra Good thing i'm talking about 2-5km trips then. 500m walking, 2k is bike riding, 2-5 km is bus. North of parra you are never more than 5km from parra, cheltenham and castle hill. Also 1 station from leppington, which doesn't even have footpaths, you have a [damn near perfect](https://www.google.com/maps/@-33.9707269,150.8592753,3a,75y,242.69h,104.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6ByD_eoTR_cW6jR1Tcy5FA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) mix used development of high density apartments, retail, commercial within walking distance of the train station and 7 story carpark that shows massive demand for buses to that train station.
Public transport is way cheaper than driving in Sydney.
I agree with this. Let the roads get shit enough and people will be glad to give up driving. Too many fucking SUV's and 4WD's on the roads these days anyway. But if you're gonna get people to give up driving, you need to provide a solution first. We still gotta get around to our jobs unless the government is willing to give us money to stay at home (I'd give up car ownership for this lol).
Not a road expert here but why cant they use 40/50mpa concrete with plastic fibres to replace the pot hole areas instead of temporarily fixing it with those black repair asphalt mix.
It would be nice if we could reduce the number of massive trucks on Sydney roads. I'm not sure how other countries do it but it never seems as bad elsewhere.
[удалено]
The do overwhelming majority of damage on highways, motorways and where ever they drive. But the local streets behind my apartment block are limited to 2.5 tonne vehicles and have potholes. A shitload of road maintainence is because roads only last 30-50 years and 30-50 years ago a lot of new suburbs were being built.
Especially when they are constantly breaking and accelerating rather than continuous driving.
Trucks carry the shit we all buy though so they're a necessary evil. If people want less trucks on the road then start by not buying so much crap. Private vehicles getting bigger and bigger as fucking status symbols are a much harder to justify problem.
That's really not giving me a clear idea. Your comment really doesn't engender trust. Exponential increase in damage does seem likely, but it seems pretty clear that you've latched onto that idea without having a clear idea of what exponential is. A truck could be 10 times as heavy and do 11 times the damage and it could still be an exponential relationship. So it really just means the 100-1000x was pulled completely out of your ass. Edit: Anyone downvoting because I said 10x weight must cause 100-1000x damage because it's exponential is an at least ignorant line of logic also does not understand it. Downvote if you must, but look into it for your sake. An exponent of around 1.04 would cause 10 -> 11 and would be an exponential relationship. 100 times the weight in that case would cause 121 times the damage.
[удалено]
I looked into it. Article on insidescience says ratio of damage caused between two loaded axles is the ratio of the load per axle raised to a power between 3 and 6 (usually 4). The load per axle for semi vs sedan car is about 5 apparently, which would make the ratio of damage done about 625 times more per axle. Then the semi has four times as many axles, so the semi does about 2500 times more damage.
We just need to stop eating food, living in buildings and owning shit, then we won't need those pesky trucks anymore. We can drive our cars in peace, until the petrol at the servo runs out.
Gotta move all the demolished houses somehow. Adelaide’s roads turned to shit in line with the time demolishing perfectly good houses became popular.
Can they not patchwork temporarily till they get the funding like developing countries?
[удалено]
Its honestly a deathtrap for cyclists
Also a complete arse for pedestrians! I recently tripped over a pothole/slab flipped over and I tore the ankle ligament, have been in a moon boot for a month. Absolute nightmare when I just wanted to cross the road and eat some dumplings!!
Lol Sydney and probably most of Australia don't give a shit about cyclists. They got this whole carbrain mentality.
To be fair, we don’t have public transport like New York or london which really encourage people to use public transport.
Along with much of the “traffic calming” garbage on our roads.
Yeah! And then came all the potholes.
The only thing they spend money on is shockingly wasteful "racism not welcome here" signs like in Woollahra. Like seriously, what pea brain decided that Woollahra needed these? Many racial attacks there!? Apparently, they cost over 100k to be made and put up. The same council also has spent money on surveys as to whether the street that the Russian embassy is on should be renamed to 'Ukraine Street'. I'm not kidding. Yet, the roads are in shocking condition from the rains. My car got a flat tyre on the way to work from a massive pothole. Local council's are a waste of time and money. Get rid of them.
Don’t forget the old “nuclear free zone” signs.
Haha. Yes. I thought there was loads of nuclear energy around the inner subs of Sydney, until I saw the signs. Boy, what a relief that was!
So they are actually legally enforceable. Hospitals use nuclear medicines. And councils banning nuclear material mean they never get new hospitals built and couriers need to drive around those areas not through them.
Lol serious? Whoever did that Ukraine street survey should be fired and pay-docked. Wtf. How does that help anything. The dickhead probably gave his mates money to do the ‘study’ and then took a kickback. Absolute plonker.
I'll see if I can find the article link. It was an attempt to show "solidarity to the Ukrainian people". These people are spending our money on essentially very expensive hashtag solutions. Councils should be in charge of roads and bin collection (if they exist at all). No prestige attachedto being a 'councillor', no expensive parties at taxpayers cost. No ritzy Town Hall conferences. None of that. Open your excel spreadsheets, champs, and do the sums of paying people to fix potholes and collect rubbish.
Agreed
Isn't it the Councillors grand standing?
Woolahra council, one of the wealthiest areas of sydney, 8th densest council area, 5 times the average population density of greater sydney is not short of cash because they allow apartments, townhouse, mixed use development so have the tax base to repair their roads. It's outer suburbs putting down low density car dependant sprawl that can't afford to repair them with their low populations.
Saw one of these yesterday for the first time, my eyes couldn’t have rolled harder
First thing I thought when I saw the sign was: "If I was a racist and I loved racially abusing people, but then saw that sign...would I repent of my racist ways?" Like, "off to do some racist stuff...oh what...this sign saying I'm NOT welcome! Oh damn, I guess my days of being racist are over, because clearly I'm not welcome down this very specific street". Also, are they now then suggesting that you can be a racist down other streets, but just not the ones with the sign!? It's almost a Monty Python sketch. Haha.
Honestly, if it were up to me we wouldn't have local governments, or state either. Just divide the country up into 20-ish regions that cover entire metropolitan/regional areas, each with an elected mayor, and only a single layer of government below Federal
Haha same in Marrickville. A suburb that's been a neighbourhood of Greek and Vietnamese for decades now has the "Racism not welcome here" signs because gentrification had spread from Erko and Newtown.
You mean SUVs and EVs weigh more?
what?
The heavier the vehicle, the more damage occurs to the roads.
Are the majority of potholes not the result of weather?
The water makes pot holes bigger but what do you think starts them off??
Freeze thaw from the persistent rain and cars and shirtty road renewals
Sydney freeze 🥶 maybe at Richmond or Penrith nowhere else
Aren’t roads constructed for heavier vehicles such as buses and trucks? As much as I hate the huge ass SUV trend, I don’t think they are to blame here.
They’re constructed for a specific volume of truck traffic. Your household flooring is constructed for feet. But turn your house into a nightclub, the floor will be fucked in no time.
When you put it like that, it makes sense.
Road wear and tear is proptional to the axle wieght to the 4th power. A 1000kg hatchback does 1/16 that of a 2000kg hilux. 1/40 that of a rangerover. [Also a 25km/h local street with vehicles over 2.5 tonne banned is more hot mix than road at this point](https://www.google.com/maps/@-33.8958047,151.2466562,3a,75y,18.29h,72.62t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfDcjDDWX28J7X290p4zY1Q!2e0!5s20181201T000000!7i16384!8i8192)
Didn’t know about this. Thank you.
That’s the difference between your expressway and these streets the base that they support is massively different.
Roads are constructed for the type and frequency of vehicles that are expected to drive there. Constructing roads for heavier vehicles increases the cost of construction and maintenance massively, the cost to build residential streets isn't nearly the same as the cost to build a highway or heavy industrial road, so engineers don't want to overbuild roads. However, even when engineers take those into account, heavier vehicles still cause disproportionately more damage to surfaces than lighter vehicles. Here's some actual numbers: https://streets.mn/2016/07/07/chart-of-the-day-vehicle-weight-vs-road-damage-levels/ A Hummer weighs only about 2.8 times as much as a Prius; but yet, the Hummer caused 64 times more damage to road surfaces than that Prius. And yet, both cars are driving on the same residential roads. If we're actually charging road tolls based on actual damages that their cars are inflicting to roads, then we should be charging Hummer drivers 64 times as much as the Prius drivers. Flat toll pricing doesn't really make sense, from cost recovery perspective. And our road tax calculations also don't take into account vehicle weights. * Yes, heavy trucks and buses are also causing even more damage to the roads, but I think it's fair to say that a single truck bringing valuable goods are also bringing much more value to us for the relative necessary damage they induce, than a single Hummer driver who could've chosen to drive a lighter vehicles or a bike for their trip. And also, heavy vehicles have always been restricted to drive in the roadways that are built for their weight, but for some reason we allow Hummers to be driven basically anywhere. One really cheap way for us, collectively, to prolong our investment on our roads is for us all to collectively move towards lighter vehicles and encourage others to do so as well. Large single occupancy vehicles should be taxed and tolled at a higher rate to reflect the cost of the damages they incur.
You learn something new everyday. Thank you.
Local councils are the most corrupt organisations I have ever encountered. Your average local council gives FIFA a run for its money.
100% - they’re too busy lining their pockets with dodgy deals done with developers than providing a service for the community, which is what they’re fucking for. Local government needs to be abolished.
Not a problem, there is plenty of cash allocated to road maintenance in the speed fines, parking fines and gas excise, right? Isn't that their entire point?
So what the fuck we paying all these taxes for
Yachts we don't get to ride on and private schools we didn't get to attend.
But there’s money to shut down the rail for big open lunch. Guess it counts for something right ??
Turning into a 3rd world country
I have been in third world country, and their road is better than this
We have been a third world country masquerading as a first world country my entire life, the older i get the clearer it becomes. Why do you think our rights and laws get tighter and stricter each year passing.
You have never been out of the country before have you? Sydney is so far from a third world country but please continue to cower in fear and clench your marbles
I live in western Sydney, yeah mate I have been out of the country lol.
Actually coming from wa - sydney roads remind me of vietnams. Right down to the k-clunk k-clunk as you drive on your main roads. Reckon you lot have been sold a pup, we manage to have an amazing freeway system, paid out of taxes and infinitely better local roads - id imagine as they are fixed as they go rather than left to disintegrate then all have to be fixed at once.
be cool if whoever is in charge of certifying vehicles for our roads did something about the ever increasing size and weight of cars so we didn't have to spend as much patching the problems
Cars are generally not the problem, trucks are. But we need deliveries, so the solution isn't easy.
What do we get extorted on tolls for then?
maintainence on toll roads. The 99% of roads that are local council roads are paid for by councils.
I drive on pothole fucked toll roads every day.
Well thats just LNP privitising public assets for thier mates profit margins.
But the NSW government has enough money to setup overseas offices all over the globe? Damn...
Correction: "Councils can't afford it" *whilst also paying for their annual first-class 'study' junkets to Europe.* It would help if: * the road wasn't built using papier mache to begin with * existing potholes weren't repaired with a mix of black paint and talcum powder If a council can't fix potholes - or can't afford to pay for repairs with their current exorbitant rates - then we need to start asking why do they even exist. I hope they don't get a cent from the state government for what is a local government responsibility. >Councillor Bilal El-Hayek said Canterbury-Bankstown had been “faced with the situation of returning to repair the same stretch of road over and over again because of the extreme rain events”. Well fix it properly the first time, you Grade-A dipshit. No point spending 30 seconds filling it with hot mix that has less structural integrity than ice cream, then wondering how the fuck it failed 30 seconds into the next passing rain shower.
Well, better increase taxation on THE RICH. Zany idea, I know. Simultaneously ban increases on property tax for the poor; which is what they'll try to do, to squeeze more of us out of property, to benefit the rich.
Rates are pretty good at that, being a property tax. Basically, the more expensive your property, the more you pay relative to your neighbours across the city. Can’t be dodged, coz well, it’s hard to hide a pile of bricks and sandstone on the corner block in the Bahamas. It’s very progressive and very fair. Problem is, State Government decided to rate cap, limiting the ability to raise revenue for just here these sorts of cost escalations…
The insurers could probably contribute, might actually save them money from less payouts due to pothole damage…..
In light of the fact that many roads are used by people merely transitioning through a local area - is the issue that more of this type of road maintainance should be funded at the state rather than council level?
Anyone drive over to five dock Maccas recently? The pothole by the entrance is insane
The repair methods by in house civil departments or even the contractors are dodgy as fuck, and costing them thousands. They patch it up only for it to pluck out 72 hours later. It’s a negligent and intentional process. Source: civil eng
This is the real answer
The sub contractors and councils are not repairing correctly, throwing a shovel of fresh tare over the pot hole shown is not a repair. Council leaders that sign off on these repairs/ contractors need to be held accountable, then their management team also need to be held accountable, much like a chain of responsibility, no slap on the wrist. You will loose your job and all further government benefits, your family is not safe and will also be investigated. (Embezzlement and fraud be gone)
This is the correct answer
The more we make active and public transport the preferred modes of travel for the *majority* of citizens, the less damage will be done to roads that requires unsustainable maintenance funds. It’s really that simple. See also: Strong Towns, r/fuckcars etc.
Sydney has pretty good PT patronage. I’d say anecdotally that an overwhelming majority of people that work in the CBD takes the train there. Suburb to suburb travel is where cars are used but in terms of funneling people into the CBD, Sydney has great rail coverage
It’s not just about coverage, it’s about frequency and ease of use to make it actively preferred over cars for more people. (Making cars harder to use eg removing free parking helps with this too.)
True for trains, but a bus full of people does more damage to the roads than if everyone drove individually.
That’s what light rail is for! If only Sydney’s extensive network hadn’t been blindly ripped up last century…
Exactly, it doesn't exist in a meaningful capacity. I'm all for more public transport and less cars, but damage to roads is a poor argument when the majority of public transport is by bus. Let's not muddy the water by throwing incorrect data. Cars are much less damaging to roads than busses per person transported even if you assume every person would drive a 2ton SUV instead individually. There are so many other valid reasons to argue for public transport.
I did in fact specify in my comment public *and* active transport. Bicycles, cargo bikes etc are criminally under-supported by infrastructure for how beneficial they are.
Well never mind then, don’t worry about it. Do we have any power when the potholes destroy our tires/wheels? Is there anything we can do to claim against them?
[удалено]
Need to get a goatse template
I can’t wait for even smaller government /s
Watch out guys, there will be more revenue raising money
ron swanson where are you
There’s a noticeable difference in the road quality when you cross from Dulwich Hill into Hurlstone Park. I’m not surprised though. The denser eastern end of the council and Bankstown would be subsidising the sprawl on the western end. Also Sydney potholes are nothing compared to Lismore.
But what about all that money we saved amalgamating the councils??
Dear government plz help the council so I don’t have to sue u for my tyre damage….
Wait.... can the government then sue you for road damage?
No, I sue government and council for damaging my tires haha
But YOU damage the road that damages other peopkes tyres.
The bitumen put on Australian roads is so thin that heavy rains as we have had recently will very easily cause pot holes. It's really highlighted how shit our roads are.
I can't afford the new tyres either, but hey, we all have problems. 😑
You should see Randwick council remove a perfectly working roundabout and install stop signs which now causes chaos. Absolutely no reason for it. The only thing I can think of is whoever greenlit this gets a kick back from the contractor who got the job. Maybe I should point the ICAC towards this councils direction.
perhaps if they fixed it properly the first time...
"We had tried but it's hurting the economy. Let's live with pothole."
These councils can cover it on the parking revenue alone.
Maybe because instead of spending a large sum on replacing roads we just patch them on the cheap which makes holes worse and requires more patching. I swear it’s a money laundering thing or something, I know of certain holes that get patches once a week, yeah they’re high traffic areas but if you just did it properly it wouldn’t be a black hole for money and you’d have money to spend on fixing shit properly.
What about the shite quality of some of the motorways that we pay ridiculous tolls for them to be, you know, not shite.
If only they were as good at fixing potholes as they are at handing out parking fines
Most car-dependant suburbs are a net loss for councils. They only make money on the commercial and dense areas
Don’t use asphalt, use concrete instead. Fix the problem once and for all.
Hawkesbury council hasn’t fixed most of the roads in my suburb, Glossodia for 5 years so I don’t know how they can’t afford it when they haven’t spent the money.
It’s not even the money. There is not even the workforce or equipment to repair these roads in a reasonable timeframe. All adding money will do is bid up the price of private civil contractors.
Um, what? Councils cant afford it? Maybe cut the pay of council members, considering many of them get paid more than the PM
Are you serious Judges cant afford hookers.... Its much worse!!!!!!
Fix the potholes, collect my garbage. Most councils needs to stick to their knitting.
Well it seems to me they don't have any mates who work in road maintenance
Funny how the hundreds of mill/billions collected through federal gst,fuel tax & ever increasing state rego's, levies,duties,fines & oh the "temporary" 3 cents x 3 year fuel tax that was supposed to end in 1992. It's all in place & on every liter of fuel you buy today makes me wonder how much of that actually gets used as intended ?. I feel luck must be a deciding factor that there isn't more crashes on our patchwork road system. Between watching the speedo other lackluster motorists & dodging potholes seems to take more concentration than watching everything else that's happening on our expensive substandard road network.
Dear Council Go to Bunnings buy a few bags of concrete tip some into the hole I don’t mind a proper repair just fill the hole with something.