Talk:New Zealand Cycle Trail

Waikato River Trails
Two things about the Waikato River Trails (WRT): 1) I've written an article about this Quick Start, and 2) It's incorrect that construction started in Nov 2009. They started construction many years ago. If that's what the Herald article said, then they got it wrong. The WRT website has the details.  Schwede 66  06:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Quick Starts
I think this article should have a section on the seven Quick Starts. I'll write it if I get to it. But if somebody wants to get going, that'll be good. The Ministry of Tourism website is a good start for this.  Schwede 66  06:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

New development
Some of today's announcements could be worked into the article:
 * http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1002/S00155.htm
 * http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/nga-haerenga-new-zealand-cycleway-takes-shape/5/38057
 * http://www.tourism.govt.nz/Our-Work/New-Zealand-Cycle-Trail-Project/

Map
Map should show all the trail locations that have opened since the top to bottom plan has since changed... --Grapeman4 (talk) 10:07, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that a map would be useful. However, there was never a top to bottom plan. That's what the media talked about, but it was never government's intention to create a path running the length of the country.  Schwede 66  17:27, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Intention to add an item to the beginning of "History" section
You may use external websites or publications as a source of information:-

This report was instrumental in forming the basis for approval of projects for government funding

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/resources/research/reports/274/docs/274-New-zealand-walking-and-cycling-strategies-best-practice.pdf

In July 2004 a report was commissioned by Land Transport New Zealand into best practices for cycling and walking strategies in NZ. Reference was made to local groups and overseas best practices and the reviewing existing strategies. In recent years a number of legislative and policy changes had been made in New Zealand New Zealand and walking and cycling projects were being actively encouraged.

To qualify for a Land Transport New Zealand subsidy a project must be either specifically or generically identified in a current strategy so it was important to get councils and local authorities to develop strategies.

This research project aimed to simplify the task of practitioners in developing the new strategies. LawrieM (talk) 03:36, 14 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Nah, that's not correct, . Not at all. RR274 is relevant when road controlling authorities apply for funding from NZTA. The NZ Cycle Trail did not get funded via NZTA but from the tourism budget, and it was mostly not road controlling authorities that applied for funding anyway. Hence RR274 was not a consideration.  Schwede 66  04:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

The NZ Cycle Trail wasn't an isolated project that just popped up from nowhere?. It was the result of an increasing interest in cycling by the public over time and a resulting increased interest by Government and Government Bodies. I think that this is a fair assessment of what happened - is it not? Who paid for what isn't so relevant ?

If the above summary is a fair assessment of what happened should "the report" not go into the History Section? I think it should. If you want to come up with something acceptable along those lines let's have a look at itLawrieM (talk) 23:56, 19 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Well, indeed, it was a project that popped up from nothing. As the article notes, it was a late addition to the items discussed at the 2009 job summit. What it doesn't say is the backstory: a couple of British tourists had a chat with a Kiwi about "wouldn't it be great to be able to ride the length of the country?". That Kiwi, an Auckland real estate agent, conveyed that concept to his mate John Key. And that was just prior to the job summit. That's how it came about, and I'm sure it's documented somewhere. It certainly was reported in the media at the time; only the Herald is still online from back then, though. There was absolutely zero planning by officials prior to the job summit. And it was the only initiative from that job summit that came to anything.
 * The project initially rested with the Ministry of Tourism and it was "vote tourism" (that's what government calls those items) that paid for it; the money did not come out of "vote transport". The project was later transferred to MBIE.
 * There are other pertinent bits that the article does not mention:
 * John Key made this happen within cabinet. He used his position as PM to push this through. His biggest detractors were Steven Joyce (who at the time was minister of transport) and Bill English (who at the time was minister of finance). I do not think that this is in the public domain, though.
 * The project was going really well. Coming up to the 2017 election, everyone expected that National would put another funding round forward as part of their election promises. That didn't happen because the public wasn't aware of the previous point (I don't think it leaked out of the party), and Key had resigned in December 2016. With Key gone, the project was dead within National. Again, this isn't in the public domain, other than its external effects.
 * What is in the public domain is that there was an MOU between National and the Greens on this project. Key and Kevin Hague had haggled that out. They worked together really well over a prolonged period.
 * Because it was going so well, Hague managed to talk Key into extending this primarily rural project into urban areas. That was the genesis of the Urban Cycleways Programme (UCP). That did get funded by the NZ Transport Agency. This made some serious cash available to city and district councils as you can read when you follow the link.
 * In some areas, the UCP was an extension of the rural projects, but mostly it was standalone.
 * I hope that's a helpful overview. Feel free to ask me what happened; I was part of the team tasked with making this happen. I'm not a WP:RS, though, it's just that my memory is still intact (I think).  Schwede 66  03:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)