Wellington Parking - They are about to clamp down on bike parking

[Hawkeye]

http://www.wellington.govt.nz/news/display-item.php?id=3614



100 new parks in the last year!. None of which are in the area where they are needed. Also If you do the maths (which they obviously haven't), with the increase in numbers of bikes on the road, they would need to provide an extra 170/year to meet the demand.

The very fact that bikes are being parked wherever there is space highlights that none of the 'new' 100 parks are where they are needed ie. in the CBD
Why would I ride past my place of work to go to the top of Willis street etc just to find an empty spot. The CBD is the location where they need to significantly increase the parking spaces.

I would also love to know where these private parking buildings are that cater for bikes.

[Jon Visser]

Hi all,

Yes, we are embarking on a campaign to address the parking habits of motorcycle and scooter riders in Wellington City. Unlike last time, we will not be jumping straight into a "zero tolerance" approach, but have first undertaken to install as many additional on-road spaces as we could and have now embarked on a media campaign to explain how (and where) best to park motorcycles.

Just some statistics to set the scene:
* In 2006 we accommodated about 450 motorcyclists in the CBD per day on 350 on-road spaces (for free) and the remainder parking off-road (i.e. we used to be able to cater for most).
* In 2009 we now have 1000 motorcyclists entering the CBD each day (and still growing rapidly), and have only been able to increase on-road parks to 450 spaces. Therefore more than half will now need to find off-road spaces. It is impossible to locate 550+ metres of additional kerbspace for motorcycle parks without adversely impacting on other road users.
* In comparison, Sydney has about 600 on-road spaces for about 4,500 motorcyclists (CBD).
* We will be using posters, newspaper articles, radio interviews and web pages to communicate to riders how they should be parking. No enforcement campaign will commence until we have had a reasonable opportunity to carry out this media campaign, and even then it will be limited to those who persistently continue to offend after receiving reasonable warning notices.
* We will also continue to review the availability and location of on-road spaces, but one fact that will remain is that there simply isn't the space available in Wellington City to accommodate all bikes like we used to.

To address some of the specific comments you have made made so far:
* 100 additional spaces were placed where we could accommodate them and admittedly not in the high-demand places where illegal parking occurs. However, given that these 100 additional spaces are almost 100% utilised, that is still a significant actual improvement for the riders that now use them.
* Parking buildings - I have just negotiated with most of the (commercial) parking buildings in Wellington City that they will now accomodate motorcycles. This provides riders with access to hundreds of additional parking spaces. Most will be available on a commercial basis (to cover the administrative costs for the security, cover and guaranteed availability of the space that they provide) but there are also a few off-road places that will accommodate bikes for free. Maps showing all appropriate public-access motorcycle parking locations in Wellington City will be provided to all riders parking in the CBD through leaflet drops over the next month, and I will post a URL when these are available on-line. There are also many private parking facilities that riders may be able to negotiate access to, especially if they want to park so close to their destination.

Realistically, as we can no longer provide free on-road spaces for all motorcyclists to use, and we would like to have some empty spaces available during the day for riders to be able to come and go, we need to somehow achieve a significant shift of bikes to off-road parking locations. Motorcyclists (especially commuters) really need to consider how and where they park as all other road users do, i.e. park in an appropriate and designated space (whether using a car, bus, train, motorcycle or bicycle) and walk the remainder of their journey.

I am genuinely interested in the concerns of motorcycle riders in Wellington City and have therefore used my real name for this forum. I am happy to discuss needs and to develop policies and responses that balance the reasonable needs of _all_ road users.

Jon Visser
Manager, Infrastructure Performance
Wellington City Council

[Lurch]

WCC is embarking on a new campaign to clear the footpaths of bikes and scoots. I approve of some of what they are trying to do but am a bit shocked at this comment :
"People commuting to work on motorcycles should be parking in public or private parking buildings so that other motorcycle users who need to come and go during the day have more space available to park on the road"

http://wellington.govt.nz/news/display-item.php?id=3614

[Squiggles]

I am genuinely interested in the concerns of motorcycle riders in Wellington City and have therefore used my real name for this forum. I am happy to discuss needs and to develop policies and responses that balance the reasonable needs of _all_ road users.


Awesome. :rockon:

[Jizah]

Seriously good post. Thanks for taking the time.

[Badjelly]

Thanks for the post, Jon.

I work in the suburbs and only come into Wellington City occasionally to shop. One thing that strikes me is that it can be harder to find a parking spot for the bike than it would be if I brought the car. There are often vacant pay & display parking spots but nothing for the bike. (Admittedly I have to pay for the car.)

Another thing that strikes me is that there are still quite a few odd little spots here & there (eg. triangular spaces at the either end of a row of diagonal parks) where it would be perfectly safe and considerate to park the bike, but it's illegal. So I think the council could still try a little harder to find bike parking spots.

[Ixion]

Hi all,

..
Just some statistics to set the scene:
* In 2006 we accommodated about 450 motorcyclists in the CBD per day on 350 on-road spaces (for free) and the remainder parking off-road (i.e. we used to be able to cater for most).
* In 2009 we now have 1000 motorcyclists entering the CBD each day (and still growing rapidly), and have only been able to increase on-road parks to 450 spaces. Therefore more than half will now need to find off-road spaces. It is impossible to locate 550+ metres of additional kerbspace for motorcycle parks without adversely impacting on other road users.





Hang about. If there are 500 more motorcyclist coming into the city, odds are that each of those 500 used to drive in by car. So that's 500 fewer cars coming in, effectively the provision for car parking has increased at the expense of motorcyclists. Since one car space can hold about four bikes spaces, fairness would indicate that about 125 car park spaces should be converted to bike parks.
..



.. Motorcyclists (especially commuters) really need to consider how and where they park as all other road users do, i.e. park in an appropriate and designated space (whether using a car, bus, train, motorcycle or bicycle) and walk the remainder of their journey.

..

There are differences. Firstly, security. Motorcyclists need/want their bikes to be parked either where they can keep an eye on them OR in a secure place. Otherwise bike thefts go through the roof.

Secondly, a motorcyclist arriving in the city, hopefully is wearing decent protective clothing. Which is heavy, hot, and most definitely not designed for walking long distances in. An expectation that motorcyclists will have a long walk at the end of their journey has serious adverse safety implications, since , inevitably, if motorcyclists (and more so, motor scooterists) have to trudge for several kilometres they will NOT wear that protective clothing. And injury rates go through the roof.

If WCC motorcycle parking strategy relies on parking facilities remote from the journey endpoint then they need to provide secure storage (eg lockers).

Motorcycles represent almost the ONLY solution to city congestion. But if motorcycles are to play their part in freeing up the road space, they must be considered by planners as vehicles in their own right , not as small cars.

[CookMySock]

"People commuting to work on motorcycles should be parking in public or private parking buildings so that other motorcycle users who need to come and go during the day have more space available to park on the road"

That is normal parking policy. Thats what carparks are FOR - to allow customers to get in and out of the town and butter your and my bread - NOT for employees to fill up because they can't be effed walking.

Steve

[Lurch]

If there aren't free bike parks in town that I can use as a commuter I will go back to driving the car even if it's slower.

I have always assumed the council is in a win/win situation by encouraging more commuters to ride their bikes by offering free parking, I mean its cheap for them to offer per passenger and they reduce congestion on their under funded infrastructure. Obviously I am wrong? :blink:

[Hawkeye]

And.....

Jon Visser
Manager, Infrastructure Performance
Wellington City Council

has actually reponded on that thread above.

[davebullet]

Jon - firstly thanks for the informative post.

Does the council have a target number of free parks to support riders that come and go?

Is the council going to provide guidelines as to what off-street parking will be tolerated (eg. on the footpath?). I know bikes are not meant to obstruct pedestrians, however, some footpaths are wide and can accommodate a row of bikes and still allow 2 pedestrians to pass eachother easily.

After the marketing campaign, how will warning notices be served. Having never received a ticket on the bike and with Wellington weather, I might not know I have been served.

How will the council monitor "day stayers" and decide on what is a reasonable parking timeframe? (chalk mark on the tyres then after XX minutes a ticket?)

Thanks,
Dave.

[Fatjim]

Ixion, motorcycles aren't seen as a positive replacement option to cars, you know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

Also, many motorcyclists have chosen this type of transport in favour of car pooling and public transport, not just using their own car. I ride because it saves me parking costs, and the commute time is predictable, within about 10%, regardless of the weather/traffic. Not because it saves the environment (which it doesn't), or aids congestion which it doesn't (cause there's not enough of us).

But you're right. If I can't use a parking building I select my parking spot where my baby is least likely to be knocked over or scratched. And it has to be close to were I'm going as riding gear is a curse to walk in.

[Lurch]

I agree Ixion, I'm not going to bring the bike in if I have to park it in a dingy corner of a parking building where it's supposedly secure.

The reality is that many of the parking buildings around town are about as secure as the back streets of Taita at night.

Also I'm not going to get on a bus/walk for 2km carrying my bike gear after parking. I ride the bike because I get to park close to work. No free bike park on the street for me = one more car back on the road.

[Lurch]

Thanks guys, didn't think to check the Rant and Rave forum for a post about this.

[CookMySock]

It is impossible to locate 550+ metres of additional kerbspace for motorcycle parks without adversely impacting on other road users.Uhh, what other road users? Have all these extra motorcyclists never been to town before, or did they previously drive cars?

That makes no sense. The more parks you have for bikes, the more realestate you claim back. Bikes take 1/4 of the space of one car. Bikes can carry two people - how many cars have more than two people in them?

If you really wanted to resolve some congestion problem, you would be creating much much more parking for bikes, and take advantage of what is obviously a windfall for you - one of having parking being freed up for customers to come in and spend.


one fact that will remain is that there simply isn't the space available in Wellington City to accommodate all bikes like we used to.Uhh, bikes carry two people, cars carry four-five, one carpark takes one car (five people) or four bikes (eight people), uhh what am I missing?


Realistically, as we can no longer provide free on-road spaces for all motorcyclists to use, and we would like to have some empty spaces available during the day for riders to be able to come and goA nice idea on the face of it, but how many bike riders actually come to town to run an errand, rather than park there all day?


we need to somehow achieve a significant shift of bikes to off-road parking locations.Why?


I am happy to discuss needs and to develop policies and responses that balance the reasonable needs of _all_ road users.Why is a bike a different sort of road user than a car?

Steve

[Lurch]

A nice idea on the face of it, but how many bike riders actually come to town to run an errand, rather than park there all day?

This is a very good point to discuss, I really doubt that very many motorcyclists in Wgn are there for a "quick trip to the shops". If I'm going shopping I almost always take the car.

[Nasty]

There is of course the option of parking in the buildings that we work in ... lots of us do that anyway .. but it saves on even a small work. One of the options that I proposed informally to Council was that if they encouraged other building owners to allow bikes to park in the unused spaces then that would be a good idea. Unfortunately they would need to lead the way .. and there is not a lot of free space to use in the council parking areas.

Jon makes some good points ... about some valid issues ... those who ride and park in Wellington know that there are some issues, even worse for those who park in Boulcott Street where the only parking is on the footpath ...

In all of the buildings I have worked in Wellington I have managed to negotiate the ability to park in them ... sometimes it is about making a move to propose that sort of thing .. and normally they don't charge for the convience of it.

[Jon Visser]

Hi all,

I will try to respond to as many questions as possible. Some questions may cover the same ground so please do not be offended if I do not respond directly but check my postings for a relevant answer.

Badjelly wrote:
"Another thing that strikes me is that there are still quite a few odd little spots here & there (eg. triangular spaces at the either end of a row of diagonal parks) where it would be perfectly safe and considerate to park the bike, but it's illegal. So I think the council could still try a little harder to find bike parking spots."
Response: Agreed - though it should be the Council's traffic engineers that determine (and mark) such appropriate places and not riders. Many riders are now parking in the triangular spaces at the ends of parallel parks, but do not realise that when we install parallel parks we typically allow for 6 metres for the parks in the middle and only 5 metres for the parks at the ends, so those spaces are vital for cars to be able to get in & out. Parking motorbikes in there will eventually result in bikes getting knocked over.

Ixion wrote:
"Hang about. If there are 500 more motorcyclist coming into the city, odds are that each of those 500 used to drive in by car. So that's 500 fewer cars coming in, effectively the provision for car parking has increased at the expense of motorcyclists. Since one car space can hold about four bikes spaces, fairness would indicate that about 125 car park spaces should be converted to bike parks."
Response: good try, but these commuters all came out of off-road spaces, not on-road ones (we have 2-hour limits on CBD on-road car parks). By commuters shifting from car to motorcycle, they have freed up spaces in parking buildings, not on the road. We do not have the space available _on the public road_ to accommodate the current and future number of motorcycles. That is exactly why we are encouraging them to go back to parking off-road so that occasional visitors (like Badjelly :-) have somewhere to park. Commuters that switch from car to motorcycle will still be saving themselves a lot of money for parking compared to what they were paying for when using a car.

Ixion wrote:
"There are differences. Firstly, security. Motorcyclists need/want their bikes to be parked either where they can keep an eye on them OR in a secure place. Otherwise bike thefts go through the roof."
Response: How are the security concerns of motorcycle riders any different to those of car or bicycle users? No-one wants their vehicle stolen. Parking garages provide much greater security than on-road parks, as well as typically having cameras that can be used to identify and track down offenders. Also cars and pedestrians are much more likely to knock over inappropriately parked motorcycles on the public road than in a parking garage. Parking garages could even be asked (if lobbied by people such as yourself) to provide steel security loops set into the floor that you can attach locks to etc.

Ixion wrote:
"Secondly, a motorcyclist arriving in the city, hopefully is wearing decent protective clothing. Which is heavy, hot, and most definitely not designed for walking long distances in...If WCC motorcycle parking strategy relies on parking facilities remote from the journey endpoint then they need to provide secure storage (eg lockers)."
Response: Very good point. Again something that you could more successfully lobby a parking garage to provide than for on-road spaces. Council does have some public shower facilities available at the end of Featherston Street (possibly why Grey Street is so popular? Though I note that the motorcycle bay adjacent to the Old Bank Arcade frequently has some empty spaces).

Ixion wrote:
"Motorcycles represent almost the ONLY solution to city congestion."
Response: As you say, "almost". Public transport represents a much more sustainable and environmentally friendly solution that is also cheaper to society (if not to the individual) when taking into consideration the wider costs of the hugely increased number of accidents that motorcycle riders have. It is therefore no secret that the Council has far greater support for people shifting to public transport than motorcycles under the current environment. While the number of motorcycle riders entering the CBD has doubled over the past few years, the number of serious accidents they are having has considerably more than doubled. This may be due to the commuters typically being new to riding motorcycles, doing so during peak hours, and not even needing to have a motorcycle licence or registered vehicle (for 50cc scooters) etc. While we understand the benefits a motorbike presents to an individual (and the limitations of public transport), from a planning perspective we must support what is best for the majority community and therefore we are asking all motorcycle riders to exhibit the same level of individual responsibility for their actions that the serious and experienced bike riders do. In that regard, motorcycle riders have just as much responsibility as car or truck drivers to behave according to the road rules, which includes parking.

davebullet wrote:
"Does the council have a target number of free parks to support riders that come and go?"
Response: A general guideline for on-road parking spaces (in the absence of more accurate statistics) is that about 85% of the spaces should be "vacant" for them to operate effectively. In order to be able to determine the quantity and types of on-road parking spaces required and how we manage them, we are going to consult with riders on the street to identify their specific habits and needs. Again, I will post a URL for this consultation on this forum so that others can also provide submissions (though only relevant to Wellington City riders of course).

davebullet wrote:
"Is the council going to provide guidelines as to what off-street parking will be tolerated (eg. on the footpath?). I know bikes are not meant to obstruct pedestrians, however, some footpaths are wide and can accommodate a row of bikes and still allow 2 pedestrians to pass eachother easily."
Response: Council has a Footpath Management Policy (updated 2007) which describes the appropriate use of footpath space.
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/policies/footpath/footpath.html
The problem is not so much the amount of room that motorcycles take up, but that they create effectively a permanent obstruction that causes problems specifically for:
- people with sight impairment (who rely on a consistent streetscape to be able to get around safely).
- maintenance contractors (who need to access the footpath and cannot do so if there are bikes blocking the road and they cannot reasonably be expected to place "no parking" signs on every single footpath on the off-chance that someone will park illegally there).
- emergency service and road managers (such as me) who are sometimes required to clear a footpath to allow another activity like a parade, protest or emergency to take place.
- building owners who complain to the Council that their entraceways and fire sprinkler system access panels etc are being blocked.
With all of the activities typically allowed on the footpath under our policy (e.g. sandwich boards, seating, retail displays etc) they are very temporary in nature and the person responsible is always very close by so the obstructions can be immediately shifted by the person responsible. Riders cannot be easily contacted or expected to immediately shift their bike for the above situations. It is also very difficult to tow motorcycles (and I don't want to have to do that). Therefore we will continue to use discretion where warranted (e.g. in the suburbs where the principles of the footpath management policy can be met) but we will need to be quite strict in the CBD to meet public expectations.

davebullet wrote:
"After the marketing campaign, how will warning notices be served. Having never received a ticket on the bike and with Wellington weather, I might not know I have been served."
Response: We typically attach notices (e.g. leaflets & infringement notices) to motorcycles by wrapping them around the handlebars and securing them with a rubber band. This would be quite noticeable to riders as they must grab their accelerator in order to operate the bike. If an infringement notice gets removed by someone else the registered owner of the bike will be posted a reminder notice in the mail before any further action is taken. For this campaign, we will first issue information leaflets, then issue $0 infringement notices, and only those who have already been issued with a $0 notice will then be issued with an actual fine. We will not start issuign infringement notices for a month so that riders have a reasonable opportunity to locate an alternative (and proper) parking space.

davebullet wrote:
"How will the council monitor "day stayers" and decide on what is a reasonable parking timeframe? (chalk mark on the tyres then after XX minutes a ticket?)"
At this time there are no fees or time restrictions for on-road motorcycle parking bays, so there is no need to monitor or enforce in that regard. We are only concerned at this stage with people who park outside the designated motorcycle parking bays. As stated above, further reviews (after the current campaign has run its course) will clarify whether we should be introducing any restrictions (time or fees), but I think it would be fair to say that it would be good for both the Council and the riders if this could be avoided (e.g. by enough people voluntarily shifting from on-road to off-road parks).

[Lurch]

Public transport represents a much more sustainable and environmentally friendly solution that is also cheaper to society (if not to the individual) when taking into consideration the wider costs of the hugely increased number of accidents that motorcycle riders have. It is therefore no secret that the Council has far greater support for people shifting to public transport than motorcycles under the current environment.

Lets maybe revist the public transport option in around 2 years once there is a train network to speak of. Although by then the charges will probably be higher than the cost of running a car and paying for a car park. (they aren't far off it at the moment and the car is both quicker and more reliable)

[Ixion]

Well, I don't live in Wellington. So this isn't my debate

But what I think I'm hearing you say here

"Bugger. We went all out to be as bloody minded as possible to car drivers, so as to force them onto to public transport, despite its vileness. But, lo, the contrary sods are coming in on motorcycles instead. So we're going to have to turn the clobbering machine on motorcycles also. Once there are no other transport options available , they'll *have* to use public transport whether they want to or not , which is the only way we'll ever force people to use it"

[Lurch]

Ixion, it certainly does feel like WCC is getting desperate for ways to force people into a public transport network that isn't fit for purpose.

[Trudes]

Lets have a Citizen's Initiated Referendum:
"Should Politicians and Government Department Ministers be forced to use public transport for one month so they can sympathise with the plebs?"

[Lurch]

"Should a motorcycle park, as part of good council services be considered a luxury in New Zealand?

[Devil]

Wellingtons parking doesn't really concern me directly, but thank you Jon for taking the time to explain clearly your position, and for speaking directly with those affected.

Ps: Dont mind that Ixion fulla, he's a grumpy old bugger... But also related to BRONZ...

[Jon Visser]

Ixion, it certainly does feel like WCC is getting desperate for ways to force people into a public transport network that isn't fit for purpose.

I think a much more important message to take from what I have written is that the Council would rather see a reduction in the number of motorcycle riders getting hurt or hurting/affecting others.

[bogan]

I think a much more important message to take from what I have written is that the Council would rather see a reduction in the number of motorcycle riders getting hurt or hurting/affecting others.

So you admit there is an alternate agenda of getting motorcyclists of the roads?

[Jon Visser]

So you admit there is an alternate agenda of getting motorcyclists of the roads?

If there were 80,000 commuters coming into town on motorcycles instead of cars, parked legally and none of them got hurt, I would be ecstatic :-)

[Lurch]

So where do you park your bike during the day Jon? Just out of curiosity?

[Ixion]

If there were 80,000 commuters coming into town on motorcycles instead of cars, parked legally and none of them got hurt, I would be ecstatic :-)

But you have previously said that none of the motorcycles coming into town are replacing cars ; and that WCC policy is that there will not be parking available for 80000 motorcycles (or even 1000 come to that)



the Council would rather see a reduction in the number of motorcycle riders getting hurt or hurting/affecting others.

The only interpretation I can put on that is that Council considers that increased numbers of motorcyclists is a BadThing because "they will hurt themselves" , so Council should force them onto public transport instead. Patronising nanny state or what?

[Ixion]

Ps: Dont mind that Ixion fulla, he's a grumpy old bugger... But also related to BRONZ...

Moi ? Grumpy? never. Like my avatar says, just a sweet gentle innocent old man.

[Jon Visser]

So where do you park your bike during the day Jon? Just out of curiosity?

I drive now because of my role, but when I used to ride I always parked my bike off-road - at home, outside (university campus) or inside a building (at work).

[Kinje]

http://www.wellington.govt.nz/news/display-item.php?id=3614

Campaign Against Illegal Motorcycle Parking

Free parking for motorcycles and scooters hasn't stopped riders from illegally parking on inner-city footpaths and roads and we're about to get tough on offenders. Over the past year we have provided extra on-road parking spaces for about 100 motorcycles and scooters in the inner city, bringing the number of motorcycle parking spaces in the central city to about 450.

Despite this, many riders continue to illegally park their bikes and scooters on the footpath all day, causing a hazard for pedestrians. Others park their bikes in the manoeuvring spaces at the ends of parallel parks, preventing cars from being able to safely get in or out.

We get lots of complaints from the public about illegally parked bikes and we're about to embark on a campaign to let riders know they will be ticketed if they continue to park illegally. The campaign will involve tying 'message straps' to motorcycles parked illegally in the central business district, reminding riders that they should find a correct park just like any other vehicle user. This will be followed up by an enforcement campaign. Tickets could range from $60 to $200 depending on the type of offence.

The Council's Infrastructure Performance Manager, Jon Visser, says the number of motorcycles and scooters being parked on the footpath has escalated since the rise in petrol prices because more people are using them to get to work. "We estimate the number of motorcycle commuters has increased from about 500 to 1000 a day since 2006. People commuting to work on motorcycles should be parking in public or private parking buildings so that other motorcycle users who need to come and go during the day have more space available to park on the road."

Jon says the worst area is on Grey Street between Lambton Quay and Featherston Street. "There are so many bikes parked on the footpath that people with prams or wheelchairs can't get past and need to go on to the road to get around the bikes."

He says some riders may not realise the problems they are causing because they park their motorcycles on the footpath in the morning and leave in the evening when the footpath probably isn't as busy. "If they realised the danger to pedestrians, and to their bikes, with people tripping over them they might change their habits. With the weather improving, it's vital that we get the bikes off the footpaths so that road renewal works, increased pedestrian numbers and the many activities that typically occur over summer can take place safely."

Jon says the Council's Footpath Management Policy makes it clear that footpaths are for pedestrians. Motorcycle users are expected to park correctly and complete their journeys on foot like everybody else.

Motorcycle and scooter parks are marked with signposts and are located all over the central business district, including Featherston Street, The Terrace, Lambton Quay, and Willeston, Victoria, Wakefield, Willis and Dixon streets. Motorcycles can also be parked in many public and private parking buildings. For a detailed map of available parks check out our website.

[Jon Visser]

But you have previously said that none of the motorcycles coming into town are replacing cars ; and that WCC policy is that there will not be parking available for 80000 motorcycles (or even 1000 come to that)


The only interpretation I can put on that is that Council considers that increased numbers of motorcyclists is a BadThing because "they will hurt themselves" , so Council should force them onto public transport instead. Patronising nanny state or what?

Please read my earlier posts carefully. I said that the motorcycle commuters are replacing car drivers that used to use _off-road_ parking. The Council is not concerned about the increase in motorcycle numbers, but the number of accidents that they are having, as well as the other associated adverse impacts they are having on those they share the public road with (e.g. by parking on footpaths). Our intent is to ensure that those who choose to ride do so safely and appropriately.

[Str8 Jacket]

Lets have a Citizen's Initiated Referendum:
"Should Politicians and Government Department Ministers be forced to use public transport for one month so they can sympathise with the plebs?"

That'd make an awesome TUI advert!

[Laxi]

Ixion, it certainly does feel like WCC is getting desperate for ways to force people into a public transport network that isn't fit for purpose.
definatly sounds that way to me


I think a much more important message to take from what I have written is that the Council would rather see a reduction in the number of motorcycle riders getting hurt or hurting/affecting others.

when did it become the wcc charter to be add to the safty nazis, any thoughts on banning busses due to the number of accidents they've been involved in? we pay shit loads in acc fees because we choose to ride, public transport is a joke, and the invironmental benifits are debatable, (ever follwed a diesel bus? choking away on the noxious fumes?) and most places in the world would laugh at having so many overhead wires criss-crossing a city

[Str8 Jacket]

when did it become the wcc charter to be add to the safty nazis, any thoughts on banning busses due to the number of accidents they've been involved in? we pay shit loads in acc fees because we choose to ride, public transport is a joke, and the invironmental benifits are debatable, (ever follwed a diesel bus? choking away on the noxious fumes?) and most places in the world would laugh at having so many overhead wires criss-crossing a city

Its quite obvious really.... Ban the pedestrians, they're obviously the ones causing the accidents by not looking where they are walking. Must be cage drivers... :whistle:

[Lurch]

Just think, if the Labour government hadn't of spent 100 million dollars building the new "Gucci Prison Bars" (http://www.beehive.govt.nz/node/34278) Supreme Court, which I must say is one of the most out of place and asshole ugly buildings in NZs history, we perhaps could of had a couple of extra parking spaces for motorcycles around town.

I know how about the new IRD building is forced to create a few new motorcycle parks as part of the gigantic parking lot it has under it?

[Ixion]

Please read my earlier posts carefully. I said that the motorcycle commuters are replacing car drivers that used to use _off-road_ parking.



Yes. You did. I was in error . But the end result is the same - 500 fewer cars which means in effect 500 MORE car parks for cars, and proportionately less for bikes



The Council is not concerned about the increase in motorcycle numbers, but the number of accidents that they are having, as well as the other associated adverse impacts they are having on those they share the public road with (e.g. by parking on footpaths). Our intent is to ensure that those who choose to ride do so safely and appropriately.

That sounds rather sinister. I am sure that your present audience would be interested in exactly HOW you propose to ensure that.

And also in what statistics you have to back up your concerns about the accident rate? (BTW , does WCC have a mandate for this - they are not the Police , nor even the MoT. The days of City Councils running their own traffic cops are long gone)

[Laxi]

Its quite obvious really.... Ban the pedestrians, they're obviously the ones causing the accidents by not looking where they are walking. Must be cage drivers... :whistle:

:slap::doh:

[Clockwork]

I drive now because of my role, but when I used to ride I always parked my bike off-road - at home, outside (university campus) or inside a building (at work).

If we had that luxury you can be assured we'd all do the same.

From what I've read of your comments here, Jon. this has as much to do with the social engineering of commuters onto public transport as it does with the saftey of footpath users. Despite acknowledging that there is a problem with lack of parking around Grey st, rather than address the shortage of spaces for bikes and scooters (in the problem area) the only action it seems the council are prepared to take is "chase 'em off the road".

While you make interesting points about bikes parked on footpaths, in my opinion more that 90% of the bikes I've seen parked on the footpath really are well out of the way of pedestrian traffic. as for the visually impared and maintenace contractor argument you used. Melbourne seems to be able to cope with bikes on the footpath, why can't we?

Personally I park in those little gaps at the end of a line of car-parks. I've seen up to four bikes in the space I use and while I personally would never attempt to occupy the fouth position closest to the car-park for risk of damage to my bike, its a risk I would be happy to let other's take. But not the council it would seem; according to the council website parking here uses "manouvering" space left for the exclusive use of the vehicle fortunate enough to occupy the last space in the line (all the other parkers have to make do with the space alotted). Come on now, does the council really think it better to inconvenience four bike riders by prohibiting them from parking there in order to ensure the lucky car owner doesn't need to make a little more effort entering or vacating that space?

Thanks for fronting up to put a face to this latest campaign. Its unfortunate I didn't see any requests for input when this latest policy was being formed. Out of interest is this action being driven by our elected representatives or was it initiated by the council's "Mandarins"?

[elle-f]

Then they bloody need to make more~!

[Str8 Jacket]

If we had that luxury you can be assured we'd all do the same.

From what I've read of your comments here, Jon. this has as much to do with the social engineering of commuters onto public transport as it does with the saftey of footpath users. Despite acknowledging that there is a problem with lack of parking around Grey st, rather than address the shortage of spaces for bikes and scooters (in the problem area) the only action it seems the council are prepared to take is "chase 'em off the road".



While I have the luxury of parking in the basement at work I agree with you regarding this comment. It costs me $108 a month to take the train, about the same for a monthly pass on the bus. It costs me less than $40 a month to commute on the FXR. The train in unreliable, packed and inconvenient. Someone needs to wise up and get real. With the cost of using public transport and crap level of service provided why whould you want to use it? Let's face no one really wants to go to work, why make it harder!

[Squiggles]

Seems there are two items that WCC wishes to address

1) Onstreet parking inc Footpaths
2) Motorcycle Safety


why can't we?
To the best of my knowledge, parking of footpaths has always been a no-no (somewhere in the land transport act?), and WCC has chosen to play nice and use its discretion. In Auckland we are not so lucky & when the decision was made to enforce, fines were the first thing handed out.

[Clockwork]

Seems there are two items that WCC wishes to address

1) Onstreet parking inc Footpaths
2) Motorcycle Safety


To the best of my knowledge, parking of footpaths has always been a no-no (somewhere in the land transport act?), and WCC has chosen to play nice and use its discretion. In Auckland we are not so lucky & when the decision was made to enforce, fines were the first thing handed out.

I understand that it is an offense. My point is that it dosn't need to be, there are cities that seem to be able to cope, all it takes is the political will. It seems the only will our politicians currently wish to act on is to make motorcycle commuting less desirable.

[Badjelly]

I understand that [parking bikes on footpaths] is an offense. My point is that it dosn't need to be, there are cities that seem to be able to cope, all it takes is the political will...

It seems to work well in Melbourne, but they have much wider footpaths than Wellington.

[cheshirecat]

I think we need to instill the philosophy/culture that Motocycles are part of todays solutions, not the problems. OK it's fair not to block pavements. We have the problems that cars knock bikes over, which these days can cause a writeoff AND we can't use car parking bays. Maybe office/shop/cafe owners can provide us a space IF we can give something back in return.
Maybe one of the rags might do a sensible article on this.

[Devil]

Someone say offroad parking?
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/p2w0Nod2TEo&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/p2w0Nod2TEo&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Ms Piggy]

We need to write letters en-mass to the Dompost & WCC etc.

[Hitcher]

Parking in parking buildings is no answer, unless the owners of said provide bike-sized parks at bike-sized prices.

[James Deuce]

Well, I and 6 others out of the 30 or so I work with have migrated from the second small car to a motorcycle to commute on in the last 4 or 5 years.

We're terribly sorry that doesn't fit with your plans. Wellington Motorcyclists are not transitory in nature. The vast majority who use bike parks are there for the length of their working day.

I have been running a proper experiment with public transport and have almost completed 3 months of using bus and train to get to and from work.

Public transport is hideously unreliable. The bus I catch from Maungaraki has been more than 5 minutes late 56% of the time, more than 10 minutes late 34% of the time, and the remaining 10 % is split almost evenly between not turning up at all or arriving at the stop early and not waiting for the correct departure time. I have relayed my findings to the Bus company and have had no reply. The one time I dared to ring them when the bus didn't turn up, I was asked, "What the fuck do you want me to do about it?"

Given that I work right next to the train station the train timetable (though there is little commitment to the concept of a timetable) doesn't really affect me that much as I don't have to catch a connection on the way to work.

However there have been a few train disasters lately and such was the wait for a bus to Petone train station on one of those occasions I missed the last bus (#150) that heads up Dowse Dr. Given that my kids were all in bed, my wife couldn't come to get me so I had to walk the 3.7kms from Petone Station to my house at the top of Dowse Dr. It doesn't sound like much, but people in my poor physical condition have been found dead half way up that hill. This can be the end result of a train leaving 10 minutes late also (happens more than you'd like too).

Just so you know, I have had $3500 worth of damage done to my bike over the last 2.5 years in WCC motorcycle parking. Other motorcyclists, vans, and even the wind have all contributed. The "free" (I do pay my rates and there is a bit in there for the GWRC, so I know you're getting some help there) bike parks are not the sacrosanct havens of blissful motorcycle protection you are trying to paint, and there is no way I would park my bike in a Wilson carpark, given the number of bikes that have disappeared from them in the back of vans.

Now you don't want me to bring my bike to work once I've finished my increasingly failing public transport experiment? If I can't get myself to work, I don't get paid, I don't shop in the CBD, I don't pay taxes or rates, and my family may end up a little disadvantaged as a result.

There's a lot of talk about improving public transport. There's very little done to fix the problems inherent in the currently available transport stock, and despite the hard sell about the new trains on the horizon, I doubt they will be bedded in and running reliably before 2012. Even then I guarantee that the feeder services will still be as appallingly, hopelessly arrogant about their customer base as they are now. There's no alternative so you have to put up with what you get.

While we're on it, Snapper cards: Indian Dairy owners won't let you use them to buy a Chocolate bar while you wait for the bus because of the 2% transaction fee. The readers in the buses fail once a week, so I still have to carry at least enough cash to pay for one fare.

I think you folk need to "man up" so to speak, and actively tell us to piss off, stop beating around the bush.

We get it, OK?

[davebullet]

There are many nooks and crannies to park in. I park at the corner of a building protected by bollards, which the blind would unlikely navigate, able bodied peds can easily walk around (using the whole footpath) and cars cannot not fit. I doubt any services run along (no sign of tobys, manholes or other service holes) for which my parking would obstruct their work.

Unless the building owner / tennant complains, I presume my off-road parking will be ok... but time will tell!

I switched to motorcycle commuting because of the shortened time and reliability. The train is cheaper from Johnsonville than riding a bike (once you factor in buying a bike, gear, rego, insurance, servicing etc...) but takes me 25 mins all up (gear off / on, traffic slowness) compared to 45mins on a good day walking to / from the train at either end and assuming the J'ville train is running to time (which it usually is weather permitting).

I actually enjoy commuting on my bike and look forward to beginning my workday with a smile (nice ride in during sunny days) and can cheer up before I get home if I've had a bad day. I think that makes me a happier CBD citizen.

[Swoop]

Jon, thank you for joining the forum and putting across the views expressed.

I do however wonder, is a mountain being made out of a molehill? Perhaps looking at the Melbourne model of accomodating motorcycles, would be an idea?
Motorcycle transportation is a very efficient system, particularly when the NZ public transport system is abysmal, at best.

The attitude of "live and let live" would be nice to see from the parking wardens who appear to overzealously risk life and limb, to enforce a narrow minded attitude against two-wheeled transport.

So long as bikes are being parked with thought for other people (pedestrians, cars, etc) there is very little to be concerned with and should be allowed and encouraged.

[Hitcher]

Ixion, it certainly does feel like WCC is getting desperate for ways to force people into a public transport network that isn't fit for purpose.

Not at the moment. But that's changing.

I'm interested in knowing what the WCC is doing to get parking building operators to provide bike-sized spaces at bike-sized prices. There's only limited free parking to be had in the James Smith parking building...

[Howie]

Having just read through this thread, I am wondering if it would be worth someone writing and posting a e-Petition about CBD motorcycle parking on the Wellington city council's web site located here. http://www.wellington.govt.nz/haveyoursay/e-petitions/index.php

I would have a go at writing one myself, but as I do not work in the CBD, or visit it very often during Business hours on a bike it is probably better being set up by someone who is more affected by the current lack of parking.

Cheers

Paul

[Gremlin]

In January 08 I was in Wellington CBD for a day, and come 0830-0900 when I arrived, found all the bike spaces around where I needed to be (Featherston st if I vaguely recall) taken. Given that I was on a Blackbird with full luggage (for a trip as far south as Chch, and over a week) I don't think I could have parked in a motorbike place either.

I settled for a bit of space on the end of a couple of angle parked cars, between car and start of a driveway. I was pleasantly surprised to come back at the end of the day to find the bike unmolested, with no tickets as a welcome.

I think WCC is certainly better (and more aware) than Auckland, and a simple example is that Jon is here answering concerns.

Good luck to your parking woes :yes:

ps... Devil, your bike would never fit into a van. It would collide with the rear of the van, and turn it into a compact :lol:

[Bob]

Jon,

Let me congratulate you for having the courage to come onto a bike forum and raise this subject, knowing full well you would get a mix of good and bad responses.

For those of you having a pop at Jon, I'd like to compare this to the attitude we were shown in London, when the three-year trial of three bus lanes being opened to bikes completed and the results were 'supposed' to be released. I say 'supposed', as they were, quite frankly suppressed (as they didn't give the result the then council wanted, ie. bikers came out with an improved safety record, rather than "no improvement so we can drop the scheme").

Not once we we asked for our opinion, and the fudging and avoiding of publishing the results was downright embarrasing, as they barely stopped short of saying "The dog eat them".

It was only when the new Mayor came in he forced through an expansion of the scheme for a further three years, making all bus lanes available.

So for someone to come on board and actually ask for your opinions and suggestions? A step to be lauded, not berated.

As I am on the subject of bus lanes - as I live a rather long way from Wellington (!), I do not know... but do the buses have bus lanes? If so, then do you open them up to bikes? As someone who commutes every day, having bus lane access is an utter boon. Not only is my journey faster, but it is safer and also takes bikes out of the main traffic flow, hence easing congestion.

Back to bike parking - in London we have a lot of bike spaces, both in the business district and also around the fringes. The best has to be the one in Alie St, in Tower Hamlets. Not only is it free, but it also features a security barrier.

Take a look in the feature in this link, to see a couple of photos of the barriers (http://www.bobpickett.co.uk/bkit/bikepark.htm)

I hope this is of use in your planning.

Bob

[davebullet]

Re Gremlin's point.... If there is concern about bikers not having enough free parks for temporary parking, alternate bike parks (well maybe 1 out 4) could have a time limit imposed to afford transient bikers' parking.

[James Deuce]

Re Gremlin's point.... If there is concern about bikers not having enough free parks for temporary parking, alternate bike parks (well maybe 1 out 4) could have a time limit imposed to afford transient bikers' parking.
Mr Visser is overstating the case.

I would posit that 98% of Wellington bike parking is occupied around "normal" business hours by people working their shift, whatever that may be.

Bob, there are no bus lanes in in Wellington, other than the inner city and some inner suburbs. Not a battle worth fighting.

Read Mr Visser's posts closely Bob. He isn't after opinions. He's telling us that WCC are about to start charging for bike parking and is making up figures about how much space is needed to park bikes to justify not providing parking. It is disingenuous to try to put any other interpretation on the matter.

Bikes are being discouraged as a form of transport, and are being removed from the transport mix before they reach the critical mass to dent congestion.

[Lurch]

Also, if any year was a crucial year to encourage the use of motorcycles as a form of commuter transport then surely this is the one?

The current economy, high pressure on public transport and roading are already encouraging more people to get on a bike, surely it can only help to relieve commuter congestion?

Also while we're keeping things off footpaths how about those mobility scooters parked up on the street :wari:

[Jon Visser]

That sounds rather sinister. I am sure that your present audience would be interested in exactly HOW you propose to ensure that.

And also in what statistics you have to back up your concerns about the accident rate? (BTW , does WCC have a mandate for this - they are not the Police , nor even the MoT. The days of City Councils running their own traffic cops are long gone)

My approach (contrary to me predecessors) is to focus on engineering first (i.e. getting teh road as right as we can get it) and then on education, rather than jumping straight into an enforcement approach.

Council does have a responsibility to promote the safety of road users as the Road Controlling Authority for Wellington City. We run many road safety campaigns in conjunction with the NZ Transport Agency and the Police.

[Jon Visser]

Parking in parking buildings is no answer, unless the owners of said provide bike-sized parks at bike-sized prices.

Absolutely. I have just finished negotiations with all the major parking garages in Wellington that they will now also cater for motorcycles. That means good well-lit spaces in prime locations (not dark dingy corners) close to the entranceways and kiosks where their staff can keep an eye on them. Riders should expect to get exactly the same service and security that car owners get. Compare that to the risk of your bike getting stolen or knocked over by a scooter in a Wellington gale in an on-road park... that's got to be worth something.

Prices offered will be substantially cheaper than for cars. Having all major garages signed up will (and already has) introduce competition between them to attract motorcycle customers, which will result in competitive prices and services specifically catering for riders. All of these garages will be shown on the maps that will be provided to motorcycles parking in the streets. Rates that I have been provided with so far (for prime commercial motorcycle parks) range from $50 per month to $100 per month.

[Swoop]

Rates that I have been provided with so far (for prime commercial motorcycle parks) range from $50 per month to $100 per month.
Good luck.
Those prices are going to penalise biker's wallets, especially if they have moved from $0.00 yearly parking cost for their bike. Suddenly finding $600- $1200- for a years parking...:gob::blink:

[Devil]

Dare I mention it's free in all the Auckland city carpark buildings?

[Jon Visser]

I do however wonder, is a mountain being made out of a molehill? Perhaps looking at the Melbourne model of accomodating motorcycles, would be an idea?
Motorcycle transportation is a very efficient system, particularly when the NZ public transport system is abysmal, at best.

If the Council did not receive so many complaints from the rest of the public who do see this as an issue that affects them, then yes we could continue to show the same discretion as we have done in the past. As someone else has mentioned, the Melbourne streetscape is immensely different from Wellington and is not a fair comparison.

I also do not know where this thread got off the rails (excuse the pun) in relation to public transport. This current campaign has nothing to do with shifting people to public transport. It was only raised that public transport is _safer_ than motorcycling (as a comparison). This campaign is solely about encouraging motorcyclists to park with due consideration for others. The feedback we have from the community is that they do want the Council to address this issue because what used to be quite reasonable (and I acknowledge that many riders do try their best to park well out of the way) has now gone beyond what they consider reasonable and has become a problem for them. Everyone has a right to use the public road, and the Council is tasked with determining the fair allocation of that very limited space to the many varied purposes that the public want to use it for. In that capacity, our Councillors (who represent the majority community) have set some very clear expectations on what activities the footpaths may be used for, and parking vehicles on them is not one of those. If you think it should be, then by all means lobby your Councillors to change that policy.

[Jon Visser]

As I am on the subject of bus lanes - as I live a rather long way from Wellington (!), I do not know... but do the buses have bus lanes? If so, then do you open them up to bikes?

New Zealand has two types of "bus lanes". Those defined by law as a "bus lane" may be used by buses, motorcycles and bicycles. In addition to this, local authorities also have the ability to create "special vehicle lanes" which essentially allow or exclude specific vehicle types. Some authorities have used this approach to create lanes that may be used by "buses only", which technically excludes all other types of traffic (such as motorcycles). In some cases they allow "buses or taxis only". This variation across the country and even within a single district makes it quite difficult (as a motorcycle rider) to determine whether you may or may not use a section of "green coloured" road. Signs and road markings aren't always very helpful either. Many bike riders therefore tend to avoid the bus lanes (certainly in the lower North Island) in case they get it wrong. This can get really confusing if there is a "bus lane" that motorcycle riders can use, but it has a "buses only" turning restriction that prevents the bike from being able to turn onto that road. Fortunately in Wellington (unlike Auckland or Christchurch) we do not currently enforce the use of bus lanes as Wellingtonians are, in general, very well behaved :-)

[Swoop]

If the Council did not receive so many complaints from the rest of the public who do see this as an issue that affects them, then yes...

This campaign is solely about encouraging motorcyclists to park with due consideration for others. The feedback we have from the community is that they do want the Council to address this issue because what used to be quite reasonable (and I acknowledge that many riders do try their best to park well out of the way) has now gone beyond what they consider reasonable and has become a problem for them.
So, an increase in numbers of 2-wheeled transport has filled the available parking for bikes.
The council has failed to notice this change in parking needs and bikes have parked in "other" areas available.
= The pedestrians complain.

So by converting more car-parking spaces into bike parking, as suggested earlier, the bikes are off of the pavement, the pedestrians happy, (& eventually) the councillors happy.

Another alternative is to have a piece of plywood which would permit a bike to park on top of it, and take this around the streets working out every nook and cranny which could have a squirt of paint applied and "hey-presto!" another parking space. It would be easy to locate a hundred or so areas like this.
If the public see a bike parked there, in an "authorised spot" they would be less inclined to complain. Also the complaint's from bikers to the council might be less, because the parking wardens would have less work!

[Jon Visser]

So, an increase in numbers of 2-wheeled transport has filled the available parking for bikes.
The council has failed to notice this change in parking needs and bikes have parked in "other" areas available.
= The pedestrians complain.

So by converting more car-parking spaces into bike parking, as suggested earlier, the bikes are off of the pavement, the pedestrians happy, (& eventually) the councillors happy.

Council was very aware of the increase in numbers and responded by firstly increasing our on-road parks from 350 to 450 spaces (a significant increase considering the limited space available in the CBD) and secondly by showing discretion in regard to enforcement by not issuing tickets. As I mentioned in my first posting, this is not just a "few" bikes that we need to create a few more spaces for. It is now 550 and increasing. In a few years this "deficit" could be 1,000 parks. We are responding by addressing this issue to change parking habits now, so that the city can operate effectively and efficiently into the future. We can simply not continue to convert on-road car park spaces into motorcycle spaces. Taking car parks out of commission would cripple the retail business that the city relies on to survive, i.e. we would all lose out and the property owners would not stand for this (which would result in very unhappy Councillors). At best (and we will continue to do so) we can convert a few spaces every now & then, but this will only provide up to 6 spaces per car park bay (i.e. would just be tinkering with the problem, not fix it). To cater for 1000 motorcycles we would need to decommission about 170 spaces, which would for a start represent a $1m loss to the ratepayers (or a 0.5% rates increase) not to mention the detrimental impact this would have on the commercial viability of the CBD. Also, as many of you have pointed out already, the spaces would really need to be close to everyone's destinations, and the only "underutilised" on-road car parks that we can convert tend to be the ones further away from the CBD. On the other hand, we do have lots of space available in the centre of the CBD (in the parking garages) due to commuters changing from cars to motorcycles, so it makes sense to use this space instead.

The limited kerbside parking space that we have available in the city is currently allocated to a very delicate mix of short-term car parking, motorcycle parking, bus stops, taxi stands, loading zones and mobility spaces etc, and there is no way that we can take so many other types of spaces out of commission without having a significant detrimental impact on the users of those other types of parking. ALL are asking for more kerbside spaces for their type of vehicle, and obviously we cannot say yes to all.

In relation to using the footpath, all the "nooks and crannies" that we could turn a blind eye to prevously are now full and the surplus is overflowing onto the footpaths. This is therefore also not a sustainable solution and will eventually result in people getting hurt. We would not be seen as a responsible Council if we allowed that to happen.

We therefore do need to bring about a change in how we consider motorcycle parking, and that is why we are introducing this campaign.

[bogan]

hang about, Do motorcyclists not buy things from shops? Have i missed something here, 1 car park = 6 bikes, if cars average 2 people in them, that is still a 3x increase in parks per person, so more, not less people could park close to the cbd, now how does that hampers sales?

I do of course realise that not everybody has a bike but if those who do are forced to use cars, then this will only increase the problems for parking and congestion.

And where do you get the 1mil loss for 170 parks changed to bikes? gimme a can of paint and 100k and ill go sort it out, actually, for a hundy k ill supply the paint as well!

[Nasty]

hang about, Do motorcyclists not buy things from shops? Have i missed something here, 1 car park = 6 bikes, if cars average 2 people in them, that is still a 3x increase in parks per person, so more, not less people could park close to the cbd, now how does that hampers sales?

I do of course realise that not everybody has a bike but if those who do are forced to use cars, then this will only increase the problems for parking and congestion.

And where do you get the 1mil loss for 170 parks changed to bikes? gimme a can of paint and 100k and ill go sort it out, actually, for a hundy k ill supply the paint as well!

Ok choose what you read and go for it. Yes of course riders buy from shops - but cars are on a two hour time limit ... bikes are not. Hence bikes stay all day during which the rider goes to work - spends little and then buggers off home.

Also your costing seems to not quite measure the same thing - e.g. loss of income rather than loss of carparks - hence the impact on rates.

[Lurch]

hang about, Do motorcyclists not buy things from shops?

Actually, i would be willing to bet most motorcyclists are commuters not shoppers in Welliington and do not contribute greatly to retail.


And where do you get the 1mil loss for 170 parks changed to bikes?

My guess is that the $1m is loss of parking meter revenue

Edit: In fact $4 per hour X 8 hours a day X ~ 240 working days a year X 170 car parks = $1,305 600 in revenue!

[Clockwork]

In relation to using the footpath, all the "nooks and crannies" that we could turn a blind eye to prevously are now full and the surplus is overflowing onto the footpaths. This is therefore also not a sustainable solution and will eventually result in people getting hurt. We would not be seen as a responsible Council if we allowed that to happen.

I think we would all agree that those who park without consideration for other road/footpath users should be ticketed.

The bike park adjacent to where I work currently has bikes parked two deep. Those that arrived early sure wont be able to leave early!

What you seem to be saying is the council were tolerant and co-operative but too many people complained about those bikes that were parked inconsiderately. Why not continue with the rider education process you claim to be embarking upon, ignore the bikes in the "nooks and crannies" and "out of the way" and just ticket the problem bikes?

It must be apparent that some people complain about bikes for petty reasons simply because they resent the fact that riders aren't as inconvenienced as they are. Where I work, I parked my bike off-road in a court yard for many years, I and other's were recently evicted onto the streets simply for aesthetics. The building's new owner felt they made the area somehow untidy.

[bogan]

Actually, i would be willing to bet most motorcyclists are commuters not shoppers in Welliington and do not contribute greatly to retail.



My guess is that the $1m is loss of parking meter revenue

Edit: In fact $4 per hour X 8 hours a day X ~ 240 working days a year X 170 car parks = $1,305 600 in revenue!

ahhh, now i see

[Mully]

Dare I mention it's free in all the Auckland city carpark buildings?

Indeed.

Jon, thank you for fronting up to a situation which was probably never going to be comfortable for you. As you have seen, bikers are passionate about their mode of transport, and any perceived unfairness grates somewhat. Central Government has certainly had a go (or two) at marginalising motorcycles.

That being said, the debate has been relatively clean and the baying mob has restrained themselves admirably.

While I disagree about your comments regarding the superiority of public transport compared to motorcycles (I notice you lump all two-wheeled motorised transport into motorcycles, but that's neither here nor there at this point), I'm from Auckland and our public transport can be described as woeful at best.

Moving to Devil's comment (quoted above), and moving on from your (probably correct) assertion that many motorcycles parking in Wellington have moved from "off-road" parking, Auckland City do supply free motorcycle parking in all it's owned carparks.

Does the Wellington Council own any carparks? Is it prepared to dedicate spaces for motorcycles in those carparks to encourage motorcycle parking there?

Failing that, is there any intention of Wellington Council to encourage private parking building operators (Wilson, et al) to provide free satisfactory parking within their structures? It seems to me that motorcyclists as a whole are unlikely to pay to park.

[Jon Visser]

Does the Wellington Council own any carparks? Is it prepared to dedicate spaces for motorcycles in those carparks to encourage motorcycle parking there?

Wellington City Council has sold off most of its commercial car parking buildings (that is an issue for a completely different thread :-) and currently only operates three:
* Michael Fowler Centre (open-air, no motorcycle parks available, but lots of on-road ones in the vicinity)
* Central Library (very small basement carpark with some odd spaces that can be used by motorcycles & scooters for free)
* Clifton Terrace (a section of space suitable for about 20 bikes is currently being set aside for free motorcycle parking and this will be included in the maps about ot be circulated)


Failing that, is there any intention of Wellington Council to encourage private parking building operators (Wilson, et al) to provide free satisfactory parking within their structures? It seems to me that motorcyclists as a whole are unlikely to pay to park.

All commercial operators that we have been in discussions with are keen to get involved. Only the James Smith provides space for free but, in all fairness, in this world you get what you pay for (i.e. I understand from other riders that this space is not a very desirable place to park). The better a space is (security, covered, managed, guaranteed availability etc) the more reasonable it would be to have to pay for that space/priviledge.

[Squiggles]

Sent you a PM :)

[cheshirecat]

Hi
I'd just like to say it's great you (John as representing the council) are engaging in this forum and taking time to respond. I like the initiative of trying to find extra spaces with companies.

Just my 2 cents worth anyway

M

[caseye]

Yes jon, welcome to KB, I hope the boys and girls haven't given you too hard a time .Your personal approach just might win freinds and influence people.
A commitment to ask us, or any motorcycle associations before doing something might go a long way towards establishing a workable relationship.

[rustic101]

Well done John, thank you for representing the WCC and being part of the group. Also for taking the time to explain rather than taking a brick bat approach.

My employer informally and unofficially provides free parking to riders. This aside I have noticed (and its my perception)… WCC Parking revenue is down a few hundred thousands of dollars for the last financial year which I think was just short of 9.5 million??. As a result I have witnessed more and more free space being converted into coupon parking.

Prior to getting back onto a bike I use to park up Wadestown Road and a few other places for free and walk into town. However these spaces are now ALL coupon parking??? What strikes me is that these spaces are a fair distance from the ‘Town Belt’ and are not in residential areas in term of creating an obstruction for home owners.

So my perception is this is a move to increase revenue for WCC, albeit after providing an 'education and notification campaign'. :scooter:

[James Deuce]

My approach (contrary to me predecessors) is to focus on engineering first (i.e. getting teh road as right as we can get it) and then on education, rather than jumping straight into an enforcement approach.

Council does have a responsibility to promote the safety of road users as the Road Controlling Authority for Wellington City. We run many road safety campaigns in conjunction with the NZ Transport Agency and the Police.

You'd do better to drop the campaigns and concentrate on putting a tarmac coating on road based metal hatch covers and manhole covers. Purely from a motorcyclist's perspective. Spend your existing budget on concrete outcomes rather than blue sky words and programmes and please avoid levying extra from already over-burdened ratepayers too thanks.

The rest of you suck ups can drop the act too. You're not normally this polite with n00bs EVER.

[Nasty]

Sent you a PM :)

If it was to Jon note he won't be able to respond to PMs until he has been on KB for five days.

[bogan]

Just a thought, is there any other cities very similar to welli? in geogrphy, poulation, demographic etc. Could then just copy whatever works.

[Nasty]

Just a thought, is there any other cities very similar to welli? in geogrphy, poulation, demographic etc. Could then just copy whatever works.

Find another city to model it on - where they have addressed this and it worked ... Wellington itself is quite unique .. so good luck!

[jellywrestler]

jon, its great to see you here on kiwibiker (or kiwibitcher as some see it) and fronting up to the people. Has the council thought of identifying footpath areas where parking a bike would be ok and making up a small plate attached to the ground stating its an authorised bike park and seeing how this would work?

[James Deuce]

Did you read and understand what he is saying Jellywrestler?

The council is going to make street parking for motorcycles time limited. Anything not time limited will be metered. Parking buildings are being suggested as alternates, but because they aren't council parking buildings they will cost money.

Footpath parking will earn you a ticket. They aren't interested in entertaining the idea they are after revenue.

[FatHead]

Having now read the full story on this issue from Mr Visser (thank you by the way) I can understand where the council is coming from and hope that a solution can be reached that benefits all. Personally I dont have an issue with paying a small amount for parking either in a parking building or on the side of the road. I expect that now I am going to get slammed for putting this out there but hey it may be a simple and less painful solution than getting hit with a parking fine. Anyway lets not dump on Mr Visser he is after all trying to do his job and it is far better we have some sort of feedback option than the council just doing what they please at the expense of the local motorcycle fraternity.

[Jon Visser]

My guess is that the $1m is loss of parking meter revenue. Edit: In fact $4 per hour X 8 hours a day X ~ 240 working days a year X 170 car parks = $1,305 600 in revenue!

That calculation is about right Lurch but determines the potential revenue we could earn. In order to fairly determine the "lost revenue" we then have to multiply it by the "average occupancy rate" and the "payment compliance rate" (not everyone fweeds the meter :-). For the Wellingotn CBD these two rates are typically well over 90%, hence we adopt a slightly more conservative estimate of $6k per car park.

[Lurch]

I still don't see the problem.

Put in more bike parks = less parking meter income but saves on roading expansion costs, public transport costs and rip off parking companies making money for being assholes. All whilst keeping bikes off footpaths and motocyclist from revolting.... even the revolting ones.

[Lurch]

That calculation is about right Lurch but determines the potential revenue we could earn.

It was a gross generalisation, and overestimate but I'm glad it was a reasonable example.

[James Deuce]

Having now read the full story on this issue from Mr Visser (thank you by the way) I can understand where the council is coming from and hope that a solution can be reached that benefits all. Personally I dont have an issue with paying a small amount for parking either in a parking building or on the side of the road. I expect that now I am going to get slammed for putting this out there but hey it may be a simple and less painful solution than getting hit with a parking fine. Anyway lets not dump on Mr Visser he is after all trying to do his job and it is far better we have some sort of feedback option than the council just doing what they please at the expense of the local motorcycle fraternity.

It won't be a small amount. It will be enough to push the erquation for affordable commuting vs public transport firmly into the public transport arena.

There is little point expecting the outcome to be beneficial for anyone except WCC and Wilson Parking. Anyone expecting Wilson Parking to charge less for an individual bike park than a cark park really doesn't understand their business model.

If Mr Visser was interested in inner city road safety he'd be looking at clamping down on jay walking, speeding buses on Lambton Quay and making sure that the coefficient of friction for road access covers was something a little better than ice.

[Jon Visser]

This aside I have noticed (and its my perception)… WCC Parking revenue is down a few hundred thousands of dollars for the last financial year which I think was just short of 9.5 million??. As a result I have witnessed more and more free space being converted into coupon parking.

Prior to getting back onto a bike I use to park up Wadestown Road and a few other places for free and walk into town. However these spaces are now ALL coupon parking??? What strikes me is that these spaces are a fair distance from the ‘Town Belt’ and are not in residential areas in term of creating an obstruction for home owners.

Resident and Coupon parking areas have not been reviewed for many years and a report went to Council on 20 August to suggest a few changes. On 14 September we will enter into public consultation on those schemes. Income for those schemes is up, but as for motorcycle parking everyone wants more space and residents are finding it harder to find a park near their home so they all want changes in their favour. One of the proposed changes is to align resident parking with residential areas in the District Plan because, as you say, some of these areas are currently not residential (zone boundaries and usage change over time). If you're interested, keep an eye out for that public consultation - it is an opportunity for people to be heard.


So my perception is this is a move to increase revenue for WCC, albeit after providing an 'education and notification campaign'. :scooter:

Quite the opposite. I can assure you that this "education" campaign is costing the ratepayers a lot more than an "enforcement" campaign would. Those who know me can verify that while some people have suggested introducing time restrictions or fees for on-road motorcycle parking, I am very much against that in principle. If we can all work together to achieve a "good" street environment that keeps everyone happy without needing to resort to enforcement or fees, that would be the ideal outcome. And if, as part of that solution, people shift to public or private parking garages (as we are promoting), then the Council will not receive any of that revenue.

I am also not shy about admitting that parking, in general, is very much about revenue. Revenue is used as a tool to generate frequency of parking turnover so that many people can share a limited amenity. Revenue is used as a tool to deter people from offending. Revenue is collected to recover the costs of providing, maintaining and managing the asset upon which people park. All of this revenue offsets rates such that the users of parking spaces (and not ratepayers who don't own a car) pay for that amenity. Every single major city in the world uses revenue in this manner to manage parking, despite all the possible alternatives considered. With regard to motorcycle parking, it is therefore quite unique in that most cities provide some spaces for free, and I'd like to work together to keep it that way.

Someone has asked what overseas cities we can compare Wellington to. Although Wellington appears quite unique, we do often use San Fransisco and Monte Carlo as cities that share many of the geographical features and challenges as Wellington (i.e. highly compact CBD with a waterfront on one side and steep narrow roads on the other).

[Jon Visser]

jon, its great to see you here on kiwibiker (or kiwibitcher as some see it) and fronting up to the people. Has the council thought of identifying footpath areas where parking a bike would be ok and making up a small plate attached to the ground stating its an authorised bike park and seeing how this would work?

If it was a matter of a couple of spaces that could be an option. Rather than marking the spaces we have just been turning a blind eye. However, with a deficit of 550+ spaces, we're not going to find them on the road or the footpath, especially long-term as the numbers of both cars and bikes keep increasing.

The person who suggested we "simply convert the on road Pay and Display spaces to motorcycle parks" probably does not realise that this would involve clearing car parking from about 10 city blocks, devastate the CBD retail industry and cause a 0.5% rise in rates for 80,000 Wellington households and is therefore anything but trivial (or practical).

[Jon Visser]

It won't be a small amount. It will be enough to push the erquation for affordable commuting vs public transport firmly into the public transport arena.

There is little point expecting the outcome to be beneficial for anyone except WCC and Wilson Parking. Anyone expecting Wilson Parking to charge less for an individual bike park than a cark park really doesn't understand their business model.

If Mr Visser was interested in inner city road safety he'd be looking at clamping down on jay walking, speeding buses on Lambton Quay and making sure that the coefficient of friction for road access covers was something a little better than ice.

The figures I have been quoted by the three major parking garages so far (Tournament, Wilson and CarePark) range from $50 per month to $100 per month, which is substantially less than the rate charged for cars (typically a minimum of $200 per month). Wellington City Council is not charging for any motorcycle parking so stands to earn nothing.

The other road safety issues you have listed are all valid concerns that we are also working on (in addition to the motorcycle parking issue):
- People may remember the actors dressed up as school kids trying to draw attention to the dangers of jaywalking.
- We have assisted police with anti speeding campaigns targeted at buses in the CBD and they drive a lot slower now (though 30km/h still feels mighty fast when you're right next to one).
- I have a "road protection team" that now chases up the utility companies to ensure that their service covers have a minimum coefficient of friction (many telecoms covers have now been replaced by ones with concrete surfaces) and that sites which have been recently chipsealed or sandsealed are swept more regularly and signposted until the loose material is all gone (many bikes slip on the loose material if they don't get adequate warning).
If you have any site-specific concerns, by all means please send them through by PM.

[caseye]

You'd do better to drop the campaigns and concentrate on putting a tarmac coating on road based metal hatch covers and manhole covers. Purely from a motorcyclist's perspective. Spend your existing budget on concrete outcomes rather than blue sky words and programmes and please avoid levying extra from already over-burdened ratepayers too thanks.
"The rest of you suck ups can drop the act too. You're not normally this polite with n00bs EVER."


LOL hey I'm always polite, in the frist instance.I'm not a Welly ite but I've lived there and know how hard it is to park anywhere without losing something, yer shirt, the bike/car or the kids! but hey, lets see what else comes of Jon being here before we start the bell ringing.



"The other road safety issues you have listed are all valid concerns that we are also working on (in addition to the motorcycle parking issue):
- People may remember the actors dressed up as school kids trying to draw attention to the dangers of jaywalking.
- We have assisted police with anti speeding campaigns targeted at buses in the CBD and they drive a lot slower now (though 30km/h still feels mighty fast when you're right next to one).
- I have a "road protection team" that now chases up the utility companies to ensure that their service covers have a minimum coefficient of friction (many telecoms covers have now been replaced by ones with concrete surfaces) and that sites which have been recently chipsealed or sandsealed are swept more regularly and signposted until the loose material is all gone (many bikes slip on the loose material if they don't get adequate warning).
If you have any site-specific concerns, by all means please send them through by PM."

[Lurch]

The WCC needs to stop spending money on $400,000 toilets (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2833154/Is-that-toilet-a-crayfish-or-an-aardvark)and start getting real. I like to have an interesting and attractive city to live in but stop paying wanks like this for their "art" and start fixing the infrastructure.

[ajturbo]

hey Jon..

thanks for fronting up!!!

i use my bike and it is worth millions to me.. (only a few thou to others) and i try to park close to where i am going....

but i know there is a problem.. and at least you guys (council) are trying....
and the warning thing, you cannot get much fairer ...

[AD345]

Gads, I'm glad MY job doesn't involve interaction with the public (especially the motorcycling subset thereof).

Sheesh

Either lobby your employer for places to park or pay up.

If I was in Jons position I think I could make a pretty good case for making ALL on-road motorcycle parks time-limited and try to push all commuters into parking buildings or employee parking. Thus out-of-towners like myself who visit the city (and are more likely to spend cash than those engaged in earning it) would have somewhere to bloody park.

[Swoop]

and that sites which have been recently chipsealed or sandsealed are swept more regularly and signposted until the loose material is all gone (many bikes slip on the loose material if they don't get adequate warning).
This is a major issue throughout NZ. Unsignposted roadworks seems to be far too common an occurrence and I would personally like to see insurance companies able to claim back for accidents caused by this type of negligence by road crews.
[/rant]

[CookMySock]

If there were 80,000 commuters coming into town on motorcycles instead of cars, parked legally and none of them got hurt, I would be ecstatic :-)Great! Lets work toward that solution. Whats the first step forward? With the doubling of the number of motorcyclists in one year, you already have a massive momentum in place.

You can't insist on none of them being hurt though. Thats never going to happen. It's not happening with cars either.

Steve

[cheshirecat]

Great! Lets work toward that solution. Whats the first step forward? With the doubling of the number of motorcyclists in one year, you already have a massive momentum in place.

You can't insist on none of them being hurt though. Thats never going to happen. It's not happening with cars either.

Steve
Absolutely

We could help bring 'bikes are part of the solution' philosophy.
The MTA ride to work day was a 'good thing'. Another 'good thing' si the biker community. EG when any of u breaks down etc. Maybe we could have bring a commuter in morning, then the difference in conjestion could then be measured and sen for all

[davebullet]

You either watch someone else implement a solution you hate, or be a hand on the wheel (or should that be bars :-) to make it better.....

I think there is still merit in painting something in areas where motorcycles / small vehicles can squeeze in for the following reasons:
1. Cheap to implement (paint)
2. Make crystal clear what parking will be tolerated (safe, considerate for pedestrian and services access) - avoid unnecessary fines and hostility between the Public and Council
3. Create many more legal parks

To help the council - why don't we start a list of spots? How could we do this? - GPS and a camera?

[scootnz]

How about the spot right outside Wellington Central Police Station? corner of Maning Lane - a spot out of the way and even protected by bollards. Bikes park there already. Is it classed as footpath? Private property? What?

I'm a commuter who parks under my building, (luckily space is provided for free, but it has been a little oversubscribed in the last 12 months) and has occasion to use on road motorcycle parking for short trips around the CBD maybe three or four times a week.

The motorcycle park outside the district court (near the Post Boxes on Lambton Quay) is way too small, and the next nearest motorcycle park is all the way down Lambton Quay (near a drycleaners) and always completely full.

Someone wrote something about having to lug gear around - that's right - when you're already wearing heavy leather gear, carrying a helmet, and a bag of some description, walking long distance is a bit of a bugger. It's not like you can leave the stuff on your bike (like you can in a car), because it may not be there when you get back (if you're unlucky).


You either watch someone else implement a solution you hate, or be a hand on the wheel (or should that be bars :-) to make it better.....

I think there is still merit in painting something in areas where motorcycles / small vehicles can squeeze in for the following reasons:
1. Cheap to implement (paint)
2. Make crystal clear what parking will be tolerated (safe, considerate for pedestrian and services access) - avoid unnecessary fines and hostility between the Public and Council
3. Create many more legal parks

To help the council - why don't we start a list of spots? How could we do this? - GPS and a camera?

[davebullet]

What about converting underutilised bicycle parks? I've noticed a couple down Victoria St. that are consistently underutilised.

Another option could be some parking along frank kitts park. Coonvert some of the green strip to concrete. With the right "off-ramp", you wouldn't interfere with traffic flow and convert what is otherwise unused green area into parking.

What about converting other boggy / squelchy green spaces?

The real problem here is the various resource management, local body green space and other environment acts to jump through.

[magicmonkey]

Jon, on reading your posts it sounds very much like the council has been aware of the situation for some time and allowed it to get to critical mass before addressing it. Seeing as you are predicting more bike traffic in the future is there something in the pipe line to keep on top of this, on a rolling basis, rather than just hoping that the private car parks will take up the slack?

One thing which hasn't been mention (or that I haven't noticed anyway ;)) is the idea of a 'park and ride' type arrangement, we use them in the UK and they really are a great way of cutting down congestion, freeing up city centre parking and reducing emissions. There are plenty of places around wellington to put the car park and a free or heavily subsidised bus into the city centre would get people interested in using the scheme. If it needs to make money rather than being subsidised then gradual rate hikes could wind up providing revenue as well although you do run the risk of putting people off if there is no financial benefit.

I bet the car parks would make a great place to learn to ride on the weekend as well :p

[Marknz]

I'd like to see all councils cut down on this sort of crap that I spotted yesterday while SHMBO was getting her hair-cut in Waiwhetu... two carparks marked up, neither of which should be used.

Paid your rates lately?

[Garry.W]

I congratulate Jon on putting himself out there so to speak and have read his posts with interest. Debating the issue on a forum is one thing, getting something sensible done about this issue is another. I wrote to Councillor Pepperell recently.

"Got to congratulate the Council once again for its completely over the top response to an ongoing issue, which included some pretty flash "marketing". Many will have assumed the photo attached to the article was taken on the spur of the moment. Nothing is ever quite as it seems though, I sat and watched as the photographer spent a good 20 minutes with the "actors" involved taking shot after shot on staged manoeuvres until they got it "just right". The guy on the 650GS in no way represents how motorcyclists actually park along the side of the ANZ building and even then the two females still had plenty of room to walk past him. One could imagine someone actually tripping over that side stand but in the main, tripping over a scooter when there's a good couple of metres of footpath left is highly unlikely for most people. Enough of that, just making a point about the "spin". I note the ANZ building now has signage up saying it's illegal to park next to this building and vehicles (assuming motorcycles being the culprits) will be towed at owner's expense etc, etc. Nice touch.

I agree though that the footpath is not an ideal place to park a bike but since Grey Street seems to be the biggest area of concern, according to this article and this is where I park my bike (legally mostly), I remind you of conversations we had back in 2007 when we were going through the rigmarole of Council proposals to charge for motorcycle parking.

This issue was always going arise where motorcycle use increases quickly and the demand for motorcycle parking outstrips supply, such as during higher petrol prices or the breakdown of public transportation systems, a relatively frequent experience here. I said at the time if this happened and was neglected, the result would be inappropriate parking on footways and elsewhere to the inconvenience of pedestrians and other road users. By own admission (again in the article) Council provides 450 motorcycles parks around the CBD yet there's now over a 1000 bikers a day coming in. Most are commuting for work so will be here all day. Do the maths.

You say you want to encourage bikes over single occupant cars in the CBD, and this makes sense, but how about talking with us about what is needed in the city for the growing motorcycle riding population or listening to us when we have solutions that could work rather than saying bugger you all, we'll fine you if you can't find a legal space. I suspect if it came down to it and one had to pay for a parking space they'd bring a car in instead.

A case in point is the Grey Street parking. We used to have the entire left-hand side of Grey Street from Featherstone St to Lambton Quay a couple of years ago but, since the installation of the water feature and the redesign for pedestrian use, there's about half the space for an increasing number of bikes, all ridden by people who work in the immediate vicinity. I recall coming in one day to find this space was actually redesignated as a "Loading Zone". Apparently this was a mistake by contractors and was fixed up following a letter to the Mayor, but nevertheless it shows how much we are thought of.

On the right hand side of Grey Street we've suggested that the best thing would be to retain the two disability parks, put an extra park in designated as a loading zone, and the remaining car parks removed in favour of motorcycle parking. As it stands there are too many people in cars trying to negotiate such a small, no exit street and all they do is end up blocking things up, knocking bikes over (yes, this does happen) and generally being more of a threat to pedestrian traffic than a bunch of, predominantly, scooters parked on the edges of the footpath. Come on down and have a look at what a zoo this place becomes at 4:30 or so one afternoon.

Appreciate it if you'd pass this on to those concerned."

[Jon Visser]

This is a major issue throughout NZ. Unsignposted roadworks seems to be far too common an occurrence and I would personally like to see insurance companies able to claim back for accidents caused by this type of negligence by road crews.
[/rant]

Where the site is not left to our minimum standards (warning signage or sweeping) the contractor is liable for such damage. Wellington's Code of Practice for Working on the Road was used as the basis for developing a national Code of Practice which will be mandated by law across all of NZ in the near future (under the Infrastructure Bill) with the intention of standardising (best) practices across the country.

[Jon Visser]

You either watch someone else implement a solution you hate, or be a hand on the wheel (or should that be bars :-) to make it better.....

I think there is still merit in painting something in areas where motorcycles / small vehicles can squeeze in for the following reasons:
1. Cheap to implement (paint)
2. Make crystal clear what parking will be tolerated (safe, considerate for pedestrian and services access) - avoid unnecessary fines and hostility between the Public and Council
3. Create many more legal parks

To help the council - why don't we start a list of spots? How could we do this? - GPS and a camera?

Yes - that is a good idea. Council officers can really only act in two ways - to enforce the rules that do exist or to legalise the activities that are occurring. We are open to suggestions to optimise the use of public space, at the request of the public. Often the people who live, work and play in our city ar far more knowledgeable about their local community, i.e. what works and what doesn't. For on-road car parks, some measures of demand and utilisation would be good (i.e. if it is very underutilised by cars and there are a lot of motorcycles wanting to park in the area that may be a good reason to switch). In some cases there may be other types of parking issues (e.g. taxis using Pay & Display spaces so public cars do not get to use them anyway and a motorcycle park would be more effective). Ask a few key questions like "is it safe (for your bike and to get in & out)?", "who normally uses this space (and are likely to object to the proposed change of use)?". Send the suggestions to:
Area Traffic Engineers
Wellington City Council
PO Box 2199
Wellington
We then review the proposed change in relation to road and traffic safety engineering design principles as well as other relevant Council policies, e.g. our Footpath Management Policy would probably preclude most of the footpath areas from being able to be marked as motorcycle parks (otherwise we would have already done so). If appropriate, we then prepare a submission to the Councillors (this is called a "traffic resolution") to get their approval. This is a public notified process so anyone may contribute to support or oppose the proposed change. Once the Councillors agree to the proposed change, we can then mark it on the road and enforce it. I have just arranged for another on-road motorcycle bay to be created in Cable Street in this manner. While this may relieve some pressure (a few spaces at a time) it will not likely address the majority of the issue (now or into the future) so people (especially commuters) do still need to be thinking about parking off the public road.

[Jon Visser]

How about the spot right outside Wellington Central Police Station? corner of Maning Lane - a spot out of the way and even protected by bollards. Bikes park there already. Is it classed as footpath? Private property? What?

The area enclosed by the bollards on the corner of Victoria Street and Maning Lane is private property (i.e. the central police station). For any such private property you would need to contact the property owner for approval to park there.

[Jon Visser]

What about converting underutilised bicycle parks? I've noticed a couple down Victoria St. that are consistently underutilised.

Another option could be some parking along frank kitts park. Coonvert some of the green strip to concrete. With the right "off-ramp", you wouldn't interfere with traffic flow and convert what is otherwise unused green area into parking.

What about converting other boggy / squelchy green spaces?

The real problem here is the various resource management, local body green space and other environment acts to jump through.

Please see my other post about how to suggest such changes. I expect that it is not likely that green spaces (of which we already have so few in the CBD) will be sacrificed for motorcycle parking.

One opportunity that people should take advantage of is that when the Council comes out with public consultations (e.g. for projects like the Adelaide Road development, Maners/Cuba Mall changes etc) you should be submitting requests for motorcycle parking to be included in the re-design of those spaces. It is much easier to get them included in the up-front design than to try and change what has already been built.

[Jon Visser]

Jon, on reading your posts it sounds very much like the council has been aware of the situation for some time and allowed it to get to critical mass before addressing it. Seeing as you are predicting more bike traffic in the future is there something in the pipe line to keep on top of this, on a rolling basis, rather than just hoping that the private car parks will take up the slack?

Yes, this is a problem that has developed over time up to a point where our traditional approach (converting on-road parks where possible and turning a blind eye to people parking _considerately_ on the footpath) is no longer working and requires a different solution. Some individuals are now not being considerate (e.g. parking next to mobility spaces so that people can't get out of their cars, parking in front of fire/sprinkler control panels, parking in front of building emergency egress points, blocking footpaths, parking along the building face where people with sight impairment tend to walk so that they do not need to follow the much more dangerous kerb line etc). These individuals are spoiling things for everyone, and the Council must act to address this offending. The way our law works is that if we enforce a law for one person, we must also enforce it for everyone else that is committing the same offence. We have been to Court many times where a person has successfully argued that they should be let off because others are getting away with the same offence (in this case the offence would be "parking on the footpath", not the way in which this is done). The ticket ends up being overturned, Council (i.e. ratepayers) have to pay court costs and the offending continues. Therefore if we do have to enforce the rules for the worst of the offenders, we must be consistent and enforce the rules for everyone. I understand that does seem very unfair to all those who are considerate and do not cause such a big problem, but it is just one of the constraints that we must work under.

The solution we are proposing now may also not suffice in the long term, so we are constantly keeping abreast of what is happening in other cities in similar circumstances. Most tend to move to a mixture of "free" parking and time-restricted or fee-restricted parking to manage demand if the users of the spaces are not being considerate towards each other. While we are not at that stage here in Wellington City, it is entirely up to how the bike riders choose to behave as to whether such tools would need to be considered in the future.


One thing which hasn't been mention (or that I haven't noticed anyway ;)) is the idea of a 'park and ride' type arrangement, we use them in the UK and they really are a great way of cutting down congestion, freeing up city centre parking and reducing emissions.

Yes, we do have park & ride for our rail network (servicing the northern suburbs). Not sure whether we are also looking at park & ride for the bus networks to our southern/eastern suburbs (but I think that would make sense). These facilities are well utilised in some areas, but as you can tell from some previous messages this is very dependant on the quality of the public transport service provided (and we have had a large number of issues with this recently). Provision of public transport is a Greater Wellington Regional Council (not Wellington City Council) issue, but we do our best to lobby for improvements for our city.

[magicmonkey]

Yes, we do have park & ride for our rail network (servicing the northern suburbs). Not sure whether we are also looking at park & ride for the bus networks to our southern/eastern suburbs (but I think that would make sense). These facilities are well utilised in some areas, but as you can tell from some previous messages this is very dependant on the quality of the public transport service provided (and we have had a large number of issues with this recently). Provision of public transport is a Greater Wellington Regional Council (not Wellington City Council) issue, but we do our best to lobby for improvements for our city.

I didn't realise there were 2 councils at work here, that's got to make things tough!!

On the park and ride idea though, somewhere close to the junction of highway 1 and 2 with access from both could cut out a huge amount of congestion by covering Hutt valley and Porirua. Saving people from having to find parking every day and cutting their costs down would mean decent uptake (although there would need to be an awareness campaign, obviously). Using the train doesn't really count as a park and ride IMHO as people still have to pay full fares on the train, that's just a car park at a train station ;)

[PuppetMaster]

I had a giggle, I had no issues at all riding in on my two wheeled transporter, even found a park without issue -

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2840299/Delays-for-Wellington-commuters

[magicmonkey]

The way our law works is that if we enforce a law for one person, we must also enforce it for everyone else that is committing the same offence. We have been to Court many times where a person has successfully argued that they should be let off because others are getting away with the same offence (in this case the offence would be "parking on the footpath", not the way in which this is done).

heh, crazy kiwis!! If someone 'got away' with something then they should count their lucky stars rather than becoming a beacon of hope for every one else trying to dodge out of a parking ticket!!

Still, that's easily remedied by a change in the wording of the law, ie. 'Parking on the footpath without due care and attention'. 'due care ans attention' would need to be defined legally of course and parking wardens would need educating (possibly the toughest task :p) but it's not unachievable...

[NZDobbo]

Firstly I'd like to congratulate Gary for articulating, in quick order, the frustrations of his fellow motorcyclists to the dis-information (and from Gary's observations disingenuous) campaign being run by the Council on motorcycle parking in the CBD.

I've recently had the misfortune of having my legally parked bike on Grey Street knocked over by an errant motorist, causing several thousand dollars worth of damage - not to mention the inconvenience. I've also personally witnessed two other bikes knocked over by cars reversing out of the Grey St parks in the last few months. In both instances the motorists concerned 'failed' to notice anything amiss and rapidly left the scene.

Less the disabled parks, the conversion of the remaining car parks on Grey St would go a long to ease the footpath congestion problems that is obviously causing the Council sleepless nights. Admittedly, Council parking and fine revenue projections might take a dip in the short term, but this would be more than offset by the increase in goodwill from the growing motorcycling community.

:wacko:Food for thought?

[RusoR]

Jon,

I hate to think how much time you've spent responding to entries in this thread. How about a public meeting to discuss the issues face to face with those affected?
Also, I recall an article in the paper the other day that mentioned the recession had slowed down large developments on the Wellington waterfront. Why not use some of that space as a temporary solution until a longer term plan could be formulated? The waterfront area from Frank Kitts down to the Railway station is pretty close to the problem bike parking areas and for most in heavy bike gear would not be an unreasonable walk to their place of work. Personally I would prefer this as a viable off road parking solution, and a better use of the space than the proposed 40 berth Campervan park.
I wouldn't trust Wilson Parking as far as I could throw them....

[davebullet]

Jon,

I hate to think how much time you've spent responding to entries in this thread. How about a public meeting to discuss the issues face to face with those affected?
Also, I recall an article in the paper the other day that mentioned the recession had slowed down large developments on the Wellington waterfront. Why not use some of that space as a temporary solution until a longer term plan could be formulated? The waterfront area from Frank Kitts down to the Railway station is pretty close to the problem bike parking areas and for most in heavy bike gear would not be an unreasonable walk to their place of work. Personally I would prefer this as a viable off road parking solution, and a better use of the space than the proposed 40 berth Campervan park.
I wouldn't trust Wilson Parking as far as I could throw them....

In addition, there is probably a lot of wasted concreted / asphalted "land" in the CBD that could be utilised.

There is a disused car sales lot opposite Te Papa that hasn't been used in months (year+?). Although this is probably private land, some council "covenants" on use would be good to see this land go to some use. why the owners don't setup daily parking is beyond me (making some money for the site). The covenant I'm talking about is a maximum period of "disuse" permitted. Legally, I doubt this would fly "I can do what I like with my land" mentality....

[StoneY]

I think a much more important message to take from what I have written is that the Council would rather see a reduction in the number of motorcycle riders getting hurt or hurting/affecting others.

Cop out John- you know it and we know it
Concerned for our safety- bollocks!
I think the Council is just being bloody minded- and looking for a new revenue generator -
"Oh, bike numbers have doubled- how can we make on this one!"

Our bikes are less intrusive- less environmentally destructive- and less intrusive on the streets than Cars, Vans, Trucks....only Bicycles have any edge on our motorbikes

I gave up the train to take the bike because I got SICK of it breaking down - DAILY at one time!
Same for the older busses- they break down often- even have crashes too! (I was on one that had a massive smash on the motorway taking out 4 cars!)

Those trains, and at least half the aging Diesel busses- would be ordered off the road if anyone other than Govt bodies owned the death traps - double bloody standars again, and especially on the environment side- trolly busses actual carbon total is higher than a diesel bus due to electrical generation- FACT!

When Wellington Council and Tranzrail get the public transport sorted- then you will be in a place to implement such restrictive sanctions (yes SANCTIONS) against the motorcycle community

Dont forget- this growing pool of motorcycle riders are also rate paying voters- and we will vote you lot out if we get pissed off enough

[Clockwork]

I note that Jon appears to have stopped responding to this thread but I will post this anyway in the hope that he is still reading it.

Jon, you claim 150 extra spaces have been provided for motorcycles recently, can you supply details of when and where. The reason I ask is that I know for a fact the that bikes lost upto 6-7 spaces on Hunter St within the last two years and as I was walking along Balance St today it appears from the road markings that a number of bike parks have been lost to a loading zone outside the Occidental.

The other thing I noticed on my return to work was the number of places where bikes could easily be accomdated with no loss of revenue. At the other end of Balance St, behind there Shell service station there is the most enourmous loading zone, large enought to accomdate two large trucks, lord only know what businesses in the vacinity would need deliveries that large (and all to be completed within 5 mins according to the signage). In any case half of that could be made over to Bikes, that would accomdate 15 easily.

At the Customhouse Quay end of Johnston St you could easily fit 10-15 bikes on a stretch of road that currently has no parking allowed. This is a two lane one-way street with more than enough space for traffic turning both ways at the lights so its hard to see any rational reason that parking has been prohibited in this area but it could easily accomdate bikes, again with no loss of revenue.

At the intersection of Customhouse Quay and Jervois Quay a large flush median (which is largley ignored) was marked up to "Square off" the intersection. I believe you could easily accomdate 30+ bikes in this area (with the added benefit that traffic would now have to obey the road markings when crossing the intersection)

How many bikes could be accomdated on Post Office square behind the "French Kiss" Coffee vending caravan? As the caravan and its furniture are obviously causing no inconvenience to pedestrians the bikes would neither AND they'd largley be hidden behind that mobile billboard that is frequently parked there that the pedestrians also seem to be able to walk safely around.

I havn't yet investigated the nooks and crannies around Queens Warf but I bet there would be loads of places there too that could accomdate bikes.

What are your thoughts on this, Jon?

[Big Zappa]

Get in early, or learn where the tricky parking bays are that don't fill up as much.

Or ride in to work in the wet - scooters don't seem to have their waterwings on and stay at home.

All I can say is, if you get rid of free motorcycle parking altogether, some will catch public transport sure, but many others will just drive their cars to work. As it stands free parking is a huge incentive for motorcyclists.

And guess what, all those commuters that clog up the bays go to cafes, shops etc just like anybody else.

[scootnz]

http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=11230

[b1kerb0b]

Ixion wrote:
"Motorcycles represent almost the ONLY solution to city congestion."
Response: As you say, "almost". Public transport represents a much more sustainable and environmentally friendly solution that is also cheaper to society (if not to the individual) when taking into consideration the wider costs of the hugely increased number of accidents that motorcycle riders have. It is therefore no secret that the Council has far greater support for people shifting to public transport than motorcycles under the current environment. While the number of motorcycle riders entering the CBD has doubled over the past few years, the number of serious accidents they are having has considerably more than doubled. This may be due to the commuters typically being new to riding motorcycles, doing so during peak hours, and not even needing to have a motorcycle licence or registered vehicle (for 50cc scooters) etc. While we understand the benefits a motorbike presents to an individual (and the limitations of public transport), from a planning perspective we must support what is best for the majority community and therefore we are asking all motorcycle riders to exhibit the same level of individual responsibility for their actions that the serious and experienced bike riders do. In that regard, motorcycle riders have just as much responsibility as car or truck drivers to behave according to the road rules, which includes parking.

I think that's pretty weak Jon... from Miramar it costs $8 a day to commute via bus, and the congestion is awful. During winter especially I was sick a lot when bussing, as soon as I started riding again, even in the depths of cold wet winter, I wasn't getting sick all the time. Logical conclusion? The bus was detrimental to my health, and I am not exaggerating.

So, $8 a day vs at most $2 in fuel? Hmmmm...

Now, quite honestly I'd love it if the parking buildings accepted motorbikes & scooters, but the attitude from them has been appalling. I tried to negotiate a deal with them for some of my friends and i got a) laughed at and b) got quoted THE SAME as a car and c) got told they would allocate the top corner of the roof, uncovered, that was unusable by cars. What a joke.

So cat amongst the pigeons time: do the motorbike parking right... allow a certain number of FREE bike park areas, and create some areas on the street that are "permit" spaces - in order to park there you must have a WCC parking permit. Make it a small payment per month, you a) relieve the "free" parking congestion issues because you're giving an alternative riders are MORE likely to trust, and b) you get some income return therefore make it more likely it is economically feasible for the council to convert some car spaces to bike parks.

We don't all ride because we are freetards and don't want to pay. Often it's because we can't see the sense in 1 person commute in a car, or hate sub-standard stinky cattle-class public transport, or maybe it's lifestyle. IMHO if someone has a $20,000 bike they can afford to pay a few bucks a month for a park but they also don't trust putting their bike in a dingy dark corner of a dogey parking building.

my 2c

[b1kerb0b]

If there were 80,000 commuters coming into town on motorcycles instead of cars, parked legally and none of them got hurt, I would be ecstatic :-)

The interesting thing is that almost all of the scooters coming into the bike shops for accident repair are the fault of cars... Hmmmm

[Jon Visser]

Also, I recall an article in the paper the other day that mentioned the recession had slowed down large developments on the Wellington waterfront. Why not use some of that space as a temporary solution until a longer term plan could be formulated?

And also in response to the earlier post suggesting green spaces along the waterfront: Please note that the waterfront is all private property (owned and managed by Wellington Waterfront Limited). The Council is trying to negotiate the use of such space (whether for motorbikes or campervans) in the interests of the public good, but it is up to WWL how they allow the land to be used. So far they have accommodated parking but only on a commercial basis (they need to get a return on their asset just like all other private companies) so this is effectively already covered by our suggestion for commuters to use commercial or private space (with the property owner's consent of course).

[Clockwork]

And also in response to the earlier post suggesting green spaces along the waterfront: Please note that the waterfront is all private property (owned and managed by Wellington Waterfront Limited). The Council is trying to negotiate the use of such space (whether for motorbikes or campervans) in the interests of the public good, but it is up to WWL how they allow the land to be used. So far they have accommodated parking but only on a commercial basis (they need to get a return on their asset just like all other private companies) so this is effectively already covered by our suggestion for commuters to use commercial or private space (with the property owner's consent of course).

http://www.wellington.govt.nz/haveyoursay/meetings/title/Council/2009/29Jun1600/pdf/Waterfront.pdf

"1. The Wellington Warterfront Framework
Wellington Waterfront Limited is a Council Controlled Organisation....."

Please stop pissing us about Jon, are you here to help us find a solution or are you here as some sort of PR exercise that is about to fail spectacularly!

I'd still quite like a response to my post #118 (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1129394583&postcount=118)

[Jon Visser]

Jon, you claim 150 extra spaces have been provided for motorcycles recently, can you supply details of when and where.

A map is located here:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/pdfs/mcycle-parking.pdf
This will be updated soon when the info pamphlets are ready - these will include slightly clearer maps. The 13 parks at the end of the list (from 34 to 46) are the new ones that we have created over the past year. These provide an additional 100 (not 150) spaces.


The other thing I noticed on my return to work was the number of places where bikes could easily be accomdated with no loss of revenue. At the other end of Balance St, behind there Shell service station there is the most enourmous loading zone, large enought to accomdate two large trucks, lord only know what businesses in the vacinity would need deliveries that large (and all to be completed within 5 mins according to the signage). In any case half of that could be made over to Bikes, that would accomdate 15 easily.

I will have a look at that area as a possibility. This is indeed for parking large trucks in, though the P5 restriction appears a bit strange and I would like to know a bit more about when trucks or smaller service vehicles typically use this space (note that there are very few loading zones along Featherston Street as we try to keep that sort of activity off the main arterial roads). If it turns out that the large trucks only use this loading zone at night (when the P5 time restriction may not apply) then maybe we could have "shared" spaces, i.e. motorcycles during the day and loading zone at night.


At the Customhouse Quay end of Johnston St you could easily fit 10-15 bikes on a stretch of road that currently has no parking allowed. This is a two lane one-way street with more than enough space for traffic turning both ways at the lights so its hard to see any rational reason that parking has been prohibited in this area but it could easily accomdate bikes, again with no loss of revenue.

"No parking" areas (broken yellow lines) are only placed for specific reasons, usually associated with safety, sight lines, access (e.g. for emergency vehicles etc). Given the extremely limited space that we have for parking in the city, we are very reluctant to use such a tool where this is not neccesary. Unless something changes (e.g. the street layout or the usage of the adjacent building etc) it is very unlikely that areas marked with broken yellow lines will be made appropriate for motorcycle parking (where they have been put in for safety/access). However, I am aware of a number of locations where they have been put in to create clear sight lines (typically to allow traffic to see pedestrians and vice versa) and while parkign a truck or a van at that location could create a visual obstruction, parking motorcycles may not. The no parking space at that end of Johnston Street exists because the left lane has the ability to turn left or right. Left-turning vehicles may be held up by pedestrians on the crossing, so the clear space has been provided for them to move over and wait while letting the right-turning traffic past so that they are not unreasonably held up. This effectively creates two lanes although technically the road is not wide enough to mark three lanes (one for left-turners and and two for right-turners).


At the intersection of Customhouse Quay and Jervois Quay a large flush median (which is largley ignored) was marked up to "Square off" the intersection. I believe you could easily accomdate 30+ bikes in this area (with the added benefit that traffic would now have to obey the road markings when crossing the intersection)

The white hatched section of the carriageway exists to allow traffic exiting Customhouse Quay to get up to speed before merging with the much faster left hand lane of Jervois Quay - especially in peak commuter hours this area is used for the two lines of traffic to merge "like a zip". The white lines are allowed to be driven on. The sharper turn lines with a give way and hold bar are for traffic wanting to cross all three lanes of Jervois Quay (almost perpendicularly) in order to get into the right-hand lane to turn right at the next set of signals. These need to wait for a much bigger gap in the traffic.


How many bikes could be accomdated on Post Office square behind the "French Kiss" Coffee vending caravan? As the caravan and its furniture are obviously causing no inconvenience to pedestrians the bikes would neither AND they'd largley be hidden behind that mobile billboard that is frequently parked there that the pedestrians also seem to be able to walk safely around.

I thought this was a great idea and I have already proposed this as a possibility. The proposal was rejected on the basis that this is a pedestrian space intended to be used for people to gather and rest well away from the bustle of the inner city streets or after having crossed the Quays (i.e. for families with children, part of the city-to-sea linkage). It is really a "park" even though it is paved. There were also safety concerns with bikes needing to cross potentially busy pedestrian spaces (e.g. the pedestrian crossing from Queens Wharf) or entering traffic on the busy Quays unexpectedly. Bikes would likely use pedestrian ramps rather then the kerbs. We are much more in favour of finding spaces that adjoin the road so that bikes can be parked safely without needing to cross pedestrian paths. I will therefore have a look at the Custom House Quay side of Post Office Square which is much quieter, adjoins the road, is not greatly utilised and already has some obstructions like trees along it.

[Jon Visser]

Wellington Waterfront Limited is a Council Controlled Organisation.....

CCOs are not under the control of council officers, but they have a board of directors (answerable to the Councillors) and their own management structure. Some are even part-owned by other organisations. I can assure you that the waterfront space is entirely out of our WCC officer control and we have no ability to manage their land for parking etc. One day that control may come back to us, and then I would be happy to look at how usage of that space can be optimised.

[Jon Visser]

Now, quite honestly I'd love it if the parking buildings accepted motorbikes & scooters, but the attitude from them has been appalling. I tried to negotiate a deal with them for some of my friends and i got a) laughed at and b) got quoted THE SAME as a car and c) got told they would allocate the top corner of the roof, uncovered, that was unusable by cars. What a joke.

So cat amongst the pigeons time: do the motorbike parking right... allow a certain number of FREE bike park areas, and create some areas on the street that are "permit" spaces - in order to park there you must have a WCC parking permit. Make it a small payment per month, you a) relieve the "free" parking congestion issues because you're giving an alternative riders are MORE likely to trust, and b) you get some income return therefore make it more likely it is economically feasible for the council to convert some car spaces to bike parks.

I'm sure that a lot of other riders will probably disagree with the proposal to introduce fees for on-road motorcycle parking. Also, while riders do purchase things from time to time, they are in no way comparable to the very high turnover of car parking for commercial/retail activities (i.e. the two activities do not compete or replace each other).

Our current campaign has been to (successfully) lobby parking garage operators to provide riders with access to very high quality parking spaces at much reduced rates, and then to encourage riders to take up that option (through media and pamphlet drops - these will come out soon). As a large group of customers (rather than as individuals) riders will be able to lobby these garages to provide even better services and price competition over time. That appears to address the concerns you have raised.

[davebullet]

Those trains, and at least half the aging Diesel busses- would be ordered off the road if anyone other than Govt bodies owned the death traps

Private companies are profit margin driven, therefore I think the opposite would occur. You'd end up with older buses as the private company milks as much capital value out of them as it can

[Str8 Jacket]

I'm sure that a lot of other riders will probably disagree with the proposal to introduce fees for on-road motorcycle parking. Also, while riders do purchase things from time to time, they are in no way comparable to the very high turnover of car parking for commercial/retail activities (i.e. the two activities do not compete or replace each other).

Our current campaign has been to.....

enable the WCC to make as much money as possible...

Let's be honest Jon. This is about revenue not actually what is best for the people....

[DougieNZ]

Intersting this debate...

Big ups to Jon for coming on here and putting the WCC perspective.

I am a little interested as to why we as motorcyclists think that we can demand:

- free motorcycle parks
- To park illegally on footpaths

Imagine if all parking was made free in the CBD! There would never be any parks available for those visiting the city. Provided free or reduced price secure car parks were provided for motorcyclists in parking buildings, then I see no problem with charging for the street parks. Why should we demand any more than other road users?

The parking on footpaths in undoubtedly a hazard and is clearly illegal. So why should we think we can get away with it? What about he disabled people that can't go about their business or injure themselves by tripping over illegally parked motorcyles? What about their rights?

[magicmonkey]

Intersting this debate...

Big ups to Jon for coming on here and putting the WCC perspective.

I am a little interested as to why we as motorcyclists think that we can demand:

- Unlimited free car parks
- To park illegally on footpaths

Imagine if all parking was made free in the CBD! There would never be any parks available for those visiting the city. Provided free or reduced price secure car parks were provided for motorcyclists in parking buildings, then I see no problem with charging for the street parks. Why should we demaind any more than other road users?

The parking on footpaths in undoubtedly a hazard and is clearly illegal. So why should we think we can get away with it?

well, for one there's precedent for free parking for bikes, then there's congestion, space and emissions, to name a few.

The request from most people has been to allow legal parking on specific pieces of pavement so as to not cause a hazard or run foul of the law rather than to a bunch of bikers ranting about wanting to park in the most hazardous place possible and get away with it...

To start with Jon's input was pretty valuable, until it became clear that he was here to tell everyone why they weren't going to do things rather than listen and try to pick things up, that's my people have been making sensible suggestions ;)

[Clockwork]

First of all, Jon. Thank you for replying to my post and answering my question about the new bike park locations. I won't let your reply go entirely unchallenged though.


CCOs are not under the control of council officers, but they have a board of directors (answerable to the Councillors) and their own management structure. Some are even part-owned by other organisations. I can assure you that the waterfront space is entirely out of our WCC officer control and we have no ability to manage their land for parking etc. One day that control may come back to us, and then I would be happy to look at how usage of that space can be optimised.

You choose your words carefully but as a WCC Officer you are presumably doing the bidding of the Council; and who is the limited part of Wellington Waterfront Limited?. The Council. The fact is that is that motorcycle parking on the waterfront could be arranged more easily than arranging for paid parking with the likes of WWL's tenants (Wilson Parking). My guess is only political will stands in the way.

I note too that informal bike and scooter parking outside TSB Arena has recently been moved on, so if that act has caused more bikes on the streets and footpaths we know who to thank. Who would have moved them on Jon?



The white hatched section of the carriageway exists to allow traffic exiting Customhouse Quay to get up to speed before merging with the much faster left hand lane of Jervois Quay - especially in peak commuter hours this area is used for the two lines of traffic to merge "like a zip". The white lines are allowed to be driven on. The sharper turn lines with a give way and hold bar are for traffic wanting to cross all three lanes of Jervois Quay (almost perpendicularly) in order to get into the right-hand lane to turn right at the next set of signals. These need to wait for a much bigger gap in the traffic.


This one won't wash, Jon. First of all this intersection is not marked for merging traffic is is a Give Way and anyone foolhardy enough to try and accelerate and merge through that intersection runs the very real risk if steaming into the back of cars waiting to turn left into Brandon St



I thought this was a great idea and I have already proposed this as a possibility. The proposal was rejected on the basis that this is a pedestrian space intended to be used for people to gather and rest well away from the bustle of the inner city streets or after having crossed the Quays (i.e. for families with children, part of the city-to-sea linkage). It is really a "park" even though it is paved. There were also safety concerns with bikes needing to cross potentially busy pedestrian spaces (e.g. the pedestrian crossing from Queens Wharf) or entering traffic on the busy Quays unexpectedly. Bikes would likely use pedestrian ramps rather then the kerbs. We are much more in favour of finding spaces that adjoin the road so that bikes can be parked safely without needing to cross pedestrian paths. I will therefore have a look at the Custom House Quay side of Post Office Square which is much quieter, adjoins the road, is not greatly utilised and already has some obstructions like trees along it.

Great if you really are going to relook at the use of this space although my suggestion would be lot cheaper than trying to fit bike parks on the Customhouse Quay side. The suggestion that the area is "...to be used for people to gather and rest well away from the bustle of the inner city streets..." Have you stood near Jervois Quay lately? Surely Queen's Warf would make a better resting place.

And finally, whoever made this objection "There were also safety concerns with bikes needing to cross potentially busy pedestrian spaces" obviously hasn't heard of the Council's plans for buses on Manners St. If these sorts of objections are going to be taken seriously then again I have to question how serious were the attempts to resolve this problem.

While I have your attention, check out the intersection of Hunter & Victoria Sts or at the end of any line of angle parks. There are plenty of places where Bikes & Scooters could park if the old yellow paint wasn't splattered around quite so liberally.

[StoneY]

Our current campaign has been to (successfully) lobby parking garage operators to provide riders with access to very high quality parking spaces at much reduced rates, and then to encourage riders to take up that option (through media and pamphlet drops - these will come out soon). As a large group of customers (rather than as individuals) riders will be able to lobby these garages to provide even better services and price competition over time. That appears to address the concerns you have raised.

John,

I have just rang EVERY major parking building in Wellington.
None even know of any council approach, your name, or that Bikers are being pointed at them-

Please provide the parking companies you have SUCCESSFULLY negotiated with

I was quoted CAR prices for a space beside a lift shaft- a wet, cold, slimy spot under the Lombard (not even in the building) where my bike would be either rotted out with corrosion or stolen/vandalised by glue sniffers - thanks Wilson Parking, very farkin generous

They had never heard of this lobbying- nor have they even a motorcycle rate in ANY of thier buildings - wanna park there its CAR rates end of story-

I for one would happily pay for a DRY, SECURE, leased space for my bike at say 40$ per month based the 200$ per month I used to pay for a Gilmer Tce spot from the Council

And again- why should we the motorcyclist be penalised for lack of council management?
I say it again I AM A RATEPAYER- treat me with the respect I am due because I pay YOUR salary pal

[StoneY]

Private companies are profit margin driven, therefore I think the opposite would occur. You'd end up with older buses as the private company milks as much capital value out of them as it can

Dude- Mana Coaches-
Private firm- busses much MUCH cleaner and in better shape than MOST of the busses I see on CBD routes-
I rest my case

[Ixion]

I'm sure that a lot of other riders will probably disagree with the proposal to introduce fees for on-road motorcycle parking. Also, while riders do purchase things from time to time, they are in no way comparable to the very high turnover of car parking for commercial/retail activities (i.e. the two activities do not compete or replace each other).

...

Hang about , hang about. What's that mean? The total number of cars is more than bikes so the total take is greater, of course. But, per head, a bike rider is going to spend just as much at shops as a car driver. Probably more. Bikers are a very attractive commercial demographic. High discretionary income (we can afford those money pits called bikes, for a start), and very easy to deal with (no kids hanging on, no buying one cup of tea for the whole afternoon).

I, like all riders, do indeed "Purchase things from time to time". Do you imagine that bikers are ascetics who buy a single sack of bean sprouts and a roll of haircloth a year? We have to eat like other people, y'know. And drink. We need clothes. Phones. Cameras. Computers. Stereos .Holidays. And all the other delights of a consumer society.

That has to be one of the downright silliest statements I've ever read.

I think you are basing your campaign on some very limited and incorrect assumptions about the nature of the biker demographic. You need to do a LOT more research.

[bogan]

John,

I have just rang EVERY major parking building in Wellington.
None even know of any council approach, your name, or that Bikers are being pointed at them-

Please provide the parking companies you have SUCCESSFULLY negotiated with


That seems extremely poor that nobody is aware of the campaign. Makes me think this whole thing could be just a cleverly thought out wind up thread?

[vhot]

Whatever anybody in the WCC says, this bike parking issue comes down to simple dollars and cents.

Our Council may pretend that it is GREEN, but this issue has proven that it is far from interested in the environment. Look also at how pushbike riders have been sidelined and put in with main-stream traffic? If the WCC was really interested in emissions et al, it would have built bicycle tracks that are protected from heavy traffic. Instead they are setting car and truck drivers up for a fall, we jostle daily with pushbikes every day on our congested roads.

WCC needs to convert more inner city car parks into bike parks and what better way than using GREEN paint for bike parking? Other countries use colour coded paint for different uses. E.g RED paint says don't park here.
Why can't WCC start this trend? Easy and cheap. Oops sorry - it won't make any revenue.....

[davebullet]

John,

I have just rang EVERY major parking building in Wellington.
None even know of any council approach, your name, or that Bikers are being pointed at them-

Please provide the parking companies you have SUCCESSFULLY negotiated with

Who did you speak to at the parking buildings? It could be a matter of the head honchos of the parking building companies not cascading the information down the chain.

[davebullet]

I think the real motive from WCC is a few pedestrians or servicemen complaining about a couple of bikes here and there who are inconsiderately parked on the footpath.

The WCC has no $ to gain if we all end up parking in a private carpark building. They are not talking about metering our on-street parking (refer to one of Jon's earlier threads).

No, I don't work for the council. I am trying to see things from the public's perspective, not just a bikers.

Why should bikers be treated differently to cars? When car parks on the street fill up, where do cars park? On the footpath? - no, they go to a parking building.

I am not saying ban bikes from footpaths.... I think there are safe / unobtrusive footpath areas we can park in due to our size. We just need them to be clearly marked (as I noted before) to avoid confusion, fines etc...

[Swoop]

I am not saying ban bikes from footpaths.... I think there are safe / unobtrusive footpath areas we can park in due to our size. We just need them to be clearly marked (as I noted before) to avoid confusion, fines etc...
Quite so.

As suggested on the last page, looking at the areas that have been liberally coated with yellow paint, would be an excellent starting point.
Obviously a car is too big to fit there, or obstructs vision. A bike could park in that same place without interfering with traffic flow OR impede vision (as a bike sits lower).

[Jon Visser]

I have just rang EVERY major parking building in Wellington.
None even know of any council approach, your name, or that Bikers are being pointed at them-

Please provide the parking companies you have SUCCESSFULLY negotiated with

Agreements have been reached with the managers of Wilsons, Tournament and CarePark facilities who have agreed to make all of their Wellington facilities available. Prices will vary depending on the facilities offered, but I have been quoted typical ranges of $50 to $100 per month. These companies now need to advise all of their local building operators and prepare their administrative departments and the physical facilities to accommodate motorcycle customers. When that is ready, the information such as the locations of these garages will be provided to all riders via leaflets and information on our web sites (hence the delay with issuing these as we are waiting on the parking garages to prepare for this). I will ask the companies to ensure their internal staff are all aware of these changes.

[Str8 Jacket]

Prices will vary depending on the facilities offered, but I have been quoted typical ranges of $50 to $100 per month. .

Again, it costs me no more than $40 a month (including maintenance costs and WoF Rego etc) to ride my bike to work. Why would I see this as 'value for money' when you have just effectively doubled my costs to get to work?

[Hawkeye]

Jon,

How about converting the parking bays along side 40 Customhouse Quay to bike parking. (photo included). This is a spot that is close enough to the CBD but not a spot that car drivers would normally use for their 20 min quick shop!
There is ample room along that building that would not interfere with pedestians as there is already car parking and a footpath and it could fit in 30-40 bikes (or even more if bike bays are marked). And it would not affect a large number of car parking spots.

And if you also included along no 34, your talking about close to 100 extra bike spots which ARE close enough but not interfering with the CBD foot traffic.
That could eleviate most, if not all, of the Grey st area issues.

The big question remains. Are the council prepared to listen to the suggestions of those affected or are you on here just giving lip service as a PR excercise and revenue gathering is the driving force.

The jury is currently out!

[Wilson Parking]

Hello, Wilson Parking have been in discussion with the Council about this issue and are more than happy to offer parking for bikes at our various sites around Wellington. For rates and locations, feel free to contact us on 04 473 2293 or email me at garethp@wilsonparking.co.nz. Thanks

[Hawkeye]

Hello, Wilson Parking have been in discussion with the Council about this issue and are more than happy to offer parking for bikes at our various sites around Wellington. For rates and locations, feel free to contact us on 04 473 2293 or email me at garethp@wilsonparking.co.nz. Thanks

How about publishing your rates on this thread?

[Tournament Parking]

Hi All,

Tournament Parking has a dedicated motorbike parking area at James Smiths Car Park. This area is undercover and can hold 40-50 bikes. This area is currently provided free of charge (and has been for many years). This is on a first in, first served basis.

As part of the discussions with the council we have introduced a dedicated space for motorbikes at the Plimmer Tower Car Park. This park is located on the corner of Boulcott Street & Gilmer Terrace and has excellent pedestrian access to the Terrace, Boulcott Street & Lambton Quay (via Plimmer Steps). For more info and rates for this site contact us on 473 3432.

We can also provide parking options for bikes at our other locations around the city. For further information on locations and rates (which are very reasonable) phone 473 3432 or email info@tournament.co.nz

We have several members of staff who ride, so we are keen to help out where we can.

Cheers

Tournament Parking

[rustic101]

a picture paints a thousand words :Oops:

[Hawkeye]

Hello, Wilson Parking have been in discussion with the Council about this issue and are more than happy to offer parking for bikes at our various sites around Wellington. For rates and locations, feel free to contact us on 04 473 2293 or email me at garethp@wilsonparking.co.nz. Thanks


Hi All,

Tournament Parking has a dedicated motorbike parking area at James Smiths Car Park. This area is undercover and can hold 40-50 bikes. This area is currently provided free of charge (and has been for many years). This is on a first in, first served basis.

As part of the discussions with the council we have introduced a dedicated space for motorbikes at the Plimmer Tower Car Park. This park is located on the corner of Boulcott Street & Gilmer Terrace and has excellent pedestrian access to the Terrace, Boulcott Street & Lambton Quay (via Plimmer Steps). For more info and rates for this site contact us on 473 3432.

We can also provide parking options for bikes at our other locations around the city. For further information on locations and rates (which are very reasonable) phone 473 3432 or email info@tournament.co.nz

We have several members of staff who ride, so we are keen to help out where we can.

Cheers

Tournament Parking


Forgive me for being synical, but having travelled in cars for a number of year, I have seen a trend by your companies. Keep the rates reasonable until everyone gets used to using the parking, and then slowly but surely, hike up the prices.

[Jon Visser]

Whatever anybody in the WCC says, this bike parking issue comes down to simple dollars and cents.

You are correct that parking is very much about money. Parking revenue is the tool used to generate turnover of car parks so that many people can share a limited amenity, as a deterrent for parking incorrectly, in order to recover the costs of providing, maintaining and managing the parking assets (including that portion of the road surface used to park on) and to ensure that these costs are paid for by the people that use them (e.g. this may be out of town people rather than Wellington ratepayers, and it would also not be fair to charge it through the rates for those who don't have a car).

In saying that, the Council is not expecting to receive any money from motorcycle riders, only that they obey the law and have consideration for their fellow citizens who want to legally and safely use the footpath.


WCC needs to convert more inner city car parks into bike parks and what better way than using GREEN paint for bike parking? Other countries use colour coded paint for different uses. E.g RED paint says don't park here. Why can't WCC start this trend?

In New Zealand the colours used for road marking are specified by law. Anything contrary to the law would not be enforcable and may cause accidents or people being unfairly ticketed (e.g. if Wellington used different colours from the rest of the country then this would confuse people, especially visitors to our city).

[sinned]

When something of value is provided free it distorts the value of it to the user and others end up paying in one way or another. The others in this case include ratepayers and other uses of parks.


Interesting this debate...
I am a little interested as to why we as motorcyclists think that we can demand:
- free motorcycle parks
- To park illegally on footpaths

Imagine if all parking was made free in the CBD! There would never be any parks available for those visiting the city. Provided free or reduced price secure car parks were provided for motorcyclists in parking buildings, then I see no problem with charging for the street parks. Why should we demand any more than other road users?
Agree.
There is no parking available now in the central city for motorcyclist who needs a park for an hour or two during the day. I take the car - as I know I can find a park.


Agreements have been reached with the managers of Wilsons, Tournament and CarePark facilities who have agreed to make all of their Wellington facilities available. Prices will vary depending on the facilities offered, but I have been quoted typical ranges of $50 to $100 per month.
We should be thanking Jon for facilitating a service for motorcycle parking from the parking companies. Thanks Jon.


Again, it costs me no more than $40 a month (including maintenance costs and WoF Rego etc) to ride my bike to work. Why would I see this as 'value for money' when you have just effectively doubled my costs to get to work?
You may not see this as value for money and you may determine that public transport is better value.


Other points:

I am a ratepayer why should I be subsidising parking? - How many motorcycles and scooters parked for free in the city are owned by riders living out of the city? :Pokey:
There may be fewer scooters on the road if the users had to pay for parking. :innocent:
Street parking for bikes should be metered - I have attached a photo of metered bike parking in Nice (southern France). There are zillions of bikes on the road in that part of the world.
$50- $100 bucks a month for a covered park sounds good value. A car park is 4X that. :yes:


I am about to drive into the city for business and will be paying for parking.

[Clockwork]

Forgive me for being synical, but having travelled in cars for a number of year, I have seen a trend by your companies. Keep the rates reasonable until everyone gets used to using the parking, and then slowly but surely, hike up the prices.


Or worse... if enough riders started to use them the Council would see the opportunity to replace "unused" motorcycle parking with P&D car parking... then the off-road rates would go up.

If there has been an increase in bike/scooter numbers it will be because commuters have responded to conditions... public transport, congestion and parking charges and where able, have chosen to convert there chosen mode of transport. Many riders pay inflated registration and insurance charges to use their bikes and free and convenient parking is an part of the calculation that riders include in their decision making process. Moving us into off-road parking will make a significant impact on the economics of the commute.

Right now the Council seem to believe that the on-road parking serves the city's retail outlets. I doubt that very much. I suspect that this city's retail outlets exist almost entirely on the backs of the commuters that come here Monday to Friday (including the motorcyclists)

As telecommuting becomes more practical many CBD employers will seek to reduce their high rental/power bills by encouraging more and more employees to telecommute, my own employer is already moving this way. At the moment, for professional and social reasons I would rather make the daily journey into Wellington but as my transport options become less palatable I will become more amenable to telecommuting.

When the commuters have been driven out of the city who will bother travelling into Wellington just to access the retail outlets when there are already better and more convenient options in the outer suburbs. Ones with free parking, shop conveniently close to each other, and in the warm and dry.

I challenge you once more, Jon. Look at the southern end of Featherstone St behind the ANZ building, how many car spaces would you need to surrender to completely resolve the bike parking problems on Grey st? Look at the last 10m of that road where parking is prohibited altogether. Is bike parking really that big-a-problem elsewhere in the city? Why do you insist on attempting to crack this nut with such an unpopular sledge hammer?

[vhot]

Jon Visser said:
In New Zealand the colours used for road marking are specified by law. Anything contrary to the law would not be enforcable and may cause accidents or people being unfairly ticketed (e.g. if Wellington used different colours from the rest of the country then this would confuse people, especially visitors to our city).

We managed to get green bus lanes painted all around Wellington. (How long did that take to get into law?) I am not sure how many other cities in NZ have these bus lanes, but surely it can't be too laborious to bring in a 'change of law' to allow for green painted motorbike parking spaces?

Next we will be hearing how the council will want to make bicycle riders pay to park their bicycles.

[Jon Visser]

How about converting the parking bays along side 40 Customhouse Quay to bike parking. (photo included). This is a spot that is close enough to the CBD but not a spot that car drivers would normally use for their 20 min quick shop!
There is ample room along that building that would not interfere with pedestians as there is already car parking and a footpath and it could fit in 30-40 bikes (or even more if bike bays are marked). And it would not affect a large number of car parking spots.

And if you also included along no 34, your talking about close to 100 extra bike spots which ARE close enough but not interfering with the CBD foot traffic.

I assume you mean the section along Shed 11? There is no footpath here at all (pedestrians would have to walk on the live carriageway or amongst the motorcycles) and quite a lethal area to be manouvering bikes. I'm surprised we even have a parking bay here (we'd rather put in a footpath!) but we had to keep this facility as it is actually there for diplomatic cars only (for the adjacent embassy) though cars and motorcycles can use this area at night and in the weekends for free.


Are the council prepared to listen to the suggestions of those affected or are you on here just giving lip service as a PR excercise and revenue gathering is the driving force.

Yes - we are prepared to listen and act on your suggestions. Where the suggestions are turned down, I am hopefully providing information that will assist people to understand what needs to be considered to create new spaces (though I fear I must just sound like someone who keeps saying no...). What you want to see is some of these suggestions being successful (i.e. not just all being turned down). I am happy to report that your suggestions have resulted in two new free motorcycle parking areas being created within the last week - space for about 20 motorcycles has just been marked in our Clifton Terrace car park and I have just arranged for a small one to be put in on Cable Street by Chaffers Street.

In looking at the Grey Street pressure area (and following on from your suggestions to re-visit the broken-yellow-line spaces where these are for sight-lines only) I am just in the process of proposing that the section of Featherston Street just before Hunter Street with broken yellow lines be converted to motorcycle parking. The current restriction exists to give Featherston Street traffic adequate visibility of the buses coming from Hunter Street. However, a lot of cars and delivery trucks abuse that space and park illegally, blocking that sight line. If this was motorcycle parking only, the motorcycles would actually be assisting with keeping the sight lines open, and as an added benefit it is right next to our public shower facilities where people could get changed from their riding gear into work clothes (under shelter). That could potentially provide space for about 10 bikes or scooters (though as explained before, nowhere near the 550 shortage we have and therefore in parallel to creating new spaces where we can we will continue to encourage motorcycles to park off the road).

Please do keep those suggestions coming...

[Clockwork]

Jon, you cite that 550 number but I doubt there are 550 bikes parked illegally around Wellington on any given workday let alone 550 that are actually causing the problems around Grey St. Indeed, I'd suggest that there were less than 20 Bikes causing the problems around there.

[Jon Visser]

Jon, you cite that 550 number but I doubt there are 550 bikes parked illegally around Wellington on any given workday let alone 550 that are actually causing the problems around Grey St. Indeed, I'd suggest that there were less than 20 Bikes causing the problems around there.

At one point we counted 50 illegally parked bikes in Grey Street alone (and I have the photos to prove it). You only need to look at a few key places like Boulcott Street (20), Courtenay Precinct (40), Victoria Street (15) etc for the numbers to add up very quickly. There are many smaller streets with only one or two which don't look like many on their own (see the photo essay that someone posted a thread to) but they do all add up. It is a real problem to other road users that we are finding a reasonable and practical solution to.

[Hawkeye]

I assume you mean the section along Shed 11? There is no footpath here at all (pedestrians would have to walk on the live carriageway or amongst the motorcycles) and quite a lethal area to be manouvering bikes. I'm surprised we even have a parking bay here (we'd rather put in a footpath!) but we had to keep this facility as it is actually there for diplomatic cars only (for the adjacent embassy) though cars and motorcycles can use this area at night and in the weekends for free.


Please do keep those suggestions coming...

While in some way's I agree with you, there could easily be a line painted (or even bollards) marking the demarcation of the foot traffic from the bike parking. If the bays were actually painted at an angle, again this would reduce the physical footprint that bikes would take up.
I would like to ask how many times diplomatic cars use this site and actually how many car spaces they require. There is room to fit about 20 cars there. How many times does an embassy have 20 diplomatic cars rolling up?
What I'm suggesting will also create a space that pedestians can use.
Even if only half was made available to bikes, it would help.

While I'm on the suggestion theme:
There a two car parks on Customhouse Quay between Grey St and the Optimation House ramp to the underground car park. (pic included). This is a defined size due to the restrictions of the corner on one side and the ramp on the other. Could this site not be a possiblility for converting to bike parking. It would not interfere with any other bays due to the physical constraints of the corner and the ramp. Yet it would also help to eleviate the Grey St. overcrowding.

[Hawkeye]

At one point we counted 50 illegally parked bikes in Grey Street alone (and I have the photos to prove it). You only need to look at a few key places like Boulcott Street (20), Courtenay Precinct (40), Victoria Street (15) etc for the numbers to add up very quickly. There are many smaller streets with only one or two which don't look like many on their own (see the photo essay that someone posted a thread to) but they do all add up. It is a real problem to other road users that we are finding a reasonable and practical solution to.

Hi Jon,

I would love to see that photograph that shows 50 'illegally' parked bikes on Grey st. Because no matter how I work it out, (10 along the wall of ANZ, another 6/7 on the other side of the path, 4/5 between trees etc) There is no way I can see how the figure can reach 50. How about posting said photo on here as evidence to back up your claims. Because without hard evidence, it's just another statement that may be true (or not).

[Jon Visser]

I would love to see that photograph that shows 50 'illegally' parked bikes on Grey st. Because no matter how I work it out, (10 along the wall of ANZ, another 6/7 on the other side of the path, 4/5 between trees etc) There is no way I can see how the figure can reach 50. How about posting said photo on here as evidence to back up your claims. Because without hard evidence, it's just another statement that may be true (or not).

When we took the survey, there were exactly 49 bikes illegally parked along Grey Street (most of them in the section outside the ANZ, photos included) between Jervois Quay and Lambton Quay, including near the intersections with the Quays and Featherston Street (some photos included as examples - I could only upload a maximum of 6 files). Note that any motorcycle parked other then wholly inside the roadmarkings for a motorcycle parking bay are technically considered "illegal".

[scracha]

Again, it costs me no more than $40 a month (including maintenance costs and WoF Rego etc) to ride my bike to work. Why would I see this as 'value for money' when you have just effectively doubled my costs to get to work?

Agreed. $40 would be good value if the parking were secure, covered, RESERVED and had a place to stash your gear.

[Hawkeye]

When we took the survey, there were exactly 49 bikes illegally parked along Grey Street (most of them in the section outside the ANZ, photos included) between Jervois Quay and Lambton Quay, including near the intersections with the Quays and Featherston Street (some photos included as examples - I could only upload a maximum of 6 files). Note that any motorcycle parked other then wholly inside the roadmarkings for a motorcycle parking bay are technically considered "illegal".

Hi Jon,

So the 50 quoted is not only Grey St, but also the surrounding streets which is what I was implying. Of the pics of Grey St shown, I can only count 25 bikes (possibly 26). If you are going to quote numbers like that then the facts need to be correct otherwise... well you work it out.
I am not condoning this parking by the way because I have thought at times, some of the parking there is abismal.

[Drogen Omen]

One option we took was look for a space on the footpath next to a building that is not in the way of any pedestrians. and then look at the boundary lines on the council website for that building and see if the boundaries are far enough out so that you bike is parked inside the lines. then ask the building manager if he is ok with you bike parked there every day. if he says yes then your sorted.

Technically you are parking on private property and the council cant do anything about it.

We did get a couple of parking tickets one day and went back to the council with a letter signed by the building manager saying that this he was ok with us parking on his private property then we showed the council that the boundary lines were well away from his building which meant you could actually park 2 bikes in front of each other on the footpath and still be inside the lines. all the tickets issues to the bikes that were parked there were withdrawn.

That's what we did on Willis street opposite the CopyNZ shop, upper end of Willis..

[IdunBrokdItAgin]

Apologies for the long post.

Just read through most of thread and a few things jump out at me:

1) There seems to be a lot of nit picking going on (50 bikes in grey street or grey street and featherstone combined?). I think the point has been proven that there is a lot of unauthorised parking going on and some of the more exterme parking is not leaving room for the widest pedestrians (prams, mobility chairs etc).

2) There also seems to be an overwheleming voice from the riders that their belief that using bikes releives commuiting stresses on the road system and that the free parking offset the higher road charges bikes have to pay (even though it is ACC that pumps it up).

3) That Wellington retailers beleive that free bike spaces reduce the oppurtunity for day shoppers to come into their stores.

My 2 cents is that:
1) there is a lot of unauthorised parking but most are in unused space which is not required by pedestrians. Fast and hard rules will just cause resentment. I like the idea of an education campaign but I would apply it to dangerously parked bikes not all of them.

2) Riders do help lessen congestion - the council needs to take this into account. Already the bike stand I park in has filled up since word of this has got out (Willis street). If there becomes no free and easy place to park I would revert to commuting with my car and leave the bike for weekends.

3) Commuters make up the vast majority of weekday retailer customers. The golden mile should get to grips with itself and stop blaming slack sales to lack of customer oppurtunity. Try not selling everything at RRP for once (Kirks - apart from once a flippin year). I am always confused why the golden mile has so much power with the council (Jville shopping centre debacle for instance?).

So council: Taking space away from riders may increase congestion. Fining stupidly parked bikes is ok by everyone (but only where pedestrians are put in danger).
Losing a couple of p&ds to alleviate congestion further, or alleviate problem parking wouldn't bankrupt the council would it?

[Str8 Jacket]

You may not see this as value for money and you may determine that public transport is better value.



As I have stated earlier. It costs me 3x more to take public transport that is unreliable, crowded, germ-fested and inconvenient,

[rustic101]

:spanking:

The more I read responses from WCC, through Jon, the more I become suspicious. The old saying, ‘if it looks like a duck; quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, then it’s a duck….I firmly believe that there are wider indications WCC are seeking to increase its revenue.

I’m not going to thrash through the other arguments and counter claims. What I have noticed is that most of the threads are looking at the topic (‘WCC take zero tolerance approach to motorcycle parking’) in isolation.

There are clear financial facts that support WCC is losing revenue from the trains, parking etc Therefore it follows naturally WCC must seek alternative means of gathering revenue.

Some specific questions I have for Jon are:
• How many complaints have been made and over what period?
• Are complaints available (sanitised) by way of an OIA?
• How many injuries have been caused to pedestrian’s vs parked bikes?
• How often is an audit done of all parking spaces to ensure they meet the MOT and LTSA legislation/ Policy? i.e some examples other than parking on a footpath are;
o near a corner, curve, hill, traffic island or intersection, if it will stop other people from seeing along the road
o on, or closer than 6 metres to, an intersection, unless there are parking spaces or a notice telling you that you can park there
o on, or closer than 6 metres to, the approach side of a pedestrian crossing
o closer than 6 metres to a bus stop marked only by a sign
o in front of, or closer than 1 metre to, a vehicle entrance
o on, or closer than 50 centimetres to, a fire hydrant, unless somebody who can move the vehicle stays with it
o on a yellow circle on the road

• Are WCC or Transit going to apply a tariff to vehicles coming into and out of the city?
o Will any Tariff applied be applied to motorcycles?
• Will WCC or Transit be using Automatic Plate Recognition (APR) cameras to conduct this?
• Will WCC be using CCTV ‘safety cameras’ to monitor and electronically issue parking infringement notices?
o What are the legalities and privacy issues of this practice if the answer to the above question is ‘Yes’?

I have the answers to most of the questions above but would like to get an official WCC perspective. This will also allow other site users to have additional information to base their opinions on. I look forward to the reply.

Kind regards

Sam
:scooter:

[sinned]

:spanking:

I’m not going to thrash through the other arguments and counter claims.

There are clear financial facts that support WCC is losing revenue from the trains, parking etc Therefore it follows naturally WCC must seek alternative means of gathering revenue.

Some specific questions I have for Jon are:
- not quoted -

I have the answers to most of the questions above but would like to get an official WCC perspective. This will also allow other site users to have additional information to base their opinions on. I look forward to the reply.


I spent the time "thrash -ing through the other arguments and counter claims" so you could also. Why should Jon answer your questions, and the revenue, cost for parking questions have been well answered. It is quite obvious a lot of KB posters here don't like the answers - but that is another issue.
My view - you should be paying for parking.

[Clockwork]

...
Agree.
There is no parking available now in the central city for motorcyclist who needs a park for an hour or two during the day. I take the car - as I know I can find a park.


We should be thanking Jon for facilitating a service for motorcycle parking from the parking companies. Thanks Jon.


Your views would carry more weight if it wern't so apparent where your self interest lies. If I were a weekend rider who only needed to "pop" into town for an hour or two once in a while (when the weather was nice of course) I suppose I'd appreciate all those free short term parks dotted around the city. So I guess its easy to see why you have no problem with expecting commuters to pay and park off-road.

Anyway, thanks for your support, do drop by again.

[sinned]

Let us fantasize and think what could occur if WCC agreed to provide parks in all the locations suggested in this thread.
Summer is arriving and many commuters will be thinking, should I buy a scooter? Well why not, fuel is expensive and a scooter uses little of that, they are not expensive to buy and best of all parking is free. It is a no-brainer for someone needing to reduce their costs.

Given the growth in ownership of 2 wheeled transport I wouldn't be surprised if another 100+ free parking spots were filled up by Feb 2010. And then KBrs can have another crack at the WCC - why not make all of Featherston Street MC parking and ......?

My point is; if parking is provided free the relative cost of public transport, 2 wheels and cars is distorted and the demand for bike parking will never be meet. ACC discovered this with physio services.

[davebullet]

Has the council started handing out warning notices?

[Lurch]

Let us fantasize and think what could occur if WCC agreed to provide parks in all the locations suggested in this thread.
Summer is arriving and many commuters will be thinking, should I buy a scooter? Well why not, fuel is expensive and a scooter uses little of that, they are not expensive to buy and best of all parking is free. It is a no-brainer for someone needing to reduce their costs.

Given the growth in ownership of 2 wheeled transport I wouldn't be surprised if another 100+ free parking spots were filled up by Feb 2010. And then KBrs can have another crack at the WCC - why not make all of Featherston Street MC parking and ......?


I don't particularly see a problem with this possibility.

[magicmonkey]

My point is; if parking is provided free the relative cost of public transport, 2 wheels and cars is distorted and the demand for bike parking will never be meet.

In a city centre there will never be enough parking, it's the councils job to manage changes surrounding commuter preferences though. Put simply, if there are more people using bikes the council has an obligation to step up and react to that, they are supposed to be managing the city after all ...

[sinned]

In a city centre there will never be enough parking, it's the councils job to manage changes surrounding commuter preferences though. Put simply, if there are more people using bikes the council has an obligation to step up and react to that, they are supposed to be managing the city after all ...

Agreed, and the WCC appear to be stepping up and reacting to the bike parking situation.

[Swoop]

Will WCC be using CCTV ‘safety cameras’ to monitor and electronically issue parking infringement notices?
Interesting. This was on last night's news.
Yes WCC will be using the cameras to ticket motorists, according to the article.

[magicmonkey]

Agreed, and the WCC appear to be stepping up and reacting to the bike parking situation.

yeah, sounds like 'appear' is quite right. The main advice give by Jon/WCC seems to be 'pay for private parking', and that's fair enough in many respects. However, if we're talking about an extra 550 bikes in an area as small as the CBD that's only a part of a solution rather than the be all and end all.

I don't think that any one suggestion here will resolve the problem but taking a little from most of them would help a lot. So far Jon/WCC have just said 'no' to everything while quoting stats from unknown sources (with the exception of a few on street parks which have been noted, good on ya for that :niceone:)

One major problem with paid for bike parking on the street is that there is nowhere on a bike to put a ticket which is secure from straying hands and the wellington wind, it's not really a workable solution for on-street and would probably cost a small fortune in people going to court saying that they did have a ticket, honest (I'm sure some of the more on to it bikers would exploit this to get away with not buying tickets in the first place as well; making prosecution a necessity as well as next to impossible to enforce).

If parking wardens could be trusted to not spuriously ticket bikes to make quotas then an approach to parking on the pavement where safe to do so would work wonders, unfortunately, without properly marked areas this is an unlikely reality though.

[sinned]

One major problem with paid for bike parking on the street is that there is nowhere on a bike to put a ticket which is secure from straying hands and the wellington wind, it's not really a workable solution for on-street .......


There is a solution used in hundreds of places outside NZ. See the photo in this post http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1129399925&postcount=150 . The machines providing a means of paying for a numbered parking lot have been and may still be used in other areas of NZ for car parks.

[magicmonkey]

There is a solution used in hundreds of places outside NZ. See the photo in this post http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=1129399925&postcount=150 . The machines providing a means of paying for a numbered parking lot have been and may still be used in other areas of NZ for car parks.

I'm not too familiar with the existing infrastructure as I tend to park out of town, I've only ever seen ticket type machines though and the approach of having a meter per park might wind up costing a lot to put in place.

That said, I really an unclear on which type of meters are used so excuse me if I'm way off the mark :o

[Clockwork]

If parking wardens could be trusted to not spuriously ticket bikes to make quotas then an approach to parking on the pavement where safe to do so would work wonders, unfortunately, without properly marked areas this is an unlikely reality though.

So far the parking wardens have done an excellent job not ticketing bikes parked on the footpaths. And I'd suggest that by far the majority of bikes on footpaths are well out of everyone's way. Not least because the council has spent (how many?) years steadily reducing road widths around the CBD and enlarging the footpaths.

No one here is suggesting that inconsiderately parked bikes shouldn't be ticketed and the wardens already have the technology to photograph vehicles they ticket in order to justify their actions.

What we have here is a somewhat simplistic and punitive response to a largely localised problem that avoids the council having forgo any income from the conversion of existing P&D parking (not that this is in anyway about revenue) with no real attempt at compromise on the part of the Council.

What will now happen is that very few off-road parks will be used so long as free parking remains. Those off-road park operators will start to lobby the Council to introduce some sort of time-limit or coupon parking scheme else it will be no longer "economical" for them to continue to offer the service.

We should be honoured to be witnesses in the birth of a whole new revenue stream, players in a whole new economy in its infancy.

(and it will wipe the smile off the faces of those queue jumping, congestion dodging, free parking, dangerous, smug and antisocial motorcyclists.)

[sinned]

Technology has few limits.


I'm not too familiar with the existing infrastructure as I tend to park out of town, I've only ever seen ticket type machines though and the approach of having a meter per park might wind up costing a lot to put in place.

A common type of machine covers a number of parking spots. It has a button or selector for the numbered park you are using. Select the park and pay your money. The display on the machine shows the expiry time for each park. So the council only needs to mark out the parks and install one such machine at each location.

[firefighter]

Reading the title of this thread cracks me up.

As if it's such huge issue that the council needs to target bikes on footpaths.....Gimme a fucken break.

Just picken on the little guy, who discretely parks his bike out of the way and does'nt effect anyone, and keeps a park open for a car, pollutes less and de-congests the road by using the bike in the first place.

Go to war with the council and get to work at 5am, take all the car-parks up with your bikes and leave them there all day, everyday until the council figures out that the bikers were'nt really effecting anyone but those choosing to be upset about it.

[Jon Visser]

I’m not going to thrash through the other arguments and counter claims.

I have the answers to most of the questions above but would like to get an official WCC perspective. This will also allow other site users to have additional information to base their opinions on. I look forward to the reply.

The revenue issue is very simple - Council does not collect revenue from motorcycle parking, either from our on-road spaces or our parking garages, and is not intending to. We do not operate public transport or parking garages and revenue from on-road parking trends upwards, not downwards, over the years. The only way that motorcycles could end up having to pay for parking in public spaces is if the public got so upset with motorcycle riders and the way they are parking that they lobby for the Council to take an even tougher stance on this issue. Whether that happens is entirely up to the riders. I am doing my best to help avoid that situation.

In response to your specific questions:

• How many complaints have been made and over what period?
Probably about 30 to 40 over the past year depending on your definition of "complaint" vs "inquiry" and some being repeated complaints about the same issue from the same person or group. In comparison to other issues, that is quite high (e.g. we used to get that number of complaints about sandwich boards each year but now we only get one or two). In saying that, the quantity is not as important as the substance of the complaint, i.e. pedestrians have the legal right to use the footpath and motorcycles do not, so if we receive a complaint then we must side with the party whose rights we are supposed to protect under the Local Government Act.

• Are complaints available (sanitised) by way of an OIA?
Yes

• How many injuries have been caused to pedestrian’s vs parked bikes?
Not many - these are usually not reported. It may be easier to ask this forum how many people have had their bikes knocked over (I am aware of a couple).

• How often is an audit done of all parking spaces to ensure they meet the MOT and LTSA legislation/ Policy? i.e some examples other than parking on a footpath are;
o near a corner, curve, hill, traffic island or intersection, if it will stop other people from seeing along the road
o on, or closer than 6 metres to, an intersection, unless there are parking spaces or a notice telling you that you can park there
o on, or closer than 6 metres to, the approach side of a pedestrian crossing
o closer than 6 metres to a bus stop marked only by a sign
o in front of, or closer than 1 metre to, a vehicle entrance
o on, or closer than 50 centimetres to, a fire hydrant, unless somebody who can move the vehicle stays with it
o on a yellow circle on the road
All of these are high-risk areas and we would be concerned with anyone parking at such locations. Many have been marked with broken yellow lines. We review the markings usually on an as-needed basis (e.g. in response to complaints or if the adjacent land-use changes). All are monitored in the CBD daily by our wardens and on an as-needed basis in the suburbs.

• Are WCC or Transit going to apply a tariff to vehicles coming into and out of the city?
I am not aware of any such plans. Congestion charging would be a substantial change to how we manage traffic and would require careful legal considerations and possibly even law changes. If any such proposal was raised, it would be publicly consulted on. Consultation was carried out a number of years ago in relation to tolls for Transmission Gully, and this indicated that drivers were not prepared to pay more than about $2 which was not enough to make such a scheme worthwhile (considering the cost to install and operate it).

o Will any Tariff applied be applied to motorcycles?
As for above. In evaluating such a scheme they would probably look at what is done in other cities, and I am aware that often if there is such a charge motorcycles would be exempt or pay less.

• Will WCC or Transit be using Automatic Plate Recognition (APR) cameras to conduct this?
No idea - these days they use RF ID tags attached to vehicles and other such gadgets. Motorcycles only have a plate on the rear so ANPR is typically not a good tool for that. I remember when the first speed cameras came out many years ago, the police commissioner was out with his technical staff to see it being used for the first time. A friend of mine was its first victim - he was on a bike doing about 160km/h as he flew over the crest of the hill. The photo shows his pillion passenger over the top of the rider as he slammed on the anchors. The police realised immediately that they had an awesome photo but no plate, so they pursued & caught him (much further) down the road...

Readers may also be amused to hear that the first person to receive a ticket for exceeding 80km/h in Ngaranga Gorge (the first "variable speed limit" in the country) was the engineer that calculated that 80km/h was the safest maximum speed for that road :-)

• Will WCC be using CCTV ‘safety cameras’ to monitor and electronically issue parking infringement notices?
Funny you should mention that:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/news/display-item.php?id=3632
We intend to use cameras to address only those infringements that result in traffic safety issues (i.e. not for parking time or fee restrictions - normal wardens will continue to do that). The cameras will likely be self-contained rather than CCTV - we're only using the new City Safety CCTV cameras as a trial to test the technology & processes.

o What are the legalities and privacy issues of this practice if the answer to the above question is ‘Yes’?
No issues if we are only collecting information about the vehicle and not about any people. That is what we are effectively doing already when the parking warden takes a photo of the offending vehicle for evidence. The vehicle's registration plate is public information accessible by anyone through the national vehicle registration database. We intend to do it as overtly as possible (not covertly as was suggested) because the more people are aware of it the less likely they are to offend and the less likely we will need to issue an infringement notice (I'd be happiest if we didn't need to issue any tickets because it means people are obeying the law and not putting others' safety at risk). Current indicators are that the publicity, equipment and operating costs will be substantially greater than any fines we may be collecting from such cameras, which supports that we are doing this to improve safety, not to make money. The accounts will be made publicly available to support this.

[Jon Visser]

Has the council started handing out warning notices?

Not yet. The first step will be two sets of information leaflets distributed to all motorcycle riders over the next few weeks. They are printed but we are awaiting a "fine" (sunny, dry and not-so-windy) day. The first set does not have a map of garages on the back yet as that list is continually growing. The second set will, and will coincide with a poster campaign in shops such as those where you can purchase or hire motorcycles/scooters.

Once that is complete, then we will think about issuing warning notices. I'd first like to see what progress we can make through the publicity campaign.

[FatHead]

Again a big thank you to you Jon for doing what you can to make this transition more palitable for the motorcyclists of Wellington. I expect that you will have all this information available on the council website also when it becomes available and that you will advise us all of the link to that information.:2thumbsup

[Kendog]

Not yet. The first step will be two sets of information leaflets distributed to all motorcycle riders over the next few weeks. They are printed but we are awaiting a "fine" (sunny, dry and not-so-windy) day. The first set does not have a map of garages on the back yet as that list is continually growing.

Can you post a PDF of the leaflet in here please.

[RusoR]

Go to war with the council and get to work at 5am, take all the car-parks up with your bikes and leave them there all day, everyday until the council figures out that the bikers were'nt really effecting anyone but those choosing to be upset about it.

I recall hearing a similar protest was done by bikers a few years ago. Interestingly enough WCC Traffic Bylaws prohibit motorcycles from parking in bays controlled by a multiple meter ie a P & D machine. Ironically most if not all of on street parking in CBD is controlled by P & D. Any such protest would be illegal and subject to the full brunt of the law and resulting consequences. Not a problem if you have long pockets, but I don't...

[firefighter]

I recall hearing a similar protest was done by bikers a few years ago. Interestingly enough WCC Traffic Bylaws prohibit motorcycles from parking in bays controlled by a multiple meter ie a P & D machine. Ironically most if not all of on street parking in CBD is controlled by P & D. Any such protest would be illegal and subject to the full brunt of the law and resulting consequences. Not a problem if you have long pockets, but I don't...

So, a motorcycle is NOT allowed to park in a pay and display carpark?

Are you sure?

If most parks are pay and display, where are you supposed to park then?

Seems a bit weird if that's true, that's actually discrimmination. It still carried at least one person, it just does'nt take up as much space as a car would have in it's place.
Plus it can fit at least two bikes...... ie. two cars worth can fit into it, therefore saving another space.

I see no difference between a bike using and paying for the space to a car.....unless the car MUST be full of passengers.(%99.9) of the time it'll be an SUV with a single person)

What a weird by-law.(do you know if auckland is the same?)

[Ixion]

I had heard that WCC prohibited bikes from parking in car spaces EVEN IF THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY THE CAR FEE.

I discounted it because that seemed so perverse and downright discriminatory that I could not believe it.

If it IS true then it is blatently obvious that WCC are just carrying out an anti-motorcycle vendetta , and all this talk in this thread is just a hypocritical smokescreen

And, for the record, Auckland is perfectly happy for bikes to park in car spaces provided they pay the appropriate fee. Or, to park for free at the ends of pay and display bays.

[firefighter]

And, for the record, Auckland is perfectly happy for bikes to park in car spaces provided they pay the appropriate fee. Or, to park for free at the ends of pay and display bays.

I don't really have any beef with paying for the space. Not being legally allowed to without other options apart from parking out of town I do have problems with.

So is it actually legal to park at the ends of the pay and display parks? (in auck)

[Ixion]

I don't really have any beef with paying for the space. Not being legally allowed to without other options apart from parking out of town I do have problems with.

So is it actually legal to park at the ends of the pay and display parks? (in auck)

There is a formal undertaking by the General Manager (Parking) of ACC that the practice is permitted. (You do need to park crossways - ie 90 degree to the kerb. )

[StoneY]

why not make all of Featherston Street MC parking and ......?

Now someones talking some sense at last

That would work well- could even afford to leave 2 or 3 loading zones big enough for a few delivery vans in Featherston

Think about it- its the perfect street to annex for one mighty huge bike park including Grey st as well

Heaps of public lifts to the Terrace- and reachable for all bar anyone working down by Courtenay way- and another one could be done for that end of town on a smaller scale, say Allen St???

[Howie]

I had heard that WCC prohibited bikes from parking in car spaces EVEN IF THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY THE CAR FEE.

I discounted it because that seemed so perverse and downright discriminatory that I could not believe it.


This Bylaw is a bit historic, in that it applied to multi park meter systems eg. Pay and display, it is perfect legal for Bikes to park in the old style parking meter parks with individual meters if you can find any. The bylaw for them even mentions 2 bikes in a park, as long as the fee has been paid. The relevant Bylaws are on this page. http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/bylaws/traffic.html Sections 4, and 6.

Cheers

Paul

[scracha]

Stop being such pathetic bitches and get campaigning.

http://notobikeparkingfees.com/

[bogan]

Stop being such pathetic bitches and get campaigning.

http://notobikeparkingfees.com/

awww, they get to have all the fun, can we have a bike protest ride too?

[scracha]

awww, they get to have all the fun, can we have a bike protest ride too?

But I thought apathy was a degree course over here?

Actually...now yer talking. I won't hold my breath waiting on BRONZ organising a protest ride though.

[Ixion]

Well, as BRONZ Wellington ceased to exist some eyars ago, I won't be holding mine either. If it was Auckland, we would.

[James Deuce]

I had heard that WCC prohibited bikes from parking in car spaces EVEN IF THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY THE CAR FEE.

I discounted it because that seemed so perverse and downright discriminatory that I could not believe it.

If it IS true then it is blatently obvious that WCC are just carrying out an anti-motorcycle vendetta , and all this talk in this thread is just a hypocritical smokescreen

And, for the record, Auckland is perfectly happy for bikes to park in car spaces provided they pay the appropriate fee. Or, to park for free at the ends of pay and display bays.

Badda-bing.

Just so you know Howie, they do enforce the bikes banned from parks governed by multi-bay meters bylaw.

WCC are GOING to make on-street motorcycle parking time limited, and the private companies they are asking to take up the slack will see a huge opportunity to leverage the same money as a car park for stuff they've previously given away free. Spaces that will be marked out around the size of the average coffin. Irony.

The on-street parking will be barely used, because as I've said it is used mostly by people working their "9 to 5", and then they'll be removed because the private companies will be doing a better job of providing motorcycle parking, so it will be the "market deciding".

I got "into trouble" on Friday for riding around the barrier arms to get to my park that work pays for in a Wilson Parking managed parking building. By persistently and non-aggressively pointing out that there was no point me stopping and getting out my wallet to use the swipe card when it meant stopping on an incline, taking gloves off and fumbling with zips, especially if it was going to hold other cars up, he relented.

But then pointed out that they were looking forward to making motorcycles pay for parking.

I, very slowly, pointed out that work pays for the park I use, and sometimes I even park my car there.

He stood stock still and was unable to speak, and so it was that I left him in this state to proceed to my park.

He tracked me down while I was putting the disk lock on and told me I couldn't park there and I asked, "Why?"

He said I was preventing the park's normal user from using the park.

I got out my letter from work and the one from Wilson Parking and showed it to him. It detailed which park was mine. In which I was parked.

He said he would prefer it if I didn't use it, as they would be putting special motorcycle parks in soon. I resisted the urge to tap on his head to see if it would ring like an empty shell casing, and pointed out that the park was paid for for by my employer, and if I wished to park a perambulator there I would.

He asked me what a perambulator was.

Sometimes I am too smart for my own good.

[mrchips]

Perhaps WCC should change it's slogan to "Absolutely Positively <strike>Wellington</strike> Profitable".

I commend you on your composure.

[sinned]

Sometimes I am too smart for my own good.
You could have been blessed with "Stupid is as stupid does".

[Jiminy]

First of all, I don't commute, so my view is a bit biased.

I'm actually really supportive of Jon Visser and his team's efforts. First, I have seen new bike parks mushrooming between where I live and where I work. Then, the council has taken a pretty light stance on illegal bike parking, which they are only reconsidering now because the issue has become too big. Before they start handing out tickets, they are planning to give notices with maps of bike parks to give us the time to find alternatives. And now, he's negotiating with the car parks and listening to our suggestions for new bike parks (he couldn't grant all our wishes, but at least he's trying).

I certainly appreciate the council's efforts to provide us with free parking, but I don't think we are entitled to it by default, it's just a nice to have. If I had to commute daily, I wouldn't mind renting an off-street car park with 2 or 3 other bikers.

Just my 2c

[James Deuce]

If I had to commute daily, I wouldn't mind renting an off-street car park with 2 or 3 other bikers.

Just my 2c

I know it's only 2c but don't sell yourself so cheap. You will see on-street parking for bikes disappear very shortly. If you don't commute, you won't understand the frustrations a lot of commuters have to put up with.,

None of the car parking companies will let you share a park with other bikes. I've already asked Wilson Parking if I could do that with my employer paid for carpark, but they'll only do it if the other guys pay the same monthly rate for the park.

[bogan]

...

None of the car parking companies will let you share a park with other bikes. I've already asked Wilson Parking if I could do that with my employer paid for carpark, but they'll only do it if the other guys pay the same monthly rate for the park.

what pricks, isnt it the space you are renting? not what gets put in it. Tell him two bikes constitutes perambulator!

[IdunBrokdItAgin]

It still seems to boil down to the same thing.

History is as follows

Currently bikes park for free in predetermined spaces.
Use of bikes helps to alleviate congestion (offset for the use of free parking). Anyone care to argue this or is this a given?
Council is unable/ unwilling to meet the demand for increased spaces in line with (bike useage) growth. Which can be evidenced by the increase in illegal parking.
Private contractors being asked to supply overflow bike parking.
Issue came about due to complaints about illegal parking (predominantly on Grey Street).


Whilst I sympathise with the responsibilities of the council it stills smells wrong to me. It seems like the first move to remove free parking for bikes.

May I ask one question to Jon at the council: "Is their any fee sharing agreement going on with the private suppliers of the new motorcycle parks?"

In fact let me ask another more important question: "Why can't the council require all private carparks to assist in the creation of more FREE parking for bikes?"

Staff costs etc that was bRought up before is bull, I've never had to speak to anyone in a carpark before (unless the machine is broke) and they all have waivers about damage/ loss to vehicles or property.

[davebullet]

There is still underutilised green space / off road areas which could be converted to motorcycle bays without impacting open space requirements, visibility safety to other users and without costing too much to provide.

I hope the council picks up on the painting the ok off-street areas to park for free. I see some construction for bus parking (?) is taking place at the south end of the Events Centre at Frank Kitts Park.... could be used as motorcycle parking on the offdays when not needed by buses (as the adjacent bus areas are under-utilised). Could be simply implemented by placing a few traffic cones in the area on days when parking is required by buses.

[Jon Visser]

So, a motorcycle is NOT allowed to park in a pay and display carpark?

If most parks are pay and display, where are you supposed to park then?

That is correct. Letting motorcycles use Pay & Display spaces was trialled quite some time ago, and many bikes ended up with tickets because the pay & display receipts had been blown away, stolen or disintegrated by rain. This was such a fiasco for everyone concerned that the Council enacted the Bylaw that prevented motorcycles from using spaces covered by Pay & Display but it was still OK for two bikes to share a single-head meter bay (as long as someone fed the machine).

Riders are expected to park either in an on-road motorcycle space, all day, for free, within the property/building where they work if this has a parking facility (e.g. in a basement) which could be for free or for a charge (check with your building owner) or off-road in a commercial parking facility.

At the time the Bylaw was made, there was quite a mix of both types of parking. Since then, there has been a concerted effort to replace all single-head meters with Pay & Display machines. Last year there were about 90 single-head meters and this year down to about 50. Typically these only remain where there is only one or two on-road car park for miles around (and therefore usually occupied by cars) or for mobility parking spaces, so these are in general not much use to riders. Also, there are now products available on the market that could allow riders to lock the receipt to their bike (lockable display cases that could be attached to a wheel-lock) and we now use plasticised paper for the receipts. Therefore I would agree that because the situation has changed, it would also be very apropriate to revisit the suitability of our Bylaw. This would make it much more possible for riders who spend short periods of time in the CBD to find a parking space that they can use, noting that there is a maximum time restriction of two hours for Pay & Display spaces.

At $4/hr and a two-hour maximum time limit, making these spaces available to motorcycles to use will not address the problems we are having with commuter parking.

Just to avoid any doubt (or to address the same questions that keep getting asked) we have no intention of making any existing Pay & Display car parking spaces available for motorcycles to use for free unless it can be shown that they have a very low utilisation rate (we have no set target in mind but if the space is vacant say 85% of the time you could argue it is not working very well). We also do not intend to convert any footpath spaces for motorcycles to use - if this was considered appropriate we would have done so by now. There are still some spaces around that we can consider, e.g. the "no-parking" space at the end of Featherston Street.

I personally have no problem with the concept of (a couple of) motorcycles using the Pay & Display spaces as long as they have paid for the use of that space between them (this would support what people are saying, i.e. a more efficient use of road space) and will include this in the next Bylaw review (which will not be for at least a year due to other Bylaw reviews currently being considered by Councillors). To assist with this, maybe people can post some useful suggestions on how to deal with the following practicalities:
* How could receipts be attached to motorcycles so that they are secure and easily (and consistently) visible to wardens? Note that we are not able to replace all our P&D machines with "multi-bay" devices as the cost for this would exceed what we are approved to spend under the LTCCP.
* Council would expect to receive no more and no less than the posted fees for that space per hour of use, regardless of whether there was a car or one or more motorcycles parked in it (since our costs to provide, maintain and manage that space remain the same). If more than one motorcycle was allowed to use a P&D space at the same time, how could this be managed so that each rider doesn't end up paying the full amount each, nor have a situation whereby only one rider pays, and the second bike gets a ticket because the first bike left early?

[James Deuce]

Mr Visser, the multi-bay parking meter issue has been done to death previously. WCC Councillors have stated that they don't want motorcycles using them and are prepared to stand by that decision, so it isn't going to change unless the attitudes to motorcycles from Councillors in general changes radically.

The only way to deal with it is an RFID tag like a snapper card that is permanently affixed to the bike that meter maids can detect with the right equipment and deduct money from the card to cover parking.

There were a number of responses to that idea but the two that stand out as the most negative were:

1. A motorcycle could occupy a parking bay all day and the Council wants people limited to 60 minutes in the inner city.

2. It's a waste of space. Which is nonsense given that more than 90% of Wellington traffic in the commute and during the business day is occupied by only one person.

From a personal perspective I am wary of any technology that allows my personal vehicle to be monitored by a third party.

[Jon Visser]

And, for the record, Auckland is perfectly happy for bikes to ... park for free at the ends of pay and display bays.

Note that Wellington is a lot more dense and compact than Auckland, and in order to squeeze in as many amenities as possible we have installed "shortened" spaces at the ends of our on-road parallel car parks (5m instead of 6m). In some cases where there is plenty of room this is OK and we will mark it (e.g. Featherston Street by Waring Taylor Street). Where it is not OK we have marked it with broken yellow lines. Some are still under review. Technically these spaces are not space set aside for parking on, but form part of the carriageway that cars drive on in order to get into or out of their parks.

Someone has raised that with diagonal parks, there is a substantial triangle at the end that could be used for motorcycle parking, and I am looking into that as a possible standard design option for future roading improvements. In recent times, we have turned that space into a "raised footpath" section (i.e. with a kerb around it) that is not very greatly utilised, is difficult from a drainage perspective and makes it impossible for our street cleaners to get their machines around. Having this at road level & marked as suitable for motorcycles to use would make a bit more sense.

[Jon Visser]

It still seems to boil down to the same thing.

History is as follows

Currently bikes park for free in predetermined spaces.
Use of bikes helps to alleviate congestion (offset for the use of free parking). Anyone care to argue this or is this a given?
Council is unable/ unwilling to meet the demand for increased spaces in line with (bike useage) growth. Which can be evidenced by the increase in illegal parking.
Private contractors being asked to supply overflow bike parking.
Issue came about due to complaints about illegal parking (predominantly on Grey Street).


Whilst I sympathise with the responsibilities of the council it stills smells wrong to me. It seems like the first move to remove free parking for bikes.

May I ask one question to Jon at the council: "Is their any fee sharing agreement going on with the private suppliers of the new motorcycle parks?"

In fact let me ask another more important question: "Why can't the council require all private carparks to assist in the creation of more FREE parking for bikes?"

Staff costs etc that was bRought up before is bull, I've never had to speak to anyone in a carpark before (unless the machine is broke) and they all have waivers about damage/ loss to vehicles or property.

While I would probably phrase your "history" list slightly differently, it does pretty much come down to that, excepting that we have not engaged any "contractors" to provide "overflow parking". We are expecting motorcycle riders to park appropriately, which may include the use of a commercial public parking garage. There is no arrangement, financial or otherwise, between the Wellington City Council and any of the commercial parking garages in relation to motorcycle parking (we only have some agreements in place for weekend car parking and parking for Council-owned vehicles). All these garages are entirely private companies that are expected to achieve returns for their shareholders on the investment they have made in their asset (and therefore it would not be appropriate to expect them to provide such space for free). My dealings with the garages has been solely to achieve better facilities at a lower cost on behalf of motorcycle riders, in order to alleviate pressures on our publc parking assets.

[Jon Visser]

Can you post a PDF of the leaflet in here please.

First flyer PDF attached. Second one will include maps.

[Lurch]

First flyer PDF attached. Second one will include maps.

Although the flyer is succinct, without the context of this discussion it would not put me in a good mood if I was a recipient.

In fact i would probably collect a bunch of them, soak them in water and stuff them up the exhaust pipes of a number of WCC vehicles.

[IdunBrokdItAgin]

Personaly I find the flyer to be polite and would not take offence at it. Map of available locations would be ideal.

Jon, I don't envy your job on this. I still believe that the council approaching private car parks has given them (the car parks) the idea that they can get away with charging for a service which used to be for free (to my understanding bikes could park in unused space for free in private car parks).

Good intention but it seems to have back-fired.

Also, thank you for answering both of my earlier questions.

[Jon Visser]

The only way to deal with it is an RFID tag like a snapper card that is permanently affixed to the bike that meter maids can detect with the right equipment and deduct money from the card to cover parking.

Because wardens do not know when a bike arrives or leaves, it would not be practical for them to make that transaction. A better model would be something like SmartPark, which is activated and deactivated by the user. However, a SmartPark machine out in the open wouldn't survive long (weather or theft). We are currently trialling a new technology like SmartPark but with a barcode sticker that is placed on the vehicle and the user activates and deactivates their on-line account via TXT message. The on-line account can then be topped up via internet banking etc and they only pay for the actual time used. Ths is much more secure as no-one else can use the same barcode unless they also steal the mobile phone number associated with it. Wardens simply scan the barcode and their hand-held gadget shows whether the barcode has been activated for the correct area and they have not exceeded the maximum limit. This could be a potential solution, but I'd still like to hear other ideas.

[Ixion]

Auckland seem to manage just fine. Perhaps you could contact Brian Tomlinson , General manager parking (ACC) and find out how they do it.

[James Deuce]

Because wardens do not know when a bike arrives or leaves, it would not be practical for them to make that transaction. A better model would be something like SmartPark, which is activated and deactivated by the user. However, a SmartPark machine out in the open wouldn't survive long (weather or theft). We are currently trialling a new technology like SmartPark but with a barcode sticker that is placed on the vehicle and the user activates and deactivates their on-line account via TXT message. The on-line account can then be topped up via internet banking etc and they only pay for the actual time used. Ths is much more secure as no-one else can use the same barcode unless they also steal the mobile phone number associated with it. Wardens simply scan the barcode and their hand-held gadget shows whether the barcode has been activated for the correct area and they have not exceeded the maximum limit. This could be a potential solution, but I'd still like to hear other ideas.

RFID was the only solution WCC was prepared to discuss last time around.

However, you're discussing semantics. I suggested the Snapper model and you simply responded with slightly different technology. It's the same idea. A separately held user account specifically used for parking that is debited by a technology solution.

[Swoop]

Note that Wellington is a lot more dense...
It must have something to do with the circular wind tunnel, filled with politicians...<_<


Thread needed some humour...:done:

[Jon Visser]

I still believe that the council approaching private car parks has given them (the car parks) the idea that they can get away with charging for a service which used to be for free (to my understanding bikes could park in unused space for free in private car parks).

Some garages (e.g. James Smith) provided some "otherwise unused" spaces for free and they will continue to do so (though in relation to security, lighting, weather protection etc you get what you pay for :-)

Others allowed individual bikes to park in car spaces at the same rates as for cars.

The new option is that several bikes will be able to use good quality spaces for reduced rates at most garages - some garages will need some time to set aside suitable space & modify barrier arms & detectors etc, but the more riders that ask for it the more facilities will be made available.

In relation to a previous post about someone trying to get through a barrier arm, I used to park my bike in a basement garage and had the access card inserted into a pocket on the back of my riding glove (many gloves have these). This worked fine when it was dry but it was hard to wait on a slope in the wet so I usually just followed a car...

[scracha]

Note that Wellington is a lot more dense and compact than Auckland
Good try, but comparing Wellington to one of the LEAST densley populated cities on the planet isn't particularly relevant. Why not have a look at how non NZ cities (you know..cities that are well into the millions) manage to have free motorcycle parking?



This is blatant revenue generation and I'd strongly advocate Welly bikers getting off their collective arses and organising protest.


A kiwi verison of notobikeparkingfees.com is in order methinks.


Hmm...come to think of it. I'd suggest all NZ bikers get off their arses, because if the capital gets away with it, other towns and cities will follow.

[bogan]

Good try, but comparing Wellington to one of the LEAST densley populated cities on the planet isn't particularly relevant. Why not have a look at how non NZ cities (you know..cities that are well into the millions) manage to have free motorcycle parking?



This is blatant revenue generation and I'd strongly advocate Welly bikers getting off their collective arses and organising protest.


A kiwi verison of www.notobikeparking.com is in order methinks.


Hmm...come to think of it. I'd suggest all NZ bikers get off their arses, because if the capital gets away with it, other towns and cities will follow.

jon did compare wellington with san francisco, where they charge for parking, but maybe thats why the comparison was made :shifty:

The protest i'd be most keen for was sensible ticketing, theres plenty of spaces to park on road, or in car parks, which are simply left over space that hasnt been marked, or lazily marked as broken yellows. But if you park there, you get a ticket.

Maybe sensible marking is a more viable idea though, how bout every ticket issued to a biker, the biker can apply to be let off by rezoning the space as a bike park? Would you be open to this sort of idea jon?

[Pwalo]

I work in Petone, but had to pop into Wellington yesterday to pick up some new specs. I couldn't find a 'legit' bike park anywhere round the CBD at 9.30am.

I hadn't realised that there were so many scooters around the place! It was just like Melbourne seeing bikes parked up everywhere, and I didn't see any upset locals complaining as I parked up on the W-I-D-E footpath. (Seems as if the footpaths are wider than the road in some places).

I really can't see a problem with the status quo. As long as m/cycles and scooters aren't blocking access, who cares? If some one parks in a stupid place ticket them.

[scracha]

I liked this snippet:-

What’s so bad about charging motorcycles to park when cars have to pay?
Rather than asking why shouldn’t bikes pay, ask yourself why should cars pay?

Cars should pay because:

They pollute,
They congest,
They take up a large amount of road or kerb space,
They cause significant wear and tear to road surfaces,
They demand large-scale and complex parking infrastructures to accommodate them,
Their use needs to be controlled and/or discouraged.



Motorcycles/Scooters however:

Do not pollute as much as cars,
Do not congest at all,
Do not take up large amounts of road or kerb space,
Do not cause wear and tear to road surfaces,
Do not require large-scale and complex parking infrastructures to accommodate them,
Their use needs to be encouraged and promoted as an alternative to both cars and the already overburdened public transport system.

[sinned]

I work in Petone, but had to pop into Wellington yesterday to pick up some new specs. I couldn't find a 'legit' bike park anywhere round the CBD at 9.30am.

Thats why I take the car into the city during the day - I can nearly always get a street park and if not I use a parking building.
Street parking for cars is something the WCC is managing well.



What’s so bad about charging motorcycles to park when cars have to pay?

Motorcycles/Scooters however:

Do not pollute as much as cars,
Do not congest at all,
Do not take up large amounts of road or kerb space,



I am not sure these points are that accurate.

MC typically use 50% less fuel than a car. However some are serious polluters and especially 2 cycle scooters.
Of course they add to congestion - just a little less than cars. In slow / crawling traffic they or the rider are less efficient at keeping a steady flow.
A MC parked side on is about as long as a car is wide. Sure 2 or 3 can be parked in the space otherwise taken by a car.


It doesn't help the cause by overstating the case for MC/Scoots.

[scracha]

I am not sure these points are that accurate.
MC typically use 50% less fuel than a car. However some are serious polluters and especially 2 cycle scooters.

A huge percentage of the pollution a vehicle makes in its lifetime is during it's creation and destruction........constructing a bike causes waaaay less pollution. "some are serious polluters....yep...$hite old bikes and $hite old cars...hardly relevant". Hey...I'm all for banning 2 smokes in cities :-)



Of course they add to congestion - just a little less than cars. In slow / crawling traffic they or the rider are less efficient at keeping a steady flow.

By just a little less, you mean that they need less than half the width of lane a car uses. This is especially relevant in reducing congestion at intersections. Traffic seems to flow pretty well in Vietnam and parts of India where bikes are the majority. There's no way in hell you'd get that volume of people moving if they were all driving cars.



A MC parked side on is about as long as a car is wide. Sure 2 or 3 can be parked in the space otherwise taken by a car.

See your previous pointl; a MC parked parallel to the road is not blocking the road and adding to congestion like a similarly parked car would.
If a motorcycle is parked side on (perpendicular?) then it's normally due to there being limited parking available and therefore its making more space available for cars to park when compared to parking a car.



It doesn't help the cause by overstating the case for MC/Scoots.
Doesn't help by understating the case either.

You can make constructive and civilised points all you like. Bikers in Wellington and the rest of this country are yet again about to get shat on by the revenue gatherers unless we protest loudly

Don't come complaining like a Pomm after WDC start charging and handing out tickets left right and center. If it were my local council doing similar I'd seriously be starting a fucking riot. In fact, I feel so strongly about this issue that if someone down there got their finger out their arse and organised protest rides and some sort of legal fund to fight it I'd certainly join in the fun.

[rustic101]

I spent the time "thrash -ing through the other arguments and counter claims" so you could also. Why should Jon answer your questions, and the revenue, cost for parking questions have been well answered. It is quite obvious a lot of KB posters here don't like the answers - but that is another issue.
My view - you should be paying for parking.

Yes I have read all of the threads and details, but reiterated that I was; in short, 'not going to cover ground already covered'!!! Jon has presented here on KB representing WCC and is prepared to answer ALL of our questions (full credit)... That aside even if he had not, he is a civil servant, as such must provide an open and transparent answer to questions from the public...

As for KB readers not liking the answers! You may be right, but that does not mean we or I have to bend over and take one up the arse... Every body is entitled to their opinion and I like others are exercising that right by asking reasonable questions. IN this particular case it does 'matter,' as if every one rolled over then there will be no accountability, then watch rates, parking and everything else go through the roof..

There are some people who will pay the window price and others that will haggle for a deal, I know which one I am. Personally do not care about my own needs as my employer allows me to park in our building but that will not prevent me from using my knowledge or skills to benefit others.

I suspect that WCC did not just wake up one morning and think,,,, hum lets start time limiting M/C parks.. It is my view after reviewing the WCC financial forecasts, traffic safety data and strategic direction, that this is a very clear determined move to increase revenue for WCC!!!

I'll leave the last quote to my mother - Believe half of what you see and nothing of what you read.

[huff3r]

Other points:
[LIST]
I am a ratepayer why should I be subsidising parking? - How many motorcycles and scooters parked for free in the city are owned by riders living out of the city? :Pokey:



I live in Porirua. My rates pay for ANYONE from ANYWHERE in the WORLD to park for free. I don't mind. It makes everyones lives much much easier.
And before you go on, most those who park in our free carparks are from outside the region, who come to Porirua to shop only because it will not cost them parking.

[Swoop]

And before you go on, most those who park in our free carparks are from outside the region, who come to Porirua to shop only because it will not cost them parking.

Something the retailers in central Welly will be able to start bitching over. Less bikes will equal less passing foot-traffic customers.

[Jon Visser]

jon did compare wellington with san francisco, where they charge for parking, but maybe thats why the comparison was made :shifty:

The protest i'd be most keen for was sensible ticketing, theres plenty of spaces to park on road, or in car parks, which are simply left over space that hasnt been marked, or lazily marked as broken yellows. But if you park there, you get a ticket.

Maybe sensible marking is a more viable idea though, how bout every ticket issued to a biker, the biker can apply to be let off by rezoning the space as a bike park? Would you be open to this sort of idea jon?

Thank you - my point was exactly that - you cannot compare Wellington CBD to Auckland.

San Fransisco does have free parking for motorcycles, about 475 spaces for ten times the number of riders than in Wellington (where we provide 450 spaces for free). As a percentage, that means Wellington riders are a lot better off in comparison. For the spaces in San Fransisco where fees apply (I haven't counted them but probably several hundred at least) they charge something quite nominal like US$0.25/hr (US$40/month).

While I would agree that riders create less pollutants than other modes of transport and park a lot more efficiently, they do not improve traffic flows or reduce congestion. If they ride safely (i.e. in line with traffic as they are supposed to do) there is no discernable improvement in traffic flow. The ones that ride between vehicles frequently have accidents which then holds up 40,000+ commuters for a few minutes each causing significantly worse overall network performance (per kilometre-hour travelled per year) for the city than if they had used a safer mode of transport. Sure it may be the cars that take out the rider, but if the rider had been riding in line with the cars in the first place they would have been much less likely to be hit (this discussion has probably been had on other bulletin boards already). While an individual rider may get to their destination quicker than they would if they had been driving a car, this does not mean everybody else does. Some never arrive :-( Unless people have been in an accident or had to deal with the consequences of a rider having an accident they really have no idea what the real cost of such accidents on our community truly are. Some laws really do exist to protect, not to annoy...

As I have said before, it would be great to see a reduction in motorcycle accidents which would make all of their other benefits a lot more compelling as reasons to encourage their use.

[davereid]

Thanks for fronting up in the forum Jon, a brave move by any standard !

But, I don't think council should be considering accident statistics in its transport planning, that is the job of other agencies.

And, if accident rates were to be considered, walking and cycling would have to discouraged well before motorcycling, as they both have higher accident rates per passenger km than motorcycling.

Since the introduction of cycle helmets, the number of people cycling for transport has reduced by about 19%, with the distance they travel reducing by about 3% per annum, so allowing for cyclists, doesnt seem to stack up well with what people are actually doing.

Thats as people are choosing motorcycles in preference to public transport, or cars.

You argue that providing a motorcycle park removes a car park.

Quite True !

But removing a car park, provides 5 or 6 motorcycle parks - way more than the number of people carried by the car displaced by the bike !

Transport planners also tend to make the statement that public transport is the most carbon friendly, and sustainable form of transport.

But its not actually true, its not even almost true.

In a transport planners best fantasy, trams are bursting with happy commuters sharing jokes and comradeship, all arriving at work on time, clutching wicker baskets full of goodies, as the children politely stand to allow the elderly to sit.

In reality, only at tidal flow peak times are the busses and trams full, and then the elderly stand. No one sharing jokes, just swine flu, and the cost of the trip is four or five times the cost of petrolwould be. Most of the time the busses are empty, providing transport to no-one, or only a drunk that has peed himself, and a terrified teenage girl for him to leer at.

Thats the insurmountable problem that public transport faces - It can be transport efficient, with a bus every 3 minutes just in case there is a passenger needing transport. Of course, thats not very fuel efficient.

Or it can be fuel efficient, with the bus leaving when it is full. But thats not very transport efficient.

In reality, public transport has to lie somewhere in the middle, managing to be neither fuel efficient, or transport efficient.

So, while a bus can have infinitely inefficient fuel usage - that is it is carrying NO useful passengers, a motorcycle is different.

Even carrying only the rider and his gear it is fully utilised. Going from where the user is, to where he wants to be, at exactly the right time, without a single wasted km.

The future is personal transport, not public transport. We simply arent rich enough to keep pouring millions and millions of dollars into that black hole.

[Clockwork]

Sorry Jon but I can't agree with you. Motorcycles CAN and DO reduce congestion. Can you imagine how congested those major Asian cities would be if everyone currently riding a bike or scooter started driving a car? Can you imagine how much less congested Wellington would be if everyone currently driving a car started riding a bike?

And when you start justifying your Council's position by putting on a "concern-for-our-safety hat" I get cold shivers down my spine. Don't you worry about us, We're big boy and girls, we know the risks involved and for our own reasons choose to take them on, in all weathers. In doing so we make this city's roads and public transport systems (which we've already paid our share for by the way) just a little less congested for everyone else.

We don't ask much in return, just somewhere to park the machine reasonably close to our destination so that wont need to walk halfway across the City in hot, heavy (quite possibly wet) riding gear. And preferably, as now, free of charge.

[davebullet]

Jon,

Is there a minimum safe measurement for unobstructed use of a footpath? If so, we could measure and identify a lot more useful spaces for parking. I have a camera and a tape measure to help this endeavour.

I'd like to resort to warnings and tickets, only when people knowingly park outside allowed areas on footpaths obstructing pedestrians.

Under OSH, we have a minimum (I think it is 90cm) gap between desks / furniture in an office for egress in the event of fire / emergency (and general safety).

Surely some recommended footpath guidelines exist?

[Jon Visser]

Jon,

Is there a minimum safe measurement for unobstructed use of a footpath? If so, we could measure and identify a lot more useful spaces for parking. I have a camera and a tape measure to help this endeavour.

I'd like to resort to warnings and tickets, only when people knowingly park outside allowed areas on footpaths obstructing pedestrians.

Under OSH, we have a minimum (I think it is 90cm) gap between desks / furniture in an office for egress in the event of fire / emergency (and general safety).

Surely some recommended footpath guidelines exist?

Our Footpath Management Policy (http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/policies/footpath/footpath.html) recommends a number of minimum unobstructed widths that we should try to achieve throughout the city, though adds that this needs to be determined by some degree of common sense by officers (e.g. if it requires 3 metres and the footpath is only two metres wide with a postal receiver on it then this could obviously not be achieved and we would need to look at other measures to keep people as safe as they can be). Under the key principles of the Footpath Management Policy it would not be appropriate for officers to allow any motorcycle parking on public footpaths. We could allow items that improve pedestrian access or public amenity (i.e. an object that is useful for the pedestrians using that space, such as seating) only, and a parked motorcycle would conflict with those primary goals.

Our Code of Practice for Working on the Road also allows some narrower guidelines where the site is controlled through traffic management (i.e. any access issues can be dealt with by the contractor if required).

The key principle is that any obstruction on the footpath, in order to be safe and manageable, must be there consistently (so that people with sight impairment can learn where they are) and temporary/managed such that it can be removed to cater for peak demand, e.g. if a parade or protest comes through or if roadworks need to take place etc. With sandwich boards and seating etc these can be instantly removed by the owner, but with motorcycles this is not the case. The obstructions should also be designed so that a cane can detect them before people with sight impairment walk into them, which is not the case with some motorcycles depending on how they are parked. So regardless of whether there is some space available, that does not mean it is appropriate to use it in the manner that is being proposed as it is contrary to our Footpath Management Policy.

Also in relation to enforcement, there is no dispute that there are some really bad examples out there that the Council must address (currently a minority of situations but increasing) which we currently can not do. I reiterate that the way the law works, we must either apply the same rules to everyone or no-one, otherwise any enforcement measures simply get tossed out of court. It would be nice to continue with applying discretion to most and only dealing with the worst, but that is simply not legally possible as it inconsistently "victimises" a minority group of offenders (who also have some legal rights). In order to be able to deal with the worst of the offenders, our responsibility is to ensure that all riders know what the expectations are of them (and that these expectations are reasonable) and then to apply the law consistently. We are currently carrying out that first step by advising people that there are alternative places that people can park instead, and that continued offending will be dealt with.

It is also worthwhile to note that footpaths are not just used for people to get from A to B. We have designed many "eddy" spaces into our footpaths where people (such as tourists, parents with children & elderly etc) can stop, rest, take shelter from the bustle of the main foot traffic, and deal with things like medical emergencies etc. These spaces are deliberately designed to be out of the flow of traffic, and the intention is to have them open and available for when they are needed. If we were to allow those eddy spaces to be used for motorcycle parking, we would only be left with "thoroughfares" for moving pedestrians, and that would only partially cater for all pedestrian needs. For a good healthy urban streetscape we should not be looking to fill all potential gaps with things - having some open spaces is quite vital to make a dense city such as our "liveable".

[sinned]

I can't argue with any of the points Jon has made. We actually need more eddy spaces around motorcycle parking to allow those of us who want to review, admire and drool over the nice machinery to stop and have time out without impeding the flow of foot traffic.

[Jon Visser]

But, I don't think council should be considering accident statistics in its transport planning, that is the job of other agencies.

As the Road Controlling Authority, it would be completely and utterly irresponsible for us to ignore safety in the management of our roads. Almost everything that we do is primarily focussed around safety.


And, if accident rates were to be considered, walking and cycling would have to discouraged well before motorcycling, as they both have higher accident rates per passenger km than motorcycling.

That is absolutely incorrect. You are six times more likely to have a serious accident on a motorcycle (per kilometre travelled) than any other mode of transport. Also the accident statistics don't mean that any particular mode of transport should be "discouraged", but that everything we do should aim to reduce the likelihood of accidents and injuries happening to those choosing their preferred mode of transport.


You argue that providing a motorcycle park removes a car park.

No, we are saying that a commuter that shifts from car to motorcycle does not free up on-road space but off-road space. We cannot accommodate them on the road so therefore they need to park off the road where the additional parking capacity has been created.

We are also saying that the on-road car parks cater to a specific number of vehicles that have a short-term parking need. Unless there is a change to that need we are not considering modifying the amenity that is currently provided to cater for that need unless it can be shown that there is an over-supply of that amenity. Our occupancy statistics suggest that there is an under-supply in the centre of the CBD (100% occupancy in some areas) with some flexibility around the periphery. For public parking facilities, 85% occupancy is considered "healthy" meaning that people have a reasonable chance of finding a park. Our occupancy figures are on average well over 90%, so it would be extremely difficult to argue that we should be reducing that amenity.

The two types of parking demand are mutually exclusive and both are lobbying for an increase in peak areas. In the CBD, we provide about 3,500 car spaces for about 40,000 short-stay cars (i.e. 8.75%) with fees ranging from $1 to $4 per hour. We provide about 450 motorcycle spaces for 1,000 bikes for free, mostly all-day parkers (i.e. 45%). Those statistics already indicate a massive preferential treatment towards motorcycles. As for cars, any demand in excess of what we can accomodate on the road will need to utilise off-road parking, and that is not an unreasonable expectation given the above statistics and in comparison to other cities.

(e.g. Sydney has about 600 on-road spaces for about 4,500 bikes so only cater for about 13% and expect the rest to park off the road - for many cities they cater for around 10% of motorcycles on the road, so Wellington already has one of the highest percentages and that is therefore not likely to increase much, certainly not to 100%).

[Ixion]

(e.g. Sydney has about 600 on-road spaces for about 4,500 bikes so only cater for about 13% and expect the rest to park off the road - for many cities they cater for around 10% of motorcycles on the road, so Wellington already has one of the highest percentages and that is therefore not likely to increase much, certainly not to 100%).

But does Sydney have this perverse ban on parking anywhere OTHER than a (free) motorcycle park? I don't think so (And BTW, I have seen a SHIT load of bikes parked on footpaths in Sydney)

What that amounts to is , you are saying "You can only park in the free motorcycle park areas , even if you were willing to pay the same fee as a car. But there aren't enough motorcycle parks, and aren't going to be. So you are totally fucked"

It is the refusal to allow motorcycles to use paid street parking, even if they are willing to pay for it that totally destroys the credibility of your arguments. Nor incidentally, can you take a position that motorcyclists are a greedy lot who expect free parking. Obviously, there are a significant number of motorcyclists who ARE willing to pay for parking. Otherwise the bylaw would be unnecessary.

[Ixion]

Sure it may be the cars that take out the rider, but if the rider had been riding in line with the cars in the first place they would have been much less likely to be hit (this discussion has probably been had on other bulletin boards already). While an individual rider may get to their destination quicker than they would if they had been driving a car, this does not mean everybody else does. Some never arrive :-( Unless people have been in an accident or had to deal with the consequences of a rider having an accident they really have no idea what the real cost of such accidents on our community truly are. Some laws really do exist to protect, not to annoy...

As I have said before, it would be great to see a reduction in motorcycle accidents which would make all of their other benefits a lot more compelling as reasons to encourage their use.


Firstly "but if the rider had been riding in line with the cars in the first place they would have been much less likely to be hit" is quite incorrect . You are MORE likely to be hit sitting in line pretending to be a two wheeled car. I'm speaking with over 40 years experience on this. If you sit in line in stagnant traffic (a) you will quickly be rearended (b) you will quickly be sideswiped by some moron who just sees a gap without a car in it and moves into it SMIDSY.

But I think this quote actually strikes to the real WCC agenda.

Motorbikes are evil, dangerous things and we , WCC, are going to do all we can to discourage them. Right?

(BTW Jon, you say that you rode a VT250. Yet you seem notably ignorant of things that bikers with a few years experience all learn. How long did you actually ride?)

[CDFloss]

I think its pretty cool that there's this (parking related) discussion going on. I have free off-street parking provided at work, but if I moved to another CBD-based job, I would have no problem paying a reasonable amount for parking - and by reasonable I mean if a car costs X to park, and we agree that at least 3 bikes can park in the same space (we easily manage more than this at work btw), then I'd expect to pay no more than X/3. Realistically though the Wilson/Tournament/etc will probably see this as an opportunity to charge more than X/3 and thereby increase their return per sq.meter of parking space. I hope not though. :rolleyes:

And now for something slightly off-topic...


... In reality, public transport has to lie somewhere in the middle, managing to be neither fuel efficient, or transport efficient...

...The future is personal transport, not public transport. We simply arent rich enough to keep pouring millions and millions of dollars into that black hole.

:niceone::clap::2thumbsup:scooter::rockon:

I totally believe that public transport has its place, and should strive to achieve this mythical "efficiency balance" as far as practically possible. But public transport should not be put forward as an eco-alternative to personal transport, because that is not its place.

I'm all for developing more efficient small cars, motorbikes, etc - as well as other emerging "personal transport" vehicles, but the key to realise is that people will always prefer the independent transportation option (why else are mobility scooters so popular with the grey-brigade once they lose their licenses? The answer is INDEPENDENCE). I used the trains for years, but always resented having to wait for them to arrive on THEIR schedule (pfft!) which was a waste of MY time. :no:

Dave

PS: Where's my f'ing flying car!

[scracha]

If they ride safely (i.e. in line with traffic as they are supposed to do) there is no discernable improvement in traffic flow.

"as they are supposed to do" - says who? You?

I know it's a terrible inconveniece to others when some selfish biker lands on their arse through lane splitting but the fact of the matter is that legally, the car driver is often at fault. Perhaps if you really wanted to see a reduction in motorcycle accidents in Wellington you could distribute pamphlets and posters up to educate all the silly car drivers who deliberately obstruct the path of motorcyclists going about their lawful business.

I won't go into how daft some aspects of the law in NZ is regarding filtering but bikes are supposed to filter (a.k.a. lane split). I take exception to WDC not planning for and including a perfectly legal activity in their traffic management plans. Perhaps if they thought more about motorcyclists and lane splitting when planning and designing the road system in cities there would be less accidents and more discernable improvements in traffic flow. Again, without soundling like a broken record....have a look at how it's done in other cities around the world (and don't cherry pick examples like Frisco that just happen to suit WDC's agenda)

It's also perfectly safe when done properly. On a motorcycle, it's much safer than moving in stop-start bumper to bumper traffic. In fact, in the UK you will fail your driving test if you don't filter in traffic where appropriate.



never arrive :-( Unless people have been in an accident or had to deal with the consequences of a rider having an accident they really have no idea what the real cost of such accidents on our community truly are. Some laws really do exist to protect, not to annoy...

So the real agenda is about reducing Wellington's accident statistics and improving revenue by having the nanny state "protect us" by effectively pricing out and/or making it difficult to park a motorcycle.

My bad, I mistakenly believed it was about improving Wellington's traffic flow?

Ban all bikes, that'll reduce accident statistics. Best reduce the speed limit in town to about 30 and whilst you're at it, ban anyone under 21 from driving.

[davereid]

You are six times more likely to have a serious accident on a motorcycle (per kilometre travelled) than any other mode of transport.

Your statistics placing motorcycles as 6 times more likely per km than walking or cycling do not stack up.

I searched and searched but could not find kiwi figures, but the UK should be at least representative, if not directly comparable.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/may/08/cycle-accidents-road-deaths-rise


646 pedestrians and 136 cyclists killed in 2007.

But the average commuter mileage undertaken by a pedestian is only 200 miles a year, and 36 miles for a cyclist.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/personal/factsheets/walkingfactsheet.pdf
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/personal/factsheets/cyclefactsheet.pdf


609 motorcyclists died in around the same period.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1145589.ece


Clearly, per km, walking is the most dangerous form of transport, and cycling is not far behind.

[Badjelly]

As the Road Controlling Authority, it would be completely and utterly irresponsible for us to ignore safety in the management of our roads. Almost everything that we do is primarily focussed around safety. ... You are six times more likely to have a serious accident on a motorcycle (per kilometre travelled) than any other mode of transport.

I don't want this thread to get diverted more than it already has onto safety (because I think it is a diversion) but I have to ask, can you point me to some references to back up that statement? Specifically in comparison with cycling.

[davebullet]

Our Footpath Management Policy (http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/policies/footpath/footpath.html) recommends a number of minimum unobstructed widths that we should try to achieve throughout the city....

Thanks for your reply Jon. All your points make sense.

I had a quick skim of the policy (will read in more detail later). It is good to see some numbers provided for minimum footpath widths.

I understand the need for "eddies", but I am sure there are places where the footpath is sufficiently wide, that some motorcycle parking can be accommodated, whilst allowing for space for a flow eddy.

The policy also states that "Retail display stand may extend up to 800mm from the building facade". Assuming the footpath minimum width is not compromised, then many motorcycles or scooters would be about that wide if parked hard against a building. I know you have pointed out that such displays can be immediately removed if required (protests, emergency service work etc...) which is a downfall. However, I would argue that should a car be parked in a way that obstructs protests or emergency service work (since cars would obstruct flow more), the Council would have provisions for towing and the same could be applied to bikes parked on the footpath in these extreme circumstances (all risk on the rider).

I will submit areas using Google maps where I believe some more motorcycle parking could be accommodated, whilst still maintaining the minimum widths and allowing for foot traffic eddies.

[Jon Visser]

What that amounts to is , you are saying "You can only park in the free motorcycle park areas , even if you were willing to pay the same fee as a car. But there aren't enough motorcycle parks, and aren't going to be. So you are totally fucked"

As per one of my previous posts I have added to our list of items to review when we next review the Traffic Bylaw that the ban preventing motorcycles from using Pay & Display spaces for short term parking (i.e. up to two hours) should be removed and replaced with some smarter clauses on how this could be permitted. I am still interested in hearing ideas on how such spaces can be equitably shared between riders so that we: do not end up giving tickets to riders because the one with the reciept has ridden off; charge all riders the full fees for sharing the one space; or only allow one bike to take up a whole space and pay a fraction of the amount due (none of these are sensible or fair to all concerned). Even then, from observation it appears that most of the motorcycles park in the CBD all day and very few come & go. We will carry out some research to verify the ratio a bit more accurately after this campaign is complete, but it is unlikely that allowing motorcycles to use P&D car spaces for up to two hours will address our current problems.


It is the refusal to allow motorcycles to use paid street parking, even if they are willing to pay for it that totally destroys the credibility of your arguments. Nor incidentally, can you take a position that motorcyclists are a greedy lot who expect free parking. Obviously, there are a significant number of motorcyclists who ARE willing to pay for parking. Otherwise the bylaw would be unnecessary.

Again, if people are genuinely willing to pay for parking their motorcycle then it would make an infinite amount of sense that if a commercial parking garage charges $2.50/day for a good space (protected, lit & guaranteed etc) and the cost of using an on-road car space is $4/hr up to 2 hours only then the garage option (for commuters needing all day parking) would be much more appropriate and that is what we are promoting - this would free up on-road space for casual parkers so that they wouldn't need to use car parking spaces.

[Ixion]

..
Again, if people are genuinely willing to pay for parking their motorcycle then it would make an infinite amount of sense that if a commercial parking garage charges $2.50/day for a good space (protected, lit & guaranteed etc) and the cost of using an on-road car space is $4/hr up to 2 hours only then the garage option (for commuters needing all day parking) would be much more appropriate and that is what we are promoting - this would free up on-road space for casual parkers so that they wouldn't need to use car parking spaces.


So, how many of these garages are there in Wellington? And how many square miles does Wellington cover. I'm not going to be impressed by the idea of an hour's trudge in full gear from the nearest parking building to my work place.

Maybe Wellington has hundreds of parking buildings, I don't know. In Auckland , there aren't that many and as you get away from the CBD they get rarer real fast. And I gather that the footpath ban and the can't park in a car space even if willing to pay, extend across the WHOLE of Wellington.

I guess an interesting question would be, if you announced that all CAR on road parking was to be abolished and all car drivers would ave to park in parking buildings, do y' reckon you'd have a riot on your hands?

[Jon Visser]

I understand the need for "eddies", but I am sure there are places where the footpath is sufficiently wide, that some motorcycle parking can be accommodated, whilst allowing for space for a flow eddy.

Agreed, and that is why we have been able to use discretion for some time while only a few bikes were parking in this manner. Due to the sheer magnitude of the numbers now doing so and the rising level of complaints from the public, building owners and retailers, we appear to be reaching a point where the amount used is in excess of what the public consider acceptable.


The policy also states that "Retail display stand may extend up to 800mm from the building facade". Assuming the footpath minimum width is not compromised, then many motorcycles or scooters would be about that wide if parked hard against a building.

Just a note on the retail display dimensions: displays may not extend more than 500mm onto public footpath. Sometimes there is a strip of public footpath that is actually owned by the adjacent private property owner, so the actual building facade may be set back from the property boundary. It has been raised that this space is "private property" that could be used for parking. Technically it is still public road and can be managed as such (i.e. infringement notices could be issued and building owners can get bikes towed etc). There are quite a few places like outside the police station and the example someone raised in Willis Street where it is OK to park like that and also some like outside ANZ that are not OK with either the building owner or the Council). Therefore to use it for motorcycle parking, you would need to:
1) Get building owner permission before starting to use it
2) Building owner would need to clear with us whether this was appropriate (as such spaces are still considered as "public footpath" and usually there is a requirement under various easements, encroachments or laws to keep such spaces clear of obstructions, especially "corner splays" - the 45 degree sections of building removed at intersections typically for sight lines).
3) If considered appropriate we would usually require installation of things like planter boxes or bollards etc so that the area is clearly defined, people with sight impairment can reasonably find their way around that location regardless of whether bikes are present, and only the approved area is used and does not spread to un-approved areas thereby blocking accessways etc.

When looking for suitable spaces to propose, you should only consider such "private property" spaces and ideally where there is a vehicle crossing adjacent. As previously advised, it is extremely unlikely that we will be marking any sections of footpath as suitable for motorcycles to park on, as this would be contrary to the Council's Footpath Management Policy.


I know you have pointed out that such displays can be immediately removed if required (protests, emergency service work etc...) which is a downfall. However, I would argue that should a car be parked in a way that obstructs protests or emergency service work (since cars would obstruct flow more), the Council would have provisions for towing and the same could be applied to bikes parked on the footpath in these extreme circumstances (all risk on the rider).

We don't particularly want to tow if we can avoid it, in emergency situations that may not even be possible or practical (or may even make it worse) and legally we cannot tow for many situations (i.e. planned events/activities) unless there was a 48-hour prior notice provided to vehicles in the way of signs etc. For defined parking spaces on the road this is easy as we simply put up a sign by the car park and barrier it off in advance of the works or activity taking place. With the footpaths we cannot do that, as firstly we would not know where to put the signs, secondly there is very limited space to put up any traffic signs on the footpath, thirdly it makes no sense to put up "no parking" signs on a public footpath where it is already illegal to park anyway, and lastly it would be unreasonable to barricade off the fooptath for the entire day on the offchance that people may be parking illegally there if we're not going to be carrying out the work until later in the afternoon etc. Sure we could go to significant lengths (at ratepayers' expense) to try and find clever work-arounds to all of these issues, but the bottom line is that if people were not parking illegally in the first place then that would not be required.

[magicmonkey]

I searched and searched but could not find kiwi figures, but the UK should be at least representative, if not directly comparable.

You really can't apply UK crash figured to NZ in any way shape or form. To start with people drive very differently in the UK, the environment is vastly different, the level of training completely different...

[Jon Visser]

But does Sydney have this perverse ban on parking anywhere OTHER than a (free) motorcycle park? I don't think so (And BTW, I have seen a SHIT load of bikes parked on footpaths in Sydney)

Sydney is experiencing exectly the same types of issues as Wellington, i.e. massive growth in numbers, increased on-road parking bays as much as possible, trialled payment options but found that Pay & Display receipts don't work, problems with motorcycles & scooters parkingon the footpath and commencing with plans to address this behaviour just like Wellington is:
http://cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/AboutSydney/documents/ParkingAndTransport/MotorcycleScooterActionPlanStrategy.PDF

Check out section 9, especially 9.3:
"the City of Sydney has provided more than 500 free and dedicated motorcycle
spaces in the CBD, most of which have been installed in the previous two years in response to rider
requests. The majority of the dedicated motorcycle parking in central Sydney is currently unrestricted.
Motorcyclists are now the only motorists with access to dedicated on-street commuter parking. All other
on-street parking spaces available to general drivers are timed pay parking spaces for short stays. Car
drivers wishing to commute to central Sydney must use off-street spaces. Despite the provision of more
than 500 on-street commuter spaces, demand for further motorcycle parking is high and growing. Riders
wishing to rely on on-street parking to commute are having to arrive earlier each morning to secure a
space. It is not however feasible for the supply of on-street motorcycle parking to continue to grow at
recent rates. Given the competing demands for the allocation of the limited kerbside parking and the
growth in motorcycle usage, it is not possible to continue to increase the supply of parking and to remain
ahead of demand for free unrestricted parking on the streets of central Sydney."
"The physical conditions which allow footpath parking in Melbourne differ from those found in Sydney.
Whereas Melbourne’s road reservations are 30-40m in width across much of the CBD, most reservations
in Sydney are 20m, and footpaths are generally no more than 3.6m wide. In Melbourne, the Victorian
Motorcycle Advisory Council recommends that motorcycles are parked at least one vehicle length from
the building line, and at least one wheel diameter from the kerb. This maintains access to the building line
for vision-impaired pedestrians. A motorcycle parked in compliance with these guidelines on a typical
Sydney footpath would frequently obstruct the main travel path for pedestrians, or obstruct secondary
pedestrian spaces such as near street trees or street furniture.
Footpath motorcycle parking also has the potential to conflict with the strategic goals outlined in the
Sustainable Sydney 2030 plan. Improving the public domain and the experience of outdoor life in the CBD
will require increased pedestrianisation, reduced footpath clutter, higher standards of urban design and
measures to reduce the noise and amenity impact of motor vehicles. The City has already begun working
to achieve these goals by rationalising signage on the footpath and developing a trial system of on-street
markings for parking controls.
The City’s proposed changes to ticket parking will provide a convenient alternative to footpath parking,
and will reduce the incidence of unauthorised footpath parking in central Sydney. In addition, the trial of
secure anchor points in inner neighbourhoods will provide motorcyclists with a safe alternative to locking
bikes against poles or fences."

[huff3r]

So in order to ensure our footpaths are free for people to walk on, you require more people to walk further on our footpaths? (i.e from a far-away parking building, or similar)
The biggest issue here is not the number of bikers, but the number of pedestrians :P

[Jon Visser]

Your statistics placing motorcycles as 6 times more likely per km than walking or cycling do not stack up.

My claim is based on extensive research conducted by the New Zealand Transport Agency:
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Pages/motorcyclecrashfacts.aspx

"Motorcycle Crash Facts
Last updated on 28/05/2009 10:03 a.m.

Motorcyclists face a number of risk factors that do not affect car drivers. The main risk factors are decreased stability and a much lower level of occupant protection than is provided by a car. In addition, a motorcycle is less visible to other road users than a car or a truck. These factors together give motorcycling a higher level of risk per kilometre travelled than other modes of transport.

Motorcycle Crash Facts 2008 contains the latest summary of motorcycle crash data including graphs and tables.

Download a copy of Motorcycle Crash Facts 2008 (PDF v7.0, 287kb) or email info@MOT.govt.nz."

Further information about road safety in NZ can be found here:
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/

Although you can argue about the detailed statistics as they relate to fatalities, serious accidents or all accidents for each mode of transport, the facts speak for themselves - motorycles are the most risky mode of transport in New Zealand.
"The New Zealand Travel Survey indicates that, on average, the risk of being involved in a fatal or injury crash is more than 18 times higher for a motorcyclist than for a car driver over the same distance travelled (2003-2007 data)"

The data sheet goes on to say that the recent trends are that motorcycle accidents are occurring more frequently to older age groups and lower CC ratings, especially scooters, and that in most cases the rider was at fault. The statistics correlate scarily with the increase in inexperienced riders using 50CC bikes (with no motorcycle licence required) during rush hour commuter traffic (i.e. the experienced riders with the large bikes are actually getting safer).

Sobering reading for riders...? Everything in the world is in a balance, typically between dollars and risk - while riding a motorcycle may be a lot cheaper and much better for the environment, this is offset by increased risk to the rider (i.e. while most benefit financially, others pay the ultimate price). For some people that risk, living life on the edge, may be entirely acceptable to them (for me that was certainly the case and why I rode bikes when I was younger, though I never graduated to a real bike :-).

[Jon Visser]

So in order to ensure our footpaths are free for people to walk on, you require more people to walk further on our footpaths? (i.e from a far-away parking building, or similar)
The biggest issue here is not the number of bikers, but the number of pedestrians :P

We're talking about Wellington here, where the parking buildings are only a few steps away from where most people work...

[Leseid]

In an ideal Wellington City we would have separate moped and motorcycle parks as each requires a unique parking formation. Moped parks can be placed on narrower roads as they aren't all that long and can all park perpendicular to the curbing. Motorcycle parks can be left where they are if all the mopeds left the motorcycle parks, then all the motorcycles can park in a more uniform formation requiring less space.

There's little money to be made from motorcycle parking so if I where the council I wouldn't really do anything about it. All the mopeds parked in motorcycle parks are good for the cafes that pay rates.

There's human progress for you, it all comes down to money.

[davereid]

My claim is based on extensive research conducted by the New Zealand Transport Agency:
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Pages/motorcyclecrashfacts.aspx

Its still wrong !.

That data compares motorcyclists to cars and trucks.

My comparison was with pedestrians and cyclists.

I have researched it, and I simply can't find any N.Z. data to compare motorcyclists to cyclists or pedestrians on a comparable basis. If you can, I'd love to read it !

But, its actually a diversion from the real topic - I was merely attempting to introduce the idea that a transport planner for a council had no place using council policy to reduce the number of users of a particular transport class in the interest of "safety".

I completely agree that as a transport planner you have to make things as safe as you can for any user of the road or footpath, its clearly an important part of your role.

The key fact, at least for me, is that your own data shows people are choosing motorcycles, over cars trains and trams. But the council has not introduced viable parking options to meet the demand.

The problem appears to be simple....

a) Council has chosen pay-and-display over simple parking meters, as pay and display makes much more money.

b) Motorcycles were not considered, as they can't pay-and-display.

c) Council has dealt with this by banning motorcycles from pay and display, but now don't know how to actually go about generating revenue from bikes.

But its all OK. Ratepayers will easily find millions of dollars to subsidise environmentally unsound, unsuatainable public transport, in the public interest.

And motorcylists will be carefully considered in future planning.

Yeah Right.


[EDIT - I found some N.Z. data ...

30% of road deaths in urban areas are pedestrians and cyclists

- Source NZ Government http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Documents/SaferJourneys_FULL_Final_ISBN.pdf
]

[sinned]

We're talking about Wellington here, where the parking buildings are only a few steps away from where most people work...
My observation and conjecture is that, Wellington pedestrians will mostly be those who arrive and leave the CBD by public transport. Those using public car parks probably don't walk very far.

[Clockwork]

But, its actually a diversion from the real topic - I was merely attempting to introduce the idea that a transport planner for a council had no place using council policy to reduce the number of users of a particular transport class in the interest of "safety".

+1

10chars

[James Deuce]

My claim is based on extensive research conducted by the New Zealand Transport Agency:
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Pages/motorcyclecrashfacts.aspx

"Motorcycle Crash Facts
Last updated on 28/05/2009 10:03 a.m.

Motorcyclists face a number of risk factors that do not affect car drivers. The main risk factors are decreased stability and a much lower level of occupant protection than is provided by a car. In addition, a motorcycle is less visible to other road users than a car or a truck. These factors together give motorcycling a higher level of risk per kilometre travelled than other modes of transport.

Motorcycle Crash Facts 2008 contains the latest summary of motorcycle crash data including graphs and tables.

Download a copy of Motorcycle Crash Facts 2008 (PDF v7.0, 287kb) or email info@MOT.govt.nz."

Further information about road safety in NZ can be found here:
http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/

Although you can argue about the detailed statistics as they relate to fatalities, serious accidents or all accidents for each mode of transport, the facts speak for themselves - motorycles are the most risky mode of transport in New Zealand.
"The New Zealand Travel Survey indicates that, on average, the risk of being involved in a fatal or injury crash is more than 18 times higher for a motorcyclist than for a car driver over the same distance travelled (2003-2007 data)"

The data sheet goes on to say that the recent trends are that motorcycle accidents are occurring more frequently to older age groups and lower CC ratings, especially scooters, and that in most cases the rider was at fault. The statistics correlate scarily with the increase in inexperienced riders using 50CC bikes (with no motorcycle licence required) during rush hour commuter traffic (i.e. the experienced riders with the large bikes are actually getting safer).

Sobering reading for riders...? Everything in the world is in a balance, typically between dollars and risk - while riding a motorcycle may be a lot cheaper and much better for the environment, this is offset by increased risk to the rider (i.e. while most benefit financially, others pay the ultimate price). For some people that risk, living life on the edge, may be entirely acceptable to them (for me that was certainly the case and why I rode bikes when I was younger, though I never graduated to a real bike :-).

It's not sobering at all. What's sobering is the implication that other road users rely on the protection of a crash cell and are quite OK with hitting another road user with their vehicle, either through a lack of skill or deliberate action.

Pedestrians and cyclists have always had the roughest deal in terms of road users in NZ. They are undertaking by far the riskiest road user activity, not motorcycling. I hear no cries to enforce safety clothing for pedestrians, nor do I see traffic planners banning pedestrians and cyclists or even enforcing a ban on jaywalking.

New York reduced pedestrian injury and death with the simple expedient of beat cops who are willing to shoot you for jaywalking.

I'm not giving you carte blanche to shoot motorcyclists by the way, though I do regret planting the seed.

[bezajel]

(...) We are currently trialling a new technology like SmartPark (...) Wardens simply scan the barcode and their hand-held gadget shows whether the barcode has been activated for the correct area and they have not exceeded the maximum limit.

This doesn't seem to get past the problem of how two motorcyclists can use the same park without both paying. Unless by "activated for the correct area" this means the 'system' knows the park is paid for for a certain amount of time, and a second motorcycle arriving could simply pay for any excess time they intend to stay. In fact, having a bar-code for each bike would be redundant, if the park had a code, and the user sent a text (or something) to pay for that park until a certain time, they would only be charged for time that has not already been paid for (i.e. it doesn't matter who pays for the park). Wardens could then use their thingie to check whether the park had been paid for. This would be like a metered system without a physical meter - just done automagically through whatever technology SmartPark would use. (Then the only problem is the technology failing, but that's another issue..)


(...)You will see on-street parking for bikes disappear very shortly.(...)

None of the car parking companies will let you share a park with other bikes. I've already asked Wilson Parking if I could do that with my employer paid for carpark, but they'll only do it if the other guys pay the same monthly rate for the park.

As far as I can remember, this first point hasn't actually been suggested by Jon at all. Jon - can we get some sort of words around the Council's commitment to maintaining the on-street parking we currently have?

As for the second point - this seems to be contrary to the Council's intent. Can you use some sort of sway in communicating to the car-parking companies that this is unacceptable? In fact, I suspect it is not legal to charge more on a per car-park basis for motorcycles than for cars. I.e. if my partner and I come in together in the car, we pay once for one space; however if we come together on our bikes, we would have to pay for the same space twice.


(...) It would be nice to continue with applying discretion to most and only dealing with the worst, but that is simply not legally possible as it inconsistently "victimises" a minority group of offenders (who also have some legal rights).(...)

(...)For a good healthy urban streetscape we should not be looking to fill all potential gaps with things - having some open spaces is quite vital to make a dense city such as our "liveable".

I understand the dilemma in the first point - however I don't see how it's not legally possible to CONTINUE - i.e. you've managed to legally apply discretion in the past, but it's no longer legal to apply discretion?

As for the second point, this is really really important. I'm a bit concerned with suggestions that green spaces should be converted to parking.


As per one of my previous posts I have added to our list of items to review when we next review the Traffic Bylaw that the ban preventing motorcycles from using Pay & Display spaces for short term parking (i.e. up to two hours) should be removed and replaced with some smarter clauses on how this could be permitted. (...)

I might have missed this somewhere, but what are the time-frames we are talking about for different stages of this project/these reviews? For example, when might we expect to see bylaws changed, new motorcycle parks created in identified spots, etc.? Obviously you're consulting at the moment, but it's hard from this end to know whether our input has actually been considered, if we don't see any suggestions implemented in a certain timeframe - so my question is, what should the expected timeframe be and what steps are there between you thinking something is a good idea and us seeing it happen on the street? I hope you will keep us updated on these issues as we go through.


It's not sobering at all. What's sobering is the implication that other road users rely on the protection of a crash cell and are quite OK with hitting another road user with their vehicle, either through a lack of skill or deliberate action. (...)

I know it's getting off-topic, but this I think is one of the key issues for motorcycle (and cyclist and pedestrian) safety, especially in urban areas where car drivers are more often at fault for accidents, and there's some great research out there about risk cultures and perceptions of threat. What I don't know is how/if this can be changed. I'm sure it won't have anything to do with parking, so the topic for another thread I suspect.