Wellington Parking - They are about to clamp down on bike parking [Archive] - Page 2

James Deuce

26th September 2009, 13:36

i think all this is getting completely over the top.... we are talking about a coupon or sticker...the infrastructure already exists for coupon parking...get a coupon printed up valid say for a month or whatever....Make it of a size like a warrant of fitness or registration sticker,we already have holders for those,and they would be easy to mount on a handlebar, triple clamp, or mirror mount or even stick on a number plate...any bike parked in a pay and display spot (or wherever ) without a coupon...bang ticketed.It would have to be legal of course for ONE bike to be in a pay and display spot,but once one bike is there four or five bikes could join it there.In fact the above solution would work for the current pay and display coupons..
Do you commute and is commuting on a motorcycling made at least partially financially possible due to free parking?

Coupon solutions for motorcycles aren't supported by WCC because of the "ease of tampering" defence. I have pointed out during the last round of "get the hell out of our city you greasy freeloaders" parking consultation that very few people have things like WoFs or Rego or even license plates removed from their motorcycles, so it is unlikely that a coupon holder similar to a WoF holder will be fiddled with.

Not supported by WCC.

Though that may of course be viewed differently now and it would be a welcome change of policy.

Since this discussion has come up, one of the tenants (a Govt Dept) in the building where I work has made moves to remove motorcycles from the under building carpark as "cars are being damaged", and they are citing concerns about over crowding "because the Council told them that most of the bike parks near here will be removed in the near future".

It may be over the top, and I'm sure that what I was told above is hearsay, but it concerns me that rather than make more parks available in response to reportedly being told that on street parking will be limited soon, at least one Government department is making moves to prevent their staff commuting via motorcycle, or at least make it more difficult to do so.

I know Mr Visser thinks that parking 1km fromwork is acceptable, but the reality is that for motorcyclists, walking a kilometer in boots that aren't designed for it, carrying the clobber you need for a day at work, can prove to be awkward to the point of dissuading some from bothering. Like me.

BMWST?

26th September 2009, 13:55

Do you commute and is commuting on a motorcycling made at least partially financially possible due to free parking?

Coupon solutions for motorcycles aren't supported by WCC because of the "ease of tampering" defence. I have pointed out during the last round of "get the hell out of our city you greasy freeloaders" parking consultation that very few people have things like WoFs or Rego or even license plates removed from their motorcycles, so it is unlikely that a coupon holder similar to a WoF holder will be fiddled with.

Not supported by WCC.

Though that may of course be viewed differently now and it would be a welcome change of policy.

Since this discussion has come up, one of the tenants (a Govt Dept) in the building where I work has made moves to remove motorcycles from the under building carpark as "cars are being damaged", and they are citing concerns about over crowding "because the Council told them that most of the bike parks near here will be removed in the near future".

It may be over the top, and I'm sure that what I was told above is hearsay, but it concerns me that rather than make more parks available in response to reportedly being told that on street parking will be limited soon, at least one Government department is making moves to prevent their staff commuting via motorcycle, or at least make it more difficult to do so.

I know Mr Visser thinks that parking 1km fromwork is acceptable, but the reality is that for motorcyclists, walking a kilometer in boots that aren't designed for it, carrying the clobber you need for a day at work, can prove to be awkward to the point of dissuading some from bothering. Like me.

I do commute but i go the other way.If i worked in the city i would use the bike,and the free parking aspect appeals,but if i had to pay i would expect a bike parking coupon to be about 1/4 of a car parking coupon.If the council want to start charging then they have to be open to ways to do it,and surely the first step has to be a ticket or coupon system...its the simplest way.The tampering defence on the part of the council is bullshit.Keep the receipt for the coupon...and provide that as proof or purchase if your coupon does go missing and you get ticketed.As far as the other aspect goes "at least one Government department is making moves to prevent their staff commuting via motorcycle, or at least make it more difficult to do so",the people who suggested that to me would get told very firmly to mind their own business,or human rights violations are in order.Damage to cars....prove it.....etc etc

Squiggles

26th September 2009, 18:30

Even then, from observation ...

Has the council actually done a count of the number of bikes entering the cbd? and on the length of their stays? I know the Auckland city council had not a clue as to the number of bikes entering and exiting daily.

StoneY

27th September 2009, 20:45

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.

Dude- I was a truck driver for 5 years- that statement is utter bullshit

Motorcycles are JUST as visible- assholes in cages just dont LOOK for them, or arrogantly ignore the fact they HAVE seen them and fail to give way

I have had no less than four cars this year alone deliberatly pull out on me and flip me the bird (right they couldnt SEE me im not AS VISIBLE)

icemotoboy

27th September 2009, 23:05

I had been using the James Smith Carpark (in Wellington, beside the Duxton) building to park my Aprilia RS250 occasionally for a number of years when I take my bike in the city, along with two friends who also parked their bikes there. I used to pay for a carpark there - till the parking people actually requested I not pay and simply ride around the barriers and use their designated motorcycle parking. I have no idea why they do this, but all the parking guy could tell me is that there was no money in motorcycle parking - and they prefer to have bikes in one place so they don't cause obstructions.

I don't generally use the bike for comuting, as I tend to either walk or run into work. I just use the motorcycle when I am running late or need to run errands.

Both my other friends had their bikes stolen. I've had three attempted thefts on my motorcycle, two of which were during the day. One did over $6000 worth of damage to my motorcycle, taking 13 months to fix. They tried to pick the motorcycle up and poped of the fairings. And it appears they tried to hotwire the motorcycle (neglecting the fact it is a kick start, instead frying the electronics). They also tried to drill the lock, before giving up. My motorcycle had a chain lock, and an alarm. They may have helped prevent the bike being stolen (the bastards have not got it yet!), it didn't stop them trashing it.

I then began parking my bike in the carpark basement at my work (on Willis Street). Cyclists would then wedge their cycles in beside my nice expensive fairings, making lovely little patterns all over them.

In principle, I agree with the need to do "something". I have often parked on footpaths when not in the CBD. I particularly didn't think about the implications for blind people walking along and falling over a parked bike. That IS a real concern. I can see how bikes on footpaths are really a problem, particularly in the CBD. And, the wind tends to blow bikes over that are parked on the street or footpaths anyway. Basically, I'd like to use off-street parking but have yet to find one that suits my needs and stops the freaking bike ninja's trying to steal my little piece of italy.

Above you mentioned little difference, security wise, between motorcycles and cars. Motorcycles, particularly my mint-condition Aprilia RS250 2003, are much easier to pick up and fit in the back of a van than, say, a Toyota Camry. Chain locks are pretty easily foiled, and despite having video footage of all the attempted thefts - there wasn't a single lead (nor police/insurance interest) in pursing the culprits. The sole reason my bike was not stolen was because every time they tried to pick the bike up and lift it into the van, the bits they were holding onto kept breaking. Eventually, it was so screwed they just ditched it. The police officer who I spoke to suggested it was a bad idea to park it in the carpark building, as lots of bikes get stolen from there. The insurance company threatened to raise my premium if I continued parking in off-street parking in the CBD. All bar one of these attempts occured in broad daylight - something that would be noticed if the bike was parked beside pedestrian traffic.

There is a lack of an overall strategy for dealing with the "final solution to the motorcycle question". Regardless of what outcome the council wants, unless you get the carpark companies, the police, your staff, the insurance companies, and the community on a common track and plan - then the strategy won't work. Each state and local government party involved with motorcycles are dealing with them on a problem-by-problem basis:
- the council : use off-street parking
- the police : don't use off-street parking
- the LTNZ : don't use a motorcycle
- insurance companies : own but don't use a motorcycle

My points:

- Off-street parking companies don't WANT motorcyclists revenue - because they are a headache. I am concerned your plan appears to hinge on this point.
- Motorcycles get stolen from existing off-street parking buildings. Partly because motorcycle designated parking is in the darkest, crappiest, place in the parking building. Steel bars for chains do not deter the thieves.
- Motorcycles are more prone to theft because they are more easily stolen. Security considerations are different, although not necessarily bigger or smaller - just different.
- Lack of co-ordination and by-in from the Police, the parking companies, insurance companies, and the council to solve the problem(s) together. There is no "win-win-win-win" solution that benefits you all (let alone the motorcylists themselves).

I don't think you will be able to solve those problems in the short term, and a solution is needed in the short term. Coupon parking seems like a better idea to me, for the short term, until parking companies decide there is money in motorcycle parking.

...alternatively, the CEO of the Dunedin City Council (where my old man works) LOVES his motorcycles... so you could all move there (as I am doing soon!).

davereid

28th September 2009, 16:12

This doesn't seem to get past the problem of how two motorcyclists can use the same park without both paying.

Good points in your post..

The solution is just old fashioned VENNER style parking meters. Allow 1.5 metres per bike, and give em all a meter.

Or, if you want to maximise carparks, give car parks VENNER style meters. If a bike is in first, he pays the meter.

If another bike shows up, so what ? You have already rented, and been paid for the space so council loses nothing.

If there are 5 bikes in the space, and an expired meter TICKET THEM ALL ! As any of them could have paid the fee.

Leseid

28th September 2009, 21:24

Dude- I was a truck driver for 5 years- that statement is utter bullshit

Motorcycles are JUST as visible- assholes in cages just dont LOOK for them, or arrogantly ignore the fact they HAVE seen them and fail to give way

I have had no less than four cars this year alone deliberatly pull out on me and flip me the bird (right they couldnt SEE me im not AS VISIBLE)

I have a theory on that actually, I am under the impression the average motorist looks for gaps between objects of a certain size i.e. other cars and trucks. Any object smaller requires a different part of their brain to override the lazy mental habit.

Ixion

28th September 2009, 21:40

I agree with your theory.

Cagers look along the roof lines of oncoming vehicles. If they see a gap with no car (or truck) in it, their mind (or what passes for a mind, we are talking cagers here) says " Ah, gee a gap. No car dere. Oi can go into that gap. Bout time I been waiting ages, at least 10 seconds. " And that's the end of it, they stop looking , just wait for that gap to get up to them. And pull out as it approaches. "Ah, sorry mate didn't see ya, but it's all ya own fault , cos ya didn't have ya headloight on, or if ya did I didn't see it, and it's your job to make sure I see ya, an I didn't so it's ya fault".

Badjelly

29th September 2009, 10:57

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...

The Motorcycle Crash Facts document compares accident rates of motorcycle and cars but not (as far as I can see) bicycles.

There is also a Cycle Crash Facts (http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/CyclistCrashFacts/) document that has a more complete comparison. It has a chart entitled "People killed or injured in motor vehicle crashes per million hours spent travelling, Jul 2003 - Jun 2007(all ages)". It has motorcyclists at 120, cyclists at 35 and car drivers at 8.

As I said in an earlier post, I think safety is a bit off-topic for this thread, except in so far as it affects local bodies' enthusiasm for encouraging motorcycling. I think we all realise motorcycling is more dangerous than driving a car. (Hands up who doesn't realise this! You at the back? Sorry, you don't count, you're obviously living on another planet.) We could (and will) discuss the reasons why and we can even try to do something about it, but we're not going to erase the difference.

What I want to challenge is this idea that cycling is clean, green, sustainable and generally a good thing, whereas motorcycling is dirty, smelly, crazily unsafe and generally a bad thing. In switching my commuting trip from a car to a small bike I have cut my fuel use by 67% (fuel consumption has gone from 10 to 3.3 l/100 km), I take up a little less space on the road (I ride like a Nana), and a lot less space at the end of the trip. But when I fill out a form on sustainable transport (my employer's into that stuff) I'm invisible. Walking, cycling and public transport are sustainable, apparently, and motorcycling is not.

Now I don't ride the bike primarily so I can boast about sustainability, I do it because I enjoy it (and it does save fuel). Cycling's an option I've considered too, but I'm not at all convinced it would make me safer, not if I ride the same route, through the winter months and in all weather as I do with the motorbike.

sinned

29th September 2009, 16:08

The notices were placed on bikes this afternoon. They were wrapped around the throttle so hard to miss.
Here is a pic of the action.

Bretman

29th September 2009, 19:17

Yes, I too had one of the "considerate parking" notices affixed to my handlebars this afternoon.

I must say I was a bit aggrieved considering my bike was parked at the front of a private carpark leased commercially by our company and shared with permission with one of our company cars. The bike is parked considerately and entirely within our leased park, nowhere near a footpath.

Mr Visser: I suggest that you have a word with your enforcement staff to ensure they understand which parking areas are council owned and therefore within jurisdiction which are private, commercial parks; and perhaps also that they are a little less indiscriminate in their "leaflet dropping".

As far as I can make out, I'm actually already doing what your campaign is aiming to encourage people to do - park in commercial parks freeing up council motorcycle spaces... don't you think?

Thanks for the rubber band, though.

davebullet

29th September 2009, 20:58

BMWST?

29th September 2009, 21:03

cheshirecat

29th September 2009, 21:06

Just a point of interest. A study in the UK found that train travel is less effienct energy wise then one person driving a a car in. I'm trying to track the study down again.

sinned

29th September 2009, 21:10

Just a point of interest. A study in the UK found that train travel is less effienct energy wise then one person driving a a car in. I'm trying to track the study down again.
That was quoted on Top Gear and I wasn't sure if it was made as a statement of fact or a pisstake. I would be interested in reading the study.

Ixion

29th September 2009, 21:16

It's probably true. Same goes for buses.

In peak hour transport (which is when public transport is claimed to be good), the train or bus , carrying a full load of passengers into the city (or wherever), is very efficient.

BUT-- once it gets to the end of the run, it has to go back again!. And this time there's bugger all passengers (nature of rush hours, everybody's going the same way). So it has to lug all that huge weight (bus, or train and carriages), back to the beginning with scarcely a passenger to put against that energy expenditure.

Repeat in reverse at the end of the day.

This is the bit that the "private transport is evil" greenies always carefully omit. They always quote the figures for public transport based on a full passenger load. And ignore the fact that you can't just stockpile trains at the end of the line.

cheshirecat

29th September 2009, 21:32

That was quoted on Top Gear and I wasn't sure if it was made as a statement of fact or a pisstake. I would be interested in reading the study.

Got it it's here (http://www.engineering.lancs.ac.uk/research/download/Environmental%20impact.pdf)
car comes out at 22l per 600k with two people and a train 22l per seat

davereid

30th September 2009, 07:04

Interesting report.

Of course, the car is rated per passenger. The train is rated per seat.

Neiher the car or the train is ever full. But if the car were, it would be well over twice the trains efficiency.

We really need to challenge this drivel that "public transport is sustainable and green.

Cos its not. No matter how many times they say it is.

Bretman

30th September 2009, 07:40

Yes, of course I do... but as a rule I park in motorcycle spaces rather than on the footpath.

I take issue because the implication of the leaflet is that it has been left because your bike is parked illegally and that it is a warning of an impending ticket.

If it was just an informative leaflet, then you're right, but it wasn't worded that way.

Bretman

30th September 2009, 07:45

I was parked on private land (Jon Visser confirmed this in an earlier post) and got the same warning notice today. I think The Council needs to educate staff about which areas are private parking vs. obvious footpath parking.

I'll keep parking there and see what happens....

I'm with you on this one... I'm generally supportive of parking enforcement staff, but its a bit of a wind-up to imply you will be ticketed for parking on private property.

Nasty

30th September 2009, 07:49

sinned

30th September 2009, 09:36

Nasty

30th September 2009, 09:43

Swoop

30th September 2009, 10:17

I particularly didn't think about the implications for blind people walking along and falling over a parked bike. That IS a real concern.
I believe this is a bit of a red herring. A blind person uses a cane to detect any object in their path. Someone could put their bag in the middle of the footpath and they would detect it.

If it was just an informative leaflet, then you're right, but it wasn't worded that way.
It is an information campaign. Logically, every bike should get information. If you parked legally and missed out on getting a leaflet, then parked "illegally" the next day........ I'm sure the wailing and gnashing of teeth would be heard far and wide by all bikers affected.

Clockwork

30th September 2009, 10:55

I believe this is a bit of a red herring. A blind person uses a cane to detect any object in their path. Someone could put their bag in the middle of the footpath and they would detect it.

Agreed, complete red herring. No blind person can expect public areas to remain entirely static for safe navigation, thats why they have canes and dogs.

Incidently, I was parked on the road and left about 4pm yesterday, I had no notice attached to my bike, does this mean its ok parked where it is?

davebullet

30th September 2009, 12:06

.... And ignore the fact that you can't just stockpile trains at the end of the line.

I've witnessed the Johnsonville train "stockpile" itself at both ends of the line :laugh:

Drogen Omen

30th September 2009, 14:03

Did any of you welly KB'rs get one of these notices on your bike yesterday?

If you didn’t or it got too wet and mangled to read it, here it is.

Please Park with Consideration

There aren’t enough on-street parks for motorcycles.

If you are parking all day, please consider parking in a commercial parking building. Your bike will be more secure and sheltered from the weather and you will be guaranteed a space. We have negotiated with the city’s parking providers to get motorcycle parking at reduced rates.

You may want to get together with friends or colleagues to share a parking space in a private garage – check with your building owner or employer.

Parking anywhere other than in designated motorcycle parking spaces is hazardous, illegal or a nuisance to others. Motorcycles and scooters that continue to park illegally will soon start to receive tickets.

Absolutely Positively Wellington City Council

This is fucking bullshit... I can’t believe they keep making it harder for bikers... didn’t ACC costs go up a couple months ago also???

Bastards... they have noticed there is too many bikes on the roads and not enough cars so they put more tax on the petrol starting this week, plus another 3cents by the end of the year, and they don’t even bother to put one car park aside for bikes on every street.

It’s just another one of those money things... “bikers aren’t paying for parking” on no we have to do something to fix that... “let’s force them to park in parking buildings“... “if that doesn’t work we will start charging bikes to park in bike parks”... “we have to squeeze some money out of them, after all it’s not fair on cagers having to pay for a car park”...
:argh:

We need to do something about it... I know there must be some KBrs that work for the council..........
:angry2::angry2::angry2:

we'll for one, I'm gona keep parking on my usual spot. cause the spot i park in is private property and i have permission to park there from the building owner. the building boundaries go right down to the gutter almost so the council and park wise have no say... bitches... :mad:

IdunBrokdItAgin

30th September 2009, 14:21

Drogen Omen

30th September 2009, 14:21

you'll see...
next thing every one will start cycling to work and then the council will bring in rego's for bikes...
and road user charges... hahahaha
maybe even WOF's

Geeeeeeeedy bastards...

Drogen Omen

30th September 2009, 14:36

Jon Visser, 17. September 2009, 9:38

You can read all of my responses on the following bulletin board:
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=106738

Basically we do not have any problems with a few motorcycles parking considerately and out of the way and we have turned a blind eye to this. Right now the community has a problem with this because building owners and retailers are getting upset, pedestrians are getting upset and people with sight impairment are getting hurt walking into motorcycles. They are all asking the Council to do something about this, and given that this activity is technically illegal we must take the side of the community that is asking for them to be removed. Given the huge and increasing deficit between motorcycles entering the CBD and the on-road parking spaces available, the Council has been working to increase not only the on-road spaces (which are very much constrained by the available space and the needs expressed by all types of users who all want more space) but also to secure good quality parkign access for motorcycles off the road in parking bu8ildings for greatly reduced fees. All major parking operators (Wilsons, Tournament and CarePark) are now prepared to offer well-lit, secure and guaranteed parking spaces for motorcycles from around $2.50 per day ($50 per month). Council’s campaign is therefore not to penalise motorcyclists or extort money from them, but to encourage them to park off the road as all other motor vehicles do. This campaign is costing the Council a considerable amount of money, and we are not asking riders to pay us a cent – all Council owned motorcycle parking spaces (including those in our Clifton Terrace Parking Garage) are free. Therefore anyone who implies that we are doing this to obtain revenue is entirely wrong – we are doing this at a cost and solely for the safety of pedestrians in support of our Footpath Management Policy:

http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/policies/footpath/footpath.html

Jon Visser
Infrastructure Performance Manager
Wellington City Council

James Deuce

30th September 2009, 14:42

Just found this article.

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

Has anyone got details on who and where the reduced rate private parking for motorbikes are (or are going to be)?

I assume that these will have to be available to bikers before they can start ticketing for illegal parking?
There aren't any and Mr Visser has had to retract that there are ANY private car parks that have agreed to let motorcycles in for free or a reduced charge at the Council's behest. It will be a frosty day in hell before Wilson Parking lets anyone park a motorcycle at a reduced cost in one of their parks.

They are "in negotiation", however no details have been forthcoming.

The comment about blind people walking into motorcycles on footpaths is utter emotive bilge. The comment about building owners getting irate about motorcyclists parking illegally around the base of their buildings is in no small part due to a couple of building owners no longer allowing motorcycles to park in their basement or enclosed courtyard, a la the old Defence building in Stout St.

Drogen Omen

30th September 2009, 14:45

??????????? Footpath managment policy...

is that why the council is going to convert the manners shoping area into a bus lane with footpaths on each side...?

every one know buss drivers buy their licenses online for $4.99 and can't tell the difference between footpaths and roads... and they have no idea what red lights mean or what speed signs are...

our Train system is shit an unreliable. our buses are never on time if they even turn up...

hmmm wonder if thats why the bus drivers refused to have GPS units installed in their buses... just incase they wanted to take the family out for a bus ride to illegally poach some paua and cray's...

Fix the transport system first Mr Jon Visser of Infrastructure Performance Manager at Wellington City Council ...

The biking seen is fine as it is...

Drogen Omen

30th September 2009, 14:52

Can a protest be organised, such as parking a bunch of bikes in car parking spaces all near the council buildings be arranged?

this is sounding better and better... make thoes fat ass Council staff have to walk to work... see how they like it... pft... think they can make us park miles away from work... fuck them...

Swoop

30th September 2009, 15:00

...the reduced rate private parking for motorbikes ...
*quiet chortle*
Like that will ever happen...

sinned

30th September 2009, 15:02

Did any of you welly KB'rs get one of these notices on your bike yesterday?

Good to see the notices have woken up at least on KBr to proposed change. Were you too busy Tag 0 Rama - ing :whistle: to follow the debate?
:calm:

Badjelly

30th September 2009, 15:02

We really need to challenge this drivel that "public transport is sustainable and green.

I reckon this topic deserves its own thread (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=1129432906).

Drogen Omen

30th September 2009, 15:11

Good to see the notices have woken up at least on KBr to proposed change. Were you too busy Tag 0 Rama - ing :whistle: to follow the debate?
:calm:

hehehehe yip... way too busy tag'o'ramaing... hehehe

see this parking bikes in parking buildings not gona work... as i will need to get my bike out to go after tags at all times through out the day...

davebullet

30th September 2009, 19:10

I don't see what the issue is with leaflets being left on any and every motorcycle in sight. Some of those parked legally or on private property and receiving a notice may next week or sometime soon seek a park in another place. At least they will have been warned.

Get over it. Be :calm:

Yeah - it's good to warn people... but you don't know if they think you are illegally parked or not. The bottom of the notice says continued infringement will result in a fine.

Normally I take a warning notice on my cage / bike as "you've done something wrong".

I'll ask the council whether the police have complained or asked. I suspect they've just told their wardens (I believe the parking warden service is subcontracted anyway by the council) to place a warning on any bike on / near the footpath. I didn't check any bikes in the on street parking to see if it was a blanket drop.

Drogen Omen

30th September 2009, 19:21

Yeah - it's good to warn people... but you don't know if they think you are illegally parked or not. The bottom of the notice says continued infringement will result in a fine.

Normally I take a warning notice on my cage / bike as "you've done something wrong".

I'll ask the council whether the police have complained or asked. I suspect they've just told their wardens (I believe the parking warden service is subcontracted anyway by the council) to place a warning on any bike on / near the footpath. I didn't check any bikes in the on street parking to see if it was a blanket drop.

yes it was a blanket drop.

the problem is there is no enough parking spaces and now the spare places on the footpath that is not being used will be made illegal to park on... even if the footpath is as wide as the grand fucking canion...

DrDuc

30th September 2009, 23:22

[QUOTE=Jon Visser;1129383201]Hi all,

* In comparison, Sydney has about 600 on-road spaces for about 4,500 motorcyclists (CBD).

I'm not sure about NSW but at least in Victoria (Melbourne) it is perfectly legal to park a motorcycle on the footpath so long as it does not hinder other users (pedestrians) - this means parking on the footpath but out of the way close to the kerb. I have found that system works very well for all users (foot and motorcycle) - motorcyclists are considerate and pedestrians are tolerant. I think that system would be welcome and effective here. Let's just grow up, be considerate and tolerate sharing.
Marc

Jon Visser

1st October 2009, 10:05

There aren't any and Mr Visser has had to retract that there are ANY private car parks that have agreed to let motorcycles in for free or a reduced charge at the Council's behest. It will be a frosty day in hell before Wilson Parking lets anyone park a motorcycle at a reduced cost in one of their parks.

Please see the posts earlier on this thread by Wilsons and Tournament Parking garages. They not only confirm that they have agreed to provide parking for motorcycles in all of their garages, but also provide their contact details.

The next set of fliers will include maps on the back of all possible parking locations. I would have preferred them to go out on a drier day, but things were dragging on a bit and I wanted to have at least the fist set issued before the end of the month. As most people have already figured out, they are not a ticket and do not imply that the recipient is parking illegally. They are issued to all riders so that all are equally aware of what is expected of them. Even those who park legally on the road all day may wish to consider their fellow riders who would like to come & go during the day.

davebullet

1st October 2009, 11:18

The major concerns I have about bikes in a carparking building is security and safety. I guy at the gym had his SV knocked over due to the tight turning space and poor judgement of a car driver - causing $1,500 of damage.

Drogen Omen

1st October 2009, 15:09

Please see the posts earlier on this thread by Wilsons and Tournament Parking garages. They not only confirm that they have agreed to provide parking for motorcycles in all of their garages, but also provide their contact details.

sorry Jon, but do you have a list of which car parking buildings have agreed to this thing your talking about, cause i walked down to Wilson's car parking building on Willis street and Wilson's car parking building on the terrace and talked to them about the so called cheaper rates for motorcycle parking... they said that they had not been told anything about it...

also i have got written permission from the building owner of where i park my bike, i managed to get a boundary view from the council for this building and about 80% of the footpath falls inside the buildings boundaries. this makes the location we park our bikes in Private property and Park Wise do NOT have any jurisdiction over it. also our bikes are well out of the way of pedestrians... you could drive 2 cars side by side down this section of footpath and still have enough room for our bikes to be parked there safely.

so will continue to park my bike in the same spot on the footpath out of the way of pedestrians just as it has been for the last 5 years.

Jon Visser

2nd October 2009, 09:34

also i have got written permission from the building owner of where i park my bike, i managed to get a boundary view from the council for this building and about 80% of the footpath falls inside the buildings boundaries. this makes the location we park our bikes in Private property

Parking on private property is fine as long as you have the building owner's permission. The bike must be wholly parked on private property, i.e. have no components sticking out over the boundary line. If we receive complaints from the building owner about bikes parking on the public footpath on their property (without their permission) we do have the ability to issue an infringement notice and the building owner has the ability to get it towed as long as they put up signs to that effect (e.g. as happened outside the ANZ building in Grey Street).

do you have a list of which car parking buildings have agreed to this thing your talking about

Below is the information supplied by the parking garages to KB. Note that this is aimed at commuter parking, not casual parking, so the garage attendants will probably not be able to help you. You should first contact the parking operator through their office to determine the best location and pricing for you, and to set up an account.

We will publish an updated map soon showing all possible public parking locations where you may be able to park your motorcycle or scooter.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

WCC on-road:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/pdfs/mcycle-parking.pdf

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wilsons
http://www.wilsonparking.co.nz/go/regions/wellington-cbd
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, Gareth Phillips.
(able to accommodate motorcycles & scooters at any of the facilities shown on the map except for Price Waterhouse Coopers)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tournament
http://www.tournament.co.nz/default.aspx?rid=2
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

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Care Park:
http://www.carepark.co.nz/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=38&Itemid=56
On a commercial and casual basis we have over 25 different sites through out wellington. We have a covered/manned and secure carpark in Boulcott St that would be perfect for motorcycles & scooters and many others around town.
Email info@carepark.co.nz
Toll Free number 0800 227 372
Phone (04) 388 9681

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drogen Omen

2nd October 2009, 12:33

I have uploaded the boundary of the building that we park our bikes at.

key:
- the yellow line is the boundary of the building we park in front of.
- the red line is the boundary of the next building.
- the blue line is the boundary of the next building.
- the green box's are where we park our bikes.

Os you can see the boundary goes right to the tree's

Our bikes stick out past the building by about 20cm. but there is still plenty of room for wheel chairs.

I will take a photo with our bikes park in the spot and show how far out the boundary actually goes.

James Deuce

2nd October 2009, 12:49

Please note that Wilson's have expressly forbidden the sharing of car sized parks by multiple motorcycles.

Drogen Omen

2nd October 2009, 14:11

Please note that Wilson's have expressly forbidden the sharing of car sized parks by multiple motorcycles.

Well that sux... it better be $2 a day for the car park then... cause no one will park in the buildings if its too expensive... after all that's why so many people are riding bikes now. cause they are cheaper to run and parking is free. we are in a recession after all...

Jon Visser

5th October 2009, 09:21

Please note that Wilson's have expressly forbidden the sharing of car sized parks by multiple motorcycles.

Wilsons will be putting aside designated motorcycle-sized parking spaces (on an as-needed basis) for motorcycles and scooters to use so that they can all easily get in & out without damaging each other or the adjacent cars. Therefore there should be no need to use car parking spaces by motorcycles unless people choose to hire such a space for a particularly large or expensive bike (which some people do).

Jon Visser

5th October 2009, 09:29

I have uploaded the boundary of the building that we park our bikes at.

That is a great example:
* The building owner has historically cleared with the Council that such parking is OK (a few property owners along Willis Street have done so where Council has not purchased the extra strip of land that was going to be used to widen the road).
* There are permanent physical obstructions present (e.g. the church fence & trees) that channel pedestrians away from the area used for parking (other property owners along here have put in bollards).
* There is a vehicle crossing adjacent to the location where motorcycles can safely get on & off the road and across the footpath.
(Note that the red property boundary is not actually quite right - the church car park encroaches onto the public footpath)

Drogen Omen

5th October 2009, 09:52

That is a great example:
* The building owner has historically cleared with the Council that such parking is OK (a few property owners along Willis Street have done so where Council has not purchased the extra strip of land that was going to be used to widen the road).
* There are permanent physical obstructions present (e.g. the church fence & trees) that channel pedestrians away from the area used for parking (other property owners along here have put in bollards).
* There is a vehicle crossing adjacent to the location where motorcycles can safely get on & off the road and across the footpath.
(Note that the red property boundary is not actually quite right - the church car park encroaches onto the public footpath)

cool so we are ok to keep parking in that location?

would i be able to get you to write a letter advising that we are permitted to park here, just in case park wise issue any of us a parking ticket.
that way we could present it to park wise or the council to get the tickets revoked.

you can email it to: christian.moore@energyintellect.com

cheers for the clarification Jon.

FatHead

15th October 2009, 11:55

All, I have just been to see Candice from wilson parking wellington@wilsonparking.co.nz and she has identified several spots in the James Cook carpark that they are happy to mark as bike parking:clap:. I told her I was going to post on this forum and she was happy for anyone to discuss with her through the wilsons website www.wilsonparking.co.nz (http://www.wilsonparking.co.nz) If you let her know I (Brian Martin) sent you she will do a deal for you.

The more requests for permanent parks they get the more spaces they will put aside (including car park spaces if the numbers are high enough) and they are willing to make access for us motorcyclists easier as well (I don't think I should discuss how here but I think the solution will be fine for all):2thumbsup. They also have places in other buildings around the city that they are willing to talk to us about on an as needed basis.

Well done Wilsons and thank you Candice

Jon Could you let us all know when the next lot of flyers will be going out and when our friends with the ticketing machines will start leaving us love notes.

:Offtopic:Now to read about the ACC Levies :weep:

StoneY

15th October 2009, 12:04

Guys and Gals

There is a Bike Park, semi covered, secure behind barriers and cams at the Clifton Tce parking (building?) under the Tce Motorway

Pix to follow

You drive IN the BLUE private entry lane and leave the same way FREE of charge
Only uber wide HD's or other sidebag carrying cruisers will have an issue fitting

My ST4 parks there now and its totally alone bar a wee scooter so , off street, safe, camera coverage, semi weather protected......
Keep my ST4 company :niceone:

Oh and Mr Visser, there are several OTHER places in Clifton suitable to be marked for bikes, any chance of you and I walking throgh please?

Jon Visser

15th October 2009, 14:42

Jon Could you let us all know when the next lot of flyers will be going out and when our friends with the ticketing machines will start leaving us love notes.

We're just finalising the fliers now (just waiting on confirmations from Wilsons, Tournament and Carepark for all of their details on the fliers) and I am hoping to distribute them around Thursday 22 October. As soon as they are finalised I will post them electronically here, as well as to all those who have contacted me individually for them.

There are currently no plans to recommence with enforcement yet as I am waiting to see what the response to the fliers and posters is first. I am still optimistic that we can address the bulk of these issues without needing to resort to fines. When we do recommence with enforcement, our intention is to issue $0 notices at first so that it is clear what is and what is not OK, and to iron out any issues such as private property boundaries.

It is good to see some positive progress in some areas (e.g. Grey Street is looking a lot tidier than it has for many months), some positive remarks (e.g. on this forum) and some reports of increased utilisation of off-road facilities.

I am even more pleased to announce that we have just agreed to install a few more on-road motorcycle parking spaces in Panama Street (off Featherston Street just before Grey Street). As was suggested on this forum, we are looking a bit more closely at the "yellow" sections of road that cannot be used for parking larger vehicles. There are some sections of no-parking on Panama Street that, because of fire hydrants and old dis-used vehicle crossings, can not be used for car parking but can quite easily be converted to motorcycle parking without any loss of car parking space. It would be good to hear if there are any other such locations around the city.

davebullet

15th October 2009, 16:00

When we do recommence with enforcement, our intention is to issue $0 notices at first so that it is clear what is and what is not OK, and to iron out any issues such as private property boundaries.

Good idea.

davebullet

15th October 2009, 16:02

There are some sections of no-parking on Panama Street that, because of fire hydrants and old dis-used vehicle crossings, can not be used for car parking but can quite easily be converted to motorcycle parking without any loss of car parking space. It would be good to hear if there are any other such locations around the city.

Excellent thinking... I'm sure there are other clustered areas near multiple fire hydrants that bikes could fit and not be an obstruction.

Bodir

15th October 2009, 20:23

Hi Jon,

you do know that there is a quick fix for short term bike parking (for all the outsiders that want to travel to Wellington and have a good time).

Short term (60 or 120 min) car parks are used, as you stated pages ago, to regulate frequency. These car parks are in no way there to generate income. The time restriction is there to allow more short term customers to get to the shops without walking too far. This is necessary to avoid car parks being blocked for the whole day and therefore shops miss out on sales etc. The car parks are monitored so that everyone obeys the rules. (That is a short description of what you stated)

Now the solution for short term bike parking: Allow bikes to use these car parks.

How does this work? Simple. A bike cannot park longer than the allowed time there or it gets fined/towed. You got the system in place to enforce that, so no extra cost. Up to now - no disadvantage.

How to charge the bikes. And here comes the trick! BTW the one that council does not like. You don't. As per your argumentation the short term parking is only a regulating too, not a revenue tool. Hence no income required.

Now this would be unfair to all the cars that park and pay. But guess what - why do they have too? P&D zones get extended each year because they are solely there to generate income. The parking times don't change but now you have to pay to use the same spot for the same time. In your example the city would loose 1m if the converted P&D to bike parking. That shows that the revenue is already build in the budget (same as the fines for not obeying).

Conclusion of this example. It is easy to provide short term parking for bikes, but it is far more convenient to pretend to find solutions and cash in on the fines once there is not enough parking anymore in private owned places for the casual biker.

Looking forward to your response in how you want to rationalize your way out.

StoneY

15th October 2009, 20:29

Bodir, get the fuck out of this thread

New member, 1 post, from Jaffaland...this is Wellington you moron and Jon's shown some bloody good faith here so FUCK right off out of it

Jon Visser

16th October 2009, 10:26

you do know that there is a quick fix for short term bike parking (for all the outsiders that want to travel to Wellington and have a good time).

Short term (60 or 120 min) car parks are used, as you stated pages ago, to regulate frequency. These car parks are in no way there to generate income.
...
Now the solution for short term bike parking: Allow bikes to use these car parks.

Hi Bodir,

I am not entirely sure what you are suggesting. Motorcycles are already allowed to use time-restricted parking, for free, for short term parking. Any motorcycle or scooter may use any P5, P10, P60, P120 etc for up to that time restriction. However, to my knowledge there are very few of these in the Wellington CBD. The only ones I can think of other than P5s and P10s (which are effectively "loading zones that anyone may use") is a P60 at the top end of Cuba Street. Typically we have a lot of P60, P120, and P240 spaces in the suburbs and these may be used by riders (up to the posted time limit).

Our metered parking does exist to generate income to offset the costs involved in providing parking amenity in Wellington City (as opposed to being rates-funded). Metered spaces controlled by a single-head meter may be used by riders. The ones covered by the "Pay & Display" machines may not currently be used because of technical issues around the displaying of receipts. If we can find a reasonable solution to that technical issue (i.e. which does not unreasonably disadvantage riders, car drivers or our ratepayers) then I'd be happy to let riders use these spaces as well. We would need to publicly consult on any such change to our Bylaw, so I would need to put forward a case and consultation document that, when considered by all car drivers, would receive majority support. If we simply said "lets allow all riders to use any P&D spaces all day for free" we would simply get thousands of objections from car drivers (who outnumber riders 40 to 1 and are also pressuring me to increase, not decrease, the number of spaces available to them) and the change would be rejected. Even then, it would only solve the problem for short-term parking needs, whereas most of the riders are commuters looking for all-day parking.

Bodir

16th October 2009, 11:49

Hi Bodir,

I am not entirely sure what you are suggesting. Motorcycles are already allowed to use time-restricted parking, for free, for short term parking. Any motorcycle or scooter may use any P5, P10, P60, P120 etc for up to that time restriction. However, ... top end of Cuba Street. Typically we have a lot of P60, P120, and P240 spaces in the suburbs and these may be used by riders (up to the posted time limit).

Witch is a great thing, but for short term bikers not the ideal solution as they are far away from the cafes and shops and if you are on a trip you have a little more luggage on your bike than the average commuter. Hence you would like to park preferably in line of sight unless you want to dismount everything and carry it.

Our... Metered spaces controlled by a single-head meter may be used by riders. The ones covered by the "Pay & Display" machines may not currently be used because of technical issues around the displaying of receipts. If we can find a reasonable solution to that technical issue (i.e. which does not unreasonably disadvantage riders, car drivers or our ratepayers) then I'd be happy to let riders use these spaces as well. We would need to publicly consult on any such change to our Bylaw, so I would need to put forward a case and consultation document that, when considered by all car drivers, would receive majority support. If we simply said "lets allow all riders to use any P&D spaces all day for free" we would simply get thousands of objections from car drivers (who outnumber riders 40 to 1 and are also pressuring me to increase, not decrease, the number of spaces available to them) and the change would be rejected.

The statement that I was trying to make only targets the short term bikers. They might be a minority, but they still require parking and are the most likely to park "illegally" (edit: (even after commuters are all sorted in day spots)) as they have a different parking need as stated above.

I am not suggesting to allow P&D parking spaces to be used for the entire day, just for the amount that they are designed for. Again, this does not help the commuters that are looking for a whole day spot, but it also helps the commuter that wants to quickly jump in a shop and grab something. (I guess shop owners will not mind if you park in front of their shop while you are inside anyway, but it would not be legal)

As the technical issue is that motorcycles cannot display any prove of purchase at the moment, I understand that a "free parking" is hard to sell to car drivers.

Even then, it would only solve the problem for short-term parking needs, whereas most of the riders are commuters looking for all-day parking.

Yes it would only solve one tiny problem, but one problem less is still one worry less and a couple more bikes off the footpaths. Not all solutions have to cover the whole crisis. Sometimes it pays off to divide a problem into its smaller issues and cope with each of them individually rather than to find the one stop shop solution. And you are doing it for the commuters at the moment by finding space for them wherever possible, either in the private sector or on government property. It is hard to find 500 spaces at once. But finding 480 (just a random number) is easier.

cindymay

16th October 2009, 12:12

Witch is a great thing, but for short term bikers not the ideal solution as they are far away from the cafes and shops

Second post from a witch from Jaffaland - fuck I love watching this site.:headbang:

BMWST?

22nd October 2009, 19:18

I parked in Tory street to day in a pay and display in my carto go to Motorad.None of the machines and none of the signs indicated that a motorcycle could NOT park there.

StoneY

22nd October 2009, 22:58

Jon Visser

28th October 2009, 15:26

All going well the next lot of flyers will have been issued today. Fingers crossed that the weather will remain dry until everyone has returned to their bikes.

A sample of the flyer is attached. There are three versions: CBD North, CBD Central and CBD South. This was done to maximise the scale for printing and there is a decent overlap between the areas.

A full map covering the whole city is also attached. This will be posted on our external web pages, which are currently being updated.

ajturbo

28th October 2009, 15:35

Ups to mr Visser gentlemen

In this thread we have ragged him a bit at timea and all along he kept a sane and level attitude, never getting emotional, never responding with anyting except VERIFIED facts.....

Kudos to you John

You have been honest with us from day one

Thank you
at least he can show his boss's what he is doing on KB all day... lol

wow what a job.. get to talk to us bikers on line and get paid!!!

well done!!!

Laxi

28th October 2009, 15:42

wow what a job.. get to talk to us bikers on line and get paid!!!

yeah but how much do they have to pay him to talk to you AJ?:bleh::lol:

XP@

28th October 2009, 16:10

Seconded, It is great to see some really good, open information coming directly in to the conversation.

Thanks!
James

Now if ACC were as open and honest....

Ups to mr Visser gentlemen

In this thread we have ragged him a bit at timea and all along he kept a sane and level attitude, never getting emotional, never responding with anyting except VERIFIED facts.....

Kudos to you John

You have been honest with us from day one

Thank you

scootnz

28th October 2009, 21:45

Umm...are you sure that park in College St is actually there? Because the motorcycle park that used to be opposite L'Affare cafe, which you can still actually see in google maps satellite view - has been gone for months.

Jess

All going well the next lot of flyers will have been issued today. Fingers crossed that the weather will remain dry until everyone has returned to their bikes.

A sample of the flyer is attached. There are three versions: CBD North, CBD Central and CBD South. This was done to maximise the scale for printing and there is a decent overlap between the areas.

A full map covering the whole city is also attached. This will be posted on our external web pages, which are currently being updated.

Jon Visser

29th October 2009, 12:08

Umm...are you sure that park in College St is actually there?

:Oops: It looks like when our contractors resealed this road a few months ago they reinstated the parking layout incorrectly as there is a problem with the underlying traffic resolution. We will arrange for the motorcycle park to be reinstated in College Street ASAP. I am quite surprised that this was not picked up (by our contract managers or the public) and brought to our attention earlier. I must apologise for this oversight - I did send someone around to verify that all these sites existed (and I was not aware of any removal of parking spaces) but that was about half a year ago now. Any other such issues please let me know so I can resolve them.

ajturbo

29th October 2009, 13:44

:Oops: Any other such issues please let me know so I can resolve them.

i am sure there was one ... just outside my office ... but it's gone now....:whistle:

HONEST :whistle::whistle:

Jon Visser

29th October 2009, 16:27

The following web pages have been updated:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/index.html
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/onstreet/onstreet.html

idleidolidyll

1st November 2009, 09:32

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.

Do what Auckland did 30 years ago:

park all motorcycles in full car park spaces sideways so no cars can fit in.
Do this en masse; those parking spaces are NOT "car parks" they are motor vehicle parks and bikes have the right to use them as do all other motorists.
You are usually city friendly by parking between cars at 90 degrees to the kerb; show Wellington City that you are pissed off; clog the cities parking spaces with bikes and show them your middle finger

StoneY

1st November 2009, 09:38

The following web pages have been updated:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/index.html
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/onstreet/onstreet.html

Thanks John

Here is one council official who took time to assist and WARN us as much as he could.

John has also made certain the BIKEOI gets council support (non politically just so the City runs as smooth as possible on the day)

There is no need for protest regards the parking, we have had John to liaise with from the moment they planned it and this is proving to actually work quite well so far

John your a credit to the council mate

caseye

1st November 2009, 09:40

I told you he was back!
Ideli is 100% right if they ain't going to play nice, then play outside the square, don't break the rules as such, but use your entitlement to the full and deny the cage drivers their usual free run, they'll soon start screaming at Council to get this mess sorted out.
no offence Jon but if it needs doing it needs doing now not in half a years time.

Jon Visser

2nd November 2009, 07:52

if they ain't going to play nice, then play outside the square, don't break the rules as such, but use your entitlement to the full and deny the cage drivers their usual free run, they'll soon start screaming at Council to get this mess sorted out.

One could argue that it is the riders "not playing nice" (i.e. causing the problems on the footpath that I then need to deal with). Please be very clear that parking a motorcycle in a Pay and Display space in Wellington City is illegal under our Bylaw.

I have great respect for the organisers of the BIKOI, in that they are doing all they can to minimise negative impact on other road users. After all, it is public support you are seeking, not for the other road users (who outnumber riders substantially) to become so annoyed with riders that they press for even greater restrictions and enforcement.

Everyone has the right to peaceful protest, which means acting within the law. If the rights of others were abused by a protest action such as blocking all the car spaces (illegally), and all the car drivers complained to me to sort it out, I would have no compunction in ticketing or towing the lot in order to keep our city's transport network functioning effectively.

Drogen Omen

2nd November 2009, 10:02

We could all quite easily stop riding and start driving our non eco friendly cars in to work everyday, I have 2 gas guzzling 4x4's at home that the wife and i could start driving into town and take up 2 car parks that some one else could have used if i could afford to register my bikes.

imagine if every biker switched to their car. what would happen to the traffic flow and parking...? there is already not enough parking in NZ city's.

all us bikers should be receiving a carbon credit that we can use to cancel out the ACC levies as we are all riding rain or shine doing our part for the environment. we take up lest parking space's, we use less petrol, we use less oil and expel a fraction of the exhaust fumes....

marine0089

2nd November 2009, 16:28

I parked in Tory street to day in a pay and display in my carto go to Motorad.None of the machines and none of the signs indicated that a motorcycle could NOT park there.

Was that the warehouse/noel leeming parking space on tory?

I always park there when heading to motorad and only just last time realised that it is a pay and display :Oops: Luckily I am usually there on weekends and haven't been caught yet.. Is a bit strange tho seeing as most of the parking lots are monitored like hawks.

idleidolidyll

3rd November 2009, 18:51

One could argue that it is the riders "not playing nice" (i.e. causing the problems on the footpath that I then need to deal with). Please be very clear that parking a motorcycle in a Pay and Display space in Wellington City is illegal under our Bylaw.

Then Wton CC is anti bike and I have no respect for them. Please post a copy of that bylaw cause I won't believe it until I see it.
Also because that kind of discrimination MUST be challenged if the council doesn't provide adequate parking in convenient locales.

I have great respect for the organisers of the BIKOI, in that they are doing all they can to minimise negative impact on other road users. After all, it is public support you are seeking, not for the other road users (who outnumber riders substantially) to become so annoyed with riders that they press for even greater restrictions and enforcement.

You may have respect but non disruptive action has never worked for bikers in the past and I doubt we'll win anything but a slightly lower rate (which they would have planned anyway to make us feel like we 'won' something when all we are being is screwed over)

Everyone has the right to peaceful protest, which means acting within the law. If the rights of others were abused by a protest action such as blocking all the car spaces (illegally), and all the car drivers complained to me to sort it out, I would have no compunction in ticketing or towing the lot in order to keep our city's transport network functioning effectively.

Legal protest does not have to be peaceul and if it doesn't disrupt, the media will happily ignore it and so wiill all you politicos

caseye

3rd November 2009, 19:32

Jon, neither Idleidolidyll nor myself have advocated doing anything illegal.

From Ideli,
"Do what Auckland did 30 years ago:
park all motorcycles in full car park spaces sideways so no cars can fit in.
Do this en masse; those parking spaces are NOT "car parks" they are motor vehicle parks and bikes have the right to use them as do all other motorists.
You are usually city friendly by parking between cars at 90 degrees to the kerb; show Wellington City that you are pissed off; clog the cities parking spaces with bikes and show them your middle finger"
From me.
Ideli is 100% right if they ain't going to play nice, then play outside the square, don't break the rules as such, but use your entitlement to the full and deny the cage drivers their usual free run, they'll soon start screaming at Council to get this mess sorted out.
no offence Jon but if it needs doing it needs doing now not in half a years time.
Please don't take my comments certainly, I won't speak for Ideli comments as advocating any more than using "our" entitlement to the full and making a very poignant point to other road users who for a change can't find a car park in Wellington city because "some" bikers have used up all the spaces, legally.

BMWST?

3rd November 2009, 20:48

Was that the warehouse/noel leeming parking space on tory?

I always park there when heading to motorad and only just last time realised that it is a pay and display :Oops: Luckily I am usually there on weekends and haven't been caught yet.. Is a bit strange tho seeing as most of the parking lots are monitored like hawks.

yep the spaces up round there...but the machines(if they are representative of pay and display machines) do not say anything about motorcycles NOT being able to park there.So if i got a ticket for parking there and my defense was there was no advice i could not park there..surely that is a defence.

Kennif

4th November 2009, 08:20

One could argue that it is the riders "not playing nice" (i.e. causing the problems on the footpath that I then need to deal with). Please be very clear that parking a motorcycle in a Pay and Display space in Wellington City is illegal under our Bylaw.

Hi Jon
Thanks for participating in this discussion - I think we all appreciate it. One thing that bugs me is the apparent arbitary actions of the parking wardens. The other day I got pinged for parking the DR in the "broken yellow line" area at Williston & Victoria. Fair enough some will say even tho the bike was parked entirely inside the yellow line and caused no obstruction either to travel of vision.

But along Featherston Street EVERY broken yellow line area on the intersections had one or two bikes parked in them - quite sensibly and responsibly but not ticketed. In addition there were 16 bikes parked on the footpath from the police staion to the Williston St bikepark. So what was it that made the little Amourguard man decided to ticket me and ignore all the rest? Was he just having a bad day? Doesn't like Suzukis? Hates blue? Pre-menopausal? Huh?

Then to rub salt into the wound (!!!) the ticket was for $60, just as it would have been if I had parked my van in that space (which really would have caused an obstruction!)

So not just an arbitary decision based on who knows what but completely unfair fine in view of the circumstances. :angry::angry::angry:

It stinks. :mad:

idleidolidyll

4th November 2009, 17:10

Kennif

4th November 2009, 20:11

Nasty

4th November 2009, 20:23

It's obvious that Wellington CC is anti bike and it may be that you will have to go as far as breaching council bylaws in large groups to get your point across.

Perhaps the very forst thing to do is park 200 bike directly outside the mayors office and rev the tits off them.............................

Always interesting to see someone from another part of the country making sweeping and rather ignorant statements ... The council is actively trying with bikes ... but bikes need to also play ball to work with the others in the city.

Roki_nz

10th November 2009, 11:57

Kennif

10th November 2009, 16:00

Hey everyone

Today the parking wardens have started issue “caution tickets” on all the bikes parked on the footpath. Currently it is just a caution and not a fine (note this is different from the WCC flyers we all had attached) but one would guess that it won’t be long until we all start to get fined :angry2:

So let's get this straight:
(a) Bikes are not allowed to park (and pay!) in a "Pay & Display" area;
(b) Bikes will not be allowed to be parked on a footpath (however considerately)
(c) WCC has not (yet) been able to provide sufficient bike-dedicated parking areas for bikes.

Right so far? So what is it that we are expected to do?

sinned

10th November 2009, 16:15

Drogen Omen

10th November 2009, 18:55

Kennif

10th November 2009, 21:13

Get in to the city early to find a free MC park or pay for parking in a building - it is as simple as that.

The issues have been well debated and answered - time to go for a ride (viz. move on).

Sorry - that's the one size fits all solution and it's a cop-out. I can't get into town early. I need a park at around 1.30pm. You might get into work early and it suits you fine - but that is you. It doesn't work for me. WCC needs to increase the number of bike parks available. And that won't happen if we all take your "I'm all right mate so the rest of you need to move on." attitude.

I don't think the WCC is anti-bike and don't agree with the comments made that suggest that they are. But if we don't ask we won't get.

Jon Visser

11th November 2009, 08:23

One thing that bugs me is the apparent arbitary actions of the parking wardens. The other day I got pinged for parking the DR in the "broken yellow line" area at Williston & Victoria. Fair enough some will say even tho the bike was parked entirely inside the yellow line and caused no obstruction either to travel of vision. But along Featherston Street EVERY broken yellow line area on the intersections had one or two bikes parked in them

While we have not been ticketing in general over the past year, we have issued tickets where:
* The vehicle may be parked so dangerously (e.g. across a shop doorway) that we are required to act to protect public safety (normally the response would be a tow).
* We have received a specific complaint from someone, and must therefore act in accordance with the law. Normally that results in the whole street (but not other streets) being ticketed for the same offence.

Your example illustrates why it is so hard (and inappropriate) for wardens to use "selective discretion" - as each interpretation may be slightly different and one could challenge why they got a ticket and someone else committing the same offence did not. Therefore the need to have a clear set of rules that apply to all and consistent enforcement.

Clockwork

11th November 2009, 08:36

Jon Visser

11th November 2009, 08:39

Please post a copy of that bylaw cause I won't believe it until I see it.

See 6.5:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/bylaws/traffic.html
I am already working to get this removed so that motorcycles can use any Pay and Display spaces legally, or to mark Pay and Display spaces as appropriate for motorcycles only, e.g. where a car can not fit.

Special class restrictions do not always need to be stated implicitly on signs, e.g. there are many taxi and taxi stand rules that are "known" by the users but do not need to be indicated on signs. However, my view is that we should make it as easy as possible for people to park correctly so clear(er) signage would always be an improvement.

As far as I am aware, motorcycles may use Pay and Display spaces after hours when that restriction no longer applies. Conversely, cars may also use motorcycle spaces after hours as long as they are not marked as "at all times" (again, these restrictions do not need to be implicitly stated on the signs, drivers and riders are "assumed" to know all of the road rules).

Also because that kind of discrimination MUST be challenged if the council doesn't provide adequate parking in convenient locales.

The Council is not obliged to provide any parking whatsoever on the road. The fact that we do is because we understand the needs of the road users and the importance of such spaces for the network to operate effectively. I would agree that, for our democracy to operate as intended, rules must be challenged.

Legal protest does not have to be peaceul and if it doesn't disrupt, the media will happily ignore it and so wiill all you politicos

Your assumption is quite wrong. The other road users have rights too, and these are protected by law. Police may use discretion when dealing with protests, but plenty of people have found that not being "peaceful" may result in various forms of legal penalty. Also we are much more likely to listen to a suggestion for improvement that takes into account all of the issues that we need to be concerned about (this helps us to do our job and justifies modifying our approach), rather than a one-sided protest from a group that is just upset at a change not in their favour (this could backfire and have the effect of making things even worse).

Kennif

11th November 2009, 08:40

Your example illustrates why it is so hard (and inappropriate) for wardens to use "selective discretion" - as each interpretation may be slightly different and one could challenge why they got a ticket and someone else committing the same offence did not. Therefore the need to have a clear set of rules that apply to all and consistent enforcement.

I suspect that s/he took exception to the teddy bear that rides around on my handlebars. :(

Jon Visser

11th November 2009, 08:59

So let's get this straight:
(a) Bikes are not allowed to park (and pay!) in a "Pay & Display" area;
(b) Bikes will not be allowed to be parked on a footpath (however considerately)
(c) WCC has not (yet) been able to provide sufficient bike-dedicated parking areas for bikes.

Right so far? So what is it that we are expected to do?

As per the fliers, we have arranged for ample parking to be made available in commercial parking garages if you cannot find free and legal parking on the road or in private buildings (i.e. exactly the same expectation as for car drivers). No significant increase of on-road parking space is possible without unreasonable impact on other types of parking, so this will not occur. Once the commuters shift to such off-road locations, this will free up the spaces on the road for short-term motorcycle parking (which we acknowledge will have difficulties in the mean time - hence the need to get people to shift off the road sooner rather than later).

We have reviewed progress and found that although some commuters are now starting to use the parking garages, we have not seen a corresponding improvement on the roads/footpaths. That means "compliant" people have taken the responsibility to make the change, but non-compliant people are taking up the illegal spaces they used to occupy. This is really not fair on the public or those riders who have shown responsibility, so we have started to issue "cautions" to all riders parking illegally.

Those who do not not heed this caution will in future receive an infringement notice (with fine - typically $40 for footpath offences and $60 for road offences) for carrying out the same offence, i.e. if they shift to a different type of location which is still illegal they will get another caution. This allows for a small grace period for people to modify their behaviour without incurring any penalty. However, as stated on the fliers, people will eventually be receiving fines if they continue to park illegally, so the bottom line is that it would be cheaper to shift to a commercial garage than to receive infringement notices. The fines may be an unfortunate necessity to "encourage" the change in behaviour if this does not occur in response to all of the communications and cautions that we have issued so far.

Jon Visser

11th November 2009, 09:16

This thread fell quiet while many of us were distracted by the ACC proposals. To my mind it's been a month or two since we first started this thread and I seem to recall many of us contributors offering suggestions of areas where we felt more motorcycle parking could be created. While maybe 80% of our the suggestions were discounted by you (many unfairly I feel) you did accept that some had possibilities. Are you able to report any progress with respect adding those suggestions to the available pool?

Since this thread stared:
* We have created a sizeable area of free motorcycle parking in the Clifton Terrace Car Park.
* We have created a new motorcycles-only parking bay on Cable Street opposite Chaffers Street
* We have identified several locations in Panama Street (adjacent to Grey Street off Featherston Street) that can not be used by any other form of parking so can be converted to motorcycles-only parking. This still needs to go through a formal traffic resolution process before we can mark it on the road.
* I am working to reinstate the College Street motorcycle park.

I have reviewed the Boulcott Street area (see photos attached). I could not find any "great expanse of footpath space" that could be re-allocated to motorcycle parking. The area on the corner (by Plimmer Steps) is extremely dangerous for pedestrians, especially those with sight impairment, and we have had a number of padestrian accidents at this exact location recently. There is nothing guiding people around these motorcycles and the alternatives are for them to walk along the kerb edge or via the steps (i.e. much more dangerous alternatives). Taking those issues into consideration, I cannot see any logical reason for approving any part of this footpath to be used for motorcycle parking. However, we have created two new parking spaces across the road from the construction site (currently indicated as "Pay and Display", though there is no P&D machine so it is not really enforcable as such). I have discussed this with our Traffic Engineer and we have tenatively agreed that when the construction site is completed, the three P&D spaces directly opposite the construction site will be reinstated and the two new spaces will become a motorcycle parking bay.

Clockwork

11th November 2009, 09:58

Jon,
I'm not too familier with Boulcott street or the P&D parks to which you refer but that road is pretty much all hill as I recall. Can I ask, if these new spaces are on a hill, will bikes using them (ie angle parked) be leaning onto their stands or away from their stands. Which is to say will the uphill be to the left of the bike, causing the bike to lean off its stand, or the right of the bike allowing the bike to rest more heavily into its stand.

I've noticed that the bike park on Willis st opposite the Willis st Village provide parks on the wrong side of the road for bikes. I personally wouldn't park my bike there because in a windy city like Wellington its way too easy for a bike to be blown off its stand and the domino effect will only make matters worse.

I also recall you acknowleging places that currently have no-parking at all times to preserve sight lines, may be re-considerd for bike parking because the bike's low profile does not obstruct these sight lines. The intersection of Featherstone st and Hunter st springs to mind.

Chocolate Boy

11th November 2009, 14:18

Interesting to note that according to http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/bylaws/traffic.html clause 4.1 (c) and (d) both clearly indicate that a motorcycle is allowed to park at a metered park.
A metered park is where one meter controls one parking space, as opposed to the multiple meter areas, where one meter controls a number of parking spaces.
So where are those metered parks? Do any of them exist around the CBD?

caseye

11th November 2009, 17:13

See 6.5:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/plans/bylaws/traffic.html
I am already working to get this removed so that motorcycles can use any Pay and Display spaces legally, or to mark Pay and Display spaces as appropriate for motorcycles only, e.g. where a car can not fit.

Special class restrictions do not always need to be stated implicitly on signs, e.g. there are many taxi and taxi stand rules that are "known" by the users but do not need to be indicated on signs. However, my view is that we should make it as easy as possible for people to park correctly so clear(er) signage would always be an improvement.

As far as I am aware, motorcycles may use Pay and Display spaces after hours when that restriction no longer applies. Conversely, cars may also use motorcycle spaces after hours as long as they are not marked as "at all times" (again, these restrictions do not need to be implicitly stated on the signs, drivers and riders are "assumed" to know all of the road rules).

The Council is not obliged to provide any parking whatsoever on the road. The fact that we do is because we understand the needs of the road users and the importance of such spaces for the network to operate effectively. I would agree that, for our democracy to operate as intended, rules must be challenged.

Your assumption is quite wrong. The other road users have rights too, and these are protected by law. Police may use discretion when dealing with protests, but plenty of people have found that not being "peaceful" may result in various forms of legal penalty. Also we are much more likely to listen to a suggestion for improvement that takes into account all of the issues that we need to be concerned about (this helps us to do our job and justifies modifying our approach), rather than a one-sided protest from a group that is just upset at a change not in their favour (this could backfire and have the effect of making things even worse).

Well done Jon,that tells me you have listened to the voices, lol from these threads I mean.
It is refreshing to see a council officer doing their best to improve a situation as opposed to as most do, simply continuing to place bigger and more expensive obstacles in the way.
Cheers.

Jon Visser

18th November 2009, 10:32

As previously advised, a special warden team will be going around today to audit parking. Any motorcycles found to be parked illegally will be issued with a caution. Those who have already received a previous caution for the same offence will receive a ticket.

Also as previously mentioned we're looking to develop a more comprehensive policy around the future management of motorcycles & scooters in Wellington City. We have had some surveyors interview arriving motorcycles at parking bays in the morning to identify typical habits. So far we have interviewed about 100 of the approximately 1,000 riders that commute into our city. However, we have not yet managed to capture the needs of short-term motorcycle parkers as we have not been able to locate any on the road (and typically they cannot find a park at a motorcycle bay anyway). If there is anyone on this thread that parks in Wellington City during the day for short periods of time (e.g. less than 8 hours) and is willing to answer a few brief questions could they please contact me at
Jon.Visser@wcc.govt.nz so that we can get some idea of quantities/durations and your specific needs can be considered.

caseye

18th November 2009, 20:40

Jon, having had the pleasure of being able to park ALL DAY! in a bike park on Lambton Quay yesterday, I'd like to say thank you again.
Only one problem could you have your wardens please give tickets to the dirty filthy construction workers who it seems regularly go and sit on someone else pride and joy and play with all the controls etc a Big Big Ticket too!
Seriously, I watched some of them doing this until I got annoyed and knocked on the widow of the Oxxy and held up my helmet, they took off quick smart.
I caught up with my good freind Brent yesterday and he tells me more of what the council is trying to do and of course who is driving this, so once more thank you.
Anyone on this site who doesn't believe that Mr Visser is trying to do his utmost FOR us can go put their head up ther collective behinds.

Jon Visser

19th November 2009, 08:44

Can I ask, if these new spaces are on a hill, will bikes using them (ie angle parked) be leaning onto their stands or away from their stands. Which is to say will the uphill be to the left of the bike, causing the bike to lean off its stand, or the right of the bike allowing the bike to rest more heavily into its stand.

On an uphill road, can motorcycles not park with their front wheel towards the kerb? There are no rules specifying which way a motorcycle or scooter must be oriented within the marked parking area, as long as it is entirely within that area. So our expectation is that riders would park at the angle that is safest for them (taking into consideration the slope & camber of the road and the ability to get in & out). Once the first bike is parked at a certain angle, others usually follow suit. Therefore it is really up to the riders (especially the first to arrive) to "set the trend" and it is within your ability to change that if you want.

I also recall you acknowleging places that currently have no-parking at all times to preserve sight lines, may be re-considerd for bike parking because the bike's low profile does not obstruct these sight lines. The intersection of Featherstone st and Hunter st springs to mind.

We have had a look at Featherston/Hunter as a possibility but our Chief Traffic Engineer has determined that, because of the need for service vehicles to have very short term parking on that side of the road and many people wanting to to stop for a few minutes to go to the public toilets there, it will instead be turned into a P10 Loading Zone that anyone (including motorcycles) may use. Instead we have identified a few such areas in the adjacent Panama Street that we have submitted for a traffic resolution to turn it into motorcycle parking.

Jon Visser

19th November 2009, 08:52

Only one problem could you have your wardens please give tickets to the dirty filthy construction workers who it seems regularly go and sit on someone else pride and joy and play with all the controls etc a Big Big Ticket too!

You will be pleased to hear that our wardens do indeed give tickets to construction workers and even our own road works crews (including excavators if registered) who park illegally and think it is OK to just put some cones around their vehicle to make it a "work site".

Ocean1

19th November 2009, 11:04

On an uphill road, can motorcycles not park with their front wheel towards the kerb?

Hi Jon. Generally it's a bad idea, the front wheel can easilly be nudged sideways making the bike unstable. Also, most bikes have a single (LH) rearwards pivoting stand and parking front wheel down would risk having the bike roll forward off the stand. It's generally accepted safe practice to park with the rear wheel against the gutter, and facing slightly uphill, if any.

There are risks associated with parking most bikes on a substantial slope however, they tend to fall over, especially with assistance from the local winds.

centaurus

19th November 2009, 12:42

Big question to you Jon regarding most bike parks in Wgtn.

Most bike parking spaces are parallel to the sidewalk, meaning that the bike's rear wheel will end up in the gutter, which in Wgtn is usually quite deep.

For scooters (that have center stand) it's not a problem but for most sport/sport-touring bikes that only have side stand, if the rear wheel is in the gutter the bike will stay almost upright being in a very big risk of toppling over when it's windy.

In most parking spaces I have to choose between having the bike too far out in the road or angle parked (wasting more space) just so I can avoid the gutter. This si an issue especially on The Terrace.

Is the WCC aware of this issue? Have you thought of any ways of dealing with this?

IdunBrokdItAgin

19th November 2009, 13:43

IdunBrokdItAgin

19th November 2009, 14:02

I've just had a quick stroll down Willis street (heading into the CBD) between MacDonald Crescent and Boulcott Street intersections.

Can the council look into whether better use of this side of the street could be developed. On this stretch there is a loading bay, no stopping markers (about three car lengths), another loading bay (two car legnths), more no stopping markers and the a huge bus stop bay (about the length of two buses) then no stopping markers again and then finally it becomes a turn left lane.

The no stopping markers don't make sense as they are not for access and are interspersed between loading bays. Also the bus stop is huge. If the no stopping bays are for emergency services etc then why can't the over sized bus stop bay be used for this? Plus I have never actually seen a bus use this stop even though it is marked as one - It's not a night bus only stop is it (maybe I'm just being blind here)?

Not suggesting creating a huge amount of M/C parks here just asking it to be investigated whether a car length or two car be added as M/C parking?

Thanks

Jon Visser

20th November 2009, 09:39

Any thoughts on how to stop bikes mis-parking in the alloted bays. I don't mind a slight angle to the kerb if they are worried about wind but I've seen bikes parked at upto 45 degrees to the kerb which is just bloody selfish as it uses up space which two other bikes could use.

It looks like there is some disagreement amongst riders about use of parking bays - some appear to think that parking at an angle is best for safety and others appear to want to maximise utilisation of the space. It would be good if riders could discuss this (e.g. on this forum) rather than us coming up with our view on what riders should do.

From a design perspective, we can ensure that for bays on slopes or with wide/deep gutters we allow ample room for the size of the box. We are also trying to minimise such "deep" gutters - effectively this occurs when new layers of asphalt build up over time. We have asked for additional funding through the Long Term Council Community Plan process to "rotomill" these streets down before future resealing. Wellington actually has very low kerb heights (typically 40mm to 100mm) compared to most other cities around the world (typically 150mm to 200mm). Kerb height impacts on things such as drainage, vehicles driving on the footpath and "jaywalking" pedestrians.

Jon Visser

20th November 2009, 09:57

I've just had a quick stroll down Willis street (heading into the CBD) between MacDonald Crescent and Boulcott Street intersections. Can the council look into whether better use of this side of the street could be developed.

This section of Willis Street, because it is so narrow, has broken yellow lines on the side of the road where there are parking bays on the opposite side of the road. This allows room for cars to move over & pass each other.

From recollection, the bus stop exists for the Brooklyn route, which comes down Brooklyn Road, heads north up Willis Street then turns left into Lambton Quay. All other buses coming up Dixon Street bypass this part of Willis Street by going via Victoria/Manners/Willis.

This part of Willis Street (especially the north end) will be redesigned and modified as part of the project to open Manners Mall to buses.

Jon Visser

20th November 2009, 10:04

Hi Jon. Generally it's a bad idea, the front wheel can easilly be nudged sideways making the bike unstable. Also, most bikes have a single (LH) rearwards pivoting stand and parking front wheel down would risk having the bike roll forward off the stand. It's generally accepted safe practice to park with the rear wheel against the gutter, and facing slightly uphill, if any.

I'm not quite sure I understand your logic. What I meant to suggest was that, on a sloping stand, bikes could park such that they are oriented with their front wheel facing slightly uphill and their left hand side stand pointing towards the downhill side (i.e. rather than basing it solely on the position of the kerb). Not sure how this would make the front wheels any more prone to being "nudged" compared to any other way of parking.

Badjelly

20th November 2009, 11:26

On an uphill road, can motorcycles not park with their front wheel towards the kerb?

Hi Jon. Generally it's a bad idea...

I'm not quite sure I understand your logic. What I meant to suggest was that, on a sloping stand, bikes could park such that they are oriented with their front wheel facing slightly uphill and their left hand side stand pointing towards the downhill side (i.e. rather than basing it solely on the position of the kerb). Not sure how this would make the front wheels any more prone to being "nudged" compared to any other way of parking.

You've lost me completely. You originally suggested parking with the front wheel towards the kerb, or at least that's what Ocean1 took from it (as did I). Your attempt at clarification is unsuccessful, I'm afraid. We're talking about parking on a sloping road (eg east side Willis St south of Boulcott St). Do your uphill and downhill refer to the general slope of the road or to the slope due to the camber of the road, or to the local vector sum of the two?

I parked in the area in question Saturday before last. Rear wheel against kerb and bike pointing not quite perpendicular to kerb, but about 20 degrees south of that. The bike was very stable, but then, it has a centre stand. :cool:

rwh

20th November 2009, 12:12

... the project to open Manners Mall to buses.

About that. The map I saw in the paper (admittedly a few months ago) seemed to suggest that the large Mercer St bike park was to be repurposed. Is that correct? Is there a planned replacement?

Thanks,

Richard

rwh

20th November 2009, 12:22

Jon,
I'm not too familier with Boulcott street or the P&D parks to which you refer but that road is pretty much all hill as I recall. Can I ask, if these new spaces are on a hill, will bikes using them (ie angle parked) be leaning onto their stands or away from their stands. Which is to say will the uphill be to the left of the bike, causing the bike to lean off its stand, or the right of the bike allowing the bike to rest more heavily into its stand.

I've noticed that the bike park on Willis st opposite the Willis st Village provide parks on the wrong side of the road for bikes. I personally wouldn't park my bike there because in a windy city like Wellington its way too easy for a bike to be blown off its stand and the domino effect will only make matters worse.

There are many factors ... I've parked there with no problems; I just angle my bike a bit more so that the camber compensates for the hill. I personally have more of a problem with a park on a significant downhill, since it means I have to reverse uphill to get in there in the first place - and with a heavyish bike and short legs, that can be a real struggle. Then there's the risk of the bike rolling forward off the stand (though first gear mostly solves that). And again with the short legs - if my bike is leaning downhill onto the stand, that means I have further to reach when trying to stand it up again.

Richard

Bodir

23rd November 2009, 22:13

On an uphill road, can motorcycles not park with their front wheel towards the kerb? There are no rules specifying which way a motorcycle or scooter must be oriented within the marked parking area, as long as it is entirely within that area. So our expectation is that riders would park at the angle that is safest for them (taking into consideration the slope & camber of the road and the ability to get in & out). Once the first bike is parked at a certain angle, others usually follow suit. Therefore it is really up to the riders (especially the first to arrive) to "set the trend" and it is within your ability to change that if you want.

Hi Jon, another reason for not parking front to kerb is the potential danger caused by reversing into traffic. When wearing the usual gear it is not so easy to clearly see fast moving road traffic whilst one tries to reverse the bike. Hence the usually safer approach of reversing into the parking spot.

Jon Visser

24th November 2009, 08:15

About that. The map I saw in the paper (admittedly a few months ago) seemed to suggest that the large Mercer St bike park was to be repurposed. Is that correct? Is there a planned replacement?

I assume this may have been for the Manners Mall redevelopment (which will remove the buses from Mercer Street). The plans that the architects drew up were "fanciful" and completely impractical. They forgot that this is part of our parade route (Civic Centre to Lambton Quay) so what they had proposed is not something that we will agree to. If there is any proposal to change parking in this area I will stress the importance of shifting (not removing) any such specific parking amenity.

Jon Visser

24th November 2009, 08:18

There are many factors ... I've parked there with no problems; I just angle my bike a bit more so that the camber compensates for the hill. I personally have more of a problem with a park on a significant downhill, since it means I have to reverse uphill to get in there in the first place

Maybe for problem locations riders can use chalk to mark with a large arrow how they wish the first rider to park? I am reluctant to paint lines on the road as they would be a slip hazard.

Swoop

24th November 2009, 11:37

motor_mayhem

24th November 2009, 12:56

Maybe for problem locations riders can use chalk to mark with a large arrow how they wish the first rider to park? I am reluctant to paint lines on the road as they would be a slip hazard.

Lines wouldn't be that bad would they? People hardly blaze into parking spaces (and if they do, they shouldn't be)

XP@

25th November 2009, 00:23

Lines wouldn't be that bad would they? People hardly blaze into parking spaces (and if they do, they shouldn't be)
Winter, windy wellington, driving rain, full wet gear, heavy bike, hard ride in...
The last thing you want is to have to negotiate white lines.

They could be thin lines, thinner than normal carpark ones may be able to get away with that. (less than the width of a boot). But they will cost - having them re painted etc, I would not want to ask the council to add another expense requiring much ongoing maintenance unless really necessary.

Could a sign under the "Bike Park" sign, with a diagram showing the preferred parking method? We could then have a printable leaflet which can refer offenders to the nearby parking instructions...

Drogen Omen

25th November 2009, 06:03

worst thing i have found about parking buildings is the smooth cement floors which are like ice when wet... no way I'm ever parking in a parking building till they lay down something gritty cause I've had issues in my 4x4 with 4 wheels imagine the damage on 2 wheels... might as well poor oil or diesel all over the parking building....

Kendog

25th November 2009, 17:19

Kersten

28th November 2009, 00:40

Hi all,
embarked on a media campaign to explain how (and where) best to park motorcycles.

Thanks for your comments Jon. I would like to make a couple of points. Firstly, if Council was attempting to make reasonable compromise based on your quote above, and not Retentive Attitudes there would be fewer complaints from Bike and Scooter users.

Lets face it, two-wheelers are cold wet and vulnerable, unless there is a quid-quo-pro in the form of convenience, the cost incentive is just not enough. In addition, two-wheelers improve city function in many ways other than just improving traffic density on the main commute. They speed delivery about the city, allow quick response for tasks such as lift repair, meter reading, courier deliveries, parking wardens, quick trips to buy items and many other tasks requiring movement of one or two people. The more popular they become, the more uses will be found that help City Infrastructure and make the city more user friendly.

At the moment the WCC is just being bureaucrat. for example, in the photo attached to your web article all of the Scooters, except the one with dismounting rider, pose absolutely zero disruption to foot traffic - even that rider may have moved the bike once off it. All are tucked in behind protruding parts of buildings or poles and this should be permissible for short term parking. There are many wide islands on footpaths about the city able to cater for curb side parks with a simple pipe barrier to segregate two or three bikes parallel to the curb for both all day commuters and short term users even when there is a lot of foot traffic. Some areas do not even need a barrier, but could be designated with painted markings for clarity. Little slots exist all over the city that can cater for 1 small scooter at a time, lets use them. It is better to allow users to park in scattered groups close to their destinations than provide large parking areas.

Parking that is considerate and not creating protruding obstacles for prams etc should be allowed as a matter of course. Their are ways to fix those who block traffic. Lets think beyond the bureaucratic square!

Jon Visser

3rd December 2009, 14:46

As far as I am aware, motorcycles may use Pay and Display spaces after hours when that restriction no longer applies. Conversely, cars may also use motorcycle spaces after hours as long as they are not marked as "at all times" (again, these restrictions do not need to be implicitly stated on the signs, drivers and riders are "assumed" to know all of the road rules).

I have confirmed with our parking contractor that:
"For parking restrictions indicated with a blue & white sign, these restrictions only apply between the hours of 8am and 6pm unless the sign specifies a different time period or 'at all times'. While the law now allows this to be enforced seven days a week, our current response is to only enforce this Monday to Saturday. Outside those hours (and on Sundays at our discretion), unless otherwise stated, anyone may park in those spaces for as long as they like."

This means that at night, unless the sign says "at all times", cars can use motorcycle spaces.

It also means that, between 6pm and 8am the following day, unless the restriction on the sign specifically says otherwise, motorcycles can use car parking spaces like Pay and Display spaces and Loading Zones.

Badjelly

3rd December 2009, 15:10

...This means that at night, unless the sign says "at all times", cars can use motorcycle spaces.

It also means that, between 6pm and 8am the following day, unless the restriction on the sign specifically says otherwise, motorcycles can use car parking spaces like Pay and Display spaces and Loading Zones.

Yes, but please don't spread it about. I have my own personal loading zone near the end of Courtenay Place to park in after hours and I don't want anyone else muscling in on it.

Kersten

4th December 2009, 11:43

I'm the opposite, I always take the scoot for a quick shop. Particularly, if it is just a couple of items the scoot costs nothing to run and is easy to park (under the old rules) so why spend four times the petrol.

Chocolate Boy

5th December 2009, 21:56

I have confirmed with our parking contractor that:
"For parking restrictions indicated with a blue & white sign, these restrictions only apply between the hours of 8am and 6pm unless the sign specifies a different time period or 'at all times'. While the law now allows this to be enforced seven days a week, our current response is to only enforce this Monday to Saturday. Outside those hours (and on Sundays at our discretion), unless otherwise stated, anyone may park in those spaces for as long as they like."

So when I'm parked in one of those spaces (with my car or my bike) how do I get to know when the council might, at its discretion, ticket me for being parked illegally?

Chocolate Boy

5th December 2009, 22:01

Since this thread stared:

* I am working to reinstate the College Street motorcycle park.

How is the reinstating of the motorcycle park in College St progressing? I contacted the council and was told that in the work that was done to expand Moore Wilsons, a contractor mistakenly removed the motorbike park.
So a) how does that get to happen? Didn't the contractor look at the plans properly?
b) why doesn't the council get the contractor (at the contractors expense) to fix their cock-up?
c) is Moore Wilsons business expansion of greater importance than reinstating the parking area?

Cheers to that contractor for making it just that little bit more difficult for us.

Jon Visser

7th December 2009, 07:57

So when I'm parked in one of those spaces (with my car or my bike) how do I get to know when the council might, at its discretion, ticket me for being parked illegally?

If in doubt, follow the instructions on the sign.

People typically learn about this rule when they study the Road Code just before sitting their drivers' licence test, but most forget the detail after a while. Just like other details such as minimum following distances, maximum tow rope lengths, speeds past school buses and accidents, legal hours of darkness etc. I'm hoping my reminder may assist a few people.

Jon Visser

7th December 2009, 08:02

How is the reinstating of the motorcycle park in College St progressing? I contacted the council and was told that in the work that was done to expand Moore Wilsons, a contractor mistakenly removed the motorbike park.
So a) how does that get to happen? Didn't the contractor look at the plans properly?
b) why doesn't the council get the contractor (at the contractors expense) to fix their cock-up?
c) is Moore Wilsons business expansion of greater importance than reinstating the parking area?

Cheers to that contractor for making it just that little bit more difficult for us.

This has nothing to do with Moore Wilsons. I understand that someone put in a new driveway to some apartments and the vehicle crossing is now where the motorcycle park used to be. This new driveway should not have been approved by the Council's vehicle crossing engineers without the reallocation of the motorcycle parks. Therefore we now need to relocate them the hard way (i.e. through a new traffic resolution) expected to go before Councillors in March 2010.

Badjelly

7th December 2009, 09:02

So when I'm parked in one of those spaces (with my car or my bike) how do I get to know when the council might, at its discretion, ticket me for being parked illegally?

If in doubt, follow the instructions on the sign.

It's the "On Sundays at our discretion" that bothers me. Do I, or do I not, run the risk of receiving a ticket for parking in a site marked (say) "Loading Zone, Goods Vehicles Only" on a Sunday?

Jon Visser

8th December 2009, 08:58

It's the "On Sundays at our discretion" that bothers me. Do I, or do I not, run the risk of receiving a ticket for parking in a site marked (say) "Loading Zone, Goods Vehicles Only" on a Sunday?

As I said, if in doubt, don't park there. If you have a specific location and time in mind, the best thing would be to call Parkwise on (04) 910 3444 and get them to confirm whether they will issue a ticket for that location, time and type of vehicle or not. If they say it is OK, I suggest you get the response in writing (e.g. as an e-mail) in case you do ever get a ticket, and you can then produce their response with the ticket when you ask for it to be waived.

If we did change our approach to Sunday parking enforcement, this would be quite widely consulted on and advertised and I'd like to think that if you did it regularly you would at least get a caution before you got a ticket (i.e. same as what we have just done for the current motorcycle parking campaign).

Badjelly

8th December 2009, 10:58

As I said, if in doubt, don't park there. If you have a specific location and time in mind, the best thing would be to call Parkwise on (04) 910 3444 and get them to confirm whether they will issue a ticket for that location, time and type of vehicle or not. If they say it is OK, I suggest you get the response in writing (e.g. as an e-mail) in case you do ever get a ticket, and you can then produce their response with the ticket when you ask for it to be waived.

If we did change our approach to Sunday parking enforcement, this would be quite widely consulted on and advertised and I'd like to think that if you did it regularly you would at least get a caution before you got a ticket (i.e. same as what we have just done for the current motorcycle parking campaign).

That's a lot of bother to go through and it leaves the majority of the population with no idea when they can park in normally-restricted areas. (Most of them don't know what the Road Code says, or that it's changed in the last few years.)

How about, if WCC is happy for a specific parking restriction to be waived on Sundays, writing that on the sign? Then we all know where we stand.

But I will phone Parkwise and talk with them.

Chocolate Boy

10th December 2009, 09:13

This has nothing to do with Moore Wilsons. I understand that someone put in a new driveway to some apartments and the vehicle crossing is now where the motorcycle park used to be. This new driveway should not have been approved by the Council's vehicle crossing engineers without the reallocation of the motorcycle parks. Therefore we now need to relocate them the hard way (i.e. through a new traffic resolution) expected to go before Councillors in March 2010.

So how did this happen? Particularly given the current increased attention to the limited number of motorcycle parks. As you say - it should not have - therefore where does the fault lie within the system and/or individually?
Seems to me that someone has cocked up, maybe by not reading some plans correctly, and now we suffer the consequence of a decrease in motorcycle parks for about 5 months in total. Great management skills in the council! :brick:

Please investigate how this happened and advise of the outcome so we can be assured it won't happen again and take another chunk out of the already insufficient number of motorcycle parks.

atothek

10th December 2009, 12:48

have seen a few tickets on bikes today. one scooter on the footpath right next to the hunter st bike park has a ticket tucked into the gap between the throttle and the controls. this is leaving a bit of a bad taste in my mouth as most bikes park sensibly - greys st was getting a bit out of hand but even then most of the ones not in the bike park were tucked away. if the council allows discretion and a grey area on for sunday parking why can't the same leniency be shown to bikes/scooters parked sensibly for a short period. i've never seen a bike get in the way of any pedestrian and i walk to work every day right past all the spots Jon has said are trouble areas - Boulcott, Greys. I have also seen blind people navigate their way past thse bikes without any issues. i think that common sense should rule and bikes parked out of the way not causing a problem should not be ticketed. it doesn't need to be black and white as is the case with sunday parking.

Jon Visser

11th December 2009, 10:38

Re: College Street:

So how did this happen?

As I said, and I do apologise on behalf of the Council in this matter, the vehicle crossing engineer that approved this did not take the motorcycle park into due consideration. This should have been run past our traffic engineers who would have arranged for the bay to be relocated when the road works were completed. We will dicuss this with the vehicle crossing engineers (who work for our Building Consents team, not the roading team).

Chocolate Boy

12th December 2009, 14:29

Re: College Street:

As I said, and I do apologise on behalf of the Council in this matter, the vehicle crossing engineer that approved this did not take the motorcycle park into due consideration. This should have been run past our traffic engineers who would have arranged for the bay to be relocated when the road works were completed. We will dicuss this with the vehicle crossing engineers (who work for our Building Consents team, not the roading team).

Well that's park of an answer, but exactly how did the crossing engineer manage to not give due consideration to the motorcycle park? Why did they not check with the traffic engineers? How do the crossing engineers manage to fail to communicate with the roading team when the two are so closely connected?

Oh and re your comment about the driveway being for access to apartments - the place where the motorcycle park was is exactly where the entrance to Moore Wilsons is. The driveway there only gives access to Moore Wilsons - it does not provide any drive-in access to any apartments. You can check this on google maps using street view (because they have kind of old pics there) - it shows the motorcycle park was immediately to the right of the Moore Wilsons car park ramp. That area is now an entry into Moore Wilsons, not an apartment parking area in sight.

So therefore it would seem that the answer is simple - put the motorcycle park back where it was, problem solved. Moore Wilsons will lose their accessway, but then if the crossing engineer had done their job properly Moore Wilsons shouldn't have got an access there anyway.

But I suppose you'll say that rather than just put it back it has to go through the due process, taking up time and resources that could have been used elsewhere. Nice work by the crossing engineer - what happened to them? Any reprimand? Or do they just get to carry on business as usual putting in crossings without talking to other departments?

Hawkeye

12th December 2009, 15:36

Well that's park of an answer, but exactly how did the crossing engineer manage to not give due consideration to the motorcycle park? Why did they not check with the traffic engineers? How do the crossing engineers manage to fail to communicate with the roading team when the two are so closely connected?

Oh and re your comment about the driveway being for access to apartments - the place where the motorcycle park was is exactly where the entrance to Moore Wilsons is. The driveway there only gives access to Moore Wilsons - it does not provide any drive-in access to any apartments. You can check this on google maps using street view (because they have kind of old pics there) - it shows the motorcycle park was immediately to the right of the Moore Wilsons car park ramp. That area is now an entry into Moore Wilsons, not an apartment parking area in sight.

So therefore it would seem that the answer is simple - put the motorcycle park back where it was, problem solved. Moore Wilsons will lose their accessway, but then if the crossing engineer had done their job properly Moore Wilsons shouldn't have got an access there anyway.

But I suppose you'll say that rather than just put it back it has to go through the due process, taking up time and resources that could have been used elsewhere. Nice work by the crossing engineer - what happened to them? Any reprimand? Or do they just get to carry on business as usual putting in crossings without talking to other departments?

FFS. 6 posts and everyone of them having a go at Jon. If you try going back through the whole thread, you will see that Jon is actually working with us not against us. He has aswered your question 3 times and apologised for the mistake. He has also stated that he is working on getting the park replaced. Other than going down there with a pick and shovel, what the fuck do you want him to do. Give the guy a break.
At the moment, he is working with us under the constraints of his role. He came on here to answer questions and try to put the council point of view. We need to work with him not against him.

Both myself and Stoney met Jon during the Bikeoi and he is a nice guy, just getting on with his job. The guy needs to be cut some slack. He didn't need to come on here and take the crap that he is getting.

Yes a mistake may have been made in this instance. But who hasn't made a mistake. Even NASA engineers fuck up sometimes. Only difference is when NASA fucks up, someone dies. The council engineer fuck up, you can't park your scooter in your favourite spot and have to walk a few extra metres.

Jiminy

12th December 2009, 18:28

What hawkeye said :niceone:

XP@

12th December 2009, 23:43

Jon is doing a fantastic job here!

This is an excellent example of council interacting an a positive way.
It would be great to see more of this type of communication. I suspect we will not see much more if they are not fully respected for what they are doing.

It would be interesting to know what the required process is to get an area of street changed in to a bike park, can you help there Jon?

Chocolate Boy

14th December 2009, 08:08

FFS. 6 posts
So sorry for only being a noob, not sure how I can fix that though.

and everyone of them having a go at Jon.
Get your facts right. Since I've only made 6 posts to date it shouldn't be too hard to count them up. One of my posts was on an ACC thread, & some of my posts about WCC parking haven't even mentioned Jon, and absolutely none of them have had a go at Jon. I've simply asked questions of Jon as the self-elected representative of the WCC on this forum - is that not the point of having a forum and Jon choosing to join that discussion?

If you try going back through the whole thread, you will see that Jon is actually working with us not against us. He has aswered your question 3 times and apologised for the mistake.
You make it sound as if I've asked the same question 3 times and been answered 3 times. In fact I asked about the Sunday discretion (so did some others I notice) and was answered.
Then I asked about progress on the College St park, and was answered. Then I asked how the mistake occurred, and got an answer that didn't give much assurance about the same not happening elsewhere in the city, so I asked for more info to give all of us that reassurance.

He has also stated that he is working on getting the park replaced.
I never doubted or questioned that. I'm sure he is, but when the Council (note that I say Council, not Jon) is busy saying we've put in more parks, you must use them or pay for parking buildings or we'll give you tickets then somehow an error within the Council means motorbike parks are removed, I think they need to be questioned on that. If they aren't, maybe the same will happen in other places, no one says anything, and we're all worse off for it.
And lets not forget about the Council making an error that then has to go through the various consent etc process to fix that error, taking up ratepayers' resources.

Other than going down there with a pick and shovel, what the fuck do you want him to do.
Oh I don't know, how about an assurance that the person who made the mistake has been corrected and some kind of assurance it's not going to happen in another part of the city. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Give the guy a break.
At the moment, he is working with us under the constraints of his role. He came on here to answer questions and try to put the council point of view. We need to work with him not against him.

So when you say give the guy a break you mean I shouldn't ask him questions about the Council point of view of motorbike parking problems? But hang on, you just said that's what he came on here for - anyone else spot the conflicting nature of those statements?

Both myself and Stoney met Jon during the Bikeoi and he is a nice guy, just getting on with his job. The guy needs to be cut some slack. He didn't need to come on here and take the crap that he is getting.
I'm sure he is - can you point out to me the part where I gave him any crap. Other than asking some questions that relate to his role and the reason he came on here.

Yes a mistake may have been made in this instance. But who hasn't made a mistake. Even NASA engineers fuck up sometimes. Only difference is when NASA fucks up, someone dies. The council engineer fuck up, you can't park your scooter in your favourite spot and have to walk a few extra metres.
A) I'm trying to think of the bigger picture, i.e. asking questions to make sure Jon can then go the department(s) that have made the mistake to ensure they're aware of those errors and not let them happen again in other places. How would you react if the same happened to the spot you usually park in? And then somewhere else? And then somewhere else?
B) It's not even my favourite spot - I think I've only ever parked there three times, but that's not the point. The problem I have is the conflicting statements and actions of the Council where they say on one hand they've provided more parks, but then on the other take some away. All I want is some response to ensure that the person who made the mistake has been held accountable for that, and to assure all of us that this error has been brought to the attention of the various roading/parking/etc departments to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Jon Visser

14th December 2009, 08:55

Nice work by the crossing engineer - what happened to them? Any reprimand? Or do they just get to carry on business as usual putting in crossings without talking to other departments?

Hi Chocolate Boy - we (the Council) don't beneft from being in this situation either so we do understand the importance of getting (or making) it right - that is my role, i.e. to improve the performance of the Council.

I also don't take any of your comments personally - they are clearly not directed at me, but at the Council in general, and it just happens to be me here representing them. When people lose something they always go through a range of emotions including needing to find someone to blame. Ultimately that doesn't get you anywhere and it is better to focus on the good things you do (or can) have.

Hawkeye

14th December 2009, 09:37

So how did this happen?
Seems to me that someone has cocked up, maybe by not reading some plans correctly, and now we suffer the consequence of a decrease in motorcycle parks for about 5 months in total. Great management skills in the council! :brick:

Please investigate how this happened and advise of the outcome so we can be assured it won't happen again and take another chunk out of the already insufficient number of motorcycle parks.

So you ask the question and throw in a snide remark.

Re: College Street:

As I said, and I do apologise on behalf of the Council in this matter, the vehicle crossing engineer that approved this did not take the motorcycle park into due consideration. This should have been run past our traffic engineers who would have arranged for the bay to be relocated when the road works were completed. We will dicuss this with the vehicle crossing engineers (who work for our Building Consents team, not the roading team).

Oh Look, Jon has apologised and is going to look into it. (It was not his mistake, it was someone elses).

Well that's park of an answer, but exactly how did the crossing engineer manage to not give due consideration to the motorcycle park? Why did they not check with the traffic engineers? How do the crossing engineers manage to fail to communicate with the roading team when the two are so closely connected?

Oh and re your comment about the driveway being for access to apartments - the place where the motorcycle park was is exactly where the entrance to Moore Wilsons is. The driveway there only gives access to Moore Wilsons - it does not provide any drive-in access to any apartments. You can check this on google maps using street view (because they have kind of old pics there) - it shows the motorcycle park was immediately to the right of the Moore Wilsons car park ramp. That area is now an entry into Moore Wilsons, not an apartment parking area in sight.

So therefore it would seem that the answer is simple - put the motorcycle park back where it was, problem solved. Moore Wilsons will lose their accessway, but then if the crossing engineer had done their job properly Moore Wilsons shouldn't have got an access there anyway.

But I suppose you'll say that rather than just put it back it has to go through the due process, taking up time and resources that could have been used elsewhere. Nice work by the crossing engineer - what happened to them? Any reprimand? Or do they just get to carry on business as usual putting in crossings without talking to other departments?

Yet more challenging statements without giving Jon any time to investigate and sort it out. And also calling for blood.

So sorry for only being a noob, not sure how I can fix that though.

Get your facts right. Since I've only made 6 posts to date it shouldn't be too hard to count them up.

Oh I don't know, how about an assurance that the person who made the mistake has been corrected and some kind of assurance it's not going to happen in another part of the city. I don't think that's too much to ask.

So when you say give the guy a break you mean I shouldn't ask him questions about the Council point of view of motorbike parking problems? But hang on, you just said that's what he came on here for - anyone else spot the conflicting nature of those statements?

I'm sure he is - can you point out to me the part where I gave him any crap. Other than asking some questions that relate to his role and the reason he came on here.

A) I'm trying to think of the bigger picture, i.e. asking questions to make sure Jon can then go the department(s) that have made the mistake to ensure they're aware of those errors and not let them happen again in other places. How would you react if the same happened to the spot you usually park in? And then somewhere else? And then somewhere else?
B) It's not even my favourite spot - I think I've only ever parked there three times, but that's not the point. The problem I have is the conflicting statements and actions of the Council where they say on one hand they've provided more parks, but then on the other take some away. All I want is some response to ensure that the person who made the mistake has been held accountable for that, and to assure all of us that this error has been brought to the attention of the various roading/parking/etc departments to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Point taken about the number of posts. My bad. As for giving Jon crap. The way in which questions are worded can be conscrewed as challenging rather than asking for information or clarification.
ie. asking for someone to be reprimanded for what could be a genuine mistake. How about simply asking if processes have been put in place to stop this happening again rather than going straight for the 'blame- reprimand' approach.

I'm not going to get into a war of words with you on here. The written words can be interpreted a number of way. But I do know that if the tone of the posts changes to constant challenges and off the cuff remarks, Jon will stop replying, back off and stop working with us.

:done:

StoneY

14th December 2009, 09:43

Well said Hawkeye

I must say, John proves again and again, his interaction here is GENUINE and out of the interest of clandestine public consultation (where else would a Council LOG ON to the 'targets' public forum to advise, liaise and clarify dynamically?)

So lets give the man some Kudos for actually trying to do his JOB while ensuring WE of the motorcycle fraternity get a say in the process, without having to spend thousands of hours lobbying the council!

Bodir

14th December 2009, 10:01

Well said Hawkeye
So lets give the man some Kudos for actually trying to do his JOB while ensuring WE of the motorcycle fraternity get a say in the process, without having to spend thousands of hours lobbying the council!

Jon may be trying, but he is still working for a council - no fast work to be expected.

Take the questionnaire about short term parking for example. I volunteered and send Jon my details. Very quick response from Jon (forwarded my e-mail to the person in charge). Then nothing, after a while an e-mail saying I will get something soon, and since then dead silence. While this is not Jon's fault it still is frustrating. So while Jon might be keen to get things done, the old saying still stands: An organisation is only as good as its weakest link.

To conclude. Venting frustration at Jon is the only option in this forum as the real people that need to be addressed are not members. That should not be taken as a personal attack, but an attack against the organisation.

And the frustration regarding the built over parks is understandable. If a person in the private sector does a mistake, it has to be fixed straight away or penalties have to be paid. If you are a government employee/politician, a "procedure" is involved that will decide what to do in due course.

Jon Visser

14th December 2009, 10:37

It would be interesting to know what the required process is to get an area of street changed in to a bike park, can you help there Jon?

The street layout exists to serve the community. If it is not serving its purpose well (e.g. underutilised or over-congested) then the community may request a change called a "traffic resolution". Such a request can be made to:
Traffic Engineer
Infrastructure
Wellington City Council
PO Box 2199
Wellington
or phoned through to (04) 499 4444.

The basic information that is needed is what the desired change is, or just your contact details so that the Area Traffic Engineer can look into the proposed change. They need to look at not just the road design and safety issues, but all likely impacts (as such a change may affect a lot of people or industries at different times of the day, e.g. couriers, taxis, buses, emergency services, adjacent premises, building developers etc). If the change is supported by the Area Traffic Engineer, public consultation takes place, a detailed design is prepared and a recommendation is submitted to the full Council to consider. The elected Councillors need to make such decisions on behalf of the wider comunity, as a traffic resolution usually involves some restriction on the public's ability to use a public space.

I have attached a sample proposal for a traffic resolution. We use this internally but it shows what sorts of information the traffic engineers usually would like to know to begin with. I have asked for a more suitable template form (for the public to use) to be made available on our external web site (e.g. so it could even be filled out & submitted electronically).

Jon Visser

14th December 2009, 10:52

Take the questionnaire about short term parking for example. I volunteered and send Jon my details. Very quick response from Jon (forwarded my e-mail to the person in charge). Then nothing, after a while an e-mail saying I will get something soon, and since then dead silence.

Good things take time :). The timeframes we are dealing with are indeed months, not days, and that does frustrate me somewhat. In practicality it does take a lot of effort to run/change a city. Right now most of our resources are tied up with the Resident/Coupon parking review that has just been completed and now needs to be implemented. I'm talking with MTA about the possibility of getting some feedback from riders during the "ride to work" day early next year.

rwh

14th December 2009, 11:51

Venting frustration at Jon is the only option in this forum

Even if you conclude that to be the case, that doesn't make it a useful one.

Richard

Chocolate Boy

14th December 2009, 12:10

Thanks Jon - you took it as intended, others didn't quite get that.

My point with wanting to know what happened re the crossing engineer was not to find someone to blame, rather to find out if/what steps the WCC or relevant depts have taken to ensure that it doesn't happen again. Any comment in that regard?

Cheers

Chocolate Boy

14th December 2009, 13:03

So you ask the question and throw in a snide remark.
Clearly directed at the Council, not Jon. How was that having a go at Jon?

Yet more challenging statements without giving Jon any time to investigate and sort it out.

They're pertinent questions to be asked of the Building Consents Team. Jon, as the representing the Council on this forum, can then take them to the Building Consents Team.

But I suppose you'll say that rather than just put it back it has to go through the due process, taking up time and resources that could have been used elsewhere.

Umm, what I've described there is the Council's bureaucratic process in a nutshell. Jon works for the Council, so I'm confident in saying that would be his response.
From there, it's not a major leap to work out that going through such a process takes up time and consumes resources that could have been used somewhere else.

And also calling for blood.

Or seeking some accountability on the part of the crossing engineer.

The engineer (and in turn the Council) made a mistake, that error has cost us, as ratepayers, money. Should they not be challenged on that? The engineer and the Council need to know that they made a mistake, find out how it was made and take steps to improve the situation.

The way in which questions are worded can be conscrewed as challenging rather than asking for information or clarification.

Got it - will stick to non-challenging questions then.

ie. asking for someone to be reprimanded for what could be a genuine mistake.

I didn't ask for anyone to be reprimanded; I asked if they had been - see above re they need to know a mistake has been made...

How about simply asking if processes have been put in place to stop this happening again rather than going straight for the 'blame- reprimand' approach.

What, something like this?

Please investigate how this happened and advise of the outcome so we can be assured it won't happen again and take another chunk out of the already insufficient number of motorcycle parks.

What Jon has said so far hasn't given me any assurance the same thing won't happen again. And before someone thinks I'm "having a go at Jon" - no disrespect there - Jon has explained how it happened but as yet there hasn't been any information forthcoming on what has occurred to prevent it happening again.

I'm not going to get into a war of words with you on here.

:girlfight:

The written words can be interpreted a number of way. But I do know that if the tone of the posts changes to constant challenges and off the cuff remarks, Jon will stop replying, back off and stop working with us.

:grouphug:

magicfairy

14th December 2009, 15:00

I just saw 2 bikes get ticketed for being on the footpath in Hunter St. The bike park was full to overflowing and both bikes were parked right at the edge of the footpath next to the bike park.They are not in anyones way - you could drive a truck past them on the footpath.
I wish now I had taken a picture!
I see able bodied drivers park all the time in the mobility park next to the bike park, and they never seem to get ticketed.

Jon Visser

15th December 2009, 08:46

I just saw 2 bikes get ticketed for being on the footpath in Hunter St. The bike park was full to overflowing and both bikes were parked right at the edge of the footpath next to the bike park.

Because this thread is so long some of the earlier points tend to get lost. The way the law works is that we can either ticket everyone for carrying out the same offence or no-one (i.e. discretion, if used, must apply to all). In order for us to be able to manage the worst of the offenders we do need to also ticket those who 'think' that they are not causing problems for anyone else. We have put in a lot of effort to minimise 'considerate' people getting tickets. On Tuesdays such people parking on the footpath by the kerb do cause problems for retailers wanting to put out their kerbside recycling. At some point in the future, when we can confidently say that no problems exist, we may be able to go back to using discretion. That is up to the riders. Right now we still need to deal with a number of riders that show no regard for anyone else including other riders. We still expect quite a few more riders (particularly commuters) to shift to off-road parking locations so that the on-road spaces are freed up for people to come & go during the day.

Drogen Omen

15th December 2009, 13:47

:argh::argh::argh:
:angry2:
there seems to be a problem here...

the problem is none of John's wisdom is getting to the plebs walking round the streets ticketing everything in sight...

where we park our bikes there are signs saying private property... we even have signed letter from the building owner giving us permission to park on his property, and yet all the bikes got warnings today.

John can you please talk to the idiots at parkwise and tell them that the bikes on upper willis street are on private property and are allowed to park there, being on private property also means parkwaise have no jurisdiction...

Drogen Omen

15th December 2009, 15:39

in our private property allowed bike park area there are 10 bikes parked next to each other at some time between 3:45pm and 4:25pm today 15/12/2009 1 bike gets a $40 ticket and 5 bikes get a warning and the other 4 are ignored. :argh::argh:

what the fuck is up with that??? :angry2: :angry2: :angry2:

maybe the fat ass parkwise plebs thumbs were too tired to write out tickets to all...

and still these bikes are on private property sort your shit out WCC & parkwise.

:bash: *do i need to get the building owner to put up a private property sign?
:bash: *do i need to paint the boundary lines on the footpath so that the parkwise minions can see where the council property actually starts???

Jon Visser

16th December 2009, 07:44

John can you please talk to ... parkwise and tell them that the bikes on upper willis street are on private property and are allowed to park there, being on private property also means parkwaise have no jurisdiction...

Parking wardens do have jurisdiction on all roads in the District, including public roads and footpaths on private property. However, I did raise this specific location with them before they commenced with the enforcement campaign, so I will look into this. As the other properties along that section of Willis Street have done, it may be appropriate for the building owner to add bollards or lines denoting the approved area as you have suggested. Could you please send me a copy of the approval you have received from the building owner?

Sometimes several bikes may receive cautions/tickets and not others because the others may have arrived after the warden was there.

Drogen Omen

16th December 2009, 07:55

Parking wardens do have jurisdiction on all roads in the District, including public roads and footpaths on private property. However, I did raise this specific location with them before they commenced with the enforcement campaign, so I will look into this. As the other properties along that section of Willis Street have done, it may be appropriate for the building owner to add bollards or lines denoting the approved area as you have suggested. Could you please send me a copy of the approval you have received from the building owner?

Sometimes several bikes may receive cautions/tickets and not others because the others may have arrived after the warden was there.

sweet thanks for your help John, I'll scan the letter on to my pc later this week and PM it to you.

Bodir

16th December 2009, 09:27

magicmonkey

17th December 2009, 06:36

What will happen if you leave WCC or get promoted to a different position?

Wellington bikeoi!!!

Jon Visser

17th December 2009, 08:56

Hi Jon, just a couple of questions regarding further plans of WCC.

As a basis of discussion, lets assume the current restructure worked. All bikes are parked in the designated areas either on public property or private sector (with the few black sheep that get ticketed).

What will happen if bike numbers dramatically increase beyond the capacity of parking spaces again resulting in a similar situation as the one that we had?

As has been pointed out by others, motorcycles take up less space than cars, so if the increase is due to people changing transport modes then theoretically there should be more parking space being created and therefore this will be less of an issue as rider numbers increase. The challenge has been to get people to park where they used to park their cars, and WCC will act as a "facilitator" to continue with this strategy.

A much wider question is how the city will cope as the quantities of all modes of transport (including cars, trucks, delivery vehicles and taxis etc) keep growing as the population grows. The physical transport network is finite and pretty much at capacity, so this will create quite a strain on both the road network as well as parking facilities. As demand increases, it is likely that providers (e.g. commercial garages) will respond to that demand by increasing the number and size of facilities. It would be likely that the price to use such facilities would also increase to match the level of demand and cost to invest in that type of property use. However, if you turned all the buildings in Wellington into parking buildings, you would never be able to get that amount of traffic in & out each day (and there would be no reason to come into the city!). Therefore there is a limit to how many vehicles the city can accommodate, so the number of parking garages required is constrained by the network capacity. Based on what has happened in overseas cities, it is unlikely that the buildings of the city will be removed to create wider roads, but it is more likely that private vehicle use will somehow be limited (e.g. congestion charging, removal of vehicle access to inner city roads, investment and improvements to mass transport modes etc). For Wellington City those types of options have certainly been dicussed but at this stage the network is coping and there is no intention to implement these yet (other than the promotion of public transport). We have just finished consulting on "Wellington 2040 - The Future of Our Central City" and this will give us some ideas.

What will happen if the private sector decides that it is not sustainable to keep the bike parks and convert some/all to something else?

Firstly any such change would go through public consultation, and it would be the public (not the "private sector") that would bring about such a change, typically through the elected Councillors. This is a possibility. I can only speculate that because all other major (and successful) cities have a certain number of on-road motorcycle parks, and that Wellington wants to be internationally competitive, that we will also retain a certain number of on-road motorcycle parks. That would assist the transport network to operate effectively. What I cannot predict (long term) is the number of spaces proportional to the number of users (for all types of transport modes, not just motorcycles) or whether these will have time or fee restrictions. One could assume that as long as people have a wish to use a particular type of transport mode, there will be facilities (roads/parking) to accommodate them (public or private) and the key is to plan for these (which we are doing, noting that numbers could go up or down, e.g. if fossil fules ran out and the only available replacement was electric cars).

What will happen if you leave WCC or get promoted to a different position?

I'll take that as a compliment :-). One of my philosophies (being from a private sector consultant background) is to get my teams, as well as the processes, methods, forms & templates etc that they use, to reflect my approach (i.e. to make myself "expendable"). Some of that will remain, and it is always possible that my replacement is even better than me. It is Council's desire that we improve engagement with the community, so it is not by chance that I am in this role and interacting in this way - it is the strategy of the organisation and one that has proven effective and therefore likely to be continued by whomever holds this role.

atothek

17th December 2009, 11:14

Chocolate Boy

18th December 2009, 09:13

What will happen if the private sector decides that it is not sustainable to keep the bike parks and convert some/all to something else?

I think what Bodir meant here was what would happen if the private parking companies decided to decrease/get rid of/massively increase any charges for bikes to park in those places, thus undermining the premise of bikes being able to use those places and forcing them back onto the streets (or footpaths).

John can you please talk to the idiots at parkwise and tell them that the bikes on upper willis street are on private property and are allowed to park there, being on private property also means parkwaise have no jurisdiction...

Couple of days ago I got a warning infringement notice for parking on a footpath (no $$ to pay but looks the same) when I was parked on an area which clearly was not a footpath, it was the area in front of some premises. There was a clear line of difference in the surface between the footpath area and that of the property. If it involved money I would have to waste my time responding and the council, i.e. ratepayers, time and money by checking and ultimately waiving the infringement.

Wouldn't it be better if the parking people we educated on which areas shouldn't be considered as footpaths, i.e. when there is an obvious boundary where the footpath finishes and private property starts.

Parking wardens do have jurisdiction on all roads in the District, including public roads and footpaths on private property.

It seems Jon that you're saying that if I park on the footpath leading up to my house that a parking warden can give me a ticket for that? I thought that if I was parked on private property that was outside of their jurisdiction (the property owner can have me towed or clamped if they want). Please clarify the situation regarding parking my bike on private property that is not the public footpath, i.e. is that private property within the parking wardens jurisdiction or not?

Badjelly

18th December 2009, 14:14

It seems Jon that you're saying that if I park on the footpath leading up to my house that a parking warden can give me a ticket for that? I thought that if I was parked on private property that was outside of their jurisdiction (the property owner can have me towed or clamped if they want). Please clarify the situation regarding parking my bike on private property that is not the public footpath, i.e. is that private property within the parking wardens jurisdiction or not?

I'm sure Jon will respond, but I'd just like to point out that an area can easily be public space and private property at the same time. There is a difference between access and ownership. Privately owned areas with public access include supermarket car parks, shops, malls and a lot of walkways and footpaths.

IANAL but the footpath leading to your house probably stops being a public space once you've passed the gate.

Chocolate Boy

18th December 2009, 15:36

I'm sure Jon will respond, but I'd just like to point out that an area can easily be public space and private property at the same time. There is a difference between access and ownership. Privately owned areas with public access include supermarket car parks, shops, malls and a lot of walkways and footpaths.

Exactly, so as far as I can tell if I park in a privately owned area that is not the footpath (and that can be clearly seen, e.g. by a change in surface from concrete to paving stones) then I shouldn't get a ticket (regardless of whether it's a warning or a fine) for parking there, but I did get that warning infringement notice in just such a spot.

IANAL but the footpath leading to your house probably stops being a public space once you've passed the gate.

Yep I would have thought so too, and the same for a footpath leading to some other private property, be it a shop or whatever, but Jon stated
Parking wardens do have jurisdiction on... footpaths on private property.
so I'm kinda confused about whether parking wardens can come onto my or someone else's property and give me a ticket for being parked there when it isn't actually a public footpath. Can you please help clarify that Jon?

Jon Visser

21st December 2009, 08:25

Jon Visser

21st December 2009, 09:03

Exactly, so as far as I can tell if I park in a privately owned area that is not the footpath (and that can be clearly seen, e.g. by a change in surface from concrete to paving stones) then I shouldn't get a ticket (regardless of whether it's a warning or a fine) for parking there, but I did get that warning infringement notice in just such a spot.

In that case it is highly likely that although the area looks private, it is still public footpath. The Council has done a number of deals with private property owners to allow them to "beautify" the pavement in front of their buildings with pavers of their choice. This is usually done through an "encroachment licence" which requires the private property owner to maintain the pavers, but Council retains the responsibility to manage the space. If you got a warning notice, it would pay to very carefully check the property boundaries and discuss any issues with the building owner and Parkwise if you intend to park there again, as it may turn out to be public footpath on public property.

so I'm kinda confused about whether parking wardens can come onto my or someone else's property and give me a ticket for being parked there when it isn't actually a public footpath. Can you please help clarify that Jon?

Part of the role of the Council (or our warranted enforcement officers) is to protect the safety & rights of public access to the public road. The "road" is defined as any space that is accessible to vehicles, including roads, car parks & accessways on private property. Whether "footpaths" could be argued to be "accessible to vehicles" would be an interesting one to test in court, though if the vehicle was parked on it then they must have got there somehow (i.e. in most cases it has been found to be part of the "road").

Wardens don't usually issue tickets on private property as there is no way of knowing whether the vehicle belongs to the property owner and is entitled to be there, and they need to make a judgement call as to whether the space is reasonably considered to be part of the "public road". However, wardens could respond at the request of a private property owner or after having researched the status of the land.

If public access to the space is controlled (e.g. via a door, fence, gate, barrier or signage such as on private/commercial car parks) then it would not likely be considered a "public road" and it would be up to the private property owner to deal with any vehicles that may be parked there.

Bodir

21st December 2009, 09:14

Jon Visser

22nd December 2009, 08:16

I think what Bodir meant here was what would happen if the private parking companies decided to decrease/get rid of/massively increase any charges for bikes to park in those places, thus undermining the premise of bikes being able to use those places and forcing them back onto the streets (or footpaths).

Commercially that would not make sense as the motorcycles now form a valuable part of their customer base and those actions would likely result in a reduction in income rather than an increase. If that situation did occur, the Council's position would be to act as a facilitator to ensure that there is provision of adequate parking facilities (in relation to the quantity of parks available - the commercial fee is market-driven).

Ultimately, if a mode of transport is impractical or unaffordable, then people's decisions should be to not use that mode of transport rather than to break the law. Therefore people will never be "forced to park illegally" - where people park is a conscious choice that each person makes individually, usually knowing what the rules are. Car drivers are similarly finding themselves in a position where it is not possible to park on the street in the CBD all day any more and they either need to park much further away (inner suburbs and even that is becoming more difficult with our decision to increase resident only parking) or pay significant fees. Eventually many will make a decision that taking a car in is either impractical or too expensive and they will choose an alternative form of commuting (e.g. park & ride).

RusoR

22nd December 2009, 12:21

The following has just been released by WCC. Within all of the proposed changes, the only one affecting motorcycle parks is in Mercer Street. If you have any feedback please direct this towards the project manager whose contact details are included in the attached letter.

Thanks for pointing this out Jon, a quick squiz at the size of the existing M/C park in Mercer Street versus the size of the proposed M/C park shows a glaring space deficit. Thanks to WCC planning staff for once again considering the needs of motorcyclists in the CBD.
I have no doubt the project management will be hearing about this.

Chocolate Boy

23rd December 2009, 07:32

Thanks for pointing this out Jon, a quick squiz at the size of the existing M/C park in Mercer Street versus the size of the proposed M/C park shows a glaring space deficit. Thanks to WCC planning staff for once again considering the needs of motorcyclists in the CBD.
I have no doubt the project management will be hearing about this.

Excellent point. The current motorcycle park in Mercer St can accommodate 25 - 30 bikes. How many will the proposed area delete from the available motorcycle parks in the city?

See - this is what I meant when I was concerned about spaces decreasing when I was asking what was happening with the College St parks that disappeared due to some planning pleb cocking up, apparently with complete impunity. It's very easy for the parks to be wiped out, but takes ages and piles of resources to get them reinstated even when the council admit they made a mistake in letting be removed.

Nasty

23rd December 2009, 07:35

Excellent point. The current motorcycle park in Mercer St can accommodate 25 - 30 bikes. How many will the proposed area delete from the available motorcycle parks in the city?

See - this is what I meant when I was concerned about spaces decreasing when I was asking what was happening with the College St parks that disappeared due to some planning pleb cocking up, apparently with complete impunity. It's very easy for the parks to be wiped out, but takes ages and piles of resources to get them reinstated even when the council admit they made a mistake in letting be removed.

But this time is not a cock up but is covered in the consultation ... respond to the PM and make your thoughts heard. This information has been out for a little bit now.

Swoop

23rd December 2009, 13:13

I just saw 2 bikes get ticketed for being on the footpath in Hunter St. The bike park was full to overflowing and both bikes were parked right at the edge of the footpath next to the bike park.They are not in anyones way - you could drive a truck past them on the footpath.
I see able bodied drivers park all the time in the mobility park next to the bike park, and they never seem to get ticketed.
The problem is that parking wardens do not get stabbed in the chest enough. They will unfortunately survive armageddon along with cockroaches and ants.

Ratti

29th December 2009, 10:53

BMWST?

29th December 2009, 22:28

Jon Visser

6th January 2010, 11:49

green ninja has been ticketed on hunter st for what i assume is parking on 'yellow lines'. people have been parking along here in two rows for a while now while the box indicating motorcycle parking only allows for 1 row. 2 rows works fine, it's usually pretty easy to get your bike out from the back and it doesn't disrupt traffic as the two rows finish the same distance out as the angle parks next to it.

the yellow lines are the length of the gutter up to the box on the customhouse quay side. it is a bit stupid to give this one bike a ticket when really all the bikes in this row would be technically parking illegally. i've parked there myself on a few occasions and it doesn't get in the way at all. poor effort here from parkwise. either enforce it for all the bikes or leave the single bike alone which is obviously being ticketed on a stupid technicality

I have discussed this with our traffic engineer and there are a few places where double rows of parked motorcycles can be OK (e.g. in line with angle or perpendicular parked cars at some locations such as Hunter or Mercer Streets). Our biggest concern would be safety in relation to riders manouvering in or out of the row furthest from the footpath (in relation to moving traffic) or riding on the footpath to get in or out of the row nearest to the footpath. Early in 2010 we will consult with the public on widening both the motorcycle and mobility parking bays at the Hunter Street location quoted above. If we receive no objections to this, a new traffic resolution could be passed that allow for the wider box to be marked as suggested and the broken yellow lines to be removed. In the mean time, all I can suggest is to park with caution and if there are markings on the road that say you shouldn't park there (e.g. broken yellow lines or outside the marked box) then don't park there or risk getting a ticket. We need to change the underlying rules before we can change the markings on the road.

1000SS

6th January 2010, 11:58

Jon Visser

6th January 2010, 11:59

As a Welly rider who uses bike for short-stay trips to CBD, may I suggest a split between large all day, Paid-for parking sites and a series of smaller sites (maybe 8-10 bikes) where it is strictly monitored as short stay? the current 120minute limit might be appropriate? Is there someone 'official' to whom I can make this a formal submission for consideration?cheers

As BMWST? has already stated, the Council is already looking at such options. International studies have shown that for public on-road parking to work effectively, there should be about 85% occupancy (or 15% vacancy) at all times. In Wellington (for motorcycles-only spaces) we have 100% occupancy and as a consequence we have other problems such as short-term parkers not being able to find anywhere to park and people parking in inappropriate locations. Therefore one of our current strategies is to shift as many of the commuters onto off-road locations, thereby freeing up the on-road spaces to operate as intended. You are welcome to contact me via Jon.Visser@wcc.govt.nz to discuss this further.

Jon Visser

6th January 2010, 12:29

I for one am a legitimate, safe, licensed road user who pays more than their share of road user charges which contributes to NZ roads including parking and I'm sick of being the target of this bureaucratic bullshit! Jon how about reading the comments by the Councils Infrastructure director on Stuff, and I quote "Wellington City Council infrastructure director Stavros Michael said the council would be starting a campaign to stop motorcyclists from parking on footpaths, where they could be hazardous to pedestrians."

The key point here is "where they could be hazardous to pedestrians." I can show you ticketed bikes every day that pose no hazard or impede pedestrian access yet are the target of this thoughtles campaign. How about the Wellington City Council use some common sense for once.

It's no wonder your staff are the brunt of peoples frustrations. I figure with the road user charges I pay every year I'm entitled to sufficient parking to be provided in Wellington.

Road user charges or any other form of government taxation does not contribute towards the parking space provided by the Wellington City Council. The NZ Transport Agency (which allocates road funding) only subsidises the cost of us providing the carriageway (i.e. the part of the transport corridor that vehicles move along). If our Council chooses to provide on-road parking space (which is entirely at our own discretion) We must recover all of the cost of providing this public amenity (about 25% of our road network or about $15m per year) from the people using it. We have chosen to do this through parking fees rather than through rates as we feel that the people paying for it should be motorists, not residents (who may not even own a car).

In relation to whether or not you feel our campaign is "reasonable", I suggest you take the time to read all of this thread. A bike does not have to be parked right in front of a doorway or actually cause an accident in order for it to present a problem for other road (or footpath) users. There are many reasons why a motorcycle parked on the footpath (even if not directly on the part people walk on) may pose a problem for someone (e.g. road maintenance people/cleaners, people looking for an open space to get out of the flow of pedestrian traffic, people with sight impairment walking outside the normal paths of travel etc). For us to be able to deal with those parking inappropriately, we must issue tickets to all those committing the same offence, otherwise the tickets will simply not stand up in court. That does mean there may be the odd person who really is parked out of the way receiving a ticket, but this is a necessary action in order to deal with the wider problem (and I can provide you with many photos illustrating that we had significant problems with illegal motorcycle parking in Wellington City - though we have seen considerable improvements during the course of our campaign). Once a reasonable level of compliance has been re-established, the Council can go back to using discretion not to issue tickets. Note that using discretion not to issue tickets works the same way as for issuing tickets - if we use discretion for one then we must use discretion for all (including the worst offenders) in order to be consistent and fair. We can't just make up the rules as we go along based on whether we like or don't like the look of how someone has chosen to park.

In relation to bearing the "brunt of peoples frustrations", we get complaints from riders and pedestrians alike, so for us it is simply a balancing act to "minimise" peoples' frustrations. I doubt people will ever be happy to receive a ticket, and nor will people be happy if we didn't administer parking rules at all. Therefore we must act in a reasonable manner, and hope that people try to understand these sorts of issues from others' perspectives rather than expecting us to be able to please or cater for everyone at all times - we can't.

1000SS

6th January 2010, 13:05

I think the council has been found wanting with its consistency on this whether it be in the media verses what you're saying on forums like this. I have also provided enough photographic evidence to the council pointing out the less than common sense ticketing of Motorbikes posing as no obstacle to pedestrians or danger with no response, again this shows a level of inconsistency by the council and the consideration of bikers.

Unfortunately I think this will be a never ending debate where by you come up with reasons, some of the valid, that justifies what you're doing and us the bikers coming up with just as many to justify our position and why we think what you're doing this is unfair and less than reasonable.

1000SS

6th January 2010, 13:06

Jon Visser

1st February 2010, 09:58

Happy New Year and I have some good news. I have just finished a meeting with our traffic engineers, who have agreed with the following proposed traffic resolutions (subject to public consultation & agreement by Councillors):

* Addition of a new P120 Motorcycles-Only parking bay in the Victoria Street parking lay-by opposite Scooterazzi. The time restriction discourages all-day parking (e.g. commuters or stock for sale) thereby making it more likely that riders can get a park.

* Addition of two new Motorcycles-Only parking bays in College Street (to replace the space that was lost). One of these will be time restricted (P120) to support the small cafe businesses at the western end, the other will be approximately 6m of unrestricted space at the eastern end (not highly utilised by cars).

The introduction of the two P120 restricted motorcycles-only spaces is a new initiative that will help us to understand how they will be utilised, iron out any issues with enforcement and hopefully provide some relief for casual parkers and riders in the south & east of the CBD where there is a lot of pressure. If this works out well, then we may propose via a "motorcycle parking policy" (draft currently being written) that we implement this approach throughout the city (i.e. not all spaces but enough to provide some vacant capacity during the day for casual parkers to use).

In addition to the above, I have also reviewed Featherston Street again with our traffic engineers and we have agreed to look into formalising a few of the short unmarked spaces at the ends of Pay & Display rows to motorcycles only and the remainder will be marked with broken yellow lines to indicate that this space is not appropriate to park in (i.e. required for vehicles to safely manoeuvre into spaces).

sinned

1st February 2010, 10:10

I am pleased to hear you are introducing P120 areas. This could make bringing the bike into the city instead of a car for short visits viable.

Toaster

1st February 2010, 11:00

Agreed, some short term parking for bike near cafes gets my vote.

Chocolate Boy

2nd February 2010, 16:47

Those initiatives are all laudable but at the same time all lack one thing - a time frame.

I'm not demanding it be done immediately - it'd just be nice to have an idea, are we talking weeks, months, or should I put a reminder on my 2011 calendar?

Cheers

Jon Visser

3rd February 2010, 09:36

Those initiatives are all laudable but at the same time all lack one thing - a time frame. ... - it'd just be nice to have an idea, are we talking weeks, months, or should I put a reminder on my 2011 calendar?

The proposal, because it technically restricts some public from using a public place and some people may object to this, needs to be fully publicly notified & consulted on, so it has to go through a full Council meeting and vote. The full Council is scheduled to hear this matter in early June - they meet very infrequently, have a large forward workload and this is not right at the top of their priorities to discuss/consider (i.e. these processes/timings are completely outside our control). If they vote in support of the proposed changes then construction will be within 3 weeks of the decision. My best guess is therefore to schedule a follow-up in your diary in about six months time.

Str8 Jacket

3rd February 2010, 10:22

I still call bullshit.

centaurus

3rd February 2010, 10:39

There are so many places where a bike/scooter can be safely parked without being in anbobody's way. Why can't the council do like the government did with the anti-smacking law and request the parking wardens to do a "judgement call" instead of blanket-ticketing everybody who is out of parking bays? It's just stupid and unproductive and and does not encourage the move from 4 wheels to two wheels.

I understand the need to keep pedestrian accessways free and inconsiderate riders should be santioned appropriately, but there are SO MANY corners and unobtrusive places that can be used as parking which would not impede anybody and would make our lives much easier. Why does the council need to be so stiff? This just sounds like bullshit red tape.

Don't take this the wrong way John, I know you have the best intentions and are working hard to make it better, but if we go down this path (trying to force ALL bikes off non-marked places) nobody will ever be satisfied. We all know Wellington is a cramped place and there will never be enough parking places for either bikes or cars. Let's at least make the best of the existing situation and use what we have.

Jon Visser

4th February 2010, 08:57

There are so many places where a bike/scooter can be safely parked without being in anbobody's way. Why can't the council do like the government did with the anti-smacking law and request the parking wardens to do a "judgement call"

It's probably worthwhile re-reading some of the earlier posts on this thread. The key issues are that:
* What a rider may think is "out of the way" does pose problems for others. When that conflict occurs we receive complaints from the public that we are not doing our jobs, so we must do something about it.
* As has been raised by others, having wardens making judgement calls about every situation rather than following clear and consistent guidelines would lead to situations where people may some days receive tickets and not on other days at the same location depending who is on patrol in that area or whether a member of the public complains. Again, we would start receiving complaints from riders that we are not doing our jobs properly/fairly.
Therefore the solution we have chosen is one that meets the needs of most people, i.e. consistently and clearly managing the road the way that it was originally designed to operate using the limited tools currently at our disposal.

if we go down this path (trying to force ALL bikes off non-marked places) nobody will ever be satisfied
I agree we will never be able to please everybody but I have received no complaints from the public for several weeks now about illegal motorcycle parking so in that regard we have managed to improve things for a huge sector of the public. As Council Officers we are required to serve the "majority" public so that does guide our decisions - in order to make improvements for 100,000 odd pedestrians I acknowledge that we have made things somewhat more difficult for 1,000 odd motorcycle & scooter riders, though we haven't asked anyone to do anything that was not already expected of them (i.e. we have not created any new laws or restrictions that did not already exist).

At some point in the future we may be able to use a bit more discretion in certain locations, but we still have the current campaign and improvement initiatives to complete before we can relax somewhat. That is a cyclic process - relax the enforcement, problems increase, increase the enforcement, problems decrease etc. During the course of that cycle, all that really changes is whom we get the complaints from and how many problems occur. My desire is to reduce the 'magnitude' of these 'peaks & troughs' so that we don't swing so wildly between offending and ticketing campaigns (this is as undesirable for us as it is for those affected). Traditionally, this response has been very "reactive". In my ideal world we would have some monitors/indicators that show whereabouts on that cycle we are and then at a much earlier point respond through gentler education or enforcement as appropriate to bring it back to a more stable and acceptable situation. That is the approach I will try to take with the policy we are working on - if successful, over time it would make riders more aware of what the rules are and what is expected of them (less "surprises") and reduce the overall public costs of having to provide education, monitoring & enforcement campaigns. Easy to say, hard to do, and I do really appeciate all the good support I have received from the quality riders on this bulletin board.

motor_mayhem

25th March 2010, 22:40

Actually John I think we as bikers are serving the majority already. The protest I would have dreamed of would be one where everyone who usually rides a bike to work all drove a car each to work one day with a sticker that says "I wanted to ride my bike here but WCC wouldn't let me park it" (and yes that's a stretch of the truth but you get the picture). Once the WCC and the public saw how much more car traffic it generated then they might realise that our mode of transport in fact has a positive externality where their roads, parks and footpaths are less crowded. Could consider a similar protest on trains purely for the benefit of the public but then with their reliability we'd never get to work at all (I know that's a tranzmetro issue and not related to WCC).

No you can't assume everyone is much happier just because a couple of people who had nothing better to do with their time didn't call you i.e. they don't necessarily represent the loosely defined majority they happen to fit into.

Agree that whatever the rules end up being they need to be clearly defined between what is and isn't ok, judgement usually leads to debate. Good work for coming on here are explaining your side.

Jon Visser

9th April 2010, 11:41

Good news (and more good news planned):

Councillors have just approved the latest set of traffic resolutions, which included a number of improvements to motorcycle parking facilities:
* Stout Street: about 5 spaces confirmed (already used by riders but didn't formally exist previously).
* Hunter Street: existing bay to be expanded to accommodate about 14 more motorcycles (legally).
* Panama Street: two sections of kerb to be allocated to motorcycles (not currently in use, about 9 new spaces).
* Abel Smith Street: existing bay to be doubled in size (7 new spaces).

In June the next set of traffic resolutions goes to Council for consideration and this is planned to include:
* College Street: 7 unrestricted spaces to replace the ones that were there previously and another 7 spaces with P120 restriction to serve the cafes.
* Featherston Street: two sections of about 3 spaces each (6 in total) signposted as motorcycles only (at the ends of parallel parks, some already in use despite them having no-stopping lines).
* Victoria Street: A new bay in the parking lay-by at the corner with Ghuznee Street - 7 spaces P120 restricted for casual parkers.
* Railway station: about 20 unrestricted spaces.

Kendog

9th April 2010, 19:14

Good news (and more good news planned):
Nice work.

rustic101

9th April 2010, 20:04

[QUOTE=Jon Visser;1129712494]Good news (and more good news planned):

Thank you John.

Also could you please thank the City Engineer(?) Name escapes me..

I complained after nearly dropping my bike in the wet on the apex of Molesworth and Hawkestone st due to a large metallic utility cover, in my riding line. Turns out this was a TelstraClear cover. However it was inspected by WCC and Telstra and they replaced it with a concrete infill cover within two weeks.

Full marks to WCC for taking positive action and owning the issue.

Jon Visser

22nd June 2011, 17:37

Hi all,
Sorry for the late heads-up, but there is a report going to Wellington City Council's Strategy and Policy Commttee meeting tomorrow Thursday 23 June 2011. Second the last item (report 7) includes a review of the Traffic Bylaw.
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/haveyoursay/meetings/committee/Strategy_and_Policy/2011/23Jun0915/agenda.html
It is a public meeting and anyone may attend - they will probably get to report 7 by late morning (say somewhere between 10:30am to 12:30pm).

As has been previously promised, Council is going to look into removing the bylaw restriction on motorcycles using Pay & Display spaces. This is the first step in that process (i.e. the report tomorrow only seeks approval from Council to start the process, and there will be plenty of opportunity for public consultation throughout the process). It is hoped that this will enable riders looking for a casual parking space to park (legally) for up to 2 hours anywhere in the city and not need to park illegally on the footpath. This was one of the major changes that riders and those from BRONZ that we met with recently have asked for - your ideas are not falling on deaf ears.

Jon Visser
Manager, Infrastructure Performance
Wellington City Council

cheshirecat

23rd June 2011, 12:38

Good stuff, efforts by all concerned much appreciated

Onward and forward

StoneY

23rd June 2011, 13:04

Just so long as the issue does not become 'now you can pay and display we are taking away xxx parking spaces on your free zones'
An issue i honestly do not believe will happen after the great work we have achieved together to date but.... been bitten by too many bureaucrats to not look 3x at any gift horses....

Thanks Jon much appreciated letting us know like this

Probably best to email me at president@bronzwellington.org.nz with notification of the public meeting that our parking issue's will be tabled at

Jon Visser

23rd June 2011, 14:16

Council has agreed to start reviewing the traffic bylaw including considering letting motorcycles use P&D spaces.

Also approved was a new motorcycles-only parking bay in Martin Square. There's not much motorcycle parking in the south of the CBD so hopefully it will be put to good use.

In September there will be a more comprehensive report looking at the wider issues around motorcycle parking in the CBD (i.e. to develop a robust and future-looking policy).

Jon Visser

caseye

23rd June 2011, 19:47

FatHead

23rd June 2011, 21:03

On you Jon Visser! I'm sure this is not all down to you, but somehow I feel that Wellys motorcyclists are being well and truly looked after by your good self and those who's ear you can bend sufficiently.
Keep up the good work.
Welly BRONZ ,you guys rock, this is significant change and deserves MUCH MORE recognition of the lengths that you lot have gone to , to get these changes started and to keep things on a good even keel with Council, working in does work.Well done all.

I agree, well done Jon:niceone:, well done those who are running BRONZ Welly. look forward to being able to get a park across town every now and then when I need to do a it of retail therapy during the work week.

sinned

24th June 2011, 00:06

The use of Pay and Display parks will meet my need to park in the city. Good proposal, hope it gets approved. I am interested in how it will work - without the paper tickets.

StoneY

24th June 2011, 08:21

The use of Pay and Display parks will meet my need to park in the city. Good proposal, hope it gets approved. I am interested in how it will work - without the paper tickets.

Someone told me recently a new PDA system is due online and will track parking on an electronic record based on your vehicle, or so I was told.
Cant recall who said it.............

Jon Visser

24th June 2011, 09:19

Someone told me recently a new PDA system is due online and will track parking on an electronic record based on your vehicle, or so I was told.
Cant recall who said it.............

WCC has just facilitated the introduction of a new parking payment method called Phone|2|Park. You just stick a barcode to your vehicle and activate it with your mobile phone. The warden scans the barcode and it tells the warden whether they have paid. Benefits:
* Motorcycles & scooters could potentially use it (no receipts required).
* You can stop payment if you return early and save some money.
* You can get it to send you a text message warning you when it is going to expire.
* You can "top up" the parking fee remotely using your mobile phone without needing to go back to the vehicle (though not beyond the maximum 2hr limit).
If you're interested, check out:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/news/display-item.php?id=4434
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/news/display-item.php?id=4439
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/onstreet/phonepark.html
http://www.phone2park.co.nz/
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/parking/pdfs/phone2park-flyer.pdf
(See - we're not all bad eh?)

Phone|2|Park could be one way that riders could use P&D parking, but part of the review would be looking at how all payment methods could be used, e.g. requiring receipts to be displayed in a box with a transparent lid locked to the bike (or multiple bikes locked together using the same space/receipt?) such that the warden can easily see the receipt and it is just as secure as if it was inside a car. As always your good ideas to help make this work will be appreciated.

sinned

24th June 2011, 19:40

I think I had heard of phone2park but assumed it was text parking at a pay terminal. I bit more promotion may be needed of the new system.

I will use it for the car and the bike once the parking rules are changed. How to contain and display the bar code on the bike is an issue; I don't want a sticker on the screen of the bike. There are clear tubular containers for the registration label on bikes which may work for the parking id.

swbarnett

24th June 2011, 20:18

You just stick a barcode to your vehicle and activate it with your mobile phone.
What about us out of towners? Could the system also take rego numbers by text?

Jon Visser

27th June 2011, 10:20

What about us out of towners? Could the system also take rego numbers by text?

The system developers have certainly looked at that option. We are reluctant to rely on rego for two key reasons:
* Safety - with parallel-parked vehicles it is relatively easy for wardens to scan the barcode from next to the vehicle (e.g. when placed on the inside of the windscreen) but if they need to continually crouch down between two vehicles to scan the rego it is bad for their backs and it will only be a matter of time before someone gets squished.
* Functionality - some customers (e.g. those with fleets of pool vehicles) wanted the barcode to be able to be used by a specific individual in any vehicle, i.e. they would take the one barcode with them and use it in any car (or motorcycle) that they choose to use. This makes it a lot easier for them to manage their accounts (the barcode is paired up to the mobile phone number, not the car).

Because we cannot expect everyone with motorcycles to sign up to P|2|P I think it is important that we also allow for other payment methods, and that we clearly make that information available at the meter (e.g. what sort of lockable device should be used for the receipt and where these can be obtained).

BMWST?

28th June 2011, 22:30

Bald Eagle

28th June 2011, 23:24

Unlike the txt to park meters which don't all work with all mobile providers, will this work with any mobile phone I wonder.

swbarnett

1st July 2011, 03:41

The system developers have certainly looked at that option. We are reluctant to rely on rego for two key reasons:
* Safety - with parallel-parked vehicles it is relatively easy for wardens to scan the barcode from next to the vehicle (e.g. when placed on the inside of the windscreen) but if they need to continually crouch down between two vehicles to scan the rego it is bad for their backs and it will only be a matter of time before someone gets squished.
How do wardens get the number plate when issuing a ticket?

* Functionality - some customers (e.g. those with fleets of pool vehicles) wanted the barcode to be able to be used by a specific individual in any vehicle, i.e. they would take the one barcode with them and use it in any car (or motorcycle) that they choose to use. This makes it a lot easier for them to manage their accounts (the barcode is paired up to the mobile phone number, not the car).
A number plate based system would solve this as well.

Because we cannot expect everyone with motorcycles to sign up to P|2|P I think it is important that we also allow for other payment methods, and that we clearly make that information available at the meter (e.g. what sort of lockable device should be used for the receipt and where these can be obtained).
In which case how would one park legally while obtaining said lockable device?

BMWST?

2nd July 2011, 11:20

Because we cannot expect everyone with motorcycles to sign up to P|2|P I think it is important that we also allow for other payment methods, and that we clearly make that information available at the meter (e.g. what sort of lockable device should be used for the receipt and where these can be obtained).

Not lockable but reqo label holder could work??

sinned

4th July 2011, 03:07

The system developers have certainly looked at that option. We are reluctant to rely on rego for two key reasons:
* Safety - with parallel-parked vehicles it is relatively easy for wardens to scan the barcode from next to the vehicle (e.g. when placed on the inside of the windscreen) but if they need to continually crouch down between two vehicles to scan the rego it is bad for their backs and it will only be a matter of time before someone gets squished.
* Functionality - some customers (e.g. those with fleets of pool vehicles) wanted the barcode to be able to be used by a specific individual in any vehicle, i.e. they would take the one barcode with them and use it in any car (or motorcycle) that they choose to use. This makes it a lot easier for them to manage their accounts (the barcode is paired up to the mobile phone number, not the car).

Because we cannot expect everyone with motorcycles to sign up to P|2|P I think it is important that we also allow for other payment methods, and that we clearly make that information available at the meter (e.g. what sort of lockable device should be used for the receipt and where these can be obtained).

John
When do you expect to implement Phone2Park for motorcycles?

Jon Visser

4th July 2011, 09:29

John
When do you expect to implement Phone2Park for motorcycles?

First we need to change the Bylaw to enable this. The proposed CBD motorcycle parking policy goes to Council September/August and the proposed changes to the bylaw after that (expect after RWC2011). There are usually a few months of public consultation before changing a bylaw, so I would be expecting sometime between March & June 2012.

Jon Visser

4th July 2011, 09:40

How do wardens get the number plate when issuing a ticket?

The handheld devices that the wardens use include a digital camera that can do 2D Automatic Number Plate Recognition (which is not used to issue a ticket) as well as a 1D barcode scanner (which is used for P|2|P).

A number plate based system would solve this as well.

No it doesn't as many sales reps regularly use rental cars so they always know their own phone number but not what car they will be driving.

In which case how would one park legally while obtaining said lockable device?

Once motorcycles can park in P&D spaces they are able to do so for up to 6 minutes for free like everyone else can. This grace period enables people to park and go to the nearest store to obtain change (and/or a receipt holder), then return to their vehicle to pay for their parking.

StoneY

4th July 2011, 12:36

First we need to change the Bylaw to enable this. The proposed CBD motorcycle parking policy goes to Council September/August and the proposed changes to the bylaw after that (expect after RWC2011). There are usually a few months of public consultation before changing a bylaw, so I would be expecting sometime between March & June 2012.

I urge everyone to remember - not being able to use PnD parks assured us of a certain number of reserved free spaces....
I would hate to think that the opening of PnD may cause us to lose spaces already allocated

At this point of time I don't believe that will happen, but you know, open Pandora's box at your own risk I say......

theseekerfinds

4th July 2011, 21:46

I urge everyone to remember - not being able to use PnD parks assured us of a certain number of reserved free spaces....
I would hate to think that the opening of PnD may cause us to lose spaces already allocated

At this point of time I don't believe that will happen, but you know, open Pandora's box at your own risk I say......

I can't help but feel that this is the first nail in the coffin of free motorcycle parking in the CBD and that under the guise of the PnD issue they will then remove the free parking facilities currently available without hesitation. they will give with one hand and whisk the rug out from under you with the other while you ogle your shiny trinket..
I was at a council meeting where the issue of free parking was on the agenda and I can say that NOTHING the council said gave me any feelings of security over long term parking in the CBD for motorcyclists, if anything it made me feel an uneasy sense of political gamesmanship was ahead and that we would be slowly but surely shuffled from the CBD to the outer limits of the city and then out into the 'burbs where no one cares if there is free motorcycle parking or not making it all the more easy to remove them in their entirety.
There is no denying that the majority of free motorcycle parks in the CBD are in premium locations and without a doubt money making locations at that. The council can never be trusted simply because they always have a hidden agenda that changes with the breeze meaning that what they say they will do on any given day they really only mean it in the given day it was said. Our free parking is under threat and the reality is we are only along for the ride (no pun intended) with regard to any council decisions. I simply can not believe that the council have the best regard for motorcyclists at heart over the long run and whilst it may not happen today or tomorrow with the shift to use of PnD parking access for motorcyclists the loss of our free parking locations will definitely happen.
of course this is only my opinion.. :rockon:

swbarnett

4th July 2011, 22:27

The handheld devices that the wardens use include a digital camera that can do 2D Automatic Number Plate Recognition (which is not used to issue a ticket) as well as a 1D barcode scanner (which is used for P|2|P).
Then why can't this be used to read plates for checking parking validity?

No it doesn't as many sales reps regularly use rental cars so they always know their own phone number but not what car they will be driving.
You wouldn't need to know the number plate in advance. The driver only needs to check the number plate of whatever vehicle they're driving when paying for the park, either by texting it or entering it into a parking meter. This is how it worked in Switzerland when I lived there.

Once motorcycles can park in P&D spaces they are able to do so for up to 6 minutes for free like everyone else can. This grace period enables people to park and go to the nearest store to obtain change (and/or a receipt holder), then return to their vehicle to pay for their parking.
This I was unaware of. Makes sense.

StoneY

5th July 2011, 08:45

So far,Council has dealt with us at BRONZ and the other groups who fronted up for discussions both honorably and fairly.
Simon (aka Riffer) delivered a logical, factual case that was built from science, fact and the councils OWN DATA!

To date, Jon has been a man of his word and the executive group I met with were keen to keep us onside. (4000+ signatures helped)

BUT
I still see our mode of transport as part of the solution, and will have NO HESITATION in calling everyone to carry out major disruptive protests IF the opening of PnD reduces our current allotment of free spaces in any way, manner or form.

Of all modes of transport in WCC jurisdictions, of the regional fleet that comes into the city daily PTW (Powered two Wheelers) have grown at a steady 10% + annually and most riders are ratepayers.
No other mode has risen anywhere near that amount, (average .5 - 1.0%) and no matter how many cagers and truckies, couriers, sales reps etc complain there is not enough curb space, there is more need of it for the motorcyclist, casually or otherwise and as we take up less space for the %age of populace serviced I see it as a win/win for all.

We use less space, we create less pollution, the myth we cause traffic jams with our 'accidents' has been busted by the sheer lack of response to actual and factual statistics provided (one muppet on the council claimed our daily accidents cause congestion, ffs) not to mention I have direct access to the statistics the refute such a dissertation.

I found the infrastructure management team to be approachable and fairly decent to deal with.
The move to open PnD to bikes is no excuse to remove the parks we have, as we still have not seen any movement from the parking buildings as promised by Council.
No lockers set up yet - in any of them.
Only ONE building in Wellington has a special rate for bikes and a special parking bay assigned...this is over 6 months since the council promised these buildings would get on the program (Jon any updates for us on this?)

Once we have access to PnD, however it is managed, if we lose ANY of the existing parks, especially the recent ones placed where it is recognized you cannot FIT a cage, I will most definitely encourage, organize and lead extremely disruptive protest in the CBD.
The plans already drawn up.

What I hope for, is the existing agreement that our current spaces will NOT be reduced.
So far there has not been any indication otherwise, but this move to allow us into PnD's scares me in all honesty.
That clause was exactly what justified our ongoing free use of our current spaces, our security blanket just became a LOT thinner....

I wish to see contracted spaces in parking buildings at a pro rata rate calculated on 2 bikes per car space (as yet only Tournament on Taranaki St have such a plan) and LOCKERS....where the f**k are our lockers????

I know Jon is a straight shooter, but ultimately he answers to the council Exec.

The Mayor is on our side
So are a few of the senior councilors, and even NZTA officials see the merit in leaving us alone as it stands.

This is not a dead issue by any means, and could still go either way.

We shall just have to wait and see but rest assured, BRONZ will not sit back and allow our parking to be stripped away by stealth, policy, or rule changes.

Brent

Jon Visser

5th July 2011, 09:35

... we still have not seen any movement from the parking buildings as promised by Council.
No lockers set up yet - in any of them.
Only ONE building in Wellington has a special rate for bikes and a special parking bay assigned...this is over 6 months since the council promised these buildings would get on the program (Jon any updates for us on this?)
...
I wish to see contracted spaces in parking buildings at a pro rata rate calculated on 2 bikes per car space (as yet only Tournament on Taranaki St have such a plan) and LOCKERS....where the f**k are our lockers????

As confirmed by all of the parking building providers (some even directly on this bulletin board) they have committed that all of the commercial parking buildings are now available to motorcycles to use on an as-required basis. If no rider asks to sign up for a monthly space, you will not see any space in the building. The moment a rider asks for a space in a building, some will be provided (and they have committed that these will be good quality spaces). The rates they offer are around a quarter of the car price (i.e. $50/month rather than $200/month) which is two times better than what you have asked for. There has been a steady increase in the number of riders using buildings and as has been stated previously it is only when there is a critical mass of riders (i.e. customers) expressing a need for certain amenities that it will become reasonable for the building providers to supply this. That is up to the riders to push for with the building operators. I am aware that there is a reluctance from riders to use some buildings due to the difficulty with access (concrete ramps that are slippery when wet). The building managers have verified that all buildings are available as promised, any claim to the contrary is simply incorrect.

However, this still does not address the need for more casual motorcycle/scooter parking space within the CBD, hece the initiative to open up P&D parking for such riders. We are doing so to support the needs of riders. I ask you to consider whether your stance is actually in support of a better solution or against the needs of other riders?

StoneY

5th July 2011, 11:32

As confirmed by all of the parking building providers (some even directly on this bulletin board) they have committed that all of the commercial parking buildings are now available to motorcycles to use on an as-required basis. If no rider asks to sign up for a monthly space, you will not see any space in the building. The moment a rider asks for a space in a building, some will be provided (and they have committed that these will be good quality spaces). The rates they offer are around a quarter of the car price (i.e. $50/month rather than $200/month) which is two times better than what you have asked for. There has been a steady increase in the number of riders using buildings and as has been stated previously it is only when there is a critical mass of riders (i.e. customers) expressing a need for certain amenities that it will become reasonable for the building providers to supply this. That is up to the riders to push for with the building operators. I am aware that there is a reluctance from riders to use some buildings due to the difficulty with access (concrete ramps that are slippery when wet). The building managers have verified that all buildings are available as promised, any claim to the contrary is simply incorrect.

However, this still does not address the need for more casual motorcycle/scooter parking space within the CBD, hece the initiative to open up P&D parking for such riders. We are doing so to support the needs of riders. I ask you to consider whether your stance is actually in support of a better solution or against the needs of other riders?

Thanks for the info Jon

The buildings I have called and asked for pricing tell me I can lease a park at the full rate as applies to leasing a park for my car, and no gear lockers are available to stash bike gear.
The exception to that response has been Tournament, referring to Taranaki st and informed spaces will be made available in the other buildings they manage as interest grows..... however this was 3 weeks ago when i made the 'research' calls.
Is it possible I have not spoken to someone in their organisations who is up with the play?

I will try again and see what response I get, as always your efforts are much appreciated and I do not doubt your honest intention to work with us.

I am always in support of a better solution, as long as our existing parking is not reduced in any way.

If at some point in the future access to PnD is used as a reason to reduce existing Motorcycle AND SCOOTER free parking as it is now, my suspicions will be validated...I hope they will be proven to be false suspicions, but my dealings with central and local govt to date have validated my reluctance to belive in the system, unfortunately.

As stated many times our mode of transport is part of the solution, and we have suffered enough attacks on our choice of transportation in the last 24 months as it stands, so please forgive me for my cynical attitude but it is what the members of BRONZ expect of me, to attempt to see their rights are protected.

Cheers
Brent

Jon Visser

6th July 2011, 08:55

Motorcycles wanting to use a building first need to set up an account with the operator (i.e. this only suits commuters). Most of the staff at the call centres should be aware of this, though some of the car park attendants are not. If you contact any of the operators (Wilson, Tournament or Care Park) and they do not allow you to set up an account for motorcycle/scooter parking please let me know and I will personally take it up with their management.

Price will vary by location and will also depend on whether multiple mototrcycles can share the same space.

StoneY

7th July 2011, 18:05

Motorcycles wanting to use a building first need to set up an account with the operator (i.e. this only suits commuters). Most of the staff at the call centres should be aware of this, though some of the car park attendants are not.

Ah, this may be the misunderstanding Jon I have been walking into the buildings and chatting with the booth attendants

Cheers mate

caseye

7th July 2011, 20:47

Bugger aye Stoney, no fight here today! LOL nice work there Jon.
Keep it going guys sooner or later we'll have a system that works and that almost everybody will be happy with, including the existing free parks staying that way.
When you moving up ere to Dorkland Jon, we need more parks in Queer street!

Virago

28th July 2011, 19:48

Email received by Kiwi Biker today:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wellington City Council is proposing to introduce a "CBD motorcycle parking policy". Details can be found here:
http://www.wellington.govt.nz/haveyoursay/meetings/committee/Strategy_and_Policy/2011/04Aug0915/agenda.html
See report 4.

There will be a public Council meeting on 4 August to discuss this. If you wish to address the Councillors regarding this, you should contact the Committee advisor:
Democratic Services
Wellington City Council
101 Wakefield Street
PO Box 2199
Wellington
Phone: (04) 803 8334
Fax: (04) 801 3020
Email: public.participation@wcc.govt.nz

Could you please advise the KB members appropriately?

Kind regards,

Jon Visser

Infrastructure Performance Manager, Wellington City Council

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

caseye

28th July 2011, 20:31

Nice work there Mr Virago and Mr Viser. Cheers for the info Jon and for putting it up here on KB where more will see it than anywhere else.OK you Wellingtonians GO! Have your say, be heard.This is an opportunity you haven't had in the past.
Make a good impression on the Welly council and who knows what could happen.

StoneY

29th July 2011, 13:58

Its not quite the rose bowl some think it is folks.

While it states we keep our parking for now, it asks council to reserve the right to address fee's in the future after consulting with the wider public (in other words after enough pissed off cagers who resent our 500m of curb space are found to have a rant about the unfairness of it all)

There are some comments in report 4 that I find not only inflammatory but outright prejudiced in regards the way motorcyclists are portrayed by the report writer

Have booked my appearance for the 4th with the coordinator and will be hoping to see a STRONG presence wearing leathers and cordura in the crowd on the day if any of you can make it along

A certain councilor has made sure we at BRONZ Wellington are totally up with the play, and the fact we have been given access to the PnD parking spaces is a red hearing, and adds to the justification to make us pay for the free bike spaces as well...
Remember envy is an ugly monster and this report is written to increase such envy from non motorcyclists IMO -

I still say a big THANKS is owed to Jon for his forthright and open communication with us as a community, but this issue is still live guys.