Bus Lane Bullshit

[Bevel]

Back me up

I'm having an email battle with Transit over bus lane usage. Please help out and see if we can change that stupid regulation. Here is the corespondence to date.

6/6/06
I travel via motorcycle during peak hour on SH1 in Auckland from Esmonde Rd over the Harbour Bridge.

I have heard that Transit does not allow motorcycles to use the Bus lane because it is considered too dangerous.

I have to ask have the people who made this decision ever had to ride a motorcycle between two rows of impatient cars that merge at random and are only inches from their bike?

As an experience motorcyclist with over 20 years of riding experience I can assure you that traveling in the bus lane is far safer. When in a bus lane I can see a bus coming from miles away and I am in a position to avoid it. He can also see me.

Car drivers are not expecting motorcycles to zip between the lanes and are not looking for them. Even if a driver was to indicate a motorcyclist may not be able to see their indicators because of the close proximity of other vehicle masking their indicators. Some drivers actually resent motorcyclist squeezing past them and go out of their way to hamper their progress as has happened to me on numerous occasions.

Please reconsider the existing ruling as it currently does not make sense to put motorcyclist in harms way. I promise that I will hamper the progress of any buses on my Italian sports bike.

Thank you


19/6/06
Dear ****

Thank you for your message to Transit New Zealand’s (Transit’s) website about motorcyclists using motorway bus lanes.

The shoulders on Auckland’s motorways are primarily emergency stopping areas and are not constructed as running lanes. They are at a lower level than the main carriageway and not surfaced with the same material.

Restricting the use of clearly defined sections of the shoulder to timetabled bus services at specified peak times on weekdays - only when the motorway is congested - means Transit can achieve some control over driver behaviour. Three licensed bus operators currently use the shoulder lanes and advice and direction on shoulder lane use forms part of the training programme for bus drivers. If inappropriate driver behaviour is observed, it is addressed through the bus operators, ensuring that both usage and speed are managed safely.

If vehicles in general were to use the shoulder as a normal running lane (at normal speeds) there would be safety issues with vehicles moving on and off the shoulder with the different carriageway heights and different levels of skid resistance. The stability of motorcyclists would be of particular concern when moving to or from the shoulder.

If motorcyclists were permitted to ride on the shoulders the number of lane changes would be greater than normal because the main carriageway shoulders end at on and off-ramps and motorcyclists would need to change lanes (merge back into the main traffic flow) frequently. The speed differential between the congested main motorway lanes and motorcycles on the shoulder would be problematic and a real safety concern. Unfortunately, for these reasons, it is not currently practical or safe for motorcyclists to ride on the motorway shoulders.

Transit does not have any plans to review its policy on the controlled use of the motorway emergency stopping shoulders in the short term. However, if Transit were to revisit this policy it would consult with representative interest groups, rather than individual users. That would include bus operators, the NZ Automobile Association and a representative national motorcyclist’s association.

I trust that this clarifies the issues raised in your email.

Thank you for your enquiry.

Yours sincerely

Warwick Mason

Warwick Mason
Traffic Engineer
Transit New Zealand
Ph 368.2026

19/6/06
Dear Mr Mason
Thank you for you replying to my email and thank you for your concern about motorcycle safety.
Unfortunately I do not agree with you that the bus lane hazards you identified with their different road levels and lane changing requirements are significant issues.
Motorcyclist have to constantly change lanes to maneuver through crawling rush hour traffic. Using bus lanes will actually reduce that hazard. Motorcycles can also adjust their speed up or down to match merging traffic faster than any other vehicle on the road.
The different surfaces and heights is unfortunate but if a motorcyclist cannot handle them then he shouldn't be riding a bike. After all we encounter them all the time with roadwork's. As an aside I have just returned from Melbourne where there are thousands of motorcycles and hundreds of miles of tram tracks. If different road surfaces where such an issue Melbourne would have to either ban motorcycles or trams altogether.
Another anomaly with banning motorcyclist from Transit NZ roads is that we are allowed to use bus lanes controlled by local councils in urban areas. These bus lane have the added hazards of driveways, cyclist and pedestrian to deal with yet are deemed safer.
As an experience motorcyclist with over 20 years in the saddle I can assure you that I am much safer in a bus lane than sandwiched between unsuspecting cars and trucks. I invite you to join me for a ride across Auckland Harbour Bridge one morning to experience first hand the reality of the situation from a motorcyclist perspective.
Yours sincerely
****

[Titanium]

But save some time and give it a miss.

[Bevel]

Here is the response to my last email. Don't waste your time reading it if you read the last one. It's exactly the same and obviously a standard letter. They didn't bother responding to the arguments I put forth disputing their logic.
let's generate a campaign to allow us to use the bus lanes. If you support this cause please email the following:

Joseph.Flanagan@transit.govt.nz
Warwick.Mason@transit.govt.nz
Nigel.Downing@transit.govt.nz
bronzauckland@hotmail.com

Hi ****

Thank you for your message to Transit New Zealand's (Transit's) website about motorcyclists using motorway bus lanes.

The shoulders on Auckland's motorways are primarily emergency stopping areas and are not constructed as running lanes. They are at a lower level than the main carriageway and not surfaced with the same material. Restricting the use of clearly defined sections of the shoulder to timetabled bus services at specified peak times on weekdays - only when the motorway is congested - means Transit can achieve some control over driver behavior.

Three licensed bus operators currently use the shoulder lanes and advice and direction on shoulder lane use forms part of the training programmed for bus drivers. If inappropriate driver behavior is observed, it is addressed through the bus operators, ensuring that both usage and speed are managed safely.

If vehicles in general were to use the shoulder as a normal running lane (at normal speeds) there would be safety issues with vehicles moving on and off the shoulder with the different carriageway heights and different levels of skid resistance. The stability of motorcyclists would be of particular concern when moving to or from the shoulder. If motorcyclists were permitted to ride on the shoulders the number of lane changes would be greater than normal because the main carriageway shoulders end at on and off-ramps and motorcyclists would need to change lanes (merge back into the main traffic flow) frequently. The speed differential between the congested main motorway lanes and motorcycles on the shoulder would be problematic and a real safety concern. Unfortunately, for these reasons, it is not currently practical or safe for motorcyclists to ride on the motorway shoulders.

Transit does not have any plans to review its policy on the controlled use of the motorway emergency stopping shoulders in the short term. However, if Transit were to revisit this policy it would consult with representative interest groups, rather than individual users. That would include bus operators, the NZ Automobile Association and a representative national motorcyclist's association. I trust that this clarifies the issues raised in your email. Thank you for your enquiry and apologies for the delayed response.


Warwick Mason
Traffic Engineer
Transit New Zealand
Ph 368.2026

[Mr. Peanut]

if Transit were to revisit this policy it would consult with representative interest groups, rather than individual users. That would include bus operators, the NZ Automobile Association and a representative national motorcyclist’s association.

I trust that this clarifies the issues raised in your email.

Thank you for your enquiry.

Hint, Hint. :yes:

[Bevel]

I've already contacted BRONZ and suggest that anyone else concerned with this issue do the same, as well as contacting Transit NZ directly. If you are an AA member get them involved too.
If you read the boards you will see that a lot of other people are concerned with this issue. Let's do something about it!

[imdying]

I don't see how riding between lanes of traffic within inches of cars is relevant to your argument. You don't have to lane split, you can sit in the line of traffic like everyone else if it worries you.

[Karma]

I wouldn't use the bus lanes on the motorway even if I could.

The amount of shit all over that lane, bits of metal and crap, I'd rather take my chances on the main road.

[avgas]

As long as there is no turning traffic your fine, dont make my mistake

[Bevel]

Have you ever experienced Auckland rush hour traffic Imdying?

[Skyryder]

I wouldn't use the bus lanes on the motorway even if I could.

The amount of shit all over that lane, bits of metal and crap, I'd rather take my chances on the main road.

Now that's a man who knows how to stay alive. Some of you bozo's who continuly bring up this bus lane thing and how safe they are don't know shit. When you have got your bus licence and have driven them for a job you might know what you're talking about. When I was driving busses I had this motto with grumpy passangers who got bitchy when the bus was late.

Better late than never. Not a bad way to ride too.

Skyryder

[imdying]

Have you ever experienced Auckland rush hour traffic Imdying?I surely have... kind of like having to visit Auckland, always make sure I leave work extra early to catch my planes on time :D

Please save me from myself seems like a pretty bizzare argument to put forward to Transit though.

[Bevel]

If you can come up with another positive argument then please let us know and I'll pass it on.

[Filterer]

Here is the response to my last email. Don't waste your time reading it if you read the last one. It's exactly the same and obviously a standard letter. They didn't bother responding to the arguments I put forth disputing their logic.

And there was me thinking someone had taken a signifigant chunk of time out of their day to write a response to your question. Silly me, bloody beauracrates(sp?)

[InDeSkyz]

You don't have to lane split, you can sit in the line of traffic like everyone else if it worries you.


Don't have to, no.
Here's my reason why I do it:
I got told by an 'ol english geezer whoz name alludes me, but ain't emportant anysway. That it is unwise to sit yerself as last in a line o traffic. This being.. people are farken blind right. So their plan is to nose dive yer arse right into the car you are tenderly waiting for. Like a good wee lad.
You know, wouldn't want to play cutsies. It's rude n all. Opposed to one Honda Preludes headlight up yer orrifce. I dunno what horrific choice we should make on dis 'er dilemma.

All I'm concernded about is me heads gone all mash coz I just watched two flippin hours of some cute british comedy AND, I can't seem to getz rid of dis 'er 'orrible accent!


So anyway. Old dude said. Don't sit last in line of cars. You asking to be jam (unless yer in teh jam selling business, then don't hesitate to take your bargins when you can.)

[imdying]

Opposed to one Honda Preludes headlight up yer orrifce. I dunno what horrific choice we should make on dis 'er dilemma.Agreed, and one reason why I myself split, although I normally only split stationary traffic.

[grandpa_dave]

Does anyone else think we should ressurect common sense policing?
Overtaking at 100k's? (Should be on a tui billboard)
Lane splitting, if done carefully is fine, but if some crazy is lane splitting at 100k's through traffic doing 50 nail him then....Bring back common sense.
Fines for holding up traffic? Fines for speeding up at passing lanes and slowing down after?......Nah....Just chuck it in the Too hard basket.....after all how could you possibly police it covertly with tinted windowed vans?

[MWVT]

Best thing to do..... just ride on the bus lanes if you think they are safer. Take the tax on the nose. Unfortunately for us, transit want us to be perfectly safe. Cages are safer than bikes (for the occupant anyways) and therefore transit won't be giving us any nice treatment anytime soon.

[Bevel]

I don't see how riding between lanes of traffic within inches of cars is relevant to your argument. You don't have to lane split, you can sit in the line of traffic like everyone else if it worries you.

One of the biggest danger to motorcycist is cars. In fact they are probably the biggest danger. By riding in a bus lane I'm staying further away from them.

[Bevel]

I wouldn't use the bus lanes on the motorway even if I could.

The amount of shit all over that lane, bits of metal and crap, I'd rather take my chances on the main road.

I don't agree with you that there is more debris in a bus lane than on the rest of the motorway but even if there was in rush hour traffic when I'm advocating we should be able to use bus lanes I am able to see as far ahead as the next corner. In a lane I can only see as far as the car in front of me and that is likely to be less than 4 seconds in front. If I leave a bigger gap some one will always cut in and still reduce it further.

[Skyryder]

In a lane I can only see as far as the car in front of me and that is likely to be less than 4 seconds in front. If I leave a bigger gap some one will always cut in and still reduce it further.

So you can see ahead of you further in a bus lane than in the standard traffic lane. So on that basis you saying that bus lanes are safer................???

Well if that's your take on riding in bus lanes................you seem to forget that there is a bus in this equation and rest assured the bus driver is more interested in what is going on up front than in his/her rear. Nine times out of ten the bike is on the bus before the driver knows. If you only knew how little rear vision busses and large vehicles have you would stay well clear of them. They have about 4 or 5 degrees of view...................the rest is a bloody big blind spot.
Skyryder

[Bevel]

So you can see ahead of you further in a bus lane than in the standard traffic lane. So on that basis you saying that bus lanes are safer................???[/B]
Skyryder

The further ahead you can see the earlier you can react. If there was any debris on the road I would see it earlier in a bus lane. I would also see the big bus and any other hazards and avoid them.


...you seem to forget that there is a bus in this equation and rest assured the bus driver is more interested in what is going on up front than in his/her rear. If you only knew how little rear vision busses and large vehicles have you would stay well clear of them. [/B]
Skyryder

I have driven trucks and I know about blind spots. Unless the bus was going to reverse in the bus lane then being behind it wouldn't be a problem. Having said that riding where you can be seen in their mirrors is the smart thing to do.

The buses would also be able to see me easier in front of them as I wouldn't be masked behind other vehicles. Not only do I want to stay clear of buses I also want to stay clear of cars and trucks. Their are a lot less of them in bus lanes and that's is why they are safer for motorcyclists.

[JohnR]

[QUOTE=grandpa_dave]Does anyone else think we should ressurect common sense policing?
[QUOTE]

And common sense legislation!
If there are restrictions on buses using the lanes, i.e. speed, time of day etc, why not apply the same restrictions to other users?:brick:
No sensible rider/driver is going to use an occasional lane with an apparently substandard surface in normal conditions...are they?:scratch:

[JohnR]

Well if that's your take on riding in bus lanes................you seem to forget that there is a bus in this equation and rest assured the bus driver is more interested in what is going on up front than in his/her rear. Nine times out of ten the bike is on the bus before the driver knows. If you only knew how little rear vision busses and large vehicles have you would stay well clear of them. They have about 4 or 5 degrees of view...................the rest is a bloody big blind spot.
Skyryder

So how do buses cope with buses in the bus lanes?

[Quartida]

If you only knew how little rear vision busses and large vehicles have you would stay well clear of them. They have about 4 or 5 degrees of view...................the rest is a bloody big blind spot.
Skyryder

While I see your argument Skyryder, this is as much of an issue when riding behind a normal bus as it is in a bus lane. However, it is rare to see a bus lane chock-a-block with buses. Oftentimes, there will be very few buses. In which case it is easy enough to keep a sensible distance away from them while enjoying the pleasures of not having to sit in traffic.

[Skyryder]

So how do buses cope with buses in the bus lanes?


They don't pass each other unless at a stop. This is one of the problems with with bus drivers v bikers. Often the bike is on top of the bus before the driver even knows about it.

Skyryder

[Skyryder]

The further ahead you can see the earlier you can react. If there was any debris on the road I would see it earlier in a bus lane. I would also see the big bus and any other hazards and avoid them.



I have driven trucks and I know about blind spots. Unless the bus was going to reverse in the bus lane then being behind it wouldn't be a problem. Having said that riding where you can be seen in their mirrors is the smart thing to do.

The buses would also be able to see me easier in front of them as I wouldn't be masked behind other vehicles. Not only do I want to stay clear of buses I also want to stay clear of cars and trucks. Their are a lot less of them in bus lanes and that's is why they are safer for motorcyclists.


Being if front is not the problem for a bus driver. That's where his attention is focused. It's the overtaking (usualy at speed) and the unexpected bike. \

Nine times out of ten passangers are behaved and let the driver do his job, but the general public usually only think of themselves and if the driver is distracted for any reason..................???????????????????

I am aware of your point on there being less traffic in bus lanes and agree that out in the open also where I like to be but having said that the last thing I want is a bus slamming into the rear of me because the driver has made a mistake.

AllI can say as a biker and an ex bus driver I keep well clear of them...........bin out for whatever reason and you will be lucky to walk away.

Skyryder

[Skyryder]

While I see your argument Skyryder, this is as much of an issue when riding behind a normal bus as it is in a bus lane. However, it is rare to see a bus lane chock-a-block with buses. Oftentimes, there will be very few buses. In which case it is easy enough to keep a sensible distance away from them while enjoying the pleasures of not having to sit in traffic.

That may well be 99% of the time..................but then I guess if we wanted to be 100% safe on the roads we would all stay home. All I can say is be carefull. There are bus drivers out there that go straight from a car licence on to a passanger licence......................standards have dropped.

Skyryder

[ajturbo]

Have you ever experienced Auckland rush hour traffic Imdying?

RUSH HR TRAFFIC?....now that is streaching the truth... my mum in her MANUAL wheel chair could go faster... and she has the use of only one arm , she is nearly blind, and would have to go to the loo every 20m.. and yet she would still get there quicker...
rush hr traffic what a joke... it gets a bit busy here some times... i have to wait for the cows to move out the way...:nya:

[tomthepohm]

Good on ya Bevel.
Damn rite, and nice one for trying to do something about it. Kiwis spend too long sitting on their arses and talking about it with out actually doin anything.

The police are a disgrace, the roads are terrible and the attitude to the whole thing gets right up my nose.

As for the bridge! Its a nightmare and just a matter of time before i or someone else gets squashed.

Good on ya, heres some rep.
Tom

[Filterer]

If they complain that their is too much shit on the bus lanes and they are uneen etc then why not get them to fix that??? Sure a bit of $$ but maybe it could be standard to always if possible put in a fully surfaced level shoulder without fuck loads of white lines all over them.

And set a maximum speed for buses and bikes of 80? or maybe slower - that way they would only be used when traffic is really heavy as otherwise you would just stick to main section

[Bevel]

From Clive Fuhr Clive of Transit NZ In responce to my email 21/06/2006 9:29 p.m. (see below) Fuhr@transit.govt.nz

I am currently receiving a number of articles about motorcycle access to motorway 'buslanes'. The publication of a letter and the associated comments perhaps explains this.
Firstly there is an important distinction to be made between the use of the existing emergency stopping shoulders, that buses use in the peak travel times, and use of the Northern Busway which is under construction.
The motorway 'shoulders' are not road carriageway, and buses are only permitted to use them a lower speeds when the motorway is congested. The motorway shoulders are the refuge for broken down/disabled vehicles and there are many reasons why it should not be regarded as an additional vehicle lane - whether that is for bikes or any other vehicles.
As for the future Busway -it is exactly that- a road for buses. There is the possibility of some limited use by 'high occupancy' (3+) vehicles but this will only be in the am peak. Strict speed controls will be in place and there will be no overtaking. Because the Busway is a road in terms of its physical construction there are many groups arguing for access, including motorcyclists, pedal cyclists, taxis, taxi vans and shuttles and non-scheduled buses. If all such uses were accommodated the Busway will lose its primary function - that of enabling buses to form part of the regions 'rapid transit' network.
In a sense it can be compared to seeking access to drive along the railway tracks in a four wheel drive or on a trail bike -it may be technically possible but it is certainly not desirable in terms of maintaining passenger transport corridors that can offer regular and reliable services. This is really a policy isue that has safety considerations to be taken into account.
Thank you for the invitation to ride on your bike. I grew up on the pillion of a Vincent Black Shadow and know the delights and dangers of motorcycling. I would not in any way deny the value of motorcycles for personal travel. Perhaps their role in the transport system needs further debate at a strategic level.
I hope this assists.
Clive Fuhr

>>> 21/06/2006 9:29 p.m. >>>

Dear Clive
I am writing in response to a letter that written by you that was published on the Kiwibiker forum. http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=657179#post657179 Please read this thread. It is an interesting debate.
I have heard various concerns about biker safety re surface conditions, different surface heights and merging traffic. None of these Transit NZ safety concerns are as threatening as other road users. I'll take my chances on the bus lane any day as my biggest concern is always mixing it up at close quarters with the driving public and there are less of them on a busway. remember cars kill more motorcyclist than anything else!
I know you are concerned with bus movement but I can assure you there are not enough buses or motorcyclist to create a congestion issue. You could always review the situation in 10 years time to see if it has changed but right now a bus lane is fairly empty and there are not that many motorcyclist on the road.
Yes your right motorcyclist had their chance to lobby and they didn't but that doesn't make their case wrong. A please keep an open mind on the issue and let's see if there is solution to the problem.
I would like to invite you on a ride with me on the back of my Ducati Monster motorbike through rush hour traffic on the motorway and then on a bus lane so you can experience first hand the situations.
Best regards

[Drum]

Clive makes a good point there. Why are we more deserving of using the busway than other road user groups?

[jord]

fuck transit. i havnt read this forum fully yet but by law you are allowed as stated in the motorcycle roadcode.

[Zapf]

Clive makes a good point there. Why are we more deserving of using the busway than other road user groups?

The truth is thou that I can't see motorcycles congesting up the busway.... we all tend to stay away from those buses as far as we can anyway.... only thing is they need to keep the 50cc scooters and choppers off that.

[Drum]

.............. only thing is they need to keep the 50cc scooters and choppers off that.

But that would be almost impossible to administrate and enforce. It would be as stupid as making just some dogs be micro-chipped. Oh. Hang on.

I also dont believe that bikes would congest the motorway bus lane, but we need to remember what the bus lane is for. It is to make bus travel times shorter, thereby encouraging more cagers to catch the bus. The benefit for us is the reduced number of cars on the road (if that eventuates).

If we get to use the lanes, then as Clive says - what about cyclists, taxi's couriers or whoever else gets jealous?

Not to mention that it would be dangerous for both bikers and other users when passing through the bus stations - or merging back into the inside lane just before the station.

Can't people see that its not as simple as just saying "motorbikes can use bus lanes".

[Drum]

fuck transit. i havnt read this forum fully yet but by law you are allowed as stated in the motorcycle roadcode.

Wrong. Read the thread mate.

[Ixion]

Clive makes a good point there. Why are we more deserving of using the busway than other road user groups?

OK. Lets ask, "why should the tax payer , at enormous expense, pay to reduce the travel time of a certain group of commuters ?"

Answer: because that class of commuter is considered to be commuting in a socially responsible way. Public transport (subsidised by the tax payer I may add), is an efficient utilisation of roading funds , measured as dollars spent on roading, per passenger journey. One million dollars, it is argued, spent on roads for public transport, moves more people than one million dollars spent on roading for cars .Therefore roading for public transpoort is a Good Thing and should be encouraged.

With me so far ? (and I'm open to hearing any OTHER reason why my tax dollars should be spent on building a busway)

But: exactly the same argument is applicable to motorcycles. In fact, despite Mr Fuhrs self serving fibs, we would be MORE efficient than buses. So it would actually be possible to construct a sound argument for Transit actually building special motorcycle lanes (they have cycle lanes after all. I suggested this at the last BRONZ meeting, but no-one was keen)

As they are not funding motorcycle-ways, it is still publically efficient to encourage motorcycle use , for exactly the same reasons as it is publiclly efficient to encourage bus use.

Other road user groups are not efficient. We are.

(The argument about cyclists and mopeds is irrelevant. They are already forbidden on motorways, and the police seem to have little problem enforcing it. Red herring)

[Jantar]

Wrong. Read the thread mate.

Sorry Drum, Its you who are wrong. The specifically allows motorcycles to use bus lanes. The exception is where motorcycles are SPCIFICALLY prohibited by signage. Motorcycles are not specifically prohibited from the bus lanes in question.

[Drum]

Are you suggesting that bikers are socially responsible Ixion? :gob:

We are talking about specifically about the north shore busway here (as that is the only busway project Clive is involved in to my knowledge.

In this particular case I would argue that it is a better use of taxpayer dollars to build a busway than a regular traffic lane. My reason is because of the existing southbound bottleneck at the harbour bridge. There would be no point in the buslane being open to all traffic because they would all have to merge into the regular traffic lanes around Onewa Road, which is already a dogs breakfast. On the other hand though, buses using the dedicated bus lane would have a good run all the way from Sunset Rd (or so) past the stationary cagers. Surely some of them would wisen up and take the bus. Just look how full the new park 'n' ride car parks are.

In general though, I dont believe bus lanes are a particularly efficient use of pavement. A regular traffic lane has a capacity of approx 2100 vehicles per hour (ignoring merge and weave). If I remember correctly the NS bus lane is intended to carry up to 100 buses an hour southbound in the AM peak.

One of the main reasons that bus lanes are being built is because Transit made a commitment in the regional land transport strategy to provide better public transport facilities. And why did they make this committment? No, its not because they like travelling on buses, its because the public transport lobby (including The Greens) pushed hard for the inclusion of these policies.

The whole strategy went out for public consultation before decisions were made - theres not much point in whinging about it now.

[Drum]

Sorry Drum, Its you who are wrong. The specifically allows motorcycles to use bus lanes. The exception is where motorcycles are SPCIFICALLY prohibited by signage. Motorcycles are not specifically prohibited from the bus lanes in question.

This point has been debated on this site ad-nauseum.
If you think youre legally entitled to use the motorway bus lanes then just do so, and let us know what happens.

You never know - you may set a legal precedent, and then we'll all be happy!

Edit: To quote Dick: "Transit New Zealand regional manager (acting), Richard Hancy, says the new rules, which will allow cyclists and motorcyclists to use bus lanes on other roads, do not apply to bus lanes on motorways. 'Motorways are governed by Transit Bylaw 2002/19 which only allows motorway bus lanes to be used by 'timetabled passenger service vehicles'. This bylaw overrides the new traffic rules,' he says."

[Jantar]

This point has been debated on this site ad-nauseum.
If you think youre legally entitled to use the motorway bus lanes then just do so, and let us know what happens.

You never know - you may set a legal precedent, and then we'll all be happy!

Edit: To quote Dick: "Transit New Zealand regional manager (acting), Richard Hancy, says the new rules, which will allow cyclists and motorcyclists to use bus lanes on other roads, do not apply to bus lanes on motorways. 'Motorways are governed by Transit Bylaw 2002/19 which only allows motorway bus lanes to be used by 'timetabled passenger service vehicles'. This bylaw overrides the new traffic rules,' he says."

You can quote anyone from Transit that you like, but the fact stands that there is not a single bylaw in New Zealand that can override an act of parliament. The traffic regulations are gazetted and have the effect of being an Act of Parliament. There is also the fact that the traffic regulation overiding the provisions of Transit's bylaw was gazzetted in 2004, thus post dating and effectively repealling Transits Bylaw. If I lived in Auckland I wouldn't hesitate to use the bus lanes.

[Quartida]

I'm sorry? There's not a single bylaw that can override an act of parliament?


What about the brothel bylaws then?

That's what bylaws are. Things that go BY the LAW. As in, here's the law, and here are some exceptions or additions.

May I also point out that you would hesitate to use the bus lanes in Auckland if you were going to be fined. Which you would be. Because i's illegal. Or, at least, not permissible BYLAW.

[Quartida]

Sorry for the double post, but I feel this needs a separate box: At least Clive Fuhr's letter seems thought out and personal. He addresses some of our concerns. He makes some good points. We can't discredit that.

[Drum]

I understand that the traffic regulations are gazetted and have the effect of being an Act of Parliament, etc.

I wont pretend to be a legal beagle or anything, but isnt the whole point of a by-law that it is a variation on an existing law. Just like the new rules that let local councils set speed limits through by-laws where previously it had to be the LTSA/ LTNZ?

You could well be right Jantar, as far as I know no one has tested the resolution of the law on this one. Any volunteers?

[Jantar]

I'm sorry? There's not a single bylaw that can override an act of parliament?


What about the brothel bylaws then?

That's what bylaws are. Things that go BY the LAW. As in, here's the law, and here are some exceptions or additions.

May I also point out that you would hesitate to use the bus lanes in Auckland if you were going to be fined. Which you would be. Because i's illegal. Or, at least, not permissible BYLAW.
Without looking up the actual legislation that legalised prostitution to get the exact wording, I think you will find that the prostitution reform act allowed local authorities to set limits, conditions etc in their district plans.

You are quite right that a bylaw is for "Things that go BY the LAW", That is not Things that BYPASS the law.

The traffic regulations DO allow Transit, or local authorities to exclude motorcycles from bus lanes, and they do it by the very simple simple method of erecting signage that specifically excludes motorcycles. It can be as simple as saying "Buses only, Motorcycles prohibited" or it can be a picture of a motorcycle with a crossed red circle. As I understand it the Auckland Motorway bus lanes do not have such signage. Until Transit erects such signs then it IS legal to use the bus lanes.

[Drum]

You dont think that the part of the Transit Bylaw which "only allows motorway bus lanes to be used by 'timetabled passenger service vehicles'", gets around this signage requirement?

I will admit I have not read the Bylaw - so this is a genuine question.

[Quartida]

Sorry Jantar, I' jumped on that one a bit much :o

I'm sure bylaws can bypass the law. But you're right, I'm not a lawyer, and I ain't going to read all the legal mumbo jumbo to find out if I'm right.

And, according to someone (Nodman?), there ARE signs on the Auckland motorway bus lanes. Perhaps we need confirmation of this?


/ EDIT: Ooh, I stand corrected about bylaws. According to a geeky studying-to-be-a-lawyer friend (everyone needs one!), "I think bylaws have to be made within the authority delegated to them by law so they would be invalid if they contradicted the law" AND "They can make bylaws that contradict national law if the legislation allows. Like the prostitution reform..."
So the question is, is the council allowed to make a bylaw about bus lanes?

If yes, then we gotta accept it, because it's in the law that they can make bylaws.

There are just too many 'laws' in this post.

[Ixion]

A bylaw is a law made under the authority of another law. Typically, parliament passes a law, and one of it's provisions says "such and such authotiy make make rules to govern X". Bylaws can only exist where permited by statute law . And only deal with such matters as the statute allows .

The Brothel Bylaw has been mentioned. It is a good example. Parliament passed to Prostitution Reform Act. A statute. One clause in that Act authorised local councils to make Bylaws to regulate the location of the brothels which the statute made legal.

So, as a statute permitted a bylaw to be passed, most city councils did so. But the bylaws were only possible because the Act permitted them and the bylaws could only go as far as the Act permitted. And a number of the bylaws have been challenged in the High Court by people who say they went beyond what the Act allowed.

So, in the case of Transit NZ. The Act that set up Transit NZ authorised it to make bylaws to regulate the state highway and motorway system.Transit made such bylaws, one of which says (in effect) "Only buses allowed in the buslanes"

Parliament has now passed another Act (Well a Road Rule technically, but it is a statutory instrument), which says motorcycles may use bus lanes unless specifically prohibited. Transit say "Piss off, we don't care , OUR bylaw says you can't".

Whether the Transit bylaw can in fact negate a later statutory provision is a doubtful point in law. Normally later legislation overides earlier. But the "bus lane" rule did not SPECIFICALLY say "despite the Transit bylaw" (as it could have). So it is a grey area, arguable either way.

And will not be settled until some deep pocketed martyr is willing to deliberatly get a ticket and fight it through the courts. It is a pity Sir Bob Jones is not a motorcyclist.

[Jantar]

No, I don't believe it does get around the signage issue. I also haven't read the bylaw, but if the quote is correct then it also excludes charter busses.

A friend of mine was an MP on the select commitee that considered this rule change. Unfortunately he lost his seat at the last election so can no longer represent us. However the rule change was targetted at allowing small, manouverable vehicles like motorcycles (and pushbikes in the cities) to use bus lanes. They recognised that there would be cases where it might not be suitable for bikes to follow the busses, so the provision was made for motorcyclists to be advised by signage.

If the wording of a bylaw was itself sufficient then how are out of town riders supposed to know which bus lanes are covered and which ones aren't?

(I might add we still do have one friend in Parliament. Our local MP has been seen on the back of her husbands HD from time to time.)

[Ixion]

Are you suggesting that bikers are socially responsible Ixion? :gob:

We are talking about specifically about the north shore busway here (as that is the only busway project Clive is involved in to my knowledge.

In this particular case I would argue that it is a better use of taxpayer dollars to build a busway than a regular traffic lane. My reason is because of the existing southbound bottleneck at the harbour bridge. There would be no point in the buslane being open to all traffic because they would all have to merge into the regular traffic lanes around Onewa Road, which is already a dogs breakfast. On the other hand though, buses using the dedicated bus lane would have a good run all the way from Sunset Rd (or so) past the stationary cagers. Surely some of them would wisen up and take the bus. Just look how full the new park 'n' ride car parks are.

In general though, I dont believe bus lanes are a particularly efficient use of pavement. A regular traffic lane has a capacity of approx 2100 vehicles per hour (ignoring merge and weave). If I remember correctly the NS bus lane is intended to carry up to 100 buses an hour southbound in the AM peak.

One of the main reasons that bus lanes are being built is because Transit made a commitment in the regional land transport strategy to provide better public transport facilities. And why did they make this committment? No, its not because they like travelling on buses, its because the public transport lobby (including The Greens) pushed hard for the inclusion of these policies.

The whole strategy went out for public consultation before decisions were made - theres not much point in whinging about it now.

You asked not whether Busways were a good idea or not, but for reasons why, assuming them to exist, motorcycles should have a better case for access than other modes of transport (ie cars) .I make no judgement about the merit or otherwise of them. But, once they are, we should be allowed to use them, because we are even more a socially efficient mode of transport (yes, indeed we are) than buses and much more so than cars.

[Drum]

Good stuff Ixion.

It appears we are all right, or wrong. Im not sure which now.

Either way, a good debate.

[Drum]

.............because we are even more a socially efficient mode of transport (yes, indeed we are) than buses and much more so than cars.

Interested in your reasoning. Not the car part - I get that.

Emissions?
Fuel consumption?
Higher contributions to the consolidated fund?

[Ixion]

Only (as far as this debate goes) in terms of roading. "Bang for the roading buck".

The purpose of spending taxpayer money on transport (of any sort - roads, bus subsidies, bridges etc) is to move people and goods to where they need to go or want to go.

The more people that can be moved per million dollars, the more efficent the spending .

Unless you are a terminal control freak there is nothing about buses, trains that makes them inherently "good" and private cars "bad"

But,runs the argument, if you spend X million dollars on providing roads for general traffic (ie, in effect, cars), you don't get much return , measured by extra people moved .Spend the same X million dollars on facilitating public transport and you move more people. Put 100 people in buses, takes less space than 100 people in cars .So a kilometre of busway moves more people than a kilometre of general motorway. Note that I'm not saying this is true. I have my doubts m'self. But it is certainly the only basis upon which spending public money on busways can be justified. Unless you take the Green approach and say that "cars are evil, full stop, and should be banned and if we can't ban them we should make the lives of people who drive them hell, and make them insanely jealous and and and " .

But, if 100 people in buses take less space than 100 people in cars, 100 people on bikes take less still (especially if we include pillions). Hence, buses more efficient than cars, but bikes more efficient than buses.

Freight is a different matter, but no-one is suggesting moving goods by either busway or bike. Though, allowing the busways to be used by heavy trucks would in fact be very sensible.

Think of it this way. Assemble 100000 people, all of whom have to get to their various destinations. Load them into cars , with the usual one person per car. Send them off down a length of road, and count how many people go past a point in an hour.

Now do the same thing but send them off in buses with "normal" peak hour loadings. Count again.

Now send them off on motorcycles some sigle some pillioning. Count again.

The most efficient transport medium is the one which gets the most people counted in the hour. I'm betting it would be bikes. Then buses. Cars last, obviously.

Of course not everyone would ride . Just as not everyone will or would take a bus. But that does not detract from the efficiency of the two wheeler.

[Drum]

..........But, if 100 people in buses take less space than 100 people in cars, 100 people on bikes take less still (especially if we include pillions). Hence, buses more efficient than cars, but bikes more efficient than buses...............

But you can get 60 odd people on a bus, and I would wager that 60 bikes take up more space than 1 bus (not too many pillion riders during the peak hours).

I dont disagree with your hypothesis, but it ignores many of the normal road factors that affect traffic flow.

So the question now is: "are motorcycles more socially responsible than buses?"

[Ixion]

I don't think they would. Bear in mind, you can get several bikes across the width. And the test was people moved. Bikes, because of their manoeverability , will more efficiently use the road space.

And you can't compare full loads on the bus (a) because they won't always be full and (b) even if the bus is full going one way it has to come back again and is unlikely to be as full on the return. You have to use an "average" load, though I'll grant you "average for peak hour" (there is no question at all that a bike is more efficient than a bus at 10pm at night, with one passenger aboard).



..So the question now is: "are motorcycles more socially responsible than buses?"..


No no. efficient. Socially efficient

I ride a two stroke. There is NO way to persuade anyone that Petal is in any way socially responsible