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

[BMWST?]

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

that is a part of the councils plan.They want a proportion of all day motorcycle parkers to move their bikes of the streets

[Jon Visser]

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]

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.

[Jon Visser]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Jon Visser]

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]

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]

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

[Chocolate Boy]

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]

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]

I still call bullshit.

[centaurus]

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]

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.