Safer Journeys for Motorcycling

[riffer]

My daily commute from Kapiti to Welly ( on a Road of National significance) encounters all road engineering issues multiple times. Case in point the observation about vegetation and unrestricted sight lines through intersections had me rolling about laughing. The Mana roundabout on SH 1 is full of lovely plants. When this was raised with NZTA as a hazard the response was that it is "a deliberate traffic calming method" .

Sounds like a different communication approach would be beneficial Paul. How about we retarget NZTA on this one, citing page 42 of the Report, where they show the dangers of obstructed sightlines?

[riffer]

I would love to see something in writing from NZTA actually stating that they have a policy of reducing sightlines in order to calm traffic.

[MSTRS:Me]

I would love to see something in writing from NZTA actually stating that they have a policy of reducing sightlines in order to calm traffic.

Wait awhile - it'll come.

2-3 years ago, I spoke with a NZTA rep who told me about their policy re removing roadside hazards. Basically it boiled down to "A motorist doesn't deserve to die because they make a mistake".
Only recently has this been put in print for public consumption.

[riffer]

Wait awhile - it'll come.

2-3 years ago, I spoke with a NZTA rep who told me about their policy re removing roadside hazards. Basically it boiled down to "A motorist doesn't deserve to die because they make a mistake".
Only recently has this been put in print for public consumption.

I think you misunderstand. My post referred to Bald Eagle's statement that NZTA had said they were using overgrown vegetation (thus reducing sightlines) as a method of calming traffic. Such statements seem to be in direct contravention with NZTA's Report which stresses that reducing vegetation in order to create better sightlines for motorcyclists would have a beneficial outcome for motorcyclists.

[allycatz]

Sounds like a different communication approach would be beneficial Paul. How about we retarget NZTA on this one, citing page 42 of the Report, where they show the dangers of obstructed sightlines?

Interesting comment...when the over planted and too tall vegetation on a the round-a-bout in Ihakara St (Kapiti) proved to be a hazard, the residents from Metlife Village yelled loudly at the council and it was trimmed. I wonder if motorcylists had complained it would of gotten the same result

[MSTRS:Me]

I think you misunderstand. My post referred to Bald Eagle's statement that NZTA had said they were using overgrown vegetation (thus reducing sightlines) as a method of calming traffic. Such statements seem to be in direct contravention with NZTA's Report which stresses that reducing vegetation in order to create better sightlines for motorcyclists would have a beneficial outcome for motorcyclists.

Oh no, I do understand.
What I tried (badly?) to say is that what they say is policy doesn't always match what is in print...

[riffer]

Interesting comment...when the over planted and too tall vegetation on a the round-a-bout in Ihakara St (Kapiti) proved to be a hazard, the residents from Metlife Village yelled loudly at the council and it was trimmed. I wonder if motorcylists had complained it would of gotten the same result

Well, when we approached NZTA regarding the barbed wire on the cheescutters in Kaikoura, they had it sorted within 48 hours.

[rustic101]

Not relevant.

Safer Journeys is not a MOTONZ initiative. It's NZTA.

Bullshit its very relevant.

MOTONZ have communicated with me directly (I have numerous emails from Phil Wright and co) which very clearly state they (MOTO"NZ) were establish and support work not being done by any other group or Agency. Even their web states this between all the bull shit (MOTO NZ has been established with a simple purpose: to use the funds gathered from motorcyclists and other riders to make riding safer.)".

I have challenged them on this several times as most if not all of their Work/ Projects/ Bullshit is already being done or has been done by other Agencies. NZTA is just one example, if Safer Journeys (Motorcycling) is not about rider safety then fuck I must be a real muppet! ergo:

Safer Journeys for Motorcycling' in a nutshell

The 'Safer Journeys for Motorcycling' guide reflects the Safe System approach. It considers motorcycling safety from the perspective of:

• safe roads and roadsides
• safe road use
• safe speed, and
• safe vehicles.

'Safer Journeys for Motorcyclists' will:

• provide guidance on the implementation of safety treatments on high-risk motorcycling routes
• reflect international best-practice, input from stakeholders, and the results of pilot projects, and
• provide advice on how to identify, assess and prioritise high-risk routes using crash data and input from riders and other key stakeholders.

BTW, C.A.S has not been used for some time, there is a new system in place.

[cheshirecat]

And here in Devon where they be all hedgerows and some pretty fast A roads, they are taking the initiative which might serve as a guidence to the powers.
Note things like the European Standard for skid resistance of manhole covers is EN124, ie they have one. Do we?
Traffic calming got one point and rider education got 242 when riders were asked on the problems of MC accident prevention.

[Berries]

BTW, C.A.S has not been used for some time, there is a new system in place.

Nah. There is a slimline version under development which is referred to in post 19, but CAS is still very much the tool being used.

As for your other comments, I laughed at the way 'Motorcyclists Own the Options' are portrayed in the document as if they represent motorcyclists. Does the compulsory taking of my hard earned give them that authority? Stand them on their own two feet requiring voluntary paid membership and we'll see how they go. So far I have seen nothing from them so I can't say I am disappointed as that is what I was expecting.

[davereid]

...MOTONZ have communicated with me directly ... which very clearly state they (MOTO"NZ) were establish and support work not being done by any other group or Agency. Even their web states this between all the bull shit (MOTO NZ has been established with a simple purpose: to use the funds gathered from motorcyclists and other riders to make riding safer.)".

I couldnt agree with you more about MOTO-NZ who in my opinion are taking the money acquired, and simply using it to to do research and fund systems that were already funded by ACC or NZTA who must be laughing their budgetary heads off.

I'm a bit more cautious around safer journeys. While it says all the right things, it often pays to look at what is not said, and what has changed.

So what has changed ?

Safer journeys acknowledges that people f up, and therefore sets up a best practice model to make the effects of an f-up less significant.

I see this as very scary for people who knowingly choose a form of transport (possibly) 18 times more likely to result in injury than the safest cars.

It also talks about "transport" as if thats all vehicles are. It thus excludes all the other reasons people may own vehicles.

In fact my elderly auntie chose her car for transport. But I choose vehicles with transport as the 3rd 4th or 5th criteria.

I ride (3) different motorcycles regularly because I LIKE them. I ride another two SOMETIMES because I like them, but they are a transport liability. I have old cars, V8s and all sorts of impratical vehicles because I like them.


So, I see that safer journeys will make different assessments than I make. And that as I choose non ideal transport, I will be penalised.

[Hitcher]

Don't get distracted by who has authored this report or who should have authored it with whose money. That is irrelevant.

What is important is that this report exists and it will be used to create government policy, if that task hasn't already been done. Remember that a submission process isn't about democracy in the sense that an election or referendum is. Submissions are about uncovering ideas and possible solutions that policy wonks haven't. Submissions are about tweaking, not about significant change. Submissions are about letting people have their say. They will all get entered into a spreadsheet and "analysed".

Moto NZ is a sop that was spawned by the Bikoi. Its representativeness is questionable, particularly any implied mandate it may have to speak on behalf of motorcyclists. Its agenda is not within its own control. It will follow an easy path for as long as it is funded. Not that this matters a jot in terms of the issue currently before us.

[BMWST?]

look no further than the roundabouts at Maungaraki overpass for restricted sightlines,or the newish roundabout at the sh1 exit to tawa .ASs you come to the roundabout you cannot get a clear sighline to the right because of grass/and the bank.I think the contour of the bank is deliberate tp blocjk the view of the road

[riffer]

look no further than the roundabouts at Maungaraki overpass for restricted sightlines,or the newish roundabout at the sh1 exit to tawa .ASs you come to the roundabout you cannot get a clear sighline to the right because of grass/and the bank.I think the contour of the bank is deliberate tp blocjk the view of the road

Good points. I will discuss these with those I know at NZTA on Tuesday.

[riffer]

Don't get distracted by who has authored this report or who should have authored it with whose money. That is irrelevant.

What is important is that this report exists and it will be used to create government policy, if that task hasn't already been done. Remember that a submission process isn't about democracy in the sense that an election or referendum is. Submissions are about uncovering ideas and possible solutions that policy wonks haven't. Submissions are about tweaking, not about significant change. Submissions are about letting people have their say. They will all get entered into a spreadsheet and "analysed".

Moto NZ is a sop that was spawned by the Bikoi. Its representativeness is questionable, particularly any implied mandate it may have to speak on behalf of motorcyclists. Its agenda is not within its own control. It will follow an easy path for as long as it is funded. Not that this matters a jot in terms of the issue currently before us.

True, true and true. We need to find out the stuff they haven't thought of.