Wellington says no to bikes on footpath.

**crazybigal** · 20th November 2007, 14:26

these 2 bikes on the right got tickets today, one is just on the footpath by mear cm's crazy its not even in the way, well off the walking area.

**MrMelon** · 20th November 2007, 14:37

There was an even worse one I just noticed down on Grey st. The bike at the end of the bike park, which happened to be parked on tiles, but was between the last "legally" parked bike and a tree (where you can't even walk) got a ticket for parking on the footpath. Just round the corner there's a scooter that's been parked on double yellows all day and guess what. No ticket.

**rwh** · 20th November 2007, 14:48

Originally Posted by Jim2

Congestion also includes parking. Conservative estimates give 6 bikes per carpark which in most Western countries equals the number of carparks saved due to each car only having one occupant.

Sure. So if we convert one park from car to bike, we potentially have 5 more vehicles on the road. Improvement?

Sometimes I wonder why you took up motorcycles. Riding in line with traffic on the motorway in peak hour traffic is asking to get hurt. Motorcycles do not do well in nose to tail accidents, and there are a few enlightened bureaucracies such as California that actively encourage motorcycles to lane-split, both for safety's sake and reducing congestion.

The moment traffic slows to nose to tail accident speeds, 50km/hr and below, I get out of the queue.

I think it was for fun, mostly - not for commuting, although I do. However, I don't commute along the motorway, so I don't get much opportunity to lanesplit, hence don't get much practice, so don't do it most of the time. Until I do get more practice (wide gaps at traffic lights, for example), I don't fancy dodging mirrors of cars that may move in on me without warning, while bumping over catseyes. I'm sure that for those that do it regularly it's no problem.

I accept your comment about not standing up well to a car in the backside, but there are also the issues of people changing lanes having not seen me. In the middle of the lane, I have much more room to move, a better view of the cars in front, and if I'm quick enough, up to two gaps to split into if the need arises.

Trains are less energy efficient per passenger than motor vehicles.

That I'd like to see evidence of. The only energy efficiency problem I see is that they're heavier, which is only an issue during acceleration. Ok they have to stop and start at stations, but the rest of us have intersections. Ok they're pretty blunt aerodynamically, but frontal area per passenger is low. Rolling friction of a metal wheel on a metal rail is low. Perhaps the losses in getting the electrical energy all the way from the power station to the city are significant, but petrol comes further. I'm sure I've missed something, but ...

Richard

**magicfairy** · 20th November 2007, 14:51

There is a much bigger issue at stake. If bikes are not allowed to use Pay and Display that wipes out a ton of parks in town. That means legally we can only use metered parks which seem to be fewer and fewer or bike parks.
So in fact bikes are being given less options than other vehicles, even though they take up less space and cause less congestion.

The stupidity of this can only be exposed by bikes all coming into town and taking up every metered park in Wellington.

**Fatjim** · 20th November 2007, 15:13

I'd much rather get a $60 ticket for parking in a car park than on the footpath.

**Drum** · 20th November 2007, 15:14

OK so I just bumped into one of the slack jawed primates that dispense these tax notices and gave him the hard word. Apparently WCC have a 'no tolerance' approach to bikes on footpaths. He reckons they haven't had a new directive to crack down on us - must just be a coincidence right!

Anyway he didn't know the rules himself as he recommended I occupy one of the nearby multi park pay and display spaces. Moron.

When I asked him if he would give me a ticket if I parked on the asphalt, immediately adjacent to the red brick for which I got fined for parking on, he couldn't tell me. "You might be alright", was all he could muster.

He made tracks when another biker turned up. I know these guys don't make the rules, but they sure are a bunch of total tossers.

**RantyDave** · 20th November 2007, 15:24

Originally Posted by Drum

He reckons they haven't had a new directive to crack down on us - must just be a coincidence right!

Sure. Just after the elections. Coincidence. Pure fluke.

Y'know, this is exactly how rights are eroded. A little bit at a time. You have to draw the line somewhere and you have to do something other than wave your arms and get upset. I was sick of Chairman Kerry's "for the people, provided they are property developers" regime before and I'm fucking sick of it now.

Time to start harassing councillors, I think.

Dave

**dave_a** · 20th November 2007, 15:32

Wonder if they will try and do me? Im parked where about 20 other bikes park infront of the telecom building its not on the footpath so hopefully ill be right,anyway im sure it must be private property.

Also got a little foot note on my scooter parked up at home in northland,bastards left one saying if i parked on footpath again ill get a ticket,im almost out in karori up a walkway FFS do they expect me to park 50m down the road on the street for it to get stolen or trashed

**crazybigal** · 20th November 2007, 15:39

thats one job i would refuse to do, id rather shovel shit for a living!!

Originally Posted by Drum

OK so I just bumped into one of the slack jawed primates that dispense these tax notices and gave him the hard word. Apparently WCC have a 'no tolerance' approach to bikes on footpaths. He reckons they haven't had a new directive to crack down on us - must just be a coincidence right!

Anyway he didn't know the rules himself as he recommended I occupy one of the nearby multi park pay and display spaces. Moron.

When I asked him if he would give me a ticket if I parked on the asphalt, immediately adjacent to the red brick for which I got fined for parking on, he couldn't tell me. "You might be alright", was all he could muster.

He made tracks when another biker turned up. I know these guys don't make the rules, but they sure are a bunch of total tossers.

**James Deuce** · 20th November 2007, 16:56

Originally Posted by rwh

Sure. So if we convert one park from car to bike, we potentially have 5 more vehicles on the road. Improvement?

Eh what? No we have 5 more car parks available. In which you can fit 30 more open topped, two-whelled, self-guided transport pods. Freeing up 25 car parks, and so on. Bikes use less fuel and take up less room. Why are you so against the major benefits of using two wheeled transport in an urban environment?

Originally Posted by rwh

I think it was for fun, mostly - not for commuting, although I do. However, I don't commute along the motorway, so I don't get much opportunity to lanesplit, hence don't get much practice, so don't do it most of the time. Until I do get more practice (wide gaps at traffic lights, for example), I don't fancy dodging mirrors of cars that may move in on me without warning, while bumping over catseyes. I'm sure that for those that do it regularly it's no problem.

None of that is the drama you make it out to be. It's just practice. It is exceptionally useful for learning just how little space your bike takes up, and is an ideal way to practice your low speed handling skills. I never suggested lansplitting at a huge differential to traffic speed and you learn to use the vehicles on either side of you as shields.

Originally Posted by rwh

I accept your comment about not standing up well to a car in the backside, but there are also the issues of people changing lanes having not seen me. In the middle of the lane, I have much more room to move, a better view of the cars in front, and if I'm quick enough, up to two gaps to split into if the need arises.

The middle of the lane is the worst place to be in traffic. You can't see stuff in front of the car directly in front of you. You need to be able to hit the gap instantly. I use my brakes and gearbox far less while lanesplitting than I do when riding in traffic, making it both less stressful and more fuel efficient, as well as smoother.

Originally Posted by rwh

That I'd like to see evidence of. The only energy efficiency problem I see is that they're heavier, which is only an issue during acceleration. Ok they have to stop and start at stations, but the rest of us have intersections. Ok they're pretty blunt aerodynamically, but frontal area per passenger is low. Rolling friction of a metal wheel on a metal rail is low. Perhaps the losses in getting the electrical energy all the way from the power station to the city are significant, but petrol comes further. I'm sure I've missed something, but ...

Richard

http://www.lafn.org/~dave/trans/ener...vs_autoEE.html

http://www.lafn.org/~dave/trans/ener..._mt_saveE.html

The dude's a rabid greeny too, he's not working for Chrysler or Ford.

**Swoop** · 20th November 2007, 17:29

Originally Posted by judecatmad

However, given that we've currently got a cheesecutter campaign going and we do want it to be taken seriously, and for that we need as much public support as possible, which is more important? Parking or the campaign?

Why not both? If organising a group of bikers - take advantage of the opportunity.

Originally Posted by rwh

Well, you can probably find a park closer than Upper Hutt. But it's probably better to take the train in the first place.

I really don't see why we as bikers should have more rights to park than cars - if the carparks are all full, tough for them too.

And the 'bikes reduce traffic congestion' argument - do they really?

For a real improvement in efficiency of transporting commuters, mass transport is the only way.

I have seen more efficient methods of committing suicide on a bikers' forum, but yours has the potential to be much more colourful.

Originally Posted by magicfairy

There is a much bigger issue at stake. If bikes are not allowed to use Pay and Display that wipes out a ton of parks in town. That means legally we can only use metered parks which seem to be fewer and fewer or bike parks.
So in fact bikes are being given less options than other vehicles, even though they take up less space and cause less congestion.

Lets face it, politicians do not grasp the facts when faced with efficiency. Traffic buildup, parking issues and the matter of fast/efficient/inexpensive public transportation do not matter to them.

**Fatjim** · 20th November 2007, 17:35

Well I waxed all philosophical on the way home as I lane splited and darted and reved and backfired and and and.... but anyway.

Tickets are like infractions, you're just gonna get them whether your the silliest idiot (now who springs to mind here) or a Mr Hitcher. Its just life. Who cares, you can't win, the machine is all conquering. But you can have fun while riding to and from work, and I let off quite some steam tonight I can tell you.

Anyway, got home and the ticket was sitting on the dresser so I thought I'd check it out. It was only for $40, not the $60 I was expecting. Thats a dozen of beers I saved today!