Taxi drivers, cyclists want to use busway

**vifferman** · 7th February 2008, 11:02

Originally Posted by more_fasterer

It'd be great for bikes & HOV's to use the busway, but considering how ineffective it's proving for buses, I certainly don't think that'll solve any congestion issues.

That raises a very good point. When we were in Kalifornicatia, the freeways had HOV lanes, which we made good use of. Instead of the buslanes, Transit should have built an HOV lane each way down the motorway. The buslanes are a waste of resources (land AND money), as they are unused most of the time. Most of the vehicles on the road have only one occupant, so a better way to reduce traffic would be to get people to car-pool, rather than use buses, which most D'Aucklanders seem to agree are not an option.

It's always struck me as really mental that so many people travel from to work at about the same time as their neighbours, many going to the same area. My wife travelled by bus for 7 years, and whenever she had to take the car, she'd pick up people she knew from the bus who worked near her or on the way to her work, and then use the transit lane. Not that hard to do.

I know the guy across the road from me works somewhere near me, and travels the same route at about the same time, but I'm not giving him a lift on my bike. He's even older than me, and might have a coronary and fall off.

**Swoop** · 7th February 2008, 11:35

If vehicles other than busses use the busway, there will be problems.
*Cyclists really need to be seperated from moving traffic, such as seen on the NW motorway.
* Taxis are merely looking at an easy way to earn more money without aiding mas public transport.
* Private cars "high-occupancy" or not, will send a message to other cagers that they can drive there at will.
Make a seperate lane from the existing ones' (the right hand lane?) for HOV's.
* Bikes make the most sense to be allowed. High-occupancy, environmentally friendlier, and will not hold up the busses! Small scooters may pose a problem if they are unable to keep up to the required speed, but can easily be hosed off of the front of the busses. So no worries there.

Originally Posted by NighthawkNZ

I believe motocyclists have a zero case for use of the bus lane... and why should they need it... don't believe they should be allowed on a bus lane... same with push bikes and taxis...

Quiet!
Bloody south islanders don't know what traffic is!

**fireball** · 7th February 2008, 11:56

it is a whole lot of political wank

if you ask me......
mind you being an election year go moan to an MP.....

just ban cars altogether......

**fredie** · 8th February 2008, 00:43

motobikes are allowed in bus lanes here .an cabs . hire car .

**Skyryder** · 11th February 2008, 09:20

The whole idea of buslanes is to reduce traffic flows and vehicle usage at peak times like going to and from the workplace. The general population is not going to buy a bike and commute two wheels motorised or not. That only leaves the public transport system. Unless there is a viable energy alternative the car and solo occupant will become a thing of the past at peak times. It won't happen over night but bus lanes are the start of this process.

Passenger usage on busses has been rising for some time and not showing any signs of slowing down.

Skyryder

**Rockbuddy** · 11th February 2008, 09:35

cyclists should have no rights to use the road let alone the bus lanes until they start paying road user charges like the rest of the road users

**bugjuice** · 11th February 2008, 10:21

my 2¢;

don't think bycyclysists should use it, cos they're slow. And when they get to a hill, they go slower. And some get off. And then others catch up and try to get around them. Then a bus comes at 80kph and *squash*. We have messy bycyclysists stuck on the front of buses.

as for rhamadharma cabs, tons will start using them, and then it'll get clogged when one breaks down or crashes and not as many people will be on the buses, which means they'll loose their money and point of building the system in the first place. so I can see why they said no to them too.

as for motored bycyclysists, I think we should (cos I ride one too), since we take up next to no room, if Suzuki's break down (and lets face it, they do), then they can squeeze to the side of the road, and riders have a better idea of road safety (usually) to keep out of the way until help comes. But there's an issue in itself, getting the bike out of the busway system. Also think that we should really really try to obey the 80kph limit since we would be guests. If you want to go faster, then use the motorway and not abuse the system.

I can see from the owners' point of view why they've said no to everyone. It's kind of selfish in a way, but in doing so, they are minimizing their hassles. I mean, their buses have already proven to break all the time, so the last thing they want is more people clogging it up and causing accidents.

dunno now.. hate filtering in heavy traffic (kinda hate it all together, but if i must), and it's slow by comparison to an empty stretch, so it would be nice to be taken out of some danger. I know we chose that 'life style', but still.. a lil help would be nice

**swbarnett** · 11th February 2008, 12:57

Originally Posted by Rockbuddy

cyclists should have no rights to use the road let alone the bus lanes until they start paying road user charges like the rest of the road users

Cyclists cause virtually no wear and tear so there's nothing to charge them for. Besides, cage drivers don't pay road user charges, only trucks and such.

**Rockbuddy** · 11th February 2008, 21:34

Originally Posted by swbarnett

Cyclists cause virtually no wear and tear so there's nothing to charge them for. Besides, cage drivers don't pay road user charges, only trucks and such.

I pay hundreds of dollars so that i can use my cage and bikes on the road some of it goes to the acc some to transit nz, if cyclists use our roads they inturn should pay some to acc and transit, obviously it would be a smaller amount, and until they do they have no right to comment about other paying road users

**swbarnett** · 12th February 2008, 12:24

Originally Posted by Rockbuddy

I pay hundreds of dollars so that i can use my cage and bikes on the road some of it goes to the acc some to transit nz, if cyclists use our roads they inturn should pay some to acc and transit, obviously it would be a smaller amount, and until they do they have no right to comment
about other paying road users

I thought we were talking about road user charges.

Agreed that cyclists should pay ACC etc. like the rest of us. In Switzerland you had to pay $5/year that gave you third party insurance to the tune of Fr2million (no ACC over there, compulsary health insurance).

**grusomhat** · 13th February 2008, 14:10

Originally Posted by swbarnett

Cyclists cause virtually no wear and tear so there's nothing to charge them for. Besides, cage drivers don't pay road user charges, only trucks and such.

They don't pay RUC the same way as Deisel vehicles but they are charged it as part of the price of petrol.

**swbarnett** · 13th February 2008, 15:15

Originally Posted by grusomhat

They don't pay RUC the same way as Deisel vehicles but they are charged it as part of the price of petrol.

And how much of that goes towards the roads?

Besides, we pay less than cars and trucks through petrol because we use less. Same applies to bicycles.

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance. As bikers we expect breaks because we contribute less to environmental issues, congestion etc. It only stands to reason that we extend the same courtesy to cyclists.

**grusomhat** · 13th February 2008, 20:45

Originally Posted by swbarnett

And how much of that goes towards the roads?

Besides, we pay less than cars and trucks through petrol because we use less. Same applies to bicycles.

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance. As bikers we expect breaks because we contribute less to environmental issues, congestion etc. It only stands to reason that we extend the same courtesy to cyclists.

I don't know but I'd say a decent amount. I know that around 47% of petrol price is tax. I can't remember exact figure but it's almost half. So I'd say that at least 10% of that is RUC's

I agree that cyclist should be left alone and alowed to continue using the roads at no cost as they aren't doing any damage to the roads. If everyone in NZ started biking then the roads would last a lot longer and normal taxes would probably cover the roading. Which would be very minimal. So cyclists should never have to pay to use the roads no matter what percentage of people are cycling.

**HTFU** · 13th February 2008, 20:57

Originally Posted by swbarnett

And how much of that goes towards the roads?

Besides, we pay less than cars and trucks through petrol because we use less. Same applies to bicycles.

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance. As bikers we expect breaks because we contribute less to environmental issues, congestion etc. It only stands to reason that we extend the same courtesy to cyclists.

Agree.

Cyclists pay for it in replacement tubes and puncture repair kits. Anyone that has commuted by pushy knows how much glass the City councils and Transit are not sweeping off the roads.