I knew I could trust Herald columnist Brian Rudman to insert a bit of sanity back into the bus lanes issue that has been all over the newspaper this week. Here’s part of his article in today’s paper.
Auckland City councillor Greg Moyle’s grumpiness at being ticketed $150 for trespassing on a Symonds St bus lane is understandable. But he should be kicking himself for breaking the law, not denouncing his own organisation for “revenue gathering”. After all, he is part of the council that highlighted the $43 million central bus corridor between Britomart and Newmarket as a key part of its transport policy…
…Mr Moyle misses the point in saying he was driving safely. That’s not the issue. Creating a dedicated bus lane is about providing an uncongested, car-free busway, that allows mass transit vehicles to zap large numbers of citizens about the city according to a set timetable…
…The reason for the burgeoning passenger numbers on Auckland rail is the increased regularity and speed of the service. With electrification and new rolling stock, this explosion in patronage will continue. Bus lanes are road-based public transport’s answer to double-tracking and electrification in one. But to match rail’s new popularity, they need to be car-free, so buses can keep to their timetables, and provide regular, reliable and swift service around the city.
If motorists are so envious of the unclogged bus lane they keep straying into, there’s a simple solution. Catch a bus. I promise it won’t cost $150 a trip. From Mr Moyle’s place it’s just $1.70.
Rudman nails the point about how critical bus lanes are to shifting people more efficiently and effectively around the city, and how while it seems that the lane is empty and under-used, if everyone could flood into it then all the benefits of the bus priority would disappear. I used to catch buses up Symonds Street before the lanes went in, and it could take half an hour for the bus to get from the city to the top of the road – an absolutely outrageous length of time.
I think what has become clear is that there are actually two issue here: the first being about whether bus lanes are a good idea in general and the second being whether something can be done to improve the signage over where you can and cannot enter a bus lane.
Personally, I think that the signage issue is overblown, and that if you’re uncertain you should just err on the side of caution and cut in at 20 metres. Rudman agrees that 50 metres is being pretty generous, as it’s a bus lane, not a turning lane. But if those are the rules then we should at least make it easier for people to understand them – and some sort of marking 50 metres back from intersections at problematic points of the road would achieve that. Furthermore, if you make the signage as clear as anything then you actually take away the opportunity for people to moan about it. Of course, clearer signage means fewer people breaking the rules, which means less revenue for council – so perhaps that’s what holds them back. But I’d ideally like to see no revenue for council from bus lanes because I’d like to see nobody breaking the rules.
Processing...
Reading most comments on the Herald, it seems like there aren’t that many actually questioning bus lanes but more the distance and signage which means at least there haven’t been mass calls for bus lanes to be removed. Personally I think the comments today from the council that they are using the revenue generated of help offset rates rises is important and is something that probably could have nipped this whole thing in the bud from the start. The funny thing of course is we now have C & R politicians actively backing bus lanes, not because of the PT benefits but because there is a good commercial reason to. Its just such a shame they didn’t realise sooner and improve and extend the bus lane network before this story hit the fan as residents will now fight tooth and nail to stop bus lanes being built in their area in the future.
I think this whole issue will be over before we know it, it’s a stupid media circus over nothing IMO.
Paint the bus lanes a different colour to indicate the last 50m where cars can legally be in the lane. That is all that is needed. You only need to take the bus once in rush hour to realise how effective a dedicated bus lane is.
“I used to catch buses up Symonds Street before the lanes went in, and it could take half an hour for the bus to get from the city to the top of the road – an absolutely outrageous length of time.”
That is basically the situation in Queen Street today.
I think the legitimate question for Auckland City Council is whether the signage has been deliberately unclear to make it more likely people will drive in the bus lanes so that they can collect more money. Now I think that’s a reasonably long bow to draw, but certainly my ideal outcome would be no fines because nobody drives in the lanes when they shouldn’t.
I’m not 100% certain whether that’s the council’s ideal outcome, as it means they wouldn’t be getting any money.
Rodin, the 50m allowance is there for all turning manoeuvre’s, whether that is at an intersection, into a simple side road, or pulling into a driveway. Painting a marker 50m from an intersection could complicate the issue for other turning moves.
I did like the suggestion on one of the boards that a ‘bus lane green’ stripe be painted ever 10m on every bus lane (credit to whoever suggested it, I can’t find the reference just now). Not only does this allow anyone to judge 50m at any point (five stripes, how hard is that?), the consistent green striping would leave absolutely no doubt in any road users mind that the lane was a bus lane, handy for places like Grafton Bridge or the bits of Albert St where the bus lane comes and goes.
Anyway, I think this issue will blow over as soon as the Herald has something else to scandalise, and car drivers will go back to grumbling about traffic, congestion and parking in general rather than singling out bus lanes as the source of their disquiet.
One of the 180 to comment on nzherald.co.nz, Paul said that around the world, “bus lanes have been dismissed almost immediately and/or are treated as a stupid joke. And we introduced them – disregarding overseas painful experience”.
Arghhh… Please New Zealand Herald don’t give these people any special authority unless they can sight evidence!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10661362
“That is basically the situation in Queen Street today.”
But then Queen Street should not really be a public transport spine. It would be a retail and people street if we woke up to the fact that we need our downtowns to be liveable.
“the consistent green striping”
Is bloody expensive, actually. Hard to maintain too. They didn’t even replace the stretches of greening that got torn up when Vector dug up Symonds Street a year after the Central Connector went in. Shoddy and cheap!
Also, I don’t think this matter of people (and bloody Councillors who should know better, Mr Donnely, Mr Moyle!) whinging about being found breaking the rules – not until Council gets behind their own rules. It is always easy to whinge about something you realise the people in power aren’t to keen on themselves (Which councillors use the bus? Probably 1 out of 10).