Traffic Chaos Trafalger Square - Wednesday Mornings

gordon861

Hello from an ex-pushbiker and current motorcyle rider (might go back to the pushbike sometime, need to get fit).

I just thought I'd post on here as a large number of cyclists seem to be unaware of what's happening each week in Trafalger Square with the motorcycles. I figured I'd post here in the hope that they might find the info on here because we don't get a chance to talk to many on the road as they get through the traffic fairly quickly.

The demos that are taking place are being organised by a group against Westminster Councils decision to start charging motorcycles to park on their streets www.notobikeparkingtax.com

The decision to start these events was only taken after being ignored for the last two years by Westminster despite 4,000 bikes turning up at their Town Hall on a couple of occasions, and filling lots of objections to the 'experimental' scheme. When first introduced we were promised proper bays and real security for our payment, in the two years it has been going nothing has been implimented.

Another problem with the scheme is that you need to register and pay by mobile, so you are left standing outside in all weather with your mobile in one hand and your credit card in the other, shouting your numbers into the phone.

So what does this have to do with cyclists?
Well the likelyhood is, that once Westminster have got this scheme in place and accepted there is a good chance they will start doing the same thing for a number of cycle sites as well, and you will be next. They will probably issue you with some sort of metal sticker to attach to the handlebars with a ref number or something. Also it will then spread out across London and the rest of the country like a virus.

So there you have it, we are going to be there every Wednesday morning and some evenings as well.

We are sorry if you get caught up in the mess and do what we can to leave enough space for the cycles to get through.

(PS Mods - I wasn't sure if this was the best place to post this, please move it to a better location if you can think of one.)

markshaw77

Thanks - I wondered what was going on this morning - it was pretty chaotic when I came through!

TBH, they are so busy removing what little cycle parking there is to make way for Boris' electric hire bikes that there wont be much left to charge for :evil: :evil:

As for registering bikes, I think they will have a hard time enforcing it as it would imply every occasional cyclist parking in the borough would need a "sticker" which ain't going to happen (not an issue for cars/motorbike given the registration plates). Besides, there are plenty of other options available for cyclists (locking to street furniture, etc)which they would struggle to police.

spen666

Why shouldn't motorcycles pay for parking? motorcars and motorised vans do, so why should motorised cycles be exempt?

MadammeMarie

Thanks for the info, Gordon! Hope you guys win your fight. Westminster Council is the worst!

gordon861

spen666 wrote:

Why shouldn't motorcycles pay for parking? motorcars and motorised vans do, so why should motorised cycles be exempt?

Could probably make the same argument for pedal cycles as well.

The problem isn't so much the charge, it's the charge for no return to us. We, like you, are often given over space to park in that is of no use to anyone else. The dark corner under a tree or an area that is often flooded. Until now we've not been charged and cycles/motorcycles (normally) don't cause congestion and are therefore part of the solution to keeping the roads flowing and therefore shouldn't be discouraged.

How would you feel if your local council decided that any bike parked in a designated location in their borough had to be registered with them and pay a pound a day? And then said that any pushbike locked to any other piece of street furniture would be removed. I expect there would be a large number of pushbikes on the road doing exactly the same as we are right now.

When they come for the pushbikes they might not say all bike bays have to be charged for, they might just start with a couple. So maybe 25% of riders will be happy to pay, the other 75% will try to squeeze into other existing locations of locked up to street furniture. Once pushbikes start to be a hazard in some locations due to being locked to street furniture they will start cutting locks and charging you £50 to get your bike back.

If this gets rolled out nationally you can almost guarantee that you will be next.

W1

gordon861 wrote:

If this gets rolled out nationally you can almost guarantee that you will be next.

I doubt it, we're green and untouchable, apparently!

Porgy

I doubt it too. Motorbikes pollute worse than cars and create terrible noise pollution too. Bicycles are clean and green. Besides I've started taking my bike indoors now - rarely leave it in the street due to risk of theft.

gordon861

Porgy wrote:

Motorbikes pollute worse than cars ...

LOL ... sorry just LOL

Might be an argument when you compare the polution per person of a motorbike to a full modern economical car, but a single occupency car, not likely.

jonginge

Everything else aside, cheers Gordon for the heads up.

W1

gordon861 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Motorbikes pollute worse than cars ...

LOL ... sorry just LOL

Might be an argument when you compare the polution per person of a motorbike to a full modern economical car, but a single occupency car, not likely.

Gordon, whilst you're here (and I appreciate you coming on here to give us this info) what's your view on motorbikes using bicycle filter lanes and ASLs? Genuine question.

Porgy

gordon861 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Motorbikes pollute worse than cars ...

LOL ... sorry just LOL

Might be an argument when you compare the polution per person of a motorbike to a full modern economical car, but a single occupency car, not likely.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... ortintheuk

The paper's here:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0 ... ode=esthag
http://josiah.berkeley.edu/MiniProjects ... ution.html

gordon861

W1 wrote:

Gordon, whilst you're here (and I appreciate you coming on here to give us this info) what's your view on motorbikes using bicycle filter lanes and ASLs? Genuine question.

Filter lanes I avoid if at all possible esp if there's a pushbike in there, but of course the dotted ones other vehicles are allowed to go into them they just aren't allowed to stop. The solid ones I just avoid, also they are usually on the inside lane, motorbikes normally try to stay on the outside.

I'll admit I often also move into the ASL areas but normally on the offside and I'll also make sure that any pushbikes that arrive after me have room to get right in front of any car that is waiting at the lights. Normally I find I'm off from the lights before the pushbike has started to move to they aren't obstructed by me.

Before the ASLs were officially added both pushbikes and motorbikes used to pull in front of the traffic at lights etc and still do, even where there are no ASL.

As I mentioned I used to cycle, did about 40miles a day commuting (through Southall), so I know a lot of the issues you guys face on the roads and there are a lot of problems pushbikes and motorcycles share, esp the old "Sorry Mate I Didn't See You" that turns in front of you, or the lorry that hasn't bothered looking at the road straight in front of him.

I would like motorcycles to officially be able to use the ASLs but I'm worried that some motorcyclists would attempt to bully pushbike riders instead of respecting their right to be there. At the moment the police seem to mostly turn a blind eye to motorcycles using them, which means the motorcyclists acknowledge that we are there sort of unofficially in cyclists space.

I think there is space for all of us on the roads and extra visibilty of a motorcycle should be used to help keep cars out of the ASLs or jump red lights. I think that since motorbikes have been using bus lanes it has encouraged car drivers to pay a lot more attention to what's in there before just pulling across them and racing off, because a pushbike isn't likely to chase you out of their way to show you how displeased you are with their driving but a motorcycle can out run and catch up with a car and pass on the message.

I don't see motorcycles and pushbikes as much different except for the method of propulsion. I think we should all be looking out for each other in the traffic.

Porgy

I appreciate any support on the roads from sympathetic motorcyclists - I was often bullied by motorcyclists when still new to London's roads - with considerably fewer cyclists about in those days (late 80s).

However when it comes to paying for use of roads and parking facilities the underlying principle should be polluter pays. Motorbikes pollute. Motorcyclists should pay. End of story.

greg66_tri_v2.0

gordon861 wrote:

I think we should all be looking out for each other in the traffic.

Agree. It's the tribalism (all taxi drivers are assholes, all drivers are dangerous, all cyclists are freeloading tax-dodging obstacles, etc ad nauseam) that breed tension and help to create conflict.

spen666

gordon861 wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Why shouldn't motorcycles pay for parking? motorcars and motorised vans do, so why should motorised cycles be exempt?

Could probably make the same argument for pedal cycles as well.

....

The difference is you are MOTOR cycles and like MOTOR cars, you are driving or riding MOTORIZED vehicles

Greg T

Motorcyclists should have to pay road tax, register their bikes and have insurance.

Oh hang on

W1

Porgy wrote:

However when it comes to paying for use of roads and parking facilities the underlying principle should be polluter pays. Motorbikes pollute. Motorcyclists should pay. End of story.

But they do already, through the taxes motorcycles pay on fuel, servicing, parts. And anyway, what will be done with the money? Buy more ozone? A charge for parking is a money raiser, nothing less.

My problem with motorbikes is that they should be sympathetic to cyclists for exactly the reasons that Gordon mentions - but, in my experience (and apologies for the generalisation) motorbikes are the most guilty when it comes to passing too close, too fast, blocking filter zones, blocking ASL lanes, filling ASLs thereby excluding cyclists and generally showing little consideration for other road users. Obviously this is a minority, but it is a large minority compared to cars/lorries. All my opinion, obviously, but supported by my daily experiences on the roads.

Porgy

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

However when it comes to paying for use of roads and parking facilities the underlying principle should be polluter pays. Motorbikes pollute. Motorcyclists should pay. End of story.

But they do already, through the taxes motorcycles pay on fuel, servicing, parts. And anyway, what will be done with the money? Buy more ozone? A charge for parking is a money raiser, nothing less.

Parking fees are intended to act as a deterrent for bringing motor vehicles into central London - what happens to the money is irelevent if they work as a deterent. I'm not exactly a fan of westminster Council btw - nor do I agree with their parking policy gnerally - but the underlying principles are quite clear.

i can't see any reason why motorcyclists should get special treatment that motorists don;t get.

spen666

gordon861 wrote:

W1 wrote:

Gordon, whilst you're here (and I appreciate you coming on here to give us this info) what's your view on motorbikes using bicycle filter lanes and ASLs? Genuine question.

Filter lanes I avoid if at all possible esp if there's a pushbike in there, but of course the dotted ones other vehicles are allowed to go into them they just aren't allowed to stop. The solid ones I just avoid, also they are usually on the inside lane, motorbikes normally try to stay on the outside.

I'll admit I often also move into the ASL areas but normally on the offside and I'll also make sure that any pushbikes that arrive after me have room to get right in front of any car that is waiting at the lights. Normally I find I'm off from the lights before the pushbike has started to move to they aren't obstructed by me.

Before the ASLs were officially added both pushbikes and motorbikes used to pull in front of the traffic at lights etc and still do, even where there are no ASL.

As I mentioned I used to cycle, did about 40miles a day commuting (through Southall), so I know a lot of the issues you guys face on the roads and there are a lot of problems pushbikes and motorcycles share, esp the old "Sorry Mate I Didn't See You" that turns in front of you, or the lorry that hasn't bothered looking at the road straight in front of him.

I would like motorcycles to officially be able to use the ASLs but I'm worried that some motorcyclists would attempt to bully pushbike riders instead of respecting their right to be there. At the moment the police seem to mostly turn a blind eye to motorcycles using them, which means the motorcyclists acknowledge that we are there sort of unofficially in cyclists space.

I think there is space for all of us on the roads and extra visibilty of a motorcycle should be used to help keep cars out of the ASLs or jump red lights. I think that since motorbikes have been using bus lanes it has encouraged car drivers to pay a lot more attention to what's in there before just pulling across them and racing off, because a pushbike isn't likely to chase you out of their way to show you how displeased you are with their driving but a motorcycle can out run and catch up with a car and pass on the message.

I don't see motorcycles and pushbikes as much different except for the method of propulsion. I think we should all be looking out for each other in the traffic.

The more you type, the more you comer over as selfish IMHO

You object to paying like other MOTOR vehicles have to for parking.

Its ok for others to pay as long as you don't have to

Its ok for you to deliberately block the roads if you do not get your own way

You clearly do not know the law re cycle lanes

You openly admit to breaking the law re ASLs when it suits you, irrespective of the fact it is a criminal offence


Re cycle lanes - Rule 140 of The Highway Code ( remember it is a code, not the law states....

140
Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply

Unavoidable does not mean because you are a selfish twonk and want to get to your destination a few seconds faster

W1

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

However when it comes to paying for use of roads and parking facilities the underlying principle should be polluter pays. Motorbikes pollute. Motorcyclists should pay. End of story.

But they do already, through the taxes motorcycles pay on fuel, servicing, parts. And anyway, what will be done with the money? Buy more ozone? A charge for parking is a money raiser, nothing less.

Parking fees are intended to act as a deterrent for bringing motor vehicles into central London - what happens to the money is irelevent if they work as a deterent. I'm not exactly a fan of westminster Council btw - nor do I agree with their parking policy gnerally - but the underlying principles are quite clear.

i can't see any reason why motorcyclists should get special treatment that motorists don;t get.

Because they take up less room (both for parking and in traffic) thereby reducing congestion? If each car driver was a on a motorbike, there would be much less congestion (though I note your linked article on pollution which makes interesting reading). Surely that should be encouraged?

Porgy

If motorbikes can be made cleaner and quieter then I'd agree with you - maybe - the fact that they take up less space does help with congestion, but if every motorist changed to a motorbike next week just imagine the extra pollution and the noise we'd have to endure...speaking as someone who lived in Central London for 10 years.

spen666

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

...

i can't see any reason why motorcyclists should get special treatment that motorists don;t get.

Because they take up less room (both for parking and in traffic) thereby reducing congestion? If each car driver was a on a motorbike, there would be much less congestion (though I note your linked article on pollution which makes interesting reading). Surely that should be encouraged?

They are accordingly charged less for parking, pay lower VED etc.

There is no reason to exempt them and make someone else pick up the tab for the lost income

Porgy

Don't motorbikes get to enter the congestion zone for free too?

greg66_tri_v2.0

Porgy wrote:

Parking fees are intended to act as a deterrent for bringing motor vehicles into central London

Disagree with that. If they were, they'd be much, much higher (think: £30 per hour). They're pitched, like the congestion charge, to affect the behaviour of a small minority, but to regarded by the vast majority as a necessary and manageable pain.

I seriously doubt Westminster would like to have empty streets and zero parking revenue.

Porgy

Greg66 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Parking fees are intended to act as a deterrent for bringing motor vehicles into central London

Disagree with that. If they were, they'd be much, much higher (think: £30 per hour). They're pitched, like the congestion charge, to affect the behaviour of a small minority, but to regarded by the vast majority as a necessary and manageable pain.

I seriously doubt Westminster would like to have empty streets and zero parking revenue.

Well that was the principle behind decisions to ramp up parking controls a decade or so ago - however - like anything compromise, mismanagement and politics have watered it down so it doesn't work like it should.

W1

Porgy wrote:

If motorbikes can be made cleaner and quieter then I'd agree with you - the fact that they take up less space does help with congestion, but if every motorist changed to a motorbike next week just imagine the extra pollution and the noise we'd have to endure...speaking as someone who lived in Central London for 10 years.

Charging motorbikes to park won't make them cleaner and quieter, it might discourage their use but that will just add more cars to the road (increasing congestion and pollution) or more likely cram more people onto public transport (a quality of life argument, much like pollution - noise or air). Motorcycles should be encouraged. Cycling is already (as we all know) the best/cheapest way to get around, but it's not practical for everyone.

I've not read the studies behind the article but no doubt you have - were these motorbikes in general that are more polluting or was it broken down by size? Bearing in mind most motorbikes in London are 50cc mopeds.

gordon861

Porgy wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... ortintheuk

The paper's here:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0 ... ode=esthag
http://josiah.berkeley.edu/MiniProjects ... ution.html

OK taking a look at the Guardian story.
First it's 4.5 years old, the emmissions on bikes have improved a lot since then, most larger bikes going fuel injected. Also reading the story they tested 50cc and 800-1150cc motorcycles which are probably the worst range to test for a cummuting study.

Most commuting is done on bikes of between 125 cc and 600cc. A 50cc motorcycle/moped will probably be restricted(and geared) to do 30mph so it will mean that most of the time it will be running at near 100% of it's power, this is not a clean way to run a bike. In the same way as if your do any distance at close to your own personal max speed on your pushbike you will fatigue much quicker than if you are taking it easy.

125cc is the limit before you do your test, these bikes can do 50mph fairly easily so will be a lot more happy at commuting speeds. The logical step up from a 125cc if you just want a little more power is a 250cc and these are also very economical.

The next 'band' of commuting bike is the 500/600cc bike, these are very happy at motorway speeds and above so are often used for commuting from further away. These bikes are also fairly light and manouverable in traffic so work well as commuters.

Once you get to the 850-1200cc band you are into heavy bikes often capable of speeds in excess of 130-150mph. These bikes are generally too heavy to commute with easily and the owners often use them for long distance riding as well.

Also modern bikes often burn fuel very efficiently. For a comparison, I ride a 600cc Honda and my car is a 999cc Toyota Aygo. Both do about the same mpg, the car is generally a little less, that might be my driving but my riding style hardly effects my bikes mpg. The bike produces 102bhp from 600cc but the car is only producing 68bhp from 999cc, that sounds pretty efficent use of fuel to me. But if the car has multiple people in it it is a much more efficent use of the fuel.

Picking those bikes to do the study with screws with the figures you will get out. It would be like me using a BMX and a low end mountain bike to work out how much energy is used when you cycle to work. Really I'd get a more truthful result if I used a regular road bike or a hybrid to calculate the figures.

cjcp

Porgy wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Parking fees are intended to act as a deterrent for bringing motor vehicles into central London

Disagree with that. If they were, they'd be much, much higher (think: £30 per hour). They're pitched, like the congestion charge, to affect the behaviour of a small minority, but to regarded by the vast majority as a necessary and manageable pain.

I seriously doubt Westminster would like to have empty streets and zero parking revenue.

Well that was the principle behind decisions to ramp up parking controls a decade or so ago - however - like anything compromise, mismanagement and politics have watered it down so it doesn't work like it should.

That was the publicly-stated principle. Since the operators of the congestion zone were a proft-making organisation, there was a conflict between the notion of reducing the number of cars on the road and making money.

W1

spen666 wrote:

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

...

i can't see any reason why motorcyclists should get special treatment that motorists don;t get.

Because they take up less room (both for parking and in traffic) thereby reducing congestion? If each car driver was a on a motorbike, there would be much less congestion (though I note your linked article on pollution which makes interesting reading). Surely that should be encouraged?

They are accordingly charged less for parking, pay lower VED etc.

There is no reason to exempt them and make someone else pick up the tab for the lost income

What lost income? The council are looking for extra income!

Same argument can apply to us of course!

greg66_tri_v2.0

Porgy wrote:

Well that was the principle behind decisions to ramp up parking controls a decade or so ago - however - like anything compromise, mismanagement and politics have watered it down so it doesn't work like it should.

But can that be right? If the policy behind ramping up parking controls is to deter parking and so deter cars from entering the borough, isn't the solution to paint double yellows on every piece of road in the borough, so removing anywhere to park?

Porgy

Greg66 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Well that was the principle behind decisions to ramp up parking controls a decade or so ago - however - like anything compromise, mismanagement and politics have watered it down so it doesn't work like it should.

But can that be right? If the policy behind ramping up parking controls is to deter parking and so deter cars from entering the borough, isn't the solution to paint double yellows on every piece of road in the borough, so removing anywhere to park?

It's a bit of both - obviously people still need to park so extra parking restrictions such as yellow lines, removing areas where you can park and where you can park the cost goes up.

I remember reading various documents from my time in the Green Party when councils had their "green awakening" - but yes - essentially i agree with you they have become money raising ventures - bloody councils eh?