spinofflive
Is the Cambridge Terrace bike lane the secret killer?
Is the Cambridge Terrace bike lane the secret killer?

WellingtonSeptember 10, 2024

The mystery of the killer bike lane

Is the Cambridge Terrace bike lane the secret killer?
Is the Cambridge Terrace bike lane the secret killer?

A chain of three cafes closed down and the owner blamed cycleways. But none of the cafes were anywhere near one. What is happening? Joel MacManus investigates. 

Last week, the people of Wellington reacted with shock to the news that Pandoro Panetteria would be closing its three cafe and bakery locations. In a letter taped to his cafe window, owner Tony Beazley blamed cycle lanes for the closure, alongside the economic downturn and public service layoffs. But that begged the question, which cycle lane was at fault? 

The Pandoro on Woodward St is next to a pedestrian laneway, but there’s no cycle lane to be seen. The nearest one is on Whitmore Street, 270 metres away. The Pandoro on Willis St doesn’t have one either. There’s a curb that I once crashed a Beam scooter into while eating a pie with one hand, but no bike lane. The closest thing that could be considered a bike lane is the path around the waterfront, 420 metres away over the City to Sea bridge. 

By process of elimination, the business-killing cycleway must surely be at the third Pandoro, the original site on the corner of Wakefield and Allen St. According to a Stuff article, “Foot traffic had been killed off by construction work, cycle and bus lanes on Wakefield Street.” Finally, a lead! I put on my reporter hat and went down there to question the Wakefield Street cycle lane for myself. But when I arrived, I discovered something chilling: It doesn’t exist. There is no cycle lane or bus lane on Wakefield Street, and there never has been.

Perhaps there was some confusion? In the same article, Baezley blamed “the cycle lane and bus lanes coming off Cambridge Terrace” – but that doesn’t make sense either. Cambridge Terrace is 300m away and the bus and bike lanes don’t go in the direction of Wakefield St. 

This isn’t the first time business owners have reported mysterious accounts of deadly but invisible cycleways. A florist in Newtown has repeatedly told media a cycleway “destroyed” “ruined” and had been a “king hit” for her business – but there is no cycleway outside it and there were never any on-street car parks. Last year, UFS Pharmacy on Courtenay Place closed, blaming the Golden Mile project which includes a cycleway past the shop – but that work had not started and isn’t due to start for at least another year

What is going on? Are these bike lanes secretly moving around in the night? Is the ghost of Wishbone involved? The mystery consumed me. I became obsessed. I retreated to my room for days, creating a complex web of pins and twine,  shouting “Pepe Silvia” at random intervals. 

‘Hutt Valley, Kāpiti, down to the south coast. Our Wellington coverage is powered by members.’
Joel MacManus
— Wellington editor

Then on Saturday, I found the answer in the most unlikely of places: an opinion piece in The Post by multi-millionaire tech entrepreneur Luke Pierson. The headline was “Meet Wellington’s new elite – cyclists”. Suddenly, everything fell into place. All these strange, inconsistent claims have a simple explanation. There has been a tear in the fabric of spacetime that sucked some of our fellow citizens into a parallel reality within the same universe, sort of like the Upside Down from Stranger Things. It seems to mostly be business owners, newspaper letter writers, and uncles.  

“It’s time someone said what we’re all thinking: the cycleways have no cyclists,” Pierson wrote. This is a big giveaway that he’s in the Upside Down. In the version of Wellington I am currently experiencing (assuming this is the real Wellington) there are clearly way more cyclists than there used to be. Trying to deny that fact would be absurd, it is obvious to anyone with eyes. Compared to two years ago, cycling is up 118% on Cambridge Terrace, 76% in Thorndon, and 26% in Oriental Bay. In the other dimension, apparently no one uses the bike lanes, and they must be in slightly different locations. 

a bike lane in wellington
A bike lane on Wellington’s harbour, heading towards the airport Photo: Wellington City Council

Pierson, whose house won a Home of the Year award and was featured in Home Magazine, was greatly concerned about elitism from people using one of the cheapest forms of transport. He defined Wellington’s overclass of pedal-lords as: “Tertiary educated, able bodied, professional knowledge workers with end-of-trip facilities, a spare $10k for an e-bike, and flexible working arrangements… quite a privileged group, don’t you think? And very small. I’ve run some numbers, and I reckon they represent well under 5% of the city’s population”.

The version of Wellington that exists in the other dimension must have very different demographics. Here are some numbers from our reality:

  • 69% (nice) of jobs in Wellington are knowledge work roles in management, professional services or administration. 
  • 47% of Wellingtonians have a bachelor’s degree or higher, the highest rate in New Zealand.
  • Only 4.2% of Wellingtonians reported having a physical activity limitation.  
  • Oh, and e-bikes don’t cost $10,000. Here’s a brand new one for $1,399 at Evo Cycles

Pierson argued anyone outside the “elite” demographic would not adopt cycling. “I doubt it will be busy parents on the school run. With the exception of an incredibly fit few, it won’t be the elderly, either.” This is another clue about the differences between the two worlds. In our reality, baby boomers are the fastest-growing market segment for e-bike sales, and parents with kids on e-bikes are an increasingly common sight around town.

A partial map of Wellington’s planned cycleway network.

It’s as if the other reality is stuck in the past. Pierson seems to be aware that e-bikes exist, so the timelines can’t have diverted that much, but he thinks they still cost $10,000. My guess is he is living sometime in the late 2000s. 

After piecing all the evidence together, here is my best theory of what has happened: 

It was an early Monday morning at Lake Karapiro on November 2, 2009. Prime minister John Key strode across a grassy embankment smiling and waving at a small cluster of media. He picked up a shiny metal spade and raised it to the sky, the handle gleaming a spark from the morning sun. In one swift, forceful motion, John Key thrust his blade downwards, deeply penetrating the moist, dewy earth. It was the official sod-turning ceremony for the first part of the New Zealand Cycle Trail, the largest investment the government has ever made in cycling infrastructure. The idea of right-wing support for cycling must have created a bubble of confused, undirected rage from talkback radio callers so severe it caused a rupture in time itself. 

When the prime minister separated that dirt from the ground, he was also separating our universes. This explains why so many people are convinced that Sir John Key is still prime minister – because in their world, he is.

I tried to call Key to ask if he knew how to put the fabric of time and space back together but he must have changed his number.

Keep going!
Image: The Spinoff
Image: The Spinoff

PoliticsSeptember 9, 2024

Windbag: Should Wellington City Council refuse to hold a Māori ward referendum?

Image: The Spinoff
Image: The Spinoff

A new law requires councils to hold referendums – at their own expense – if they want to keep their Māori wards. But what if they just… didn’t?

Wellington City Council last week joined dozens of councils around the country in a rebuke of the coalition government by voting to retain its Māori ward. Under a new law, the government requires councils that want to keep their Māori wards to hold a referendum at the next local election, at the council’s own expense. Wellington’s councillors voted 13-3 in favour of keeping the Māori ward, thereby triggering the referendum. Ray Chung, Tony Randle  and Nicola Young were the three votes opposed.

In a short speech introducing the debate, Tory Whanau said, “I’m proud to be the first Māori mayor of Wellington, but getting here wasn’t easy. There was plenty of adversity along the way. I don’t want [Māori] representation to be reliant on chance. I want to make sure Māori always have a seat at the table, no matter who is in charge.”

Wellington’s Māori ward councillor, Nīkau Wi Neera (Image: Joel MacManus)

Whanau added a series of amendments to the vote that didn’t fundamentally change anything, but served as an extra middle finger to the coalition government, including one noting that “the law requiring councils to hold a poll on Māori wards conflicts with council’s responsibility to uphold the wellbeing of their communities, especially Māori”.

Throughout last Thursday’s meeting, there were plenty of fighting words about defending localism and tino rangatiratanga, but how much weight do those words have?

Several councillors, including Nureddin Abdurahman, Rebecca Matthews and Iona Pannett, wanted the council to outright refuse to hold the referendum. “What’s the actual consequence for us breaking the law? What would happen?” asked Pannett. There aren’t any explicit provisions in the new law stating the consequences for not holding a referendum, it is just “required”. Council officers were vague in their response, saying it would “create a problem”.

The mayor’s staff told me after the meeting that their legal concerns related to the company the council contracts to run its elections, Electionz.com. According to their advice, the company could face consequences if it runs an election without including the legally required poll for a Māori ward. That justification seems a bit of a weak excuse – it’s hard to imagine a contractor would face consequences for not doing a job they weren’t hired to do. The council would bear the ultimate responsibility if it decided to breach the law.

Far North Council and Palmerston North City Council also debated refusing to hold a referendum. Friday was the final day for the 45 councils that established Māori wards without referendums to decide whether they wanted to keep or ditch them. Only two have voted to do away with theirs – Kaipara and Upper Hutt.

Whanau said she considered the idea of refusing a referendum but wanted to take a bipartisan line. “It’s much more important to me to have a unified way forward. I’m aware of my role as a Māori mayor, and in the week of te kīngi passing, I want it to be about unity, not to take a shot at the government. I’m happy to leave that for another day.”

Councillors on the left weren’t entirely satisfied with that. Some were gearing up for a fight. “The challenge is not to honour [te Tiriti] when it is easy, it is to honour it when it is more difficult,” said Rebecca Matthews.

Publicly refusing to hold a referendum is risky, but could have political upside for Whanau and the rest of the council’s left. It would set up a high-profile showdown against the government on one of the coalition’s least popular policies. A 1News Verian Poll last month showed 46% of voters think the government’s policies are increasing racial tensions in New Zealand, compared to just 10% who think tensions are reducing. The government’s approach to Māori issues might play well for a certain portion of Act and New Zealand First voters, but they are toxic to the median voter, especially in Wellington.

Local government minister Simeon Brown and Wellington mayor Tory Whanau are in conflict over Māori wards (Image: Tina Tiller)

It might be the kind of stunt Whanau needs. If the 2025 mayoral election is a debate about rate increases, she will probably lose. If it’s about progressive social issues and conflict with a government that laid off thousands of people in the city, she stands a much better chance. Whanau would be the right person to take up that fight too: She’s a wahine Māori, Wellington is the largest council with a Māori ward, and it is the capital city and therefore has the attention of the political press.

There would be risks, of course. It would set up a strange constitutional showdown. There would be some kind of inevitable retaliation from the government. The mayor would find herself in the line of fire from the prime minister’s office. It would almost certainly kill any chance of a city deal. In the short term, it could hurt Wellington economically – it’s just a matter of whether voters blame the council or the government. In the long term though, it could end up being a positive thing for Wellington to flex its muscles and show that it won’t be pushed around by the whims of every passing minister. It could put the city on a path to…. dare I say it… self-determination.

It’s possible there is another reason the mayor backed down over the referendum. Councillors at Thursday’s meeting were extremely confident that Wellingtonians would vote to keep the Māori ward. If there is a turnout bump in 2025 from a Māori ward referendum, it will benefit Labour and the Greens. Left-leaning councillors could take a bold, principled and high-risk stand against the government to defend tino rangatiratanga – or they could do what they’re told, commission the referendum, and still probably get a slight benefit on election day.

‘Hutt Valley, Kāpiti, down to the south coast. Our Wellington coverage is powered by members.’
Joel MacManus
— Wellington editor