e-Mobility Parking Plan
- Background
- Overview
- Personal Mobility Device Safety Action Plan
- Problem statement
- e-Mobility Parking Working Group
- Context
- Goal
- Delivery phases
- Shared responsibility
- Solutions
- Designated e-mobility parking areas
- Reporting poor parking
- Communication and education
- Regulation
- Document review
Background
Overview
E-mobility devices, such as e-bikes and e-scooters, are widely used across Queensland. There are clear benefits to enabling e-mobility devices safe access to Queensland's transport network, by improving sustainability, reducing traffic and parking congestion and supporting multi-modal connections to rail and bus stations. However, the rapidly rising popularity of e-mobility has introduced challenges, including conflict over public spaces, such as roads and paths, and concerns regarding safety and amenity for riders and other road and path users.
Shared e-mobility devices, that are available for public hire through an app, are dockless and can be deployed and left in a range of public spaces. Shared e-mobility providers typically deploy devices across the network in a safe and organised manner. For example, devices that are parked in neat rows in areas that are unlikely to create a hazard or inhibit access for other path users. However, users often leave devices at the end of their trip in a way that creates an obstruction for other path users and creates safety and amenity risks. The consequences of these risks are greater for some members of the community, in particular people who have a mobility or vision impairment, and this has the potential to result in reduced accessibility and inclusion.
Accessibility for e-mobility users should not come at the cost of accessibility for other road and path users. Safe and equitable access to public space and transport is a fundamental right. This e-Mobility Parking Plan (this Plan) seeks to address this by setting out the tangible activities required to improve e-mobility parking and create more accessible and inclusive paths for all who use them.
Personal Mobility Device Safety Action Plan
The Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) is currently progressing a range of initiatives aimed at improving the safety of Personal Mobility Devices in Queensland. Personal Mobility Devices are a subset of e-mobility and include e-scooters, e-skateboards, solowheels and Segways.
In June 2022, the Minister for Transport and Main Roads released the Personal Mobility Device Safety Action Plan. The action plan includes a range of safety focused actions for delivery over the short, medium and longer term. This was the outcome of significant stakeholder engagement, including with local governments, e-mobility users and industry, pedestrian and disability advocates, other road user groups, research and academia and the Queensland Police Service.
The Personal Mobility Device Safety Action Plan includes 2 actions focused on parking, the establishment of a specific parking working group (Action 5) and the investigation of solutions for improved parking, in partnership with the working group (Action 8).
TMR has established the parking working group who have agreed to expand their focus to investigate solutions for e-mobility parking, as opposed to Personal Mobility Devices specifically. This ensures that all e-mobility devices (for example, e-scooters and e-bikes) are considered equally in the development of solutions.
Problem statement
E-mobility parking can be a problem for both private and shared devices, in cities, suburban and regional areas. However, the problem is most acute where:
- path availability and access is limited
- there is a high density and variety of path users, including vulnerable path users, such as people with a mobility or vision impairment
- there is a high density of shared e-mobility devices in use
- there is a lack of recognisable, safe and accessible parking locations near e-mobility users' destinations.
In such conditions, e-mobility users may struggle to find appropriate parking for their device or lack the knowledge to park the device safely so as not to impact other path users.
In Queensland, e-mobility parking problems are most frequently observed in inner and suburban environments, or near popular hubs, where high volumes of shared e-mobility devices can clutter and obstruct busy footpaths. These problem areas also often coincide with geofencing boundaries.
e-Mobility Parking Working Group
TMR established the e-Mobility Parking Working Group in May 2022. Reflective of the shared responsibility for e-Mobility parking the parking working group includes representatives from disability advocacy organisations, shared e-mobility providers, path user associations and advocacy groups, and a range of local and state government representatives with expertise spanning policy, planning and accessibility.
Organisations represented on the parking working group include:
- Department of Transport and Main Roads
- Brisbane City Council
- City of Gold Coast
- Townsville City Council
- Bundaberg Regional Council
- Mackay Regional Council
- Fraser Coast Regional Council
- Local Government Association of Queensland
- Beam Mobility
- Neuron Mobility
- Bird
- Vision Australia
- Queenslanders with Disability Network
- Royal Automobile Club of Queensland
- Queensland Walks
- Bicycle Queensland
The initial role of the parking working group is to develop solutions to address e-mobility parking issues. This Plan represents a collective agreement by the parking working group to improving e-mobility parking in Queensland.
The parking working group will also play an important ongoing role. Members are encouraged to bring e-mobility parking proposals to the parking working group for consultation across a broad range of stakeholders and it is hoped that lessons learned from trials can be shared freely to create a community of practice. This will support a diversity of evolving trials as well as future efforts to standardise e-mobility parking across Queensland.
Context
Goal
This Plan sets out a clear approach for improving e-mobility parking in Queensland. The solutions proposed are designed to be simple to implement and comply with. While it is hoped that solutions can have general application, a specific focus has been placed on more problematic high-density environments.
All designated parking solutions require adequate space, in the right areas, and may create unintended challenges and require compromise where there is conflict over the allocation of public space such as roads and paths.
Effective e-mobility parking solutions can make active transport such as e-mobility more attractive in both regional areas and cities and improve liveability. These outcomes, when codesigned with representatives and advocates from the disability community and other stakeholders, align to the visions of both the Queensland Transport Strategy and the Accessibility and Inclusion Strategy, by contributing to ensuring safe, efficient and integrated transport accessible to all.
Delivery phases
While there are some innovative approaches emerging, within Australia and internationally, there is no single agreed or standardised approach to improving e-mobility parking. As such, improving e-mobility parking in Queensland requires a phased delivery approach. This will include:
- Trial and discovery – Spanning approximately 12 months, this phase will see an expansion of localised e-mobility parking trials and the development of communication and education materials in consultation with various user groups, including disability representatives. Trials may vary in scale and complexity and it is acknowledged that some local governments have already commenced relevant trials.
- Standardisation – Requiring a longer timeframe, this phase will see the development of standardised e-mobility parking signage, pavement markings and other parking infrastructure, progressive roll-out and retrofit of infrastructure, easy mechanisms for reporting unsafe parking, ongoing communication to and education of users as well as the consideration of regulatory solutions. Once standardised, solutions should be subject to regular review as technology develops and social and environmental factors evolve.
Initiatives within this Plan are set out within these 2 phases, with clear timeframes for delivery. Timeframes commence from the publication of this Plan.
Shared responsibility
Responsibility for improving e-mobility parking in Queensland sits with a broad range of stakeholders. No one government or industry group can unilaterally solve the problem. Broadly speaking, responsibilities across sectors include:
- Queensland Government – Overall coordination, development of standards and guidelines, investigation of regulatory solutions, and broad communication activities.
- Local governments – Contractual arrangements with shared e-mobility providers, strategic planning, infrastructure delivery, and broad communication activities.
- Shared e-mobility providers – Direct education and behaviour incentivisation of users, provision of usage data, deployment of devices in an appropriate manner, quick response to known issues, and improved technology.
- E-mobility riders – Personal responsibility to park e-mobility devices appropriately.
- Landowners (including public and private entities) – Provision of parking infrastructure in appropriate areas. For example, private land or at existing public transport hubs.
The parking working group includes representation from each of these sectors with the ability to positively influence improved e-mobility parking. As such, the development and delivery of this Plan is necessarily a shared responsibility of the parking working group. Throughout this Plan the responsibility for each initiative is clearly identified. Where multiple organisations or sectors have a role to play, this is acknowledged.
Solutions
Designated e-mobility parking areas
Designated e-mobility parking areas, sometimes referred to as e-mobility parking hubs, are the most important solution for improving e-mobility parking in Queensland. The provision of adequate designated e-mobility parking areas will help to improve parking for both privately owned and shared e-mobility devices. While it is acknowledged that the consumer demand for shared e-mobility devices require dockless arrangements, there is still considerable scope to provide clearer guidance as to where devices should be deployed and where a user should leave a device at the end of their trip.
Designated e-mobility parking areas should be designed and installed to improve the safety and amenity of relevant path and road environments and to ensure that they promote accessibility and inclusion of all users. This requires the co-design of designated e-mobility parking areas with involvement from a broad range of stakeholders, including people with mobility and visual impairments.
Designated e-mobility parking areas can be both physical (for example, using signs, markings and pavement decals or other infrastructure such as racks) and virtual (for example, supported by geofencing and in-app information). They can also be located in a range of environments, depending on specific local factors. Designated e-mobility parking areas should be located clear of and out of the path of travel of people using the footpath. Consideration should be given to adjacent private land (where business owners may mutually benefit from the presence of a designated e-mobility parking area) or in a safe on-road facility (for example, in the place of a car parking space).
There should be a sufficient number of designated e-mobility parking areas to accommodate likely demand and these should be located in areas where e-mobility trips are known to commonly start and finish (for example, informed by shared e-mobility trip data, or at destinations along planned movement corridors). Whether physical or virtual, technology can play an important role in supporting designated e-mobility parking areas. Geofencing, camera positioning algorithms and QR codes are known examples of systems that support enhanced localisation of e-mobility devices. In turn, this enables greater use of incentives for parking within a designated e-mobility parking area or disincentives for not parking within a designated e-mobility parking area.
The design and installation of appropriate designated e-mobility parking areas is also an important enabler to other solutions within this Plan, including communication and regulation. Designated e-mobility parking areas require adequate space, in the right areas, and it is acknowledged that some compromise is likely where there is conflict over the allocation of public space such as roads and paths.
Trial and discovery
The actions proposed in the table are a non-exhaustive list of initiatives that could be trialled. The intent of this Plan is not to make all of these actions mandatory but to provide high-level solutions that can be adapted to local contexts.
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
| Investigate examples of best practice e-mobility parking nationally and internationally and report back to the parking working group. |
Local governments Shared e-mobility providers |
3 months |
| Develop a simple set of criteria for selecting designated e-mobility parking areas trial locations and guidance for what to consider when installing a designated e-mobility parking area. Note: draft criteria and guidance is included at Appendix A to this plan. | TMR | 3 months |
| Commence trial of designated e-mobility parking areas at selected Brisbane busway stations. | TMR Brisbane City Council |
3 months |
| Provide insights from shared e-mobility trip data to local governments and other relevant planning agencies to support the identification of designated e-mobility parking area locations. |
Shared e-mobility providers | Ongoing |
Initiate and expand e-mobility parking trials to:
|
Local governments Shared e-mobility providers |
Ongoing |
| Publish an overview of e-mobility parking trials online. |
TMR | Ongoing |
| Expand use of geofenced no parking and restricted parking areas in key problem locations. Consideration be given to geofencing to allow through movement for e-mobility devices but to discourage parking where there is insufficient clear pedestrian space. |
Shared e-mobility providers | Ongoing |
| Trial of a range of innovative technology solutions to support more accurate localisation of e-mobility devices within designated e-mobility parking areas and share lessons learned with the parking working group. |
Shared e-mobility providers | Ongoing |
| Conduct academic research into trials to determine the impacts of parking solutions for the transport system and related infrastructure. | TMR Brisbane City Council |
12 months |
Standardisation
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
| Adoption of lessons learned from trials of incentives and technology supporting improved use of designated e-mobility parking areas. |
Shared e-mobility providers | 1—2 years |
| Develop standardised signs and markings to designate designated e-mobility parking areas on roads and paths (for example, within the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices). |
TMR | 2 years |
| Update of Public Transport Infrastructure Manual to provide guidance for the installation of designated e-mobility parking areas at public transport hubs. |
TMR | 2 years |
| Progressive rollout and retrofit of designated e-mobility parking areas in line with agreed guidelines. |
Local governments | 2+ years |
Reporting poor parking
The parking working group has identified challenges with easily reporting instances of poor e-mobility parking (for example, when a device is found blocking a path or fallen over in a way that creates an obstruction or hazard). Most shared e-mobility providers have a mechanism for reporting poor e-mobility parking, including via an app or web form. However, there is no standardised approach.
Agreements between local governments and shared e-mobility providers should provide that e-mobility providers are required to address known or reported instances of poor parking within a certain timeframe (for example, defined service level response times). Shared e-mobility providers also utilise technology to identify and respond to issues (for example, tilt sensors are able to indicate where a device has fallen over). Despite this, public reporting is still a critical input to identify instances of poor parking and support the timely resolution of issues so that path and road users are not inconvenienced or disadvantaged.
There would be benefit in greater standardisation of reporting mechanisms as well as ensuring that community members have easy access to details about how to report instances of poor e-mobility parking.
Trial and discovery
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
Shared e-mobility providers to ensure details about how to report instances of poor parking are easily available to members of the public. Consideration to be given to:
|
Shared e-mobility providers | Ongoing |
| Information about how to report unsafe parking to shared e-mobility providers included on relevant government websites. |
Local governments | 3 months |
| Provide shared e-mobility device users meaningful and timely feedback about parking behaviours through, for example, analysis of end of trip photos. |
Shared e-mobility providers | 6 months |
Standardisation
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
| Investigate options for a standardised reporting mechanism for all shared e-mobility devices. |
TMR Local governments |
1 year |
Communication and education
Communication and education are critical to improving e-mobility parking in Queensland. E-mobility users are often unaware of how to park their devices appropriately and in a way that does not create issues for other path and road users. For example, users may intuitively leave their devices close to or leant against the wall of a building at the edge of a footpath unaware that this creates an obstruction for vision impaired people who use canes and rely on building and pavement lines to help navigate paths.
Shared e-mobility providers already provide in-app information to users about how to park appropriately and have recently rolled out a range of information online about safe parking practices. While this is extremely valuable, more is needed to ensure users understand how to park appropriately and the consequences of failing to do so, in particular for vulnerable path users. As noted in the previous table, the increased availability of easily recognisable designated e-mobility parking areas will also support clear communication on this issue.
Opportunities for additional communication and education include social media, web content, training events and stakeholder communications. Communications and education should highlight the impact of poorly parked e-mobility devices on people who are blind or who have low vision, people with mobility impairments and other people with disabilities.
Trial and discovery
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
| Develop consistent messaging to users about how to appropriately park e-mobility devices and the rationale for safe parking. Specific consideration to be given to how to ensure people with a mobility or vision impairment are not disadvantaged by e-mobility parking on paths. |
Parking working group | 3–6 months |
| Review and update existing communications to align with agreed messaging. | Parking working group | 3–6 months |
| Consideration be given to engaging with local media to promote safe parking messaging, alongside ad-hoc social media posts (outside of a focused communication campaign) |
TMR Local governments Shared e-mobility providers |
3–6 months |
| Promote awareness of parking reporting mechanisms within communications channels for path user advocacy groups |
Parking working group | 6–12 months |
Standardisation
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
| Investigate a focused communication campaign targeted at improving e-mobility parking. |
TMR | 6–12 months |
Regulation
There are 3 main regulatory levers with the potential to influence improved e-mobility parking. These are:
- Queensland Road Rules – which includes rules that govern the parking of motor vehicles such as cars and motorbikes
- Agreements between local governments and shared e-mobility providers – which can establish deployment conditions and performance requirements.
- Other legislation that governs use of public space – for example, public transport infrastructure such as railway stations, ferry terminals and busways.
While the road rules are an effective tool in regulating the parking of motor vehicles, there are challenges associated with regulating e-mobility parking in the same way. Enforcement of motor vehicle parking assumes that once a vehicle is parked by a driver, it is very unlikely to have been moved. Motor vehicles are also registered and so it is possible to identify a responsible person for an unattended vehicle. When an enforcement officer comes across an illegally parked motor vehicle they are able to issue an infringement to the registered operator of that vehicle, who is well placed to identify the offending driver (if not themselves).
By contrast, e-mobility devices are often lightweight and easily moved after they have been parked by a user. These devices are also not registered and so it is not always possible to identify a responsible person for an unattended device. Efficient enforcement of e-mobility parking is therefore much more challenging. An enforcement officer would need to witness a user parking illegally and intercept them before they left the scene, or the device was subsequently moved by another person. Further work is required to understand if changes to the road rules could support improved e-mobility parking.
Agreements between local governments and shared e-mobility providers may be a more effective regulatory instrument to improve e-mobility parking. Consideration should be given to updating these agreements based on the results of e-mobility parking trials.
Trial and discovery
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
Review and update agreements between local governments and shared e-mobility providers to trial:
|
Local governments Shared e-mobility providers |
6—12 months |
Standardisation
| Action | Responsibility | Timeframe |
| Investigate whether changes to the QRRs would support improved e-mobility parking. | TMR | 1 year |
| Identify and address any regulatory barriers for e-mobility device parking at public transport infrastructure. |
TMR | 1—2 years |
Document review
| Review period | List of key amendments | Date |
| 6 months | ||
| 1 year | ||
| 2 years |
Auslan and audio version
- Last updated 20 December 2023