The future of urban mobility: a look from the parking “industry”

First of all, one perception: this cannot be about the prevalence of ideology or moralistic biases; it must be about pragmatism, without harming people or their property or their surroundings, and about leadership.

The reasons are simple: urban mobility affects us all and has many faces, some of which are very common:

• Taking the children to school.

• Travelling to workplaces.

• Going out for a walk.

• Going to the health centre.

• Doing sport.

• Shopping at the market or the local shop.

• Visiting family or friends.

• Leisure activities such as shopping, hospitality, culture, etc.

• Carrying out commercial activities for my company or handling personal matters.

• Last-mile distribution (C/D).

• Etc.

And, in addition, once any of these actions is finished, “you have to go back” because none of them is an end in itself. BETWEEN THIS GOING AND COMING BACK, SOMETIMES, THERE IS PARKING.

We must combine these simple needs with the how, that is, which means of transport I use to get around:

• Private car.

• Shared car.

• Taxi.

• The above with electric propulsion or combustion engine.

• Motorcycle.

• Bicycle.

• Scooter.

• Bus.

• Metro.

• Tram.

• Etc.

With these obvious points alone, we have reached “10 common reasons for deciding on mobility” and “10 ways to carry it out”. If we combine the reasons and the modes in pairs, we get 100 different possibilities, although some may not make much sense. Let us assume that 80% are logical => 80 pairs / possibilities and a magnificent puzzle of the multimodal need-transport binomial.

This simple description of everyday actions and ways of getting around (mobility) tells us that this is a complex matter, that although it requires technique and science, it is not mathematics, that we all understand it, and that it becomes blurred when Public Administrations (AAPP) make decisions through an ideological lens.

In fact, the car is not to blame; that would be far too simplistic. Without overlooking the fact that the automotive industry in Spain generates 10% of GDP, almost as much as tourism, although with less employment, but more investment in R&D&I.

Parking operators, both OFF and ON street, manage vehicles when they are moving at zero speed; that should be the perspective from the parking “industry”.

However, the parking tool is not being used to manage mobility, not even since 2008, when city budgets for mobility “infrastructure” disappeared.

To use this tool, it is first necessary to answer some questions:

• What kind of city model do we want? It should be simple, achievable, understandable, and economically viable. To define it, we do not need a strategic plan or a mobility plan, we need a PLAN.

• What objectives must we achieve to move closer to that city model? But specifically: sub-objectives for the blue zone and for car parks.

• Do these achievements improve citizens’ quality of life?

• Am I considering citizens’ feelings, or am I losing touch with what is happening on the street?

• Do we know how to define indicators and KPIs to measure, provide feedback, and make decisions?

Well then, if we are clear about some of the answers, the parking “industry” helps us influence the future of urban mobility, since it allows us to:

• Decide whether I prefer cars and motorcycles on the street (blue zone) or in a car park.

• Establish restrictions / limitations on vehicles while accompanying them with parking options.

• Use technology to communicate good information to citizens through apps.

• Implement the decision by acting on the right variable:

  • Parking time.

  • Fare amount.

  • Resident vs non-resident.

  • Penalising the overuse of parking time in certain locations.

  • Peak hour vs off-peak hour: smoothing demand.

  • Managing demand (citizens), not just supply.

  • Using dynamic pricing according to pollution in the city, pollution generated by the vehicle itself, or the previous variables.

Depending on the approach decided by the Public Administrations, we will achieve:

• Recovering space for people.

• Calming traffic.

• Improving environmental quality.

• Reducing noise.

• Generating employment.

• Improving the perception of safety in the street.

• Etc.

We must not forget that we can put these mobility improvements for citizens into practice without carrying out costly and lengthy works or building new infrastructure: more management with ingenuity, good judgement, prudence and decision-making, vertical and horizontal signage, planters and bollards, instead of re-urbanisation works.

Therefore, we begin to see where there is public space to recover for people, something highly valuable and, consequently, something that cars cannot occupy all day, as shown by the Paris project to eliminate 50% of on-street parking spaces or Pontevedra’s requirement to drive at less than 6 km/h and park for less than 15 minutes in certain areas of the city.

In the future of mobility, there are three fundamental issues to take into account: (1) the last mile, (2) the electrification of transport, which will forever change the reasons and the way we reach our destination when travelling around the city, especially the city centre (or rather, city centres), and (3) hard and soft technological support.

The last mile is the final stage of our journey, and it will hardly continue to be done by private car. It will be carried out by one of the modes described above, regardless of whether it is public or private and, probably, with a preference for individual rather than collective transport. In addition, it will not matter whether the need is work-related, family-related or leisure-related. Citizens demand alternative mobility options and the freedom to use whichever suits them best (the one they consider most competitive).

The propulsion energy for urban means of transport will be electricity, due to pollution requirements, which are being externalised from cities.

Now then, without the layer of technology that we are weaving around mobility and parking, none of this will be possible. I believe we no longer even consider the possibility of choosing an alternative without having an App.

Lastly, we must think about citizens; for us, operators, they are customers, and they are responsible, intelligent, and the ones who best know: (1) which means of transport is most convenient, fastest and most economical for them to exercise their right to mobility (their most competitive mode), and (2) the reasons why they choose it.