Summary
Bike Marrickville has prepared detailed feedback on the proposal by Inner West Council for the forthcoming shared e-bike strategy. This is a short summary of our feedback.
Bike Marrickville strongly supports: (1) shared e-bikes as part of the Inner West's transport system; and (2) the development of this strategy by Inner West Council.
While there are many positives to the roll-out of shared e-bikes in the Inner West, the current situation is not sustainable. The problem with shared e-bikes in the Inner West right now is not e-bikes. The problem is a lack of parking and infrastructure. Parking will be the greatest issue limiting or accelerating successful shared schemes in the Inner West.
Bike Marrickville considers the strategy should particularly address the following parking issues:
1. Council has the power now to deliver low-cost parking infrastructure across the Inner West — we don't need to wait for a future regulatory scheme.
2. The new regulatory scheme will further strengthen Council's ability to require operators to be high-quality and to use parking — but we don't need to wait for regulation.
3. Shared-bike parking infrastructure needs to take account of all users (including cars, pedestrians and other cyclists) — separate parking in no-stopping areas is best.
4. We should get on with providing parking across the LGA now — this doesn't preclude Council also seeking funding from the NSW Government when grant programs are available.
5. Getting parking right can be simple and low-cost, but is needed (along with an associated Council-led communications campaign) to re-build social license and support bicycle use.
The submission also recommends strategic directions and actions regarding: (1) operator restrictions (go-slow / no-go); (2) selection and regulation of operators (max = 3 operators); and (3) future advocacy by Inner West Council to State Government (part of the NSW public transport system).
Bike Marrickville stands ready to support Inner West Council in developing and implementing this strategy.
Bike Marrickville strongly supports: (1) shared e-bikes as part of the Inner West's transport system; and (2) the development of this strategy by Inner West Council.
While there are many positives to the roll-out of shared e-bikes in the Inner West, the current situation is not sustainable. The problem with shared e-bikes in the Inner West right now is not e-bikes. The problem is a lack of parking and infrastructure. Parking will be the greatest issue limiting or accelerating successful shared schemes in the Inner West.
Bike Marrickville considers the strategy should particularly address the following parking issues:
1. Council has the power now to deliver low-cost parking infrastructure across the Inner West — we don't need to wait for a future regulatory scheme.
2. The new regulatory scheme will further strengthen Council's ability to require operators to be high-quality and to use parking — but we don't need to wait for regulation.
3. Shared-bike parking infrastructure needs to take account of all users (including cars, pedestrians and other cyclists) — separate parking in no-stopping areas is best.
4. We should get on with providing parking across the LGA now — this doesn't preclude Council also seeking funding from the NSW Government when grant programs are available.
5. Getting parking right can be simple and low-cost, but is needed (along with an associated Council-led communications campaign) to re-build social license and support bicycle use.
The submission also recommends strategic directions and actions regarding: (1) operator restrictions (go-slow / no-go); (2) selection and regulation of operators (max = 3 operators); and (3) future advocacy by Inner West Council to State Government (part of the NSW public transport system).
Bike Marrickville stands ready to support Inner West Council in developing and implementing this strategy.
Feedback on proposed Inner West Council Shared E-Bike Strategy
‘Making shared e-bikes work for the whole Inner West community’
Figure 1 — Rendering of possible shared e-bike parking in a no-stopping area at the entrance to the Probert St / Albermarle St intersection, Newtown — including simple, low-cost concrete infrastructure to prevent bikes from tipping over.
Executive Summary
Shared e-bikes present a transformative opportunity for sustainable and equitable transport in the Inner West.
There are, however, key challenges that need to be addressed to maximise the potential of this transport mode. In particular it is critical that we fix parking so that:
• We rebuild the social license for shared e-bikes in the Inner West
• We make it easier and more attractive for users to access this form of transport
The problem with shared e-bikes in the Inner West right now is not e-bikes. The problem is a lack of parking and infrastructure.
We commend Inner West Council for preparing a shared e-bike strategy, and we recommend that it be based on the following principles:
• Effective shared e-bike parking that is widely available and incorporated, by default, in future place-making
• Growth in shared e-bike use, and wider community acceptance, through infrastructure and clear communications
• A high-quality, fair and well-regulated operator model in our local community
• Shared e-bikes as a fully integrated part of the Inner West's public transport network
To support these principles we recommend that Inner West Council prioritise the following actions in the Strategy:
• Immediate provision by Council of clearly sign-posted, high-quality parking in locations across the Inner West LGA
• Long-term communications campaign in the Inner West to explain the role of e-bike sharing and community expectations for parking and use
• Acceleration of separated cycleways throughout the Inner West in recognition of increased cycling rates due to shared e-bikes
• Limit the number of go-slow areas in the Inner West, and do not have any no-go areas
• Carefully select three (or fewer) operators to ensure the quality of shared e-bikes in our community, and apply operator authorisation conditions targeted at our community's key areas of concern
• Advocacy to the NSW Government for shared e-bikes to move to being an integrated part of Sydney's public transport system
As the NSW Government extends powers to local councils to regulate share-scheme parking, this strategy is an opportunity for Inner West Council to work with the community on how this will occur in the Inner West (and to position the Inner West to access infrastructure grants related to the exercise of those powers).
Bike Marrickville stands ready to work closely with Inner West Council on this opportunity.
There are, however, key challenges that need to be addressed to maximise the potential of this transport mode. In particular it is critical that we fix parking so that:
• We rebuild the social license for shared e-bikes in the Inner West
• We make it easier and more attractive for users to access this form of transport
The problem with shared e-bikes in the Inner West right now is not e-bikes. The problem is a lack of parking and infrastructure.
We commend Inner West Council for preparing a shared e-bike strategy, and we recommend that it be based on the following principles:
• Effective shared e-bike parking that is widely available and incorporated, by default, in future place-making
• Growth in shared e-bike use, and wider community acceptance, through infrastructure and clear communications
• A high-quality, fair and well-regulated operator model in our local community
• Shared e-bikes as a fully integrated part of the Inner West's public transport network
To support these principles we recommend that Inner West Council prioritise the following actions in the Strategy:
• Immediate provision by Council of clearly sign-posted, high-quality parking in locations across the Inner West LGA
• Long-term communications campaign in the Inner West to explain the role of e-bike sharing and community expectations for parking and use
• Acceleration of separated cycleways throughout the Inner West in recognition of increased cycling rates due to shared e-bikes
• Limit the number of go-slow areas in the Inner West, and do not have any no-go areas
• Carefully select three (or fewer) operators to ensure the quality of shared e-bikes in our community, and apply operator authorisation conditions targeted at our community's key areas of concern
• Advocacy to the NSW Government for shared e-bikes to move to being an integrated part of Sydney's public transport system
As the NSW Government extends powers to local councils to regulate share-scheme parking, this strategy is an opportunity for Inner West Council to work with the community on how this will occur in the Inner West (and to position the Inner West to access infrastructure grants related to the exercise of those powers).
Bike Marrickville stands ready to work closely with Inner West Council on this opportunity.
Context
Currently there are thousands of shared e-bikes deployed across all parts of the Inner West, with a constant stream of riders using them to get to work or study, do their shopping, explore a new part of the city, or as part of their daily commute. As anyone who has visited Sydenham station in the AM or PM peak knows, shared e-bikes are now a very popular part of our transport network — thousands of commuters each day are now using shared e-bikes as part of their Inner West transport journey. This strategy needs to work for these people.
The present approach to shared e-bikes is, however, impacting the wider community too, because of the lack of a coordinated approach to parking. Negative sentiment towards shared e-bikes is understandably growing because of the 'messiness' and other challenges that they have brought to our public domain. There are very few dedicated parking spaces, it is not obvious to users where they can find a bike or park it after use, bikes fall over too easily, bikes block footpaths, and it's not obvious how the community can fix issues they don't like.
The strategy needs to work for the whole community — not just shared-bike users, but also the wider community, whose social license the success of shared bikes in the Inner West Council area depends on.
About Bike MarrickvilleBike Marrickville is a volunteer-run not-for-profit group of local residents promoting cycling and improving the local environment.
Bike Marrickville advocates for everyone who rides or would like to ride a bike in and around the former local government area of Marrickville in Sydney's Inner West.
Bike Marrickville members attend Inner West's Local Transport Forum meetings, and other site visits and consultations.
Ensuring the effective integration of shared e-bikes into the Inner West community, as an effective part of our transport network, is a key priority of Bike Marrickville.
The present approach to shared e-bikes is, however, impacting the wider community too, because of the lack of a coordinated approach to parking. Negative sentiment towards shared e-bikes is understandably growing because of the 'messiness' and other challenges that they have brought to our public domain. There are very few dedicated parking spaces, it is not obvious to users where they can find a bike or park it after use, bikes fall over too easily, bikes block footpaths, and it's not obvious how the community can fix issues they don't like.
The strategy needs to work for the whole community — not just shared-bike users, but also the wider community, whose social license the success of shared bikes in the Inner West Council area depends on.
About Bike MarrickvilleBike Marrickville is a volunteer-run not-for-profit group of local residents promoting cycling and improving the local environment.
Bike Marrickville advocates for everyone who rides or would like to ride a bike in and around the former local government area of Marrickville in Sydney's Inner West.
Bike Marrickville members attend Inner West's Local Transport Forum meetings, and other site visits and consultations.
Ensuring the effective integration of shared e-bikes into the Inner West community, as an effective part of our transport network, is a key priority of Bike Marrickville.
|
Our vision for cycling in the Inner West
Bike Marrickville's vision is for an Inner West where walking and cycling are the top choice for short trips. Where every child can ride safely to school, parents feel confident riding with their kids, and local shops thrive on vibrant, walkable high streets. A place where freedom doesn't mean owning a car, but being able to move easily, safely and joyfully; and where, on the days you do need to drive, streets are calmer, uncongested and more pleasant for everyone. |
The unique opportunity of shared e-bikes
Bike Marrickville is excited by the opportunity that shared e-bikes present to significantly increase active transport use in the Inner West.
Already Sydney is reportedly now one of the top three cities in the world for shared e-bike usage, with almost 3 million trips in Greater Sydney in the first six months of 2025. And within Sydney, the Inner West is one of the key locations where those trips occur. Bicycle NSW report that almost 20% of people in Sydney now use shared e-bikes, with uptake surging among Gen Zs where nearly one-third ride e-bikes regularly (32%). [1]
60% of trips in the Inner West are shorter than 5km and a quarter of those could be carried out by walking, using public transport, or cycling. A key barrier to people cycling, however, is affordable access to a suitable bicycle. Shared e-bikes have the potential to fill this gap.
Other key potential economic, social and environmental benefits of shared e-bikes include:
• Like car sharing (e.g. GoGet), there is no need for ownership, addressing transport disadvantage (e.g. enabling households to own one less car and reduce their transport costs).
• Dealing with the 'last mile' in the transport journey — extending the reach and effectiveness of our public transport system.
• Replacing private trips and reducing private vehicle usage — making limited road space less congested and more available for critical uses including public transport and commercial carriage.
• Enabling more trips in the Inner West to be undertaken with lower transport emissions.
• Providing new social and recreational opportunities for the community — cycling, including on e-bikes, has clearly quantified societal health and wellbeing benefits. [2]
The current state-of-play with shared e-bikes is both unusual and unsustainable. Shared e-bikes operate in a shared road environment (footpath and carriageway). This means shared space allocation needs to be considered carefully and deliberately (including, particularly, in relation to parking). Managing these issues is important for the current and future acceptance and success of shared schemes and the social licence they hold with the hosting community.
Due to current regulatory settings, private companies have entered the market and are providing shared e-bike services with very limited oversight. This is not how public transport services are typically delivered, where the government ordinarily takes a lead role in planning, procuring, and subsidising services to ensure they are well integrated, equitable, and reliably delivered. The current issues with shared e-bikes — particularly with bike parking and infrastructure — speak to this current 'laissez-faire' approach and the absence of powers and support, particularly for local government.
We think this evidence of demand and 'proof of concept' presents a strong case for council and government to now take a much more active and deliberate role — through procurement, subsidy, integration with the wider transport network, and parking infrastructure — so that the benefits of shared e-bikes can be secured more consistently and fairly.
In this context, the work of Inner West Council in preparing this strategy is commended. As the NSW Government extends powers to local councils to regulate share-scheme operators, this strategy can help guide the Council's approach and ensure the Inner West is a leader in balancing the competing considerations associated with this important issue. The Strategy can also play an important role in supporting Inner West Council to access forthcoming parking infrastructure funding that the NSW Government has indicated will shortly be made available.
Already Sydney is reportedly now one of the top three cities in the world for shared e-bike usage, with almost 3 million trips in Greater Sydney in the first six months of 2025. And within Sydney, the Inner West is one of the key locations where those trips occur. Bicycle NSW report that almost 20% of people in Sydney now use shared e-bikes, with uptake surging among Gen Zs where nearly one-third ride e-bikes regularly (32%). [1]
60% of trips in the Inner West are shorter than 5km and a quarter of those could be carried out by walking, using public transport, or cycling. A key barrier to people cycling, however, is affordable access to a suitable bicycle. Shared e-bikes have the potential to fill this gap.
Other key potential economic, social and environmental benefits of shared e-bikes include:
• Like car sharing (e.g. GoGet), there is no need for ownership, addressing transport disadvantage (e.g. enabling households to own one less car and reduce their transport costs).
• Dealing with the 'last mile' in the transport journey — extending the reach and effectiveness of our public transport system.
• Replacing private trips and reducing private vehicle usage — making limited road space less congested and more available for critical uses including public transport and commercial carriage.
• Enabling more trips in the Inner West to be undertaken with lower transport emissions.
• Providing new social and recreational opportunities for the community — cycling, including on e-bikes, has clearly quantified societal health and wellbeing benefits. [2]
The current state-of-play with shared e-bikes is both unusual and unsustainable. Shared e-bikes operate in a shared road environment (footpath and carriageway). This means shared space allocation needs to be considered carefully and deliberately (including, particularly, in relation to parking). Managing these issues is important for the current and future acceptance and success of shared schemes and the social licence they hold with the hosting community.
Due to current regulatory settings, private companies have entered the market and are providing shared e-bike services with very limited oversight. This is not how public transport services are typically delivered, where the government ordinarily takes a lead role in planning, procuring, and subsidising services to ensure they are well integrated, equitable, and reliably delivered. The current issues with shared e-bikes — particularly with bike parking and infrastructure — speak to this current 'laissez-faire' approach and the absence of powers and support, particularly for local government.
We think this evidence of demand and 'proof of concept' presents a strong case for council and government to now take a much more active and deliberate role — through procurement, subsidy, integration with the wider transport network, and parking infrastructure — so that the benefits of shared e-bikes can be secured more consistently and fairly.
In this context, the work of Inner West Council in preparing this strategy is commended. As the NSW Government extends powers to local councils to regulate share-scheme operators, this strategy can help guide the Council's approach and ensure the Inner West is a leader in balancing the competing considerations associated with this important issue. The Strategy can also play an important role in supporting Inner West Council to access forthcoming parking infrastructure funding that the NSW Government has indicated will shortly be made available.
Suggested Principles for Strategy
Bike Marrickville strongly supports appropriately regulated and managed shared e-bike schemes. We think this will help ensure shared e-bikes:
• Are seen as a legitimate transport mode that is not in conflict with other forms of active transport (e.g. pedestrians);
• Are complementary to the needs of other forms of cycling and their infrastructure needs (e.g. parking);
• Contribute positively to urban design and the public domain and are easily incorporated into future planning for the Inner West; and
• Play an important role in mode shift — reduced car dependence for shorter journeys, increased public transport use for longer trips, improved transport efficiency overall.
The following principles are suggested to guide the growth of shared e-bikes in the Inner West:
1. Effective shared e-bike parking, widely available and incorporated by default in future place-makingThe Inner West has the opportunity to be a global leader in how shared e-bikes are integrated into dense urban environments. With a modest investment the Inner West can deliver the clarity and order of docked bike-share systems without requiring fixed docking stations. The policy goal should be to capture the benefits of docked systems — predictable, well-defined parking that protects footpaths and public space — through clearly marked, consistently provided parking locations for shared e-bikes. Except in particularly high-density, high-activity areas with very high levels of formal parking provision for shared e-bikes, app-based parking restrictions should not apply to users. Shared e-bike parking should also automatically be included in new public areas (whether provided by Council or by the private sector as a condition of development approval).
2. Growth in shared e-bike use, and wider community acceptance, through infrastructure and clear communicationsExpansion of shared e-bikes should be matched by accelerated delivery of separated cycling infrastructure and sustained community education by Council on use and parking of shared e-bikes. Communications should set clear expectations for responsible use, reinforce cycling as a safe, normal, and efficient transport choice, and provide clear guidance on parking. Council should accelerate its existing active transport infrastructure program to pre-empt the uptake in cycling that will be caused by a high-quality shared e-bike program.
3. A high-quality, fair and well-regulated operator model in our local communityOperators should be selected based on their ability to deliver fleet quality, pricing transparency, safety, and equitable distribution across the Inner West. Council should work with State Government to ensure that appropriate regulatory controls are in place while ensuring these do not disincentivise shared e-bike use, or render shared e-bike schemes economically unsustainable.
4. Shared e-bikes need to be made a fully integrated part of the Inner West's public transport networkShared e-bikes should be recognised as part of the core transport network alongside walking, buses, trains and light rail. Council should work with State Government to support long-term integration, including fare and incentive alignment, to enable seamless multimodal travel and maximise uptake as a legitimate everyday transport option.
• Are seen as a legitimate transport mode that is not in conflict with other forms of active transport (e.g. pedestrians);
• Are complementary to the needs of other forms of cycling and their infrastructure needs (e.g. parking);
• Contribute positively to urban design and the public domain and are easily incorporated into future planning for the Inner West; and
• Play an important role in mode shift — reduced car dependence for shorter journeys, increased public transport use for longer trips, improved transport efficiency overall.
The following principles are suggested to guide the growth of shared e-bikes in the Inner West:
1. Effective shared e-bike parking, widely available and incorporated by default in future place-makingThe Inner West has the opportunity to be a global leader in how shared e-bikes are integrated into dense urban environments. With a modest investment the Inner West can deliver the clarity and order of docked bike-share systems without requiring fixed docking stations. The policy goal should be to capture the benefits of docked systems — predictable, well-defined parking that protects footpaths and public space — through clearly marked, consistently provided parking locations for shared e-bikes. Except in particularly high-density, high-activity areas with very high levels of formal parking provision for shared e-bikes, app-based parking restrictions should not apply to users. Shared e-bike parking should also automatically be included in new public areas (whether provided by Council or by the private sector as a condition of development approval).
2. Growth in shared e-bike use, and wider community acceptance, through infrastructure and clear communicationsExpansion of shared e-bikes should be matched by accelerated delivery of separated cycling infrastructure and sustained community education by Council on use and parking of shared e-bikes. Communications should set clear expectations for responsible use, reinforce cycling as a safe, normal, and efficient transport choice, and provide clear guidance on parking. Council should accelerate its existing active transport infrastructure program to pre-empt the uptake in cycling that will be caused by a high-quality shared e-bike program.
3. A high-quality, fair and well-regulated operator model in our local communityOperators should be selected based on their ability to deliver fleet quality, pricing transparency, safety, and equitable distribution across the Inner West. Council should work with State Government to ensure that appropriate regulatory controls are in place while ensuring these do not disincentivise shared e-bike use, or render shared e-bike schemes economically unsustainable.
4. Shared e-bikes need to be made a fully integrated part of the Inner West's public transport networkShared e-bikes should be recognised as part of the core transport network alongside walking, buses, trains and light rail. Council should work with State Government to support long-term integration, including fare and incentive alignment, to enable seamless multimodal travel and maximise uptake as a legitimate everyday transport option.
Recommended Actions for Strategy
Bike Marrickville commends Inner West Council on preparing a strategy for shared e-bikes in the Inner West. It is recommended that the following actions be included in the forthcoming strategy.
Action: Immediate provision of a network of high-quality parking for shared e-bikes across the Inner West LGA
The Inner West can proceed with delivering a high-quality shared e-bike parking network immediately, without waiting for regulatory reform.
Regulation is only relevant in locations where parking is formally limited to designated areas; however, strong outcomes can still be achieved even where no parking restrictions exist, provided high-quality infrastructure is in place. Most users are seeking to do the right thing, and when clear, convenient and visible parking options are provided, they will naturally align their behaviour with those facilities. This is fundamentally an infrastructure and design task that can be implemented within existing powers and road management frameworks.
Apps should only restrict parking locations where sufficient formalised shared e-bike parking is availableBike Marrickville's position is that there should be limited app-based restrictions on e-bike parking, except in high-activity / high-density areas where demand and pedestrian volumes require more structured management. Shared e-bikes provide a unique opportunity for people to have ready access to a high-quality bicycle close to their home or work — to achieve this, bikes need to either be 'free-floating' or available at very regular intervals.
Where parking is proposed to be restricted, we recommend that this only occurs in high-activity areas where a sufficiently dense network of parking corrals is put in place (with initial temporary locations until permanent corral infrastructure can be delivered). Bike Marrickville recommends that parking should only be restricted when an approved parking location is available every 100 metres — so that riders always have a clear, nearby place to end trips, and parking behaviour is naturally guided into predictable patterns.
Shared e-bike parking should be located on-street where possibleBike Marrickville recommends that Inner West Council adopt an approach of prioritising on-street shared e-bike parking where possible. The area's high population density, high rates of walking and — in many locations — historically narrow footpaths put our footpaths and other pedestrian areas at a premium.
It is recommended that this priority for non-footpath locations be embedded in Council's strategy, with on-road locations progressed under the new local road decision-making delegation where possible (i.e. notified to the Local Transport Forum following installation).
Bike Marrickville therefore strongly supports the suggestion in the 'Bike and micromobility device parking guidance (draft)' from Transport for NSW that shared e-bike parking can be located at the approach or departure side of non-signalised intersections (in areas otherwise signposted as 'no stopping'). Locating shared e-bike parking in these locations will provide ready access to shared e-bikes for our community, while minimising the impact on parking for other road users.
Transport for NSW outline (at p14):
"Under NSW Road Rule 170(3), motor vehicles must not stop within 10 metres from the nearest point of an intersecting road at an intersection without traffic lights (unless permitted by regulatory signage). This protects sight lines between vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians. It is common practice to signpost 10 metres in urban areas. Replacing some of this length of No Stopping with bike parking at carriageway level may be feasible, subject to a road safety assessment to ensure removal does not impede safety. This may be used to deter illegal parking near intersections, provided that sign distances are maintained, regulatory signage is updated as required by the road rules and safety is not compromised."
Bike Marrickville notes that prioritising on-street parking also reflects current NSW Road Rules that restrict adults from riding bicycles on footpaths.
An example of how this may operate, in the narrow, high-density streets west of Australia Street, is shown in Figure 2 below, and adjacent to the Wilson Street cycleway in Figure 3 (located in City of Sydney LGA but heavily used by Inner West residents).
Parking corrals are placed in existing no-stopping areas on the approach side of each intersection. Placing corrals in this location would avoid the need to reallocate existing car parking but would transform parking accessibility for shared e-bikes and reduce the number of shared bikes being parked on the narrow footpaths of Denison, Chelmsford, Albermarle streets etc.
The cover image is a rendering of how one of the parking spots in Figure 1 (on the entrance side of the Probert St / Albermarle St intersection, Newtown) may appear.
The Inner West can proceed with delivering a high-quality shared e-bike parking network immediately, without waiting for regulatory reform.
Regulation is only relevant in locations where parking is formally limited to designated areas; however, strong outcomes can still be achieved even where no parking restrictions exist, provided high-quality infrastructure is in place. Most users are seeking to do the right thing, and when clear, convenient and visible parking options are provided, they will naturally align their behaviour with those facilities. This is fundamentally an infrastructure and design task that can be implemented within existing powers and road management frameworks.
Apps should only restrict parking locations where sufficient formalised shared e-bike parking is availableBike Marrickville's position is that there should be limited app-based restrictions on e-bike parking, except in high-activity / high-density areas where demand and pedestrian volumes require more structured management. Shared e-bikes provide a unique opportunity for people to have ready access to a high-quality bicycle close to their home or work — to achieve this, bikes need to either be 'free-floating' or available at very regular intervals.
Where parking is proposed to be restricted, we recommend that this only occurs in high-activity areas where a sufficiently dense network of parking corrals is put in place (with initial temporary locations until permanent corral infrastructure can be delivered). Bike Marrickville recommends that parking should only be restricted when an approved parking location is available every 100 metres — so that riders always have a clear, nearby place to end trips, and parking behaviour is naturally guided into predictable patterns.
Shared e-bike parking should be located on-street where possibleBike Marrickville recommends that Inner West Council adopt an approach of prioritising on-street shared e-bike parking where possible. The area's high population density, high rates of walking and — in many locations — historically narrow footpaths put our footpaths and other pedestrian areas at a premium.
It is recommended that this priority for non-footpath locations be embedded in Council's strategy, with on-road locations progressed under the new local road decision-making delegation where possible (i.e. notified to the Local Transport Forum following installation).
Bike Marrickville therefore strongly supports the suggestion in the 'Bike and micromobility device parking guidance (draft)' from Transport for NSW that shared e-bike parking can be located at the approach or departure side of non-signalised intersections (in areas otherwise signposted as 'no stopping'). Locating shared e-bike parking in these locations will provide ready access to shared e-bikes for our community, while minimising the impact on parking for other road users.
Transport for NSW outline (at p14):
"Under NSW Road Rule 170(3), motor vehicles must not stop within 10 metres from the nearest point of an intersecting road at an intersection without traffic lights (unless permitted by regulatory signage). This protects sight lines between vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians. It is common practice to signpost 10 metres in urban areas. Replacing some of this length of No Stopping with bike parking at carriageway level may be feasible, subject to a road safety assessment to ensure removal does not impede safety. This may be used to deter illegal parking near intersections, provided that sign distances are maintained, regulatory signage is updated as required by the road rules and safety is not compromised."
Bike Marrickville notes that prioritising on-street parking also reflects current NSW Road Rules that restrict adults from riding bicycles on footpaths.
An example of how this may operate, in the narrow, high-density streets west of Australia Street, is shown in Figure 2 below, and adjacent to the Wilson Street cycleway in Figure 3 (located in City of Sydney LGA but heavily used by Inner West residents).
Parking corrals are placed in existing no-stopping areas on the approach side of each intersection. Placing corrals in this location would avoid the need to reallocate existing car parking but would transform parking accessibility for shared e-bikes and reduce the number of shared bikes being parked on the narrow footpaths of Denison, Chelmsford, Albermarle streets etc.
The cover image is a rendering of how one of the parking spots in Figure 1 (on the entrance side of the Probert St / Albermarle St intersection, Newtown) may appear.
Figure 2 — Potential shared e-bike parking locations in a high-pedestrian Newtown residential area — with no loss of existing on-street car parking (at 100m frequency).
Figure 3 — Potential shared e-bike parking locations in the surrounds of the Wilson Street cycleway — with no loss of existing on-street car parking (at 100m frequency).
Shared e-bike parking infrastructure should reflect the design quality of overseas 'docked bike parking' but be simpler and lower costThe Inner West can be a global leader by delivering the clarity and order of docked bike-share systems (e.g. Paris Vélib' or Santander Bikes in London — see Figure 4) without requiring the cost or complexity of fixed docking stations. Docked bike schemes have been explored in Sydney and Melbourne before, but the cost of these systems (including, particularly, the docking systems) has been prohibitive. Shared e-bikes provide a chance to get the aesthetic and operational benefits of a docking system (like London has) without the cost or complexity. Shared e-bikes do not require expensive docking infrastructure — but may still benefit from some physical parking support to make sure they are neatly parked and don't fall over.
Figure 4 — Santander bikes parked in London at a fixed structure that holds the bikes upright. A simpler version of this infrastructure could be rolled out in the Inner West that holds the bikes upright without needing the complexity / cost of a mechanical locking mechanism for the bike to 'dock' and be locked in place.
We also need to recognise, however, one of the shared scheme's underlying principles and benefits: relatively 'location-flexible' end-to-end journeys. We don't need to end up with only 10 parking bays across the entire LGA; we need a multiplicity of low-cost parking bays (that can be more easily accommodated on-street).
Bike Marrickville recommends that Inner West Council develop a consistent network of simple, purpose-built infrastructure — including wheel stops, bike stands, and clearly marked parking bays — that create obvious, intuitive "homes" for shared e-bikes in the public realm. Where possible it is recommended that shared e-bike parking corrals consist of the three components shown in Figure 5:
Bike Marrickville recommends that Inner West Council develop a consistent network of simple, purpose-built infrastructure — including wheel stops, bike stands, and clearly marked parking bays — that create obvious, intuitive "homes" for shared e-bikes in the public realm. Where possible it is recommended that shared e-bike parking corrals consist of the three components shown in Figure 5:
Figure 5 — Three key components for shared e-bike parking.
Shared e-bike parking should be separate from, and in addition to, but nearby to, private bicycle parking — to help cyclists 'do the right thing'It is recommended that shared e-bike parking is located close to, but separate from, other bike parking. The western side of Sydenham station provides a good example of this, where both parking options are clear. The needs of shared e-bike parking are different from private bicycle parking (i.e. private bikes need a hoop to lock to, whereas shared e-bikes do not), and it is important that parking suitable for private bicycles is not misused by shared e-bikes.
Ensuring shared e-bikes are provided for when the Inner West public domain is enhancedAs we develop a comprehensive approach to shared e-bike parking in the Inner West, this should also encompass how shared e-bike parking is provided in new development. This includes both new public spaces delivered by Council (e.g. libraries, town squares, refreshed parks) and publicly accessible areas delivered by the private sector (e.g. streetscape improvements as part of residential development).
Council's policies should formally provide that when the Inner West public domain is changed, shared e-bike parking must be considered and — where possible — provided for. In the case of private sector developments this should be recognised in planning conditions. Ensuring that shared e-bikes are explicitly considered and provided for when delivering new public space in the Inner West will have a direct community benefit.
Ensuring shared e-bikes are provided for when the Inner West public domain is enhancedAs we develop a comprehensive approach to shared e-bike parking in the Inner West, this should also encompass how shared e-bike parking is provided in new development. This includes both new public spaces delivered by Council (e.g. libraries, town squares, refreshed parks) and publicly accessible areas delivered by the private sector (e.g. streetscape improvements as part of residential development).
Council's policies should formally provide that when the Inner West public domain is changed, shared e-bike parking must be considered and — where possible — provided for. In the case of private sector developments this should be recognised in planning conditions. Ensuring that shared e-bikes are explicitly considered and provided for when delivering new public space in the Inner West will have a direct community benefit.
Figure 6 — Example of shared e-bike parking in Gdansk, Poland, showing sensitive inclusion of parking infrastructure in the public domain (image courtesy: Bicycle NSW).
Inner West Council should immediately start delivering low-cost shared e-bike parking across the local government area rather than waiting for NSW Government fundingThe NSW Government has indicated that it will be considering further infrastructure funding to support shared e-bike parking. Bike Marrickville stands ready to support Inner West Council in applications to access this funding. Given the scale and importance of this issue, however, it is imperative that Inner West Council does not wait for NSW Government funding to deliver parking. It is recommended that Inner West Council immediately progress the development and delivery of shared e-bike parking across the Inner West, with delivery to be further supported by the NSW Government once available.
There is an urgent need for shared e-bike parking to be prioritised in the Inner West — for the benefit of the whole community, including riders. By immediately prioritising the accelerated and widespread delivery by Council in 2026 of low-cost shared e-bike parking, there is an opportunity to respond to community concerns, boost the social license of shared e-bikes in our community, and make it easier and safer for walkers and cyclists in our community to get around.
Managing major demand for parking at key locations during key periods (e.g. AM peak)We already see the demand on shared e-bike parking during key travel periods in the Inner West. For example, the designated shared e-bike parking in the western forecourt of Sydenham station often has in excess of 20 shared e-bikes parked following the AM peak.
If parking restrictions are put in place, this might limit the capacity of users to park if there is not space in the designated parking area. This can be a significant problem for users, especially if alternative parking is not obvious.
To mitigate this risk, Bike Marrickville suggests that Inner West Council work with Transport for NSW and the operators to ensure:
• Real-time app information for shared e-bike users on available parking locations (taking into account all brands of bikes parked) — this should be possible with the standardised data-sharing requirements that Transport is imposing;
• Larger parking facilities at known or expected hot spots (e.g. train stations, shopping malls, supermarkets, cinemas, parks) are identified in Council's strategy and delivered urgently — the Sydenham station example shows the benefit of having a large dedicated area;
• A large number of dispersed nearby parking spots — ideally each corral would have at least three spots, to increase parking availability in the surrounding areas;
• Temporary event parking facilities (supplied in conjunction with Bike Valet) — a dedicated signposted area for an unlimited number of share bikes to be parked;
• Potential for regular bike rebalancing from 'tidal locations' (by operators, Council or Transport) — currently a feature with Vélib, CitiBike and Santander bikes.
It is recommended that Council's monitoring and evaluation plan for shared e-bikes in the Inner West include analysis of the user parking experience and ensuring the "argh, I can't find a park" effect is minimised. It might also be possible for Council and operators to trial innovative responses in the Inner West on this issue. Bike Marrickville would support this too.
There is an urgent need for shared e-bike parking to be prioritised in the Inner West — for the benefit of the whole community, including riders. By immediately prioritising the accelerated and widespread delivery by Council in 2026 of low-cost shared e-bike parking, there is an opportunity to respond to community concerns, boost the social license of shared e-bikes in our community, and make it easier and safer for walkers and cyclists in our community to get around.
Managing major demand for parking at key locations during key periods (e.g. AM peak)We already see the demand on shared e-bike parking during key travel periods in the Inner West. For example, the designated shared e-bike parking in the western forecourt of Sydenham station often has in excess of 20 shared e-bikes parked following the AM peak.
If parking restrictions are put in place, this might limit the capacity of users to park if there is not space in the designated parking area. This can be a significant problem for users, especially if alternative parking is not obvious.
To mitigate this risk, Bike Marrickville suggests that Inner West Council work with Transport for NSW and the operators to ensure:
• Real-time app information for shared e-bike users on available parking locations (taking into account all brands of bikes parked) — this should be possible with the standardised data-sharing requirements that Transport is imposing;
• Larger parking facilities at known or expected hot spots (e.g. train stations, shopping malls, supermarkets, cinemas, parks) are identified in Council's strategy and delivered urgently — the Sydenham station example shows the benefit of having a large dedicated area;
• A large number of dispersed nearby parking spots — ideally each corral would have at least three spots, to increase parking availability in the surrounding areas;
• Temporary event parking facilities (supplied in conjunction with Bike Valet) — a dedicated signposted area for an unlimited number of share bikes to be parked;
• Potential for regular bike rebalancing from 'tidal locations' (by operators, Council or Transport) — currently a feature with Vélib, CitiBike and Santander bikes.
It is recommended that Council's monitoring and evaluation plan for shared e-bikes in the Inner West include analysis of the user parking experience and ensuring the "argh, I can't find a park" effect is minimised. It might also be possible for Council and operators to trial innovative responses in the Inner West on this issue. Bike Marrickville would support this too.
Action: Communications campaign in the Inner West to explain the role of e-bike sharing and community expectations for parking and use
It is critical that we clearly communicate to our community how shared e-bike systems work in the Inner West. As a new form of transport, they require a shared understanding of both their benefits and the practical expectations for their use in public space.
This communications campaign has three goals. The first is to build positive community sentiment that shared e-bikes are a legitimate, accessible and useful way to get around. They should be seen as part of the everyday transport mix, alongside walking and public transport, and actively encouraged as an option for a wide cross-section of the community.
The second is to support riders in understanding what "good use" looks like in practice, particularly when it comes to parking. Clear guidance is needed on where bikes should be left, with the preference being clearly designated infrastructure where available. In areas without dedicated facilities, riders should still be supported to make good decisions about safe and considerate parking — including avoiding footpath obstruction, positioning bikes parallel to the kerb where appropriate, and ensuring they do not create hazards or block pedestrian movement.
The third goal is to provide community education for non-riders about how to interact with shared e-bikes in public space. This includes discouraging inappropriate actions such as moving bikes onto footpaths where they obstruct access, or putting trash in the basket of parked bikes. It also includes publicising clear pathways for reporting issues, given that all bikes are identifiable and linked to operators, as well as simple guidance on how communities can request additional parking infrastructure in high-demand locations.
This is a new transport system, and it is reasonable to expect that it requires an accompanying period of education and norm-setting. This is consistent with the introduction of other major public systems and technologies — such as EFTPOS, seatbelts, or public transport smartcards — where clear communication and behaviour guidance were essential to successful adoption and community acceptance.
It is critical that we clearly communicate to our community how shared e-bike systems work in the Inner West. As a new form of transport, they require a shared understanding of both their benefits and the practical expectations for their use in public space.
This communications campaign has three goals. The first is to build positive community sentiment that shared e-bikes are a legitimate, accessible and useful way to get around. They should be seen as part of the everyday transport mix, alongside walking and public transport, and actively encouraged as an option for a wide cross-section of the community.
The second is to support riders in understanding what "good use" looks like in practice, particularly when it comes to parking. Clear guidance is needed on where bikes should be left, with the preference being clearly designated infrastructure where available. In areas without dedicated facilities, riders should still be supported to make good decisions about safe and considerate parking — including avoiding footpath obstruction, positioning bikes parallel to the kerb where appropriate, and ensuring they do not create hazards or block pedestrian movement.
The third goal is to provide community education for non-riders about how to interact with shared e-bikes in public space. This includes discouraging inappropriate actions such as moving bikes onto footpaths where they obstruct access, or putting trash in the basket of parked bikes. It also includes publicising clear pathways for reporting issues, given that all bikes are identifiable and linked to operators, as well as simple guidance on how communities can request additional parking infrastructure in high-demand locations.
This is a new transport system, and it is reasonable to expect that it requires an accompanying period of education and norm-setting. This is consistent with the introduction of other major public systems and technologies — such as EFTPOS, seatbelts, or public transport smartcards — where clear communication and behaviour guidance were essential to successful adoption and community acceptance.
|
Example: Comms campaign to promote debit / credit card use on Opal
The shift to contactless "tap and go" payments using credit and debit cards through Opal was, on the surface, a simple and intuitive change. A sustained Transport education effort was, however, undertaken to explain that the system worked everywhere across public transport, how fares would be calculated, and that tapping on and off was required for correct charging. The campaign helped normalise the use of contactless credit and debit cards to pay for transport in NSW. Even intuitive technologies still need clear, consistent communication to become habitual at scale — especially when they change everyday behaviour across a whole system. A similar approach could be taken to normalising how shared e-bikes are used in the Inner West — and what 'good' for the community and users looks like. |
Action: Acceleration of separated cycleways throughout the Inner West in recognition of increased cycling rates due to shared e-bikes
There is a direct relationship between increased shared e-bike use and the acceleration of separated cycleways and other infrastructure in the Inner West.
Not only will improved infrastructure increase the rates of cycling (including shared e-bike usage), but the additional cyclists in our community due to shared e-bikes will increase the business case (Figure 7) and need for high-quality cycling infrastructure in our community.
There is a direct relationship between increased shared e-bike use and the acceleration of separated cycleways and other infrastructure in the Inner West.
Not only will improved infrastructure increase the rates of cycling (including shared e-bike usage), but the additional cyclists in our community due to shared e-bikes will increase the business case (Figure 7) and need for high-quality cycling infrastructure in our community.
Figure 7 — Improved economics of infrastructure when cycling rates increase due to shared e-bike use.
Bike Marrickville commends Inner West Council for its recent work in planning for future cycling infrastructure. It is recommended that the delivery of this infrastructure be accelerated as part of the shared e-bike strategy.
To assist Council, Bike Marrickville provided an extensive submission to the 'Building our Community' process in February 2026 identifying priorities for cycling infrastructure investment in the Inner West Council area. These were:
Priority cycleway projects for design and construction (funded via the developer contributions plan):
• Marrickville Rd East Cycleway
• Lilyfield Rd Cycleway
• Iron Cove Creek Masterplan delivery
• Pyrmont Bridge Rd Cycleway
• Robert St, Rozelle Cycleway
• Sydenham Road Strategy & Cycleway
Priority cycleway and quietway projects to support housing uplift:
• Addison Road Cycleway, Marrickville
• Beach & Pine Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Sydney Steel Road & Edinburgh Rd Cycleway, Marrickville
• Hercules Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Loftus Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Bland Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Livingstone Street Cycleway southern extension
• Johnston Street Cycleway, Annandale
• Mallet St, Booth/Moore St, Allen St Cycleway in Leichhardt / Annandale / Camperdown
Support for the following other campaigns that would improve cycling in the Inner West:
• A new Marrickville Town Square at the corner of Calvert Street and Illawarra Road.
• Pocket parks / road closures on Illawarra Road, between Marrickville Rd and Sydenham Rd, and another between Sydenham Rd and Addison Rd.
• Cooks River path lighting, widening, and separation of pedestrians and cyclists. Plus connections to the path, and collaboration with other councils along the route to ensure consistency in infrastructure styles delivered.
• Delivery of the Iron Cove Creek path.
• Balmain Road cycleway, in front of Callan Park.
A full copy of our submission is available on this website.
To assist Council, Bike Marrickville provided an extensive submission to the 'Building our Community' process in February 2026 identifying priorities for cycling infrastructure investment in the Inner West Council area. These were:
Priority cycleway projects for design and construction (funded via the developer contributions plan):
• Marrickville Rd East Cycleway
• Lilyfield Rd Cycleway
• Iron Cove Creek Masterplan delivery
• Pyrmont Bridge Rd Cycleway
• Robert St, Rozelle Cycleway
• Sydenham Road Strategy & Cycleway
Priority cycleway and quietway projects to support housing uplift:
• Addison Road Cycleway, Marrickville
• Beach & Pine Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Sydney Steel Road & Edinburgh Rd Cycleway, Marrickville
• Hercules Street Cycleway, Dulwich Hill
• Loftus Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Bland Street Quietway, Ashfield
• Livingstone Street Cycleway southern extension
• Johnston Street Cycleway, Annandale
• Mallet St, Booth/Moore St, Allen St Cycleway in Leichhardt / Annandale / Camperdown
Support for the following other campaigns that would improve cycling in the Inner West:
• A new Marrickville Town Square at the corner of Calvert Street and Illawarra Road.
• Pocket parks / road closures on Illawarra Road, between Marrickville Rd and Sydenham Rd, and another between Sydenham Rd and Addison Rd.
• Cooks River path lighting, widening, and separation of pedestrians and cyclists. Plus connections to the path, and collaboration with other councils along the route to ensure consistency in infrastructure styles delivered.
• Delivery of the Iron Cove Creek path.
• Balmain Road cycleway, in front of Callan Park.
A full copy of our submission is available on this website.
Action: Limit the number of go-slow areas for shared e-bikes, and do not have any no-go areas in the Inner West
Bike Marrickville is concerned about the potential for no-go or go-slow areas to reduce the utility and attractiveness of shared e-bike schemes as a potential alternative sustainable form of transport. Experience in other cities is that large go-slow areas can significantly reduce uptake of cycling, reducing the role of shared e-bikes in supporting sustainable transport.
Bike Marrickville recommends that go-slow areas should only be put in place:
• In areas where cars are prohibited from travel;
• Where there is high-quality cycling infrastructure (either 'pop-up' or 'permanent') in place to support connected journeys through the area;
• Where the 'go-slow area' is not adjacent to a general traffic area where bikes may inadvertently (due to GPS drift) be slowed down, resulting in an unsafe speed differential between cars and bikes;
• Following consultation with the Local Transport Forum, including the Inner West Bicycle Coalition;
• On a fixed-term basis with a review of the go-slow requirement at least annually.
Go-slow areas should be supported by clear visual cues for cyclists, including indications of alternative safe and efficient routes.
Bike Marrickville does not support the use of no-go areas in the Inner West LGA. International experience suggests that no-go zones can be highly controversial and undermine policies intended to improve public spaces and boost rates of walking and cycling. [3] Where there are concerns about bicycle movements in an area, Bike Marrickville considers these should be addressed through go-slow areas (subject to the considerations above), communications campaigns, and alternative safe / efficient infrastructure.
Bike Marrickville is concerned about the potential for no-go or go-slow areas to reduce the utility and attractiveness of shared e-bike schemes as a potential alternative sustainable form of transport. Experience in other cities is that large go-slow areas can significantly reduce uptake of cycling, reducing the role of shared e-bikes in supporting sustainable transport.
Bike Marrickville recommends that go-slow areas should only be put in place:
• In areas where cars are prohibited from travel;
• Where there is high-quality cycling infrastructure (either 'pop-up' or 'permanent') in place to support connected journeys through the area;
• Where the 'go-slow area' is not adjacent to a general traffic area where bikes may inadvertently (due to GPS drift) be slowed down, resulting in an unsafe speed differential between cars and bikes;
• Following consultation with the Local Transport Forum, including the Inner West Bicycle Coalition;
• On a fixed-term basis with a review of the go-slow requirement at least annually.
Go-slow areas should be supported by clear visual cues for cyclists, including indications of alternative safe and efficient routes.
Bike Marrickville does not support the use of no-go areas in the Inner West LGA. International experience suggests that no-go zones can be highly controversial and undermine policies intended to improve public spaces and boost rates of walking and cycling. [3] Where there are concerns about bicycle movements in an area, Bike Marrickville considers these should be addressed through go-slow areas (subject to the considerations above), communications campaigns, and alternative safe / efficient infrastructure.
Action: Carefully select a limited number of operators to ensure the quality of shared e-bikes in our community, and apply operator authorisation conditions on issues of key concern for the Inner West community
Bike Marrickville understands that under the new NSW regulatory model for shared e-bikes, Inner West Council will be responsible for granting operating authorisations to approved operators before they can deploy devices within the Inner West Council area. These operating authorisations can include conditions imposed by Inner West Council. [4]
Bike Marrickville understands that the Council is currently in consultation with the NSW Government about how this authorisation process will occur and the matters that Council will be able to regulate.
Recommend no more than three operators in the Inner WestBike Marrickville recommends that, to the extent possible, Council should seek to limit the number of operators to no more than three.
This number will allow some healthy competition and innovation, while still providing a manageable group of operators for Council, Bike Marrickville and other stakeholders to work with.
An excessive number of operators will make it difficult for users to experience a consistently high-quality shared e-bike experience, and for shared e-bikes to have a social license with the wider community.
Inner West Council should have clear community-focussed selection criteria and authorisation conditionsIn selecting operators for the Inner West LGA, Bike Marrickville recommends that Council include consideration of the matters below. Any commitments made by operators in relation to these selection criteria (e.g. fleet mix; pricing; availability etc.) can then be reflected in authorisation conditions imposed by Inner West Council.
Bike Marrickville understands that under the new NSW regulatory model for shared e-bikes, Inner West Council will be responsible for granting operating authorisations to approved operators before they can deploy devices within the Inner West Council area. These operating authorisations can include conditions imposed by Inner West Council. [4]
Bike Marrickville understands that the Council is currently in consultation with the NSW Government about how this authorisation process will occur and the matters that Council will be able to regulate.
Recommend no more than three operators in the Inner WestBike Marrickville recommends that, to the extent possible, Council should seek to limit the number of operators to no more than three.
This number will allow some healthy competition and innovation, while still providing a manageable group of operators for Council, Bike Marrickville and other stakeholders to work with.
An excessive number of operators will make it difficult for users to experience a consistently high-quality shared e-bike experience, and for shared e-bikes to have a social license with the wider community.
Inner West Council should have clear community-focussed selection criteria and authorisation conditionsIn selecting operators for the Inner West LGA, Bike Marrickville recommends that Council include consideration of the matters below. Any commitments made by operators in relation to these selection criteria (e.g. fleet mix; pricing; availability etc.) can then be reflected in authorisation conditions imposed by Inner West Council.
| Criterion | What Council should prioritise |
|---|---|
| Fair pricing | Prioritise operators with pricing that is accessible for the community. Recent innovations by operators in Sydney have made shared e-bikes much more affordable, and able to be used for people's daily transport needs (e.g. $2.75 for 20 minutes of riding). |
| Fleet controls | Prioritise high-quality fleets that can deal with the rough and tumble of the modern urban environment, are suitable for a range of uses (e.g. shopping, commuting, airport travel), are resistant to vandalism / anti-social behaviour, and have innovative safety features (e.g. lower centre of gravity, and high-quality helmet detection). |
| Equitable distribution | Prioritise operators who commit to providing transport access across Greater Sydney. Recent experience shows the Inner West is an attractive market, with shared devices now available across the LGA. Council should prioritise operators who also commit to operating in areas of Sydney with lower transport accessibility (e.g. parts of South Western Sydney) to support our family, colleagues, classmates and friends living where public transport and cycling are less accessible. This is part of the Inner West's responsibility to be a good civic citizen of the Greater Sydney region. |
| Parking innovation | Prioritise operators who demonstrate a strong understanding of how critical parking issues are, and a willingness to use the Inner West as an international best-practice example of 'getting parking right'. This might include novel low-cost parking infrastructure, bicycle designs that reduce the risk of toppling, or the use of Bluetooth / Wi-Fi / other technologies to more accurately locate parked bicycles. Operators will play a critical role in shaping public-domain outcomes in the Inner West, and those willing to embrace this role and prioritise innovation should be given preference. |
| Wider network | Prioritise operators who also operate in surrounding areas to ensure a more seamless user experience moving between LGAs. |
Bike Marrickville notes that a balance will need to be found between ensuring the operator models and conditions in the Inner West respond to the concerns of the community and Council, while also creating an environment that encourages positive innovation and allows operators to provide cost-effective services to our community. Particularly in the current economic climate, ensuring that regulation is not unnecessarily burdensome and does not significantly increase the cost of shared e-bike services in our community will also be important.
Bike Marrickville would be happy to work with Inner West Council to refine the approach taken to selecting operators, and negotiating operator authorisation conditions. Bike Marrickville would also be willing to be a formal part of this selection and authorisation process if that would assist Council.
Bike Marrickville would be happy to work with Inner West Council to refine the approach taken to selecting operators, and negotiating operator authorisation conditions. Bike Marrickville would also be willing to be a formal part of this selection and authorisation process if that would assist Council.
Action: Advocacy to the NSW Government for shared e-bikes to operate as an integrated part of Sydney's public transport system
Bike Marrickville recognises the extensive time and effort that Inner West Council, and other councils in the Greater Sydney area, have already invested in engaging with the NSW Government on this critical active transport issue.
Although significant progress has been made in establishing a regulatory regime for shared e-bikes in NSW (including the Inner West), Bike Marrickville recommends that continued advocacy and engagement on reform also continue to be a key action in Council's shared e-bike strategy.
In the short term, Bike Marrickville appreciates that Council's advocacy and engagement will likely be focussed on working with Transport for NSW, the operators and other stakeholders to implement the Road Transport (General) Amendment (Micromobility Shared Arrangements) Regulation 2026 and transition to shared e-bike schemes operating under that regulation (and associated legislation).
Bike Marrickville is also confident that Council will continue its effective efforts to partner with the NSW Government to grow and improve the cycling infrastructure in the Inner West. As recent successes have shown — including the GreenWay and Sydenham shared e-bike parking — there is immense untapped demand for high-quality cycling infrastructure delivered in partnership between the NSW Government and Council. As outlined above, shared e-bikes present both a need and an opportunity for this co-delivery to be accelerated.
Bike Marrickville has also identified a third area of advocacy where we believe Inner West Council should seek to partner with the NSW Government on reform: genuinely integrating shared e-bikes with NSW public transport. If experiences to date can be seen as a 'trial' or 'pilot' of the technology, and if near-term improvements are made to overcome initial 'teething' issues (e.g. parking), then in the medium term we encourage Inner West Council to advocate to the NSW Government for e-bike sharing to fundamentally become part of Sydney's public transport.
Genuine integration of e-bike sharing in Sydney's public transport could mean a few things. This could include:
Bike Marrickville recognises the extensive time and effort that Inner West Council, and other councils in the Greater Sydney area, have already invested in engaging with the NSW Government on this critical active transport issue.
Although significant progress has been made in establishing a regulatory regime for shared e-bikes in NSW (including the Inner West), Bike Marrickville recommends that continued advocacy and engagement on reform also continue to be a key action in Council's shared e-bike strategy.
In the short term, Bike Marrickville appreciates that Council's advocacy and engagement will likely be focussed on working with Transport for NSW, the operators and other stakeholders to implement the Road Transport (General) Amendment (Micromobility Shared Arrangements) Regulation 2026 and transition to shared e-bike schemes operating under that regulation (and associated legislation).
Bike Marrickville is also confident that Council will continue its effective efforts to partner with the NSW Government to grow and improve the cycling infrastructure in the Inner West. As recent successes have shown — including the GreenWay and Sydenham shared e-bike parking — there is immense untapped demand for high-quality cycling infrastructure delivered in partnership between the NSW Government and Council. As outlined above, shared e-bikes present both a need and an opportunity for this co-delivery to be accelerated.
Bike Marrickville has also identified a third area of advocacy where we believe Inner West Council should seek to partner with the NSW Government on reform: genuinely integrating shared e-bikes with NSW public transport. If experiences to date can be seen as a 'trial' or 'pilot' of the technology, and if near-term improvements are made to overcome initial 'teething' issues (e.g. parking), then in the medium term we encourage Inner West Council to advocate to the NSW Government for e-bike sharing to fundamentally become part of Sydney's public transport.
Genuine integration of e-bike sharing in Sydney's public transport could mean a few things. This could include:
- Applying an Opal Transfer Discount when moving between shared e-bikes and other public transport modes
The current Opal transfer discount automatically deducts $2.00 for Adults (or $1.00 for Child/Youth, Concession, and Gold Senior/Pensioner fares) when you switch between metro/train, ferry, bus, or light rail within 60 minutes of your last tap-off, combining those trips into a single continuous journey. Shared e-bike use should be added to this discount regime. - Enabling the booking of shared e-bikes through the Next Generation Opal App
Shared e-bike users currently have to download and operate different apps to use different companies' bicycles. There is no uniform experience for users — or for the wider community (who might use the apps to contact operators about issues with bike parking etc.). It is also not possible for users to see all the bike options in a local area, or how a trip option might include a shared e-bike ride in a user's journey.
Integrating shared e-bikes into the NSW Government's travel app (currently Opal Travel) would overcome this issue, and make it easier for the community to engage with shared e-bikes as part of the transport network. - Uniform branding of shared e-bikes as part of a NSW Government public transport offering
One of the complaints about shared e-bikes is that they are privately branded objects being left in the public domain. It is understandable that companies like to differentiate their products — including so that users can easily identify which company owns a bike (and hence which app to use).
It doesn't, however, need to be this way — as we know with Sydney's buses, which since 2010 have transitioned to a uniform Transport for NSW design regardless of the private operator. A similar move in Sydney (e.g. common branding as Opal Bikes) would make the bikes a more consistent, credible part of the public domain and the transport system — and would avoid the risk of gaudy or unattractive designs. - Subsidising shared e-bike travel on a consistent basis with subsidies provided to other public transport modes (and toll discounts)
Under current and proposed regulation, shared e-bike rides are not subsidised by the NSW Government. This is despite the significant wider public benefit realised when community members use shared e-bikes instead of driving, or take up capacity on buses, trains or other public transport. There is also a significant — and well-recognised — wider societal benefit from cycling that shared e-bike journeys generate. [5]
Often shared e-bikes are compared to ride-sharing companies or taxis, with the question that if there is no subsidy for those services, why would the government subsidise shared e-bikes? Bike Marrickville's position is that a fairer analogy would be for shared e-bikes to be compared to bus, ferry or Metro passengers — taking cars off the road, and using a public and sustainable service to move around the city.
The fact that shared e-bikes (like most bus, ferry and Metro services) are currently privately delivered should not preclude shared e-bike users from receiving an appropriate government subsidy for each ride (in addition to the Opal Transfer Discount). As with those services, a fair subsidy (and overall fee structure) could be determined by the NSW Government with advice from the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal.
It is recommended that Inner West Council include this subsidy reform in future government advocacy — both in active-transport-specific advocacy, and in more general pre-budget submissions etc.
Action: Clear monitoring and evaluation plan for shared e-bikes in the Inner West
Bike Marrickville recommends that the strategy include a commitment to ongoing monitoring and evaluation of shared e-bikes in the Inner West against agreed metrics. Monitoring and evaluation will help ensure that the opportunity presented by this transport mode is maximised, that Council and Government resources are used efficiently, and that emerging issues are identified quickly and effectively managed.
Appropriate areas of measurement might include:
Bike Marrickville recommends that the strategy include a commitment to ongoing monitoring and evaluation of shared e-bikes in the Inner West against agreed metrics. Monitoring and evaluation will help ensure that the opportunity presented by this transport mode is maximised, that Council and Government resources are used efficiently, and that emerging issues are identified quickly and effectively managed.
Appropriate areas of measurement might include:
| Measure | Possible metric |
|---|---|
| Shared e-bikes are an effective part of the transport network in the Inner West | Number of trips taken on shared e-bikes in the Inner West |
| Shared e-bikes are an affordable transport option for people in our community | Average cost of a 20-minute trip for a user in the Inner West |
| Shared e-bike parking is available when it is needed | Number of shared e-bike parking spots in the Inner West Utilisation rate of those spots Number of hours e-bike parking spots in the Inner West are fully utilised |
| Shared e-bikes are supported by the Inner West community | Community attitude to shared e-bikes as part of the Community Satisfaction Survey — regular users; occasional users; non-users |
Conclusion
Bike Marrickville congratulates Inner West Council for its leadership and work in this area. Shared e-bikes are already reshaping how people move around the Inner West, delivering clear benefits for sustainability, access, and local vibrancy.
However, the system is currently constrained by inconsistent parking, fragmented regulation, and uneven public acceptance. Bike Marrickville recommends Council adopt a strategy centred on:
• Delivering a comprehensive parking network;
• Supporting community education;
• Accelerating cycling infrastructure; and
• Advocating for stronger integration of shared e-bikes into Sydney's transport system.
By acting now, Council can address legitimate community concerns while preserving and expanding the significant public benefits that shared e-bikes both already provide and can increasingly offer in the future.
However, the system is currently constrained by inconsistent parking, fragmented regulation, and uneven public acceptance. Bike Marrickville recommends Council adopt a strategy centred on:
• Delivering a comprehensive parking network;
• Supporting community education;
• Accelerating cycling infrastructure; and
• Advocating for stronger integration of shared e-bikes into Sydney's transport system.
By acting now, Council can address legitimate community concerns while preserving and expanding the significant public benefits that shared e-bikes both already provide and can increasingly offer in the future.
Endnotes
[1] Committee for Sydney and Bicycle NSW, 'Why we can't hit the brakes for e-bikes on trains' (August 2025). https://bicyclensw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/250821-Committee-for-Sydney-and-Bicycle-NSW-submission.pdf
[2] Anderson CC, Clarkson DE, Howie VA, Withyman CJ, Vandelanotte C. 'Health and well-being benefits of e-bike commuting for inactive, overweight people living in regional Australia.' Health Promot J Austr. 2022 Oct;33 Suppl 1:349-357. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9790588/
[3] See, for example, the ongoing debate in Brussels about a proposed no-go zone in the city centre: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/dec/20/brussels-bike-ban-plan-for-pedestrian-zone-dangerous-and-absurd
[4] Pursuant to Road Transport Act 2013 s148ZZA.
[5] Anderson CC, Clarkson DE, Howie VA, Withyman CJ, Vandelanotte C. 'Health and well-being benefits of e-bike commuting for inactive, overweight people living in regional Australia.' Health Promot J Austr. 2022 Oct;33 Suppl 1:349-357. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9790588/
[1] Committee for Sydney and Bicycle NSW, 'Why we can't hit the brakes for e-bikes on trains' (August 2025). https://bicyclensw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/250821-Committee-for-Sydney-and-Bicycle-NSW-submission.pdf
[2] Anderson CC, Clarkson DE, Howie VA, Withyman CJ, Vandelanotte C. 'Health and well-being benefits of e-bike commuting for inactive, overweight people living in regional Australia.' Health Promot J Austr. 2022 Oct;33 Suppl 1:349-357. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9790588/
[3] See, for example, the ongoing debate in Brussels about a proposed no-go zone in the city centre: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/dec/20/brussels-bike-ban-plan-for-pedestrian-zone-dangerous-and-absurd
[4] Pursuant to Road Transport Act 2013 s148ZZA.
[5] Anderson CC, Clarkson DE, Howie VA, Withyman CJ, Vandelanotte C. 'Health and well-being benefits of e-bike commuting for inactive, overweight people living in regional Australia.' Health Promot J Austr. 2022 Oct;33 Suppl 1:349-357. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9790588/
RSS Feed