Appropriately developing neighborhood-appropriate street parking policies

(Based on a set of email exchanges, edited)

From Tom:

Right now I can't move my little mini car beacuse the nightclubbers will start to show up at 6:30 pm [and park in the 14th Street NW/U Street neighborhood] with their big SUVs and no spaces will open until 3 am. This is a really small irresponsible segment of the nightclub community as there's a subway station two blocks away and they know they'll be drunk driving when they leave. 3 am hell breaks loose around here.Arlington even has now gone to 24/7 Residential Parking Permit requitements.

Unfortunately with Jack we'll probably have to wait for Graham's parking reforms to get any relief. Graham and Wells got their wards' parking changes by law a year ago. Of course it's about money as the side of the street where non-RPP can park for 2 hours charges market rate with the new smart meters.Jack told me he won't make a move until the ANC recommends it so I'm getting the ANC to act. Here's a link that describes how the Expanded RPP works in Ward 6.

From me:

I'm basically familiar with it. I saw Don Shoup, author of The High Cost of Free Parking, speak in 2005 for a DC "great streets" conference. And I've skimmed his book. I think it's fine. And I will add your points to my 2009 transpo wish list section on parking.

I favor what is called "performance parking," but at the same time, I think that residents need to pay far more for the privilege of having a car and being provided with street parking space for practically no cost. It's a privilege supported by the almost 40% of households (like mine) in the city which don't have cars. And then when the car owners grouse about Zipcar getting dedicated spaces....! (although I have to be thankful for that debate, 'cause it led me to have some important insights on the issue).

Anyway, DC doesn't have a transportation plan, and within that nonexistent transportation plan, there should be an element on parking and curbside management.

And that element, if properly written, would provide all the support for the regulatory structure neighborhoods need to deal with parking issues, without a neighborhood having to petition the local caudillo (elected Councilmember) to deal with it.

In short, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY DEVELOPING NEIGHBORHOOD-SPECIFIC PARKING POLICIES REQUIRES THAT EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD GET A SPECIAL LAW PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL.

I hate this "creation" of a piss poor transportation plan in bits and pieces through a series of convoluted legislative actions.

Speaking of Arlington County, their transportation plan is very elegant. The provisions within each element "cascade" from the goals and priorities laid out in the introduction to the Plan and are for the most part mutually supporting. I can see how 24/7 RPP would logically follow, because the entire plan is based on discouraging suboptimal mobility and single occupancy vehicle trips particularly, and each element is designed to support the realization of that goal/priority. Hence 24/7 Residential parking priority. But within that priority, the Element does not prioritize parking at curbside for automobiles at the expense of transit, pedestrians, bicycling, or urban design.

Without the equivalent kind of transportation plan in DC, it makes it much harder to do the right thing. And without a plan, elected and appointed officials lack the cover they need to lead on hard issues. And without a plan, elected officials get to grandstand, and appointed officials cower.

E.g., with a Comprehensive Land Use plan that would prioritize management of transportation demand as well as preserving houses, churchly land acquisition to support tearing down houses would be prevented. Instead there would be transportation demand management plans for each church. Within this context, you would allow double parking, properly managed, because an imposition of double parking for a couple hours/weekly is much better public policy than it is to tear down domiciles (housing people, generating property and income and sales taxes) in favor of the creation of parking lots used for a handful of hours weekly. At the same time, the church would have to work to limit the overall number of trips, by encouraging car pooling, and other measures. Etc.

I think in mixed use districts, residents should have the option of declaring their block 2 hour restricted til midnight. This shouldn't have to require involvement the councilmember in order for action to be taken.

This is from my 2008 transportation wish list:

18. Take on the parking mafia. Do a parking study of the entire city, comparable to what Seattle did, and change requirements accordingly, including a paradigm of shared parking systems in commercial districts. As a result, Seattle eliminated parking requirements in certain areas, including around transit stations, stating:

Lower parking requirements based on local demand and to support alternative transportation. In Urban Centers and high capacity transit station areas, allow the market rather than the code to determine appropriate parking supply.

DC really bobbled an opportunity during the Comprehensive Land Use Plan revision process to address parking and curbside management, which by and large it failed to do.

19. Speaking of parking and curbside management, change the residential parking permit system in DC to one that emphasizes the privilege, rather than the right, to park. 40% of the people in DC do not own cars. Why should the 60% that do be privileged with practically free parking spaces?

a. Residential parking permits should cost a lot more generally. As you probably know, Prof. Shoup estimates that the value of the public space on the street is about $1800 annually.

b. There should be a limit on how many residential parking permits can be issued per household. Only one car can fit in front of a typical rowhouse. Multiple cars per household should be discouraged.

c. The rate for residential parking permits should go up considerably for each additional permit per household address.

d. Parking permit rates should be weighted according to how large a car is, and its carbon footprint (maybe). One of the big problems I'd say anecdotally is that people in the city may only be buying one car, but it is much much larger than it used to be (an SUV). This further reduces available parking inventory for residents.

Tom responded (and the thread discussed other things too):

The value of parking around here is much more than $1800/yr. Spaces rent for $200-$250/mo and sell for $50,000.