I don't think a congestion fee is the right direction for DC or congestion fees are sexy, but there are better policies, at least right now

-------------
Revised with significant additional content at the end.
-------------


Flickr photo of a congestion charge sign by KZ08.

Arlington's CommuterPage blog has an entry proposing a congestion fee for DC, "Save Two Birds With One Starbucks - Fixing Washington's Traffic." And this has been discussed for a couple years. And some people think it's a good idea.

I am not on the bandwagon.

To be honest, I don't think traffic is that bad in downtown DC, although some streets, such as New York Ave., I Street (especially since PA Ave. is closed), K Street and others have comparatively heavy traffic and are in fact, very much congested.

But even at the same time, many other downtown streets are not congested, and even during rush hour I can ride through intersections on my bike, through stop lights, because there isn't oncoming traffic.

And the reality (granted most regional congestion studies focus on freeways) is that most of the highest congestion areas in the region are not in DC proper, and it's unlikely that assessing a congestion fee in DC would have any impact on those problems.

Furthermore, we can't trust the suburban jurisdictions--which includes Arlington, which happily picks off organizations from DC for relocation to their fair burg as it is--to not use the existence of a congestion fee in DC to urge presently DC-located organizations and businesses to relocate to the suburbs in large part for their car driving employees to avoid a congestion fee.

More important to DC's transit financing agenda than imposing a congestion charge would be to:

(1) impose a transit withholding tax, comparable to how it's done in Portland and Lane County Oregon (or soon for the MTA in Greater NYC) -- in a paper I wrote a couple years ago, I estimated this could generate $200 million/year. And it would be applicable to everyone who works in the city, whether or not they drive. Since 70% of jobs in DC are held by non-DC residents, it could be considered a commuting tax, on the other hand it would be fully justified and the use targeted.

(2) impose an annual personal property tax on automobiles registered in the city. I came to this position in a roundabout way. The annual fee for a residential parking permit is $15. The value of using a parking space on the street is worth upwards of $2,000 year, but people still whine about proposals to increase the fee.

But there are really two aspects to raising the rate, one has to do with the value of the parking space, but the other has to do with recovering more of the costs of paying for roads as typically, automobile taxes and fees cover no more than 55% of the cost of roads.

And increasing parking permit fees solely doesn't address the need to recover more of the costs of paying for roads for people who have off-street parking spaces, and therefore don't require residential parking permits.

I haven't costed this out. But the annual registration fee in the city is pretty low, from $72 to $155/year, depending on the weight of the automobile.

(3) but still, it is necessary to raise residential parking permit fees, in order to send the proper message for how much these spaces are worth, and to discourage people from buying larger vehicles or multiple vehicles and expecting to be able to store the vehicles on the street.

This is what I wrote in last year's The revised revised People's Transportation Plan/2008 Transit-Transportation wish list:

[C]hange 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.

A SmartCar on East Capitol Street, Capitol Hill, DC

Note that the various plans for "improvements" of parking policies in residential districts are really further prioritization of resident demands for parking preferences, i.e., such as that being considered in Ward 1. The proposals provide additional protections for resident parking (which further privileges car owners at the expense of people who don't own cars) without adequately charging for it.

See "Night-time Public Hearing/Ward 1/Protecting Residential Parking" from the Councilmember Graham website and the proposed legislation.

It shows the absolute necessity of having a Master Transportation Plan comparable to that possessed by Arlington County and having an element on Parking and Curbside Management like they do.

It's not that the Comprehensive Plan doesn't address this issue. Here's what it says in the Transportation Element:

T-3.2 Curbside Management and Parking 415

Long- or short-term parking is part of almost every car trip, and parking—especially when free—is a key factor in the mode choice for a trip. The availability and price of parking can influence people’s choices about how to travel to work, shop, and conduct personal business. The District’s challenge, like that of many other major cities, is to manage limited curbside space to accommodate ever increasing parking demand. 415.1

There are approximately 400,000 parking spaces in the District of Columbia. The majority of these parking spaces (260,000) are on-street parallel-parking type spaces. About 6 percent of these on-street spaces (16,000) have parking meters. Another 140,000 parking spaces are located off-street in parking lots and garages. The majority of the off-street spaces are located in Downtown parking garages. 415.2.

And then this action

Action T-3.2.C: Curbside Management Techniques
Revise curbside management and on-street parking policies to adjust parking pricing to reflect:

a. the demand for and value of curb space;
b. adjust the boundaries for residential parking zones;
c. establish parking policies that respond to the different parking needs of different types of areas;
d. expand the times and days for meter parking enforcement in commercial areas;
e. promote management of parking facilities that serve multiple uses (e.g., commuters, shoppers, recreation, entertainment, churches, special events, etc.);
f. improve the flexibility and management of parking through midblock meters, provided that such meters are reasonably spaced and located to accommodate disabled and special needs populations;
g. preserve, manage, and increase alley space or similar off-street loading space; and
h. increase enforcement of parking limits, double-parking and other curbside violations, including graduated fines for repeat offenses and towing for violations on key designated arterials. 415.7

Action T-3.2.D: Unbundle Parking Cost
Find ways to “unbundle” the cost of parking from residential units, allowing those purchasing or renting property to opt out of buying or renting parking spaces. “Unbundling” should be required for District-owned or subsidized development, and the amount of parking in such development should not exceed that required by Zoning. Further measures to reduce housing costs associated with off-street parking requirements, including waived or reduced parking requirements in the vicinity of Metrorail stations and along major transit corridors, should be pursued during the revision of the Zoning Regulations. These efforts should be coupled with programs to better manage residential street parking in neighborhoods of high parking demand, including adjustments to the costs of residential parking permits. 415.8

This sentence bears repeating:

These efforts should be coupled with programs to better manage residential street parking in neighborhoods of high parking demand, including adjustments to the costs of residential parking permits.

Parking for residents is the "third rail" of local politics and the City Council does everything it can to avoid addressing this.

David Alpert of Greater Greater Washington rightly called me to task in the earlier version of this entry because I equated performance parking policies (better, market pricing of street parking, mostly in commercial areas) with residential parking policy initiatives.

One of the reasons though that some of the performance parking policies bug me has to do with restrictions on parking on side streets (remember that I do commercial district-retail revitalization consulting) and that the residents are getting almost a complete free ride on the cost of these spaces.