Park (Legally) In Front of Your Own Driveway!
From the pages of the Dupont Current: Dee-Dot is launching a trial program in Georgetown under which residents will be allowed to park their cars in front of their own driveways. The plan, of course, is part of a longrunning effort by Georgetowners to mitigate their longrunning parking crisis. So the idea here is that Dee-Dot will, like, issue special permits to driveway people and take the necessary precautions to guard against abuse of the program.
The biggest drawback of the program is that it essentially privatizes public space. One great thing about street parking is that whether you're driving a Mercedes or a Hyundai, that open spot is a first-come, first-served proposition. Driveway-front parking adds a big element of privilege to what was once a level playing field---especially in G'town, where those with driveway rights are likely to be pulling out with some pretty sweet rides. But there's more than just egg-headed equality theories at work here: Consider a scenario in which a driveway person on a busy Saturday night hops in his Saab and prepares to pull out of her personal space. The brake lights will signal to other motorists that there's a space opening up. As soon as the Saab pulls out, someone else will be lining up to take the spot. One of the following scenarios will result: (1) The person realizes it's a driveway and moves on to seek another spot; (2) The person just says fuck it and takes the spot, setting up a possible towing situation; or (3) The Saab person gets out of the car and explains how this piece of public space is actually his.
According to the Current, however, one of the main objections from residents is that the program will end up diminishing the number of parking spots available in the neighborhood. The paper didn't explain the reasoning behind this position, and it's a bit hard to figure. Sure, some cars that get permitted for driveway-front parking could be longer than the width of the driveway, thus encroaching on other spaces. But that seems like a minor concern. Another possibility is that driveway people might buy another car because of the guaranteed space. Or they'd turn their driveway into a garden and park full-time in their guaranteed street spot. But those scenarios would simply result in a wash: One additional space, one additional car. Any thoughts out there on how you add parking spaces and diminish them at the same time?
Comments
Leave a Reply
You can follow any responses to this entry through its comments RSS feed.
6:59 pm
Ummm... is this really an issue of haves vs. have nots? If you don't let the people park in front of their own driveways, then nobody gets the space. Essentially, it already belongs to the driveway owner. Letting them park another car there is good for everyone, since it's no longer taking up a public space, anyway. This is a pretty lame argument against. The rest of the arguments are even more obtuse. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this idea.
9:39 am
Hey, Jamie, since DDOT isn't permitting many new curb cuts at private residences, and since most of the grandfathered private drives that the old curb cuts go to are actually on public space, why not just allow DDOT to repair the curb cuts? If the "haves" feel like they're losing something, well, all they are losing is their existing exclusive use of public space, a use not generally being granted anymore. If that loss is too much for them to bear, than how about granting them term-limited exclusive parking rights in front of what used to be that private drive?
The present plan amounts to a two-for-one that only benefits people who already have one, and have for many years. It doesn't make public policy sense.
1:38 pm
Eric:
Responding to your question, one obvious mechanism is that the current scarcity of parking spaces acts as a disincentive to car ownership. Increasing the number of parking spaces would lessen that disincentive, and increase the overall number of cars. Those cars, no doubt, would be used at some rate for local trips and so would rely on existing spaces in that way.
12:36 pm
It "privatizes public space" ??? This is the most asinine article I've read in a long time and I can't believe that some people think this is actually an issue. The space in front of people's driveways isn't public in the first place because the public has never been allowed to use it. It's true that that space on the road may be maintained by the public government, but it's the homeowners who pay the property taxes for that privilege. There's no reason homeowners shouldn't be allowed to park in front of their own driveways. We already have the exclusive right to access our driveways in order to get in and out of our property, so what's wrong with it if WE block them? The only reason we're currently not allowed to park there is because cops simply have no practical way of knowing whether or not a car parked there belongs to the homeowner. But this policy of *nobody* being allowed to park there is just a waste of space, and if there can be some way for the police to recognize the homeowner's car then they should do away with it. As for the argument that allowing parking there would increase the number of cars that people own, that's equally stupid. The government can find ways of reducing traffic congestion that don't involve needlessly reducing parking spaces or taking away a person's right to control/restrict access to his own property. And as for Mark's suggestion that the government should just fill in the curb cuts and take away people's driveways, well, that makes me wonder what kind of jealous mean-spirited idiots live in this city.