Posted June 3, 2002. Community comments on this report are welcomed. Please send them to ANC 2E.
Contents:
May 30, 2002
Ensuring the best use of curbside parking is extremely important throughout the urban areas of the District of Columbia. A good curbside-parking plan is particularly important in Georgetown, a densely populated historic district with strong components of residential, commercial and institutional uses.
While it must be recognized that the streets are public space and should as much as possible be freely and impartially open to all, priority for on-street parking must be given to nearby residents. Curbside parking, where it can be safely implemented, is an important benefit to residents, visitors, and commercial interests, all of which contribute to a thriving community. As the nation's capital, Washington DC has a special responsibility to accommodate visitors from around the United States. However, as a residential community, Washington must also protect its citizens and their needs.
In the modern world, automobile access is a necessity, notwithstanding the good availability of mass-transit alternatives to automobiles in Georgetown. Yet, a large number of residents in the ANC 2E area must rely on curbside parking for their vehicle. Residents who are often forced to park far from their homes are disproportionately inconvenienced compared to occasional visitors, and lack of parking can greatly reduce quality of life. Public safety is also a concern when cars are parked out of sight and residents must walk long distances after parking. In addition, reducing the ready accessibility of non-commercial parking to visitors can be good public policy, because it encourages visitors to use alternative means of transportation and so reduces traffic congestion and air pollution.
An effective and flexible legislated system must be in place to give residents the access to nearby curbside parking that they need while also providing for special residential needs and fair access to others. A functional system must balance the demands of residents who want to park their own vehicles, residents who want to have guests, and visitors who want to enjoy the thriving commercial and historic district of Georgetown. For years, the city has worked along with the community of Georgetown to try to strike that delicate balance.
In August, 2000, The Georgetown Neighborhood Parking Task Force, in conjunction with the Department of Public Works (DPW) published a report as the culmination of upwards of three years of work. The task force reported that they had created over four hundred parking spaces in Georgetown, made changes to the structure of RPP in order to improve parking legislation and enforcement, and provided valuable statistical information about parking in Georgetown. This report acted as the starting point for the current proposal.
Despite the best efforts of the community and the city up to this point, however, the current system remains the focus of considerable criticism. Residents continue to complain about the inadequacy of on-street parking and the difficulty of obtaining visitors passes. Residents with medical problems and other special needs are unaware of mechanisms already in place to allow their needed help to park in the District. Enforcement remains inadequate.
The following report contains ANC 2E's recommendations for how to improve the residential parking program. It is composed of a series of resolutions adopted by the ANC at its regularly held public meeting and a brief sketch outlining the discussions of the perceived problems with the current system, as well as options for improvement that were suggested by a small working group of residents for ANC 2E's review.
On February 19, 2002, the ANC 2E Traffic and Parking Committee convened a working group to discuss problems associated with the visitor parking permit program (VPPP) and with the District's residential parking program (RPP). The working group consisted of representatives from the ANC, Citizens Association of Georgetown (CAG), residents of communities within ANC 2E and of neighboring communities, and representatives of the business community of Georgetown.
The purpose of the working group was to discuss problems with the VPPP and to brainstorm options for solutions. These discussions quickly led into discussions of the RPP as a whole. The outcome was a list of parking-related problems that the working group deemed to be important for the Georgetown community as well as for other residential neighborhoods throughout the city.
These problems and potential solutions were presented to the Georgetown community at a public meeting of the ANC 2E Traffic and Parking Committee that was held on April 9, 2002. The outcome of that meeting was a list of recommendations for the ANC. Those recommendations, with the remainder of this report, were presented to the public again at ANC 2E's regular public meeting on April 30, 2002.
Below are listed the ANC 2E resolutions from the April 30, 2002 meeting. The meeting was properly noticed and was attended by all eight commissioners. Following the resolutions is an outline of the problems and possible solutions as identified by the working group before the April 9 meeting.
1. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E contends that, because of the poor state of the current system in terms of technology, enforcement, and program structure, it would be imprudent to completely change the current visitor pass system. Until the current Residential Parking Program meets community standards of enforcement and technology, ANC 2E believes it best to work with the current system of visitor's passes and work out the problems that exist with it.
Discussion
When this issue was brought before the public, many residents expressed concern about the potential for counterfeiting and other abuse under all of the proposed alternatives (described below). It appears that no alternative plans have been proposed that can be effectively implemented until technology and enforcement are improved. Should such capabilities be enhanced, this question could be reconsidered. The commission reached its position after hearing great opposition to changing the current VPPP within the current RPP system.
2. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E contends that the first step in improving the RPP and the VPPP is to improve technology. For proper functioning of the system, we encourage the city to invest in technology that can keep accurate records of registered vehicles and visitors passes. That technology must be network-ready, and the parties involved in the administration of the RPP and VPPP systems must be able to access the information stored in the program. In particular, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Public Works, and the Metropolitan Police Department must be able to participate in the system. Additionally, the city should begin to invest in technology that would allow enforcement aides to access the information instantaneously.
3. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E supports the city's purchase of handheld computers for parking enforcement aids so that they can better do their jobs.
4. The following resolution was approved by a 6–2 vote of ANC 2E: ANC 2E recommends that, in addition to the Metropolitan Police Department, the Department of Motor Vehicles begin to issue temporary visitor passes. The DMV issues every other type of temporary pass and for consistency should be able to issue a temporary visitor pass. Additionally, with the implementation of DMV satellite offices, residents can access VPPPs more conveniently at the DMV than at MPD.
Discussion
The Department of Motor Vehicles informed ANC 2E and the public that it currently issues passes for healthcare workers, contractors, and those seeking short-termed reciprocity. The only other types of temporary passes issued by the city are regular visitor passes, which are only issued by MPD.
5. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E recommends that the Department of Motor Vehicles should develop and implement a comprehensive outreach plan that will better inform people of the variety of passes that are available.
6. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E recommends that because the parking program is effectively run through three distinct District offices that one person should be designated to oversee and coordinate parking problems among the three offices.
7. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E contends that relaxation of parking regulations should not be permitted. In order for the RPP to function properly, it must be consistently enforced regardless of special requests for lax enforcement.
Discussion
See enforcement section in the accompanied table for more information on the intent of this motion.
8. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E recommends that enforcement patterns must be more varied and distributed. Enforcement officers must be deployed continuously throughout the posted hours of RPP. Furthermore, they should plan their routes so that they are not in the same places at the same time every day.
9. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E recommends that towing on the major thoroughfares of Georgetown, particularly Wisconsin Ave., Reservoir Rd, and M St. must be continuously monitored for illegally parked cars during rush hour. Tow trucks should be on hand for immediate deployment during those times.
10. The following resolution was approved unanimously by ANC 2E: ANC 2E strongly opposes measures to limit the number of parking permit stickers to residents who have garages because of opposition from residents and a concern about the feasibility of enforcement.
Discussion
See Residential Parking Program section of the accompanied table for more information on the purpose and intent of this motion.
11. ANC 2E offers no position on this matter. Discussion suggested that this is not an issue impacting Georgetown residents.
Discussion
See Residential Parking Program section of the accompanied table for more information on the purpose and intent of this motion.
With regard to the overall structure of the VPPP, four main alternate programs were discussed, each of which comes with a separate set of advantages and disadvantages.
Structure: Each household would get a number of passes that are each valid for one day. Passes would have scratch-off dates that would make it difficult to counterfeit and reuse passes. Unscratched tickets are not valid. Each household could be limited to a particular number of tickets with the possibility to obtain additional books under strict control.
Advantages: This type of program is flexible for residents and makes unexpected situations easier to deal with, such as tradesmen or unexpected guests. It has counterfeit resistance built into it with the scratch-off validation. It allows for multiple guests at a given time. Additionally, hosts would not need to gather information about their guests, such as license plate numbers, ahead of time. Overall, it is very simple and easy to manage.
Disadvantages: Hang Tag passes make it more difficult to monitor which cars are being given visitor passes, so it becomes easier for the same car to be parked as a visitor over a long period. This isn't necessarily a disadvantage, but it could be a problem if the system is not structured so as to prevent excessive purchasing of additional passes. District law does not allow a vehicle to be housed in the District for more than thirty consecutive days without being registered. Because this type of system doesn't maintain a good record of how many passes a particular vehicle has been given, it makes it more difficult to enforce that aspect of the law.
Structure: Each household would be given a certain number, probably two, visitor tags that are not dated. They can be given out to guests on arrival and returned to host upon departure. The hanging tag would be decaled and barcoded to prevent forgery.
Advantages: This type of program is flexible for residents and makes unexpected situations, such as tradesmen or unexpected guests, easier to deal with. Hosts would not need to gather information about their guests, such as license plate numbers, ahead of time. Overall, it is very simple and easy to manage.
Disadvantages: Hard passes make it more difficult to tell how long a pass has been on any one car, so it becomes easier for the same car to be parked as a visitor over a long period. District law does not allow a vehicle to be housed in the District for more than thirty consecutive days without registering it. Because this type of system doesn't maintain a good record of how many passes a particular vehicle has been given, it makes it more difficult to enforce that aspect of the law.
This type of program also limits the number of guests a person has at given time. While this is not necessarily a disadvantage, it prevents small gatherings at a person's home that are afforded in other systems.
Structure: Each household would be given a number of adjudication passes. Visitors would park on the street without posting any visitors pass, and the host could give the adjudication passes to the visitor to remit in place of payment for any citations received.
Advantages: This type of program is flexible for residents and makes emergency visitors easier to deal with, such as tradesmen or unexpected guests. Hosts would not need to gather information about their guests, such as license plate numbers, ahead of time. However, it does allow for a tracking of visitor license plates numbers to prevent abuse of the system in the form of overuse.
Disadvantages: An adjudication system's biggest problem is that it is a waste of manpower on the part of the enforcement aids because some or many of the tickets that they issue will be legitimately invalid.
This system also permits abuse in the form of transferal of passes. For instance, residents could sell their passes to people who have received citations.
Structure: Residents go to the police department or some other agency office to get visitor passes.
Advantages: A similar form of this system has been in place in the community for some time, so people are better at understanding how it works and what they need to do. Additionally, if executed properly, it allows the District to keep good records of visitors and prevent abuse of the law.
Disadvantages: The system is cumbersome for residents and hard to execute for the city. Residents need to leave their home every time they need a pass, and they need to know personal information about their guests, often before they arrive. Emergency visitors are not dealt with adequately in the plan, and frequent guests are not adequately dealt with.
The following table lists the problems reported during the ANC 2E Traffic and Parking Committee working group meetings and the April 9 public meeting held by the committee. In the second column is the recommendation for action or finding of fact by the working group. Also referenced is the related ANC 2E action at its regular public meeting of April 30 (if any). Unless noted otherwise, the ANC position was in support of the working group recommendation.
| Perceived problem | Task Force Finding or Proposal | ANC motion |
|---|---|---|
| Visitor Parking Permit Program | 1 | |
| Abuse of Visitor Permits for Long-Term Use—The current system relies on a written log of permits issued. This antiquated system allows abuse by letting individuals obtain repeated visitor passes, contrary to regulations. Without computerization, records cannot readily be cross-referenced or shared between offices. Additionally, exclusive use of paper records prohibits expansion of the program. | Technology—The VPPP, as well as the RPP, needs to be computerized. Maintaining an electronic log will enable proper functioning of a complex system. Accurate records of how many times a particular car has been granted a pass must be available instantaneously to avoid abuse of the system. Additionally, a well-kept database of passes will provide portability so that the VPPP system can be accessible outside of the police station. | 2, 3 |
| Inconvenient Accessibility—Traveling to the police station to pick up parking permits makes the process more inconvenient than it would be if there was a more central location to pick up visitor passes. It requires that people leave and probably lose their parking space in order to get a pass.
Residents have complained about poor service from the police department, while the police department has complained that issuing visitor passes is an inefficient use of manpower. |
Expansion of the program to the DMV—Although running the program out of police stations provides many advantages to residents, including extended hours, for many people, the police station is not conveniently accessible. The DMV is currently in the process of setting up satellite offices throughout the city, and DMV offices could also provide visitor-parking passes. In conjunction with technology implementations, DMV participation could be a major step toward making the program more accessible. | 4 |
| No provision for legitimate frequent visitors—There are some legitimate visitors to the Georgetown community who must frequently park on residential streets for extended periods (for example, visiting nurses). | The task force learned that the current VPPP has mechanisms for dealing with qualified frequent visitors, but many residents are not well informed about these features. This aspect of the existing program should be better highlighted and advertised. This recommendation is not intended to imply that all frequent visitors should be qualified to receive temporary passes. In particular, special passes should be offered to registered nurses and qualified home-healthcare workers, and licensed contractors with proof of work (with explicit time limitations) | 5, 6 |
| No provision for tradesmen—It is often difficult to get a parking pass for one-day tradesmen (such as plumbers or electricians) because they often come with little notice, for emergencies. | The hang-pass and hard-tag systems would essentially solve this problem. No further discussion was held on this issue and no recommendation was considered as to how to improve the current system. | |
| Residential Parking Program | ||
| No provision for leased cars—The current system provides no mechanism for people who lease cars outside of the District to obtain parking stickers. | The task force learned that there is currently a mechanism in place for registering leased vehicles in the District. The task force did not support any measures that would permit leased out-of-state vehicles from obtaining RPP passes without first registering the vehicle in the District. | |
| No mechanism for loaned vehicles—When vehicles need to be repaired or serviced, there is no legitimate means of obtaining parking privileges for temporary replacement vehicles. | The hang-pass and hard-tag systems would essentially solve this problem. No further discussion was held on this issue and no recommendation was considered as to how to improve the current system.
Note: While neither ANC 2E nor the task force took a position on a solution to this problem, it is considered an important problem and ANC 2E might well address it in the future. | |
| Ward Two commuters abuse system—Because parking zones extend throughout the entire ward, people who live outside of Georgetown can use their Zone 2 parking sticker to park in Georgetown, far from their home. | Zone Size—In order to ensure the integrity of the residential parking program, which seeks to provide residents with on-street near their home, RPP zones should be reduced in size. One suggestion for new zones is to use the Neighborhood Clusters that have been defined by the DC Office of Planning. Cluster boundaries are for neighborhoods and are not affected by redistricting. Zones of this size would allow people to park within their community and build cohesiveness, and will help to eliminate the unfortunate parking effects caused by commuters.
Note: ANC 2E did not take a position on this issue, although the task force discussed it at length. The above is only meant as a record of the task forces’ discussion and is not an ANC position. ANC 2E expects to discuss this issue further in the future. | |
| Multiple cars in a household take up spaces—Residents who own multiple vehicles take up a disproportionate share of on-street parking spaces. While people are entitled to own as many cars as they please, they should be discouraged from having several vehicles. | Sliding Scale for Multiple Cars—A proposal was made that every household should be permitted to register up to three vehicles at the same rate, but that after three, however, there should be a steep increase in the per-car price of the parking permit to discourage households from parking excessive numbers of cars on the street.
Limit Parking Stickers for Residents with Off-Street Parking—A proposal was made that residents having access to off-street parking should not be allowed to obtain residential parking permits for those vehicles which could be housed off-street. While this proposal received some support, most comments were strongly in opposition. Objections included the difficulty of determining access to off-street parking and the disincentives this proposal might present for maintaining off-street parking. | No Action: 11 Opposed: 10 |
| Enforcement | ||
| Informal Relaxing of Enforcement for Some Groups—It has been pointed out that enforcement officers are often encouraged not to ticket in certain areas because of events that are occurring nearby. | Enforcement must be formal and constant. There should not be exceptions for any group because there is no way of doing this fairly. | 7 |
| Inconsistent enforcement—Some areas of Georgetown get little enforcement, while in some areas enforcement is stricter. | Make Enforcement More Comprehensive and Constant—While certain areas of Georgetown need heavier enforcement than others, it is important not to ignore any part of the community. | 8 |
| Predictable enforcement patterns—Some of the areas that are receiving strict enforcement are being patrolled in a patterned fashion, allowing abusers of the system to predict the timing of enforcement. | Vary Times in Particular Areas—Parking enforcement officers’ schedules should be rotated on a regular basis to prevent familiarity with time and location of enforcement. | 8 |
| Need for towing—In high-traffic areas of Georgetown, such as M St., illegally parked vehicles are more than an inconvenience for residents—they slow down traffic throughout Georgetown. These vehicles cannot be permitted to remain illegally parked. | Increase towing, particularly on M St. during rush hour. | 9 |