Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In

In an effort to patch a budget gap, city officials in Washington D.C. are considering increasing the annual fee for a residential street parking permit from $15 to $30.

The idea seems like a winner overall: It would help move parking fees ever so slightly more in line with the true value of street space (though still woefully under-priced from that standpoint). And it would raise revenues rather painlessly, spreading the price increase broadly.

false

Topher Mathews at Greater Greater Washington says there's still a better way to structure the increase. He argues for leaving the price static on households with only one car, while doubling the fee for each additional car owned by a given family. He offers this example of how such an increase would work for the neighborhood of Georgetown and its parking crunch:

According to the 2000 Census, there are roughly 4,936 cars in Georgetown. There are only 4,640 households in Georgetown. Of those households here's how the car ownership breaks down:

  • 20% of households have no car
  • 57% of households have one car
  • 23% of households have more than one car

You might think that since only 23% of households have multiple cars, they can't be causing much of the parking shortage. But that's wrong. Almost half (46%) of cars in Georgetown are owned by households that own more than one car.

Essentially, these multi-car households are taking more than their "fair share" of street space and can do so simply because the majority of people don't do it. Moreover, they only pay an extra $15 per car to do it. That's not right.

Fee increases that deter multiple car ownership not only have the potential to raise more revenue than across-the-board fees, says Mathews, they could also reduce congestion by helping ensure the costs of owning more than one car better reflect the associated social costs. That's a true win-win.

Elsewhere on the Network today: The Urbanophile outlines a proposal that makes developers accountable for future costs they may impose on municipalities in the event they eventually abandon the development. The Overhead Wire rebuts a Megan McArdle article in The Atlantic, which contrasted China's high-speed rail development plans with the United States', based on relative population. And Human Transit explains how transfer avoidance among transit systems can lead to complicated routes that have the effect of deterring casual users.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Trump’s ‘EV Mandate’ Does Not Exist. But Car Dependency Does — And We Can End It

The new president has sworn to unravel Biden's EV plans. But would they have been enough to decarbonize the transportation sector without confronting how much Americans drive?

January 22, 2025

Wednesday’s Headlines Get a Gentleman’s ‘C’

Transportation for America gave the Biden administration middling grades. Meanwhile, President Trump is already following through on promises to cancel EVs.

January 22, 2025

Drivers Keep Hitting Pedestrians In Front of An Iconic St. Louis Ice Cream Shop. Advocates Are Fighting Back.

A series of crashes outside a popular St. Louis landmark carries a larger lesson about traffic violence, and the cost of government inaction.

January 22, 2025

Tuesday’s Headlines Take Me Home, Country Roads

Getting around without a car in a small town isn't easy, as one Fast Company writer found out. More bike lanes and denser town centers would help.

January 21, 2025

How America Can Reconnect Its Neighborhoods Before the Next Climate Catastrophe

America is replete with sprawling, disconnected neighborhoods that send residents out of their way by design. A new study explores just how bad it is — and what we can do about it.

January 21, 2025
See all posts