If you’re reading this, please head down right now to the Zoning Commission, 441 4th St NW (One Judiciary Square). If you arrive before 6:30, I’ll be at Firehook (until 6) and then out front; everyone testifying in support of the rules gets a free Firehook cookie on me. Opponents: feel free to spend lots of time writing detailed comments on this post. :)
This is the last of ten daily posts about why the Zoning Commission should approve the Office of Planning recommendations on off-street parking, leading up to the hearing on Thursday, July 31 at 6:30 pm.
- #10: Row houses aren’t obsolete after all
- #9: Removing minimums is proven elsewhere
- #8: Car sharing reduces parking demand
- #7: On-street management solves “spillover”
- #6: Minimums undermine neighborhood retail
- #5: Minimums deter good projects
- #4: Minimums raise housing costs
- #3: The sky won’t fall
- #2: Historic districts show life without minimums
Today’s argument is very simple: Parking requirements cause traffic.
More parking means more cars.
More cars mean more driving.
More driving means more traffic.
DC’s streets have no more room for more traffic. We’re not about to widen them, nor should we. Major routes are already plenty busy. DC is growing, and some of those people will get around by driving, while others won’t. To avoid paralyzing gridlock, we need policies that promote as much of the latter and as little of the former as possible. This change will do that.
Our choice is simple. More suburban development, more traffic, more pollution, more high gas bills… or higher transit ridership, bicycling, and roads with enough room so people who really do need to drive can do so.
The Current reporter asked me why this is so important. As I told him, it’s important because parking affects so much else. And because we may be stuck with this zoning code for another 50 years. We can’t afford 50 years of the 1958 vision of the city.
Come on down to 441 4th Street right now and speak up.