Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
D.C. Ticketing Homeowners for Parking in Their Own Driveways
Fresh from a proposal to charge residents extra fees for street lights, D.C.’s latest effort to generate revenue is to ticket residents for parking in their own driveways.
No, that isn’t an exaggeration:
Beverly Anderson is mad as hell. She just started to get tickets for parking in her own driveway.
That’s right. The District of Columbia is ticketing people who park their cars in their own driveways.
“This is clearly an attempt by the city to extort money out of property owners,” Anderson tells WTOP.
Anderson has received two of the $20 tickets in the past month. Anderson has owned the Capitol Hill house (and the driveway, so she thought) for more than ten years and has never gotten a ticket. And she’s not alone.
It turns out that D.C. has an odd, obscure law stating that the land between the front of your house and the street, otherwise known as your driveway and front yard, falls under a bizarre classification known as “private property set aside for public use.” Essentially, though owners have to pay for its maintenance and upkeep (they can be fined if they don’t), it’s considered public property. Which apparently means that, technically, you can’t park your car on it. The city recently dusted off the law, and began writing parking tickets if any part of a resident’s car is parked between the front facade of their house and the street, even if it’s parked in the driveway.
When Anderson complained, one D.C. official told her that if she wanted, she could pay the city to lease the land between the front of her house and the street, which would allow her to park her car there legally.
In November 2007, I wrote about how D.C. was phasing out due process rights for people who want to contest parking tickets in person.
Vermont Gun Owner|4.29.09 @ 7:20PM|#
Can we start ticketing Congressmen for parking their asses in the public seats of the Capitol Building?
Paul|4.29.09 @ 7:23PM|#
"private property set aside for public use."
In post-Kelo America, this is known as your house.
Paul|4.29.09 @ 7:25PM|#
Do people in DC have fences around their front yards? What would happen if you fenced in your hard and driveway in such a way that the cops/ticketers physically couldn't get in?
Kolohe|4.29.09 @ 7:28PM|#
It turns out that D.C. has an odd, obscure law stating that
the land between the front of your house and the street
Before RTFA, I thought maybe she had the type of garage that's
nearly on the street, so parking in front of it would block the
sidewalk. In that case the city might have had a point.
But looking at the pic, the car isn't even in front of the house,
it's on the side of it.
hmm|4.29.09 @ 7:28PM|#
This is where a 100 German Shepard, 10 feet of chain, and a large 5 foot stake come into play. Along with a sign stating, "You get the ticket on the windshield and I will pay double."
|4.29.09 @ 7:33PM|#
Essentially, though owners have to pay for its maintenance
and upkeep (they can be fined if they don't), it's considered
public property. Which apparently means that, technically, you
can't park your car on it.
How does this follow? Is there an ordinance that says prohibits
parking on public property? Or failing that, does the District
install parking meters or post No Parking signs next to every
driveway?
dfd|4.29.09 @ 7:36PM|#
This is where a 100 German Shepard, 10 feet of chain, and a
large 5 foot stake come into play. Along with a sign stating, "You
get the ticket on the windshield and I will pay double."
They'd just have the Metro Police come shoot the dog and then
ticket you for having both a car and a dog in a "public" space.
Love Crimes|4.29.09 @ 7:37PM|#
"They'd just have the Metro Police come shoot the dog and then
ticket you for having both a car and a dog in a "public"
space."
a car and a DEAD dog in a "public" space.
dfd|4.29.09 @ 7:42PM|#
How does this follow? Is there an ordinance that says
prohibits parking on public property?
Yes, actually. You can't park in a "public space" that is not on
the street. In essence they are treating it like parking on a
sidewalk.
|4.29.09 @ 7:56PM|#
It's actually not that obscure of a law, although D.C.'s does have an over-reaching extent. Many cities that have a grass strip between the sidewalk and street consider it to be private property, but require you to keep it maintained. There are also quite a few cities (mostly in blue states) that will ticket you for parking (red state fashion) on your lawn.
|4.29.09 @ 8:02PM|#
Reason #56 why I have no desire to own any property any more. Of course, in this case they could ticket a renter's car too, but the point is: you don't actually own property, you just rent it from the government.
anon|4.29.09 @ 8:07PM|#
Just keep nodding as they explain the law, the procedure, where
to send the payment, where to appeal, how its not really your
property, just keep them talking...
don't let them see your hands in your pocket... checking the
safety... off, good... keep talking...
Robert|4.29.09 @ 8:12PM|#
OK, so your driveway's for public use. What use would that be?
It's more depth than people need for help in making a turnaround
(substitute for U turn). What is that space being kept clear for?
Unless it's just an excuse to lease it back to you as in the
example given. But even then, if they don't advertise it, how does
anyone benefit?
Also, I suggest the title be changed to "...on Their Own
Driveways", because "in" suggests on the street parallel to the
curb, blocking the driveway.
Are you allowed to wash a car on the driveway if someone's sitting
in it and the engine running?
Grandpa Withers|4.29.09 @ 8:15PM|#
"OK, so your driveway's for public use. What use would that be?
It's more depth than people need for help in making a turnaround
(substitute for U turn). What is that space being kept clear
for?"
Emergency vehicles.
|4.29.09 @ 8:15PM|#
Throughout the history of civilization, tax-collectors have
always been "creative."
As a peaceful anarchist, I always wonder if "civilization" is worth
it's cost.
MJ|4.29.09 @ 8:37PM|#
Yes, it is arrogant big left-liberal government at work, but exactly what one must expect when governments have no respect for private property rights.
|4.29.09 @ 9:00PM|#
Back when I lived in the DC suburbs, I never considered living
within the district itself. This is one more reason why real estate
in Maryland and Virginia is far more appealing.
-jcr
K.T.|4.29.09 @ 9:00PM|#
I have no where else to vent, so a wholly unrelated
comment...
If President Obushma cuts into Lost with his 10,000 day
press conference, I'm switching my vote from (D) to (R) in the
Virginia goober-natorial race.
|4.29.09 @ 9:02PM|#
one D.C. official told her that if she wanted, she could pay
the city to lease the land between the front of her house and the
street,
Let's just say that if she had beaten the official to death for
suggesting that, the prosecution might want to use one of their
peremptory strikes to keep me off the jury.
-jcr
|4.29.09 @ 9:17PM|#
Your home may be your castle, but the moat area around it -- well, that belongs to US in the government, along with the alligators with which we stock it. Watch your step!
IceTrey|4.29.09 @ 9:22PM|#
"Any area between the property line and the building restriction
line shall be considered as private property set aside and treated
as public space under the care and maintenance of the property
owner."
In my opinion this would mean you can't park on the side or even in
back of your house either. If your houses footprint covers the
building restriction line on all four sides and the property line
encloses all four sides. Technically this could mean that your
entire yard, although private property is public space?! So I guess
if you had a backyard pool anyone in the city could come and use it
whenever they wanted.
perilisk|4.29.09 @ 9:25PM|#
Urge... to... kill... rising...
@JCR: Agreed. I might have to OJ that trial.
I hope Radley moves west of the Rockies so I can pray for DC to be
destroyed by an asteroid with a clear conscience. Not that I'm
religious, but you never know what could happen.
|4.29.09 @ 9:39PM|#
I hope DC mayor Adrian Fenty isn't too local to be on Dickipedia. Cuz, dick move.
Paul|4.29.09 @ 10:09PM|#
"Any area between the property line and the building
restriction line shall be considered as private property set aside
and treated as public space under the care and maintenance of the
property owner."
Strangely, Seattle has almost the opposite situation. The sidewalk
out to the street in front of your property... erh, I mean "your
property"-- sorry, almost forgot what country I'm in-- is public
space for which you're responsible. Sidewalk cracks because of the
100-year-old maple the city planted in the easement? It's on your
dime to fix it.
|4.29.09 @ 11:37PM|#
Brandybuck, I'm in a 'red' state and these pinheads are banning
parkin' on my yard right here...they already declare old cars that
may have an expired tax stamp as nuisances and haul em off to the
crusher then hand you a bill.
We own nothing, can use nothing, w/o paying tribute. Join me in
reminding these thieving pukes that they retain their sinecures
only at our pleasure, right?
Texas Toast|4.30.09 @ 12:08AM|#
I'm in a 'red' state and these pinheads are banning parkin'
on my yard right here
So am I, but local government is still Red (solid Democrat, 90%
black).
Sick of this|4.30.09 @ 12:41AM|#
"Join me in reminding these thieving pukes that they retain
their sinecures only at our pleasure, right?"
Forget sinecures, let's remind them that they retain their LIVES
only at our pleasure.
Those who survive the first round of attacks, I mean.
|4.30.09 @ 12:46AM|#
Wait... so can you park on the street in front of the house? If so, why do you get a ticket for one and not the other?
inDglass|4.30.09 @ 1:06AM|#
In Indianapolis, you can't park a car on any public or private property with a for sale sign on it, or you can be fined by the city. Your only legal options are to sell by word of mouth, classified ads, or to a dealer.
Colonel_Angus|4.30.09 @ 1:56AM|#
So... why does that fuckhead Chav think living in cities is so great?
Suki|4.30.09 @ 5:18AM|#
Wow, just wow. I hope writer friend is catching this. Fits right in with his future vision of DC.
Brn|4.30.09 @ 6:34AM|#
Someone might want to explain to these officials what happened to Charles I when he tried dusting off old laws and applying them in new and innovative ways to collect money.
|4.30.09 @ 8:51AM|#
Quickest solution- find out where the Mayor and Director of Public Works lives, and start using their yards like a park.
Xeones|4.30.09 @ 9:16AM|#
My initial reaction was "Nuke DC from orbit, it's the only way
to be sure." But then i remembered that the whole point of building
the capital where and how it was built was to discourage
people from living there. This is why Washington is not represented
in Congress, why it was built in a fetid swamp: to make living in
the seat of power and (thus) ruling this country as unpleasant and
unattractive a task as it ought to be. So it's probably inadvertent
on the city's part, but it's in keeping with, you know, how things
are SUPPOSED to be in the damn place.
I hope DC bans air conditioning next. Then we can REALLY party like
it's 1899, as the bureaucrats flee in droves every summer.
Fuck centralized power, yo.
|4.30.09 @ 9:55AM|#
"Quickest solution- find out where the Mayor and Director of
Public Works lives, and start using their yards like a park."
AWESOME Adam! I might fly to DC just for the opportunity to do that
myself.
CB
|4.30.09 @ 10:01AM|#
It sounds like essentially the same law we have in
Toronto.
I need to buy a permit to park in my driveway and if I don't, I can
get a parking ticket.
It seems like city officials like to pretend they're not raising
property taxes and instead put in all sorts of new taxes on your
property.
Eric S.|4.30.09 @ 10:24AM|#
FYI--
In University City, Missouri (crunchy inner-ring neighborhood of
St. Louis) you cannot park a pickup truck on your driveway.
phalkor|4.30.09 @ 11:39AM|#
When I found out the penalties for parking tickets I adopted a new policy; do not pay parking tickets. Apparently the only consequence is they can boot your car after the 3rd unpaid ticket or tow it after 3 days with boot or five tickets. The parking tickets are around 20 bucks and you get a bout at 5% chance to get one. A parking permit is $900, please tell me why it's a good idea to get one?
bubba|4.30.09 @ 12:16PM|#
the whole point of building the capital where and how it was
built was to discourage people from living there
Bingo. Fck them.
Kilroy|4.30.09 @ 12:33PM|#
"It turns out that D.C. has an odd, obscure law . . ."
So let me get this straight: when you entered into an arrangement
with the government (when you bought the house you agreed to any
easement and obligations already in place), they had a bit of odd
and obscure fine print already in place. Either you didn't read all
the fine print and didn't take the time to understand what you were
getting into; or you read it and thought that since it's stupid,
odd or obscure that somehow it didn't apply to you; or you knew it
would apply to you but didn't think you'd get caught.
Is it a stupid law? ABSOLUTELY
Are the police wrong for enforcing it? NO
We can't legitimately expect freedom of contract and enforcement of
agreements if we don't want the stupid and inconvenient parts to
apply to us.
Bad laws need to be enforced as a lesson to stop making bad laws,
and as an incentive to have them fixed. Perhaps the police are
doing the right thing by raising awareness of this bad law, which
will lead to it being changed.
Colonel_Angus|4.30.09 @ 12:42PM|#
^That sounds like something that might not actually appear on a property deed. In other words something that people might not know about until they actually get fucked over by it. Just like almost any obscure law.
|4.30.09 @ 12:58PM|#
"Come on up to NH | April 30, 2009, 8:54am | #
Move up to NH... the Free State.
www.freestateproject.org"
I live in NH, and from December to April, we can't park on the
public streets overnight. I do think we're done with the snow
now.
In southeastern NH, we have a huge influx of MassHoles bringing
their socialist crap with them, harassing conservatives. My
original intent was to sell my house (after 25 years, which is
closing in) for a profit (Hah!) to one of them, and leave. but
where to go...
I am thinking, houseboat...motor home for a change, alternate
between the two... OR a houseboat on a trailer, floods be
damned.
Kilroy|4.30.09 @ 1:04PM|#
It sounds like that strip of land in front of the house is
considered an easement, which should show up on any property
surveys and assessments. Even if it doesn't, you're still bound by
the law and ignorance is not a legitimate defense.
I'm certainly not defending the law itself, just its enforcement.
We should never make exceptions to laws, because that won't fix the
underlying problem. Instead we should enforce them so literally and
thoroughly that it forces lawmakers to really think about the laws
they create. When we cut corners and do "what's right" we help hide
the consequences of bad decisions, and the lawmakers and leaders
face no accountability.
Sometimes the most subversive thing you can do to an organization
or government is to follow orders and do what you're told. It's
amazing how much they actually hate that. No joke.
Mr. X|4.30.09 @ 1:14PM|#
In Indianapolis, you can't park a car on any public or
private property with a for sale sign on it, or you can be fined by
the city. Your only legal options are to sell by word of mouth,
classified ads, or to a dealer.
This law is probably unconstitutional. The Institute for Justice
won a case in the 6th Circuit striking down a similar law. 6th
Circuit doesn't cover Indiana, but if you were to put a for sale
sign on your car and get ticketed for it, I'd be willing to bet
that IJ would hook you up with pro bono representation.
|4.30.09 @ 1:49PM|#
Kilroy,
"...We should never make exceptions to laws..."
I guaranty you broke a few laws today. Maybe you hit the jackpot
and committed an obscure felony.
Have you read all of the laws in your city, county, and state?
Kilroy|4.30.09 @ 2:08PM|#
Although nothing specific comes to mind, I suppose it's very
possible that I did break a law of some sort today; and if I got in
trouble for it then the first thing I'd do is verify that the law
does exist and applies in that situation. If not, then I'd appeal.
If so, then I'd accept the punishment.
The second thing I'd do is decide whether it's a law that should
stay, go, or be changed (based on risk assessment). If it needs to
go, or be changed, then I'd go out of my way to see that
happen.
What I wouldn't do is say: Yes it's a law, and yes I've agreed to
live according to the laws of my community, but this one is dumb so
I don't think it should apply to me.
Stagman|4.30.09 @ 2:09PM|#
This factually indistinguishable from a protection racket:
Mafia robs store. Mafia goes to store owner and offers
protection from robberies they themselves commit.
vs.
Government writes ticket for parking on your property.
Government then offers to "lease" the property back to the
property's owner to avoid tickets the government writes.
I take it back, what DC is doing is worse. At least the store owner
still owns his store after buying protection.
|4.30.09 @ 2:43PM|#
Kilroy
From your earlier post:
"...Either you didn't read all the fine print and didn't take the
time to understand what you were getting into..."
My point is that it's an almost impossible task to figure out how
every law will affect you. Especially if you're not a lawyer.
Kilroy|4.30.09 @ 2:50PM|#
StupendousMan, you're exactly right, and that is part of the
point I'm trying to make.
If we just shrug our shoulders and do the best we can and
bend/break the rules and make exceptions when they get in the way
of progress, then nothing will change. If we stick to them 100%
then either people will get angry enough to demand the problem gets
fixed or things will grind to a halt, forcing a fix anyway.
The fact that it's practically impossible to not break rules
because not everyone is a lawyer is a problem that needs to be
fixed. The only way that is going to happen is by not sweeping the
problem under the rug and pulling out the duct tape to keep things
functioning.
|4.30.09 @ 3:54PM|#
There's a simple solution to this. Just show up on the lawns of representatives, mayors, and cops. Hold a barbecue. When they ask you to leave, tell them this is public property and according to the law you have every right to be there. Make sure to do this in mass, not just as an individual as individuals don't have rights in America.
|4.30.09 @ 5:03PM|#
What a stupid and ill-informed article. Did the "journalist"
attempt to do any research? DC doesn't have a front yard
requirement, and therefore most houses are built up to the front
property line. There is the "appearance" of a front yard or
driveway because the actual paved streets are often narrower than
the very generous 60-90 foot public right of way. Therefore there
is the appearance of 10-20 feet of front yard that is actually
owned and controlled by the city.
(to be totally and technically accurate the federal government owns
title to all public rights of way, but jurisdiction is transferred
to the DC Government).
Before you spout off, maybe you should do some damned research.
Idiot.
Invisible Finger|4.30.09 @ 5:58PM|#
Yes it's a law, and yes I've agreed to live according to the
laws of my community
Unless you specifically gave carte blanche to every law any
legislator come up with, you didn't agree to that.
Russ 2000|4.30.09 @ 6:05PM|#
I tend to agree with Dave if I can see that photo accurately. In
Chicago we had a notorious cop who used a ruler to check how much
of your rear bumper was hanging over the sidewalk to note the exact
amount on the citation. If the woman complaining had a miniscule
portion of the car hanging over the sidewalk, it would not have
been a surprise to me.
Of course, cops have no valid reason to complain that the public
doesn't respect them when the PD treats the public like this.
Really?|4.30.09 @ 8:30PM|#
Yes it's a law, and yes I've agreed to live according to the
laws of my community
So if the lobbyists successfully bride the legislators to pass a
law to round up and gas all the Jews, you'd be ok with that?
It's pretty dangerous for people to have a "whatever the law says,
and screw human and civil rights" attitude.
Kilroy|5.1.09 @ 12:32PM|#
C'mon "Really?", stop looking for a fight that isn't
there.
In no way have I said that all laws are good, nor have I said that
laws that are enacted illegally (via bribery, in violation of the
constitution, etc.) are ok.
My point is that we should change or remove bad laws rather than
leave them in place and just ignore them when it's
convenient.
Do you really want the police to be in the position of picking and
choosing which laws to enforce based on convenience and their
personal opinion of what "makes sense"? I don't, I'd rather give
them only good laws to enforce.
FIX the problem, don't leave it there and then complain about
it!
|5.1.09 @ 9:54PM|#
K.T.: your "thank the lord" comment was the exact same thought, word for word, that I had after reading the story. I, thankfully, only rented for the eight years that I lived there. I can only imagine the nightmare of being a homeowner there.
|5.4.09 @ 1:47PM|#
The answer to this is EASY -- if D.C. wants to take the position
that it has some kind of interest in the front yards of private
property, then make them take the good with the bad -- here's
how:
1.) Locate a dangerous condition on your driveway; i.e., pothole,
uneven pavement, etc.
2.) Trip/fall on the dangerous condition;
3.) Sue D.C. for negligence -- after all, you were injured on
D.C.'s property, so surely they are liable for your injuries.
Really, the answer here is for the law to be nuked; it's old,
wrong, and unnecessary. Get rid of it.
strat|5.5.09 @ 2:22AM|#
Per Wikipedia on Charles I and the Ship Tax: "It will be seen,
then, that the statement of Henry Hallam that in 1634 William Noy,
the Attorney-General, unearthed in the Tower of London old records
of ship money as a tax disused and forgotten for centuries has no
real foundation."
On that note, did we ever repeal the telegraph (now phone) tax
passed to fund the Spanish-American War?
|5.5.09 @ 8:54PM|#
> Per Wikipedia...
People who quote Wikipedia for anything sound like idiots. Go to a
real source. With few exceptions, the more popular a resource on
the Internet is, the more ret@rded it is. Google being one of the
few exceptions.
The fact is, ret@rd things attract masses of ret@rded people who
think they are being smart by jumping on a bandwagon. But that
doesn't make you look smart when everyone sees that all the people
on the bandwagon are ret@rded. Think of Wikipedia as such a
bandwagon of ret@rds, and don't associate yourself with it.
anonymous|10.7.09 @ 8:43PM|#
lets all take a big fat shit in the driveways of D.C officials it is "public" property.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245