Are driveways required to have curb cuts?

[Eva B.]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA.

My car was recently towed after I parallel-parked on a street where the "driveway" had no markings at all--NO CURB CUT, no red paint on the curb, nothing. I was baffled about what happened to my car until a painter who was working on a house a few doors away pointed out a small sign on what looked like a front entryway recessed several feet from the sidewalk that said "No Parking--Violators Will be Towed at the Owner's Expense." We scrutinized the sidewalk and saw no official indication that this was a driveway, but someone had painted two lines with dark purple paint (!) on the street where the "driveway" was. Of course, I couldn't see this when I was driving and after I parked my car, they weren't visible either.

So my question is this: are homeowners required to have curb cuts or any other official visual indicators marking their driveway that can be seen from the sidewalk? Would it be worthwhile to protest the ticket?

Thanks for your help!What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

[justalayman]

when you looked to the side, are you suggesting there was nothing that indicated it was a drive; Something such as tire ruts from use, a paved lane, anything?

[Eva B.]

Thanks for your question. No there were no tire ruts or a paved lane and no wear from use. There were two small patches of gray paint though that covered up where any markers should have been.

[CdwJava]

My car was recently towed after I parallel-parked on a street where the "driveway" had no markings at all--NO CURB CUT, no red paint on the curb, nothing. I was baffled about what happened to my car until a painter who was working on a house a few doors away pointed out a small sign on what looked like a front entryway recessed several feet from the sidewalk that said "No Parking--Violators Will be Towed at the Owner's Expense."

That sign has absolutely no bearing on a legal private tow for blocking the driveway. A private person can NOT legally authorize a tow from a public street all because they have a sign like that posted. All because the resident calls it a driveway does not make it so.

So, who towed it? Was it a private tow? If so, what authority (usually a Vehicle Code section) was cited to justify the tow?

If the city towed it, then there is definitely an authority section.

So my question is this: are homeowners required to have curb cuts or any other official visual indicators marking their driveway that can be seen from the sidewalk? Would it be worthwhile to protest the ticket?

No, "curb cuts" are not required to designate a driveway.

You got a tow AND a ticket? What code section is on the ticket?

And, in case this is a city of county code, what city or county is this?

[Eva B.]

Thanks for your response--I really appreciate it. The city (San Francisco) towed my car and the ticket code was 500/500E "Blocking Driveway". Part of the problem is that the no parking sign was posted in a recessed alcove and the doors at a glance look very much like entry doors (French doors), not garage doors. You really had to look hard to see it was a garage. More bad luck, a large tree on the sidewalk blocked the sightline to the sign, so I couldn't see the sign or the garage from my parked car. I wish the homeowner had posted the no parking sign on the tree--that would have saved everyone a headache!

From what you're saying though, the homeowner doesn't have to have curb cuts--which would be the very thing that would solve the problem. Under the circumstances, would protesting the ticket be of any use?

Out of curiosity, why are curb cuts not required, especially in a city like SF?

Thanks again for your help!

[CdwJava]

Thanks for your response--I really appreciate it. The city (San Francisco) towed my car and the ticket code was 500/500E "Blocking Driveway".

I suspect that this refers to CVC 22500(e):

22500. No person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle
whether attended or unattended, except when necessary to avoid
conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a
peace officer or official traffic control device, in any of the
following places:
(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus
engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load
or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant
to an ordinance.
In unincorporated territory, where the entrance of a private road
or driveway is not delineated by an opening in a curb or by other
curb construction, so much of the surface of the ground as is paved,
surfaced, or otherwise plainly marked by vehicle use as a private
road or driveway entrance, shall constitute a driveway.

The highlighted portion for unincorporated areas may give you some idea how a hearing officer with the police or parking authority might interpret the section.

Understand that tows and parking cites are challenged "in house," so to speak, for the first two levels and only go before a judge if you keep contesting it.

As for the tow, have you gotten the car back? What code section did they cite as the authority to TOW the car?

Part of the problem is that the no parking sign was posted in a recessed alcove and the doors at a glance look very much like entry doors (French doors), not garage doors.

Was the way from the doors paved? Were there clear delineations (ruts or a level or gravel area) from those doors to the street? Was there a high curb? No curb?

The sign has no real legal standing unless posted (properly) by the city. I can post a "No Parking" sign in front of my house, but it has no legal standing at all.

From what you're saying though, the homeowner doesn't have to have curb cuts--which would be the very thing that would solve the problem. Under the circumstances, would protesting the ticket be of any use?

If the driveway was clearly a driveway to the average Joe, then you stand little chance of prevailing. If the space matches the rest of the yard, then maybe you will.

Out of curiosity, why are curb cuts not required, especially in a city like SF?

Because the law does not require it. And in many places (like in my city) many of the curbs are low, sloping curbs and not perpendicular to the pavement.

[Eva B.]

Thanks for the thorough explanation. I got my car back the same day and the citation code was indeed CVC 22500--the towing code was 500/500E "Blocked Driveway." The way from the doors was not paved; it was just the same sidewalk as the rest of the block, but that's pretty typical for San Francisco.

I think the situation is just confusing. The house painter said, "This is a weird block--I saw another car get towed for the same reason a couple of days ago." Which makes me wonder why the homeowner doesn't get the curb painted red so there's no question about where the driveway is. The curb is high, but tree roots are pushing it up in certain places, so it's not completely level there anyways. I don't think the driveway was clear to the average Joe, but I'm sure the homeowner would disagree!

Oh well! Thanks again for your help. Now I know what the law actually says, so that's good.

[CdwJava]

San Francisco has always been quite anal about their parking situation. Even 30 odd years ago when I started going there regularly it was tough on parking.

About all I can say is to suggest you be very, very careful in the future when parking in a residential area. Whenever I go to the city (which is rare these days) I park in lots and take public transportation or walk ... it's cheaper and less frustrating.

[Trustme1977]

You're completely right, they can't tow you if they don't have a curb cut and other driveways on the block had curb cuts for other driveways and their "driveway" did not. They likely couldn't get permission for that driveway and chose to ignore that "little issue" and are trying to assert their lack of a right to use a sidewalk as their driveway. The car was probably towed at night and the officer didn't look carefully and assumed it was a curb cut.

I would definitely protest the ticket, and if you have the time, sue them in small claims for the cost of the tow and our lost time fighting all of this crap.

As far as interpreting that statute, you can't interpret a statute by ignoring the first part of a sentence.
In unincorporated territory, where the entrance of a private road
or driveway is not delineated by an opening in a curb or by other
curb construction, so much of the surface of the ground as is paved,
surfaced, or otherwise plainly marked by vehicle use as a private
road or driveway entrance, shall constitute a driveway.

It doesn't matter if the ground surface is paved, or whether its marked as a private drive because there was a curb!!.. This doesn't sound like an unincorporated area with no curb, and it sounds like the street had a curb and drives WERE delineated by openings in the curb, and if so, then the portion highlighted by a previous poster would not apply.

It sounds like this person is some A**HOLE that is trying to skirt the permit process, either they were too cheap to apply for a curb cut permit during construction of their house, or (more likely) the area would not allow for the driveway (I bet it was two driveways and they only had permission for one). Also, SF won't paint the curb red if its not a legal driveway (AND that costs money too). There is some A** on my street who constructed a house like this, say, what street was this?

Good luck on the ticket, and be sure to take lots of pix of the curb when you fight it.

[CdwJava]

There still is no legal requirement under state law for there to be curb cuts to delineate the driveway. Pictures to contest the citation will be a must. If the OP prevails, then she can seek compensation from the department. She could also have sought a post-storage impound hearing on the tow had she requested it within 10 days of the tow. She did not, so she will have to try and submit a claim later ... again, provided she prevails in her challenge of the parking citation and that is by no means a sure thing.

[Trustme1977]

Exactly, there is no legal requirement there be a curb cut, just as the statutes says -- in an unincorporated area and if it is clearly marked as a driveway it is legal driveway. This logically implies that if a street is in an incorporated area and the driveways are delineated by curb cuts, then to be a legal driveway it must have a curb cut. Otherwise, the statute would make no sense, and laws are interpreted to be consistent with themselves. San Francisco has a stringent permitting process to create curb cuts based on the available parking in the area and the zoning of the house. There simply should not be a driveway over a sidewalk in the vast majority of the city, if it does exist, then it is in violation of the building code. The SFgov.org has a parking guide with links to the traffic code that discusses the width of a driveway as between curb cuts and the parking regulations by color of the curb. It also states that the city will not paint your curb if the driveway is in violation of a city code (e.g. illegal driveway). So no, there is no requirement there must be a curb cut for a driveway (but in 90% of SF this is the case, otherwise, the city parking and traffic codes would make no sense, and again the statutes are interpreted to be consistent with themselves. So yeah, if every other driveway on the street had a curb cut and this one didn't, then yes, it has to have a curb cut to be a legal driveway according to state and local statutes. (I only know of certain areas in Bernal Heights that don't have curbs).

It might also be an option to sue the people in small claims, but probably not worth your time or money, as you'll still have to try and collect the judgment if you're successful. Good luck!

[I_Got_Banned]

Exactly, there is no legal requirement there be a curb cut, just as the statutes says -- in an unincorporated area and if it is clearly marked as a driveway it is legal driveway.... ... ... ... ... ... So no, there is no requirement there must be a curb cut for a driveway... ... ... ... ... ...

Glad we got to the bottom of that one...

[CdwJava]

This logically implies that if a street is in an incorporated area and the driveways are delineated by curb cuts, then to be a legal driveway it must have a curb cut.

Here is the legal definition of a "driveway" in CA:

490. "Private road or driveway" is a way or place in private
ownership and used for vehicular travel by the owner and those having
express or implied permission from the owner but not by other
members of the public.

There is no requirement that there be curb cuts or anything else to be called a driveway.

All that section 22550(e) does is define when it can be cited and what helps define a driveway in an unincorporated area where it is less like to find clear curb delineations.

22500. No person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle
whether attended or unattended, except when necessary to avoid
conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a
peace officer or official traffic control device, in any of the
following places:
(e) In front of a public or private driveway, except that a bus
engaged as a common carrier, schoolbus, or a taxicab may stop to load
or unload passengers when authorized by local authorities pursuant
to an ordinance.
In unincorporated territory, where the entrance of a private road
or driveway is not delineated by an opening in a curb or by other
curb construction, so much of the surface of the ground as is paved,
surfaced, or otherwise plainly marked by vehicle use as a private
road or driveway entrance, shall constitute a driveway.

490 is a definition, 22500 is enforcement.

Many municipalities (like mine) have a good number of curbs that are rounded. There is no difference between the curb in front of my house and the curb at the end of my driveway. The difference is that my driveway is clearly paved from the garage to the street. In this instance the OP will have a defense if he/she can show that the driveway was not all that obvious. If it is clearly a driveway to a reasonable person, then the OP will likely lose his/her appeal. If it looks no different than the front yard, then he/she might prevail.

Note that 22500(e) does not require that the city has to approve the area as a driveway, only that it is a place of private ownership used for vehicular travel by the owner. if the city has a zoning ordinance or code regulations against such a driveway, that can be raised as a separate issue.

So, for the OP to prevail, he/she needs to take copious photos and try to convince the hearing officer or panel that the driveway was not clearly designated as such. Unfortunately, as the OP has not contested the tow within the 10 day window, receiving compensation from the city for the tow may be difficult if not impossible. But, who knows.