The Rosemont Citizens Association voted to oppose removing parking spaces on Braddock Road between Russell Road and Commonwealth Avenue. They did NOT vote to oppose bike lanes.
Speakers repeatedly affirmed their support for safe, efficient, and accessible streets for all users—drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, and transit riders. They also emphasized that Rosemont’s strength lies in how neighbors care for and support one another, even when they disagree.
The motion presented to the Rosemont Citizens Association for consideration and vote focused on removing parking on this short stretch of Braddock Road, including the only handicap-accessible parking space adjacent to Good Shepherd Lutheran Church. Eliminating that space would make the church inaccessible to people with mobility impairments—the very individuals the Americans with Disabilities Act is designed to protect.
Good Shepherd is more than a place of worship; it is a community hub used by the Alexandria Choral Society, the Symphony Orchestra of Northern Virginia, Encore Senior Chorus, 12-step groups, INOVA blood services, and the Rosemont Citizens Association itself. Several of these organizations have stated they could no longer meet there without nearby parking, threatening one of the neighborhood’s key gathering spaces.
These concerns are not anti-bike. They are pro-accessibility, pro-safety, and pro-community. One can support safe, efficient streets for all users while also believing that adding bike lanes at the expense of essential parking on this segment of Braddock Road is not the right solution. The Rosemont Citizens Association’s position reflects legitimate concerns and asks the City to pursue safety improvements that do not shut residents out of their homes or community institutions.
The conversation about the Braddock Road Trail Access and Corridor Improvement Project should continue, but it must do so with accuracy and respect, not division and misinformation.
The bike lanes would replace the street parking. If you oppose removal of street parking, you're opposing the addition of bike lanes. They are mutually exclusive.
Not so. Three options: 1) Implement shared bike/car lanes like those on Commonwealth Avenue, Russell Road, and Braddock Road west of Russell Road; 2) Put bike lanes on other streets than Braddock Road; 3) Ask the city staff to design other solutions.
It is incorrect and misleading to say that the Rosemont Citizens Association voted against bike lanes. They voted in favor of preserving parking & accessibility.
Let's try to find solutions, not create divisions.
Nancy this is magical thinking. The street envelope is what it is. The question is whether to compromise car parking to fit a bike lane or not.
When we pretend city staff can go back and find some magical third solution, that is indeed a vote for prioritizing parking over a safe bike lane because that’s the status quo that will remain.
City staff cannot magically create flying bikes that can zip right over our parked cars. (Or mostly empty parking spaces it’s convenient to have just in case, in this particular case). We know and understand all the tradeoffs in this case because city staff has been pretty tireless in their public engagement.
The Rosemont Citizens Association voted to oppose removing parking spaces on Braddock Road between Russell Road and Commonwealth Avenue. They did NOT vote to oppose bike lanes.
Speakers repeatedly affirmed their support for safe, efficient, and accessible streets for all users—drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, and transit riders. They also emphasized that Rosemont’s strength lies in how neighbors care for and support one another, even when they disagree.
The motion presented to the Rosemont Citizens Association for consideration and vote focused on removing parking on this short stretch of Braddock Road, including the only handicap-accessible parking space adjacent to Good Shepherd Lutheran Church. Eliminating that space would make the church inaccessible to people with mobility impairments—the very individuals the Americans with Disabilities Act is designed to protect.
Good Shepherd is more than a place of worship; it is a community hub used by the Alexandria Choral Society, the Symphony Orchestra of Northern Virginia, Encore Senior Chorus, 12-step groups, INOVA blood services, and the Rosemont Citizens Association itself. Several of these organizations have stated they could no longer meet there without nearby parking, threatening one of the neighborhood’s key gathering spaces.
These concerns are not anti-bike. They are pro-accessibility, pro-safety, and pro-community. One can support safe, efficient streets for all users while also believing that adding bike lanes at the expense of essential parking on this segment of Braddock Road is not the right solution. The Rosemont Citizens Association’s position reflects legitimate concerns and asks the City to pursue safety improvements that do not shut residents out of their homes or community institutions.
The conversation about the Braddock Road Trail Access and Corridor Improvement Project should continue, but it must do so with accuracy and respect, not division and misinformation.
The bike lanes would replace the street parking. If you oppose removal of street parking, you're opposing the addition of bike lanes. They are mutually exclusive.
Not so. Three options: 1) Implement shared bike/car lanes like those on Commonwealth Avenue, Russell Road, and Braddock Road west of Russell Road; 2) Put bike lanes on other streets than Braddock Road; 3) Ask the city staff to design other solutions.
It is incorrect and misleading to say that the Rosemont Citizens Association voted against bike lanes. They voted in favor of preserving parking & accessibility.
Let's try to find solutions, not create divisions.
Nancy this is magical thinking. The street envelope is what it is. The question is whether to compromise car parking to fit a bike lane or not.
When we pretend city staff can go back and find some magical third solution, that is indeed a vote for prioritizing parking over a safe bike lane because that’s the status quo that will remain.
City staff cannot magically create flying bikes that can zip right over our parked cars. (Or mostly empty parking spaces it’s convenient to have just in case, in this particular case). We know and understand all the tradeoffs in this case because city staff has been pretty tireless in their public engagement.