Rosemont Citizens Association votes to expand opposition to parking removal on Braddock Road
Vote expands November resolution that passed 49-10 with 59 of 4,136 residents voting
The Rosemont Citizens Association voted Thursday night to expand its opposition to the city’s Braddock Road bike lane project, with 61 of the neighborhood’s 4,136 residents voting to oppose parking removal across the full length of the corridor through Rosemont.
The vote was 61-12 with three abstentions, according to an attendee who provided the count to The Alexandria Brief. The Alexandria Brief attended the meeting but left before the vote took place.
The resolution broadens the RCA’s November 19 position, which passed 49-10 with 59 residents voting to oppose removing parking on one segment of Braddock Road between Russell Road and Commonwealth Avenue.
The meeting drew 76 voters—slightly higher turnout than November but still representing 1.8% of the neighborhood’s population, according to census data published by the RCA.
Mayor Alyia Gaskins attended the meeting and fielded questions about the project during a discussion period before the vote. Several residents raised concerns about parking access and the project’s impact on their properties.
What was voted on
According to RCA President Jol Silversmith, the motion expanded the scope of the November resolution to include the full length of Braddock Road through Rosemont, not just the segment between Russell Road and Commonwealth Avenue.
The city’s Braddock Road Trail Access and Corridor Improvements Project includes multiple design options for different segments of the corridor. The November resolution opposed Options 1A and 1B, which would create protected bike lanes by removing parking between Russell Road and Commonwealth Avenue.
Silversmith said the meeting agenda referenced other segments, including stretches between Commonwealth Avenue and Mount Vernon Avenue.
Voting was conducted by paper ballot. Organizers distributed voting slips to residents as they signed in at Good Shepherd Lutheran Church.
Mayor acknowledges divided opinions
During the question-and-answer period with Mayor Gaskins, one resident expressed frustration with city planning processes, saying decision-makers should better understand how projects impact residents’ daily lives.
“I sometimes feel in the last couple of years that the city will have some beautiful idea... and then come up with ideas [without] any sense of how it impacts people who live here,” the resident said, referencing both the proposed arena and the Braddock Road project.
Gaskins acknowledged the community is divided on many issues, including this project.
“For every single person who tells me they don’t want an idea, there’s another person who tells me they do,” Gaskins said. She cited a meeting earlier that evening with a business owner who had supported the proposed arena project.
“I think what your council is trying to do is I’m hearing from somebody on this side, this side, the middle, behind, and all of these pieces, and we’re trying to put together the best we can,” Gaskins said.
Resident concerns about access
One resident who said they have no off-street parking told the mayor the project could make it impossible to use their home.
“If this goes through, I literally will not be able to use my house,” the resident said, noting they had been struck in a pedestrian crosswalk less than a year ago.
The resident, who identified as a scientist and researcher, questioned whether the city had conducted sufficient engineering studies for the project, particularly regarding the type of bike lanes proposed and their impact on existing infrastructure.
“I haven’t seen studies even in the way of an engineering report for what type of bike lanes are going in,” the resident said.
Gaskins said the city conducts studies for all projects but acknowledged she hadn’t reviewed the specific details for this one.
“I can tell you [that] for every project we do the types of studies you were talking about,” Gaskins said. “Between now and Tuesday I have 60 issues that we have [or] are going to be voting on.”
The project’s path
Gaskins explained that the Braddock Road project does not currently require City Council approval unless there’s an appeal. Instead, it would be reviewed by city boards first.
“For this particular project, it actually doesn’t necessarily come to the Council unless it’s on an appeal,” Gaskins said.
The city announced in November that the project would not appear on the December 8 Traffic and Parking Board agenda as originally expected. The city’s project webpage now states: “No action will be taken on this project until 2026.”
The corridor has been identified as a safety priority by the Virginia Department of Transportation and a 2023 Safe Routes to School Walk Audit at George Washington Middle School.
The representation question
The January 22 vote came two months after The Alexandria Brief raised questions about how the RCA characterizes votes and whether small meeting turnouts can represent entire neighborhoods.
The RCA’s website states: “Everyone who resides or owns a property in Rosemont is automatically a member.” After the November vote, the RCA announced on Facebook that “the Rosemont Citizens Association voted” to oppose parking removal, without disclosing that 59 of 4,136 residents participated.
The Alexandria Brief reached out to Silversmith multiple times in November seeking comment on how the organization characterizes votes and whether it believes small turnouts can speak for thousands of residents. The RCA did not respond.
The day after the November story published, Silversmith sent a formal letter to the Traffic and Parking Board stating “the Rosemont Citizens Association opposes the removal of parking spaces” without disclosing the vote count.
According to the RCA constitution, the organization requires only 15 members present to constitute a quorum for official votes. The constitution also states that “individuals living in the above-described area who are not members of the Association may vote on specified matters such as land use issues or other matters of general community concern at the discretion of the elected officers.”
How RCA characterized the vote
On Friday, the RCA posted on social media that “the membership voted to adopt a further resolution” by a vote of 61-12 with 3 abstentions.
The posts specified the expanded opposition covers parking removal “between Mount Vernon and Commonwealth, in addition to the previously-adopted opposition to their removal between Commonwealth and Russell.”
The RCA also announced that the project is “tentatively to be considered by the Traffic and Parking Board on February 23.”
The characterization differs from November, when the RCA announced “the Rosemont Citizens Association voted” without disclosing the vote count. The January posts disclosed the vote count but characterized the 76 voters as “the membership,” despite the RCA’s website stating that “everyone who resides or owns a property in Rosemont is automatically a member” of the organization’s 4,136 residents.
What’s next
It remains to be seen how the RCA will characterize Thursday’s vote publicly and whether the organization will disclose participation numbers.
The city’s project webpage instructs residents who want updates to contact project manager Alex Carroll at alexandria.carroll@alexandriava.gov.
The RCA announced Friday that the project is "tentatively to be considered by the Traffic and Parking Board on February 23.
The Alexandria Brief reached out to RCA President Jol Silversmith for comment. This story will be updated if a response is received.
Update, January 23, 2026: The Rosemont Citizens Association posted on social media Friday that "the membership voted" 61-12 with 3 abstentions to expand opposition to parking removal between Mount Vernon Avenue and Commonwealth Avenue, in addition to the November opposition between Commonwealth Avenue and Russell Road. The RCA also announced the project is "tentatively to be considered by the Traffic and Parking Board on February 23." This story has been updated to include the RCA's characterization of the vote and the February 23 meeting date.
Did the Alexandria Brief make similarly petty comparisons about whether the recent General Assembly primaries reflect a true mandate of Denocrats when so few people voted? Give it a rest. Gathering 60 votes in person at a civic association meeting that was well publicized in advance is a landslide compared to how most civic associations handle these things. And I don’t necessarily agree with the vote either.